Biker tased by Portland Police
Thread started by
Purp at 06.12.08 - 4:14 pm
A Portland man says he was tackled, pushed off his bike, and then tasered repeatedly by a Portland Police officer in Southeast Portland last night.
The Portland Police Bureau, in a written statement about the incident, say that Phil Sano (a.k.a. “Rev Phil”) did not have a front light on his bicycle and that he refused to stop when officers requested.
http://bikeportland.org/2008/06/11/man-on-a-bike-is-tackled-then-tasered-by-portland-police/?
reply
Just to play devil's advocate, the dude looked like this
Purp06.12.08 - 4:15 pm
reply
Nah man, fuck all that.
Rev. Phil is a good dude and this is not the first time the police have shit on him.
Stereotyping based on appearance = FAIL
kyber06.12.08 - 4:20 pm
reply
Oh, haha. We know who rev. phil is. Looks like the charges will get "dropped".
the reverend dak06.12.08 - 4:22 pm
reply
Sano, "They looked kinda’ like cops, but generally cops do not tackle bikers unless it is Critical Mass.”
LOL
User106.12.08 - 4:33 pm
reply
(UPDATED*) At his arraignment at the Justice Center in downtown Portland a few hours ago, Sano says the clerk told him he had been given a “no-charge”. *According to a source who is a lawyer that means (for whatever reason) the case is not going forward, but the charges can brought back to life at a later date. My source says this could be an indication that either the police or the DA’s office didn’t think they could prove, or didn’t want to try to prove, the charges.
Translation: "Oops, we fucked up. Maybe if we don't charge him with the infraction, it will just go away."
PC06.12.08 - 4:36 pm
reply
Holy shit! Not Rev Phil!.
I will ride my tallbike in solidarity for you, my compadre.
This is shitty news.
SPOOK06.12.08 - 4:38 pm
reply
Stereotyping based on appearance = FAIL
loal i was jp
Purp06.12.08 - 4:48 pm
reply
A little, case of the "Letter of the Law" being enforced way, too literally.
It's one thing to be caught without a bike-light, but to be trampled to the ground for failing to stop for a minor infraction is asinine coming from even my pro-law-enforcement type of view.
Perhaps some inquiries should be made to the IA-section of the Portland Police Bureau if it hasn't already been done so.
A reduction in rank, limited-duty, desk-jockeyed, demoted to lock-up/city jail duty, all of those would be good therapy for the officer responsible.
And like my previous post, I'm still at a lost as to how this aggressiveness could make it past the psych-exams.
But, if this gets any more exposure, those will probably follow as well.
Aside from that, ride on Rev.Phil, and don't let the canned-Heat(aggressive, local PD) get you down
bentstrider06.12.08 - 4:56 pm
reply
fuck cops
I'm sick of reading about freaks in uniform. Legalized atrocities of a relatively civil social system.
burn 'em
Eric Hair06.12.08 - 5:00 pm
reply
Fundamentally, if you refuse to obey a command from a law enforcement officer, not only are they within their right to stop you using whatever means necessary, but they have a responsibility to do so. If you don't stop after being ordered to do so, the assumption is always going to be that you are resisting because you are covering another crime - whether stolen vehicle, concealed weapon, outstanding warrants, or something else. Of course a cop is going to tackle you off your bike if you don't stop. It doesn't matter how egregious the cop's reason for stopping you is, once a cop has ordered you to stop, you need to comply swiftly. Getting pulled over, no matter what kind of vehicle you are in/on, is not a request being put to you for your consideration. It is mandatory. Failing to do so will be considered resisting and will actually open you all kinds of consequences that you wouldn't have faced if you had simply stopped on request - including a search for weapons, drugs, etc.
Providing a reasonable amount of time to respond and effect a stop needs to be part of the process, but I don't see anything here to indicate that he wasn't given time to stop. If you ignore an order from a cop, you are asking for it, if you ask me. You can contest an illegal stop in a court, but it isn't a cop's job to hear your argument. That's for the judge and jury to do, so take it up with them. If a cop has what s/he considers to be reasonable justification to search, arrest, or cite you, then they are going to do so. If you disagree, the side of the road is NOT the place to make your case.
That said, I've gotten out of more tickets than I can count by simply being respectful and polite to the citing officer. I pull over as quickly as possible, use "sir" and "ma'am," and if necessary, politely make a case for why they should let me off. Simply verbally acknowledging an officer's request will be enough to garner enough time to safely stop in the vast majority of cases.
ideasculptor06.12.08 - 5:15 pm
reply
Understood, Sam.
But I don't care. Fuck the authorities. We don't need them.
