
I'm not going to lie, I missed this yesterday. In fact, I wrote the date down wrong, but it's big news, and so it's time to play catch up. There was a hearing in federal court yesterday to decide whether to unseal certain documents in the Chasse case. The Oregonian and Willamette Week were both there, and I'm going to link you to James Pitkin's coverage because it caught the most interesting angle in proceedings—that the judge not only ruled against releasing more documents, but also, said he's considering trying the Chasse case outside Portland, because it's impossible to find a juror in Multnomah County who hasn't had their mind poisoned by all the media outrage surrounding the case.
As if to bear the judge's opinion out, this video just surfaced online. Full disclosure, I'm working on a documentary about Chasse's death, but it seems some people can't wait for the damned thing to come out, and have begun trying to make documentaries of their own. This one, posted by Bob Seaver, features maudlin piano, and even poetry, to make its point. In particular, it focuses on statements being made recently by the Portland Police Association boss, Scott Westerman, in defense of the officers involved in the death:
Seaver recently discovered iMovie, it seems, having just posted another Youtube focusing on Mark Kruger, a cop with an interest in "military history."
Protester Chantilly Geigle, who was arrested for splurging red paint around the entrance to city hall on the third anniversary of the death of James Chasse, plead guilty to a misdemeanor in court yesterday. Geigle was originally charged with felony criminal mischief after the city presented a bill of $1,440 to clean up the paint—16 hours of cleanup at $90 an hour according to Laurel Butman of the city's Office of Management and Finance. The Mercury received the following letter yesterday, in reference to the high cost of cleanup:

Geigle pled guilty yesterday to second degree criminal mischief, a misdemeanor, and will pay a $200 fine, as well as $1400 in restitution. "They paid $250 to get a rug cleaned," she says. "So it's pretty ridiculous."
Geigle plans to bake cupcakes with red frosting on them and solicit donations outside city hall, in exchange for a flier about Chasse's death, and a cupcake, to pay off her fine. "As far as I'm aware that's legal," she says. "But someone on the Oregonian's website called me an 'attention whore' and that really hit me hard. This is about Chasse. He's haunted me for three years, and I still see his face in the faces of the mentally ill people I work with. I don't feel that enough has been done. At the very least, the three officers who did this should be fired."
Lots of people have got in touch with Geigle over recent weeks. "Not all of them agreed with what I did or how I did it," she says. "But they all agreed that what happened to Chasse was murder."
"The cops are always talking about how the mental health system is broken and the cops have been scapegoated," she continues. "But really, they've scapegoated the mental health system. This is a police accountability issue." "If a mental health worker had done what happened to Chasse, they would not only have been fired, but jailed," she continues.
The Oregonian reported today that a jury awarded three men $175,000 in a civil suit against the city on charges of assault, battery and false arrest. The men were returning to their car in a parking garage when police followed them, thinking they had been involved in an altercation on the street. When one of the men handed over his concealed weapons permit, the officers pulled their guns.
"Someone's having a Glock pointed at their head and being told, 'If you move or do anything else, I'll shoot you," says Jason Kafoury, one of the lawyers on the case. No charges were filed against the men.
It's troubling that one of the officers in this case, Leo Besner, has been in hot water before. In 2007, the city paid a $500,000 settlement to the family of Raymond Gwerder after Officer Besner, then a sniper, shot Gwerder in the back while Gwerder was on the phone with a police hostage negotiator. In light of the recent series of legal losses for the police, Kafoury believes oversight needs to come from outside the police bureau.
“I think that the police need an independent review board to oversee accusations of misconduct,” Kafoury says, adding that the board could be made up of locally elected citizens.
The Oregon Supreme Court decided today that Measure 11's mandatory minimum sentences were unconstitutional in two specific cases.
In cases against Veronica Rodriguez and Darryl Anthony Buck, the court upheld their convictions but deemed their mandatory 75-month sentences for first degree sexual assault to be unconstitutional. In Rodriguez's case, she was convicted of sexual assault for standing behind a 13-year-old boy so that her breasts rested on the back of his head in a room with 30 to 50 other people.
The court found that sentencing a person with no prior convictions to 75 months in prison for sexual assault to be "so disproportionate as to shock the moral sense of all reasonable persons as to what a right and proper sentence should be."
But while the decision doesn't strike the law from the books, it does raise interesting questions for future cases.
"I think it clearly raises the question of how many other people are slipping through the cracks of Measure 11,” says David Rogers, executive director of Partnership for Safety and Justice.
For Rogers, the decision confirms what polls done by PSJ show: that Measure 11 is unreasonably harsh and should be scaled back and eventually overturned.
“It’s costing the state too much, it’s problematic, it’s not good public safety policy,” Rogers says.
But he's not looking for another ballot measure, which he says are often used to confuse voters. Instead, he thinks the legislature should take up Measure 11's faults.
“That’s the job of legislators is to create public policy.”

According to the Oregonian and a posting on the Portland Independent Media Center, Geigle waited for police to arrive while distributing leaflets on the death of James Chasse, a schizophrenic who died while in police custody from injuries he sustained while being arrested. The arrest came on the third anniversary of Chasse's death.
Geigle was arraigned Friday on a felony charge of criminal mischief. She did not want to talk to the Mercury until she had spoken with Thad Betz, her court-appointed lawyer. Betz was in drug court Friday afternoon.
Geigle did call the Mercury before her protest yesterday. "I just don't know what else I can do," she said. "I think it's so important to draw attention to this issue."
More details as we get them—check next week's paper for more.
Are Portland's gang enforcement police officers legitimately targeting gang members, or sweeping up young black men for “doing fifty-five in a fifty-four,” as Jay Z and criminal defender Chris O’Connor assert? Much has been reported in the Mercury about how the police bureau's gang enforcement efforts might bring about racial profiling. But I decided to head down to the courthouse yesterday to see how the various issues played out on street level.

O’Connor’s claim of racial profiling came Thursday, September 10, during a motion-to-suppress-evidence hearing involving his client, Robert James. James, an African American, 26 years old, was stopped in June for allegedly rolling through a stop sign on his bike in North Portland around at 17th and Killingsworth. Arresting Officer Cody Berne—who is a member of the police bureau's Hotspot Enforcement Action Team (HEAT), which focuses on gang activity—testified Thursday that he turned on the overhead lights and chirped his siren at James, who stopped and waited on his bike. Berne approached James and asked him if he was carrying any weapons.
Here’s where it gets a little fuzzy. According to Officer Berne, James said he didn’t have any weapons, and offered the officer the right to search him. James testified that Officer Berne asked to frisk him. Either way, James testified that he really didn’t feel like he had a choice in the matter.
“You can’t just tell an officer ‘no, you can’t search me,’” he said.
Officer Berne said he patted James down, and that he felt a “bindle” of drugs in his pocket, but that he didn’t make an issue over the alleged bindle at first, instead asking James for his ID and taking it back to his patrol car to check if James had an arrest record. James did, for armed robbery. Officer Berne said he then returned to James and asked him about the drugs in his pocket, at which point James ran. When Berne finally caught up with him, the drugs were gone, Berne said. James was arrested for escape and traffic violation.
O’Connor argued yesterday that stopping James was a "pretense stop," one that was racially motivated. He also said James was never officially detained, and that he was under no obligation to stay in the area of the officer or consent to any search.
For his part yesterday, Officer Berne was poised and calm, if seemingly a bit rehearsed, espousing that his goal was “to make sure no 14-year-old kid is walking around with a gun,” and other harmonious goals. But under pressure from O’Connor, Berne acknowledged that race is “a factor I’d consider” in deciding who to pull over.
Multnomah County Circuit Court Judge Jerry B. Hodson readily admitted to being rusty on search-and-seizure protocol, but assured both legal teams that he’d read up on the cases and statutes they cited. Hodson said he would make a decision about the motion to suppress on Monday morning, September 14.
The Mercury also has a call in to Sergeant Don Livingston, who oversees Berne. We'll keep tracking this story, and give you updates as we get them.
City Commissioners Randy Leonard, Nick Fish and Amanda Fritz called this afternoon for the publication of the city's controversial "secret list," going against the advice they have been given so far by the city attorney's office to keep it secret.
City council passed an "emergency ordinance" this afternoon to pay Multnomah County almost $1million of taxpayer dollars to administer part of the program. But the discussion took an unexpected turn after council faced questions from public defense attorney Chris O'Connor about keeping the list secret.
"Commissioner Saltzman and I have one small disagreement, which is publish this list," said Leonard. "Other than that this is a remarkable program."
"I want to add my voice to the chorus arguing for publishing the list," said Fish. "We get good legal advice, but ultimately we are the clients."
Fritz said she agreed with the remarks made by Fish and Leonard. She wanted to see how many women were getting into the program, too. After the session, Fritz clarified her remarks: "It's public record, how many times someone has been arrested," she said. "So why would we want to keep it secret? Since people could go to the trouble to get hold of this information themselves, I think the fact that it has been kept secret has become a distraction." "There might be a public benefit in publishing this list," she told a KBOO reporter.
You can catch up on what the list is by watching this 10-minute documentary, but in brief: It targets around 450 drug addicts in Old Town for felony treatment on what would otherwise be treated as misdemeanor drug offenses. The list is assembled by taking the number of arrests of Old Town offenders, and those who have been arrested the most over a 30 day period get on the list. At present, there is no way to find out if you are on the list, and no way to challenge your status on the list. The list has already faced its first constitutional challenge in court, when a judge overturned the felony treatment of two defendants under it. Broader constitutional challenges are expected soon, but in the mean time, the city has continued to decline to share the list with the public.
It's not clear at this point what is going to happen next. Commissioner Leonard would not go so far as to tell the Mercury that he is going to file a city ordinance to publish the list, despite now being in a majority on council, calling for its release to the public.
"I will defer to Dan's judgement," said Leonard. "But if I was the police commissioner and I heard what I heard today, I would come back to my office and order the police chief to publish the list on the web."
"I don't mind stepping on toes," said Leonard, "and I have before, and I will again, but I want to give Dan the benefit of the doubt. He's operating with the team day to day, and is getting some information that I am not getting. But based on what I heard today, I would be very surprised if he didn't go back and say that."
"Then the debate is about whether certain people should be forced into treatment," said Leonard. "And I will have that discussion all day."
Commissioner Saltzman was unavailable for comment immediately after the hearing, but staff said they would be discussing the outcome of today's council session with the commissioner over coming days. More after the jump.
Multnomah County Circuit Court Judge Stephen Bushong unexpectedly annihilated the city's sit/lie law at a special session this afternoon, after the city asked him to "clarify" his late June ruling that the law is unconstitutional.
