Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Victory for Reclaim the Streets at Police Review Commission
After a gruelling, epic multi-hearing saga at the Berkeley Police Review Commission,, 16 months after the original incident at the February 9 Reclaim the Streets emergency demonstration for indigenous rights against the IMF/WB in Ecuador, two activists are vindicated by an overwhelming ruling in their favor. Lawsuit is ongoing.
After a gruelling, epic multi-hearing saga at the Berkeley Police Review Commission, 16 months after the original incident at the February 9 Reclaim the Streets emergency demonstration for indigenous rights against the IMF/WB in Ecuador, two activists are vindicated by an overwhelming ruling in their favor. Lawsuit is ongoing.
A fairly complete description of what happened that night can be found at the Reclaim the Streets website,
http://xinet.com/rts/
Under "Past Actions" -> "Ecuador Emergency Action".
More specifically to this update, the Berkeley PRC (a "third-party"City-Council-appointed citizen body with City-funded staff of investigators and administrators) ruled late last night as follows:
Case # 1872 Ryan Salsbury, who spent four days in jail after being falsely arrested for "inciting a riot" and whose property was stolen by police, much of it never returned:
1) Excessive Force (Torrence #63) Sustained 3-0;
2) Excessive Force (R. Brown #113) Sustained 3-0;
3) Excessive Force (D. Lindenau #3) Unfounded (although he is known to have stolen the indigenous freedom banner which was destroyed, and admits to having struck demonstrators with batons);
4) Excessive Force (Unknown Officers) Not sustained (waiting for findings to know why);
5) Improper Arrest, Search, Seizure, Stop or Detention (Sgt. Nielsen, S-12) Sustained, 3-0;
6) Improper Arrest, Search, Seizure, Stop or Detention (Torrence #63) Not sustained, 3-0;
7) Improper Arrest, Search, Seizure, Stop or Detention (R. Brown #113) Not sustained, 3-0;
8) Improper Arrest, Search, Seizure, Stop or Detention (D. Lindenau #3) Unfounded, 3-0 (complainants by their own accord said he had been mistakenly named by police/staff);
9) Improper Arrest, Search, Seizure, Stop or Detention (Unkown officers) Not sustained, 3-0;
10) Improper Police Procedure: Improper Confiscation of Property (Sgt. D. Williams, S-7) Sustained, 3-0;
11) Improper Police Procedure: Improper Confiscation of Property (Unknown officers) Not sustained, 3-0;
12) Improper Police Procedure: Failure to Return Property (Unknown officers (should include Captain William Pittman, who was caught lying to cover up part of the Department's role)) Sustained, 3-0;
13) Other: Abuse of Discretion (Sgt. Nielson, S-12) Unfounded 3-0;
14) Other: Abuse of Discretion (Hemre #671) Sustained 3-0;
15) Abuse of Discretion (Sgt. D. Williams), Unfounded 3-0;
16) Other -- Abuse of Discretion (Unknown Officers? Sgt. Reece) Sustained 3-0;
SECOND COMPLAINT
Case #1873 -- Jason Meggs (me). My property was confiscated, much of it destroyed, much of what remained was not returned. This included keys, passport, money, tools, a bicycle, and a very special couch. Most importantly, when I protested I was struck repeatedly with batons, and sustained a serious and ongoing injury.
1) Excessive Force (Officer Jones #5) Sustained, 3-0;
2) Excessive Force (Officer K. Reece #6): Sustained 3-0;
3) Improper Police Procedure -- Improper Confiscation of Property (Sgt. D. Williams S-7) Sustained, 3-0;
4) Improper Police Procedure -- Failure to return property (Unknown officers) Sustained, 3-0;
5) Other -- Abuse of Discretion (Unknown Officers) Not sustained 3-0.
This was truly amazing, to have come through this gruelling process after being harmed so much by the Berkeley Police Department, and actually have a part of the City recognize that we were harmed.
