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

human & civil rights | police / legal

So what does the police spokesman say about using force?

The Portland Police are portrayed as using "Force" .....
So the PPA says "Not our guys" we are being misrepresented by the media
HAHA ...sure
The use of force by Police is portrayed as "trumped up" media by the Portland Police Association rep Mr King
Read the article written on November 30 in the Trib here:
 http://www.portlandtribune.com/opinion/story.php?story_id=116492345161114000

I suggest adding some insight to the comment section about what is really the truth and the need for correction this media spin/coverup.
Click the link above and add your opinion on the Trib site

I fear the police more than a gang standing on a street corner.
Where is the accountability?
When will we get honest officers?
When will our city really care to protect us?

According to Mr King these are all fine men being misrepresented
maybe a few of them...but
I think not, and
I'm Not Buying

Not after what I have seen on these streets firsthand.....

Read the PARC Report 08.Dec.2006 08:25

You are on the right track....

AVAILABLE at: PARC.INFO



Police Assessment Review Center (PARC) is an independent review for police located in Southern California. They are responsible for overseeing the Consent Decree forced upon the LAPD by the FBI due to a pateren of Civil Rights violations.

Portland commissioned PARC to review the PPB proceedures in a long-term review process that began in 2001. PARC delivered its initial report to Portland in 2003 and made 89 reccomendations. Central in the review is Recomendation 5.15 which requires independent review of "Police Shootings and In-Custody Deaths". Portland has never acted upon that reccomendation. In 2005, PARC completed its first review and found:


A recurrence of biased investigations, as we have now seen from 1997 through 2001, raises the question as to whether a fair and balanced process and result can be reached without oversight by an outside agency. For just that reason, Recommendation 5.15 in the PARC Report called for civilian oversight of PPB investigations of administrative issues and analyses of tactical decisions arising out of officer-involved shootings and in-custody deaths. Our examination of the cases we reviewed this year reinforces the need for civilian oversight.

Finally, we note the irony arising out of the recurrent bias and/or lack of thoroughness found in officer-related shooting investigations. While such deficiencies necessarily undermine public confidence in the PPB's ability to investigate itself, in cases where most reasonable observers would conclude that there is little doubt about the fact that a shooting is justified, such deficiencies in the investigation process create doubt where otherwise none would exist. (p. 70, 2005 PARC Review)


Portland Police Bureau and the City Council are sandbagging the public, the media, and the Federal Government. The PPB has instatutionalized non-accountability and they don't want that to change. The PPB is being protected by the City of Portland and the City Council. How have they done this? By engaging the Police Asset Review Center to begin a voluntary review. Portland has avoided a consent decree forced by the FBI by volunteering to monitor itself with indepent review, thereby, they have avoided being compelled to change...Portland City Council and PPB have volunteered to change. But, nothing has changed and nobody can compell change...because Portland will forever be on the road to change.

Hard Facts: Portland established the Independent Review Committee (IRC) which is an extention of the City Auditor's office. The City Auditor keeps track of Portland's money and works very closely with city council and the City Attorney to conserve funds. IRC has been around for a few years, however, in 2005, when PARC provided its last review it did not acknolwledge the IRC as a satisfactory entity to provide truly independent review.

The effect: PPB is going on with business as usual. NO ACCOUNTABILITY and a process that is secret and biased against the public. It is defended by the Portland city Council, the Mayor, the Portland Police Association, The Police Union, the District Attorny's office, and the Police Appologists. The media follows along because this is an investigative story and the City Council is not going to make a Press Release exposing their complicity. Finally, it is harming the public because the recent police homicides and beatings of innocent citizens has proven that the cops, under this criminial system, are teflon...nothing sticks. The cops are more likely to use excessive force when they know they will never be held responsible for their criminal acts.

What to do: Read the PARC Report of 2003 and the review of 2005. Explain this to your friends and make them read the report. Create a petition to compell the City Council to act on Reccomendation 5.15. Raise this matter to the level of public attention and the media will follow. It is up to the people to be educated to defend themselves. This is a rather easy matter because the evidence is all ready available on-line.

