..regardless of the vid, what seems to have been highlighted...is a whole body of train users in agreement that breakfast sandwich eating/coffee drinking/and snacky people etc is something that is seen every morning on the platforms....so being fine with all others, while singling one person out...would be seen as prejudice..if there had been a purge that morning of sandwich eaters across the platforms, then thta would have dismissed any possible prejudice...it’s good to see those every day sandwich eating users coming together in their agreement of this..:lovedup:...while it’s also being addressed by BART...

Then they need to seek a change politically and democratically and not via vilifying people for doing their job. I feel sorry for the poor persecuted law enforcement officer.
I terrible trial by social media hysteria

...no change is needed to ‘all breakfast sandwich eaters on platforms have equality with no singling out/harassment of one’...the claim is that the officer predetermined his own criticisms when he broke that simple foundation rule of upholding the law equally for everyone with no prejudice perceived...hopefully this will lead to BART and its officers politically and democratically upholding its rules and laws etc with equality for all in the future...:flutter:..

Nothing like a hot sausage squeezed in between two baps to set you up for the day ahead.

America has a black and white devide that’s without question.

Like this country’s class devide of upper middle and lower class.

i fail to see what is so wrong about eating a sandwich


also here in my country you got many people eating in public areas, and usually sandwiches but also sometimes French fries


which in my opinion seems ok to do


the only problem i see here is the targetted person being black, and we all know for a long time, police officers in america being racist


so the sandwich ain't the problem here, it's certain police officers who need a talking to, no longer be racist

if law enforcement wants to be respected, make sure we can respect them by being showing more equality, in their punishments, cause i don't think this would've occured if the person was white

I’m curious as to why eating food on a station platform is an offence? Seems pretty daft to me. :shrug:

I am not an officer of the courts. This isn't a professional opinion I'm giving or I'd be charging.

I don't believe it was a racially motivated arrest, I believe that he was arrested because he was mouthy and belligerent with the officer. You keep saying that he was arrested for eating a sandwich. I'll say it again... he was cited for eating a sandwich. He was physically held because he kicked off. The fact that he's black is neither here nor there. And not a word from anyone yet about him making a homophobic comment to the officer. He's claiming he was singled out because he was black. That doesn't give him the right to abuse someone else. Maybe next time it would be better to get the whole incident on film, not just the bit they wanted to show.

Like I said, G, just my personal opinion: Not a racist incident, more a pissing contest.

I read that eating and drinking is banned on the trains and the platform for cleanliness, and they made it an offence under Public Health. They also can't smoke. So if this bloke had been smoking and the officer told him to put it out and he ignored the officer.... the outcome would have been the same.

It just seems like a really petty rule to have in place. Smoking I understand, but eating just seems a bit over the top.

Tbh I think this whole situation could’ve been avoided if the cop just gave the guy a warning instead of trying to hold him for eating the sandwich in the first place and then calling for back up. Just seems like a huge waste of time.

Well, you don't have to agree with the law. Lots of laws are petty... but they're there for a reason. And the cop did warn him... and he was ignored. That's why it kicked off in my opinion.

..I think it’s fine to have the rule, Big E...it’s just applying it equally to all platform eaters is obviously the thing...otherwise it would easily be perceived as harassment and singling out...which is exactly what’s happened in this incident...and also hence the eat in protests which are happening ...as it appears to be so commonplace on the platforms...(...except for Mr Foster, interestingly...hmmmm..)...

Well said Ammi, blatant discrimination. You dont have to pretend to be a lawyer to see that

But that why I find this rule quite petty though because when you apply them to someone it’s going to come across as singling out especially if their are other people doing it and is just going to cause situations like this one.

Not an offence.

The level of self control expected from the untrained public when dealing with the trained police is extraordinary. Eric Garner simply moved his hand and was then piled on by 8 police all shouting that he was resisting arrest. The officer tried to grab his hand, Garner moved it away then - 'I cant breathe, I cant breathe, I cant breathe'.

These aggressive policing polices baffle me, so when this guys sues I hope he wins and the police reconsider where these polices are getting them other than fired, in court or on the news.

I'd say it would be to minimise the amount of lawsuits filed due to slip related injury on the platform.
The rule is not being enforced consistently though that's obvious, hence the protests on the platform fir attempting to make an example of one guy.

Glad you brought that up Girth meant to mention that.. why would you have to be mealy mouthed to the police for fear of arrest? No offence was committed so there was no grounds for arrest :/
Where is this homophobic comment? Surely if the guy was being so offensive the other platform eaters wouldn't have been so supportive.

I have never said that the police officer did nothing wrong. I said they both overreacted.

Being belligerent is not against the law, you're right. Refusing to show ID and using a homophobic slur is.

When are you going to comment on the man making a homophobic comment to the officer?

I havent commented because we didnt see it. IF it happened then its appalling.

Twice in the video the officer says he's under arrest for 'eating' and one other time he says for 'resisting arrest'. He never mentions ID. So did he ask him for ID once only? Seems unlikely.

I will only comment on the video.

It's not against the law to refuse to show ID in California.

I guess the video was recorded just for that reason. I'd rather know what happened first, than assuming the man with the sandwich was being racially singled out, and that the cop was a racist. And if evidence comes to light that this man was racially singled out, I'll be the first to condemn it.

We're going round is circles now, G. Good to chat with you again though.... it's been ages.

It's helpful to comment on what was said. .. not what you think was said.

...I think for me also, Girth...on several occasions we hear a police officer say..’stop resisting arrest’...and yet we don’t see any resistance at all to the handcuffing/detaining...all we see is a man questioning it and saying that he was feeling harassed ...so without knowing what the apparent ‘homophobic slur’ was, it’s only an interpretation of something from the police officers, surely..and their interpretations of ‘resisting arrest’ seem a bit skewed to me....unless the comment is on a witness’s vid or something...?..in which case it’ll be something that’s presented in the inquiry....?...

It isn't against the law not to show ID in California, although it is in some other states. I neve said he was detained only for now showing his ID, but it was mentioned in the article I read, and I'm thinking it was just one of the things the man did or said that led to him being detained.

But people really don't know for sure what happened, and the man was never arrested anyway. So I'm willing to bet that refusing to show his ID was just one of the things he did, along with a probable homophobic slur and ignoring a request from the officer.

YEah, its strange the public are expected to quickly comply to police officers and obey their instructions without any dissent. Belligerence toward the police is not a good idea :joker: but its also not a crime.

I didnt know that. Makes me now think he's definitely going to sue.

As the article we both read stated 'Context is key'. If he used homophobic slurs then we'll find out soon enough but based on the video this was huge waste of everyones time.

Good to chat with you too, its definitely been too long :thumbs: