All posts in the topic after assessment
Summary
- There are 117 posts — by 45 authors — in this topic.
- Latest post made by Thomas Sylvan Hilber at 2008 Sep 26 13:59 UTC
| From | File | Date |
|---|---|---|
| Jamie Delton | bobparker.JPG | 2008 Sep 07 17:34 UTC |
| Andrew Hine | Quotes show.ppt | 2008 Sep 09 21:15 UTC |
| Samuel Meidinger | Photo-0065.jpg | 2008 Sep 24 04:06 UTC |
The City of St. Paul is required to submit an after-assessment of how the
convention security, etc. went.
Each Councilmember has been invited to participate.
I'd invite each of you to be involved by sending something thru SPIF
Try to be concise. Offer a what went right or wrong and if wrong, suggest
how it could've been corrected.
I will submit these along with my own.
For example:
Independent journalists were arrested and shouldn't have been.
Suggest we should've offered pre-RNC credentialing I.D. tags and allowed the
holders to move thru the streets without fear of arrest.
Crowds of non-violent protesters were caught in the middle and were confused
as to how to escape police v.s. violent protesters.
Suggest a St. Paul cop should've been in charge of all non- st. paul units.
An officer(s) should have been available to lead non-violent demonstrators
to safety.
Your input will be submitted net week.
Thanks Dave for taking a lead on this effort. You may be the only public official that has spoken out on the police violence. I would start with sending this (FOX 9, yet) video to both mayors and askingfor their reaction and to explain who the higher ups werethat ordered the tear gassing of non-violent, but civil disobedient protesters? http://www.myfoxtwincities.com/myfox/MyFox/pages/sidebar_video.jsp?contentId=7364281&version=1&locale=EN-US This would go a long way in answering the many questions that many of us have and clear the air some in the general understanding of what really caused the obvious overreaction (to put it mildly) of the police and other security forces. It is only the right thing and the political thing to do by the mayors. In today's Strib, a letter writer called for both of their resignations. I do not believe this should be done, but the mayors need to tell uswhat person or organization told the police and security to use tear gas on unarmed and non-violent protesters. The correct thing to do was to just pick up the protesters and put them in a van or truck to get them out of the way. This is what was done before the last few conventions. Are you as outraged as I am? The cops even went beyond their orders and kept tear- gassing this poor young woman over and over and assaulting her! Even the gassing of the woman once, I feel is unlawful, as well as possibly unconstitutional. We all need to send this video to as many public officials as we can, as I feel this is the most telling of the videos that I have seen of the police violence at this convention. Thanks again Dave for all you do, Gary Thompson Highland
Submitted to whom, Dave? I think that any self-evaluation by the City would
take longer than a week.
And personally, I have a lot more questions than answers. But I suppose I could
rephrase them. Instead of asking: "Why was the representative of the lead
local law enforcement agency (Matt Bostrom) telling citizens in December 2007
that no police officers infiltrating protest organizations, would be wearing
uniforms (not war-like tactical gear), would actually be in charge (not the
Secret Service), and that demonstrators would be greeted by smiling cops on
bicycles while at that very moment the Ramsey County Sheriff's office had
(according to search warrant affidavits made public earlier this week) ALREADY
infiltrated the RNC Welcoming Committee?" I suppose I could rephrase it to
suggest that such tactics might not be wise.
Diane Gerth
West End and Downtown
Why did some protesters have to wear masks and other facial coverings? Walk into a bank like that and what happens? Tom Meemken Battle Creek ----- Original Message ----- From: Diane <email obscured>> To: St. Paul Issues <email obscured>> Sent: Saturday, September 06, 2008 8:33 AM Subject: Re: [SPIF] after assessment Submitted to whom, Dave? I think that any self-evaluation by the City would take longer than a week. And personally, I have a lot more questions than answers. But I suppose I could rephrase them. Instead of asking: "Why was the representative of the lead local law enforcement agency (Matt Bostrom) telling citizens in December 2007 that no police officers infiltrating protest organizations, would be wearing uniforms (not war-like tactical gear), would actually be in charge (not the Secret Service), and that demonstrators would be greeted by smiling cops on bicycles while at that very moment the Ramsey County Sheriff's office had (according to search warrant affidavits made public earlier this week) ALREADY infiltrated the RNC Welcoming Committee?" I suppose I could rephrase it to suggest that such tactics might not be wise. Diane Gerth West End and Downtown Diane Gerth West End, St. Paul Info about Diane Gerth: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/dianegerth<http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/dianegerth> This topic's messages may be viewed at: http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/7dmvNBMYmM29XFJIMEBJxv<http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/7dmvNBMYmM29XFJIMEBJxv> ----------------------------------------- To post, send your message to: <email obscured><email obscured>> To leave or for daily digest, type "unsubscribe" or "digest on," in subject line and send to: <email obscured><email obscured>> More info about St. Paul Issues Forum: http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/stpaul-issues<http://forums.e-democracy.org/groups/stpaul-issues> E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules<http://e-democracy.org/rules> ----------------------------------------- Technical assistance thanks to our friends at http://OnlineGroups.Net<http://onlinegroups.net/> Citizens Guide to St. Paul http://e-democracy.org/wiki/Citizens_Guide_to_St._Paul<http://e-democracyorg/wiki/Citizens_Guide_to_St._Paul> Questions about rules violations? Send complaints and items for investigation to: <email obscured><email obscured>>
Problem: Police were uniformed in black and military-style battle gear,
creating the impression, if not the reality, of a militarized, occupied, and
confrontational city, instead of a safe, festive environment. Lots of research
and work goes into designing military uniforms for the political statements of
authority and imposition of power in confrontational and violent contests for
power. Those kinds of political statements are precisely the ones that should
NOT be made by people charged with ensuring public safety in a supposedly happy
and festive event.
Solution: The same level of personal protection and command cohesion provided
by the military-style, battle-duty uniforms could have been provided by
uniforms with a more sporting appearance, maybe even paid for with sponsored
logos as sports teams do. Use of civilian, sporting-style protective gear by
police would have helped decrease the sense of confrontation and the
military-authoritarian political statements that were given so clearly and so
often during this convention.
Thanks, Dave, for doing this. Democracy works because people like you
make it happen.
My bits:
We know for a fact that Sheriff Fletcher relied heavily on infiltrators to
secure information on protest groups. This may have been reasonable,
given the publicly stated intent to behave violently by some of them.
However, this action needs to be accompanied by a full accounting of the
actions of the undercover agents involved, including proof that they were
not agents provocateurs.
Suggest that the names and full actions of the infiltrating agents be made
public along with a full accounting as to why the groups were targeted.
Some of the actions by Sheriff Fletcher in advance of the convention
resulted in little evidence being seized and no arrests. This begs the
question as to whether they were designed to intimidate.
Suggest that the information that was used to obtain the warrants along
with the name of the judge that signed the warrant be made public, along
with the authority that this judge had in Ramsey County.
During the more difficult times of open rioting, little was done to
control rumors. This was very unfortunate, and is a major part of
restoring order in any such situation. Stories of beatings and macings
were circulated, some proving true later but most not.
Suggest that a website listing every arrestee along with picture be made
available, and that staff be on had to use the latest technology such as
twitter, etc to rebuff rumors.
The complete closure of the entire stretch along Kellogg from I-35E to
the Mississippi made it impossible for anyone to get around. Delegates
and other people here for the convention were not able to leave the site,
meaning that economic impact was minimal from this event.
Suggest that in the future we stipulate that a crossing at Smith/Main and
at the Science Museum be maintained as a minimum, and that we refuse to
host event that cannot operate with these crossings in place.
Economic impact is, anecdotally, not what we hoped for. We need to find
out what this convention was worth to the city.
Suggest a formal study by neighborhood /zip code to assess the economic
impact.
The site of so many police in riot gear was enough to damage police
relations with the citizens for many years. To undo this damage, we need
to know exactly what the conditions are that prompt this show of force.
Suggest a public review of all police procedures for controlling a riot
and a public comment period based on how these standards worked during the
convention.
Well, I guess riot squads have to wear protective gear and it is
always scary looking; if we have a next time, to soften the their
appearance, each officer should be issued and be required to wear a
tutu over the lot with his or her badge number with the respective
city or county served emblazoned across the bodice. Perhaps when they
are not acting on orders and encountering members of the public, they
should be required to perform a short ballet routine.