Visit PARC.INFO for a full review of the portland police bureau

Filming proves the other side 08.Dec.2006 18:23

documented worker bee

so did you see today the LA cop who was filmed by a hidden camera apply a choke hold to a handcuffed 16 yr old? ... Then he removed the cuffs and challenged the child to a fist-fight.

You can read about this here:
 link to www.latimes.com

Documenting abuse is a sure fire way to get these issue on the table
Facts and hard evidence and film ...can help make the point more revelant
In this case it was a hidden cam at the police station.....

.....well now there is an idea!

This is about Portand 08.Dec.2006 20:42

Albert

Hello...this is not about LA it is about Portland. Does anyone have video of anything in Portland? It's too easy to dismiss something as being a problem that does not exist in Portland. King will have to be confronted with true abuse before he will change. I can't help but think that if there were a problem, we could at least come up with our own proof. Somebody..anybody...let's get rolling.

Here's Portland for you... 09.Feb.2007 19:57

Sixpack wabc@mutualaid.org

Here's an article found in the St. John's Sentinel, 2-1-07. What follows is a rebuttal emailed to the author of the article, painting a clearer picture of how police treat people, even though, admittedly, they were doing "nothing against any laws". When I went back to the Sentinel website after the email was sent, the article was not there...wonder why?

Water squatters
Floating homeless camps leave theft, filth in their wakes
By Sophie Harris, St. John's Sentinel
Feb 01, 2007


Sheriff's Deputy Kevin MacAfee of the Multnomah County Marine Patrol Division looks from afar at the illegally moored floating home of Albert Prado on the Multnomah Channel.

On Dec. 9, the Multnomah County Marine Patrol, a special division of the sheriff's office, arrested three individuals who had been living illegally in an unapproved floating structure in the Multnomah Channel.

The "barge" consisted of three boats and one partly constructed shack, all connected by ropes and planks and covered with tarps. The structure was moored off the shore of Port of Portland property, just up river from Terminal Six and about 200 yards from Northeast Marine Drive.

In multiple locations along the river in North Portland, Hayden and Sauvie islands, people with nowhere else to live have taken to residing on the water, mooring their homemade crafts outside the boundaries of regulated marinas and staying there indefinitely. The boats are often previously abandoned vessels or makeshift shacks on top of flotation devices; often they are half sunken, covered in tarps and without power or running water.

Deputy Ron Osborn said, "If I were a homeless person, I'd think this was a pretty good place to live: no rent - all you need is a shell of a boat."

As long as they are not so far out into the channel as to block navigational flow, and as long as they follow a series of safety regulations (such as having a running light on at night), anyone can anchor their boat in public waterways. The line between legally anchoring one's boat and illegally setting up residence on the water is unclear.

Located on the outskirts of marinas or houseboat communities, homes like these are not only eyesores but hazardous to public safety. According to law enforcement officials, the residents themselves often prove to be threatening and disruptive neighbors, as well. On the verge of homelessness, many are suspected to be drug users and/or mentally unstable. Most homes do not have a septic tank, and with no sewage system in place it can be inferred that they are dumping their waste directly into the water. Multnomah County deputies have arrested several individuals on charges of dumping feces into the water and burning their trash on public lands. Most homes do not have proper electricity, so people use propane, Bunsen burners or jury-rigged generators to cook and heat their homes; the incidence of fire is high.

This practice of "anchoring out" - living permanently on the water - has posed a challenge for many waterfront cities. In the San Francisco Bay Area, for example, Richardson Bay is littered with dilapidated homes. The boats are anchored haphazardly using sunken car engines or other heavy objects and often drift around when the winds are high. In North Portland, the River Patrol cites numerous run-ins with anchor-outs: they have rescued the squatters when their boats have blown free from their anchors and drifted into the channel, they have cited them for dumping feces into the water, and they have put out fires that have started on their boats.

