portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reporting portland metro

police / legal a22: bush protest | m20: day x | week of bombing

Alan Graf's Press Conference Speech

City of Portland and the Portland Police Bureau Concedes Defeat


Agrees to Pay $300,000 plus Attorney Fees and Costs to End Law Suit

Press Conference Team of Activists and National Lawyers Guild Attorneys Bring City of Portland to its Knees.
Who's Streets? Our Streets!!!

So says the Portland Progressive Community as it takes to the streets time and time again to voice its vigorous dissent and dissatisfaction with the policies and practices of the Administration of George W. Bush--an administration that continues to torture prisoners, spit on the Bill of Rights, destroy the environment, lie to the American public, engage in an illegitimate war and exhibit a criminal disregard for the rule of law.

Despite how the police tried to portray the August 22, 2002 and March 2003 demonstrations as protestor riots, the truth has finally come out. It was the police acting in a criminal manner similar to the President they were attempting to protect. The actions of the Portland Police showed a blatant and criminal disregard for basic humanitarian principles and human rights in this town.

We won, the police state lost. Chalk a big one up for Portland's activist community.

This is the first time that we have seen any real police accountability in this town

Round two is next and we are ready.

While Chief of Police Foxworth blithely states that he has the utmost confidence in Officer Kruger and his actions—once again the videos and pictures speak otherwise. Here is a picture of a man who Foxworth promoted to Lieutenant after he used chemical weapons indiscriminately against protestors and against Fox News camerawoman Beth English.

Tell me chief, if Kruger dressed up in white robes, burned crosses and claimed to be a civil war buff, would you assert that it was engaged in an innocent pastime and promote him? How could you allow a so called "student of history" trusted with a badge and a gun proudly strut around in a Nazi uniform while at the same time applying chemical weapons to indiscriminately torture peaceful protestors. I am appalled.

You should know that through the two years of this law suit, the city resisted producing documents at every turn about every detail regarding the police. The city attorneys vigorously fought to keep our police as the secret police. And as we got into the details of the PPB we found out why.

The officer that pepper sprayed babies is still on the streets. No admonishment. The officer that hammered Bill Ellis's head to the ground, hit him over the head with pepper spray is still on the streets. No admonishment. The officer that twisted a woman's head who was peacefully protesting, cackled with glee while spraying a woman a foot smaller than him, pepper sprayed a Fox news camera woman and dresses up in Nazi drag-- was promoted to Lieutenant. He was rewarded for being a criminal. The officer that has a financial interest in Armor Holdings, the company that manufactures pepper spray cannisters is still on the streets encouraging their use by the PPB and was promoted like Kruger.

This is one dysfunctional institution. In the Portland Police Bureau, the crud rises to the top..

During discovery, Commander Dave Benson swore to the court under oath that the specifications for the use of pepper spray were top secret because the police didn't want the protestors to find out about the chemical weapons used against them. Then we did a search on the internet and bought for ourselves the same cannister that the police use.

During the course of this suit, we hired Dr. Woodhall Stopford of Duke University who is the top chemical weapons advisor to the U.S. Army. He said, and the city now knows this, that it is dangerous to public health to use pepper spray for crowd control. Why? Because pepper spray can cause fatalities especially amongst children, people with asthma, and elderly. If you use pepper spray to disperse a crowd, you cannot know the health condition of individual members of the crowd. It is irresponsible, and criminally reckless to continue to use chemical weapons against the people of Portland. Foxworth and the entire city council is now on notice that chemical weapons can cause fatalities. The city produced no expert who stated anything to the contrary. If there is a fatality, the question is- will we see Foxworth and the city council charged with manslaughter?

We spent almost five months negotiating with the city attorneys with the help of Senior Judge Ed Leavy of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals. Judge Leavy was a wonderful negotiator and really helped us reach a good agreement. We had an twelve page agreement on the table that would have restricted the police in how they treated peaceful protestors. The city had four attorneys there and Commander Sizer. They agreed to the basic provisions of the settlement. But Foxworth never showed up. And at the last minute, he tubed the agreement and instead recommended that city buy us off with 300K and pay for our attorney fees..

One of our Plaintiffs refused to take the money because he believed that the settlement agreement that was on the table was the only way to change the police force. That was Lloyd Marbet. I don't blame Lloyd for taking that position but I disagree with him. I think we have won the first big battle in a long protracted war.

To this day, there have been no substantial changes in police behavior. However, out of this litigation grew the NW Constitutional Rights Center-it is the litigation team of lawyers, paralegals and activists who joined together with the vow that if you disrespect the Bill of Rights, if you treat activists and protestors with disrespect:

We will be back at you, back in your face, back at you-- suing you, deposing you, investigating you, making your life miserable and costing the city of Portland- money, again and again and again. We will be back at you with video cameras in your face, particularly in North Portland where the Center plans to work with a group of African-American youth patrolling their streets.

Whose streets? Their streets!! To make sure that the police don't murder any more unarmed African-Americans on the street. This time there will be video cameras and lawyers funded by this law suit to continue the vigilance.

Indeed, vigilance is our answer to both local and national oppression. Vigilance and truth saying is our response to the use of chemical weapons on peaceful American patriots. Why do we call it the First Amendment? Why is the First Amendment so vital to our society and its ability to keep on? Because without the protections it holds for the voices of the minority, our fragile democracy will die an untimely death.

