Courtroom Sparring in Pepper Spray Case

For immediate release
April 20, 2005

Plaintiffs and Defense Spar Over Attorney General Opinion on Pepper
Spray in 2ND Week of Pepper Spray Q-Tip Case

Contact: Karen Pickett, 510-548-3113
Background and legal documents available at
http://www.nopepperspray.org. Press packets including video footage
and courtroom drawings by court artist K. Rudin are available through
the above number.

San Francisco, Calif.-After Defense attorneys implied that
then-Attorney General Dan Lungren supported direct application by
Q-tip into the eyes of non-violent demonstrators, the plaintiffs'
counsel cried foul. Plaintiffs' attorneys then argued before the
judge without the jury present that it was a misrepresentation, given
a letter from Lungren stating the direct swabbing is "not accepted
police community standards." The judge has not permitted that letter
to be entered into evidence in the civil rights case about the use of
liquid pepper spray on protesters engaged in sit-ins for Headwaters
Forest in 1997. The jury will decide whether that use of the caustic
chemical was "excessive force" when used against non-violent
protesters. The jury has not been permitted to hear about the letter.

The Nov. 17, 1997 Lungren letter references the Attorney General's
review of the use of pepper spray by law enforcement and the Humboldt
county incidents. The letter found that use of pepper spray to be
"unprecedented." Further, the letter states, after "conditionally"
approving use of pepper spray products for use "limited to
controlling hostile or violent subjects" in 1992, the office reviewed
the 1997 incidents and found the direct swabbing and close range
spraying "in conflict with POST [Peace Officer Standards and
Training] training" and "neither supported nor directly addressed by
training." The Defense was citing POST guidelines, but guidelines
that were only changed after the 1997 incidents when two Eureka
officers joined the panel and lobbied to blur the lines between
passive and active resistance in arrest situations. The Eureka
officers and Humboldt county were feeling the heat from public
outrage following the airing of video footage of the sit-ins and
pepper spraying on national TV. The entire Lundgren letter is
available upon request.

Plaintiff Spring Lundberg commented, "It was clear in 1997 that they
violated accepted community standards by their actions. Now almost
eight years later they are attempting to rewrite history because of
this lawsuit."

Sheriffs' Deputy Marvin Kirkpatrick finished his testimony on Monday
4/18. He advocated increasing the dose of pepper spray and waiting
longer to provide first aid for coercive purposes. He said direct
application of pepper spray results in what "some people refer to as
pain". Current Sheriff Gary Philp was on the stand Tuesday, and that
is when the Attorney General issue arose.

Expected on the stand Wednesday and Thursday are:
--Dave DuBay, Defense Technologies, who testifies in cases where use
of pepper spray is challenged

--Dennis Lewis, defendant who was Humboldt County Sheriff when pepper
spray incident took place

--Maya Portugal, plaintiff who was 16 years old when she was doused
with pepper spray at the sit in at the office of Congressman Frank
Riggs.

--Vernell Spring Lundberg, plaintiff who was 17 years old when she
was swabbed with pepper spray

--Anthony Bouza, former Minneapolis chief of police who is Plaintiffs
police practices expert

--plaintiffs Sam Neuwirth and Noel Tendick who are suing for
violation of 4th Amendments rights.

Court sessions continue through Thursday this week at the S.F.
Federal Building (450 Golden Gate Ave., room 10, 19th floor) before
the Hon. Susan Illston. Court schedule is 8:30 am -1:30 pm.
###