For anyone who has ever dealt with the PRC, you know how hard it is to get ANYTHING sustained, even by a 2-1 vote. If you ever have an issue to bring before the PRC, particularly a serious one where injury or other hamrs have occurred, GET A COMPETENT REPRESENTATIVE, PREFERABLY AN ATTORNEY WHO IS PLANNING TO SUE ON YOUR BEHALF. The process is just too stacked against the citizen, particularly those who are unfamiliar with the process -- which is most people when they come before the PRC.
And the Berkeley PRC is considered a model of police accountability!
In case you were wondering about the results, here is how the PRC defines the rulings:
Unfounded: The alleged act did not occur.
Not sustained: The evidence fails to support the allegation, however it has not been proven false.
Exonerated: The alleged act did occur, but was lawful, justified and proper.
Sustained: The allegation did occur and the action is not justified.
The PRC records are open to the public, and you can obtain the guidebook as to their procedures, and what the allegations are. If you have a competent investigator and the Police aren't too censorial, you will also receive police reports, General Orders, even select portions of CAD (radio) transcripts. These all aid you in making your case.
Most common mistake I've seen by complainants including myself: not making sure that their witnesses are interviewed or told to be at the hearing. Second most common: not making sure that their allegations were really brought in full, usually they get simplified and then the officers argue that the allegation was never made. Third most common: not abiding by the procedures for evidence (or stopping the police when they violate them). Fourth: (whoops I forgot and it's late). Fifth: getting your hopes up that you will find justice at the PRC. You will probably "lose" but the value of the process goes beyond whether your allegations are sustained. The process goes before the City Council and City Manager, the Police Chief, and is enough of a pain in the ass that the cops have to actually think for once about the ramifications of their actions.
That's a rough order. Actually, not getting adequate representation, and not following through, probably top the list, along with failing to document injuries and other damage (which also goes for car crashes, by the way -- it is said to always get medical documentation right away, and that you shouldn't have to worry about the cost if you were wronged under law and the other party has money or insurance).
Further thoughts:
We live in an era where accountability in government is threatening to roll back all gains into the dark ages of COINTELPRO and worse. The recent victory in the Judi Bari trial shows that motivated people who care can still have some clout if they sacrifice a great deal and work extremely hard. Without those efforts much more ground would be lost, and many more would suffer than already do.
The former FBI director Louis Freeh was quoted at a fairly recent Senate Appropriations committee hearing (read, place where you put the pitch to get more money) saying that Reclaim the Streets is an example of a terrorist group. This was before the War on Terrorism had been turned into the new thrust of the military industrial complex (replacing the War on Drugs, which replaced the Cold War). I've read that even Food Not Bombs was classified as a terrorist group.
Clearly the propaganda machine continues in its predictable way, and the violence and abuse dished out deliberately by the BPD on February 9, 2001 against the nonviolent Reclaim the Streets demonstration is one arm of this. Don?t sit down, don't stop looking, don't stop thinking.
A fairly complete description of what happened that night can be found at the Reclaim the Streets website,
http://xinet.com/rts/
Under "Past Actions" -> "Ecuador Emergency Action".
