On Oct 28th, 2015 I posted one of my famous – or is it ‘infamous’ – “trunk rants”; this one dealing with South Carolina deputy Ben Fields’ violent criminal attack on a 16 year old high school girl who was being uncooperative in response to instructions from the school staff.
Well I’m going to give you some facts the mainstream media isn’t telling you, as well as correcting some information they’ve gotten completely wrong.
The victim’s family reached out to me after seeing my video, and we spoke on the phone last night.
It turns out that the victim has some mental health issues. She’s schizophrenic and bi-polar. When a person is diagnosed with both, it’s called schizoaffective disorder. The victim had been in treatment and was determined to have reached a point where she could attend public school. As you can imagine, a person with schizoaffective disorder isn’t going to act like everyone else at all times. But more importantly, the school was well aware of her medical issues. If there is one guy you don’t want to send to deal with a teenage girl with mental issues, it would be an aggressive angry cop on steroids.
Lest people imagine her condition makes her violent or disruptive, in fact it’s just the opposite. The family tells me that by natural temperament she is a very quiet girl and her meds make her even more so. In fact, they tell me that even around family it takes effort to get her to engage in even a small bit of conversation.
This dovetails with the factual account of what happened in the classroom. While defenders of her being violently attacked claim she was “disruptive” in the classroom, that’s not accurate. The teacher’s initial issue was that the girl was not participating in the class. That description appears to be based on the girl looking at her phone, which is against school policy. That makes perfect sense for a quiet introspective teenage girl with mental health issues and who is taking meds that, according to her family, make her even more quiet.
Despite the school knowing about her condition, she was told to leave the class and go to a “discipline room”. That’s the equivalent of what was known as “detention” in my day. The girl declined to follow those instructions, saying she’d only glanced at her phone for a second. The teacher then summoned an administrator who repeated the instructions. Again the girl declined. So far there is no error by the school. They were simply giving the student an instruction. But what happened next is a MONUMENTAL error. Knowing her mental health issues they then called in a thug in uniform – known to the students as “Officer Slam” or “The Slammer”. And how do you think he got that nickname? The answer is pretty obvious; slamming people to the ground is his trademark. It’s what he does when a student is uncooperative. Talk about a man who should not be working around teens. Talk about sending the worst message possible to young people! And of course the rest you’ve seen in the videos of the deputy’s violent attack on the girl.
I wonder about the people who defend the deputy. Their lies and gross distortion are many and disgusting, but due to time constraints I’ll only address a few.
One claim is that 1 of the 3 videos shows the girl striking the deputy in the face. Not even remotely true. What the video QUITE CLEARLY shows is the girl swinging her arm upward AFTER the deputy initiated his violent attack, as her chair is being tipped backward. There are two possible interpretations of her actions, and neither condemns her. First, is that as she realizes she is being attacked she was attempting to defend herself. If that was the case, I don’t blame her a bit for defending herself against an illegal violent attacker. But, I don’t believe that’s what happened.
What happens when you’re sitting calmly in a chair and joker suddenly rocks it backward hard without warning. Right, your hands immediately fly up and forward in an autonomic response; it’s your body attempting to shift weight and momentum to counteract the backward tipping motion. We see the same thing in bull riding. The rider’s free arm is elevated and flails back and forth to counteract the affects of the tipping action created by the movement of the animal beneath him. It seems readily apparent to me that is what is seen in the one video that the deputy’s defenders misuse to try to justify Fields’ actions.
Another is that the school had ordered the teen off campus and the deputy was there to arrest her for trespass. As previously discussed, the sole request of the school was to move to the “discipline room”, so there was no trespassing involved.
Another general claim, based on nothing but a desire to justify Fields’ actions, is that he was arresting her for some charge of which the video viewers are unaware. Nope. The teen committed no criminal act, which means there was no basis for an arrest, nor did Fields at any time tell his superiors during the internal affairs investigation that he was affecting an arrest. It’s just lies from those who support any and all violence by cops.
One version of their lies is that the teen had violated section 420 of Chapter 17 of the South Carolina criminal code. In this instance I don’t know whether to attribute the false characterization to lies or just ignorance.
The opening sentence of section 420 is, “It shall be unlawful for any person willfully or unnecessarily to interfere with or to disturb in any way or in any place the students or teachers of any school or college in this State, or to loiter about such school or college premises, or to act in an obnoxious manner thereon…
Statutes are interpreted by what are called in law, “the rules of statutory construction.” One of the rules of statutory construction is that the phrase “any person” when used in a statute that specifically names other classes of person as the persons upon whom the prohibited action is conducted, excludes the named classes from the meaning of “any person”.
So, since section 420 reads, “It shall be illegal to…interfere with or disturb…students or teachers”, the law presumes that students and teachers are not within the meaning of “any person”. Accordingly, deputy Fields was not arresting the teen for a nonexistent violation of section 420 – nor did he claim to internal affairs investigators that he was affecting an arrest for section 420. It’s just made up lies by cop worshippers.
And of course all of what I just explained is validated by the fact that Sheriff Lott fired Fields. If Fields had been affecting an arrest when he became violent with the teen, he might have arguably received a suspension for unnecessary use of force, but he would not have been fired. He was fired because he was a peace officer who can only use violence to affect a detainment, which requires reasonable suspicion of criminal conduct, or an arrest, which requires probable cause of criminal conduct. Neither of which existed in this matter.
In closing, I have to wonder how much of the defense of Fields is race-based. I wonder how many people, whether consciously or subconsciously, consider a big, clean-cut, squared-away looking, white deputy being violent to a teenage black girl they consider “disrespectful”, to be what America is all about. Because…well…you know…”Them uppity niggers gotta be shown who’s boss.” I’m pretty confident that had it been a 300 pound black deputy smashing a little white girl on the concrete, 90% of those who are so disgustingly supportive of Fields would be screaming for that black deputy’s badge. It’s a shame than all too many Americans still think that way.