City Commissioner Nick Fish was there to watch the verdict, along with representatives from the Portland Business Alliance—which has pushed for the sit/lie law all along—and plenty of interested local media. Fish, himself a former civil rights attorney, spent a few moments afterward, chatting not with the city attorney's staff, but with the defense attorney in the case, Clayton Lance:

Hit the jump.
Lee Perlman, the man accused of defacing a Recall Sam Adams petition, was arrested today on a misdemeanor charge of criminal mischief in the third degree.
Volunteers Gaye Harris and Joe Favata were getting signatures in the parking lot of the Albina Community Bank in northeast Portland on August 6 when Perlman approached them and asked to sign. He then scribbled across the petition, which already had eight valid signatures, and returned it to the volunteers, saying “here’s my signature,” according to Jasun Wurster, head of campaign to recall the mayor.
The volunteers got a picture of his license plate as he drove away and then called the police, says Wurster.

“We’re deeply disturbed that he thought he could silence eight citizens,” Wurster told the Mercury. “We’re going to prosecute him to the fullest extent of the law. Our attorneys are in contact with the DA’s office and the Secretary of State elections division to see if any [more serious] crimes have been perpetrated by Mr. Perlman.”
Perlman is a writer for the Hollywood Star News and other local publications. When contacted Monday for his comment regarding the incident, he said, “I think it best I don’t talk about it.”
Perlman is still in custody on $1,000 bail. The jail only allows visitors on the weekends.
Update, 3:49pm
District Attorney Mike Schrunk says he is yet to reach a charging decision in the case.
"We'll figure it out and file the appropriate charge, if there is one," he says. "And if we don't, then we'll come up with a written reason why we haven't charged him."
Schrunk said as far as he knew, there was no conferring between the DA's office and the cops before arresting Perlman. Police spokeswoman Mary Wheat concurred. "We don't make decisions based on politics," she says.
City Auditor Andrew Carlstrom says the eight signatures defaced by Perlman are still valid, because everything is still legible on the petition.
"I'd much rather be thinking about some of the other crimes that happen in this town," says Schrunk. "It's not like it's armed robbery, but it seems to be interfering with the process and there should be a consequence for doing that."
Asked whether he would be pursuing the death penalty in this case, Schrunk declined comment.
-Rachael Marcus
Tiffany Kimmel and Taimi Arvidson at the University of Oregon have produced a first class exploration of the city's secret list program. We first started examining possible constitutional issues in the Mercury last year. Here's the documentary:
There's also a feature article on the program at the university's website. I prefer the video, personally: It's perfect if you want to catch up on the controversies of this program in just ten minutes. Enjoy.
"There is a lot of positive energy that has developed out of this tragedy," said Multnomah County Chair Ted Wheeler this morning, discussing the county's unanimous vote to settle the County's role in the death of James Chasse, jr for a record $925,000. Meanwhile, the Chasse family's attorneys filed documents yesterday in their ongoing case against the City of Portland that contain troubling new details.
Wheeler coupled the settlement vote with a more positive step by the county this morning: The decision to finally move forward on a sub-acute facility for those, like Chasse, who are in mental health crisis. Wheeler has drawn criticism from mental health advocates for the past two years for failing to move on the idea—a key recommendation of a committee formed by former mayor Tom Potter in the wake of Chasse's death.
"I think this is in the best interest of the community and the Chasse family, and it allows us to get beyond the legal issues in the case and move toward a better system of delivery for people in mental health crisis," said Wheeler.

The new center is expected to open on East Burnside and MLK, on the second floor of the existing Hooper Detox Center, in late 2011. In the spring, the county gave Central City Concern $1million slated for the sub-acute facility to move the Hooper detox center to a new CCC building at the old Ramada Inn in the Rose Quarter by May 2010—thereby making space for an overhaul of the Hooper building. PDC has approved $75,000 in pre-development for the project, and has set aside $2million in its 2012-13 budget to cover the cost of the sub-acute center, said PDC government affairs specialist Keith Witcosky. Witcosky said PDC will "be as creative as we need" to cover the time lag between now and 2012, and hopefully move the money into this fiscal year so that work can begin as soon as possible. The county currently faces an $800,000 a year budget hole in opening the sub-acute facility, said county mental health director Joanne Fuller, but it hopes to plug the gap by working with the city, state, and CCC. "There is also the potential for stimulus dollars," said Fuller.
"I don't think a celebration is in order today," said Wheeler. "There's an opportunity here."
Wheeler said the new center, which is expected to house those in mental health crisis for up to 10 days while they stabilize, before moving them into housing through CCC, "is going to be effective, and cost effective, and I don't want to overlook the fact that it's humane."
If anyone were tempted to celebrate, they would have been sobered pretty quickly by further developments in the case. New documents filed yesterday by Chasse family lawyer Tom Steenson throw new light on it: State medical examiner Karen Gunson had previously explained broken ribs in Chasse's back from his fall to the ground. But since no evidence exists to suggest Chasse ever fell on his back, the deposition of Gunson contains a new concession: "Since there is no evidence that Chasse landed on his back when he was taken down to the concrete, and if he was struck in the left side, Gunson opines that it is more probable that his posterior left ribs were broken by a violent kick or knee drop than during the fall," says Steenson, in yesterday's document filed with the court. Here's Gunson's deposition:
Gunson found 48 separate abrasions or contusions on Chasse's body, including 16 possible blows to the head.
