Judge Bars UC From Releasing Pepper-Spray Report
Don't Miss This
- Man Accused Of Stabbing Sacramento Woman To Death Arrested
- Old Sacramento’s Gold Rush Days Panned Because Of Drought
- Colusa Husband And Wife Arrested For Allegedly Kidnapping Teen Who Made Their Child Cry
- Dolls Lefts On Doorsteps Were Meant To Spread Cheer Not Chill
- 5 Women Who Have Been Killin’ It This Summer
Get Breaking News First
DAVIS (CBS13/AP) — A judge has temporarily barred the University of California from releasing a report about the pepper-spraying of student protesters by police officers at UC Davis.
Alameda County Superior Court Judge Evelio Grillo on Tuesday issued a temporary restraining order requested by the union representing officers involved in the Nov. 18 incident.
A task force investigating the encounter was scheduled to release its findings and recommendations Tuesday. But it delayed its publication online after learning the officers’ union planned to seek a restraining order. The judge ordered UC to allow the union attorney to see the report. Grillo set another court hearing on March 16.
Fatimah Sbeih was there on Nov. 18 when her fellow students were doused with pepper spray by campus police. CBS13’s exclusive video shows Fatimah wiping the spray out of another student’s eyes.
“You saw him in pain and he’s screaming, ‘My eyes, my eyes,'” she recalled.
Tuesday Fatimah was hoping to finally see the independent investigation’s report on what happened that day.
“It’s closure, it’s a whole lot of things, it’s been so long,” she said. “It’s disappointing. There so many people who are waiting for this.”
The judge has scheduled the next hearing on the matter for march 16.
UC Davis Chancellor Linda Katehi, whom some have called on to resign after the incident, released a statement saying she was disappointed by the delay. But for students, the delay only adds to the frustration that has been building since November.
“Not very happy at all about any of it,” one student said. “I don’t think it’s been handled well at all.”
Union attorney John Bakhit says the officers want to make sure the report doesn’t include names and confidential personnel information that should not be made public.
“Our concern is not just the names, but any types of conclusions that relate to discipline of any alleged misconduct that they would be released to the public, and that is a violation of the law,” he said.