On Dec. 8, the Sheriff's Office received a report from the Port of Portland that equipment, including generators and batteries, were stolen from a dredging structure of theirs located directly across the river from a derelict barge in the Multnomah Channel. In response, the River Patrol searched the barge, where they identified the stolen material.

According to River Patrol deputies and records, Albert Prado, the owner of the barge, as well as Mike Prado and later Darrin Vollertsen, who lived in a nearby floating home, were arrested in connection with the theft. According to Sgt. Tim Lichatowich of the Multnomah County Sheriff's Office, Albert Prado is an unemployed Social Security recipient with a criminal record who appears to be in very poor health. Prado's and Vollertsen's crafts were confiscated and towed to police property.

The theft created a significant problem for the Port of Portland. Millions of dollars of machinery cannot be used until the equipment is replaced.

Surrounded by other anchor-outs and located in a remote part of the channel, Prado's barge has served as a sort of headquarters for a crude camp that sprung up on the water over the past seven months, according to police. At its peak during the summer there were six or seven crafts there. The police, who executed a number of outstanding warrants at the camp, were worried it was becoming a haven for wanted criminals and would continue to grow. The appearance of the camp was also linked to a marked increase in larceny in the surrounding marinas.

The Sheriff's Office identified five individuals other than Prado living on the barge, two of whom they defined as "not police-friendly." The majority of these people and others in the camp were determined to be refugees from an authorized floating home that authorities closed down in June. The residence had been a problem for over a year, with more than 76 arrests made there during that time on charges including larceny, possession of a controlled substance, and assault with a dangerous weapon, according to Off. Ken Reynolds of the Portland Police Bureau's North Precinct. After the residents were finally evicted, many simply moved down the river toward Portland harbor, creating the unauthorized camp.

In September, a city inspector visited Prado's barge and deemed the structure a hazard to public safety, ordering him to demolish or remove it immediately. Prado promised repeatedly to comply with the inspector's demands and move his boat away, but almost three months later he still had not. "I'd say its uninhabitable, but ... he's living in it," commented Lichatowich, who has been inside Prado's barge several times. "I can't explain how nasty the boats are inside. I can't even believe someone would want to stay the night in there."

Prado's boat was stored at the police dock and, as it was in such extreme disrepair, they expected he would leave it for them to destroy. The barge, made with steel pontoons and estimated to weigh over 10 tons, would have been extremely expensive to dispose of. When Prado was released from custody, however, he came to the station, claimed his property, and towed it right back down the river to moor once again at the camp location. Deputies watched as he drove away, unable to stop him.

"He's doing as he wishes with his private property and that's the bottom line," said Lichatowich. "We have to work within the citizen's rights."

Asked what they can do to deter Prado from mooring there, the officer responded that they would continue to monitor his behavior, hoping to catch him in an illegal act providing cause to confiscate his boat. They hope this year to receive funding from the Marine Board that will provide them with resources to tow and dispose of more of these anchor-outs when the opportunity arises.

"We're having to make new policy, break new ground here," Lichatowich said of their approaches to dealing with Prado and other squatters.

At least for now, though, Prado is living on the river in an unauthorized structure in an unauthorized moorage, and there is nothing the authorities can do about it.

Portland Police Officer Reynolds described it as "an unfortunate situation."


Sent to the Sentinel:

A Reply to Ms. Harris' "Water Squatters" article
The St. Johns Sentinel, 2-2-2007

Ms. Harris,

I'm responding to your article in the Sentinel, "water squatters". Although it appears you spent plenty of time on this piece, you have missed the story. I've been following this particular story for over a year, and there is much more to it than this. This is about a family's struggle together, to survive in a place where police decide who may live, and police decide who a property owner may or may not rent his own property to.

Perhaps you could interview Mr. Dan Burris, the owner of the marina mentioned in your article, 3333 N. Marine Drive. You may hear of trespassing, burglary and harassment by certain Portland police officers, who actually damaged private property in order to assure themselves easy access for future privacy violations. Did you know that the police forced the man to close his legal business, the marina, after repeated threats? He was held responsible for whatever debris the river currents accumulated on the riverbed beneath. Selective enforcement that was not suggested for any other marina owners within a stone's throw of there, marinas that do not host unapproved tenants.