The documents also include the deposition of Portland Police Bureau Officer Christopher Humphreys, which make it quite clear that Humphreys never saw Chasse urinate on the sidewalk—an alleged detail which has consistently been reported about the incident as a possible legal basis for the officers stopping Chasse. At most, Humphreys thought he saw Humphreys urinating in his pants because there was possibly a wet patch on his trousers, according to his deposition testimony. But the ground by his feet was completely dry.
You can download the documents in their entirety here. Warning: File Ex2.pdf contains intense and disturbing autopsy images of Chasse.
Several witnesses described Chasse's screams during his encounter with police officers at the corner of NW 13th and Everett on September 17, 2006. "He seemed like a scared animal," said witness Melissa Jane Gaylord. Electrician Tony Lee Carter "thought [Chasse] was dead" for a period during which Chasse was unconscious on the sidewalk, following his beating.
Bike lawyer Mark Ginsberg, another witness said: "I did hear Mr.Chasse yelling mercy, mercy, mercy, and that was personally pretty sort of disturbing to me."
Witness Justin Soltani said he saw an officer sitting on Chasse. "He had his knees on him. He was crouching down on his back." Soltani also said during his deposition that "Mr.Chasse couldn't run. He was galloping. He was bouncing up and down, rather than, if I saw him run."
Chasse's trouble running is consistent with accounts by Chasse's old friends that he was hit by a TriMet bus in his youth and sustained leg injuries.
"There was clear vocal mocking, the mocking of Mr.Chasse's cries for help," said witness Randall Stuart:
Portland Police Sergeant Kyle Nice radioed for backup saying Chasse was "unconscious" on the street corner, but never informed paramedics of the extent of force used or of Chasse's prolonged unconsciousness, according to the documents.
"NICE WORK BOYS. GLAD U R OK N HE ISN'T. I'LL DO THE AFTER ACTION WHEN I GET THE RPTS TONIGHT!" wrote Police Bureau Sergeant O'Keefe, in an in-car computer message to Sheriff's Deputy Bret Burton, after the event.
An expert witness, Lou Reiter, former deputy police chief of the Los Angeles Police Department, also testifies in a written statement that Officers Nice, Humphreys, and Sheriff's Deputy Burton did not follow police policies and practices in treatment of someone who is at least suspected of being mentally ill. Reiter described the officers' use of force as "unreasonable," and their failure to disclose the force used on Chasse as "unreasonable."
It is against the city attorney's policy to comment on ongoing cases.
Attorney General John Kroger spoke at length at city club today. I'd encourage you to listen to his entire speech at 7pm on OPB, because Kroger devoted the majority of his time to advocating for better drug treatment in the state. Kroger plans to convene a task force to create a 10-year-plan to improve the system, and it's an exciting prospect. "If Texas is being more innovative than Oregon on this issue," he said, "then that's something Oregon needs to think about."
Kroger also described his consumer protection and environmental prosecution efforts, which quite frankly could be transformational in Oregon. But they're not what you really want to hear about right now, so I'll cut to the chase: On the Sam Adams decision...
"I know that decision pleases some people, and it upsets some people. For all of you, no matter which camp you fall in, I will simply say one thing," said Kroger. "The Adams case raises significant legal questions, significant ethical questions, significant political questions. As a prosecutor in the case, my job is to resolve the legal questions. That's what the process does, and I am confident that we have resolved those legal questions correctly. But it would be wrong for a prosecutor to try and resolve the moral or political questions. That's not my job, that's a job for the citizens of Portland."
Multnomah County will vote next week on whether to settle its portion of the James Chasse lawsuit for $925,000. As far as the Mercury can tell, that's a record high settlement in Portland for an excessive force/death in custody suit: The city paid $600,000 to the family of Damon Lowery in 2005 (he died in 1999 of asphyxiation by 6 cans of pepper spray and being stood on by a cop), and it paid $845,000 in an excessive force settlement to a collective of anti-Bush protesters in 2004.
The proposed settlement only covers Chasse's treatment at the Multnomah County Detention Center (MCDC), where he was taken by Portland Police Bureau officers Christopher Humphreys and Kyle Nice after his beating in September 2006. The city and American Medical Medical Response are yet to settle their portions of the case, covering the conduct of police officers and the ambulance company respectively.
Chasse was left in a holding cell at MCDC prior to booking, with a "spit sock" over his head. A jail nurse, Patricia Gayman, refused to admit Chasse to the main jail after looking through his holding cell window. She also failed to provide emergency medical care, the family alleged. Video of Chasse's jail booking, on which he can be heard screaming, and can be seen hog-tied, is here:
Chasse was subsequently taken to Adventist hospital across the Willamette River in a patrol car driven by Humphreys and Nice, but he died en-route. The state medical examiner found 26 rib fractures and that Chasse had died from "blunt force trauma to the chest." Multnomah County is also responsible for the behavior of former sheriff's deputy Bret Burton, who also beat Chasse on the sidewalk, and has since been hired by the Portland Police Bureau.
"The family of James Philip Chasse will have no comment until after the county board of commissioners votes on the matter next Thursday, July 2, 2009," said the Chasse family's attorney, Tom Steenson.
"I'm not surprised the county is looking to settle," says Jason Renaud of the Mental Health Association of Portland. "The case looked very strong against them. I expect the city and the other parties to the case to settle quickly, in light of this latest development."
It's thought that the city attorney's office is facing considerable pressure from the Portland Police Association not to admit any wrongdoing on behalf of Portland Police Officers in the case. The Police Bureau instituted new training for police officers after Chasse's death.
