Sidebar
1: Letters from the Front Lines
Sidebar 2: The Walking Wounded
Sidebar
3: Marching to Different Orders
During the last week of April, Portland police began to
hear that things could get ugly on May 1.
May Day is the international holiday commemorating the
Haymarket Square riot of 1886 that symbolizes the struggle
for workers' rights. The police knew that a legion of labor
organizers, here for the ILWU national conference, would
use the anniversary to demonstrate against Powell's City
of Books. But they also received reports that some of the
anarchists blamed for the mayhem during the WTO demonstrations
in Seattle were also coming to Portland.
The police responded with overwhelming force: 150 officers,
most in riot gear, were waiting for a crowd of 350. By the
end of the day 19 protesters had been tossed in jail and
at least 20 injured (see "The Walking Wounded," page 39).
It was a sharp departure from previous Portland protest
marches, where demonstrators and police have largely coexisted.
Many who witnessed the events, either in person or on TV,
came out of the experience wondering whether it was actually
the men and women in blue, not a few kids in black, who
were more to blame.
In reaction to the furor, the Police Bureau has commenced
an internal review of its handling of the event. And Mayor
Vera Katz, who initially defended police tactics, called
a public forum for Tuesday, May 9, to let citizens sound
off.
In a couple of months, things may blow over. But it's clear
that something has changed in Portland. For many, that change
is symbolized by one man: Mark Kroeker.
Katz announced in mid-December that Kroeker, a former deputy
chief with the Los Angeles Police Department, would be Portland's
43rd police chief, the first out-of-towner to take the post
in more than a quarter-century. Kroeker, the mayor
said, waa the perfect man to "take community policing to
the next level."
The 55-year-old Kroeker was an easy choice, given his charisma
and credentials. Kroeker was the man the LAPD sent into
the ghetto in the wake of the Rodney King riots. Twice a
finalist for the department's top spot, he quit in 1997
to be second-in-command of the United Nations police
force in Bosnia. Since then he's been a law-enforcement
consultant for clients in Europe, Asia, Africa and Israel.
With a military bearing and close-cropped hair, Kroeker
displays intelligence, humor and a thoughtful manner. He
is politically astute, calm under fire and acutely conscious
of public perception.
In a Jan. 5 speech before X-PAC, shortly after his arrival,
Kroeker drew laughter and applause from what, seconds before,
had been a potentially hostile audience of liberal Gen-Xers.
"I have spent 32 years in the Los Angeles Police Department,"
he said, "but I want you to know I have not come here to
bring the LAPD to Portland."
The quip served to defuse tension over Kroeker's history
with a police force that boasts an international reputation
for corruption and brutality.
In an interview with WW last week, Kroeker spoke
about the importance of cooperation between the people he
employs and the people he serves.
In that respect, Kroeker is in step with his two predecessors,
Tom Potter and Charles Moose. Still, it's clear that Kroeker
will run this police force with a substantially different
style.
In L.A. law-enforcement circles, Kroeker was known as "extremely
rigid," says Penny Harrington, a former Portland police
chief who now heads the L.A.-based National Center for Women
and Policing. "It's very militaristic; it's very
'Don't question, just obey orders.'"
It's telling that one of Kroeker's first actions upon coming
to Portland was to propose a new grooming code: No hair
below the collar, no ponytails on male officers, no beards,
no earrings while on duty, and no mustaches that venture
beneath the upper lip.
Kroeker says his reasons, in part, are practical. The bureau's
new gas masks, he says, don't seal properly over facial
hair. Ponytails and earrings, he says, are too easy to grab
should an officer get in a fight.
But the new chief also concedes that the grooming code,
used in most big cities, would be very much about building
unity. He called it a symbol "that we belong to some team,"
one that creates "organizational pride."
He also said cops should look the way people expect cops
to look: like they are "there to do business."
Internally, the new standards have gotten mixed reviews.