(oh shit that was out loud)
Joe Borfo06.12.08 - 5:21 pm
reply
OK, I just followed the link rather than going off the 2 sentence summary at the top of the thread, and it would seem to be yet another case of unreasonable behaviour on the part of law enforcement. I still don't get all of the cop hatred that's been going on here of late. The vast majority of your interactions with cops are positive - they don't stop you, you don't stop them. So why focus on the small percentage who are bad eggs. And let's face it, there can be little doubt that most of our rides include a fair amount of egregious law breaking, and yet we still rarely have much by way of difficulties. I've got a bunch of friends who are police or CHP and without exception, every cop I've ever met through them has been an upstanding person who I'm glad to have on my side. That said, I wouldn't ride past any of them in the dark with no lights and a beer in my hand, either - at least not without expecting a ticket for it.
ideasculptor06.12.08 - 5:23 pm
reply
Fundamentally, if you refuse to obey a command from a law enforcement officer, not only are they within their right to stop you using whatever means necessary, but they have a responsibility to do so.
This isn't even remotely true.
PC06.12.08 - 5:25 pm
reply
Scenario X: An unidentified man in black yells at you from across the street and orders you off your bike, and you stop?
You must live in a nice part of town, because I won't do that over here...
In fact, this has happened to me before. Guy runs up on me and tells me to hold up for a second, acting all nonchalant. I continue walking because I don't recognize the person. All of a sudden I realize it's some drunk thug who starts cursing at me and takes a swing at me telling me I "don't belong on 'the streets'(tm)."
Now I don't stop for anyone. If law enforcement isn't required to identify themselves (either via uniform or verbally), aren't we already in a police state?
kyber06.12.08 - 5:36 pm
reply
I take no concilation from the fact that their behavior is made possible, and even scripted, by the legal system.
Why should I be courteous and respectful to someone that, from the get go, is discourteous and hostile towards me.
I stick to my above remarks.
Eric Hair06.12.08 - 5:40 pm
reply
Knowing Rev. Phil, he is always courteous, even when riding a mini bike through an indoor shopping mall.
Midnight Ridazz cussed and booed him on stage during Bike Porn and he held composure.
I know Rev. Phil knows his rights very well, and what happened was totally uncalled for from the police.
Joe Borfo06.12.08 - 5:55 pm
reply
Sam, I'm not saying I expect a pass, but I expect the response of the police to be in step with that of the infraction.
If I'm shooting at civilians, I expect the police to shoot at me.
If I'm randomly yelling at people in a public space, I expect the police to yell at me.
If I run a red light I expect a ticket.
I DO NOT ecpect to be asked to stop for not having a front light. I DO NOT expect to be tackled when I don't comply, and I DO NOT expect to be tased for lack of complacency.
People are pissed because this shit keeps happening. And the fact that it keeps happening indicates that the punishment for excessive force is not severe enough to cause a cop to think before acting. That tells me that the system is biased in a terrible way; a way that favors oppresion of civilians. No sir, I don't like it.
Eric Hair06.12.08 - 6:01 pm
reply
you should be stopped for not having a light - or at the very least, stopping you is not unreasonable. Riding without a light is incredibly dangerous. I've broken 2 bones in my life, and by far the more painful one happened because I stepped in front of a lightless bicycle on a dark street.
And they wouldn't be tackling you off your bike for not having a light, they'd be tackling you off your bike for resisting arrest/failure to comply with an order from law enforcement.
And PC, I'm all kinds of curious as to why you think you can disobey a command from a law enforcement officer with immunity from arrest. The arrest may prove to be unlawful in a court of law and all charges thrown out, but you are required to obey law enforcement when they tell you to do something. If you don't, they can arrest you - plain and simple. An officer who abuses it, however, won't remain an officer for long, at least in an ideal system. I can't even begin to imagine a scenario where an officer would tell you to do something, you would just ignore them and then they would just decide to not pursue the matter because they implicitly understood that you didn't obey because you weren't breaking the law they thought you were and you were actually correct.
ideasculptor06.12.08 - 6:11 pm
reply
I didn't disobey an order when I was pulled down off of my bike.
Also I think PC is referring to "whatever means necessary" ie I think he doesn't agree that by not obeying an officer that officer should be able to use any force he deems necessary.
I was going to write about my feelings on police officers however I think I would rather that not be so readily available on the information super highway.
franz06.12.08 - 7:59 pm
reply
Also I think PC is referring to "whatever means necessary" ie I think he doesn't agree that by not obeying an officer that officer should be able to use any force he deems necessary.
Yup, although there's no "should" about it: police officers are not, in fact, allowed to use "any means necessary" to effect a traffic stop, take hold of a fleeing suspect, or take into custody an uncooperative subject. There are myriad laws, judicial precedents, consent decrees, and departmental policies that determine what an officer may and may not do under a given set of circumstances when attempting to take a person into custody. Which ones apply depends on where you are.
PC06.13.08 - 2:50 am
reply
@ idea
you are basing your opinion on the statement of the police of what occurred. i don't know rev phil well, only met him once, but had a long talk with him. my guess is it is unlikely that he tried to evade the police so egregiously that it required a violent take down. if it did, i doubt the prosecutor would be dropping it.
indigis06.13.08 - 3:06 am
reply
PS. Rev Phil likes bike porn.
SPOOK06.13.08 - 1:17 pm
reply
Midnight Ridazz cussed and booed him on stage during Bike Porn and he held composure.
Your kidding us, these nice folks around here, booed at someone for taking his art down here to share it with us and at a financial lose. Serve him right.