I am hopeful that our new Mayor Tom Potter and the newly elected council is ready to go forward with real substantial change. I appreciate Tom's remarks that he wants to demilitarize our local police. I support those changes. I look forward to seeing the police force change from thugs in uniform to a force of peace officers that we all can be proud of, a force where no law abiding citizen is afraid when encountering an officer.. I recognize that there are good police officers out there and they need to be recognized and promoted for doing a good job.

I feel proud to be part of this team of activists and National Lawyers Guild attorneys who through their concerted efforts achieved such a historical victory.

Make no mistake about it. We are at the crossroads of history


there is no turning back.

Alan Graf

Executive Director

National Lawyers Guild--NW Constitutional Rights Center

1020 SW Taylor St. Ste. 230

Portland, Oregon 97205



(503) 452-2375

(503) 241-0260

homepage: homepage: http://portland.indymedia.org/en/2004/11/304835.shtml#156492

good job 01.Dec.2004 16:45



Hopefully Marbets suit continues with fruitful results and further promotes a healty climate in our community. I thank those who were willing to show up and demonstrate againts the despots. I further hope you maximize the use of your rewards. I also hope you did not have to keep details secret in your settlement.

MAGNIFICENT! 01.Dec.2004 17:01

Den Mark, Vancouver

Thank you, thank you, thank you, to all involved in this major accomplishment. Bless you all. When i protested in NYC against rnc, i felt safer than i've felt at Portland protests. Thanks also to brother & sister protesters who've come out regardless, over past years, regardless of sadistic criminals in uniform, regardless of kroeker/foxworth, regardless of katzencouncil. I'm sick of being treated like i'm doing something wrong in Portland for upholding standards of justice & peace. I'd be treated better were i protesting in Kyiv, Ukraine, than in Portland, USA. City officials should feel shamed by all this, but one must have principles in order to feel shame.

Thank you, thank you, thank you, & let's crank up the momentum.

More from kboo 01.Dec.2004 17:23

was lissening

Just heard an interview with Alan Graf on the Kboo news. He took exception to some of the details in the (composted) oregonianian article. Wish I could recall the details to share with you but, well, radio is like that. Kind of ephemeral.

Anyway, I expect the audio to be posted on kboo.fm but is not there yet. And doesn't he have a show in the morning?

Outstanding job! 01.Dec.2004 17:47


Now when "they" say the protesters caused the riots, I can say look to the city settlement! Outstanding job, attorneys, plaintiffs, video tapers and protesters. This good news was well-deserved, and the "fight" to get this result was wonderful! I am sooo happy! I'll never forget police marching to face-off in front of the No War Drum Corp, and without a word, they began pepper-spraying them. I was about 20' away. The spray is lethal as is tazers. Indiscriminate pounding of us will now be lessened. However, I won't trust a police officer, still, as I have become quite leery of them.

Pictures and Info Of Police In Suit Post Here 01.Dec.2004 17:51


I was wondering if someone could post the pics and the info of the cops that were involved in the suit and that are still in the streets here. So we can see the faces to look out for next time we encounter police and remember what they have done. Wasn't there a "deck of cards" with all this info?

deck of cards 01.Dec.2004 18:15




might be not the most-up-to-date one.

OK! OK! now I understand why the 01.Dec.2004 18:40


look so down 'n out today...they got their asses kicked! Way to go! Do it some more!

Video Cameras In Our Streets! 01.Dec.2004 19:21


Right On! I hope this anonomous comment- made a feature is all substantiated because this program rocks. I've seen it myself. From Seattle '99 WTO to Books not Bombs in Ashland when I was arrested '93, to last yr. at FTAA Miami. Video doesn't lie. We need to carry them as is suggested in defending OUR STREETS up there in NE Portland. Right On!!!

The use of video in the courtroom absolutely fascinates me. Keep up the good work. And lets make a pledge to have more VIDEO CAMERAS IN OUR STREETS!!!

Lt. Mark Kruger 01.Dec.2004 20:33


Here is a photograph of Lt. Mark Kruger. Notice the pin on the brim of the hat.

Keep The Cameras Rolling 01.Dec.2004 21:25

bitter root

In my opinion, this victory is tempered, somewhat, in that something like legally binding injunctive or prescriptive mandates directed at the PPB were not achieved. Nevertheless, Peoples' Counselor Graff, the legal team, the enduring plaintiffs and any others who gave of time and material are to be congratulated for taking the lead in tirelessly and meticulously building a solid, impregnable case. And winning!

Their goals, shared by others present on that day of PPB transgressions, were to make the public spaces safe for citizens of all ages and stations, unified in exercising democratic freedoms and free speech, including realistic access to the eyes and ears of those in power.
Some might consider picking up cheapo salvage video cams (maybe found in the "technology" section of the third hand emporiums: St. V's, Goodies, the Sal, etc., or at recyclers) and just haul them along to the protests. Brandish them about at the outings, making the random spectacle of hundreds...well, maybe dozens, of lenses zoomed in on the proceedings and maneuverings of the PPB. The intention being to reinforce self-discipline and inhibit the dehumanized impulses of the PPB loose cannons. Nothing lost if your "cam" is grabbed and trashed.

All the better, of course, if all the cams are active and recording!