More specifically to this update, the Berkeley PRC (a "third-party"City-Council-appointed citizen body with City-funded staff of investigators and administrators) ruled late last night as follows:
Case # 1872 Ryan Salsbury, who spent four days in jail after being falsely arrested for "inciting a riot" and whose property was stolen by police, much of it never returned:
1) Excessive Force (Torrence #63) Sustained 3-0;
2) Excessive Force (R. Brown #113) Sustained 3-0;
3) Excessive Force (D. Lindenau #3) Unfounded (although he is known to have stolen the indigenous freedom banner which was destroyed, and admits to having struck demonstrators with batons);
4) Excessive Force (Unknown Officers) Not sustained (waiting for findings to know why);
5) Improper Arrest, Search, Seizure, Stop or Detention (Sgt. Nielsen, S-12) Sustained, 3-0;
6) Improper Arrest, Search, Seizure, Stop or Detention (Torrence #63) Not sustained, 3-0;
7) Improper Arrest, Search, Seizure, Stop or Detention (R. Brown #113) Not sustained, 3-0;
8) Improper Arrest, Search, Seizure, Stop or Detention (D. Lindenau #3) Unfounded, 3-0 (complainants by their own accord said he had been mistakenly named by police/staff);
9) Improper Arrest, Search, Seizure, Stop or Detention (Unkown officers) Not sustained, 3-0;
10) Improper Police Procedure: Improper Confiscation of Property (Sgt. D. Williams, S-7) Sustained, 3-0;
11) Improper Police Procedure: Improper Confiscation of Property (Unknown officers) Not sustained, 3-0;
12) Improper Police Procedure: Failure to Return Property (Unknown officers (should include Captain William Pittman, who was caught lying to cover up part of the Department's role)) Sustained, 3-0;
13) Other: Abuse of Discretion (Sgt. Nielson, S-12) Unfounded 3-0;
14) Other: Abuse of Discretion (Hemre #671) Sustained 3-0;
15) Abuse of Discretion (Sgt. D. Williams), Unfounded 3-0;
16) Other -- Abuse of Discretion (Unknown Officers? Sgt. Reece) Sustained 3-0;
SECOND COMPLAINT
Case #1873 -- Jason Meggs (me). My property was confiscated, much of it destroyed, much of what remained was not returned. This included keys, passport, money, tools, a bicycle, and a very special couch. Most importantly, when I protested I was struck repeatedly with batons, and sustained a serious and ongoing injury.
1) Excessive Force (Officer Jones #5) Sustained, 3-0;
2) Excessive Force (Officer K. Reece #6): Sustained 3-0;
3) Improper Police Procedure -- Improper Confiscation of Property (Sgt. D. Williams S-7) Sustained, 3-0;
4) Improper Police Procedure -- Failure to return property (Unknown officers) Sustained, 3-0;
5) Other -- Abuse of Discretion (Unknown Officers) Not sustained 3-0.
This was truly amazing, to have come through this gruelling process after being harmed so much by the Berkeley Police Department, and actually have a part of the City recognize that we were harmed.
For anyone who has ever dealt with the PRC, you know how hard it is to get ANYTHING sustained, even by a 2-1 vote. If you ever have an issue to bring before the PRC, particularly a serious one where injury or other hamrs have occurred, GET A COMPETENT REPRESENTATIVE, PREFERABLY AN ATTORNEY WHO IS PLANNING TO SUE ON YOUR BEHALF. The process is just too stacked against the citizen, particularly those who are unfamiliar with the process -- which is most people when they come before the PRC.
And the Berkeley PRC is considered a model of police accountability!
In case you were wondering about the results, here is how the PRC defines the rulings:
Unfounded: The alleged act did not occur.
Not sustained: The evidence fails to support the allegation, however it has not been proven false.
Exonerated: The alleged act did occur, but was lawful, justified and proper.
Sustained: The allegation did occur and the action is not justified.
The PRC records are open to the public, and you can obtain the guidebook as to their procedures, and what the allegations are. If you have a competent investigator and the Police aren't too censorial, you will also receive police reports, General Orders, even select portions of CAD (radio) transcripts. These all aid you in making your case.
Most common mistake I've seen by complainants including myself: not making sure that their witnesses are interviewed or told to be at the hearing. Second most common: not making sure that their allegations were really brought in full, usually they get simplified and then the officers argue that the allegation was never made. Third most common: not abiding by the procedures for evidence (or stopping the police when they violate them). Fourth: (whoops I forgot and it's late). Fifth: getting your hopes up that you will find justice at the PRC. You will probably "lose" but the value of the process goes beyond whether your allegations are sustained. The process goes before the City Council and City Manager, the Police Chief, and is enough of a pain in the ass that the cops have to actually think for once about the ramifications of their actions.
That's a rough order. Actually, not getting adequate representation, and not following through, probably top the list, along with failing to document injuries and other damage (which also goes for car crashes, by the way -- it is said to always get medical documentation right away, and that you shouldn't have to worry about the cost if you were wronged under law and the other party has money or insurance).
