If you really want change in Multnomah County Sheriff Department the right pick is Muhammad Ra'oof.....

Wednesday-October 15, 2008 FOR IMMEDIATE MEDIA RELEASE!

Breaking News: To All Voters: From: Oregon State Police-Independent

Citizens Review Board

Oregon State Attorney General 2008 Election-regarding: Truly Reforming

Law Enforcement. America's Perfect Crimes!

Vote for Attorney John Kroger, & Professor of Law at Lewis & Clark

College for Attorney General of Oregon. The voters chose Mr. Kroger in

the primary election and he is the only candidate that we endorse for

Attorney General.

With 29 years in policing, 17 of those years at Multnomah County Sheriff Office,

Please Vote for Sgt. Muhammad Ra'oof for Sheriff of Multnomah County as he is

the only candidate that will implement our program, Truly Reforming Law

Enforcement to save many lives and our tax payers millions of dollars in

litigation every year due to police use of excessive force. "Envision

Oregon Safest State-Vote Kroger & Ra'oof!" To support Sgt. Ra'oof today

you may make your contributions through Advantis Credit Union for his

political camgaign as follows:

Account Name: Ra'oof Political Campaign

Routing: # 323 075 181

Account # 188539

This will help bring civility to policing for the first time in America.

Voting, wrote Thomas Paine, "is the right upon which all other rights

depend."

On June 28, 2008 Irishman, 20 year old Andrew Hanlon unarmed was shot

and killed by a Silverton, Oregon Police Officer, and not unlike past

cases the officer was not indicted by the Marion County Grand Jury? Why

are officers not equiped with the most effective "non-letahl weapon"

Super Talon that shoots out a net,(which was updated to go twice as fast

and far as the original model)? Contact: www.advancedweaponstechnology.com

They manufacture non-lethal Super Talon net gun that projects a nylon

net 22 feet per second over 50 feet in distance.

Since we send out thousands of e-mails every week if you took five

minutes now of your time, to send this e-mail to the city and county law

enforcement bureaus where you live, with a copy to our police oversight

board: js@atlansky.com we will send out updates of the results of your

most important action to save many lives. Thank you, our civil rights

activists!

Urgent action requested: We made many attempts to the Editor-In-Chief, Publisher: of The Portland Observer Mr. Charles (Chuck) Washington to publish the following data, that was first printed in The Willsonville Spokesman Newspaper, (shown below) which now must include the extremely important support of Sgt. Ra'oof's commitment to implement our new program.

Mr. Washington refuses to print the information. Please keep in mind of their slogan at the top of their front page is: COMMITTED TO CULTURAL DIVERSITY.....

Sgt. Raoof is black and Acting Sheriff Bob Skipper is white and will not support our program.

Please contact Mr. Washington at 503-288-0033 or e-mail him at news@portlandobserver.com and ask him why will he not support our program that will greatly dininish the police brutality throughout Multnomah County? Many thanks!!!

**As printed by the Wilsonville Spokesman March 12, 2008**

OP-ED

Immediate Media Release:

Questioning the use of "excessive force"

By Jerry Atlansky

Not one law enforcement officer has ever been indicted by the Multnomah,

County Grand Jury in Portland, Oregon for the use of "Excessive Force."

The average total "use of force" as reported by Portland Police Bureau

Officers about their own action, is once every two hours, which are

major facts that can't be disputed. Both were reported in The

Oregonian in connection with the horrific infamous September, 2006 police

killing of James Chasse Jr. in Portland.

Why have there been no indictments against any of the many offending

officers for the use of excessive force?

The training at the Oregon Department of Public Safety Standards &

Training, DPSST contains no specific Standards in this regard, as we

have advocated for over two years to protect the public from out

of control cops when officers witness the excessive force.

DPSST has no classroom training or simulations requiring step-by-step

procedures

on how officers must respond when other officers use excessive force.

There is also no private citizen oversight in this regard.

