LETTERS TO THE EDITOR

[June 7th, 2006] POLICE SHOOTING ACCOUNT DOESN'T ADD UP

As the WW article "Hot Pursuit" [May 17, 2006] reported, Portland Police Lt. Jeffrey Kaer killed an unarmed Portlander back on Jan. 4. Kaer had come upon the man asleep behind the wheel of a car stopped in the street and promptly applied an Oriental pain grip. The Police Bureau's news release that day said the car darted forward a short distance, then "quickly accelerated back toward the officers. Lt. Kaer fired two shots at the vehicle as it accelerated toward their position"—giving the impression that an officer directly behind the car fired through the rear window to save himself. Only Willamette Week has published that the lieutenant actually fired from the side at a car that was either stopped or starting away from him.

Bureau traffic analysts quickly determined that the deceased had peeled out three times: first, when darting forward and away from the pain grip; second, backing "several feet" away from a tree in his path; and finally, briefly, forward and away. Detectives placed a trajectory rod in a bullet hole through sheet metal to demonstrate that Kaer fired from the side of the car about 40 degrees behind its driver. Accepting Kaer's claim that he fired 10 to 12 feet from the driver, trigonometry says that the reversing car cleared him by 7 feet or more. (Kaer says the car was turning into him, but car people know the 1985 Oldsmobile Cutlass Supreme could not turn in a radius less than 15 feet.)

The bureau had both the traffic analysis and the trajectory report by Jan. 6, but it never corrected its original false impression. It hasn't apologized for the error or deception, either.

Craig Colby
Northeast 64th Avenue

Editor's Note: Colby performed the analysis cited in WW's story.

BEER IN THE HEADLIGHTS

The beer and wine industry is full of hypocrisy ["Spillover Effect," WW, May 17, 2006]. Oregon already has really cheap beer. We have the lowest "effective beer tax" in the entire United States. Oregon's beer tax hasn't been raised in 30 years.

Prevention professionals have been attempting to raise the tax for the past 14 years in order to increase the cost to reduce underage drinking. The industry has always said, "Raising the price won't reduce underage drinking." Now, all of a sudden, they claim that "reducing the price will increase consumption." They can't make up their minds.

If everyone's worried about cheap beer, eliminate the distributors and increase the taxes...a lot!

Eric Martin
Northeast Skidmore Street