Further thoughts:
We live in an era where accountability in government is threatening to roll back all gains into the dark ages of COINTELPRO and worse. The recent victory in the Judi Bari trial shows that motivated people who care can still have some clout if they sacrifice a great deal and work extremely hard. Without those efforts much more ground would be lost, and many more would suffer than already do.
The former FBI director Louis Freeh was quoted at a fairly recent Senate Appropriations committee hearing (read, place where you put the pitch to get more money) saying that Reclaim the Streets is an example of a terrorist group. This was before the War on Terrorism had been turned into the new thrust of the military industrial complex (replacing the War on Drugs, which replaced the Cold War). I've read that even Food Not Bombs was classified as a terrorist group.
Clearly the propaganda machine continues in its predictable way, and the violence and abuse dished out deliberately by the BPD on February 9, 2001 against the nonviolent Reclaim the Streets demonstration is one arm of this. Don?t sit down, don't stop looking, don't stop thinking.
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
Just goes to show what you can do if you are determined, this goes a way to exposing what we already know: there are active red squads working at the Berkeley Police Department
That's pretty good news. I remember hearing about that RTS action and the fucked-up shit the cops did. Good for you guys, and thanks for posting your analysis and advise on how to work through the PRC.
I just wanted to add that we were represented by
attorney Lawrence Hildes. Hildes is an NLG and
BCLU attorney. He works out of Community Defense
in Berkeley.
Watching him cross-examine police officers about
why they did all these things was very therapeutic.
He did a great job. It's nice to be able to bring
everyone to the table, for a more civilized, face to
face discussion (with the police not simply choosing
to ignore you, and striking you when you approach your
property).
Hopefully this reaches the police on a human level,
and hopefully they will be less likely to hurt people
like this in the future. The BPD is going through a
major turnover, and the word from many sources
(including some old-timers at BPD) is that the new
recruits are a lot more volatile and a lot less
sympathetic to first amendment events than, say,
those who lived through the Free Speech movement.
They are also much less likely to have any ties to
Berkeley. Who can afford to live in Berkeley, right?
Even cops with their high salaries. So they drive --
which also has pitted them against alternative
transportation, liveable/sustainable cities interests,
as well as neighbors tired of unenforced parking
regulations downtown and around the police station.
There's a lot more that can be said about that, but
for now, thanks to Larry Hildes for really doing a
great job with us at the PRC.
attorney Lawrence Hildes. Hildes is an NLG and
BCLU attorney. He works out of Community Defense
in Berkeley.
Watching him cross-examine police officers about
why they did all these things was very therapeutic.
He did a great job. It's nice to be able to bring
everyone to the table, for a more civilized, face to
face discussion (with the police not simply choosing
to ignore you, and striking you when you approach your
property).
Hopefully this reaches the police on a human level,
and hopefully they will be less likely to hurt people
like this in the future. The BPD is going through a
major turnover, and the word from many sources
(including some old-timers at BPD) is that the new
recruits are a lot more volatile and a lot less
sympathetic to first amendment events than, say,
those who lived through the Free Speech movement.
They are also much less likely to have any ties to
Berkeley. Who can afford to live in Berkeley, right?
Even cops with their high salaries. So they drive --
which also has pitted them against alternative
transportation, liveable/sustainable cities interests,
as well as neighbors tired of unenforced parking
regulations downtown and around the police station.
There's a lot more that can be said about that, but
for now, thanks to Larry Hildes for really doing a
great job with us at the PRC.
Hey Jason....before you go too far pumping your chest and getting all excited, why don't you tell people the truth. The PRC in Berkeley is an impotent political body ,designed to give a small group of vocal nutcases like you, a forum to vent. That way the city can honestly say they listen to you, but don't have to give anything you say a second thought. No cop has ever been disciplined at the recommendation of the PRC and their findings mean absolutely nothing to anybody. The normal citizens of the city do not even use the PRC, instead choosing to file complaints at the police department directly. If you take away Critical Mass, Carol Denny, and a handful of certified nutcases who clog up the system, the PRC would have nothing to do.