Further, no groups currently exist to advocate for changes to training

standards to give police cadets clear guidelines to follow to avoid

use of excessive force.

The Associated Press recently reported that in Boise, Idaho a class of

43 Police Academy Graduates were trying to cause post traumatic stress

disorder? That's the message on the latest class's graduation programs

and it has leaders of the Idaho Police Center doing damage control. It

read, "Don't Suffer from PTSD, go out and cause it."

It begs the question, why are the police cadet graduates so fearless

of retribution from academy officials and the top cops that hired

them throughout Idaho? This type of of message tells the public that law

enforcement's loyalty is to the worst cops not the general public.

It says that more than 150 years of police Code of Silence, Testilying,

Brutality

is condoned by the entire law enforcement community and top state officials

throughout the United States of America.

This is the final determination of our private citizens oversight group,

the Portland-based "Oregon State Police-Independent Citizens Review Board."

However, police, DPSST and other state officials still refuse to implement

our program called Truly Reforming Law Enforcement."

Here is the outline of the details of the program: If adopted by law

enforcement, all Oregon police

cadets shall, upon completion of their training, sign a formal statement

showing they were fully trained, understand, agree with

and will comply with the following policies:

1. Law enforcement supervisors and line officers would be required to

intervene when officers use excessive force. It would be mandatory also

to report the incident up the command.

2. When officers are repeatedly beating or kicking a restrained person,

all

supervisors and line officers must stop the excessive force and arrest

the offending officers.

3. If a person is not attacking anyone and an officer uses enough force

to cause that person's death, it would be considered unjustifiable homicide

subject to criminal prosecution.

All 18,000 law enforcement bureaus throughout the United States, from

federal

to Native American tribal agencies, have never had in place the three steps

we are now proposing.

Have you read The Oregonian article published Dec. 15, 2007,

"Woman sues for false arrest, battery? One of the two officers charged

in this law suit for alleged false arrest and excessive force was directly

involved in the death of James Chasse Jr. Mr. Chasse died while in custody

of the police in Old Town Portland. All of his ribs were

broken which caused massive internal bleeding. The entire incident was

witnessed by two people who filed a formal complaint with the Portland

Police Bureau. But nothing has

yet been done by the bureau or the city of Portland.

The Public get 25 years to life for unjustifiable homicide and

out-of-control

cops get time off with pay. The governmental process is completely broken

In the future we the people plan to force change to protect all people.

We have much more to inform the public to show the very sorry state we

are in with

our "non law enforcement for our worst cops."

JERRY ATLANSKY is retired from 21 years with Continental Airlines, where

he was director of passenger services, and several years with Marriott

Hotels as a director of safety.

Jerry may be contacted at js@atlansky.com

Contact for the media to reach Jerry Atlansky

Call 503.490.4433

Breaking News: To All Voters: From: Oregon State Police-Independent

Citizens Review Board

Oregon State Attorney General 2008 Election-regarding: Truly Reforming

Law Enforcement

Vote for Attorney John Kroger, & Professor of Law at Lewis & Clark

College for Attorney General of Oregon. The voters chose Mr. Kroger in

the primary election and he is the only candidate that we endorse for

Attorney General.

With 29 years in policing, 14 of those years at Multnomah County Sheriff Office,

Please Vote for Sgt. Muhammad Ra'oof for Sheriff of Multnomah County as he is

the only candidate that will implement our program, Truly Reforming Law

Enforcement to save many lives and our tax payers millions of dollars in

litigation every year due to police use of excessive force. "Envision

Oregon Safest State-Vote Kroger & Ra'oof!" To support Sgt. Ra'oof today

you may make your contributions through Advantis Credit Union for his

political camgaign as follows:

Account Name: Ra'oof Political Campaign

Routing: # 323 075 181

Account # 188539

This will help bring civility to policing for the first time in America.

Voting, wrote Thomas Paine, "is the right upon which all other rights

depend."