I'm just as concerned about the impact on business around the
convention as with the police actions. I'd like to see a before,
during and after survey performed.
Since no puking folks of any party appeared to haunt any downtown
bars into the wee hours or were able to get into them, I think we
should all do a downtown bar crawl, post-RNC, to make up for their
absence: one drink per bar to your limit and then set yourself down
at the last or at an eatery until you're sober enough to go home, or
individuals and groups could use other transportation options (like a
St. Paul cab; I wonder how they did). Or folks could just go out,
drink, eat, be merry, and tip well on their own as previously
suggested by others.
I think those of us who lived only a block from the barricade were relieved to see the end of this short (but long) week. Going into a local bar on Wednesday night, we realized talking with an owner that this convention was turning out to be a lot of expense for them (with extra staff and security costs) but not a lot more business. When all was over, we loyal customers went back to this bar with our "credential" later featured on MPR's News Cut blog: http://minnesota.publicradio.org/collections/special/columns/news_cut/archive/2008/09/taking_back_the_streets.shtml After a week of seeing people sport their press and delegate badges, we just needed to reassert the place of residents in the mix of people visiting local businesses. The server who had also been there Wednesday night gave Erik a big high five when she saw his credential and said those were the most _important credentials_ to her. Clearly the employees of local businesses and not just the residents were happy to have our fair city back. Peace to all, Cristy
For more than a year Dave Thune and others defended the worst elemnets witnessed this week despite lessons in several other national conventions. These self described anarchists stated they intended to do costly damage many times. The group's websites are documnted on looktruenorth.com and twincities.indymedia.org/rnc before it was closed to the public. Yet Thune, Mike and others attack Republicans. http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/post/2XpjHKIXtwWOSrOfgNt1nG School board member Tom Goldstein's anti-law enforcement posts are despicable. We should all be proud of the police and our city, from top to bottom. We made the world a better place by upholding order and rejecting anarchy. Again I challenge anyone to defend any of these thugs to be prosecuted Monday or soon thereafter on this board. I challenge those defending them legally to disclose it on this board. The police risked their lives. We must now prosecute or the thugs continue on to the next convention without a record. Jamie Delton Summit U
We should never blindly throw praise to all in any group. Overall the police
did their jobs well but in other cases rights did get violated and
unnecessary force was used. reporters have the right to be at and cover all
events and government in any form may not violate that right.
Everyone has a perspective on the events of last week and my are as
follows.....
Security was excellent from the standpoint of threat reduction, access
control and ability to react to threats. The City would have faired better
had much of the heavily armed presence been less visible. Everyone knew what
was in place and we did not need the shock troop effect. The police on
horses and bikes were very effective as were the casual uniformed presence
throughout the city.
Police self control and professionalism overall was very good but again some
went too far. The arrest of reporters, using mace on people taking pictures
and the senseless use of force caught by a local news team of one a young
girl. She refused to move and instead of arresting and taking her away she
was repeatedly hit with mace, pushed by bikes and knocked down several
times. This is a case where a full inquiry must take place.
We lost all sense of who was in charge and therefore no one seemed
accountable as events unfolded. We need to know who called the shots and see
the orders given and compare that too what took place. It may not be allowed
to hide behind some Homeland Security provision.
The protesters did a great job of sticking to their message and exercise the
rights they have as citizens too free speech.
97 percent of all those who protested seemed to be content to be seen and
heard. The 3 percent of idiots who did damage to our city and wanted a
confrontation with the police got it. I feel overall they got exactly what
they deserved.
The press did not I feel give the time to those who peacefully marched but
obsessed on the few trouble makers.
The City and it's staff put a good face on the city and had done great
preparation for the event. The hurricane cost much income to vendors around
town but did save us from bush and cheney. Had they been here the security
would have been even more smothering.
As a West Sider the closing of the high Bridge was a big pain.
I will be interested to see the number of law suits that follow this weeks
events and the legal opinions that come out of those cases.
Brian Joyce
West Side
Hi folks,
I'd first like to say thanks to Kathy, Audrey, Chris, Pat, Christopher,
Nate, Leslie, Sue, Neal, and Leslie, ten people from Buffalo New York who
stayed at our house for the RNC. They took four days off work, drove 2000
miles and spent 32 hours in a van, tens of hours in preparation, and 96
hours in Minnesota to express themselves at the RNC. During the same time, I
vacationed with my family and went to work for two days before taking one
day off.
I'd like to say thanks to Charlie and others like him and his wife who were
medics, peace patrollers, etc during the RNC. I appreciated it much, as I
was elsewhere.
I'd like to apologize for asking people to enjoy the experience and enjoy
Minnesota nice.
Dave, in response to your quest for input or feedback, I'd note the
following, much like others have done already.
(1) The strategy that appeared to be utilized made us less of what I was
raised to consider an American to be. It may have been a successful
strategy, but so would illegal wire tapping, imprisoning of people without
due process, etc and other strategies employed as a result of Bush
administrations interpretation of what 'success' would be fighting
terrorism. It appeared to a strategy of fear, intimidation, and blockading.
It was a dehumanizing experience to even drive by the law enforcement people
staged on Kellogg on our way to the freeway (35E)to go home on a quiet
Wednesday evening and to be frightened by their appearances. It was
demeaning to be lectured to by a law enforcement person about having made my
bed, and to go lie with them and suffer the consequences. To have an office
refuse to speak to me, and hold, in the correct fashion, the blocking baton,
and to gesture, in the correct fashion, the shielding hand motion followed
by the pointing finger was a new, image creating, experience for me. And I
had very very minor contact with law enforcement.
I don't know a specific solution, except perhaps to be more American, if
there is such a thing.
(2) Another response was the dismay I felt to see Public Works employees,
welders, electricians, and construction people, put into a position where
they had to have pouches containing gas masks. These were people who were
mobilized as close as 10 feet away from law enforcement people putting on
their gloves, dropping helmet shields or putting on gas masks, and
tightening their grip on their batons, or as close as tens of feet in the
snow plows and tandems other wised used to maintain our streets. It was
dismay and embarrassment I felt, and not embarrassment about the employees
(at least five of who I knew, and know to be good people) but the
management, political and otherwise, who did that. It actually made me feel
for a while that the intimidation and fear was indeed just a strategy, and
that danger or a threat was not really present or really expected, because
of wondering who would do such a thing if they thought it was really
dangerous.
A solution would be, if there was indeed a dangerous situation, you put
professionals in the vicinity to deal with it. You can lend machines and
material all you want, and have PW people deliver them to the professionals.
Using volunteers is no excuse for bad judgment.
(3) We went out one evening for food, to Sweeny's. They noted that business
was down the whole week. How could it be otherwise if the image you project
is one of great concrete blocks and barbed wire fencing protruding out of
it? It should have been predictable (was) and factored into what was told to
the us by the responsible people (does that imply Eric isn't a responsible
person?).
(4) True Blue Minnesota. Again it's interesting to note my preference for
strategies that convey what we think is important to be, even while not
having the appearance of being successful due to lack of exposure or the
apparent smaller number of people impacted, than for strategies that utilize
or appeal to the least or worse of our characteristics, and have the
appearance of being successful. You've already notices the use of the words
apparent and appearance. I think True Blue Minnesota was a great success,
worth every penny and minute invested by the great people who did so. I wish
I had given more, and I hope they have more fund raisers for this effort and
similar efforts. The messages convey were exciting, great ones. And the idea
of it will stay for a long time, having impact, and I hope encouraging more
and more movements in this direction.
(5) It'd be better if we, or just I, could learn to trust what our leaders
tell us about how good their decisions were, and how good their strategies
were. Because there was an approximately 100% chance of them doing that,
estimated before this event, I don't know how to successfully navigate that
problem after the fact. Who, from our independent media, do you think is
informed enough, was involved enough, unbiased enough, for me to believe in
about what happened, and why? Do you think this report will let us know?
Certainly opinions that reflect a bunch of negativity. Maybe that will
change?
Dave, and others, thanks for the opportunity.