The pin on the bottom of the hat... 01.Dec.2004 22:00

some geek

...Looks like the pin on the bottom of the hat has some sort of Allied battle insignia... I could be wrong though, so let me share some useless, but satisfying facts about military rank words:

Entomology Facts of the Day:
"Lieutenant" comes from the French "lieu" meaning "place" and
"tenant" meaning "holding." Literally, lieutenants are place

Colonel is pronounced "kernal" because the British adopted the
French spelling "colonel" but Spanish pronunciation "coronel"
and then corrupted the pronunciation.

[ http://www.military-quotes.com/military-rank.htm]

to "some geek" 01.Dec.2004 22:44


i was not talking about the round emblem on kruger's hat. look a little higher on the hat. the item i am talking about looks a little more like this well-known emblem.

What Symbol 01.Dec.2004 22:52


I don't see the swastica on his hat. I just see the little circle and what looks like eagle wings. Where is the symbol your looking at?

just below the eagle 01.Dec.2004 23:08


click on the picture to open the larger version. the swastika is just under the eagle. look closely, it's in plain view!!

I SEE IT!!!!!! I SEE IT!!!!! 01.Dec.2004 23:16


For those who cannot see the swastika on Krokers hat, It's between the eagle and the round pin.....look very very closely.....it's hard to see cause it's in the shadow on his hat, but it's there.......for a minute I was going crazy trying to find it....but I did it :-)

Also, I tried clicking on the website that the "Deck Of Cards" would be at, but nothing happened.......any other websites?????

here's the photo enhanced 02.Dec.2004 00:05


not sure if it's a hoax or not.
hoax  or not?
hoax or not?

the would be settlement 02.Dec.2004 01:35


I found this on Alan's website. It's the original settlement *proposal*. Certainly would have re-written the rule book for protests in portland if implemented as is. While it's clearly the best anyone could hope for, and not within these lawyers power to do more, it's still all "bigger cages, longer chains" in the scheme of things.


The following is our proposal to the City of Portland to settle two civil right cases the NLG has filed against the City. We believe that the following proposal if agreed to, could be the foundation for very positive change here in Portland in helping build a new relationship between protestors and the Portland Police Bureau. More to come.

The two primary goals of this Stipulated Agreement are 1) to protect and facilitate the public's constitutional right to freedom of speech and assembly, and 2) to protect and promote public safety.

The free speech and freedom of assembly provisions of the United States Constitution (First Amendment) and Article I, section 8 of the Oregon Constitution protect the rights of members of the public to engage in many activities in which information, opinions and grievances are expressed and communicated. Common forms of such activities are demonstrations, protests, rallies, vigils, and picketing. Such events and activities usually attract a crowd, including participants, onlookers, observers, media and persons who disagree with the point of view of the activity. Other events that attract crowds and that may require policing in accordance with this Agreement include athletic events, rock concerts and festivals.

The government cannot prohibit these free speech activities or regulate them in a way that will prevent meaningful and effective communication, discourse and assembly. The government may impose reasonable restrictions on the time, place, and manner of conducting these activities. However, any limitations or restrictions placed on demonstrations or other First Amendment activities must be justified by the requirements of maintaining public safety, public health, or safe access/egress from the area, and must be consistent with the rights of demonstrators to communicate effectively with their intended audience. Public speakers, demonstrations and protests may represent extremely controversial and/or unpopular points of view, but members of the Portland Police Bureau and outside agency members shall remain neutral in word and deed.

A. Demonstration: The term "demonstration" is used generically in this Agreement to include a wide range of free speech situations which require, or which may require, police traffic control, crowd control, crowd dispersal or enforcement actions in a crowd situation. Thus, the term "demonstration" as used in this Agreement includes, but is not limited to, marches, protests, assemblies and sit-ins.
B. First Amendment activities: The term "First Amendment activities" includes all forms of speech and expressive conduct used to convey ideas and/or information, to express grievances or to otherwise communicate with others, and includes both verbal and non-verbal expression. Common First Amendment activities include, but are not limited to, speeches, demonstrations, vigils, picketing, distribution of literature, holding of banners or signs, street theater, and other artistic forms of expression.
C. Officers: The term "officers" applies to all police personnel.

