Portland Mercury


 
 

« "People's Choice" Award Winner: Frocky Jack Morgan! | Main | NEW EPISODE OF PURE POD FOR NOW PEOPLE! »

Monday, April 23, 2007

News Lawsuit: Protesters called Linda Schumacher a “fur hag…”

Posted by The Unpaid Intern on Mon, Apr 23 at 12:48 PM

After a trip down to the Federal Courthouse, we got our hands on the Schumachers’ lawsuit and thought we’d fill you in on some of the details, some of which contain the term “fecal matter,” so be prepared. miss%20mo%20fur%20coat.jpgSHIT-COVERED FUR HAG!

According to the lawsuit, Schumacher Fur & Outerwear’s (SFO’s) business suffered because of the protesters’ “public nudity, obscene gestures, picketing, posting signs, playing animal rights videotapes, chanting and other expressions of anti-fur slogans, and directing oral and written threats of death or serious bodily injury and insults such as “fucking torturer”, “murderer” and “fur hag” toward plaintiffs, plaintiffs’ employees, plaintiffs’ customers an other members of the public.” And, “The demonstrations have included throwing or dispersing fecal matter, urine, chalk and red paint on or around the building and adjoining sidewalks at plaintiffs’ store.”

And who are they suing? Gregg and Linda Schumacher of Schumacher Furs and Outerwear (SFO) are suing the City of Portland. Oh, and also: In Defense of Animals (IDA), the Animal Liberation Front (ALF), People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), Matt Rossell (of IDA), Kevin Meiras aka “Bluejay” (ALF), Connie Durkee (IDA), and Alex Lilli—a “regular leader and participator in protests.”

More after the jump…

According to the suit, the Portland Police were also partly responsible, in their failure to: "Respond to emergency or non-emergency calls to plaintiffs' store; enforce federal, state of local criminal laws, arrest protesters and demonstrators who violate federal, state or local criminal laws; require permits or variances for parades, demonstrations, displays and noise amplification."

And the City was guilty of: "aiding and abbetting the protests and demonstrations by making public statements derogatory about plaintiffs and encouraging plaintiffs, among other things, to relocate their city outside the City," the lawsuit alleges.

SFO believes all of these actions, or lack thereof, were, "Based upon bad faith and ill will," towards them, violating their right to free speech, equal protection, and due process.

The Schumachers claim these actions resulted in their lease being terminated before its October 17, 2012 expiration date.

Interestingly, the suit makes no mention of a sign posted in the shop window by the Schumachers, reading, "All protesters should be anally electrocuted," or of attempts by the mayor's office to set up mediation between the Schumachers and protesters—Schumacher said at the time he "did not want to negotiate with terrorists."

Comments

OK! Now you see what happens
when people go off their meds!
If the meds were helping 'em to
be less crazy, then going off 'em will make 'em more crazy!
This is basic "common sense" and
I wouldn't put much stock in all
this craziness! Get a laugh and
move on to something else!

I'm confused. Is TeeJay2theMaxx saying he/she is off their meds?

TEEJAY I can't laugh, this is a serious news story with major implications on how our beloved Portland is going to be viewed by the masses.

First we had 12-year-old anarchist burning soldiers in effigy and now we have shit throwing animal rights activists hassling all of the beautiful people while they try to shop for fur coats.

What's next?

Unpaid Intern, shouldn't we at least at this point be more concerned about how Portland is viewed by its residents rather than the masses.

Now I don't believe it's right for someone to cause harm to another person (in reference to insults and poop flinging) but I bet if you ask a sampling of people on the streets of Portland if they believed fur is unethical and should not be allowed in Portland a majority would say yes. That being said, the City of Portland needs to fight this.

As for the anarchist burning soldiers in effigy, well it's within their constitutional rights however unfortunate though that the imagery was iconic enough to attract so much negative press from conservative media sources.

Dex said:...I bet if you ask a sampling of people on the streets of Portland if they believed fur is unethical and should not be allowed in Portland a majority would say yes.
---
I think that's pushing it, especially the bit about banning fur.