Give us a break Jamie. I think the vast majority agree with you regarding the thugs and their activities. I also think the vast majority will agree with you about the job most of the police did. However, I think you intentionally misrepresent Dave Thune's position. You have been doing it for a long time now. I am not aware of any statement by Dave that invited people to come to St. Paul to damage property, cause injury to others, including police and their horses. If anything he did invite those who wanted to come to St. Paul to protest. Protesting is our right under the First amendment, regardless of what you might think. In fact its even patriotic. With minor exception the people who participated in the various marches and protests were there to exercise their Constitution rights. Unfortuantely, a very small number were intent on something else. More unfortunate is the fact that there were far too many reports of incidents where the police evidently over reacted. It will be a while, I am sure, before we know how much they over reacted, if in fact they did over react. Having a web site that attacks Republicans or suggests ways to protest their convention is no different than Talk radio that attack Democrats includinge comments about killing this or that person. Yet they remain on the air waves because people like you and the administration think its okay. Its all part of the Rovian method togain and keep power . What is interesting is that you can't deal with what's good for the gander is good for the goose. Mike Fratto Payne Phalen Please help those who don't get enough to eat. http://oyh.org http://hungersolutions.org The future depends more on what we do between now and then Than what we did in the past.
Not so much an assessment, but a lingering question:
Given our City's stated priorities on fairness in contracting and promotion of
local business, is there an analysis of how many dollars went to minority and
women owned and local businesses? This should be particularly the case for
the dollars we spent on security that the City controlled, and the hiring
practices for peace officers from other jurisdictions.
Was the money spent in alignment with our stated - and correct - priorities?
Dude, seriously.
Not one person here is defending the idiots who ruined things for so
many. Not Dave Thune, not anybody. While attacking Republicans is a
good idea in most cases, pretty much every poster here has been in
agreement that the "anarchists" were wrong, unlawful, and need to be
dealt with in the best ways available to the police and City Attorney.
That so many lawful protesters were denied their Constitutionally-
guaranteed rights is another matter. That so many anonymous cops were
heavy-handed, and that the feeling that the DHS took over our city
completely is another matter. That the whole enchilada turned out to
be something other than we were all assured it would be is another
matter.
To smear all protesters as thugs eliminates the validity of any rant
against what, for the most part, was done. Protest is the highest
form of patriotism, (according to that lefty whiner Thomas Jefferson)
and the way that some of this was handled raises a lot of questions--
which is what responsible people are doing right now. One should not
conflate events or statements to the level of fiction just to make an
angry point-- nobody should.
It's pretty clear that Dave Thune was a great example of level
headedness through this, and I am not alone in appreciation of that.
Let me ask you Mike and Bob - one year ago when Thune was drafting his protester rights as a city council member, might his time have been better spent ensuring local hospitality business be included in RNC plans? Was Dave Thune's protester bill of rights ever applied? How much time did the council spend on Thune's pointless concerns? Let there be no question - the violent protaganists in the RNCWC and elsewhere with the aim of injuries, death, and disruption, were completely thwarted by a variety of force. Noone "overprepared" the force with un-needed riot gear. The fact that Bush and Cheney were not here had no effect on the destructive plans of the criminals whose rights were so carefully looked after by the city council. 1 year ago instead of preparing arrangements for St. Paul businesses to benefit from hospitality service, St. Paul leaders, likely in part influenced by police-power "experts" on e-democracy.org, were obsessing over the fair treatment of the feloneous criminals and the effete brats of failed parents that we witnessed last week. If they had done their job and focused on normal city administration things instead of pointlessly attending to civil rights concerns for no law-abiding protester's benefit, we would not need a pub crawl to restore lost business. The problem is city council priorities. For that alone the city council should be held to account or punished at the ballot box. What is the priority of same city council now, after the threat has left? Finding out the uniform of each law enforcement agency. UNbelievable. Let's hear from Dave Thune's colleagues now. We already know Thune's mistakes. We're paying for them. I've had enough of Thune representing the city and representing the council. Dave Thune has got to go. Bob, what is this Sept 6 2008 entry on your personal blog? http://prufrock.journalspace.com Docile young protesters should listen to police if they tell you to move somewhere. The young protester and the police she was distracting were surrounded by a riot-capable crowd waiting for a distraction to move in. Dirty bombs and fire-bombs thrown from a riot against a packed Xcel were prevented no thanks to that young protester. I would have been killed inside the X on Wednesday night as would have been many of our mutual friends if the police had lost focus for 1 second and a riot ensued. Thank you everyone for the level of professionalism. Thank you Sarah Palin for new, bold and ambitious aspirations set for eager young government people. Bob, while you and the rest of the responsible list members sort this out let me suggest your level of hatred disqualifies anyone from objective, useful analysis of this week. Jamie Delton Summit U
The following file was added to this topic:
"I would have been killed inside the X on Wednesday night as would have been
many of our mutual friends if the police had lost focus for 1 second and a riot
ensued."
This is the same sort of FEAR MONGERING that some people have used to justify a
continued infringement on American Civil Liberties.
These are Republican talking points. I heard some similarly thinking Delegates
in Rice Park aka MSNBC Freedom Square say in response to several CODE PINK
Protesters that "Our Freedoms Have Gone Too Far"
There were enough POLICE, National Guard, Secret Service, BCA, DOJ, SWAT,
Ramsey County Sheriffs and out of state Police to invade a small country....I
think they (Our Government) has shown just what it thinks about FREEDOM...of
speech, assembly and press....again...Bush Administration.
Thank you Dave Thune for giving your time and energy to the People of our City
and our NATION.
You know, if we're going to require so much security for what is essentially a private function, perhaps it makes more sense for the venue, especially for the RNC, to be someplace like this: http://www.doc.state.mn.us/facilities/linolakes.htm or someplace else that could be used exclusively and secured without disrupting the lives and fortunes of residents and business.
You may have received a campaign contribution solicitation from Mayor Coleman
yesterday.
This is what I am returning:
"No contributions will come from me unless there is a full accounting for the
repressive measures used to trample many people’s rights during the RNC.
• People who pose an imminent threat of violence should be countered with
force.
• People engaged in civil disobedience should expect to be removed and perhaps
arrested.
• People who protest and move on, who observe and move on, or who are just
bystanders should not be treated as threats, criminals or enemies of the state.
What we saw was heavy force used against many hundreds of people when there was
threat of violence by only a few dozen. How many windows were broken? Where
is the balance? We saw preventive detention and intimidation aimed not just
at stopping crimes but focused particularly at dissuading dissent.
The city lost its soul last week behind the barricades and lines of anonymous
riot squads. You have a good deal of responsibility for this and I hope you
can help to redeem this city."
Jamey,
You should speak directly to Dave Thune about his positions. I don't know his
positions on your concerns. I only know my concerns, and don't pretend to
speak for other people, or to answer for them.
Great post. Thanks.
Dean Sheldon,
SA Park
----- Original Message -----
From: Jamie Delton
To: St. Paul Issues Forum
Sent: Sunday, September 07, 2008 12:36 PM
Subject: Re: [SPIF] after assessment
Let me ask you Mike and Bob - one year ago when Thune was drafting his
protester rights as a city council member, might his time have been
Jay,
The three categories you list below are super.
However, imagine you are the "police". Tensions are running high because there
is a mass of people here. You know from the briefing that some of those in the
mass have avowed to do major harm. You have been standing on your feet all day
and they are killing you. You see a flash of unexpected movement off to your
side. Simultaneously there are five people right in front of your face shouting
and waving their hands. Three of the ten flailing hands are closed fists
holding who knows what.
In an instant, how do YOU determine to which of your groups does each of five
people belong?
It is remarkable that more people were not injured.
Dean Sheldon,
SA Park
----- Original Message -----
From: Jay Wilkinson
To: St. Paul Issues Forum
Sent: Sunday, September 07, 2008 2:51 PM
Subject: Re: [SPIF] after assessment
People who pose an imminent threat of violence should be countered with
force.
People engaged in civil disobedience should expect to be removed and perhaps
arrested.
People who protest and move on, who observe and move on, or who are just
bystanders should not be treated as threats, criminals or enemies of the state.
Dean, I was reading about those circumstances just the other day. It was
pretty famous. History calls it the Boston Massacre. Nothing new here, Dean.
On the other hand one of the most famous non-violent photos of the Vietnam
War Era occurred near this event. It was at the U of M and it was photo of
those officers standing at perfect attention while some young female protester
put daisies in the ends of their rifle barrels.