1. Pre-event planning for demonstrations shall be in the form of a detailed written operations plan.
2. When the Portland Police Bureau (PPB) has knowledge that a demonstration may happen or will happen, PPB shall proactively and repeatedly attempt to establish and to maintain communication and cooperation with representatives of the demonstration, without regard to whether a permit has been applied for or issued. If communication is established, whether prior to or during the demonstration, representatives of the demonstration should be asked to identify a primary police liaison, and a small number of assistants or "back-ups". The primary police liaison should be requested to be in continuous contact with an assigned police representative (who shall have continuous access to the Incident Commander), and with the demonstration organizers.
3. A group's failure to respond to PPB's attempts to establish communication and cooperation prior to a demonstration shall not mitigate PPB's responsibility to establish liaison and positive communication with the group as early as possible at the scene of the protest or demonstration. No retaliatory practices or adverse action shall be taken by officers against a group because it has failed or refused to appoint a police liaison or otherwise establish positive lines of communication with PPB.
4. Demonstration police liaison, crowd monitors, legal observers and other crowd-identified or self-identified individuals purporting to fulfill some constructive role in the demonstration shall be assumed by officers to be sincere and bona fide, unless there is clear and specific evidence that they are not.
5. PPB's communication and liaison with representatives of a group shall not be curtailed or abandoned because of a PPB decision to take enforcement actions or to disperse the crowd.
6. The failure to deploy adequate police resources may lead to the unnecessary escalation of a crowd situation and/or to unnecessary violence. This includes the necessary resources to make mass arrests at demonstrations where such mass arrests are a reasonable possibility. However, this must be balanced against the fact that a large and visible police presence, particularly the visible presence of the Rapid Response Team (RRT) will have a chilling effect on the exercise of free speech rights and may antagonize the crowd. Where additional resources are needed, they shall be staged at a nearby location so the officers are not readily visible to the crowd. This is especially applicable to the use of the Rapid Response Team (RRT), and other outside agency Mobile Response Team units. Members of these teams shall not walk through crowds of demonstrators or drive by demonstrators while in full view of those demonstrators.
7. Spontaneous demonstrations which occur without prior planning and/or without prior notice to the police present less opportunity for PPB planning and prevention efforts. Nonetheless, this Agreement shall apply to both spontaneous demonstrations and planned demonstrations.
8. When counter-demonstrations are planned or occur spontaneously, the overriding policing goal shall be to keep adversarial groups safely apart.
9. All Officers, including RRT and outside agency members shall display their agency's identifying patch and nametag on the outside of their uniforms. The patch and name shall be clearly visible at all times. The letters on jackets and vests shall be clearly legible at a distance sufficient to provide a measure of safety for both officers and demonstrators/observers, and in no case less than one inch in height and designed with clearly contrasting colors-example black letters on white field is acceptable, grey letters on black field is not.

1. Officers shall be professional and unbiased in all contacts with members of the public.
2. Officers shall facilitate demonstrations by regulating and/or rerouting traffic as much as practical, regardless of whether a permit has been obtained. For a demonstration without a pre-planned route, the Incident Commander shall evaluate the size of the crowd with regard to whether demonstrators should be required to stay on the sidewalk or whether demonstrators should be allowed one or more lanes of traffic. Traffic control may also be essential at varying points in a demonstration. This evaluation should be later documented in an after action report. The report shall include an explanation of how the Incident Commander protected and facilitated the public's constitutional right to freedom of speech and assembly, while protecting and promoting public safety
3. Where the only illegal conduct is that a demonstration takes place in the street, as in a march without a permit, or a march which temporarily obstructs traffic (as distinguished from a sit-in where demonstrators willfully block traffic), PPB's policy shall be to redirect traffic to safely facilitate the First Amendment activity, and to engage in dialogue with demonstration representatives regarding their route and use of the streets. As a practical matter, this may result in less traffic disruption than would result from carrying out a large mass arrest in the street.
4. Officers shall recognize that all members of a crowd of demonstrators are not the same. Even when some members of a crowd engage in violent behavior or destruction of property, other members of the crowd, usually a majority, may not be participating in those acts. A person may participate in a march that has not been granted a permit, may fail to move or disperse when the crowd is ordered to do so and may observe as some members of the crowd engage in violent acts, looting or destruction of property. Officers shall not take actions or use levels of force appropriate for perpetrators of violence, looting or destruction against demonstrators who have not participated in those activities. Officers shall not block peaceful demonstrators from leaving the scene of a demonstration. In this case, officers shall accommodate and assist those peaceful demonstrators who choose to leave the scene.
5. Individual officers shall not move into the midst of a crowd to make an arrest unless necessitated by 1) imminent threat of injury to an officer or some third party; 2) as part of a mass arrest procedure as defined in this Agreement; and/or 3) destruction of property.
6. Officers shall avoid negative verbal engagement with members of the crowd. Offensive language against officers, that are not accompanied by specific and identifiable threats of imminent violence, shall not constitute a reason for arrest.
7. Officers shall not have any weapons drawn or displayed in a threatening manner unless there is an imminent necessity for the deployment of such weapons. These weapons include, but are not limited to guns, tasers, pepper spray canisters, and sage launchers. Such displays of weapons can incite the crowd and chill First Amendment activity.
8. Nothing in this agreement shall prohibit officers from taking reasonable steps to protect themselves or others from imminent physical harm. Nothing in this agreement shall prohibit officers from taking appropriate action if violence, looting or serious destruction of property occur. However, PPB decision makers must be cognizant of overriding concerns for the safety of all involved, the volatility of a large crowd situation and the protection of those not engaged in illegal activity.

A. Decisions about crowd dispersal, crowd redirection, mass arrests, planned individual arrests or planned use of force shall be made at the level of the Incident Commander or higher. If such decisions are made by higher ranking off-site PPB officials, the Incident Commander shall first be consulted about the state of affairs in the field and about the potential decision. All such decisions shall be documented in writing with regard to time, the identity of the person making the decision and the precise decision and directions given. Such documentation shall be made at the time of the decision or as soon thereafter as possible.
B. Command staff shall be notified immediately of large or potentially disruptive demonstrations, including spontaneous demonstrations.
C. PPB supervisors and managers shall remain cognizant that crowd control situations may be volatile and emotional for members of the crowd and for officers alike. In particular, PPB supervisors and managers shall exercise the highest level of care to ensure that members of the crowd are not subjected to excessive force, corporal punishment, intentional public humiliation or similar types of mistreatment by officers.