The reason is that the PRC is intentionally designed to be a weak body against the political powerhouse of the BPD. Many times at PRC meetings, the police will openly yell and bark at PRC members, letting them know that ultimately they are powerless. This, along with other intimidation tactics, are the reasons that many more people do not utilize the PRC. In another instance in Berkeley, a man who filed complaints against the BPD was assaulted and sent up on a 5150. In yet another instance, Berkeley Copwatch intended to open up the PRC process and allow more black people and poor people access to the process. People came, but the police-organized brownshirts, I mean, neighborhood watch program was there in droves to attack and humiliate other members of the community. When they were done with their neo-fascist tirades, not many people felt like standing up and speaking out against the police. Unfortunately, even the small level of organization achieved by the neighborhood watch program exceeds that which is possible by anarchist or other sympathetic communities in the East Bay, and so we missed a great opportunity to expose the brownshirts. I could really go on and on.
"Justus",
I don't need my chest or for that matter my stomach pumped, despite all the poison floating around (your post included).
You challenge me to tell people the truth? When have I not? The PRC has many limitations, not the least of which are political. Did I misrepresent that? I certainly wasn't trying to give the end-all analysis.
As for your assertion that no "serious" cases come before the PRC, all PRC cases are public record, and your assertion is false. However, retaliation by poliec against those who make complaints; lack of understanding of the process (which favors the police); and the complexity and time commitment involved, certainly deter people. Moreover, the fact that many people do not believe the government will represent for them, treat them fairly, etc., deters people (and this they've learned through experience).
Furthermore, the PRC is a much more valuable process than Internal Affairs. Any criticism you can make of the PRC goes moreso for IA. Especially as whenever a PRC complaint is filed, an "IA investigation" begins immediately. Can you name any IA complaint which has resulted in the disciplining of an officer? Sgt. Hester couldn't on the stand recently (for a Critical Mass selective enforcement and harassment case).
One of the real values of the PRC is, again, holding a public forum which the police are REQUIRED to attend, at which they can be questioned as to what they have done. This can be very helpful not just to the PRC process, but it can inform other processes especially if cases are ongoing. Furthermore, access to policy issues is enhanced. Once again, this is not a "perfect" process and I never claimed that it is.
And your claim that no one cares, I would have assumed correct until recently. But the City Manager, the City Council, both read these reports (or at least, get them) and the City Manager has actually been signing off that he supports the PRC's findings more than once. It used to be you expected an automatic rejection. The City Manager holds ultimate power over the police, at least in the metasense of funding. The City Council holds the power to set policy. While these powers may be effectively limited, and can always just be disregarded, and the CM and CC may both be subject to threat by the police depending on the circumstance, I believe your assertion is yet again without basis. Not to mention the media has been known to cover it, and citizens have been known to care (thank you IMC).
So, nice try, with the unsubstantiated attack, I guess you were hoping I wouldn't notice? If you have any actual facts to back up your claims, please, by all means provide them.
Again, the PRC is far from perfect. I've already discussed this in the above article and previous articles.
Meanwhile, who wants the police? Who would disagree with the statement that the ideal society has no police? How can anyone justify opposing that position unless they want power over others to exploit them -- that, or a total lack of faith in humanity (in which case, how can you have faith in police? Catch-22). So, if you are hoping to achieve a society with no police, yes the PRC may seem very impotent, and working with them may seem like a defeatist/reformist sidetrack. But how does one work to improve or change society? It takes many approaches to bring about positive change.
Thanks!
P.S. Your statement that the PRC is "designed to give a small group of vocal nutcases like you, a forum to vent" has no historical basis. The PRC was founded as a serious effort to provide citizen review and reduce the instance of police abuse. It was a big battle. Lots of citizens were involved. The killing and maiming around People's Park was certainly a major reason for the effort. You might however make an argument that, given the power and corruption of the police worldwide, that anyone who would take the risk to file a complaint is a "vocal nutcase" -- however, you would be purposefully abusing the context to fulfill your agenda of character defamation (and whatever your larger agenda is, anonymous poster "Justus")...I mean, would those of civil society use the term "vocal nutcases" to describe Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Karen Silkwood, Judi Bari, ...