I would hope that every officer who did any action during the event was
doing what they were under orders to do and that none of them were operating
out
of either fear or anger, which is what it appears Dean is accusing them of.
I have more faith in them than that. I would hope that any officer that
maced a protester was under orders to do that and that anyone that use
physical
force was using the force allowed by their superiors and under their best
judgement.
Dean, you do no credit to our fine officers if you make them out to be
fearful of the protesters. If anyone has issues with the police it is at the
command level, not the officer level.
Justifying the loss of civil liberties in pursuit of some punk thug that
intends to throw urine on someone and attempting to raise that punk thug to the
level of an international terrorist is what has many concerned. Saint Paul
PD searches out and catches far more dangerous people every day in our City
without the loss of our civil liberties. Or, attempting to disburse a crowd
and not having a clearly defined disburse route, concerns people. Or when it
was determined to use force. Those are command decisions, not officer
decisions.
Your cowardly assault on our officers adds nothing to the discussion.
JMONTOMEPPOF
Chuck Repke
Ward 2
In a message dated 9/8/2008 4:21:11 A.M. Central Daylight Time,
<email obscured> writes:
Jay,
The three categories you list below are super.
However, imagine you are the "police". Tensions are running high because
there is a mass of people here. You know from the briefing that some of those
in the mass have avowed to do major harm. You have been standing on your feet
all day and they are killing you. You see a flash of unexpected movement off
to your side. Simultaneously there are five people right in front of your
face shouting and waving their hands. Three of the ten flailing hands are
closed fists holding who knows what.
In an instant, how do YOU determine to which of your groups does each of
five people belong?
It is remarkable that more people were not injured.
Dean Sheldon,
SA Park
HI Chuck, Because I saw it and filmed it, there was restraint used on both sides (Police and Protesters) for the most part. However, there were some incidents that should concern our entire community regardless of your polictics. Does this look like Police restraint to you? Just asking for your honest opinion Chuck... You can find more video and interviews at: http://radiofreenation.blogspot.com I covered all 4 days, 10 hours a day. I was there and I witnessed, filmed and recorded the events as they unfolded. If you have news, contact us: 612-599-3030 I will answer your call.
To all (especially Bob Parker),
"While attacking Republicans is a good idea in most cases,... "
It is this kind of statement and attitude, along with all the other statements
leading up to the convention (e.g. puking, RNWC) that really built up a fear of
major violence occurring at the convention.
What did you reasonably expect? The City of St. Paul would have been severely
criticized if it had not beefed up security to meet an expected problem.
Remember, 50,000 people were expected/projected on Monday, even though only
5,000 - 10,000 people showed up. The city had to plan accordingly and expect
the unexpected. Maybe next time the police should sing Kumbaya as they stand
there. Would that make it more palatable to the protesters?
So if someone starts a web site talking about throwing urine bombs, attacking
Democrats (because "it's a good idea"), and in general disrupting the next DFL
4th Congressional District convention, what would your response be. You would
be the first in line demanding that the city protect you.
So an event that should have been positive for the city seems to have left
negative feelings in many. Look at yourself first in assessing blame. If you
want peace, reject the violence.
At first I responded privately to Martin, but the more I think about it I will say it publicly. This is the video that most of us have seen of a lone protester being pushed by officers with bicycles and then sprayed with mace or pepper spray and then pushed. If you haven't seen it look at it again. It appears to be police officers following orders. 1) Using the bike tires like they were had to be something they were told to do since they were all doing it. Somewhere in their training that has to have been approved or you wouldn't see that many of them doing it. 2) She offered her arms up to be arrested several times and they wouldn't arrest her; have to believe that was under orders. She doesn't want to back up and tries to stay in one place. It would appear to be pretty easy to cuff her. You have to believe that they were instructed to move, not arrest the crowd. 3) They continued to yell at her to keep moving; again this isn't people making independent judgements. Even when she is pushed and falls to the ground and puts her hands up again, their instructions are, get up and keep moving. These guys are following orders. They continue to do this even when their side of the line is not keeping up with the right side. So, I would conclude this to be a command decision situation like I said. If not you would have thought that one of these guys would have just gotten tired of her long before then and put cuffs on her. They appear to be under orders to push, prod, and mace people in a certain direction and to avoid arresting them. At least that is what it looks like to me. So, if you don't like what occurred in this video, the issue isn't "police out of control," this is a command decision that you have issues with. If you watch it again with that in mind, you can see where it might have been much better to have simply arrested her early on but that does not appear to be an option available to these guys at that point. JMONTOMEPPOF Chuck In a message dated 9/8/2008 9:57:11 A.M. Central Daylight Time, <email obscured> writes: HI Chuck, Because I saw it and filmed it, there was restraint used on both sides (Police and Protesters) for the most part. However, there were some incidents that should concern our entire community regardless of your polictics. Does this look like Police restraint to you? Just asking for your honest opinion Chuck... You can find more video and interviews at: http://radiofreenation.blogspot.com I covered all 4 days, 10 hours a day. I was there and I witnessed, filmed and recorded the events as they unfolded. If you have news, contact us: 612-599-3030 I will answer your call. Martin Owings http://radiofreenation.blogspot.com, Saint Paul Info about Martin Owings: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/henryhammer This topic's messages may be viewed at: http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/3q5a4bIQMvLyqany2L5TV0
Kudos to Chuck for putting responsibility where it belongs, but he
doesn't go quite far enough. I've been warned on the Minneapolis
forum for not staying local with RNC posts, but since this whole
question of leadership and where the blame for violations of folk's
civil liberties across the Metro, is steeped in our federal system
and the abuse of it by Republican leadership, I'll chance it in all
of our relevant E-Democracy forums today. It is local.
This follow up thread started by Dave Thune, the St. Paul city
council person whose area includes the Xcel to gather information
about what went wrong or right about how things were handled, seemed
like an appropriate place to post; it seems a local enough issue for
Minneapolis even though the epicenter was in Downtown St. Paul. There
is, in fact, a nexus from local to global in these matters.
I wept for those we lost on 9/11, and then cried over the specter
that our reactions to events raised and at the way the G.W. Bush
White House Administration addressed the dangers to our country every
day since. Today, in the aftermath of the RNC, I'm just angry. We
have no reason to trust Republicans about anything for a long, long
time and our hopes lie with the Democrats for now.
You can read much of the same sorts of stories before, during and
after the DNC that we have here now in St. Paul-Minneapolis -- there
is a reason for this and it is steeped in federalism and the abuse of
power running rampant in our country today where Republicans have
blurred or obliterated the line between patriotism and party fealty.
I find it hard to detail and enumerate all of that which is necessary
to state the case for this (others are doing it, so I'll spare my
take); I had to resort to poetry, again:
The barricades go down and all who felt at home and once belonged
To the place once called home, but transformed into something foreign;
Hundreds, once just as welcome here as any, grievously harmed and
wronged;
While gone are thousands whose dubious philosophy was brought to
harsh light again.
A morass of questions and inadequate answers flow from those who remain
And will plague those who care about and safeguard the promises of
our Constitution,
Torturing those who conjure up the enemy at home and would our
protection feign;
The niggling details unfold and tell the story of a plan hidden and
buried in fruition.
The groundswell of outrage rises and finds expression of those
promises enshrined,
Even as those who would shackle us to the whims of a would-be ruling
class;
Hear the voices of philosophers long dead who call us to cast off the
chains that bind,
And distort not the promise but rise to challenge the failed policies
of an ass.
Every change of power is granted through and by the people, in
revolutions
And in them, the spirit of our democratic republic lives, providing
our solutions.
Vote for Democrats and hold them to the promise of change, whatever
your party. We can find our way again and arrive at our sustainable
place in the world. Republicans can help, but they need time at the
woodshed until they see the errors of their ways, i.e., the madness
of Dubya and Company can end, but not now through their party; that
party has to change and talking about change and "fighting" is not
enough, and certainly wasn't that necessary in downtowns of
Minneapolis and St. Paul.
Lets not make this an issue of attacking the Republicans or Democrats. People who showed up to protest were doing it for more than one reason. Most of the people opposed the war or the way the current administration is running the country. Some of those who came to St. Paul did so to cause the police to react. These were the people who created the problem. I think we need to take a step back and wait until we get information the police had. I would think many opinions on this list would change when they learn what actually happened. Mike Fratto Payne Phalen Please help those who don't get enough to eat. http://oyh.org http://hungersolutions.org The future depends more on what we do between now and then Than what we did in the past.