1. Lethal Force: The use of lethal force by officers is governed by the Bureau's Use of Force Policy and by case law. Nothing about a crowd control situation eliminates or ameliorates any of the constraints and criteria governing the use of lethal force.
2. Canines: Canines shall not be present at demonstrations. Canines shall not be used for crowd control, crowd dispersal or enforcement actions in a crowd situation.
3. Horses: Horses shall not be used for crowd control, crowd dispersal or enforcement actions in a crowd situation.
4. Fire Hoses: Fire hoses shall not be used for crowd control, crowd dispersal or enforcement actions in a crowd situation.
5. Motorcycles: Motorcycles, motor scooters, patrol cars, ATV's or other motorized vehicles shall not be used for crowd control, crowd dispersal or be driven through a crowd. The use of motorized vehicles for enforcement actions against individual members of a crowd is similarly prohibited, except when used to pursue a suspect who has clearly left the confines of the crowd and has committed a felony level offense.
6. Less-lethal weapons:
(a) Less-lethal weapons shall not be used for crowd control, crowd "pushes" or crowd dispersal. Less-lethal weapons include electronic immobilizing devices (EID's), such as, but not limited to, stun guns, stun shields and tasers (in either the drive stun or probe mode); and less-lethal projectile weapons, such as, but not limited to, rubber bullets, bean bags, stingers, sting balls, kinetic batons, and sage launchers.
(b) These weapons shall only be used against a specific individual or individuals who are actively attempting to cause physical harm to any person or threatening imminent serious physical injury to any person (i.e. "Menacing" under ORS 163.190) or is actively engaged in looting or serious destruction of property. Less-lethal weapons shall not be used indiscriminately against a crowd or group of persons. Less-lethal weapons shall not be used in a crowd situation if such use would cause a risk of physical injury to bystanders or others not engaged in the unlawful activity justifying the use of the weapons. These weapons shall not be used in a crowd situation if a lower level of force is available and would accomplish the policing goal. The use of these less-lethal weapons must cease when the threatening or assaultive actions cease. These weapons may not be used to knock people down for the purpose of apprehension or to otherwise prevent escape, unless the situation would warrant the use of lethal force. These weapons shall not be used for the purposes of inflicting pain, punishing an individual for prior behavior, compelling individuals to cease non-violent illegal activities or convincing protesters who are passively resisting (by sitting or lying down) to move.
(c) No officer shall use these less-lethal weapons unless that officer has successfully completed departmentally approved training for that specific weapon and/or round and is certified in its use.
(d) PPB shall have adequate medical personnel available on-scene to administer medical assistance and/or first aid to individuals injured by the use of less-lethal weapons.

7. Aerosol chemical agents:
(a) Aerosol chemical agents shall not be used for crowd control, crowd "pushes" or crowd dispersal. Aerosol chemical agents include Pepper spray, OC spray, Mace, tear gas or any other chemical agent designed to temporarily incapacitate an individual.
(b) Aerosol chemical agents shall not be used indiscriminately against a crowd or group of persons, even if the officers maintain that such persons are illegally assembled in a particular location. Officers shall only use aerosol chemical agents against a specific individual or individuals who are actively attempting to cause physical harm to any person or threatening imminent serious physical injury to any person (i.e. "Menacing" under ORS 163.190) or is actively engaged in looting or serious destruction of property. Aerosol chemical agents shall not be used in a crowd situation if such use would cause a risk of physical injury to bystanders or others not engaged in the unlawful activity justifying the use of such agents. The chemical agents shall not be used in a crowd situation if a lower level of force is available and would accomplish the policing goal. The use of aerosol chemical agents shall cease when the threatening or assaultive actions cease. These agents shall not be used for the purpose of inflicting pain, punishing an individual for prior behavior, compelling individuals to cease non-violent illegal activities or convincing protesters who are passively resisting (by sitting or lying down) to move. Aerosol chemical agents shall not be used against individuals in restraints, although there may be rare exceptions in which the use of aerosol chemical agents is justified for self-defense or defense of others if the person in restraints becomes assaultive and if there are no lower levels of force available to control or stop the attack. Aerosol chemical agents shall never be used to stop verbal behavior.
(c) No officer shall use aerosol chemical agents unless that officer has successfully completed Department approved training in the use of such agents. PPB shall issue a training bulletin documenting the risk factors associated with the use of aerosol chemical agents as noted and described by Dr. Woodhall Stopford of Duke University.
(d) PPB shall have adequate medical personnel available on-scene to administer medical assistance and/or first aid to all individuals injured from the use of aerosol chemical agents.

