Skip to content Skip to footer
Police Officer Who Killed Oscar Grant Free, but Some Protesters Could Still Face Jail Time

Protesters demonstrating in Oakland, November 5, 2010, against Grant's killing. (Photo: Thomas Hawk)

Police Officer Who Killed Oscar Grant Free, but Some Protesters Could Still Face Jail Time

Protesters demonstrating in Oakland, November 5, 2010, against Grant's killing. (Photo: Thomas Hawk)

“There were several felony arrests last July, and people were facing charges that could lead to more than a year, no question about that,” noted attorney Dan Siegel of the Oakland-based firm Siegel & Yee. Siegel is currently representing Todd Lister and Adrian Wilson, the two defendants who were accused of arson. The codefendants now face attempted arson charges, carrying a minimum penalty of eight months, with a midterm of one year. “Theoretically, that's what they're still facing,” Siegel said, but added that he was confident the as-yet unresolved case would result in a more lenient outcome.

Meanwhile, some of the burglary charges stemming from the looting that occurred in Oakland last July could potentially lead to multi-year sentences, Siegel added, leading to more time in jail than Mehserle served.

As right-wing attacks on our basic rights and services are growing louder than ever, it's essential to keep independent journalism strong. Support Truthout by clicking here.

Some of the hundreds arrested over the course of the three protests who had prior criminal convictions had their probation or parole immediately revoked as a consequence, said Rachel Jackson, a member of the Coalition for Justice for Oscar Grant and one of the organizers of the Nov. 5 community rally in downtown Oakland's Frank Ogawa Plaza.

Of the hundreds of arrests made in Oakland during waves of protests launched by Grant supporters, just a small number were on serious charges such as burglary or arson. The mass arrest of 150 individuals last November was initially made on charges of unlawful assembly, yet nearly all of the arrestees were cited and released after spending up to 24 hours in jail, and all had their charges dropped.

In that instance, Oakland police corralled 150 demonstrators who had been participating in a lawful march through the streets into a residential block in East Oakland. Once they were surrounded, Oakland police — who were aided in the streets by 32 other law-enforcement agencies that night, according to National Lawyers Guild attorney Rachel Lederman — placed them all under arrest. No dispersal order was issued prior to making the arrests, and it would have been impossible to comply if one had been issued.

In a class-action lawsuit, the National Lawyers Guild argues that the Nov. 5 protester roundup and mass arrest was a violation of the Oakland Police Department's crowd control policy, and that it constituted a violation of protesters' rights to freedom of speech and freedom of assembly. “Even legal observers and a few people who happened to live in the neighborhood were swept up,” Lederman said.

“The policy is clear, and the constitution is clear,” she went on. “You must have probable cause to believe an individual is committing a crime. But in this case, the whole crowd was herded onto a residential street, blocked in, and held on the street for hours. There was never a dispersal order, and all exits were sealed off.”

The Oakland Police Department did not respond to a request for comment.

Arrestees were held handcuffed in vans, in some cases for hours, without access to a bathroom, Lederman noted. All of the women were subjected to pregnancy tests upon being booked into jail, “which made no sense and was abusive in this particular case,” Lederman maintains, because the short time they spent there didn't justify the excuse that the test would have been necessary to determine whether anyone needed prenatal care. Several men, meanwhile, were subjected to DNA swabs, which is “only supposed to happen if you're arrested for a violent felony,” according to Lederman.

Jackson, who was also arrested that night, said she believed police conduct was “incredibly intimidating, and it has a chilling effect on free speech.”

​​Not everyone can pay for the news. But if you can, we need your support.

Truthout is widely read among people with lower ­incomes and among young people who are mired in debt. Our site is read at public libraries, among people without internet access of their own. People print out our articles and send them to family members in prison — we receive letters from behind bars regularly thanking us for our coverage. Our stories are emailed and shared around communities, sparking grassroots mobilization.

We’re committed to keeping all Truthout articles free and available to the public. But in order to do that, we need those who can afford to contribute to our work to do so.

We’ll never require you to give, but we can ask you from the bottom of our hearts: Will you donate what you can, so we can continue providing journalism in the service of justice and truth?