...... Original Message .......
On Mon, 08 Sep 2008 13:32:54 -0500 Bill Kahn <email obscured>> wrote:
>... I'll chance it in all
>of our relevant E-Democracy forums today. It is local.
>
No, this post isn't "local" in focus.
A request to all -- posts to this forum need to have a focus upon St Paul
and/ or its residents. Diatribes against one party or another where the
linkage to St Paul is either non-existent or as tenuous as this one are
off-topic.
Rick Mons
Forum Manager
Chuck, this was a really good analysis of the very sad video, shot in St. Paul. For those of you who have not seen it, this is the link to tho FOX 9 video: It is a must see video! http://www.myfoxtwincities.com/myfox/MyFox/pages/sidebar_video.jsp?contentId=7364281&version=1&locale=EN-US As you can see, it probably is the most telling video out there and from the main stream media to boot. As I said in my letter to the Star Tribune, appearing in tomorrow's paper; http://www.startribune.com/opinion/letters/28029934.html?page=1&c=y ...."These police and other security forces appeared to go even beyond their orders and kept tear-gassing some protesters over and over. The tear gassing of a nonviolent citizen even once, I feel is unlawful and probably unconstitutional. I believe the security forces were led by someone or organization other than our local police. An investigation of this terror-like behavior is definitely in order and should be done by an outside group.".... It is also possible as, Chuck analytically suggests, that the police followed a"command decision" to continue to push and tear gas the poor young woman over and over. Either way, I hope Chuck agrees that an outside investigation is in order, as it appears that the Green Party is calling for. What do you think of this video? It was not a purely isolated incident, especially if the police were given a "command decision". Are you as outraged as I am? It only enforces the need to get the Republicans out of office and take back the Constitution. For edification, the paper cut parts of my original letter, one of which said; "A letter writer (on Saturday) called for both mayors' resignations. I do not believe this should be done, but the mayors need to tell us what person or organization told the police and security to use tear gas on unarmed and non-violent protesters." This would go a long way in answering the many questions that many of us have and clear the air some in the general understanding of what really caused the obvious overreaction (to put it mildly) of the police and other security forces. Gary Thompson
Stories from the RNC you didn't get from the "BIG" Media. Here is a sort of BEST OF with video, audio and recorded LIVE broadcasts. Interview of two Gentlemen who tackled a Tire Slashing Vandal on DAY ONE. http://radiofreenation.mypodcast.com/2008/09/RNC_2008_Bystanders_Tackle_Protester_Vandal-139166.html Audio Interview with Protester who was Pepper Sprayed for offering Police a Flower: http://radiofreenation.mypodcast.com/2008/09/Witnesses_Describe_Police_Violence-139172.html Interview with Citizen Mario who is Surprised by the show of FORCE by POLICE: http://radiofreenation.mypodcast.com/2008/09/Interview_with_Mario_at_RNC-139167.html A heavy show of force for TWO PUPPETS. http://radiofreenation.blogspot.com/2008/09/puppet-terrorists.html POOR PEOPLES MARCH VIDEO: Some incredible footage. http://radiofreenation.blogspot.com/2008/09/blog-post.html An Chruch Lady Cheers Protesters, Prays For Peace: http://radiofreenation.mypodcast.com/2008/09/An_Elderly_Women_Cheers_Protesters-139170.html AUDIO INTERVIEW Crystal - Very interesting perspectives on Democracy: http://radiofreenation.mypodcast.com/2008/09/Crystal_Interview_Day_2_at_the_RNC-139173.html Day Three Video Footage: http://radiofreenation.blogspot.com/2008/09/day-3-from-rnc.html RIOT POLICE and MOUNTED RIOT POLICE Rushed Into the Crowd, here is a description of what happened LIVE as it occurred: http://radiofreenation.mypodcast.com/2008/09/Police_and_Prostesters_Clash_at_the_Capitol-139171.html Protesters and POLICE on DAY FOUR: YOU MUST SEE THIS. http://radiofreenation.blogspot.com/2008/09/rnc-day-4-protesters-clash-with-police.html Martin Owings http://radiofreenation.blogspot.com If you have a story call me at 612.599.3030 I will answer the phone.
To Chuck Repke ---
I think your point is well taken, but in making it, you raise a larger issue.
As the events of the week unfolded, it seemed clear that police
strategy and tactics were guided by an unseen hand -- presumably the
Feds. I surmise they came in and during the training process,
dictated, among other things, that arrests would be minimized (for
non-violent expressions of civil disobedience, such as the woman in
this case) and instead, would rely on harassment, intimidation, and
physical retribution.
This is nothing new. To take but one of many examples from the past,
the first Selma to Montgomery march (1965) witnessed the same kind of
tactics.
The difference is that then, this kind of police brutality was met
with revulsion and castigation across the nation from both citizens
and political leaders. Now, it is met with profound apathy from
these same groups.
I think Mayor Coleman has reacted in a cold and calculated manner in
crafting his public response to these police excesses. Despite his
rhetoric assuring us that the police would act responsibly and
protect basic civil rights and liberties, I assume he took a
defensive and apologetic stance, thinking most voters will support
his position (he is up for reelection next year, right?). And he may
be right.
But for those of us with long memories, to hear his fear mongering
about violence and "outside agitators," and his blanket endorsement
of all police actions (in one interview he used the word "heroic"),
Chuck,
My post must not have been clear. I was in not trying to malign the police, in
fact just the opposite.
The point I was trying to make was that yes, there may have been multiple types
of people in those crowds, but there was no visible difference between a
passer-by and a domestic terrorists or anyone a gradation between the two
extremes. It is not like they wore different colored hats. The police are just
human not computer driven robots. We asked them to do a near impossible job to
correctly differentiate between the innocent, the bad guys, and the really bad
guys. And they were to do this usually in an instant under the most difficult
of work conditions. I doubt that most anyone on this list could have done as
good a job.
As I said, I am surprised the outcome was as good as it was.
The real cowards are the terrorists. They don't have the courage to identify
themselves. In fact their specific mode of operation is to try to hide within
the crowd to get as close to their target as possible before maiming and
destroying. They were the very reason all the force was needed to begin with.
And now I think about it, the activist made a HUGE tactical error by having
their march as close to the RNC as possible. They played right into the hands
of the terrorists and any rogue police. They provided the "cover" these rotten
apples needed. If instead, they had chosen a site miles from the RNC, say to
march around Lake Phalen, their message would have gotten much better press.
The permitting to march would have been easier. More folks would have come.
Driving and parking would have been much easier out there. And they would have
been miles from the real troublemakers. There would have been no mistaking who
were the real bad apples. The country would have seen just how peaceful they
were. And if any police or Fletcher were "planting" troublemakers downtown,
it would have been very obvious because the "demonstrators" were out at
Phalen!.
There could have been thousands of peaceful protesters at Lake Phalen while the
12 real law-breakers faced 2000 riot equipped police in downtown St. Paul.
Wouldn't that have made Homeland Security appear pretty silly to the country by
having thousands of police for a dozen troublemakers?
If indeed the intent of the activists was hold a peaceful march as well as to
show that George Bush and the Republicans had made a police state, they made a
huge tactical error by being right in the midst of the RNC.
Dean Sheldon
SA Park
----- Original Message -----
From: <email obscured>
To: <email obscured>
Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 9:12 AM
Subject: Re: [SPIF] after assessment
Dean, I was reading about those circumstances just the other day. It was
pretty famous. History calls it the Boston Massacre. Nothing new here,
Dean.
Dean Sheldon,
You are concerned that the police had a very difficult time distinguishing
between peaceful protesters and those who intended some sort of harm. You even
say "It's not like they some different sort of hats." In reality, there were a
number of people with clearly distinguishable hats and so on, like medics,
legal observers and members of the Minnesota Peace Team. Each of these groups
had at least some members arrested and/or pepper sprayed. But here's an even
easier way to go: How about the police arrest people doing something illegal
and police leave people alone when they are simply marching or exercising their
simple free speech! And how about police arrest people who are doing something
illegal instead of torturing them with tasers or pepper spray or other chemical
weapons! That way the judge can do the judging and the police can do the
enforcing. Sort of a simple division of labor, in my opinion.