While some officers like Kroeker's proposal, others say
that the current, more relaxed rules allow individuality
and make it easier to avoid the alienation so common between
civilians and police.
Externally, Kroeker concedes, there's been less enthusiasm
for his idea. Harrington, for one, isn't surprised. "I was
the one that did away with the grooming standards," she
recalls. "My big thing was to try to get the police to be
a part of the community. How could you make them part of
the community if they look like a military invading force?"
Which is an apt description of what the Portland police
looked--and some say acted--like on May 1 ("Panic in Portland,"
WW, May 3, 2000).
The main May Day march kicked off at 3 pm on the South
Park Blocks as many Portland demonstrations do, with dancers,
kids, drummers, and plenty of signs and slogans. But it
was clear from the start that something was different. It
wasn't just the number of police officers present, it was
what they were wearing and carrying.
As the colorful mass of marchers wound through downtown,
cops shadowed them in 12-person squads arrayed in military
formation, officers wearing helmets and brandishing their
standard-issue PR-24 batons. In each squad one or
two officers had a crowd-control shotgun slung over his
or her shoulder, its stock painted bright yellow to indicate
that it had been modified to fire beanbags filled with lead
pellets. Five members of the mounted patrol were on hand,
as were four officers on shiny red ATVs and approximately
10 motorcycle cops. Some officers moved about with video
cameras recording protesters' appearances and actions. Detectives
stood by, primed for mass arrests.
According to the chief, the decisions about the number
of officers and the riot gear they carried were made by
Cmdr. Larry Findling and Assistant Chief Bruce Prunk and
approved by Kroeker in the days leading up to the march.
Kroeker says the decision was based on the size and intensity
level of the crowd expected and its lack of a parade permit.
An unscientific survey of police officers and longtime
activists indicated that the police presence that day was
substantially different from other protests.
The outfits and number of officers were not the only differences.
In several incidents witnessed by WW reporters or
captured on videotape, police took actions against demonstrators
that appeared to err on the side of unnecessary aggression.
There were clearly protesters who were out of line. A videotape
viewed by WW clearly shows that at one point someone
tossed a red plastic newspaper box toward a mounted cop.
A reporter witnessed a young marcher vainly trying to flip
a police ATV. Police also say someone in the crowd threw
lighted firecrackers at officers, that someone painted graffiti
at City Hall, and that someone threw a brick through a window
at Niketown. Protesters attempted to block the intersection
of Southwest 5th Avenue and Main Street, said Prunk. "They
initiated the contact," Prunk said. "The police did not
go out of their way to initiate any contact. I think we
were very measured and restrained in our response."
But not everyone agrees. It's clear that police in several
instances reacted with a degree of haste and force that
Portlanders had not seen before.
"I saw things that provoked a lot of questions for me about
how community policing works at street level, and whether
the tactics used were suppressing bad behavior, or instigating
it," says City Commissioner Charlie Hales, who observed
the march.
At Southwest 5th Avenue and Main Street, mounted police
charged the marchers, pressed them against a downtown bus
shelter. At Waterfront Park, an officer clubbed a young
man in the knee. Limping away, he was knocked to the ground
by a cop on horseback--apparently for moving too slow. Another
officer panned the crowd with his beanbag shotgun before
shooting two marchers in the back and legs at close range.
Their only visible offense was not moving fast enough.
Perhaps the day's most disturbing event, which occurred
on the edge of Waterfront Park, was captured on videotape
and shown on the TV news. The tape shows an unidentified
riot cop aiming his shotgun at protesters who are walking
away calmly. He fires several rounds at them for no apparent
reason, causing them to flee. After the shootings, the video
shows police circling a man who'd fallen to the ground and
leading him away in handcuffs.
According to Police Bureau policy, beanbags shot at targets
who are within 30 yards should be aimed below the waist.
Yet the video clearly shows that the barrel of the gun was
horizontal, meaning the officer was firing at the backs
of the fleeing marchers, not their legs--an apparent violation
of department policy.