On June 28, 2008 Irishman, 20 year old Andrew Hanlon unarmed was shot

and killed by a Silverton, Oregon Police Officer, and not unlike past

cases the officer was not indicted by the Marion County Grand Jury? Why

are officers not equiped with the most effective "non-letahl weapon"

Super Talon that shoots out a net,(which was updated to go twice as fast

and far as the original model)? Contact: www.advancedweaponstechnology.com

They manufacture non-lethal Super Talon net gun that projects a nylon

net 22 feet per second over 50 inches in distance.

Since we send out thousands of e-mails every week if you took five

minutes now of your time, to send this e-mail to the city and county law

enforcement bureaus where you live, with a copy to our police oversight

board: js@atlansky.com we will send out updates of the results of your

most important action to save many lives. Thank you, our civil rights

activists!

Urgent action requested: We made many attempts to the Editor-In-Chief, Publisher: of The Portland Observer Mr. Charles (Chuck) Washington to publish the following data, that was first printed in The Willsonville Spokesman Newspaper, (shown below) which now must include the extremely important support of Sgt. Ra'oof's commitment to implement our new program.

Mr. Washington refuses to print the information. Please keep in mind of their slogan at the top of their front page is: COMMITTED TO CULTURAL DIVERSITY.....

Sgt. Ra'oof is black and Acting Sheriff Bob Skipper is white and will not support our program.

Please contact Mr. Washington at 503-288-0033 or e-mail him at news@portlandobserver.com and ask him why will he not support our program that will greatly dininish the police brutality throughout Multnomah County? Many thanks!!!

**As printed by the Wilsonville Spokesman March 12, 2008**

OP-ED

Immediate Media Release:

Questioning the use of "excessive force"

By Jerry Atlansky

Not one law enforcement officer has ever been indicted by the Multnomah,

County Grand Jury in Portland, Oregon for the use of "Excessive Force."

The average total "use of force" as reported by Portland Police Bureau

Officers about their own action, is once every two hours, which are

major facts that can't be disputed. Both were reported in The

Oregonian in connection with the horrific infamous September, 2006 police

killing of James Chasse Jr. in Portland.

Why have there been no indictments against any of the many offending

officers for the use of excessive force?

The training at the Oregon Department of Public Safety Standards &

Training, DPSST contains no specific Standards in this regard, as we

have advocated for over two years to protect the public from out

of control cops when officers witness the excessive force.

DPSST has no classroom training or simulations requiring step-by-step

procedures

on how officers must respond when other officers use excessive force.

There is also no private citizen oversight in this regard.

Further, no groups currently exist to advocate for changes to training

standards to give police cadets clear guidelines to follow to avoid

use of excessive force.

The Associated Press recently reported that in Boise, Idaho a class of

43 Police Academy Graduates were trying to cause post traumatic stress

disorder? That's the message on the latest class's graduation programs

and it has leaders of the Idaho Police Center doing damage control. It

read, "Don't Suffer from PTSD, go out and cause it."

It begs the question, why are the police cadet graduates so fearless

of retribution from academy officials and the top cops that hired

them throughout Idaho? This type of of message tells the public that law

enforcement's loyalty is to the worst cops not the general public.

It says that more than 150 years of police Code of Silence, Testilying,

Brutality

is condoned by the entire law enforcement community and top state officials

throughout the United States of America.

This is the final determination of our private citizens oversight group,

the Portland-based "Oregon State Police-Independent Citizens Review Board."

However, police, DPSST and other state officials still refuse to implement

our program called Truly Reforming Law Enforcement."

Here is the outline of the details of the program: When adopted by law

enforcement, all Oregon police

cadets shall, upon completion of their training, sign a formal statement

showing they were fully trained, understand, agree with

and will comply with the following policies:

1. Law enforcement supervisors and line officers would be required to

intervene when officers use excessive force. It would be mandatory also

to report

the incident up the command.