1. The failure of a group to obtain a required permit for a demonstration, protest or march shall not justify enforcement actions by PPB.
2. Dispersing an unlawful assembly:
(a) Declaring a demonstration unlawful: A demonstration may only be declared an unlawful assembly where the crowd is (1) actively attempting to cause physical harm to any person or threatening imminent serious physical injury to any person (i.e. "Menacing" under ORS 163.190) or (2) is engaged in looting or serious destruction of property or (3) when the demonstration is for the clear purpose of civil disobedience or (4) when the demonstrators actively obstruct vehicular traffic or (5) when the demonstrators intentionally block entrances or exits to buildings. The police may not stop First Amendment activity before demonstrators have acted illegally or before the demonstrators pose a clear and present danger of imminent violence, even where some of the same individuals or organizing groups have engaged in unlawful conduct on previous occasions.
(b) The police shall not disperse a demonstration without first validly declaring it an unlawful assembly. If the police determine that protestors are unlawfully assembled and need to be removed, the police shall first give dispersal orders and arrest warnings that are clearly audible to the entire assembled crowd. The dispersal orders shall clearly and repeatedly state the amount of time demonstrators have to disperse and the route of dispersal. The dispersal orders shall state what weapons or agents may be used against certain individuals in the crowd depending upon the circumstances. The police shall station an officer at the back of the crowd to digitally or tape record the warnings to establish the adequacy of the public address equipment and to make duplicate copies of said tapes to be posted on the City of Portland's web-site within 72 hours of a receipt of a written request from any citizen.
Dispersal orders shall be made using adequate sound amplification equipment, and in a manner that will ensure that they are audible over a sufficient area. Dispersal orders shall be made from different locations when the demonstration is large and noisy. The orders shall specify adequate egress routes. Whenever possible, a minimum of two egress routes shall be identified and announced. If possible, the orders shall designate where demonstrators can relocate to continue their First Amendment activity. It shall also be made clear where media and legal observers can stand. It is the responsibility of the on-scene PPB commanders to ensure that all such announcements are made in such a way that they are clearly audible to the crowd. The crowd must then be given adequate time to voluntarily disperse prior to any enforcement action.
If the protestors do not move and instead resist movement following audible dispersal orders, arrest warnings, and adequate time to move, the police may then initiate arrests or engage in moving the crowd with squad or platoon formations (skirmish line, wedge, echelons, etc.).
All dispersal orders shall comply with the holding of the Oregon Supreme Court in State v. Ausmus, (Or. 2004).
(c) Unless emergency circumstances prevent negotiation, crowd dispersal techniques shall not be initiated until after attempts have been made through contacts with the police liaisons and demonstration representatives to negotiate a resolution of the situation so that the unlawful activity will cease and the First Amendment activity can continue.
(d) When a command decision is made to employ crowd dispersal techniques, attempts to obtain voluntary compliance through dispersal orders and attempts to obtain cooperation through negotiation shall both be continued. At any point at which a crowd is dispersing, whether as a reaction to police dispersal techniques, through voluntary compliance or as a result of discussion or negotiation with demonstration representatives, PPB dispersal techniques shall be suspended and the crowd shall be allowed to disperse voluntarily. This does not preclude a command decision by PPB to reinstate dispersal techniques if crowd compliance ceases.
3. If negotiation and/or dispersal orders do not result in voluntary movement of the crowd, then officers may employ additional crowd dispersal techniques, but only after orders from the Incident Commander or designated supervisory officials. The permissible techniques to disperse a non-compliant crowd are: a) mass arrest and b) police formations which advance towards the crowd to cause movement of the crowd.
4. Arrest: If the crowd has failed to disperse after the required dispersal orders, officers may advance upon the crowd for purposes of making multiple or mass arrests. Persons who make it clear (e.g. by sitting down) that they seek to be arrested, may be arrested. Those who show no violent resistance shall not be subjected the use of any less-lethal weapons, aerosol chemical agents or the use of batons for pushing the crowd. Merely locking arms, standing in place, or sitting down is not violent resistance
5. Police Formations and Use of Batons:
(a) After the required dispersal orders, if a crowd refuses to disperse, the police may use squad or platoon formations (skirmish line, wedge, echelons, etc.) to move the crowd.
(b) Batons shall not be used for crowd control or crowd dispersal, except as specified below:
Batons may be visibly displayed and held in a ready position. When reasonably necessary for protection of the officers or to disperse the crowd pursuant to the procedures of this agreement, batons may be used in a pushing motion to move people along or to prevent them from approaching the police or police barricades.
Batons may not be used offensively in a jabbing or thrusting motion or to strike individuals except when reasonably necessary for self-defense or defense of others against imminent threats of physical injury. Such offensive use of batons is not a permissible crowd control or crowd dispersal technique. The head, neck, throat, spine, heart, groin, and kidneys are not permitted target areas for a baton strike except under circumstances which would justify the use of lethal force. Batons shall not be used to strike an individual who is trying to leave the area or escape police dispersal or enforcement action.
1. When a large-scale event involving possible arrests is to be conducted, PPB planners shall estimate the number of potential arrestees and configure arrest teams capable of managing multiple arrests safely.
2. Where practicable, a holding facility shall be set up in close proximity to the arrests where people can be processed and cited for minor offenses and released.
3. When mass arrests are contemplated in advance, and no processing facility will be set up at the site, pre-arrangement of transportation shall be made.
4. Probable Cause for each individual arrest: Individuals may not be arrested based on their association with a crowd in which unlawful activity has occurred. There must be probable cause supporting each individual arrest. This means the officer shall have objective facts to believe that each specific individual being arrested committed the offense and must reasonably believe that the fact support the offense.
5. Officers who arrest individuals in a crowd shall fully consider the risks to members of the crowd who may be acting lawfully or who have not committed felony level offenses. In many circumstances, the safety of other members of the crowd shall outweigh the apprehension of specified individuals within the crowd, just as the potential dangers to uninvolved parties outweigh the potential benefits of apprehension in many "hot pursuit" decisions.
6. To effect an arrest, officers shall not use any force against an individual unless that individual attempts to assault the officer, a third person, or actively resists arrest. Once arrested, prisoners at the site of a demonstration shall not be carried or dragged unless the prisoners refuse to move or walk on their own volition.
7. Those arrested shall be physically removed from the scene as soon as practicable. Arrestees shall be treated humanely which includes providing water, food if applicable, and the ready use of toilet facilities within a reasonable period of time. Holding prisoners for more than one hour without water and use of toilet facilities is unreasonable and inhumane. Officers shall provide prompt first aid to any arrestee or any other person who has been pepper sprayed, shot with a less-lethal weapon, tasered or otherwise has suffered an injury during the event. Any person whose injuries are life threatening or whose condition cannot be alleviated on-scene by officers or medical personnel shall immediately transported to the nearest medical facility or hospital.
8. Legal Observers: Legal observers and media shall be permitted to observe the arrests. Legal observers should be clearly identified by designated shirts or neon green National Lawyers Guild hats. One or more legal observers shall be permitted close enough access to the arrestees to record their names. Even after a dispersal order has been given, legal observers shall be permitted to carry out these functions in any area where arrests are being made, unless their presence would unduly interfere with the enforcement action. Whenever it will not interfere with their duties, arresting officers shall respond to questions directed to them by police liaisons, demonstration representatives or legal observers on the scene with regard to the nature of the charges and the location of holding facilities. On request, the Incident Commander shall inform legal observers, police liaisons and/or representatives with information as to the nature of the charges, the location where arrestees are being taken, and whether they will be lodged or cited and released. Legal observers, police liaisons and demonstration representatives shall never be targeted for dispersal or enforcement actions because of their status.
9. Individuals who are retreating or attempting to retreat as a result of a valid dispersal order and are not engaged in criminal activity shall not be arrested.
10. Non-Violent Civil Disobedience: Some demonstrators commit non-violent civil disobedience by sitting down or otherwise blocking streets, intersections, sidewalks, entranceways or occupying a targeted office. To the greatest extent practical, demonstrators in non-violent civil disobedience situations shall be talked into compliance rather than forcibly moved. In some cases demonstrators may lock arms or use locks or lock boxes to slow down the arrest process. Where such demonstrators have been advised that they will be subject to arrest if they choose to remain, and refuse to disperse, an officer shall individually advise each demonstrator that he or she is under arrest, prior to effecting the arrest. Even after a decision has been made to use a control technique because the arrestee is not complying with directions, the officer shall continue to give verbal directions to give the arrestee a chance to comply before force is used to unlock arms or implements used to remove lock boxes. Passively resisting arrestees (i.e. arrestees who go limp) shall be carried by an adequate number of officers. While dealing with passive resistance may frustrate officers, non-violent civil disobedience is a means of making a political statement, and officers shall remain neutral, non-antagonistic and professional at all times in their response. Officers who arrest people committing non-violent civil disobedience shall use minimal force to effect the arrest and avoid "roughing up" these individuals to punish them for their political beliefs.
11. Handcuffs:
Officers shall not overly tighten flex-cuffs and/or handcuffs. Officers shall be cognizant that flex-cuffs may tighten when arrestees' hands swell or move sometimes simply in response to pain from the cuffs themselves. Overly tight cuffs can cause serious neurological damage. Officers should be able to slide their fingers between the cuffs and wrists of detainee. Each unit involved in detention and/or transportation of arrestees with flex-cuffs should have a flex-cuff cutter and adequate supplies of extra flex-cuffs readily available. When arrestees complain of pain from overly tight flex-cuffs, an officer shall check to see if the cuffs have been applied properly. If not, the proper response is to cut the cuffs off and apply new ones.
12. When juveniles are arrested, a supervising officer shall ensure that proper care is taken to notify their guardians. In the event that prisoners are taken to jail rather than processed at a holding site, juveniles shall be taken to a proper juvenile facility and not be held in adult jails. Juveniles arrested in demonstrations shall be handled consistent with PPB policy on arrest, transportation and detention of juveniles.
A. Individuals arrested for misdemeanors shall be cited and released as soon as practicable. Arrestees from a political demonstration shall not be held longer than any other arrestee for the same charge. Where holding facilities have been arranged at the site of the demonstration, arrestees shall be cited and released from that location rather than being transported to a separate facility. Where no facilities are available at or near the site of the demonstration, individuals may be held briefly at police stations for the duration of the cite and release process.
B. Arrestees will not be held under Community Safety Exemptions, unless they truly fit the profile.