Although the guns shoot tiny beanbags of lead pellets,
rather than bullets, they still can do serious damage. As
the department's 1997 general order on use of the weapons
says, "Less lethal munitions are not intended to produce
deadly effects, but just as with other impact weapons, they
can cause serious injury or death."
Detective Sgt. Mike Hefley, a police spokesman, says that,
in general, the guns can be used whenever an officer would
be justified in using a baton. He says officers should first
try to control a person verbally, then escalate up the "continuum
of force" using the threat of force and then, if needed,
force itself. It's not clear from the video whether this
process was followed.
"We realize you may have to go up this continuum of force
very rapidly," says Hefley. "You may have to skip some points
in between depending on what that person does."
Judging the proper level of crowd control has always been
one of the toughest things cops do. It's even tougher given
what happened in Seattle, where police were unprepared for
the WTO protests.
"Times are changing, techniques are changing," says Hefley,
defending the level of force involved on May Day. "Wait
until we show up and we're undermanned--and then
it's the police's fault. No matter what we do, we're going
to make some people unhappy."
Kroeker agreed that the May Day response was triggered
not only by what Portland police observers, including Findling,
saw in Seattle, but also the 1992 Rodney King riots in L.A.,
which the chief attributed to "an underreaction" by police.
"We have to keep the city safe," said Kroeker. "We have
a recent history that shows what can happen when you don't."
The police response last week in Portland was "very L.A.,"
says former police chief Harrington. "That's the way they
do things," she says, "a show of force and very aggressive."
Last year, before Kroeker came on board, a crowd-control
specialist from the Los Angeles County sheriff's department
gave Portland troops 16 hours of "mobile field force training."
Officers learned to move in formation, march in cadence
and stand in a uniformly prescribed stance. Some
police say the militaristic manner is designed to inspire
fear and, in theory, is more effective at crowd control
and dispersal.
The new chief clearly embraces the strategy. "I am satisfied
that this event was handled well," he told WW last
week. At the same time, he acknowledged that he is reviewing
the incident in which the officer was caught on videotape
shooting at the backs of protesters. And he will participate
at the Tuesday forum, in which police and protesters will
relate their versions of events.
Even some officers are questioning the bureau's handling
of the protest, though for different reasons. Police union
vice president Tom Mack says individual officers without
backup were sent into situations where they were swarmed
by "potentially hostile" crowds.
So, what does all this mean for Portland?
One could argue that, with its loose grooming standards
and relaxed attitude toward protests, the city has been
in the Dark Ages. This isn't Mayberry, after all, and perhaps
it's time Portland had a professional, big-city police force.
Prior to last November, the department had not done any
real crowd-control training in 15 or 20 years, says Capt.
Robert Kaufman, head of training.
Criminologists are of two minds on the LAPD style of leadership
that Kroeker is bringing to Portland. Some say a paramilitary
departmental culture does not rule out a progressive community-policing
program. Others say a paramilitary culture leads to an us-vs.-them
mentality, and increases the likelihood of events such as
the savage beating of Rodney King.
Kroeker concedes that his cherished ideal of a trusting
relationship between cops and community is at odds with
television images of helmeted Portland police firing shots
into crowds of protesters. Even if the use of force is appropriate,
"it's very physical and it evokes visceral reaction," he
says. "People see something that provokes distrust, it looks
bad. That's a big task that we have, to rebuild trust."
It's clear that if this is the new Portland Police Bureau,
it certainly failed some parts of its first big test.
"What I observed was not pretty and was not, in my opinion,
communiity policing," says Hales. "And it wasn't Portland,
either. In L.A. maybe it's true that every public gathering
might be seen by police as a potential threat. Here it's
as likely to be a City Club committee as an incipient riot.
"Portland is a city where people take politics and public
life seriously, and they exercise their right to have an
opinion and express it in public," Hales continues. "And
that, to me, isn't a clear and present danger to public
order."
Letters
from the Front Lines
The conflict between police and protestors causes a division
of opinion among readers. Some of the letters that didn't
fit in this week's paper will be published next week.
VIEW NO. 1:
THE COPS WERE OUT OF LINE!
POLICE WHACKED OUT
Never have I seen police
behave as inappropriately as they did on May Day. The media
have reported over and over that the Portland Police reacted
in a violent manner in response to violence by protesters
toward the police. This is not the case.
The first violent attack by the police occurred within
minutes of the parade's dispatch from the Park Blocks, and
that attack was completely unprovoked.
From there more attacks ensued, innocent men and women
were rushed and trampled by horses, beanbag guns were held
within inches of people's bodies and fired within 10 to
15 feet, a distance that is potentially lethal. One man
was shot twice in the thigh, then detained by police, who
denied him emergency care. He was later treated at Emanuel
Hospital.
Cans of pepper spray were aimed at the faces of children.
People were told to disperse, then blocked in by police
who either would not allow them to do so, or who gave mixed
messages as to where they were allowed to go. Many were
arrested because they could not get a clear answer from
the police. While crossing Front Avenue at a crosswalk that
was in my favor, I was charged by an oncoming police car
who first accelerated, then stuck his arm out the window
and gave me the finger. I witnessed one woman being beaten
and choked by a nightstick as she tried to calm a group
of terrified people. Still, the media reports "no injuries."
This is what we're dealing with.
We have no tolerance for police brutality in our city.
We have a right to assemble peacefully and to celebrate
the rights that we do have, rights that came about through
the hard work and organization of past generations. We all
need to tell Vera Katz, Mark Kroeker and his Fraternal Order
of Aggression that we aren't going to allow this kind of
behavior any longer.
Jodi Darby
Southeast Portland
STRIKING BEHAVIOR
Last week, I had the experience
of being assaulted by a police officer outside my office.
We heard drums and crowd noises outside and saw a group
of people moving through the park under heavy police escort.
The roving protest group did not seem particularly unruly,
so I went out to see, and I brought a camera along. One
of the protesters went down amid several officers who were
striking him with batons. When I attempted to take a photo
of this, I was struck from behind by a policeman, who shoved
me away from my office door when I attempted to get back
in the building. I was struck a total of seven times and
shoved several more.
The level of "spin" I see in the mainstream press is disturbing.
The press and the city government have closed ranks with
the police to present a picture that what happened was right
and justified. It most certainly was not. The use of military
tactics on civilians is completely unacceptable, not something
we should just get used to, as our new police chief seems
to think. It is an eye-opening experience to be treated
in this manner by those who are sworn "To Protect and Serve."
Evidently, I had crossed the line in the eyes of the police
from bystander to participant by the mere act of trying
to record an apparent injustice. Moral: If it looks like
you might be documenting police brutality, you may experience
it firsthand.
Bob Woods
Southeast Portland
GO TELL AUNT VERA
I went to the South Park
Blocks hoping to find a May Day celebration and festivity.
I left with images of violence, and a new understanding
that the police have an agenda, and protecting the citizens
is not on it. I was one of the people who was "herded" into
the south part of Waterfront Park. We were broken up into
three or more groups of about 25 and surrounded on all sides
by the police who then (still surrounding us) told us to
disperse. It was a very frightening experience. I felt as
though we were all about to be executed. First of all I
didn't even understand what the police were doing there.
They were the ones blocking traffic, on several streets,
with their cruisers parked in the middle of them. The protesters
(?--I wasn't really there to protest at that point, just
to celebrate Beltane) were on the sidewalks and in the park.
I have a really hard time with the lame justification of
the so-called "state of emergency." One newspaper stand
was thrown? And this is worthy of a "state of emergency"?
It seems logical that arresting the person who threw the
stand would be more effective than assaulting hundreds of
people and turning a potentially peaceful gathering into
a standoff. The major problem with the overwhelmingly inaccurate
media representation of the event, as I see it, is that
people who were told to disperse did disperse, and
they were still followed, harassed, chased, shot at and
attacked. Portland voters have the opportunity to hold someone
accountable for turning our beautiful city into a police
state. I hope everyone who is a witness stands up to tell
Vera what they think.
Tineke Bradshaw
Southeast Portland
YAHOOS IN UNIFORM
My 7-year-old son and I
were there until 4:30 pm, and neighbors asked, "How could
you take your kid?" We went for a maypole dance, to see
street theater about housing rights and such and a picnic.
There were a dozen kids in strollers, too! There'd have
been no incidents of note if the police had treated it like
any other street festival.
In Seattle, in November, an event was lost in the media--the
peaceful thousands in the labor march on Tuesday, Nov. 30.
Amtrak chartered whole trains to carry workers from Eugene
and Portland. There were no incidents. There were families,
music--everything we had Monday except yahoos in uniform.
Seattle could handle us, on a day when they had a right
to be tense. What's the Portland Police Bureau's excuse?
In an age of apathy, I should get an award for getting
my kid involved. I've taught him we have a right to assemble.
If you don't have money for lobbyists and ads, you hand
out leaflets, teach and be seen. We're supposed to exercise
those rights without interference. Working folks have marched
on May Day for over a century, to raise consciousness about
our numbers, our causes, our purpose.
I come from three generations of labor education and organizing--now
four! In 60 years, we've joined no labor march that's had
a run-in with police.
I bet there was less acting up for the first two hours
of the march than in any two hours at the Rose Festival.
I'd love to see someone look that up.
Shava Nerad
Southeast Portland
BULLYS IN BLUE
As a veteran union activist,
I came to Portland for the labor rally at Powell's. I missed
the mayhem at the parade, but what I witnessed during the
rally and the march afterwards to the Hilton gave me a very
low opinion of your new police chief. The intent here was
clearly to intimidate and, at times, even to provoke. Considering
the diversity and the size of the crowd, and the actions
of some of the officers against them, I think the people
are to be commended for maintaining peace and order.
Frank Lehn
Washougal, Wash.
DREAM RIOT
So. If the Blazers win the NBA
championship, and people spontaneously parade through the
streets of downtown without a permit, do you think they'll
be met with pepper spray?
Peace.
Randy Black
Vancouver, Wash.
VIEW NO. 2:
PROTESTERS GOT WHAT THEY DESERVED!
HIDDEN AGENDA
Your "news story" about the
May Day demonstration downtown conceded, "Technically, the
march was illegal but in line with the First Amendment."
Huh?
Let's cut to the chase. Your reporter would have complained
about any police presence, even if the law had just stood
around and done absolutely nothing. The story refers to
"protesters." To anybody watching, it was not at all clear
what the participants were protesting against, and your
story does nothing to clarify that. Perish the thought that
at least a few of them were simply trying to bait the police.
Your own photos are full of "protesters" with masked faces.
If they believed in the correctness of what they were doing,
why were they trying to conceal their identities?
I was downtown during the demonstration. I saw and heard
the "protesters." They wanted attention and they got it.
What's the big deal?
You might try looking a little deeper next time, maybe
considering why Powell's Books has become a target for demonstrations
when there are abundant examples around Portland of truly
exploited workers. One answer is that Powell's is an easy
target with high visibility. There's no high moral ground
there.
Jim Wygant
Southwest Portland
ORDER ÜBER ALLES
Willamette Week's
coverage of the May Day march was out of order. It was,
at its best, naïve and immature; at its worst, it was
one-sided and misleading. For openers, the reporter, Philip
Dawdy, tried to sneak by his statement: "Technically, the
march was illegal...."
Doesn't that then mean that the protester-marchers were
involved in an illegal assembly? If Dawdy wants to get "technical,"
how fine is the line between an illegal assembly and a riot?
If the question were simply, "Can an unlawful assembly be
a peaceful 'demonstration?,'" the answer is plain enough,
but the next question can be as obscure as the first was
obvious: Has there ever been a "peaceful demonstration"
that suddenly turned into an angry mob? How quickly and
easily Dawdy seemed to run the words "battle of Seattle"
past us....
