To: Whom it May Concern
From: The Executive Board of the Oregon Fellowship of Reconciliation
PO Box 222, Salem, OR 97308
Regarding: the May 30, 2008 incident resulting in the tasering of a UO college student and other police violence, in Eugene, Oregon
Sept 28, 2008
The Fellowship of Reconciliation is a national organization started by conscientious objectors during World War I. Martin Luther King Jr. was one of our better-known members. We have all taken an oath of non-violence. We believe that for humanity to be at our best, we must speak our conscience on matters of great import, and we must re-learn ways of preventing or resolving conflicts, without the use of violence.
We are disturbed to read and hear the eyewitness reports of the May 30 incident in Eugene which resulted in the tasering of one young man and a concussion in an older man. We are disturbed that at least 2 people who were not threatening anyone were treated by police as if they were mortal threats. We are disturbed that people who were conscious of the need to stay calm and refrain from using force, and were careful to maintain a physical distance from the police officers, were still treated as if they posed a physical threat to the police. That two people, whom by all eyewitness reports were innocent of any offense, received notable injuries from the police, is disturbing to our sense of protections guaranteed under the Bill of Rights.
What can cause police to act in this way? Were they genuinely afraid that the individuals they injured might have caused harm? Had they been instructed to act with a higher than necessary level of brutality, to incite violence themselves to discredit the students at the rally? The event was not an angry event; it was a celebration, organized by UO students, of a decision by the Lane County Commissioners. It seems irrational for the officers to have acted defensively, or to have anticipated violence from any of the participants. What had the officers been told before they arrived on the scene, as the rally was disbanding and the video journalists had left?
It is well-known that expectations create outcomes.
When police expect peaceful demonstrations they are more likely to get them. Basic courtesy and respect must be employed by the police in all situations. That takes courage of a different kind than violent control responses.
The reverse is also true: people must be courteous and respectful of police, and not give them any reason to fear physical harm. This is a mainstay of all training in non-violence. The Fellowship of Reconciliation is devoted to this principle.
It is notable, from the eyewitness reports and the press releases of two of the men arrested, that the recipients of brutal force had consciously and carefully made a point of not interfering physically, keeping a respectful and safe (they thought) distance from the police while they were tasering the first young man. Like many other witnesses, they used only their voices to ask the police why they were tasering him, and to state that they observed the force to be excessive and unnecessary.
We are disturbed to perceive a pattern with the spreading use of tasers among police in this country. The incident in Eugene is a prime example, as are eyewitness reports from protests last month in St. Paul, Minnesota. A small handful of deaths have occurred from tasers, as police apparently incorrectly believe that the effect of the fairly new technology is short-lived and harmless. The electric shock can cause great stress on the heart, and even fatal heart attacks. We understand the desire, even the need, to immobilize a person who poses a threat, and we appreciate the preference to use the less-lethal tasers rather than guns.
One can imagine defending against assault, armed robbery, or cases where a suspect has a violent weapon, or is suspected of having one, or is running away, that a taser might provide the most protection and the least harm. You would be most unlikely to receive a letter from us had a taser been used in such circumstances. We value police protection as fundamental to civil society.
What appears to be a pattern of brutal and unnecessary force by police during events of peaceful assembly is disturbing. It is as if there is an intent to discredit the people who are gathering and speaking publicly. Is there a fear of people speaking their voices in public or an intent to frighten the American people from speaking and gathering publicly? Freedom of assembly and freedom of speech are vital to the country that was founded so consciously in 1779. We must not let those distinguished rights vanish.
We on the Board of the Oregon Fellowship of Reconciliation state our support for the participants of the rally who all behaved in a non-violent manner. We state our emphatic support for David Parziale and David Owen who, in their public statements, consciously refrained from any possibility of being perceived as a threat, yet remained as witnesses and emotional support to the young man (Ian Van Ornum) who was twice tasered after he had been dragged across the street by his hair, thrown to the ground, and held there by a police officer's knee in his back. From the eyewitness reports we have read, we cannot see any reason to prosecute the arrestees. We state our support for a truly impartial inquiry into the events of May 30th, 2008 in Eugene. We state our support for the right to non-violent public speech and assembly as a basic human right guaranteed by the First Amendment and urge the media, the courts and public review processes to be attentive to what is at stake here.
Respectfully yours,
Renee Stringham, co-chaircc:
Mark Babson, co-chair
Rachel Hampton, vice-chair
Susan Watkins, treasurer
Laurie Childers, Secretary
and OFOR Board members:
- Paul LaRue
- BL Coyne
- Aba Gayle
- Loraine Stuart
- Gus Frederick
- Mayor of Eugene, Kitty Piercy all City Council Members
- Police Auditor Dawn Reynolds
- Randi Zimmer, Police Commission Analyst
- Tim Mueller, Police Commission
- Jon Belcher, Police Commission
- Norton Cabell, Chair of Civilian Review Board
- Physicians for Social Responsibility, Oregon chapter
- Scott McKee, Eugene Police Dept. Internal Affairs
- Anthony Farley, charged in May 30 incident
- Ian Van Ornum, charged in May 30 incident
- David Parziale, charged in May 30 incident
- David Owen, witness to May 30 incident
- Amy Pincus-Merwin, witness to May 30 incident
- John Kroger, next Attorney General of Oregon (Jan. 09)
- Hardy Meyers, current/outgoing Attorney General of Oregon
- Douglas Harcleroad, current District Attorney of Eugene
- Alex Gardner, next District Attorney of Eugene
- Mark Johnson, Director, National Fellowship of Reconciliation
- Michael Carrigan, Community Alliance of Lane County
- Peter Bergel, Oregon Peace Works
- Eugene Register Guard
- Eugene Weekly
OFOR |
PO Box 222, Salem, Oregon 97308 |