1. Speakers, speeches, demonstrations, protests and other lawful exercises of First Amendment rights shall not be photographed or otherwise recorded. Video and other photographic equipment shall not be used by any officer in any demonstration except to record illegal activity and/or the police response to that illegal activity.
2. Individuals who appear to be leaders, or who are speaking at rallies handing out literature or engaging in other peaceful, constitutionally protected activities, shall not be singled out for photographing or recording absent a proper justification as defined in paragraph 1 above.
3. Each officer operating a camcorder, camera or any recording device shall write a report specifying his or her location, the time and duration of recording, the field of view available from that position and the major events that were visible or audible to the operator during the demonstration. In a peaceful demonstration, to the extent practical, video camcorders and still cameras shall not be positioned or operated in a manner that would raise surveillance concerns of individuals engaged in the peaceful demonstration and/or be used in violation of ORS 181.575.
4. Unless they provide evidence of criminal activity, videos or photographs of demonstrations shall not be disseminated to other government agencies, including federal, state and local law enforcement agencies.
5. Any videos or photographs of the demonstration recorded by officers shall be kept by PPB for a period of two years. If there are no pending criminal prosecutions arising from the demonstration, or if the video recording or photographs are not relevant to an internal affairs or citizen complaint investigation or proceedings, or to potential civil litigation arising from police misconduct at the demonstration, the video recording and/or photographs shall be destroyed immediately. Otherwise, all recordings as listed above shall be destroyed no less than and no more than two years and one day from the date of the incident. The destruction of any such videos or photographs shall be documented in writing with regard to the date of the destruction and the identity of the person who carried it out.
6. The PPB shall not confiscate or in any way interfere with the use of recording equipment by third parties, the press, demonstrators and/or legal observers. Recording equipment includes, but is not limited to, camcorders, tape recorders, cameras and other such recording devices. Officers will return recording devices and the media enclosed with that device intact to arrestees upon release of that arrestee.

