• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Email Exchange Shows Multnomah County Sheriff Mike Reese Was Concerned About DA Mike Schmidt’s Plan

D

dcsports

DP Veteran
Joined
Oct 22, 2017
Messages
21,040
Reaction score
6,260
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Email Exchange Shows Multnomah County Sheriff Mike Reese Was Concerned About DA Mike Schmidt’s Plan to Dismiss Rioting Charges - Willamette Week

In an email exchange Aug. 10, Multnomah County Sheriff Mike Reese expressed concern about District Attorney Mike Schmidt's new protest policy, which he announced Aug. 11.

He was particularly alarmed by Schmidt's plan to preemptively dismiss felony charges for rioting, a decision Reese feared would embolden anarchists and anti-fascists.

"Mike, I have a concern and a question," Reese wrote to Schmidt on Monday. "I didn't realize riot was one of the charges you were presumptively dismissing.…I have witnessed situations where it's been used and the criminal behavior has been significant."

Yesterday, Schmidt announced his new policy for prosecuting protesters. Per the new policy, the district attorney's office will "presumptively decline" to prosecute cases in which the most serious violation is a city ordinance, or where the crime did not involve deliberate property damage, theft or threat or use of force against another person.

Under the new policy, the crime of riot will not be prosecuted unless it is accompanied by another felony charge that is subject to prosecution, such as assault, arson or the intentional destruction of property.

In the email, Reese recommended Schmidt subject rioters to prosecution. "The situation is incredibly volatile with a really committed group of Antifa/anarchists starting fires, damaging property and assaulting police/community members," Reese wrote. "They may feel even more emboldened if there is a public statement that appears to minimize their activities."

Schmidt replied by asking Reese to call him.
Click to expand...

This is an incredible policy. The DA even acknowledges that these are clearly violations of the law, but blames the police.
 
Re: Email Exchange Shows Multnomah County Sheriff Mike Reese Was Concerned About DA Mike Schmidt’s

Too many peaceful protesters were unlawfully gathered up that weren't involved in the looting or property damage...but were charged with rioting...a catch all phrase that entraps anyone expressing their first amendment rights. So until it gets sorted out as to who did what...then I think the DA did the right thing.
 
Re: Email Exchange Shows Multnomah County Sheriff Mike Reese Was Concerned About DA Mike Schmidt’s

Moot said:
Too many peaceful protesters were unlawfully gathered up that weren't involved in the looting or property damage...but were charged with rioting...a catch all phrase that entraps anyone expressing their first amendment rights. So until it gets sorted out as to who did what...then I think the DA did the right thing.
Click to expand...

That's not true. At a minimum, a person has to be at a riot ("riotous assembly") and refuse to leave when told to do so by the police. In reality, this is used as a charge when a person is involved in more serious behavior but it's difficult to prove they committed a specific act, so the get the more general (and lesser) charge of rioting. Even the Sheriff was concerned that these people were involved in serious acts. These aren't 'peaceful protesters'.

If they want the bad behavior to stop, they need more enforcement - not less.
 
Re: Email Exchange Shows Multnomah County Sheriff Mike Reese Was Concerned About DA Mike Schmidt’s

dcsports said:
Email Exchange Shows Multnomah County Sheriff Mike Reese Was Concerned About DA Mike Schmidt’s Plan to Dismiss Rioting Charges - Willamette Week



This is an incredible policy. The DA even acknowledges that these are clearly violations of the law, but blames the police.
Click to expand...

The specific examples the sheriff cites are still being prosecuted under the DA’s policy so I’m not sure what the beef is.

It is completely with the DA’s purview to decline prosecution in the interest of justice or just because they don’t have the time or money to chase down minor violations. It happens all the time.
 
Re: Email Exchange Shows Multnomah County Sheriff Mike Reese Was Concerned About DA Mike Schmidt’s

Gaius46 said:
The specific examples the sheriff cites are still being prosecuted under the DA’s policy so I’m not sure what the beef is.

It is completely with the DA’s purview to decline prosecution in the interest of justice or just because they don’t have the time or money to chase down minor violations. It happens all the time.
Click to expand...

Of course the DA has discretion, but it appears he is going too far here. Both the Sheriff and state police have concerns with the charges he's dropping.

The crimes being committed by these people are serious, and this is only going to embolden the bad behavior.
 
Re: Email Exchange Shows Multnomah County Sheriff Mike Reese Was Concerned About DA Mike Schmidt’s

dcsports said:
Of course the DA has discretion, but it appears he is going too far here. Both the Sheriff and state police have concerns with the charges he's dropping.