Meanwhile, County Chair Ted Wheeler has released a statement on the proposed settlement. "It is personally important to me that we demonstrate that Jim Chasse’s death serves as a continuing reminder to us of the need to substantially improve the way the community responds to mental illness and build systems of support that can sustain recovery," wrote Wheeler, who now wants to move forward with the construction of a mental health crisis center.
Conflicting statements made by Beau Breedlove about his conduct with Sam Adams, and Breedlove's acceptance of money to appear in Unzipped magazine would have most likely compromised any criminal prosecution of Adams, said Attorney General John Kroger at today's noon press conference. 
The specific "conflicting statements" in question are those made to the Oregonian about kissing Adams in a restroom, which were subsequently withdrawn in a written statement provided by Breedlove to the Attorney General, as far as I could understand.
"If we prosecuted this case in a court of law, we would have the statement from one witness—a witness who made directly contradictory statements," said Kroger. "This case is too weak to charge in court."
"Having reviewed quite frankly every criminal statute we could think of to determine whether or not there was a problem," said Kroger, "we could not."
Kroger said it is not a crime under Oregon law to lie to a police officer or investigator. So journalists also asked why Kroger decided not to put Adams and Breedlove before a grand jury, where they would have had to take an oath. Kroger responded that it wouldn't be appropriate to put Adams before a grand jury, because he would have a fifth amendment right to silence as the subject in the investigation. Meanwhile, he said, Breedlove's statements would not have been a factor in any charging decision he made.
Kroger said his office had checked immigration records to see whether there was a possibility that Adams could have accompanied Breedlove to Mexico before Breedlove's 18th birthday. "We found no evidence or record of such a trip."
Kroger said there was no indication that Adams had lied in any registered filing such as a candidate statement or voter's pamphlet, as is required to break Oregon election fraud law. There had been an option for an aggrieved party to file a civil suit against Adams, said Kroger, but "that deadline had passed."
"We are not making any assessment about Mayor Adams' credibility," Kroger added. He also said he had no comment on whether former Mercury news editor Amy Ruiz is qualified for the job as Adams' sustainability policy advisor—it was only his job to investigate whether laws had been broken. In the case of Ruiz, Kroger said, witnesses had all made similar statements as to the facts.
The only witness who had refused to be interviewed, according to Kroger's investigator Don Nelson, was Breedlove's ex-boyfriend, Mark Merkle.
I asked how investigating this case has been different from Kroger's investigation of mafia bosses and Enron thieves.
"Not different," he said. "Every criminal case is different. It's my duty to treat every putative defendant or person accused of a crime the same."
Kroger said his office had made no effort to quantify how much the five-month long investigation had cost.
"One thing I would add," said Kroger to Jaquiss, "is that if we had gone to a grand jury, then much less information would be publicly available now because of grand jury secrecy laws."
The Mercury has lodged a public records request for the full report, which Kroger's office expects to fulfil some time in the mid afternoon.
Reaction in the press gallery seemed one of broad disappointment. Most journalists it seemed were hoping for charges to be brought, whether they might have admitted it, or not. One even asked whether any witnesses had been subjected to polygraph tests.
"Generally we have been trying to treat this like we would any normal investigation," Kroger responded. "I have never subjected any potential witness to a polygraph."
Some "reporters" were more forthcoming with their reactions: "You go into these investigations and you've got shackles on," said Victoria Taft, a right-wing radio host who has followed the whole scandal very closely, after the press conference. "If you're not willing to take the word of Beau Breedlove, who is admittedly shady, but you're willing to take the word of Mayor Sam Adams, who has been proven to lie? I mean, come on. This is bad news. It's just unbelievable. Finally you can groom a kid for sex and you don't get in trouble for it."
Evidently content to ignore sound legal strategy by discussing its secret list program publicly, city council went ahead and discussed more details at last week's council session. There's still the threat of a class action lawsuit hanging over the head of the program, and the more council goes on record about it, the better for the lawyers challenging its constitutionality and seeking to raid the city's coffers for your tax dollars. With that in mind, here's a Youtube clip:
At this point I've given up trying to follow the council's differing motivations for reacting the way they do on this program, although I will note this: When questioned on a difficult political point, Commissioner Nick Fish tends to respond as a lawyer trying to win a legal motion in front of a judge, but he doesn't seem to understand the effect his demeanor might have on a jury of his peers. Observe, for example, the way he caresses Copwatch activist Dan Handelman in this clip, with, as it turns out, I think, inaccurate information. The secret list was never released to the public during the litigation earlier this year, or "published," as Fish claims. If it were, I'd have gotten my hands on a copy, but I never did. The cops have continued to argue that disclosing the list might embarrass the (mostly African American and poor) people on it.
Meanwhile Commissioner Randy Leonard says, on a tangent, that he opposes the sit/lie law on constitutional grounds—something he has explicitly denied having done, on the record, repeatedly. Up until now he has said he didn't want to support the law when there is nowhere for homeless people to go. He also says he thinks the police should disclose the secret list so that people can't have a "diversionary discussion" about the secret list, but can instead focus on the merits of the program.
All this is for the legal wonks among you, although I'll admit to finding it all fascinating from a political and human interest point of view. Nobody is arguing that giving drug addicts a way out of their addictions is right. It's secret government lists that are plain wrong—and attempting to justify them in any language, I think, or from any point of view, is to fail to learn a series of important lessons from our shared history. Down with the secret list.
