RAPPING BACK 28
Addressing Anti-Civilian Assertions
by Ardent
Authorities
Public Interations #1--Sound Advice: "Every time a Portland police officer fails to do the right thing, we all suffer... Keep in mind the public watches us all the time, and they listen to everything we say. Are we presenting a professional image with our words?" -- Sgt. Bert Nederheiser, in the October Rap Sheet, the newsletter of the Portland Police Association (PPA).
After the Oregonian revealed that Portland's "civilian review board" was reviewing current
policies on the use of profanity, the stuff hit the fan over at the PPA. In the October Rap
Sheet, Detective Peter Simpson used
his editorial column to complain that one member of the Independent Police Review Division's
Citizen Review Committee (CRC) said they don't think that any situation warrants using profanity.
Simpson wrote: "My first reaction to that was, 'what the f@%*!' You mean to tell me that out
of
all the possible things people could complain about (excessive force, bribe-taking, drug use,
disparate treatment) the use of profanity is a hot topic on the CRC?"
For the time being, let's not dwell on the fact that Simpson is implying here that there is bribe- taking going on in the Bureau--an allegation we've not even heard before. Instead, we will note that Simpson's half-humorous, half-scary response ignores that the CRC's policy issues also include possible police misuse of Detox transports, officer identification, and the idea of de- escalating situations. These issues are being drawn from multiple complaints (see CRC article).
In any case, Simpson implies that if the only thing on the CRC's agenda is profanity, the PPB must be doing a good job. "There are situations in which profanity can assist in making a communication break through with someone who is irrational and failing to listen to commands, or to add emphasis to a particular word of importance."
Simpson admits using profanity himself, perhaps inappropriately, but rationalizes that in the (otherwise reasonable) premise that officers need to be able to speak to people of various backgrounds.
He concludes by posing only two possible ways to approach a suspect, "Pardon me, but I am a law enforcement agent...you seem a bit ireful and I have a sanguine expectation that you'll cast aside that iniquitous shooting iron" instead of "Police officer, drop the f*@$#&% gun now!"
Public Interactions #2: Would you like ice with that?: "Why should someone who doesn't even know the job make policy that affects how cops are doing their jobs? If he's not the one rolling around with me in the gutter as I'm trying to subdue some violent drunk or dope crazed individual, then maybe he needs to drink a big glass of 'Shut Up' juice."--PPA Vice-President Daryl Turner, October Rap Sheet.
While much of the city's progressive community and media criticized the police attacks on protesters at a Republican fundraiser featuring George Bush (see other article), the Portland Police Association seems to have taken it all in stride.
In his September editor's statement, written before the event, Peter Simpson wrote that "the anticipation is high that activists will try to disrupt the motorcade and events... Based on his last visit, it should be a 'Hot August Night' for the working class on the battlefront."
PPA Vice President Daryl Turner reported on the aftermath of the protests in the October issue, noting that "The naysayers are at it again--a small percentage of citizens decided to break the law during Bush's latest visit to the Rose City."
Although Copwatch has never made such a statement about August 22, Turner asserted: "Organizations like Copwatch are up in arms, calling the police stormtroopers!" Despite ample videotape showing police pepper-spraying and shooting rubber projectiles at peaceful, unarmed protestors, he continued, "The media, especially the newspapers, pick up accounts of police brutality from the lawbreaking protestors and anti-police organizations and they paint those stories like they are gospel truth. When police officers tell their side of the story, all of a sudden they're liars trying to cover up. My question is, cover up what?"
Also in the October Rap Sheet, a "J. Yochim" of Wilsonville sent a letter refuting an Oregonian opinion piece by Adrienne Ratner of the Police Accountability Campaign (PAC). Her September 12 piece, "Let's set guidelines for police crowd control," prompted Yochim to claim that PAC has no need for police, and that the op-ed contends the only way to draw attention to one's cause is through civil disobedience. He defends the police actions on August 22 by talking about the need to protect the President.
He complains how demonstrations draw police from neighborhoods and is "fed up" with demonstrators drawing police attention and then "whining."
Yochim complains that Ratner's seven demands include four which are "preposterous and would eliminate any control by the police." We assume three of the proposals he's referring to are proposed bans on pepper spray, the mounted patrol, and motorcycles chasing bicycles, but can't figure out whether publishing crowd-control tactics, adhering to those tactics, making provisions for crowd dispersals, or making police videotapes available is the fourth preposterous idea.
Public Interactions #3: Common sense is not common: Officer Steve Morrow reports that a new recruit to Internal Affairs stated: "[The] courtesy and conduct material seemed like common sense to me." Says Morrow, "Courtesy and conduct serve as the catalyst for 60 percent of complaints... The majority of our peacekeeping encounters should...be dictated by common sense...discerning that which is right and appropriate considering the current circumstance."
But, as a supervisor once told Morrow, "Because common sense is not common, we need to have rules and regulations." Amen.--October Rap Sheet.
Peopl
e's Police Report
#28 Table of Contents
People's Police
Report
Index Page
Return to
Copwatch
home page