In the most cavalier of terms, Dawdy passes right by...aggressive
acts on the part of the perpetrators ...when he describes
"two cops trying to arrest [someone]." It seems to be that
any time officers of the court are "trying" to arrest someone
there is some kind of resistance involved. Isn't there a
law against resisting arrest?
If memory serves me correctly, it is fairly accepted that
one of the contributing factors that sparked the L.A. riots
of a few years ago was a politician's statement that there
would be no peace without justice. What Dawdy doesn't seem
to have any appreciation for is what police officers learn
from day one as cadets: that justice is not possible without
order. Perhaps instead of the police having "erred on the
side of aggression," as Dawdy suggests, if they erred at
all it was on the side of "order."
Richard Thompson
Newberg
YOU SAY YOU WANT A REVOLUTION?
After reading
Willamette Week's truly biased and nonobjective diatribe
of the downtown May Day events, I am further reminded of
the problems that surround contemporary protest, particularly
that in Seattle and now Portland.
Historically, when people protested (example: the French
Revolution), they did not complain about getting pushed
on the ground or arrested by local police. That is what
happens when people choose to take a stand; they also take
the risk of having their feelings hurt and their protest
defeated or denied. I am not suggesting people don't protest;
rather I ask, if you're going to protest, don't bitch and
whine about scratched knees and run-ins with officials when
things get hairy and disorganized. No one ever said protest
was supposed to be PC.
Sarah Griffith
Southwest Portland
ROAD RAGE
At what point do my First Amendment
rights end so that protesters may exercise theirs? I had
to get home to get my sick infant to the doctor; I was substantially
delayed by the protest. Acquaintances of mine lost money
as they could not get to job sites or deliver documents
due to the "rights for workers" protest. I think many protesters,
particularly those who blocked me off in traffic and shook
my car, are quite lucky the police rounded them up. I was
about to just run them over and let the chips fall where
they may. Their First Amendment rights ended when they tried
to interfere with mine.
You seem to imply that it is OK that they blocked only
one lane of traffic. Do you understand how many working
people were hurt due to that?
Civil disobedience is not a right nor an accepted good.
One must look at the causes behind the uprising, and in
this case there was none.
On a side note, the police could have been better organized,
which would have resulted in more arrests. And move means
move; there is no brutality in forcing the issue. For the
liberal ilk, if the police didn't show up, there would be
no news here. I was extremely amused by the looks on the
faces of those who were "abused." Exactly what do they expect?
Blocking my path is not a right.
John Jagosh
Tigard
The
Walking Wounded
Following the May Day march, police reported that no injuries
had occurred. That was news to John Paul Cupp, who was seen
on videotape getting shot at close range by an officer with
a bean-bag gun before his arrest. According to medical records
Cupp released to Willamette Week, he was treated
at Legacy Emanuel Hospital on May 1 for wounds to his left
calf and thigh. His calf wound had to be closed with stitches.
Cupp wasn't the only one who came out on the losing side
of May Day. WW found 20 people who say they, or someone
they saw, sustained injuries of varying degrees of seriousness.
All but Cupp requested anonymity, saying they feared retaliation.
Police say one officer's leg was bruised when a newspaper
box was thrown at him.
* A female protester who says she was whacked in the hand
by a police baton at the corner of Southwest 5th Avenue
and Main Street. The woman received treatment at Peacehealth
Urgent Care in Eugene on the morning of May 2, and was treated
for a thumb broken in three places. The woman, who asked
not to be named, had four pins implanted in her thumb May
5, according to medical records reviewed by WW. She
is now on painkillers and says she will miss six weeks of
work.
* One person with a head laceration and another person
with bruised arms; both injuries allegedly sustained during
arrests of marchers in Northeast Portland before the downtown
protest. Reported to WW by Alan Rausch, a neurosurgical
registered nurse at Legacy Emanuel who says he saw both
people while they were in custody.