The crimes being committed by these people are serious, and this is only going to embolden the bad behavior.
Click to expand...

So the sheriff is concerned about non prosecution of riot. The DA policy is that riot will only be prosecuted when another is present.

Oregon’s riot statute:


ORS 166.015¹ Riot. (1) A person commits the crime of riot if while participating with five or more other persons the person engages in tumultuous and violent conduct and thereby intentionally or recklessly creates a grave risk of causing public alarm.
Click to expand...

This is one of those vague statutes that give police almost unlimited discretion. Or that prosecutors use to pile onto defendants.

What is “tumultuous” conduct?

What is a “grave risk of public alarm”? If two grandma’s are alarmed does that make it a riot?

The violent conduct would probably be covered by any number of other laws and so would still be prosecuted.
 
Re: Email Exchange Shows Multnomah County Sheriff Mike Reese Was Concerned About DA Mike Schmidt’s

Gaius46 said:
So the sheriff is concerned about non prosecution of riot. The DA policy is that riot will only be prosecuted when another is present.

Oregon’s riot statute:




This is one of those vague statutes that give police almost unlimited discretion. Or that prosecutors use to pile onto defendants.

What is “tumultuous” conduct?

What is a “grave risk of public alarm”? If two grandma’s are alarmed does that make it a riot?

The violent conduct would probably be covered by any number of other laws and so would still be prosecuted.
Click to expand...

We're not dealing with abstract here - there have been nightly incidents, and only the most significant offenders have been arrested. The challenge is in identifying and proving a specific act for a specific person in the middle of chaos.

And significantly, there is a public safety aspect to this. These rioters are coming out at night destroying things, attempting to blind police, setting things on fire, destroying property, etc. Breaking up these riots, discouraging the behavior, is important. It's a matter of protecting the police, bystanders, and property.
 
Re: Email Exchange Shows Multnomah County Sheriff Mike Reese Was Concerned About DA Mike Schmidt’s

dcsports said:
We're not dealing with abstract here - there have been nightly incidents, and only the most significant offenders have been arrested. The challenge is in identifying and proving a specific act for a specific person in the middle of chaos.

And significantly, there is a public safety aspect to this. These rioters are coming out at night destroying things, attempting to blind police, setting things on fire, destroying property, etc. Breaking up these riots, discouraging the behavior, is important. It's a matter of protecting the police, bystanders, and property.
Click to expand...

And that challenge is the way it’s supposed to be. Unless you think it’s somehow okay to arrest a crowd of 100 people because one person breaks the law.

If the police can’t pin a specific act on a specific person then that person walks. It sucks but it sucks more to jail lots of people who didn’t do anything wrong.

And yes I know there’s the riot statute but it’s vague to the point where it’s a riot if the cop says it is. Laws like that violate the first rule of lawmaking - that laws should be specific enough so that people actually know when they are breaking them.

They have other tools to deal with unruly demonstrations and plenty of laws of use in cases of actual lawbreaking.
 
Re: Email Exchange Shows Multnomah County Sheriff Mike Reese Was Concerned About DA Mike Schmidt’s

Gaius46 said:
And that challenge is the way it’s supposed to be. Unless you think it’s somehow okay to arrest a crowd of 100 people because one person breaks the law.

If the police can’t pin a specific act on a specific person then that person walks. It sucks but it sucks more to jail lots of people who didn’t do anything wrong.

And yes I know there’s the riot statute but it’s vague to the point where it’s a riot if the cop says it is. Laws like that violate the first rule of lawmaking - that laws should be specific enough so that people actually know when they are breaking them.

They have other tools to deal with unruly demonstrations and plenty of laws of use in cases of actual lawbreaking.
Click to expand...

Again... these people broke the law.

The statute is broad, not vague. But it does have a clear standard - police have to tell the people they are participating in an unlawful assembly, and give them the opportunity to disperse.
 
Re: Email Exchange Shows Multnomah County Sheriff Mike Reese Was Concerned About DA Mike Schmidt’s

dcsports said:
Again... these people broke the law.

The statute is broad, not vague. But it does have a clear standard - police have to tell the people they are participating in an unlawful assembly, and give them the opportunity to disperse.
Click to expand...

Where is that standard? It’s not in the statute I saw.

And what does “public alarm” mean?
 
Re: Email Exchange Shows Multnomah County Sheriff Mike Reese Was Concerned About DA Mike Schmidt’s

Kim Foxx-up is getting heat for her handling of protester cases. Of course, she's pandering for votes to survive after her shady dealings regarding Jussie The Race Hoaxer
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom