Oregon sheriffs reject Gov. Kate Brown's request to staff Portland protests

[Luce]

Rioting, looting, arson, assault, and murder are not first Amendment issues and no DA in the country has the authority to decide that rioters are above the law.

I'd like to see a link to the DA saying no prosecutions for assaulting law enforcement officers, please.

 

[Napoleon]

I'd like to see a link to the DA saying no prosecutions for assaulting law enforcement officers, please.

Here is rogue DA’s policy. The only act of violence this DA is willing to uphold the law for is an act of violence committed against a civilian.

 

[dcsports]

Do you think a sheriff would refer to resisting arrest and assaulting an officer as "nonviolent and low-level crimes"? The answer is no, so obviously that's not what he was bitching about.

Yes, that's what he was griping about - The DA's new policy, which includes not prosecuting resisting arrest or assaulting an officer if it's associated with the crimes on the list.

 

[trblmkr]

I seem to remember a couple of Oregon Sheriffs siding with the Bundy's as well. Have to see if these guys are them.

 

[btthegreat]

The cases don't need to be dismissed immediately like they have been doing.

The cases can be drawn out as long as the prosecutor wants them to, but the DA doesn't want them.

I see each case as money for the city, so why dismiss any of them?

none of the money received for'court costs', pays a dime into the DA's operating budget in this biennium or budget year, and none of it will be used to hire extra staff to get this work done in this budgetary cycle. He has an operating budget set by the city probably covering either one or two years going from a January to another Januarly that he is expected to stay in regardless of his caseload, and he has very limited resources even in the best of times..

Now why on earth is it in the DA's interest to draw these cases out when it costs his office money to investigate it, to do the preliminary legal work, to staff every court appearance, negotiate any plea deals regardless of severity, if it gets complicated at all there will be more filing per motion, more appearances to staff, and maybe a need to write written or oral briefs on pretrial motions, let alone the actual trial itself. Any case not closed is a drain and a headache. He now has literally hundreds and hundreds nobody budgeted for or anticipated because of these protests and riots.

Each of Defendents can either ask for council at city/ county expense or just get a 'tip lists ' any lawyer can provide as a freebie pamplet, with a bunch of common tactics and requests designed to stall and get continuances etc, with no skin off their noses.

 

[Cardinal]

Yes, that's what he was griping about - The DA's new policy, which includes not prosecuting resisting arrest or assaulting an officer if it's associated with the crimes on the list.

Except that’s not what the sheriff said. You’re inserting that into his statement to create a false narrative.

 

[Cardinal]

Another sexist comment. I've read a number of them in the last 24 hours, ALL from liberals like you. Why didn't you say whiny little boys?? They whine, don't they?? You seem kinda whiny. Thanks!!

Boy, trump supporters sure are awfully concerned with political correctness.

 

[Logophile]

Boy, trump supporters sure are awfully concerned with political correctness.

Lol!! Touche. Thanks!!

 

[Hamish Howl]

Here is rogue DA’s policy. The only act of violence this DA is willing to uphold the law for is an act of violence committed against a civilian.

That says the exact opposite of what you said it says.

 

[Hamish Howl]

Boy, trump supporters sure are awfully concerned with political correctness.

Sucks to be them.

 

[Hamish Howl]

Yes, that's what he was griping about - The DA's new policy, which includes not prosecuting resisting arrest or assaulting an officer if it's associated with the crimes on the list.

Except that it doesn't say that about assaulting an officer.

 

[holbritter]

That has nothing to do with the stated reasons for not sending staff to demonstrations. They're butt hurt because the D.A. wouldn't prosecute nonviolent protesters who committed low level crimes. So in response they're petulantly refusing to arrest rioters and looters.

From the start police have been wearing t-shirts with "we're not professionals" written on them.

That is not at all what they are doing. That's just your opinion of the situation.

"The lack of political support for public safety, the uncertain legal landscape, the current volatility combined with intense scrutiny on use of force presents an unacceptable risk if deputies were deployed directly."

Is it really so hard to understand? That is certainly NOT in their job description.

 

[holbritter]

Here is rogue DA’s policy. The only act of violence this DA is willing to uphold the law for is an act of violence committed against a civilian.

What a ****ing joke! I'm glad I don't live there. Gotta love the 2nd on the list......Defense lawyers will have a field day with that and the thugs will continue to have a free for all.


3. Assaulting a Public Safety Officer/ Attempted APSO – ORS 163.208:

Any charge of assaulting a public safety officer, or attempting to assault a public safety officer, which arises from protesting activity should be subjected to a high level of scrutiny by the issuing deputy. Consideration should be given to the chaos of a protesting environment, especially after tear gas or other less-lethal munitions have been deployed against protestors en masse. Issuing deputies will consider the following (non-exclusive) list of factors prior to issuing a protest related charge of assaulting a public safety officer:

● Did law enforcement have probable cause for the arrest for a crime beyond those listed in Sec II (1) of this policy?
● Had the defendant been recently subjected to tear gas or other less lethal force? Were they otherwise in pain, or unable to hear, breathe or see at the moment the assaultive conduct occurred?
● If the allegation is that of a completed APSO, is there adequate documentation of the specific cause of the injury and of the severity of the injury?
● If the allegation is that of an attempted APSO, the level of scrutiny shall be even greater than that of a completed act.
● Has all available video evidence been received and reviewed?

 

[holbritter]

Except that it doesn't say that about assaulting an officer.

Yeah, it pretty much does.

 

[dcsports]

Except that’s not what the sheriff said. You’re inserting that into his statement to create a false narrative.

Again, read the policy.

 

[dcsports]

Except that it doesn't say that about assaulting an officer.

It does. Read the policy.

 

[Hamish Howl]

It does. Read the policy.

I did. It only asks if there was harm to the officer as a qualifier. It does not say that you can't arrest someone for it.

 

[dcsports]

I did. It only asks if there was harm to the officer as a qualifier. It does not say that you can't arrest someone for it.

No, it says they won't prosecute for it, which is the problem.

 

[Hamish Howl]

No, it says they won't prosecute for it, which is the problem.

But it doesn't.

 

[Metric Mouse]

Finally, some LEOs attempting to de escalate the situation in Portland by backing down. This is what the protesters have been asking for. Good on these Sheriffs for having the backbone to stand up and step back when asked to by local residents.