Deputy District Attorney Lucy Heil was arraigned and pled not guilty this morning on DUI and reckless driving charges. Heil was arrested on April 29, en route from a party attended by fellow attorneys and court staff to raise cash for the courthouse's childcare program. Her measured blood alcohol level on arrest was confirmed at 0.22% by her attorney this morning.
"My client was arraigned for a DUI and reckless driving, she is diversion eligible, and we immediately informed her employer," says Heil's attorney, Jim McIntyre. "It's a regrettable incident, and she's taking every step she can to correct the mistake and we expect to get it resolved."
"My client is being dealt with as anyone else in Multnomah County who would be similarly charged," McIntyre insists.
The District Attorney's office has also brought in an outside prosecutor on the case, to avoid a conflict of interest where Heil could potentially be prosecuted by one of her own colleagues. Both the District Attorney's office and the special prosecutor, Robin Springer from law firm Bullivant Houser Bailey, are yet to return calls seeking comment.
"She has an active law license and we haven’t received any word of the arraignment or arrest,” says Oregon State Bar spokeswoman Kateri Walsh. “OSBAR has had some complaints in the past involving DUI, and sometimes there are circumstances that might lead us to take action, but they would have to have an impact on the person’s ability to practice law, and to determine that we would have to go through our full disciplinary process.”
Heil has prosecuted plenty of DUI cases, personally.
Oregon law defines a DUI as over 0.08% blood alcohol level. Wikipedia says a blood alcohol rating of 0.22% represents "very serious intoxication," and lists "stupor, loss of understanding, impaired sensations, severe motor impairment, loss of consciousness and memory blackout" as potential side effects of a blood alcohol level over 0.21%.
Update, 2:30pm: Senior District Attorney Norm Frink says the DA's office has "initiated appropriate disciplinary action" under the terms of the DA's contract with the Prosecuting Attorney's Association. Frink couldn't comment further, pending the investigation, but said he expected it to be resolved "fairly quickly."
"I got the call on the weekend as soon as it happened," says DA Mike Schrunk. "The only awkwardness is getting someone outside the office to prosecute the case."
"It's my understanding that she's going to go into diversion, we'll take the appropriate action and deal with the internal part of it," he concludes.
The City of Portland's controversial secret list program may or may not be constitutional. That's the upshot of a ruling in Multnomah County Circuit Court this morning that could leave the door open for a class action civil rights lawsuit by more than 400 people who have been affected by the list since 2003.

JUDGE KOCH: MADE A LIMITED RULING ON SECRET LIST TODAY...
Judge Dale Koch ruled that the secret list, which is part of the city's Neighborhood Livability Crime Enforcement Program, is not an appropriate basis for defendants to be denied access to the county's drug court. He ruled that three defendants who have been denied access to the county's STOP court because they're on the list should in fact be given the opportunity to go through STOP: Ronald Terence Washington, Deandro Lamar Shavers and Jamie Helen Rodenbaugh.
Meanwhile, Koch said that the constitutionality of the list itself would be up to another court to decide. "These are very appropriate questions that are being raised here, but they are not questions for this court," he said.
Instead, Koch ruled that in the case of the five defendants in front of him this morning—Washington, Shavers, Rodenbaugh, Sylvester Brown and Janet Mary Strachan, the District Attorney's office had reviewed each of the cases independently of the defendants' status on the secret list, and so their potential convictions could still be constitutionally viable. He made no ruling on the constitutionality of the list itself, however.
ACLU partner attorney Elden Rosenthal got involved with the case as co-counsel for the defendants back in January. He asked Judge Koch this morning to write an order that states that it is unconstitutional for the District Attorney's office to make charging decisions based solely on the secret list, prior to their independent review by a deputy DA. Koch agreed to do that.
"I'm hopeful that the city will now work with the various concerned parties, the public defender's office, the rehab and civil liberties community to fix the system," said Rosenthal, afterward. "I think based on [Koch's] ruling that the use of a secret list in Portland, Oregon is inappropriate. I think it is very important that Portland recognize that there's a secret list that was affecting the civil rights of people in this city."
"We're hopeful about this," said Rosenthal. "So that the city doesn't get into costly litigation and potential damages claims. Litigation is always the last resort, but there could be potential separate actions filed and damages filed."
I met this morning with two victims of what seems to have been a very real gay witch hunt that took place on Portland State University campus late last year. 
WITCH HUNTED: Taylor Vineyard (left) and his husband, Andy Klaus...
Vineyard was "arrested" and handcuffed by PSU campus security last October after a witness, Andrew Bridge, told campus security he had seen Vineyard masturbating with another man in the bathroom at PSU's Stott Center.
It turns out that the witness, Bridge, has been involved in at least four similar cases accusing men of having group sex in public, and that his testimony can't necessarily be relied upon.
KATU investigative reporter Dan Tilkin tracked Bridge down at his house last Thursday, after the District Attorney's office threw out the charges against Vineyard:
Vineyard and Klaus allege that Bridge was also a witness, under a different name, Andrew Farris, in a public indecency case in the mid 1990s against Daryl Johnson, the former curator of Portland's Rose Test Garden. The case against Johnson was overturned by the state appeals court in July 1999, after the court ruled that it had erroneously "relied on Farris's statements as substantial evidence."
"I don't want this to happen to anyone else," says Vineyard. "People need to know who he is, what he's doing, where he is, and how to protect themselves."
