Civil rights activists call for investigation into police raid of West Berkeley homeless encampment

Written by Andrea Prichett

This article originally appeared in the July issue of Street Spirit

The brutality of the City of Berkeley’s policy and practices towards unhoused people was on full display in the early morning hours of June 4, 2025 at the intersection of Eighth and Harrison Street. From the overwhelming police presence to the use of potentially lethal munitions, suspicious smoke devices, bulldozers and a mere 20 minute window that residents were given to evacuate the site, this raid was unusual.  While it has become ever more common to see early morning raids of homeless encampments, the George Floyd-style beating of one man and the great lengths that police went to prevent onlookers from documenting the situation were particularly noteworthy.

In what would later be described by Senior District Judge Edward M. Chen as “a violation of the due process rights of the people living in tents there,” Berkeley police (BPD) woke everyone up around 6AM and shouted that they had “20 minutes” to remove whatever they could before the bulldozers moved in on their camps. One officer explained in a subsequent court declaration that police didn't really mean 20 minutes, but had told residents that as a way of getting them to move faster. Encampment residents had not received any notice of the operation, which is typically posted 72 hours before a scheduled sweep.

A perimeter of yellow “caution tape” was established about two blocks from where the bulldozers were clearing possessions and tents away on Harrison Street. Similarly, BPD cordoned off the area about two blocks east and west of Eighth Street, effectively preventing press and onlookers from being able to observe what was being taken and who was taking it. 

As I neared the intersection—well before meeting the caution tape—I was approached by two BPD officers and told to “stand behind the car,” indicating their BPD parked about 20 feet behind the cordon was as close as I was allowed to observe. When I challenged their aggression, the two men began to push and force me backwards as other officers moved in. Other observers later explained that they, too, had been prevented from even standing near the barrier. 

“Draco,” an encampment resident who had been subjected to the use of potentially lethal munitions earlier that morning, suffered the worst of BPD’s aggressions outside the established perimeter. While filming the police after being removed from his camp, Draco started walking towards the tape with his two dogs before two BPD officers forced him to step backward. When Draco subsequently stumbled behind the perimeter, he was immediately tackled and nearby officers rushed over to pile on top of him. 

At one point his throat was caught between two officers’ knees and he called out that he could not breath. Officers seemed quite indifferent to the pain Draco was expressing and continued to use their body weight and pain compliance techniques to force his arms behind his back. All the while he continued to state, “I didn't do anything,” as the 10-officer pile continued to press in on him. It was not surprising when Draco called out in pain that they “broke [his] rib.” 

Draco—legal name Austin White—was eventually cuffed and tossed face down into the back of a squad car. He was held in Santa Rita Jail for five nights before a judge released him on his own recognizance. Charges of “resisting arrest” and “battery on an officer” are expected to be dropped, especially after the footage of the incident is examined by prosecutors. 

The shocking beat down—as well as the unnecessary use of munitions, smoke, lack of required notice, and violations of the First Amendment rights of onlookers—are now the subject of formal complaints filed with the Police Accountability Board (PAB). 

In support of demands for justice, an emergency rally was called for June 11 in front of the PAB offices, just ahead of its regularly scheduled meeting. Approximately 30 community members attended the gathering, many speaking out about the violence and injustice that accompanied the encampment raid. After the rally outside, supporters attended the PAB meeting inside and spoke out about the misconduct and the lack of accountability of officers during the June 4 operation at Eighth and Harrison.

One personnel complaint has been filed against two of the officers. Officer Booze (#120) and Officer Guananja (#121) were named as being most aggressive towards onlookers and Austin White. However, the sheer size of the operation (35–45 officers) and the multiple agencies with whom the police were working that morning indicates that the operation was planned well in advance. A public records request has been filed for copies of the “Operational Plan” that describes plans for the event before it occurred, as well as the “After Action Report,” which is generally supposed to be written immediately following an action to describe the outcome and implementation of the plan. 

Policy complaints have also been filed in the aftermath of the June 4 operation. One complaint calls for clarification about whether police command staff can be held accountable for misconduct if they plan and implement actions that are obviously in violation of the law, let alone their department’s own policies. 

The other policy complaint addresses failures under the Berkeley Police Department’s current General Order entitled “Public Recording of Law Enforcement Activity,” which describes the rights of citizens to, as stated in the First Amendment, petition the government for a redress of grievances. In this case, it means the right to gather evidence that could be used to establish wrongdoing by the government. 

Berkeley once had a policy that put “the least possible restriction on citizen monitoring of the police” (Training Bulletin 91-BPD). The new policy complaint calls for a rewrite of the General Order so that officers would be held accountable for unnecessarily restricting the public’s ability to bear witness to police operations, and thus hold police accountable for their actions. 

The call for accountability is something of a desperate measure. The Berkeley City Council has disregarded many of the recommendations of the PAB in making recent decisions. It has turned down requests and opportunities to strengthen the power of the board to compel cooperation from the department. 

Recently, the council approved a report submitted by Berkeley Police Chief Jen Louis which failed to include data about the department's use of military-style equipment, which is required under the city’s Military Ordinance Reporting legislation that was passed in an unanimous decision back in 2021. Now, the Chief is lobbying to get rid of the legislation entirely. 

Activists believe that it will probably require a lawsuit to get BPD to cooperate with the PAB. One question is whether the PAB will investigate the incident and the troubling issues it raises. The other—and perhaps more important—question, is whether the council will support the PAB in doing the job voters empowered it to do

Andrea Prichett is a founding member of Berkeley Copwatch and former Police Review Commissioner.

This is the only link you really need:https://drive.google.com/file/d/1HlPhUOpVVCeECw2jMd9Ls49xu33hdKwR/view?usp=sharing