As for the concern about people hiding their identities, I think you are a bit
confused. There were very few people against the Republican National
Convention who wore disguises by covering their faces with bandanas and so on.
There were, on the other hand, literally thousands of storm troopers who
displayed neither personal identification nor unit identification. Last week,
it was near impossible to figure out who was police (and from what city or even
state), who was state troopers, who was ICE or Secret Service or Homeland
Security or private contractors. They all wore black storm trooper outfits. I
couldn't even usually identify what gender these folks were. Those where the
ones, in my opinion, who escaped responsibility and accountability by hiding
their identity behind paramilitary uniforms.
First and foremost there cannot ever be unidentifiable police. I remember when MLK was shot the St Police left Selby-Dale area - except for 1 off-duty juvenile office who immediately went into the area. Later in the week the uniforms did surround some events and took their badges off. I had a long talk with that juvenile office - that was an easy conversation because it was my father - Phil Leier 32 year officer and later Chief at Rush City. Phil told me he was ashamed of those who took off their badges. For him, the only acceptable policing was highly visible and accountable. He thought about resigning after that. Bruce Leier Powderhorn Commit random acts of literacy! Read & Release at http://www.bookcrossing.com/friend/agitator
Thanks, Dave.
A few things come to mind:
- It seems there is plenty of independent video evidence to support
The People's claims. There is also the iSpy cameras that we better have
access to. Hopefully someone can collect it all in one place and
practically recreate the entire week. If someone claims to have seen a
Poop Bomb flung from the grassy knoll, well, then let's see the video
proof. If someone says a planted anarchist did damage and then hid behind
the police, show me the video. Many incidents will have been taped from
several angles. A spreadsheet with Cameraperson, Date, Time(s), Location,
Description, ... columns could list all the video assets. Some insane
person could rent a huge TV and we could have Protest In The Park
showings.
- Everyone who got sprayed or otherwise assaulted should be
interviewed. With the aforementioned video catalog, they should be able
to pick themselves out on one or more recordings. Guilty protestors can
probably easily be indentified. If guilty security forces don't step
forward, then "the whole class should suffer" until they do.
- I had a bad feeling when Erin Dady seemed to be leading the show
early on, like she knew what was best for all of us. In hindsight, her
predictions of an economic windfall were highly inaccurate. On what data
was her rosy prediction based? In her defense, she may not have known
about the Fortress and Fences. But when she vanished into thin air
several weeks ago, I was relieved and not surprised. It was a bad omen
from the start that this thing was being driven by the lust for money
instead of the love of country. She was just doing her job, and doing
what she was told, so I don't hold it against her personally. None of us
had done any of this before so it was very hard to know how to proceed.
- The disconnect between the City Departments really became evident.
Aren't there any "cross-functional teams" these days? Public Works DID
work with Parks & Rec, but DSI seemed to show up too late, and sometimes
with a vengenace. When the electrical inspector came to the Blue Tube
truck, instead of saying "get all your stuff ON the truck like we
discussed," she said "you need a permit." We sorted it out, but I was
ready to tell her she'd be in more trouble than me if she pressed the
issue. She epitomized why people get so frustrated with DSI. Parks & Rec
should be commended. They were very helpful to us and really spruced up
our public realm. I'd like to particularly thank <long list of City folks
deleted> ... and more. They either helped out immensely, were morally
supportive, or at least didn't cause problems for us. I can't really
think of any City person who gave me a hard time (that I didn't deserve).
I'm more comfortable than ever about our town - it's Washington that
really gives me the creeps now.
- It appears Matt Bostrom was as misled as anyone. I'm still giving
him the benefit of the doubt. The hard and soft perimeters kept growing
and growing, and when more and more streets and bridges closed, people
couldn't get in, out, or around (adding to the economic woes). Agent
Kirkwood disappeared months ago and should be held accountable. At least
we have his name, I think. All the people calling the shots should be
held accountable and give statements. This was not about an al-Qaeda
threat; it was Americans on Americans. As we all seem to be concluding,
orders came from unknown sources who we may never know. There's OUR
police and then there's the Secret Police, which is the source of most if
not all of my distrust and anger. That is about as un-American as it
gets, and on what we really should focus most of this "investigation." We
should also get all the iSpy recordings and send them to any city
considering hosting one of these things.
- I guess being a Twin City hurt more than helped this time. It was
very convenient for visitors to just take their bus to Mpls and blend in
to the crowd over there. No RNC delegate in their right mind... Let me
rephrase that... Who on earth would want to pass through a prison-like
wall into a blue neighborhood they know nothing about? I bet if Dave
Cossetta knew what his block was going to look like he would never have
made the mistaken investment he did. If anything, this debacle has earned
the CoC, BOMA, and similar groups some rare sympathy. Even though her
clothes were super expensive, I was hoping that woman's boutique in the
Lawson Bldg would do well. But no. I'd be curious to see where all the
money did go, from Lamers Coaches (Wisconsin?) to Crowne Plaza to...
- The Rowleys ran into more hassles than they deserved. They and we
felt that events like The Taste and The Irish Fayre had been given
preferential treatment. And the CAAPB seemed to forget what they have let
others do in the past. Sen. Sandy Pappas standing up to Carol Molnau is
one of the highlights of this long, strange trip. One of the lowlights
came minutes earlier when Rep. Morrie Lanning said something like "Public
land was never meant to be used for political speech." The CAAPB staff
was great (Paul Mandell is a gem), as were half the Board members and
their advisors.
That's enough for now.
I've attached the "Quotes" PowerPoint show, before is was jazzed up and
music added. (Actually, music was never added - I just played iTunes
"live" as appropriate.) I'd be curious to hear from The Right how they
think these Quotes are hateful, Communist, anti-American, scummy, or any
of the other adjectives they thoughtlessly hurl. Some day I'd like to
compile everything we showed (plus the outtakes) and get it out to the
masses somehow.
AMH
Andrew M. Hine
3M IATD
Industrial Adhesives & Tapes Division
3M Center 230-1F-35
St. Paul MN
55144-1000
USA
<email obscured>
Tel: (651) 733-1070
Fax: (651) 737-2003
"dave thune" <email obscured>>
09/06/2008 09:34 AM
To
"St. Paul Issues Forum" <email obscured>>
cc
Subject
[SPIF] after assessment
The following file was added to this topic:
I personally intend to take a break from discussing the RNC on SPIF,
but before I do, there's one more observation I feel I must address to
provide some reasonable balance as I close out the last couple weeks
of my blathering about last week's circus in my backyard.
So much law enforcement action around the RNC falls into a grey area
where the public doesn't have enough information to even begin to make
a judgement. And so some try to reach conclusions based on partial
information - and the results aren't always pretty. The courts will,
inevitably, sort some of this out.
And yet, as one filters through reports, one does notice patterns that
suggest certain policy directions. And there is one area that already
shows some very disconcerting signs: government dealings with media,
especially independent media. Most significant, and perhaps most
instructive, is the way the government dealt with I-Witness video.
Several news reports describe how the St. Paul home where I-Witness
video reporters were staying on Iglehart Avenue was the subject of a
pre-convention raid. It was reported that raid was directed by
Sheriff Robert Fletcher. But that raid turned up nothing, at least as
far as the public was informed.
Then, later in the week, the office that I-Witness Video was operating
out of - near the corner of Selby and Snelling - was raided by
police. Multiple reports indicated the raid was in response to an
alleged "hostage" situation. Reports suggested that "hostage
situation" proved completely bogus, and seemed to provide cover for
police to enter in a way that would be otherwise illegal. Those
reports also indicated that police contacted the landlord, in what
many described as an attempt to get the landlord to kick I-Witness
Video out of the building.
SO WHY would law enforcement care so much about I-Witness video? I-
Witness video was made famous for taking hundreds of tapes of footage
of protests during the 2004 Republican National Convention. According
to NPR and others, the video evidence provided by I-Witness Video was
able to exonerate over 400 people for alleged crimes during the 2004
convention.
Hmmmmm.
We can't jump to conclusions, but for anyone with some investigative
sense, some initial patterns do seem to emerge - patterns which
deserve exploration.
Combine the treatment of I-Witness Video with other reports. Combine
it with the way law enforcement seemed unconcerned about providing a
way to differentiate media from protesters - media and protesters were
all arrested together on several occasions. Combine it with the
insulting suggestion made by multiple public officials that reporters
should have maybe "embedded" themselves into police response units.