The pair say they have been treated with contempt by security at PSU. Campus security chief Mike Soto allegedly called Vineyard Klaus's "little friend, partner, whatever" repeatedly on the phone in a conversation, the day after the incident. Soto did not return a call for comment.
"This was a homophobic conspiracy," says Klaus. "These security guards have gone from third rate rejects at the bottom of the pile to third rate rent-a-cops and they've got no professionalism whatsoever. They relied on the testimony of this man to victimize Taylor."
Klaus and Vineyard are now looking for an attorney to fight against the incident in court. "This has already cost us $3000 in attorney's fees," says Klaus.
"It was horrible, it was unfair, it was not right, it was clear that they hated me, thought I was disgusting, and that my just being alive was proof that I was a pervert," says Vineyard.
I hope they get some justice. And while I'd love to go round to Bridge's house like KATU reporter Tilkin to get sprayed with a water hose, I figured a phone call might suffice, since the scoop's already been made. Bridge is yet to return it.
Oregon Court of Appeals Chief Judge David Brewer announced significant cuts to the court this morning, in a letter to colleagues:
Dear Colleagues,The Oregon Judicial Department has suffered significant budget reductions for the remaining few months of the 2007-09 fiscal biennium. Although not as severe as initially feared, the reductions will nonetheless impair the operations of every court and division of the judicial branch of government, including the Court of Appeals. My purpose here is to report on the effect of these reductions on the Court of Appeals and to inform you about the plan we are implementing to meet these challenges.
These budget reductions will result in cuts to the Court of Appeals' research and opinion production staffing in two significant ways. First, every member of the Court of Appeals staff—including staff attorneys, law clerks, and judicial assistants—must take six days of unpaid leave between now and June 30, resulting in a 7.5% reduction in staff resources over that period. Further, because of the cuts, the court had to lay off the few temporary staff attorneys that it had hired to help the court bring its excess case load more current.
Worse, the state's May revenue forecast is expected to show even greater declines. The legislature will set the 2009-11 budget based on those numbers. In short, we do not anticipate sufficient funding to ensure the Court of Appeals’ ability to wholly fulfill its commitment to quality, timeliness, and efficiency in rendering appellate decisions, while promoting public confidence in the appellate process.
For years before the present budget shortfall, the Court of Appeals has labored with too few resources to meet its caseload. A recently published study showed that the Oregon Court of Appeals was last in budget per-case nationally among similarly structured intermediate appellate courts. While the current budget climate makes it impossible to address demands on services in all branches of government, deeper or even continued budget cuts will undermine the court’s ability to ensure meaningful appellate review in Oregon’s justice system.
Circuit Court Judge Janice Wilson has this afternoon issued an injunction against Bill Sizemore forbidding him from ever again managing or profiting from any charitable organization.
"This is an enormous win for justice today," said Attorney General John Kroger, commenting on the ruling on the courthouse steps. "Nothing is more important than fair elections where people obey the rules."

ATTORNEY GENERAL KROGER: NOTHING MORE IMPORTANT THAN FAIR ELECTIONS...
Sizemore has taken tax-exempt charitable donations to his American Tax Research Foundation (ATRF) and used them to fund a series of election initiatives—a violation of the law covering 501c(3) charities, which have strict rules about political activity. Sizemore also used the money for his own personal use—buying a timeshare in Mexico, gold coins, a Pontiac, and braces for his daughter, among other purchases.
Wilson also left the door open this afternoon for Sizemore to appear at a deposition to justify the contents of the tax documents he filed with the court last December in order to purge himself of a contempt ruling and get out of jail.

Wilson said much of the information in those documents, supposedly detailing how Sizemore made money for the ATRF, did not coincide with findings she had made, independently. Essentially, Wilson suggested that Sizemore might have lied, just to get out of jail—effectively inviting criminal charges against Sizemore, should the Attorney General’s office wish to pursue them.
"I don't care to speculate at all about any prospective criminal ruling," said Kroger. "From our perspective the case isn't closed and as soon as we have something to report, we'll report it."
Judge Wilson also forbade injunctive relief for the ATRF to pay its attorney’s fees and to pay other bills in order to continue operating.
“It was created as a sham, it was run as a sham, and I don’t see any reason to authorize the release of money for it to continue to operate,” said Wilson.

SIZEMORE: WAS NOT IN COURT FOR THE RULING...
"No, I'm not completely surprised he didn't want to face the music," admitted Kroger, when asked about Sizemore's absence.
This case is effectively catching up on Sizemore’s activities from 2006-7, but election watchdog group Our Oregon says there is reason to believe that Sizemore is continuing to use deceit to hide his activities from public view.
“Sizemore is right now ignoring repeated requests from the secretary of state’s office to file chief petitioner paperwork on eight petitions that he has submitted and is gathering signatures on,” says Scott Moore, spokesman for the group.
That means Sizemore still doesn’t have to file disclosure on his political contributions, where he’s getting them from, where he’s spending it, and so on. It also allows him to avoid taking responsibility for following the law.
“Once again Sizemore is hiding his activities from public view, and making a mockery of election laws that are designed to protect Oregonians,” says Moore.
The Multnomah County Courthouse on SW 4th will be closed Fridays from March 13th until further notice, due to budget cuts. Presiding Judge Jean Maurer emailed courthouse staff this morning. Judges will still show up on Fridays "to do the work of the court," Maurer wrote, albeit without staff present.
Judge Maurer is yet to return a call for comment.