2. When officers are repeatedly beating or kicking a restrained person,

all

supervisors and line officers must stop the excessive force and arrest

the offending officers.

3. If a person is not attacking anyone and an officer uses enough force

to cause that person's death, it would be considered unjustifiable homicide

subject to criminal prosecution.

All 18,000 law enforcement bureaus throughout the United States, from

federal

to Native American tribal agencies, have never had in place the three steps

we are now proposing.

Have you read The Oregonian article published Dec. 15, 2007,

"Woman sues for false arrest, battery? One of the two officers charged

in this

law suit for alleged false arrest and excessive force was directly

involved

in the death of James Chasse Jr. Mr. Chasse died while in custody of

the police in Old Town Portland. All of his ribs were

broken which caused massive internal bleeding. The entire incident was

witnessed by two people who filed a formal complaint with the Portland

Police Bureau. But nothing has

yet been done by the bureau or the city of Portland.

The Public get 25 years to life for unjustifiable homicide and

out-of-control

cops get time off with pay. The governmental process is completely broken

In the future we the people plan to force change to protect all people.

We have much more to inform the public to show the very sorry state we

are in with

our "non law enforcement for our worst cops."

JERRY ATLANSKY is retired from 21 years with Continental Airlines, where

he was director of passenger services, and several years with Marriott

Hotels as a director of safety.

Jerry may be contacted at js@atlansky.com

Contact for the media to reach Jerry Atlansky

Call 503.490.4433

I disagree with WW's endorsement. Sheriff Skipper is the least experience of the two candidates. Sheriff Skipper has been absent in law enforcement and corrections administration for 14 years. Many things have changed in regards to the science of criminal justice, and the agency he is leading.

Mr. Ra'oof has been active in his agency during Skipper's absence. He appears to be capable and extremely intelligent. He's opponent has one foot in the grave. Frankly, WW's endorsement of Skipper is a major mistake. I still enjoy your paper, but question your judgement.

Wow! Gone for 14 years and he still got it. I'm glad he's not a surgeon.

Have this issue been resolved?

From the Office of County Attorney

CONFIDENTIAL MEMORANDUM

TO: Sheriff Bob Skipper

cc: Chair Ted Wheeler

FROM: Agnes Sowle, County Attorney

DATE: August 25, 2008

RE: Qualification of Multnomah Count Sheriff.

Query: Are sheriffs in Multnomah County required to meet the qualifications set forth

by ORS 206.015?

Short Answer: Yes.

Introduction:

On August 13, 2008, you received a letter from John Minnis, Director of the Department of

Public Safety Standards and Training (DPSST) in which he asserts that the statutory

qualifications for sheriff found in ORS 206.015 do not apply to home rule counties, such as

Multnomah County. Mr. Minnis bases this assertion on an argument by Deputy District

Attorney John Bradley that under a 1980 Attorney General Opinion, a sheriff in a home rule

county “is not required to comply with state law or associated state administrative rules related to

qualifications for sheriff.” He also states that he submitted the issue to Christine A. Chute of the

Department of Justice, who agreed that the Brown opinion indicates that pursuant to Article VI,

section 10 of the Oregon Constitution, the statutory requirements for sheriff do not apply to

sheriffs from home rule counties.1

Multnomah County’s Home Rule Charter sets out none of the qualifications for sheriff found in

ORS 206.015.2 Mr. Minnis acknowledged that DPSST has always operated under the

understanding that the statutory qualifications applied to all sheriffs, and that he would seek an

1 Mr. Minnis did not provide you any written opinion by Ms. Chute, but simply revealed the

opinion in his letter to Sheriff Skipper.

2 The Charter only sets out two qualifications for Sheriff: that he be an elector of the county for

18 months prior to taking office and that he be eligible to be bonded. MCC §4.10.

Sheriff Bob Skipper

August 25, 2008

Page 2 of 4

official opinion from the Attorney General regarding “this topic and the interplay of possible

conflicting constitutional provisions and statutory law with the charters of home rule counties.”