A. Oregon's statutory right to privacy (ORS 181.575) protects the rights of individuals and organizations engaging in political and religious activity from unnecessary monitoring and surveillance by law enforcement. Officers are therefore prohibited from collecting or maintaining information about the political, religious or social views, associations or activities of any individual, group, association, organization, corporation, business or partnership unless such information directly relates to an investigation of criminal activities, and there are reasonable grounds to suspect the subject of the information is or may be involved in criminal conduct. ORS 181.575.
A. The media has the right to cover demonstrations, including the right to record the event on video, film, tape or in photographs.
B. PPB shall cooperate with media representatives covering a demonstration and not interfere with their role of reporting on the event, provided such cooperation and non-interference does not compromise or jeopardize the law enforcement mission.
C. Officers shall refrain from words or actions that create an adversarial relationship with media representatives, unless such actions are unavoidable because of specific unlawful conduct by individual media representatives.
D. Media representatives and media protected under this agreement shall include but are not limited to alternative media sources such as KBOO, representatives of Portland Indymedia, student media, alternative weeklies and webloggers. Media badges with photographs should be used by media representatives to identify themselves.
A. All PPB crowd control policies and procedures shall be set forth in a comprehensive and integrated crowd control manual.
B. All training on crowd control shall include substantial coverage of these crowd control policies and procedures.
C. All training called for in this section shall be documented with regard to individual officer attendance, dates of training, test scores or other evidence of successful completion of training, identity of each instructor and archived copies of both student curriculum materials and instructor curriculum materials.

who's streets? 02.Dec.2004 06:59

wake up

i watched the movie "the wall" yesterday. hadn't seen in a very long time, over 15yrs ago. nobody seemed to get it then and they don't now. when your 'heros' take off their masks, you'll be on the run boys and girls. the elite trim fat in a revolution but stay in control. pink has been prepping and rubbing it in your faces for decades. they mock their fans and they cheer and pay, on and on. sheeple get out of the road guess who will be your master after the massacre? one person had it right, this is not going to take any steam out of the cops killing machine. pink is mind control, moore is mind control, the dead is mind control,.....$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$some smucks sell out for much less check the 'grafs' of history rise and fall. keep marching to the meat grinder. don't alter your path, your 'rebel' heros would never mislead you, they are artists. it must be those nasty d.a.(s)

About the Cap 02.Dec.2004 14:46


That is definitely a WWII German cap. I originally thought that the shadowed figure might be the fouled anchors used often in naval insignia, but I was wrong. After a few minutes on Google I found these two photos. The eagle matches the cap.

The cover:  http://www.militariacollection.com/nazicaps.htm
The patch:  http://www.militariacollection.com/nazinsigna.htm

I'm not one to take everything somebody says (or writes) as being absolutly factual or unbiased, so my other question was "How do I know that the man in the photo is Lt. Kruger." That was confirmed by the photo in the copwatch story:  http://www.portlandcopwatch.org/PPR32/kruger32.html

I will not speculate what it means to Lt. Kruger, but the creepiness factor would keep any Nazi memorabilia out of my home and off my body.

Kruger's affinity for Nazi-wear is well documented. Why was there any surprise that his in-costume photo had a Nazi swastika?

War-gamer Hat and Club Info 03.Dec.2004 15:20

library mouse

You can check out war-gamers uniform details, among other things, including LOTS of photos (these guys like to have their pictures taken) at their website (links to subordinate websites):


The war-gamer club is comprised of groups portraying US, Canadian, UK, Soviet and nazi German units.

One of the nazi German units in this club calls itself "Sixth Fallschirmjaeger Regiment of Washington". (Fallschirmjaeger=paratrooper)
It appears that the hat in question, which sports the red-white-black nazi colors "meat ball" device, is one type worn by these "Fallschirmjaeger" war-gamers.

what are you waiting for Portland? 03.Dec.2004 16:32

do it

Why the hell do you Portlanders tolerate a Nazi hat wearing police officer on your streets?

Insist he be fired immediately.

No hoax 11.Dec.2004 21:51

Some 1

The photo of Lt. Kruger wearing the hat with swastika is no hoax. Lt. Kruger himself admitted when being deposed that he owns and wears Nazi uniforms with swastikas on them. It's quite another thing to see a photograph though...