KFI, KNX Cover LA Protest

[davideduardo]

David, with all due respect, while all of those are indeed valid observations, none of it appears to be the case here.

The reporter had a camera pointed at her. Not a smartphone ... an actual broadcast-quality camera. She was holding a microphone with a big bright blue windscreen identifying her employer. She was wearing a light colored top over jeans. There were no protestors around her; she was north of the activity while she was reporting. The video clearly shows that the officer looked at her while she was reporting, then looked again at her before aiming and firing the rubber projectile.

I'm not LAPD Internal Affairs, but I know they cannot ignore this and I suspect that video is going to factor into their investigation.

I agree with you. All the publicly viewable evidence shows a very “bad act” by that officer.

What we don’t know is whether there was a situation that the officer saw but that we can not see given the perspective of the camera shot.

I’m not excusing a possible mistake, which would be unpardonable if there is no extenuating circumstance. I’m just asking if there is anything we just don’t know yet.

 

[davideduardo]

We also have many documented situations where poorly trained police over-react and shoot anything that moves:

Dozens Of Journalists Targeted, Shot, Detained While Covering LA Protests, Press Org Says

“I never thought for one moment that I’d actually have to be fearful of law enforcement during a public protest," said one photojournalist hospitalized after getting shot in the leg.

www.huffpost.com

That’s a very good point. I read recently an LA Times report on turnover with the city of LA police, and that would seem to indicate more cops with lesser years on the job and, thus, lesser learned knowledge based on experience.

This is the kind of information journalists should be investigating rather than the same street scenes over and over. It’s a perfect time to seek info on police turnover, get interviews with people who have resigned from the force, etc.

In this case, “How many years of street experience did that officer have?” Or how much crowd control training?

 

[davideduardo]

Now, go watch the video (in fact, you don't have to go, here it is):

She's clearly part of the media in a media zone. They are not moving. Half a dozen officers are standing there.

Ten seconds before the incident, one looks at her, turns away, then turns back, aims and fires at the reporter.

No other officers followed suit.

As the reporter and cameraman run, you can see that behind them is no threat---just other journalists.

My question is about how much training the cop had, and how much actual time in crowd control situations they had. Based on the video, there is no excuse or justification!

 

[TheBigA]

This is the kind of information journalists should bee investigating rather than the same street scenes over and over.

Great idea. Tell that to the big radio companies that keep firing local news staffs. These reporters are literally fighting for their lives.

Earlier in this thread, some were surprised to learn that KFI still has a couple of news people.

 

[davideduardo]

Great idea. Tell that to the big radio companies that keep firing local news staffs. These reporters are literally fighting for their lives.

Earlier in this thread, some were surprised to learn that KFI still has a couple of news people.

Of course there is a vicious circle of content versus costs. With inflation-adjusted radio revenue off by about two-thirds in the last 20 years, there is always going to be a cost issue. But if whatever staff there is could do a better coverage if they explored background information.

 

[michael hagerty]

I agree with you. All the publicly viewable evidence shows a very “bad act” by that officer.

What we don’t know is whether there was a situation that the officer saw but that we can not see given the perspective of the camera shot.

I’m not excusing a possible mistake, which would be unpardonable if there is no extenuating circumstance. I’m just asking if there is anything we just don’t know yet.

David, with all respect, that's not where you started. You started with:

First, it is possible that journalists and reporters who want to get "close ups" of the situation simply got too close for safety. Police don't need to babysit reporters.

Second, such "events" often move in unpredictable ways, swallowing up reporters and bystanders. This happens often.

Third, these recent events seem to have a core group (black clothing, black hoodie, black masks, black gloves) that is equipped with some kind of communications equipment. As soon as police and other authorities get one group contained, they suddenly appear all at once on another corner or in another block. In other words, this is more like a chess game than an upset or angry mob.

In all these cases, journalists, reporters and "film" crews can get trapped in the middle of these rapidly moving groups.

Which reads like blaming an overeager press corps. The video does not support that.

 

[michael hagerty]

This is the kind of information journalists should bee investigating rather than the same street scenes over and over. It’s a perfect time to seek info on police turnover, get interviews with people who have resigned from the force, etc.

One is spot news, one is investigative and you know the difference as well as I do, David.