And as for the notion that taking away Critical Mass (amongst others) would leave the PRC with "nothing to do"...gee, the flip side of that is that if you take away the police from Critical Mass then the PRC would have nothing to do, and our tax dollars and precious activist energies would not be wasted as they have been. This has been proven in practice. The police directly cause problems for Critical Mass, and that is why people complain -- and a lot of crap including injuries and other abuses have not been complained about.
fin.
I don't need my chest or for that matter my stomach pumped, despite all the poison floating around (your post included).
You challenge me to tell people the truth? When have I not? The PRC has many limitations, not the least of which are political. Did I misrepresent that? I certainly wasn't trying to give the end-all analysis.
As for your assertion that no "serious" cases come before the PRC, all PRC cases are public record, and your assertion is false. However, retaliation by poliec against those who make complaints; lack of understanding of the process (which favors the police); and the complexity and time commitment involved, certainly deter people. Moreover, the fact that many people do not believe the government will represent for them, treat them fairly, etc., deters people (and this they've learned through experience).
Furthermore, the PRC is a much more valuable process than Internal Affairs. Any criticism you can make of the PRC goes moreso for IA. Especially as whenever a PRC complaint is filed, an "IA investigation" begins immediately. Can you name any IA complaint which has resulted in the disciplining of an officer? Sgt. Hester couldn't on the stand recently (for a Critical Mass selective enforcement and harassment case).
One of the real values of the PRC is, again, holding a public forum which the police are REQUIRED to attend, at which they can be questioned as to what they have done. This can be very helpful not just to the PRC process, but it can inform other processes especially if cases are ongoing. Furthermore, access to policy issues is enhanced. Once again, this is not a "perfect" process and I never claimed that it is.
And your claim that no one cares, I would have assumed correct until recently. But the City Manager, the City Council, both read these reports (or at least, get them) and the City Manager has actually been signing off that he supports the PRC's findings more than once. It used to be you expected an automatic rejection. The City Manager holds ultimate power over the police, at least in the metasense of funding. The City Council holds the power to set policy. While these powers may be effectively limited, and can always just be disregarded, and the CM and CC may both be subject to threat by the police depending on the circumstance, I believe your assertion is yet again without basis. Not to mention the media has been known to cover it, and citizens have been known to care (thank you IMC).
So, nice try, with the unsubstantiated attack, I guess you were hoping I wouldn't notice? If you have any actual facts to back up your claims, please, by all means provide them.
Again, the PRC is far from perfect. I've already discussed this in the above article and previous articles.
Meanwhile, who wants the police? Who would disagree with the statement that the ideal society has no police? How can anyone justify opposing that position unless they want power over others to exploit them -- that, or a total lack of faith in humanity (in which case, how can you have faith in police? Catch-22). So, if you are hoping to achieve a society with no police, yes the PRC may seem very impotent, and working with them may seem like a defeatist/reformist sidetrack. But how does one work to improve or change society? It takes many approaches to bring about positive change.
Thanks!
P.S. Your statement that the PRC is "designed to give a small group of vocal nutcases like you, a forum to vent" has no historical basis. The PRC was founded as a serious effort to provide citizen review and reduce the instance of police abuse. It was a big battle. Lots of citizens were involved. The killing and maiming around People's Park was certainly a major reason for the effort. You might however make an argument that, given the power and corruption of the police worldwide, that anyone who would take the risk to file a complaint is a "vocal nutcase" -- however, you would be purposefully abusing the context to fulfill your agenda of character defamation (and whatever your larger agenda is, anonymous poster "Justus")...I mean, would those of civil society use the term "vocal nutcases" to describe Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Karen Silkwood, Judi Bari, ...
And as for the notion that taking away Critical Mass (amongst others) would leave the PRC with "nothing to do"...gee, the flip side of that is that if you take away the police from Critical Mass then the PRC would have nothing to do, and our tax dollars and precious activist energies would not be wasted as they have been. This has been proven in practice. The police directly cause problems for Critical Mass, and that is why people complain -- and a lot of crap including injuries and other abuses have not been complained about.
fin.
