Nobody can predict when events will take a turn for the worse. At a moment’s notice, a frightening situation can become a violent emergency, as it did Saturday evening when North Berkeley resident Peter Cukor was allegedly bludgeoned to death. This incident was tragic, no doubt, but speculation that the Berkeley Police Department’s preparation for a coming Occupy protest is to blame for this man’s death is unacceptable.
Cukor could not fathom the danger of his situation when, according to a department spokesperson, he calmly called a nonemergency line to report a person trespassing on his property. He could not predict the urgency at which police presence was required when he walked to a nearby fire station to ask for help.
That an immediate need for law enforcement was only prompted by Cukor’s shocking homicide is beyond unfortunate. In an ideal world, police would immediately jump into action for every call, but the reality is that they cannot. Regardless of what resources the department was dedicating to Occupy Oakland’s march to Berkeley, the situation at Cukor’s residence did not present itself as an emergency until it was too late.
While Berkeleyans should rightfully expect their police department to be responsive at all times — a sentiment Berkeley City Councilmember Susan Wengraf has expressed — it is misguided to believe that, as resident Cathy Romanski stated, “a person died because of (the Occupy) protests.” Hindsight is 20/20. The facts surrounding what happened on Saturday currently are not.
Both Wengraf and Berkeley Police Chief Michael Meehan deserve credit for their quick efforts to illuminate police procedures and restore the public’s trust in those sworn to protect them. But reckless fingerpointing serves no constructive end.
It is neither fair nor just for the Berkeley community to blame Occupy — or prematurely blame any person or organization — for Cukor’s death. This killing of an innocent person is undeniably horrifying, but more than that was impossible to foresee. Compounding a trauma by assigning blame to third parties does nothing except obfuscate facts and hamper the unbiased pursuit of the truth.
Comment Policy
Comments should remain on topic, concerning the article or blog post to which they are connected. Brevity is encouraged. Posting under a pseudonym is discouraged, but permitted. The Daily Cal encourages readers to voice their opinions respectfully in regard to the readers, writers and contributors of The Daily Californian. Comments are not pre-moderated, but may be removed if deemed to be in violation of this policy. Click here to read the full comment policy.
People,
Protect yourself. Get some training.
Keep a loaded firearm at home
Get a permit to carry
If this MF was prowling around my home and threatened me or my family, the last sound he would hear is the sound of the safety clicking off.
“those sworn to protect them”
Why is the myth that police are sworn and obliged to protect us so frequently perpetuated? There is no duty to protect. The oath officers take only requires that they uphold the Constitution of the United States and the constitution of California, and carry out their duties as well as they can. Appellate courts and the Supreme Court have firmly held that there is no police responsibility to protect. If a department fails to protect, sure some scapegoat may fall to take the blame, but there is very little potential for legal recourse.
Why do I care about this?
I care because there is a flawed perception, particularly in wealthier areas, that we are safe and protected — that when we drive to our secluded home up in the hills, we are protected, not only by geography, but by a government “sworn to protect.”
Crime travels folks. The mentally unstable travel. Furthermore, there is no legal duty to protect.
Some communities obviously enjoy the luxury of having a high quality police department along with lower crime rates. Yet at the end of the day, individuals must still assume the responsibility of protecting themselves and their families.
For once, let’s stop spreading misinformation. Let’s stop assigning blame to anyone but the attacker.
yet more reasons to distrust the criminal justice system in the USA:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/27/opinion/justice-and-open-files.html?_r=1&hp
Prosecutors have a constitutional duty to disclose significant evidence favorable to a criminal defendant. But too often that duty, as laid out by the 1963 Supreme Court decision Brady v. Maryland, is violated.
[SNIP]
A small number of state and local governments have adopted open-file policies that require prosecutors to make available well before trial all information favorable to the defense, without regard to whether such information is likely to affect the outcome of the case. North Carolina and Ohio and places like Milwaukee have found that such policies make prosecutions fairer and convictions less prone to error. The Justice Department should join this movement and set a national example. But instead, it continues to take half-measures in response to its own failures to meet disclosure requirements.
[SNIP]
Those changes are not sufficient because the Brady rule is too easily skirted. It allows prosecutors to withhold favorable evidence that they deem not to be material, leaving defense lawyers unaware of evidence that may be owed them. Ninety-six percent of federal criminal cases are resolved by plea bargains, so the rule puts defendants at a disadvantage in negotiation: without access to information in the government’s files, they don’t know the evidence they face and can’t assess their odds at trial.
1. Man murdered because of #occupy.
2. #occupy protests because of seemingly sickening cultural corruption.
3. Man murdered because of seemingly sickening cultural corrupt— er, i mean…
3. Blame #occupy. Keep blinders on. Ignore syllogisms if they don’t help your argument.
I’m a longtime Berkeley resident and alumnus and this is complete bullshit. On a larger scale, consider what happened in Oakland when police resources were strained because of Occupy. There was indeed an uptick in murders. Now it is certainly misleading to suggest that Occupy directly led to the murder of Cukor, put it damn sure didn’t help stop it. And the truth of the matter is that someone would have probably been dispatched to the scene if Occupy weren’t pulling their shit.
Can you show us the data on “uptick in murders”?
http://sfist.com/2012/01/16/ktvu_investigation_reveals_crime_do.php
The real issue is how this kook wound up in Berkeley in the first place. The Left’s ongoing cultural war against America and middle class society results in an environment where criminals, substance abusers, and the mentally ill are adopted as mascots and made welcome by constricting the ability of law enforcement to do its job and either detain violent individuals or run them out of town. Nutjobs such as this paranoid schizophrenic are made to feel welcome in a town where the hands of police and public safety personnel are tied by both the professional agitators and the bleeding heart goo-goos.
the real issue is that Tony M is an obvious troll,
once again Tony, you FAILZ it hard
No, my little stalker chihuahua, YOU are the fail.
You can’t produce anything original. All you can do is follow me around and post your silly nonsense.
You have no life outside of me. Now jump as I jerk your little chain once more.