Watching the video, I was reminded of my own surreal experience in South Florida back in 2000 when I was there to cover the infamous Gore/Bush election recount. I was subjected to the same self-important attitude by the media, and the same disregard for my First Amendment rights by the police.

Then and now, the bullies provided great comedic entertainment after the fact, even though it was disturbing to endure the abuse when it occurred.

This story was also published by The Huffington Post.

The Norman Report videos were produced by Carter Mays.

In a recent phone interview, ballot access expert Richard Winger explained why the Justice Party of California is likely to prevail if, as expected, it sues for an extension on the deadline to attract the 103,000 members needed to qualify for the ballot. More news on the legal front is coming soon.

Please click on the blue button to open the registration form, fill it out (be sure to check “other” and write “Justice Party”), print it, sign it and mail it. That’s all you need to do! There’s no downside because you can vote for anyone you want regardless of your party affiliation.

“Though he’s socially conservative and highly partisan, Bopp nonetheless is willing, whenever possible, to find common ground with liberals if it furthers his primary, driving goal: to make the words ‘Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech’ an insurmountable barrier to regulating money in politics.”

I asked Novak if her organization takes any position on campaign finance, or if it maintains a neutral stance, and she said, “We think that donors should be disclosed.”

I’ve heard it argued that some donors would be more likely to give money to challengers if it could be done anonymously, because if the incumbent is reelected, legislative revenge would be a real possibility. Novak escaped before that logic could be explored. But she was a good guest, and I hope she comes back.

Although it’s generally illegal in California to use pepper spray apart from self-defense, police officers are exempt. So the only recourse for the sprayed might be to sue the sprayer for violating the Constitution and the UC Police procedures manual, which states: “Chemical agents…should be used only in situations where such force reasonably appears justified and necessary…Arrestees and suspects…shall not be subject to physical force except as required to subdue violence or ensure detention.”

Over at The Atlantic, Alexis Madrigal rejects the notion “that Pike is an independent bad actor. Too many incidents around the country attest to the widespread deployment of these tactics. If we vilify Pike, we let the institutions off way too easy.“

Madrigal has a point, and those who are itching to bust a wayward cop would find - if they were to look - many such offenders on California roadways acting as if they are above the law. It would be especially easy to nab unarmed parking enforcement officers, most of whom violate various traffic/parking laws flagrantly and chronically, even though police are always supposed to obey the entire Vehicle Code (unless responding to an emergency).

Which isn’t to say that cops with guns are more likely to comply with such inconvenient laws. To the contrary, everyone is quite familiar with the sight of an empty patrol car illegally parked at a red curb while its driver and partner enjoy lunch.

Civilians, at least in California, have surprisingly broad authority to go after Pike as well as double-parked meter maids and hungry officers who can’t be bothered to find a legal space. In fact, a cop who has committed a public offense (an act punishable by fine or imprisonment) could be lawfully arrested by just about anyone for just about anything – even a minor traffic violation.

When it comes to the actual hands-on part of law enforcement, civilians have powerful options. I doubt the summoned are required to cooperate, but a person making a citizen’s arrest is authorized to “orally summon as many persons as he deems necessary to aid him…”

If it’s in pursuit of a suspected felon, a “private person” (plus whatever posse might have been recruited) can lawfully “break open the door or window of the house in which the person to be arrested is…” and forcibly take the arrestee before a judge.

We have not yet seen civilians attempt to take such drastic action against a police officer. But on the UC Davis campus and elsewhere, relations between cops and the community are so strained that all sorts of retaliations for actual or perceived police brutality seem possible.

The situation in Los Angeles is starkly different. Protesters who are occupying two lawns on opposite sides of City Hall have impressively maintained almost total harmony with the LAPD. Police chief Charlie Beck even tolerates pot smoking in his presence. He told an LA Weekly reporter, “Marijuana use doesn’t disturb me…We don’t want to arrest anyone…The true measure of strength is when you restrain it.”

Maybe the top cops and mayors of other American cities should visit Los Angeles, enjoy a few bong hits with Chief Beck and discuss how to treat peaceful demonstrators humanely.

In the meanwhile, Lt. Pike would be well-advised to make sure he comes to a complete stop before he turns right on red in Davis.

This story was also published by The Huffington Post.

The owners of Zuccotti Park in New York are apparently authorized to prohibit camping and similar activities, and yesterday they gave entrenched demonstrators a day’s notice to  vacate the park long enough for workers to clean and inspect it. Thereafter, they warned, only those who obey park rules will be allowed to use the premises.

The decision announced early this morning to postpone the scheduled cleaning, made no mention of those rules.

The protesters say the City of New York should neither enforce the rules nor “evict” occupiers from the park. But what they haven’t explained is how the police could legally or morally justify ignoring a property owner’s trespass complaint.

Although occupiers pride themselves on adhering to a strict and democratic decision-making method, it’s not clear how – or if – that procedure honors the wishes of park owners, besieged neighbors and various non-OWS users of the park.

The movement’s overall mission has great legitimacy, but its land grabbing policy requires some elucidation.

This article was also published by The Huffington Post.

Another lawsuit, which the ACLU previously filed (and won) on behalf of Vietnam veteran/activist Robert Rosebrock, has received much less attention. But it was Rosebrock’s case – and dogged protests – which led to the newer suit.

For over three years now, Rosebrock has organized a weekly demonstration outside the VA’s West Los Angeles gates. His argument – that the VA is misusing land which was donated exclusively for the care and permanent housing of disabled veterans – is a key part of the ACLU’s complaint. The earlier suit was a response to the VA police having violated Rosebrock’s First Amendment rights when it cited him for hanging the United States flag upside down (the sign of distress) on a VA fence. It is indeed illegal to hang any sign on VA property without permission, but the police objected only to the manner in which the flag was displayed. It was that selective enforcement of the law which ran afoul of the First Amendment.

Although Santa Monica City Councilmember Bobby Shriver and a few others have been screaming about the VA’s malfeasance for some time, Rosebrock’s arrest seems to have been the tipping point. With the ACLU fighting for his free speech rights, it was inevitable that the subject of Rosebrock’s protest would finally garner the recognition it deserves.

Likewise, now that the FBI is investigating a homicide which was apparently committed on VA property last month, the hope is that federal authorities will also investigate shady land use deals the VA made with various corporate entities. Because those privileged businesses provide veterans with no services, it seems inexplicable that they are operating on the West Los Angeles campus. Activists have for years been asking the VA to disclose the terms of its lease agreements, and to provide an accounting of how income has been allocated. That the flow of money remains shrouded in mystery, suggests VA officials might be the recipients of kickbacks from leaseholders. After all, one would be hard-pressed to find more valuable real estate anywhere in the United States.

Just as Rosebrock’s case prompted the ACLU to challenge the VA anew, the FBI should realize the VA’s failure to discover a decomposing corpse is symptomatic of a larger problem. Most people nowadays think of the FBI as a counter-terrorism force, but the agency receives substantial funding for combating public corruption and white-collar crime. Rep. Henry Waxman, Sen. Barbara Boxer, Sen. Dianne Feinstein and their congressional colleagues have all failed to hold the VA accountable for its misuse of land that was donated for housing veterans. In the meanwhile, an estimated 20,000 homeless veterans languish on the streets of Greater Los Angeles.

The time has come for the Department of Justice (DOJ) to launch a major investigation. While the FBI is in the midst of probing a homicide that VA police couldn’t even detect let alone investigate, the DOJ’s top crime-fighting agency should also find out who got paid to make sweetheart deals with tenants who do nothing for veterans.

This article was also published by The Huffington Post.