Like DPSST, Multnomah County has always operated under the opinion that the statutory

qualifications for sheriff applied to Multnomah County Sheriffs.

Discussion:

John Bradley’s Theory

The theory argued by John Bradley, apparently agreed with by Ms. Chute and cited by Mr.

Minnis, rests on a 1980 Attorney General opinion written by then Attorney General James M.

Brown. The opinion addresses the candidacy for county sheriff in Hood River County. It

answers questions about two definitions, “eligible of certification” and “four years’ experience in

law enforcement,” found in ORS 206.015,3 and two questions regarding the role of a county

clerk related to the qualifications for sheriff in the Hood River County Charter. In dicta,

Attorney General Brown asserts that state law relating to sheriff’s qualifications does not apply

to home rule counties unless the county has adopted the state qualifications in, or pursuant to, its

charter. Attorney General Brown rests his dicta on the following quote from Article VI, section

10, of the Oregon Constitution, that the charter of a home rule county:

“…Shall prescribed [sic] the organization of the county government and shall

provide directly, or by its authority, for the … qualifications … of such officers as

the county deems necessary…” 1980 Ore AG LEXIS 289; 40 Op Atty Gen Ore

464 (1980). [emphasis and ellipses in original].

Bradley argues that because Multnomah County’s Home Rule Charter neither sets out the

statutory qualifications nor incorporates them, the County is not bound to the statutory

qualifications.

3 ORS 206.015 is the Oregon statute which sets out the qualifications for sheriff. It provides, in

part:

(1) A person is not eligible to be a candidate for election or appointment to the office of sheriff

unless:

(a) The person is 21 years of age or older;

(b) The person has at least four years’ experience as a full-time law enforcement officer or at

least two years’ experience as a full-time law enforcement officer with at least two years’ posthigh-

school education; and

(c) The person has not been convicted of a felony or of any other crime that would prevent

the person from being certified as a police officer under ORS 181.610 to 181.712.

(2) As used in subsection (1) of this section, “two years’ post-high-school education” means

four semesters or six quarters of classroom education in a formal course of study undertaken

after graduation from high school in any accredited college or university. The term does not

include apprenticeship or on-the-job training.

Sheriff Bob Skipper

August 25, 2008

Page 3 of 4

Attorney General Brown does not provide any additional analysis for his dicta, and specifically

does not provide any case law or analysis supporting the dicta. The omission is unfortunate

because in 1978, a Supreme Court decision regarding home rule and subsequent appellate

decisions, indicate that the Brown dicta is too simplistic to apply to the statutory qualifications of

sheriff in home rule counties and should not be relied upon.

The Law of Home Rule Authority

The state’s legislative power is limited by Article VI, section 10 of the Oregon Constitution

which states the following:

“A county charter may provide for the exercise by the county of authority over

matters of county concern. * * * A county charter shall prescribe the organization of

the county government and shall provide directly, or by its authority, for the number,

election or appointment, qualifications, tenure, compensation, powers and duties of

such officers as the county deems necessary. Such officers shall among them

exercise all the powers and perform all the duties, as distributed by the county

charter or by its authority, now or hereafter, by the Constitution or laws of this state,

granted to or imposed upon any county officer. * * * The initiative and referendum

powers reserved to the people by this Constitution hereby are further reserved to the

legal voters of every county relative to the adoption, amendment, revision or repeal

of a county charter and to legislation passed by counties which have adopted such a

charter * * *.”4

That provision gives “home rule” counties authority over “matters of county concern.” However,

the path of the law of home rule in Oregon meandered somewhat until 1978 and the La Grande

decision. In La Grande the Supreme Court held that the essential focus of the home rule

provisions is that the “form and structure of local governments is protected from most state

interference.” La Grande v. PERB, 281 Or 137, 156 (1978) adhered to on reh'g, 284 Ore. 173

(1978). The Court also held that “a general law addressed primarily to substantive social,

economic, or other regulatory objectives of the state prevails over contrary policies preferred by

some local governments if it is clearly intended to do so, unless the law is shown to be

irreconcilable with the local government’s freedom to choose its own political form.” 281 Or at

156.