UPDATE, 6:34pm:
From Mr.Rosenthal:
Matt — I am very disappointed in the headline and first sentence of your blog, and request that you issue an apology to me and Officer Myers. I did not compare Officer Myers to the Gestapo. You accurately quoted me in your blog, I related in court that I told the Oregonian that the most efficient police force in recent history was Hitler’s, that there was no street crime in Germany. I told the reporter that we are a long way from the Gestapo, because we have a Bill of Rights. I at no time suggested anything that would lead a responsible news reporter to use the headline you used, or say I compared Officer Myers to a nazi.
I ask that you, and the Mercury, immediately publish a correction, and apologize for your headline and the opening sentence of your blog.
Sincerely,
Elden Rosenthal
ORIGINAL POST, 11:14am
One of Oregon's most prominent civil rights attorneys compared Officer Jeff Myers to a Nazi in open court this morning. The attorney, Eldon Rosenthal, was hired by the ACLU of Oregon last December to fight Myers' secret list in court.
ROSENTHAL: "I do not want the court to think I am being hyperbolic..."
"After the hearing last month, I got a call from an editorial writer at the Oregonian, and she was very antagonistic towards me," said Rosenthal, at this morning's closing arguments hearing in the secret list case. "She asked me what my problem was, she said that Officer Myers is the face of community policing in Portland, and I said that one of the most efficient police forces in history was Hitler's."
"But I told her, we're a long ways from the gestapo," Rosenthal continued. "We have a bill of rights, which says that we don't go over that fence. And this is a fence issue."
"We are over that fence and out in the front yard," Rosenthal said, referring to the list. "The bill of rights is supposed to protect the house, but we're endangering the house. The principal at stake is not wanting to collect secret police lists. Secret police lists have never come to any good, wherever they are used. There's just too much opportunity for abuse."
The Oregonian ran an editorial supporting the secret list on January 8, accusing Rosenthal of "working off an old model, in which a secret list of names inevitably breeds abuses. The reality is that this list epitomizes community policing," it said.
Judge Dale Koch now plans to make a constitutional ruling on the list program on March 11.
"I'm speechless when someone makes a comparison between this program and the Nazis," said Myers, when the Mercury asked him about the comparison, after the hearing. "It seems inappropriate to me."

MYERS (left) with secret list program manager BILL SINNOTT (right): "Speechless" at Nazi comparison...
Myers said the intent of the program is to limit people's exposure to the criminal justice system by getting them drug treatment.
"Any kind of comparison to Hitler or the Nazis doesn't seem appropriate," he said.
It seems District Attorney Mike Schrunk's office cannot trust a Multnomah County Circuit Court Judge to deliver a fair and impartial trial. A deputy from Schrunk's office filed an affidavit of prejudice against Judge Marilyn Litzenberger, dated yesterday, alleging that "the state cannot receive a fair and impartial hearing" before the judge.

AFFIDAVITING: SCHRUNK (left) AND LITZENBERGER (right)...
Filing an affidavit against a judge is something done routinely by defense attorneys, but it is rarely used by the DA's office, because the move is seen as politically risky: It pits the state against a judge elected by the people. Indeed, the last time a judge was served an affidavit by the DA's office in Portland was more than three years ago.
The affidavit (scanned copy, after the jump) was filed in a felony case against a defendant named Thomas Ballard. But affidavits filed by the DA's office are usually served repeatedly against the same judge in recurrent cases for a period of several months, and courthouse sources say the DA's office plans to affidavit Litzenberger in all felony cases from now on.
It's not clear, yet, what specific move by Litzenberger has prompted the DA's office to hit back, although Litzenberger has a reputation for fierce independence within Portland's legal community. In other words, she refuses to allow more leeway to deputy DAs in court than she allows public defenders. That might be perfect in an ideal world, but it seems that Litzenberger has, for whatever reason, ruffled the DA's feathers.
"The affidavit of prejudice is an absolute right for an individual attorney to file if they believe a judge cannot be fair on an individual case," says Lane Borg, executive director of Metropolitan Public Defenders. "But it is unusual to see them used in a systematic way, and I think that is of concern."
There are currently three judicial vacancies in circuit court. Some say this move by the DA may be intended to send a message to those considering a run for those positions.
"Affidavits are filed frequently," said Schrunk, when the Mercury caught up with him, yesterday. "And we filed an affidavit. I'm not going to engage in any trash talking about a specific judge."
Schrunk refused to answer the Mercury's questions about his motivation for the affidavit, or whether his office intends to continue pursuing its vendetta against Litzenberger over the next several months. Meanwhile Litzenberger is yet to return the Mercury's calls for comment.
Police Commissioner Dan Saltzman has responded to news last week of a judge finding the controversial sidewalk obstruction law unconstitutional.
"I think we're still reviewing that decision and it would be inappropriate for me to comment on the specific case," Saltzman says. "But in the larger sense, I did support the sidewalk obstruction ordinance, I still think it is a good thing. It's a well thought-out approach."
Saltzman also noted that last week's constitutional ruling runs counter to another, earlier ruling, by a different circuit court judge, saying that the law was both "constitutional" and "reasonable."
Never mind the Sit/Lie ordinance. Don't interfere with anyone's privacy:
A. It is unlawful for any person to look through a window, transom, or door into the dwelling of another with the intent to interfere with the privacy of an occupant.B. As used in this Section, "dwelling" includes a building or part of a building in which a person temporarily lodges.
| Most Popular | I, Anonymous | Best of the Merc |
|---|---|---|
|
Point Juncture, WA