A few protesters remained last night after Berkeley Police had cleared Civic Center Park of the Occupy Berkeley encampment. OaklandElle, an Occupy Oakland Medic, was one of them, and the only one reported as being arrested.
Here's the video.
credit Steve Leibel / stevelimages.com
OaklandElle is arrested starting at the 1 minute mark for no apparent reason. There are other protesters in approximately the same relative position to the police, and there are people shouting obsenities at the police throughout the video, but nothing OaklandElle is doing seems provocative in any way.
The guy to her left is OakFoSho, who's goal in life nowdays is to video and livestream Occupy Oakland events 24 hours a day. To her right is another person with a camera. Did the police not arrest her companions because they were filming, while she was not?
About seven hours ago OakFoSho tweeted
OakFoSho Spencer: For Hire
I have been informed the #OccupyOakland Legal Team & NGL aware of @OaklandElle's arrest & are doing what they can. #OO
Later in the clip someone says "You just arrested somebody for drinking water." I don't know what that is about; it's impossible to tell from the camera shots whether OaklandElle is holding a container. But we have this cryptic tweet:
OakFoSho Spencer: For Hire
THIS! ---> RT @anonnickanon: Berkeley PD needs to focus more on controlling their emotions than controlling the water fountain in the park
Update 12:15 PM: I received this via email from the shooter of the video, regarding the 'drinking water' remark:
The "drinking water" remark is because a few minutes earlier, someone took a few steps into the park to use the water fountain, and the police arrested them. That caused the group of protesters and myself (a citizen journalist, not necessarily a protester) to go over towards the park, and then get blocked by that line of cops, where the clip begins.
An hour ago, this came across
AnonMedics Anon Street Medics
@OaklandElle and @AnonMedics spent the night in adjacent cells, singing to each other. #occupyberkeley #oomedics #oo
Here is OaklandElle, left, with another medic. The picture is taken from her tumblr blog.
Like most of those trumped-up arrests, Elle will probably have charges dismissed as soon as she is arraigned.
Still, ours is not to question why, ours is but to submit or be charged with resisting arrest.
10:14 AM PT:
susie_c Susie Cagle
#OccupyBerkeley MT @weezmgk @OaklandElle arrest happens at 32:30 in @OakFoSho's vid is.gd/x9DHpL , Cummings batons her ~1min prior
11:06 AM PT:
weezmgk weezmgk
@
@susie_c AFAIK, @OaklandElle is still in custody, nothing indicating her release so far, was in cell next to @anonmedics gal overnight
11:18 AM PT: Not much of a source, but this seems to be a pretty lucid attempt to address the question of whether you need to carry or show id and what happens if you dont.
California does not require you to have ID except under very few circumstances (like when you're driving a car). Just walking around town, shopping in the grocery store, sitting on your porch or playing in the park does not require you to have ID.
Just because we're police officers does not allow us to require identification from people.
Hiibel v. Nevada does not apply in California, even though it was decided by the US Supreme Court, because California has no statute requiring you to identify yourself when detained on reasonable suspicion of criminal activity. Nevada does, and Hiibel was convicted of violating it. If California had such a law, then Hiibel would apply. California does have a law having to do with resisting, delaying or obstructing an officer performing his duties, and it's possible someone can make a case for this if you refuse to ID yourself - I haven't seen it done yet, though.
Passengers in a vehicle are not required to show ID upon request merely because they are passengers.
The answer just above mine is probably the closest to the truth. It's not accurate to say, "whether or not you have or have not done anything illegal, you must upon a peace officer's request, provide a state's drivers license or ID card" because in California, there is no requirement that have either of those things except in certain cases (again - if you are driving a car, etc). You might be denied certain benefits if you can't prove your identity, but there is no law in this state that says you must have a license or an ID card.
I can't disagree with the rest of the answer, though. If I ask you for ID and you tell me you don't have it or outright refuse to provide it (under circumstances where you don't have to), you're going to send my "bad guy" radar into overdrive. I will very likely do everything possible to determine who you are, because I don't want to be the guy who let the murderer from Kentucky or the rapist from Illinois escape justice. And yes, depending on the circumstances, it's entirely possible I could make things very difficult for you if you refuse to identify yourself.
So the answer to your question, given the very limited amount of detail you provided, is no...you do not have to show ID when requested for a "random" reason.
HOWEVER:
You are not going to be in any position to decide if the request is just a random one. The police might have a very valid reason to request your identification, and they are not required to tell you what it is before you hand over the ID.
One sure way to find out if they have the legal right to demand your identification is to refuse to hand it over. If they have the legal right to demand it, and you refuse to hand it over, the next sound you hear will be handcuffs. If that's a chance you're prepared to take, then refuse all requests for identification from law enforcement. You'll only get arrested on those occasions when the request was legally justified.
If you're one of those people who just object to the idea of telling the police who you are, get over it. We can and do make it our business to know who someone is if we have an interest in them. If you want to be the guy that refuses to identify yourself on principle, go for it. Be prepared to have unpleasant run-ins with law enforcement.
You asked about showing your ID. That implies that you will have it with you. If you don't have your ID with you, then you can't show it, can you? However, that's no magic bullet, either. If you are in a situation where the police have legal justification for knowing who you are, and you cannot prove who you are, you run a HUGE risk of being booked into the local jail until such time as you do prove who you are. And we are not required to take your word for it, or to accept anything less than official government-issued identification with a photo on it.
So the second answer to your question, given the very limited amount of detail you provided, is yes...you should ID yourself unless you want to run the risk of getting arrested.
I'm not guessing, and the evidence I can provide you is that I'm:
Source(s):
In my 19th year of California law enforcement.
http://answers.yahoo.com/...
3:15 PM PT:
OakFoSho Spencer: For Hire
So, I'm standing in the lobby of Glen Dyre Jail w/ @OaklandElle's father who is bailing her out.
4:02 PM PT:
OakFoSho Spencer: For Hire
So now, they are saying it's going to be 2-4 hours before @OaklandElle is released. Bail has been posted. We are waiting.
4:10 PM PT:
angrywhitekid Scott Campbell
Awesome!!!! RT @OakFoSho Yay! @OaklandElle is free! yfrog.com/h6jb4gtj #OO #OccupyOakland #OWS #p21