Dear "Justus",
It's certainly true that most people don't bother to file complaints, but I've only filed one ten years ago and two recently (both sustained), so I'm not sure why I'm being credited with keeping the PRC busy. At any rate, congratulations to Jason, Hildes et al on the victory, which is hard-won. The PRC sustains fewer complaints than BPD's Internal Affairs Department.
I have to salute anyone who goes through the horrendous PRC machine, whether they're successful or not. My own experience, though successful, was like getting pickled in piss.
Sincerely, Carol Denney
It's certainly true that most people don't bother to file complaints, but I've only filed one ten years ago and two recently (both sustained), so I'm not sure why I'm being credited with keeping the PRC busy. At any rate, congratulations to Jason, Hildes et al on the victory, which is hard-won. The PRC sustains fewer complaints than BPD's Internal Affairs Department.
I have to salute anyone who goes through the horrendous PRC machine, whether they're successful or not. My own experience, though successful, was like getting pickled in piss.
Sincerely, Carol Denney
Jason and Carol - I rest my case. Now get back on your meds and do something productive with the rest of your lives.
"Justus",
Thanks for conceding your losing this debate.
-Jason
Thanks for conceding your losing this debate.
-Jason
"Jason and Carol - I rest my case. Now get back on your meds and do something productive with the rest of your lives."
Wow, I think we caught a cop. Nothing helps a selective enforcement case like jackass messages posted by a BPD officer on a local bulletin board.
Dear Mr Officer, if you had brains in your head instead of sand, you wouldnt repeat the same insults in person as well as on this message board. It allows people to identify you ... which we have now done. Fucking idiot.
Wow, I think we caught a cop. Nothing helps a selective enforcement case like jackass messages posted by a BPD officer on a local bulletin board.
Dear Mr Officer, if you had brains in your head instead of sand, you wouldnt repeat the same insults in person as well as on this message board. It allows people to identify you ... which we have now done. Fucking idiot.
justus = smashtheleft
justus = bpd cop who says the same things over and over again
cheers!
justus = bpd cop who says the same things over and over again
cheers!
Is that Michael? There's not that many people who would be familiar with all those names.
O.K.!!
We all know that the inooscent are taged to be radical if they oppose the police threat!!! In our country ran but the elite class of potential thugs!! Called the u.s. house of seneate and Goeoge Bush the most redneck and bias individual of all , not to mention evey money grubbing state official nation wide and abroad!!! The police are just thier protector's and the conservative community won't listen to the truth due to blind ignorance!!! Now! How do we stop this? Violence isn't a problem to the rich it's the poor white,black,japenese,muslim comunities they'll target with the racist's of all races to target the "war on terror"!! We should shoot ourselves in the head as we have terrorised our own and those abroad for centuries and a-lot recently!! Stop the rich with any means possible take thier homes and leave them in rubble as the racist and rich will allway's oppress??!!!!.... FIGHT WAR'S not WAR!!!!!!!!!...................... Be honest you scum sucking traorist pig's!!! Police lie and they kill!!!... Remember the 10-22-02 Anti police brutalty day and wear all black!!
We all know that the inooscent are taged to be radical if they oppose the police threat!!! In our country ran but the elite class of potential thugs!! Called the u.s. house of seneate and Goeoge Bush the most redneck and bias individual of all , not to mention evey money grubbing state official nation wide and abroad!!! The police are just thier protector's and the conservative community won't listen to the truth due to blind ignorance!!! Now! How do we stop this? Violence isn't a problem to the rich it's the poor white,black,japenese,muslim comunities they'll target with the racist's of all races to target the "war on terror"!! We should shoot ourselves in the head as we have terrorised our own and those abroad for centuries and a-lot recently!! Stop the rich with any means possible take thier homes and leave them in rubble as the racist and rich will allway's oppress??!!!!.... FIGHT WAR'S not WAR!!!!!!!!!...................... Be honest you scum sucking traorist pig's!!! Police lie and they kill!!!... Remember the 10-22-02 Anti police brutalty day and wear all black!!
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$230.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network