(When did my neighborhood become a bona-fide war zone?) Combine it
with the fact that officers had their badges covered up, despite the
promises recounted by Charlie Underwood and others. And one begins to
get the sense that in the police response, police accountability may
have been the first victim of the 2008 Republican National
Convention. What advocates actively promoted such an undemocratic
approach should be a major avenue of inquiry in the coming months.
At this point, it seems likely there were some very real threats law
enforcement had to be particularly concerned about. But it seems at
least as likely that some forces in the law enforcement community were
intent on eliminating key mechanisms of accountability.
There's not a ton we can know right now beyond these basic reports
about media treatment. But to Councilmember Thune's question, the
patterns highlighted by these basic reports deserve some serious
consideration as we review our experiences with the 2008 Republican
National Convention.
And now I'm done with my blathering. Be well.
Bob
Did anyone else notice that there was NO mention of "bridge"? Certainly an
icon of the failure of republican cost cutting.
Good points Bob; there is little question that the treatment of I-Witness
was a low point of the St. Paul reception of the convention. They were St.
Paul police from the video I saw and they broke into the house in two
separate places and, apparently, without a warrant except for a flawed one.
I believe I also saw at one of the 10:00 a.m. police news conferences, the
chief say that the police were not getting outside direction. I seriously
question that entire picture. I actually think the police at the scene on
Iglehart would not have broken and entered in that circumstannce without
prodding from somewhere. The chief may have just been a tool but it must
have come from or though that general direction.
I signed a petition going around today asking for an official investigation.
It is important, but not so important as to take us up completely. I believe
things have gotten so bad in America that we should be wary of these off-
point distractions to the extent of forgetting we may also be engaged in the
last best chance to get rid of an administration that is extremely dangerous
to all Americans. I do want to know where all this was coming from and
whether any of those 'self called anarchists' wound up in jail. But let's
keep our eyes on the prize, just in the hope that it may be a prize.
Go Obama, Beat the Bushies!
Al Uhl, downtown
Bob, it's not exactly "jumping" to conclusions to suggest that police
harassment of media organizations, especially those small, independents like
I-Witness, was deliberate, unethical, and presumably illegal. While doing legal
observer duty, I took a report from another independent media group that was
also targeted by police, with a number of swat officers driven around the
parking lot where their media van was located, and St. Paul cops driving by on
several occasions to ask routine questions that had no relevance to the work
these folks were doing (who had permission to park where they were located.)
I don't want to say more because the case could well end up in litigation, but
I checked out the group's website and saw lots of footage from both Denver and
here that did not portray law enforcement in the way they'd hope, including
that footage from day 1 where the bicycle cops clashed with protestors
(arguably forced the confrontation) downtown. Naturally, cops don't want
videographers getting them on tape knocking people down, macing them without
reasonable provocation, etc., and the fact that our own St. Paul cops were used
to carry out these acts of harassment is a disservice to everyone. If you
witnessed a cop behave badly, are you just supposed to say, "gee, I know you
were just doing your job, so we'll let bygones be bygones"? I know many St.
Paul cops, and have respect for just about every one of them. But emotions are
going to be raw around here for a while. We may be able to empathize with the
fact that officers faced the unfair choice of having to carry out orders with
which they may have disagreed, but we don't really know whether this was
assigned or voluntary duty. Every force has those who are looking to do
violence, so something like the RNC does create the climate for the bad apples
to get away with the kind of crap that we witnessed. That the messages from our
elected officials continue to keep focusing on how everybody did a great job in
law enforcement when we know the truth on the ground says otherwise, not to
mention the completely illegitimate arrests of members of the media, such as
Amy Goodman and her producers from Democracy Now!, is disheartening.
Tom Goldstein
Hamline-Midway
On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 1:26 AM, Tom Goldstein/EFQ
<email obscured>> wrote:
> such as Amy Goodman and her producers from Democracy Now!, is disheartening.
We are still hung up on Amy Goodman being arrested? Outside of hard
core liberals no one knows who Amy Goodman is. Seriously.
John Harris
webber-camden, mpls
http://www.nlgminnesota.org/rnc2008 www.minnlawyer.com/article.cfm/2008/07/28/ http://coldsnaplegal.wordpress.com/ http://www.nlgminnesota.org/rnc2008 Attention RNC 08 Arrestees and Allies! Please attend this important upcoming meeting! This will be a chance for you to talk to lawyers and organize your legal defense, as well as receive information about court solidarity plans. Bring your citation if you have it. General Arrestee Meeting When: Sunday, September 14th at 4pm Where: Walker Church (3104 16th Ave S, Minneapolis) http://www.minnlawyer.com/article.cfm?recid=78518 "The RNC — which is expected to draw 45,000 attendees — is a big stage for an upstart activist group to find itself on, so Coldsnap is also coordinating with similar out-of-town collectives such as the Midnight Special Law Collective of Oakland, Calif., and the Washington, D.C., Justice & Solidarity Collective, bringing in members from those groups to create a strong contingent of people used to dealing with crowds of protesters, police and the heated situations that can arise when the two collide." "Along with support from other activist organizations, Coldsnap works with the Minnesota chapter of the National Lawyers’ Guild, an activist legal/bar association that will help provide legal support to RNC protesters." "Coldsnap members say they appreciate the support they’re getting from the legal community, both in anticipation of the RNC and beyond." No we don't. "Coldsnap Legal Collective was founded in January 2008 by Becky and Natalia, a pair of longtime Minneapolis activists who asked that Minnesota Lawyer not publish their surnames. " Nice. "I don't want to say more because the case could well end up in litigation" What does that mean Tom? You are only a school board member right? The green hat legal observers sold themselves as peace keepers. In fact many did not know or would not answer what the organization is about. Now they are doing a complete 180 and actively suing the government, costing us money, which was not what they represented to the public. What is the connection of Coldsnap and The Neighborhood Justice Center http://www.njcinc.org/ ? http://www.nlgminnesota.org/rnc2008 http://www.minnlawyer.com/article.cfm?recid=78518 http://coldsnaplegal.wordpress.com/ http://www.njcinc.org Here they are in action, with Michael Cavlan's social skills on display: http://restraininorder.blogspot.com/2008/09/fine-representatives-of-legal.html This group will cost us money. Jamie Delton Summit U
So we should worry about repression of journalists only if they are
famous?
Chip Peterson
Mac Groveland
I personally would offer my input as being the issue of a City Council Member
publicly criticizing the police forces of his own city, state and county on the
eve of the RNC. These comments were unprofessional and reckless and should have
been saved for an appropriate time as the comments were premature and
potentially costly in relation to the support and very safety of our public
safety officials. While I support these comments in hind sight I cannot help
but feel outraged that a City Council Member could not show at least some
restraint in his comments and actions for the greater good of the community.
Holding those very comments for post-RNC discussions (such as this) would have
been prudent and a much more sensible and responsible use of ones position. Bad
form Mr Thune. Very bad form.
Now, just tonight, I understand that it is not a professional we are dealing
with as Mr Thune's public and petty displays of irresponsibility continue on in
the form of a profanity laced email proven to be from his own email and in no
way denied by Mr. Thune himself. Indeed, he stood behind his email and further
shown his elitest and fully unacceptable and unproffesional demeanor. These
latest actions make me fully understand the rational or lack there-of as
related to his pre-RNC etiquette. You might think a man who believes in his
convictions while understanding and accepting his civic position, duties and
responsibilities would be capable of rising above such petty displays in both
instances. An incorrect assumption indeed.
While others thank you for this venue to have a City Official present their
views and have their concerns potentially adderssed if not at least "heard" I,
for one, will say "No Thanks". And shame on you.
In a previous comment, a commenter was taking issue with "City Council Member
publicly criticizing the police forces of his own city, state and county on the
eve of the RNC."
That sounds dangerously like the blue code of silence, where cops can break the
law freely. As we have found out that there is no "911" to call if the police
break the law. Our only only hope to hold back lawbreaking police is when 1)
citizen journalists report what they see 2) normal citizens pay attention and
check out what is happening and 3) our elected officials speak up.
Silence supports those who do wrong, always has, always will! If we want to
live in a Democracy, we can never stand silent when wrongs happen. Open
discussion is the only way to find out what is really happening.
