If by “a people” you mean roughly half of Catalans, then you may be right. But then, it’s a weird definition of “a people”, one that is not based on race, language, culture, nationality nor geography, but on the response to one very specific issue (ie, the validity of the “referendum”).

The police in some cases mistreated some of those who thought the “referendum” was legitimate and chose to disobey specific instructions by judges and the police (and that violence was horrible, I’m not defending it in any way). But that is not “a people” more than “those without college degrees” are “a people” or “those who demand a referendum to legalise euthanasia” are “a people”. The other half of Catalans who opposed the “referendum”, or simply chose to comply with the law, did not suffer any mistreatment.

Another example: are those who choose to protest against G8 summits, sometimes causing public nuisance or damaging public goods, “a people”? Are all those who show up at “Black Lives Matter” demonstrations (individuals of all races and backgrounds), “a people”?

Excuse me for delving into these terms so much, but I think the choice of words plays an important role in all of this.