I still don't get all of the cop hatred that's been going on here of late.
May be you don't remember how the cops treated you, when you where of a younger age, I do, and it wasn't pretty. It lead me to not trust, like or see police as a benefit to me, but a danger to me and a menace on society. It easier for me now that I'm older, I can work cops like putty in my hand for the most part. Part of that is that I know how to handle them now, and part is that they don't fear my youth.
in the words of ICE CUBE's Endangered Species
"If I was old, they'd probably be a friend of me
Since I'm young, they consider me the enemy"
sexy06.13.08 - 1:38 pm
reply
@indigis:
you are basing your opinion on the statement of the police of what occurred.
No, I already posted that after reading the actual blog post, instead of the 2 line summary in the first post of this thread, it would appear that the cops were in the wrong in this case. That doesn't change the fact that the rampant cop hatred around here is, to my mind, a little uncalled for. As a general rule, we commit about 50 infractions per mile on group rides around here (when we're behaving), and I wouldn't be surprised if portland rides are much the same, and for the most part, law enforcement has shown itself to be remarkably tolerant of it. There are bad eggs in any department, and we do encounter them on occasion, and I could certainly suggest better ways of encouraging law abiding behaviour, but considering the tens of thousands of rider miles that have been pedaled on midnight ridazz rides, we've seen relatively little bad blood between ourselves and the cops. I think that perspective has been lost by many around here.
Look at it from a cops perspective. Every week the same group of people go out and break the same set of laws and cause disruption around the city. Every week, cops show up and try to encourage a bit more order in the process, with varying degrees of success. I think anyone might find that a little frustrating when it happens week after week and night after night. Don't forget, we really are breaking all kinds of laws every time we do one of these group rides. We drink and ride. We run lights. We often occupy way more of the road than we really need.
Now, if I were a police chief, I'd probably be sending cops on bikes out on the rides, which would give them infinitely more control over our behaviour at lights than a couple of cops in a cruiser shouting over the loudspeaker, but they haven't seemed to have figured that one out yet. They probably will, eventually. With cops on bikes, they could allow us to run lights where it is safe but they could also halt us where it isn't or where the disruption would be too great for their comfort. They could talk to riders who appear to be getting too wasted to ride safely and get them to stop riding or stop drinking before they cause a truly hazardous situation. They could ride on the outside of the group and encourage people to occupy a minimum amount of roadway. I've seen this done in London and it was incredibly effective.
If the reaction of the riding community to any kind of cop presence is one of hatred and mistrust, we'll never be able to find a common ground and the antagonism will continue to spiral to ever higher levels. None of us is entirely innocent and it requires both sides to modify their behaviour to come up with a solution. The ridazz seem to want only the cops to change their ways, and that is very unlikely to occur. It will have to be a multilateral effort.
Who is engaging in more illegal behaviour - the cops or the riders? It seems to me that both sides are doing their fair share, so who are we to be so judgmental about their infractions in the face of our own?
ideasculptor06.13.08 - 1:52 pm
reply
Who is engaging in more illegal behaviour - the cops or the riders? It seems to me that both sides are doing their fair share, so who are we to be so judgmental about their infractions in the face of our own?
So what you're saying here is that because some cyclists run red lights (sorry, but traffic laws are considered a pre-conventional moral dilemma in my eyes) that police are allowed to respond with excessive force?
kyber06.13.08 - 2:23 pm
reply
At what point does force become excessive? Also, how do you stop someone on a bicycle that doesn't respond to verbal commands?
In this case the taser seems excessive, but what force will be acceptable if someone fails to stop?
sc_nomad06.13.08 - 3:19 pm
reply
@idea
no one is going to deny the amount of traffic infractions ridazz commit. but, really, tasers!?!
if a cyclist was really riding fast to get away it's unlikely that a cop could catch him on foot to take him down. a cyclist going a normal pace can be stopped by grabbing the bike or the rider. someone on a bike is not in a threatening position where they have easy access to a weapon so a violent take down is not warranted for self protection.
franz was taken down and rev was taken down. neither of these guys are road warriors. they're both pretty calm paced riders.
cop hating by bicyclists is not bred in. it is a response to what they see and how they're treated. it's unfortunate, but it is what it is.
indigis06.13.08 - 3:34 pm
reply
Rev Phil is a badass - he raised a couple of hundred dollars for the Bike Oven with his Bike Porn screening in L.A., and he threw a wicked afterparty at the Oven too.
He has put his life into building up bicycling in whatever way he can.
Reading that article made me feel horrible.
ubrayj0206.13.08 - 3:45 pm
reply
I love when he tells the security gurad.
"No. the rules are 'Believe in yourself and anything is possible' "
stillline06.13.08 - 4:05 pm
reply
sexy -
"I can work cops like putty in my hand for the most part. Part of that is that I know how to handle them now, and part is that they don't fear my youth."
Me -
I know! Fluffa told me all about you and your talent!
HAHAHAHAHAHA
HOHOHOHOHOHOHOHO
HEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHEHE
User106.13.08 - 4:08 pm
reply
-->
Ridazz Roulette!
bike porn is not a crime!