Since its decision in La Grande, the Supreme Court has consistently held that although laws

enacted pursuant to home rule charters are preeminent in matters of local political organization,

state legislative enactments remain preeminent in matters concerning “substantive social,

economic or other regulatory objectives.” City of Roseburg v. Roseburg City Firefighters, 292

Or 266, 274-76 (1981). See also Pacific N.W. Bell v. Multnomah Co., 68 or App 375, 378, rev

4 The state’s legislative power is likewise limited by Article IV, section 1(5) and Article IX,

section 2, which provide home rule authority to cities. Cases interpreting city home rule are

hence analogous to situations regarding counties and are freely relied upon by the Courts.

Buchanan v. Multnomah County, 79 OR App 722 (1986) rev den 302 Or 158 (1986).

Sheriff Bob Skipper

August 25, 2008

Page 4 of 4

den 297 Or 547 (1984). Two types of state statutes impinge on local autonomy: “those which

regulate the organization of local government and those which deal with substantive state policy

and affect local government. Roseberg, 209 Or at 275.

Home Rule Authority and the Qualifications for Sheriff of Multnomah County

The home rule issue presented by Mssrs. Bradley and Minnis is that we have a state statute that

sets out several specific qualifications required for county sheriffs. The statute is found in ORS

Chapter 206 which, in addition to qualifications, sets out the duties and authority of all county

sheriffs statewide. Under the analysis set forth in La Grande and subsequent cases, we must

determine whether the state law addresses primarily “substantive social, economic, or other

regulatory objectives of the state,” because if so, it will displace our Charter provision even if it

conflicts with it. La Grande, 281 Or at 149. One could certainly argue that it is in the state’s

interest to set out consistent qualifications for all county sheriffs much as it has set out the duties

and authority of county sheriffs in the remainder of Chapter 206. In fact, it would be difficult to

argue that the state qualifications are simply matters of local government form and structure.

In this case, Multnomah County’s Home Rule Charter is silent about qualifications of its elected

sheriff other than residency and eligibility to be bonded which applies to all of the County’s

elected officials. Hence, the Charter is not incompatible with the state law; it simply adds

additional qualifications. Even if the Charter provision was incompatible, the state’s enactment

would likely control in this situation: “When a local enactment is found incompatible with a

state law in an area of substantive policy, the state law will displace the local rule.” La Grande,

281 Ore. at 149.

That does not mean that state legislation in a substantive area will automatically displace county

policy in the same area. Local legislation is not incompatible with state law simply because it

imposes greater requirements than does the state, see State ex rel Haley v. City of Troutdale, 281

Ore. 203 (1978); Oregon Restaurant Ass'n. v. City of Corvallis, 166 Ore. App. 506, 509-11

(2000), nor because the local legislation and the state law deal with different aspects of the same

subject, see AT&T Communs. of the Pac. Northwest v. City of Eugene, 177 Ore. App. 379, 390-

91 (2001), rev den, 334 Ore. 491 (2002).

Conclusion

I cannot recommend following the opinions of John Bradley and John Minnis. Reliance on dicta

in the 1980 Attorney General Brown opinion fails to take into consideration the long history of

home rule law in Oregon and the Oregon Supreme Court’s active role in its interpretation. Based

on both, I believe that if presented with this issue today, the Court would come to a different

conclusion than Mssrs. Bradley and Minnis. Further, the significance of the qualifications for

sheriff for both Multnomah County and the State of Oregon, weigh in favor of continuing to rely

on ORS 206.015 for the qualifications of Sheriff of Multnomah County until a Court finds that

they do not apply.