Most of the reported arrests, despite the idea of "floating drug labs" actually arose from police unconstitutionally demanding identification from residents in their own homes, on private property. The occassional arrests for minor probation violations and such hardly justifies the warrantless spying and the repeated privacy violations of an entire community, or the perpetual parking lot patrol, being sure that even the most mundane violations do not go unpunished.

Debris was found floating freely, presumed discards from an alleged drug lab dumpsite. Today police can still only speculate about where the debris came from, or who may have been responsible, since there is no evidence to suggest any connection to Mr. Prado, or anyone else at that marina. Interestingly, no evidence of meth labs was ever found in the marina. Mr. Prado has not been found guilty of any crime. Yet without fail, police threw Mr. Prado's prescription medications away on several occassions---adding up to hundreds of dollars of waste. (Did I mention that Mr. Prado has terminal cancer, and has about one year to live?) Luckily, the police can't take his chemotherapy from him.

Let's not get ahead of ourselves---being arrested is not a statement of guilt. We have a right to be proven guilty in a court of law, provided Portland police are not acting as the judge, jury and executioners today.

Why did police work so diligently to close this marina? Because, as they openly admit, Mr. Burris had the gaul to continue renting slips to recovering addicts with prior drug convictions---"harboring felons" they said. As a testament to the power of police and city corruption, a new clinic now replaces the former home of another man in St. Johns, who's guests were not approved of by Portland police. A vacant lot blackened by fire down in old town, where a little market used to be. A clean syringe could be purchased in a brown paper bag for a buck---no questions asked. Long before Outside-In came around. Police despised that market, and happily watched (some say "helped") it burn to the ground. Problem solved.

Perhaps you could get a clearer picture if you were to interview some of the former rent-paying residents that the police intentionally forced into homelessness, making sure no other marina would shelter them. Listen to what they went through. Then there is the little matter of the police beatings, which, as a reporter, you should recognize as common occurrences in Portland. When Mr. Prado pointed out that he was in compliance with all laws and ordinances, the statement by police that "we can do whatever we want", and the outright death threats towards Mr. Prado would make a valid point for your story, but of course, you were not made aware of those parts---were you? Police didn't tell you that they choose not to abide by a law that doesn't meet their approval or their needs.

Where do these people go; what do they do if they are not allowed to rent spaces for their homes? The State of Oregon deemed these vessels "safe" enough to take their money for registration and licensing fees. There are no laws against what has been called "anchoring out",

Does a criminal history erase the right to live? Apparently in Portland it does.

Should anyone have to stand by and watch as their property is cut into pieces before their eyes by chainsaw-wielding officers? These people had to do just that. Was that an echo of "police state" I just heard?

This is no different than other accounts of Portland police destroying homeless camps and forcing people out of the only shelter they had. Portland police treat poor, homeless and mentally ill citizens the same, wherever they may huddle for survival.

Private citizens, law-abiding samaritans are harassed and penalized daily for helping needy people (those that are not approved by police as worthy) find safety and shelter. We stand accused of "harboring" criminals or operating a "drug house", based again, squarely on the histories of the recipients. Truly, guilt by association.

Your story may be true, but it is not even close to the entire ugly truth. Your story could be a good one, if you printed the entire story--- instead of what served the purposes of police and showcases only one side of a story.

You are a journalist, damn it! You don't need brownie points to be credible.

Thank you for your time,
A. Lambert
Portland resident

southeast portland

Here's Portland For You 26.Feb.2007 11:09

Tara

I just read the comments written by A. Lambert regarding the harrasment that the so called "homeless" that chose to reside on the waters of North Portland are forced to live with on a daily basis. I have had the pleasure of knowing a number of these people on the river. They are not what the original article portrays. They were not "homeless",
those people HAD homes, ON THE RIVER! They chose to live
aboard their boats. That was, until their homes were taken from them. Their homes and all of the contents were reduced to toothpicks! Is that any way to treat people? They are people, just people. Not a gang of robbers that bring all of their stolen goods to the barge as if it were some kind of way staition of stolen goods. That is just ridiculous, RIDICULOUS!