There has been no poop flinging or urinating on the sidewalk during the Saturday protests. Gregg Schumacher makes a lot of accusations in the legal docs, doesn't mean any of it's true. I can say from my experience as a fur protester that it's full of lies.

Ed, I don't think it's pushing it to imagine legislation that bans fur sales within a specific region especially considering that there is already legislation on where and who can sale liquor, cold medicine, porn etc.

And as far as the other part that you quoted of mine: I know not a single person who thinks fur coats and or clothing are ethical though I only know a couple who actively protest against it. Beyond that I haven't been able to find any hard numbers of the public in Portland's opinion on Fur, in fact it's hard to find much (at least for me hard to find is a two page deep google search) in the way of Fur surveys. I was only able to find this one conducted by the RSPCA in London, so I guess you got me there.

Maybe his business is drying up because people don't want to be wrapped up in pelts like some backward fur trapper? Or maybe people don't like to think they're wearing a cute little baby seal around their necks.

The boobs are working, they should keep going with that. Hey, wait-- this is Portland! Where's the hot fuzzy guy shouting "THIS IS THE ONLY FUR I'LL WEAR" while stripped to his skivvies? That's legal! Bring out the boxer briefs!

Dex, I'm worried about anyone living inside or outside of Portland that's not familiar with sarcasm...

Unpaid Intern, it's the internet - most sarcasm is lost between the tips of the fingers and molded plastic keys.

So why not push for banning the sale of fur in Portland as opposed to harrassing and intimidating a legitimate business?

Right, most people don't share these extremist views. If only animal rights activists treated human animals as well as the others...

The First Amendment sucks, doesn't it G? Yeah, why DID those activists have to go ahead and actually use it? And why didn't abolitionists just push for a ban to slavery through their legislatures rather than making it difficult for those who legally owned slaves? They even provoked one of the bloodiest wars in this nation. Damn activists!

Yes there was fecal matter wiped on the windows on a saturday night in september how do I know i was called to clean it up, so if you do not know your facts refrain from stepping in it.

It's downtown. How do you know it had anything to do with the protests? (And how do you know it was human fecal matter, which is what Gregg claimed). I remember Linda's purse was stolen and she accused the protesters and continued to do it in the news, long after the police corroborated that protesters had nothing to do with it. If there were an earthquake in town, Gregg would claim the protesters did it.

The first ammendment has certain limitations. It doesn't give you the right to harrass and intimidate people in order to force them out of business. The activists should spend their time trying to actually get a law passed that bans the sale of fur within PDX city limits or in Multnomah Co.

Slavery wasn't the main issue in the Civil War either. Try reading some history instead of protesting the "immoral" use of rodents.

The person who stole the purse had known contacts with protestors, she has been at the protests before. Stop the lies it's only the Portland Mercury blog, this is the one place you get kudos for acting like jackasses save the BS for respectable publications, like the Oregonian and Hustler Magazine. By the way are you one of the "Jane Does"?

The person who stole the purse did NOT have contacts with the protesters, and the police confirmed that. Are you Gregg Schumacher, someone who believes that if you repeat it enough times, it will make it so?

The First Amendment gives other US citizens the right to say things that you might not like. The police were there for almost every single protest, and the Commander himself said that protester behavior was protected speech. Why do you think the Schumachers can't get a criminal case and have to go to civil court? You really think that police and the city decided to ignore the law and protect protesters?

Why is it when you try to have a intelligent conversation with someone they take and distort the facts. The female that sold the purse was at a protest in July, she was caught ditching the purse at the PEAR gallery where several of protesters hang out stop lying say hey guess what our bad,The police have not been present every weekend do yourself a favor go to the courthouse read the claim then go ask Gregg Schumacher to see the 400 hours of videotape and please if you think you have something to say at least know your facts.
Peace

Comments Closed

In order to combat spam, we are no longer accepting comments on this post (or any post more than 45 days old).

Blogtown End Hits: The Merc's Music Blog MOD: Merc on Design 2008: Merc Election Coverage Mercury Eat and Drink Guide  

Our Friends

Our Enemies