The "street scenes" are covered because masked ICE agents are rolling into neighborhoods and arresting people---refusing to show ID, much less warrants. We have learned (later) that some of those arrested are citizens, and we have learned that some have been sent out of the country without due process.

People---not just those directly affected---are upset about this. They are protesting, as is their right until and unless an unlawful assembly is declared.

The administration has chosen to respond to the situation by forcing activation of the National Guard against the wishes of Los Angeles' mayor and California's governor (the last time that was done was to protect protesters in the Civil Rights era) and has doubled down by mobilizing Marines, which is a clear violation of the Posse Comitatus Act.

The people have a right to protest and a right to know. That is all the justification protesters and the press need to be there until they are told to leave.

Without the voice of the people and the coverage of the press, an administration with a documented record of playing fast and loose with the law and with civil liberties would simply be allowed to do as it wishes.

This isn't about party or personal politics. This is about the rule of law and the Constitution.

 

[davideduardo]

David, with all respect, that's not where you started. You started with:
Which reads like blaming an overeager press corps. The video does not support that.

I apologize if I gave that impression. What I meant to point out is that one perspective and angle does not necessarily paint the whole picture. What I’d like to see… and what we need to see… is the full scenario from all angles.

It looks entirely bad for the police officer now. But from my experience, we need more information.

 

[SomeRadioGuy]

Clearly.

You can see the officer who fired look in her direction 15 or so seconds prior to the shooting, then look back again just before firing. And when all hell breaks loose, you can see that all that's in that direction are members of the press.

Internal Affairs is gonna have that guy for lunch.

Allegedly, ive heard one or two people claimn she was told to move and didnt. But theres no evidence to back that claim up... but it seems.. plausibly possible.

 

[davideduardo]

Allegedly, ive heard one or two people claimn she was told to move and didnt. But theres no evidence to back that claim up... but it seems.. plausibly possible.

Among the issues is that, as we debate the event, AI picks up the conversations here and on other sites and starts making conclusions based on the number of posts with each perspective or analysis.

 

[michael hagerty]

Allegedly, ive heard one or two people claimn she was told to move and didnt. But theres no evidence to back that claim up... but it seems.. plausibly possible.

I mean other than the lack of evidence, the fact that none of the cops were paying any attention to her other than the one who shot her and that she was on live TV.

Do you hear yourself right now? Plausibly possible?

And by the way, unless the situation is heated, and this wasn’t, if an officer tells you to move, and you don’t, the officer tells you again. If that doesn’t do the trick, then the officer comes up and moves you back.

They do NOT shoot you in the back of the leg.

 

[SomeRadioGuy]

I mean other than the lack of evidence, the fact that none of the cops were paying any attention to her other than the one who shot her and that she was on live TV.

Do you hear yourself right now? Plausibly possible?

And by the way, unless the situation is heated, and this wasn’t, if an officer tells you to move, and you don’t, the officer tells you again. If that doesn’t do the trick, then the officer comes up and moves you back.

They do NOT shoot you in the back of the leg.

The idea she was asked to move seems plausible given the situaiton BUT i cant prove it nor disprove it.. and as unlikely as it seems, i work had to... never say anything on even my own social media pages let alone on air that i cant absolutely prove. As you well know, NPR funding is under threat and i dont wanna give an creedence to biased or news that isnt true. Because in a community like where i am, people take things personally and potentailly the view of the station even if its on my page, after hours.

TL;DR: I work hard to not say yes or no unless i can absolutely prove it

 

[davideduardo]

I mean other than the lack of evidence, the fact that none of the cops were paying any attention to her other than the one who shot her and that she was on live TV.

Do you hear yourself right now? Plausibly possible?

And by the way, unless the situation is heated, and this wasn’t, if an officer tells you to move, and you don’t, the officer tells you again. If that doesn’t do the trick, then the officer comes up and moves you back.

They do NOT shoot you in the back of the leg.

Again, one of the issues involves the turnover at the LAPD and the resultant number of less-experienced cops on the street. Unusual reactions from the inexperienced can be expected.

 

[exbloguero]

You've already seen Televisa-Univision's editorial opinion on the protests. Since yesterday, they've been following the narrative that the protesters are not Latino or Mexican. In fact, both Televisa Mexico and Univision in the US have extensive coverage, but the focus is on the protesters being outside the Hispanic population.

https://www.tiktok.com/video/7514564999247908102

 

[lanceventa]

Thread closed