I am sad to see that the policing of the river now obviously requires some type of entertainment value for those that police the river. Recently, the entertainment was found in taking the homes of these people from them and all of their personal belongings and reducing them to toothpicks by chainsaw. How are these people expected to go on with nothing but the clothes on their backs. How would you go on with nothing but the clothes you were wearing. Not even a blanket to keep you warm at night? Don't they know IT'S COLD OUTSIDE?

These offices are seriously dishing out some extremely inhumane treatment, and all for their sick self entertaiment. I am ashamed of this display, ashamed enough for all of us! I do not want nor do I need this kind of protection. How about you? What's going to be next? Are they just going to beat them to death, or just shoot them to death? This is not a silly question! Around here this is what happens to people. Doesn't everyone realize that "YOU OR I COULD BE NEXT?" This situation is A SERIOUS ONE! When you can be shot to death by police, only for driving to the corner store, around the corner from your house, my question isn't a silly one. I don't care where you're from, it's serious!
How much longer will this be allowed?

I read every word of A. Lambert's comments. I am in echo of those words. So, "Yeah, what she said!" I couldn't have said it any better myself!

Shame on these officers for their brutal handling of these people. Shame on us if we continue to allow these practices!

I hope that these officers aren't somewhere being medaled for having the behavior of some modern day pirates, bullies, or gang members of the largest gang that I know of. Shame on these officers! They've abused their power in a most offensive way. They haven't even had to answer to anyone for it either! They've succeeded in making those officers that choose not to behave like pirates, bullies or gang members look bad too. It is little wonder that the citizens don't like and won't support them.
Who could support that? What can they expect?

Just in case there's any question???? Yes, I, for one, am fed up with what we call our "protection"! What exactly is it that you are protecting me/us from? I think I/we might need a little protection from the protection. Anyone else?

I think that these officers should have charges brought against them. Is anyone aware that these boats were reduced to toothpicks without even a word to the legal owners? I am surprised that they could just assume that these people first of all, abandoned their homes, When they slept in the EVERY NIGHT. Also, that they would be wanting these officers to go ahead and chainsaw them into toothpicks. They didn't even give the residents an opportunity rescue their personal belongings, before they fired up the chainsaws, laughing all the while. I, for one am horrified!

I think this behavior should be reprimanded and I think the reprimands are tardy, very tardy. I am sure that I am not the only citizen that feels this way. I'm challenging everyone to let the people know how they feel about this. In any method they see fit. "Beware of Portland Pirates" thoroughout town would probably do for now.

In closing I would like to add that one thing was accomplished by our authorities in the sawing up of those boats. They succeeded in converting a couple more people into a couple more homeless people. Congrats! I hope that you're proud of yourselves. You are a bunch of terrorists in disguise, and you
know without question who you are! We are living in fear of you and your police state.

Signed,

Tara
Someone That Could Be Next

So what does the police spokesman say about using force 06.Mar.2007 07:02

Another Resident of Portland

Portland Police are portrayed as "using force" is a gross understatement. These terrorists that call themselves police have gotten away with murder, time after time. I don't think it will be ending anytime soon either.

Why are they, the police permitted to police themselves by running these so called investigations on themselves. That is an outrage. It is also a waste of time and money that is paid for by the citizens, here in Portland. I can't think of a better way for them to guarantee each other that these deeds will be going unpunished. Why would anything change? I'm sure that the police are pleased with the way that things are, quite pleased!

C'mon Portland residents; Take off those rose colored glasses. All is not well here in the City of Portland! I'm not foolish enough to believe that I am somehow immune to this treatment the police are dishing out. I realize that I could be next! Everybody should realize that they could be next as easily as I could be. We really have to take a stand as a public. Out with these terrorists. Let's have officers that we can respect and admire as well as appreciate. The current situation is so far from safe or satisfactory. and I'm not kidding.