* Four marchers with injuries ranging from open cuts and
swelling bruises to a sprained thumb. Reported to WW
by a registered nurse practitioner who requested anonymity.
* A female protester, who requested anonymity, suffered
black eyes, a bump on the head and bruised knees, which
she says came after a police officer physically ran her
over on foot. Documented by medical record reviewed by WW.
* A woman who can be seen on videotape being rammed by
a police horse suffered bruised legs; the bruises were visible
three days after the march.
* A man who says he was roughed up by police had a laceration
on his arm, which he showed to a reporter the evening of
May 1.
* A man WW witnessed being batoned by a police officer
and, later, knocked to the ground by a police horse says
he suffered a bruised knee. His medical record was not available
at press time.
In addition, WW talked to eight other people who
say they sustained injuries in the march, ranging from a
bruised liver and a head laceration to bruises and scrapes.
--Philip Dawdy
Marching
to Different Orders
Police arrested more people last Monday than they did during
the three weeks following the start of the Gulf War in 1991,
when thousands marched weekly in a city that became known
as "Little Beirut."
But to get an idea of just how much the Portland Police
Bureau has changed its response to protests, you only need
to go back six months.
On Oct. 15, all the ingredients were ready for a showdown
between protesters and police. More than 300 people (about
the size of the May Day march) gathered downtown to support
Mumia Abu-Jamal, a Pennsylvania death-row inmate accused
of killing a Philadelphia cop. Abu-Jamal, a former journalist,
has become a cause célèbre for activists
and a hated figure for cops.
The prospect of activists marching about downtown urging
freedom for a convicted cop killer must have galled some
of the approximately 50 Portland cops on hand.
But they let the march proceed unmolested; even the police
told WW that the march was incident-free. Although
one riot squad appeared, it kept its distance, and no beanbag
shots were fired. The scene was tense but in control, at
least until the last protesters were clearing downtown's
Terry Schrunk Plaza. That's when police moved in and arrested
Chad Hapshe for dropping a flower on the sidewalk. Then,
when confronted by veteran activist Craig Rosebraugh, an
officer broke Rosebraugh's left arm while tackling him to
make an arrest ("Strong-Arm Tactics," WW, Oct. 27,
1999).
The local activist community was outraged.
On Oct. 22, they held a march to protest police brutality.
The event drew perhaps 125 people, who marched from Northeast
Portland to the downtown Justice Center. Although the marchers
had no permit, police allowed them to proceed without interruption.
The strategy worked. As the march wound down, the exchanges
between activists and police were, in many cases, downright
friendly.
That was then. This is now.
Following May Day's meltdown, about 125 activists gathered
in the North Park Blocks last Thursday afternoon to protest
police conduct, just as protesters had six months earlier.
They hefted signs reading "Keep L.A. tactics out of Portland"
and "Kroeker brand pork and beanbags" with a slash through
it, the international NO symbol.
Speaker after speaker denounced the police through a megaphone.
Five mounted police sat atop their horses, looking as if
they'd swallowed castor oil. After activists moved onto
Southwest 2nd Avenue, 24 riot cops and 20 more officers
eyed them from across the street, while a platoon of television
cameramen stood waiting.
As the marchers moved south toward Stark Street, a third
squad of 12 riot police trotted into view.
The marchers edged toward the crosswalk.
This time, there would be no good-natured banter to defuse
the situation. One of the riot cops stepped forward and,
holding the barrel of a beanbag gun to the sky, pumped the
action.
He didn't pull the trigger. He didn't even level the gun.
The protesters turned west, bound for Pioneer Courthouse
Square.
--Philip Dawdy
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Willamette Week | originally
published May 10,
2000
|
Police arrested protester John Paul Cupp (above) after knocking
him down with three beanbag rounds along Front Avenue. Cupp
was one of at least 20 marchers who claim to have been injured
on May 1.