No blue code of silence ever!
Grace Kelly nicknamed Kelly
Curmudgeon In Merriam Park
I fully support Dave Thune.
I find the comments below supportive of censorship, the establishment, the
powers that be, and of a police state. If everyone thought this way
there'd be no democracy in this country. Bush and the neo-cons and the
corporations and the major media don't want democracy; neither did the RNC
event or its backers (eg KSTP's Hubbard).
Alas, comments like those below get all the major media esposure; and most
of the elected local officials either buy it or are cowering in fear of
retribution. Kudos to Thune.
One used to wonder how Germany fell prey to Naziism - no longer. Take what
happened here, crank it up a few notches, get the right united across the
country, and we're in it, hell on earth.
http://www.minnesotademocratsexposed.com/2008/09/12/councilmember-dave-thune-sends-profane-e-mail-from-official-city-account/ St. Paul business owner Mike Costello sent this e-mail to St. Paul Councilman David Thune: “[e-mail redacted] 09/02/08 8:42 PM after what i saw in st paul tonight,with your non violent protestors,you need to resign,you are a disgrace to the city of st paul, [name redacted]” Source: E-mail sent to Councilman Dave Thune, September 2, 2008 Please note the vulgar, offensive and totally inappropriate e-mail sent by Thune’s from his official e-mail account in response to Costello’s e-mail: From: <email obscured> To: [e-mail redacted] Sent: 9/3/2008 7:01:10 A.M. Central Daylight Time Subj: Re: (no subject) f[***] you you little p dt What possible explanation can a sitting councilman offer for this abuse of a constituent? For over a year Dave Thune clearly sided with violent anarchists and not with a peaceful protest process. He never once advised any protester to obey boundaries, permits, and procedure and not to be violent. All this support of violence at the expense of his own constituents. He re-opened a violent group's anti-RNC HQ in a residential neighborhood supported by despicable oafs from the Lawyers Guild. Jamie Delton Summit U
If memory serves me right (granted theres room for doubt here) Costello was one of the people that were frothing at the mouth about Thune's corageous move to ban smoking in St. Paul's restuarants. Some history would explain Costello's ridiculous attack on Thune's work to protect civil liberties and hold public officials accountable. Great job on both scores, Dave; the smoking ban and the call for accountability. I'm glad you're one of our voices in city hall! caty royce south minneapolis, ex selbyite On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 3:09 AM, Jamie Delton <email obscured>> wrote: > > http://www.minnesotademocratsexposed.com/2008/09/12/councilmember-dave-thune-sends-profane-e-mail-from-official-city-account/
On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 7:29 AM, cathleen royce <email obscured>> wrote:
> If memory serves me right (granted theres room for doubt here) Costello was
> one of the people that were frothing at the mouth about Thune's corageous
> move to ban smoking in St. Paul's restuarants. Some history would explain
> Costello's ridiculous attack on Thune's work to protect civil liberties and
> hold public officials accountable.
Rediculous or not public officials should be able to take criticism
better than this.
Would Thune have said the same thing if Costello was in his office?
On the phone? On the street?
Those of you on the left sure do seem to have a lot of hate built up
for those that disagree with you. It isn't healthy.
John Harris
webber-camden, mpls
john, that would be "rIdiculous" and there is absolutely no hate in my soul
for anyone and certainly none show in my message. be well, caty
Let's put all of this in perspective Mike Costello is a bar owner in Saint Paul that has contributed monies to Thune's opponents. This is not some unknown business owner to Mr Thune this is someone who had pictures of Dave Thune with slash marks across his face on the doors and walls of his business establishment. This is someone who hates Dave's leadership on the smoking issue. If you go to his bar website as of last night at least he still had the republican elephant on all of the pages and I am sure Mr Costello was extremely frustrated that he had lost money on the Republican Convention. So, if you bet on the GOP convention and you lost money on it, and you were a Republican from Sunfish Lake who would you blame? Simple DAVE THUNE. Hell, Mike's been blaming Dave for his poor business for almost five years now. So, when Thune get's the email from Mike suggesting that since Mike is once again a business failure and this time it is because Dave has stood up for people's first amendment rights, one can understand why Dave wouldn't have taken the message as being from a "business person," but rather from a long time political opponent. JMONTOMEPPOF Chuck Repke In a message dated 9/12/2008 3:09:55 A.M. Central Daylight Time, <email obscured> writes: http://www.minnesotademocratsexposed.com/2008/09/12/councilmember-dave-thune-s ends-profane-e-mail-from-official-city-account/ St. Paul business owner Mike Costello sent this e-mail to St. Paul Councilman David Thune: [e-mail redacted] 09/02/08 8:42 PM after what i saw in st paul tonight,with your non violent protestors,you need to resign,you are a disgrace to the city of st paul, [name redacted] Source: E-mail sent to Councilman Dave Thune, September 2, 2008 Please note the vulgar, offensive and totally inappropriate e-mail sent by Thunes from his official e-mail account in response to Costellos e-mail: From: <email obscured> To: [e-mail redacted] Sent: 9/3/2008 7:01:10 A.M. Central Daylight Time Subj: Re: (no subject) f[***] you you little p dt What possible explanation can a sitting councilman offer for this abuse of a constituent? For over a year Dave Thune clearly sided with violent anarchists and not with a peaceful protest process. He never once advised any protester to obey boundaries, permits, and procedure and not to be violent. All this support of violence at the expense of his own constituents. He re-opened a violent group's anti-RNC HQ in a residential neighborhood supported by despicable oafs from the Lawyers Guild. Jamie Delton Summit U Jamie Delton Summit University, St. Paul Info about Jamie Delton: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/deltonjamie This topic's messages may be viewed at: http://forums.e-democracy.org/r/topic/6jPQrWKWm4g6FR7knTixZZ
This hate accusation seems to be a major theme in accusations about
Democratic folks by Minnesota Republicans. Certainly there seems to
be a great deal of bad feeling related to the early adoption of a
smoking ban in the City of St. Paul, so I would tend to agree with
Caty and think the exchange between David Thune and Mike Costello has
less to do with partisan hate or outrage over RNC behavior than
perceptions about the plain old economics of the RNC for local
business. That Michael Brodkorb would seize on such an exchange is
certainly not surprising, but having it end up here in a discussion
thread sort of helps define what the Republican Party is all about in
Minnesota; these folks are just lucky they live here in the land of
nice.
Costello's would seem to be different from the norm as far as St.
Paul hospitality businesses go, i.e., they don't appear to try to be
all things to all people or else have a clear and strong niche that
doesn't include folks who protest or those who support the rights to
do so. Mike doesn't strike me as all that nice or as having much
business acumen. In any case, I won't be walking or crawling into
Costello's on Tuesday night or any time in the future. Anybody else
can patronize them if they like because, after all, it is, or was, a
free country; at least it is in St. Paul Minneapolis when the RNC is
not in town.
We really have to have a good look, hard and long, at the excess of
the Republican notion of homeland security and how it affects
American democracy. Dave Thune's had a start here on this thread, but
he appears to have some telling opposition from Republican folks.
Go back and re-read the poster's comments about the councilman's actions. He
did not say Mr. Thune should not speak out. He did say the timing, "on the eve
of the RNC", and in another instance the vulgarity of Mr. Thune's official
comments are not what is expected of an elected St. Paul City Council member.
He stated Mr. Thune's actions are an embarrassment to all of us St. Paul
residents.
I agree with him.
Dean Sheldon
SA Park
----- Original Message -----
From: Grace Kelly (nicknamed Kelly)
To: St. Paul Issues Forum
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2008 10:54 PM
Subject: Re: [SPIF] after assessment
In a previous comment, a commenter was taking issue with "City Council Member
publicly criticizing the police forces of his own city, state and county on
the
eve of the RNC."
That sounds dangerously like the blue code of silence, where cops can break
the law freely. on to: <email obscured>
Oh please spare me the nazi and censorship comments. Please reread the post
again.
My statement is NOT directed at his thoughts or message in any way. I even
mention that, in hindsight, I cannot fully disagree with what I believe is his
beliefs on the issue. What I AM stating is that, in his position as a City
Council Member of this city, the host city of the event, he should hold himself
and be held by the public, to a higher standard of responsibility and ethics.
He should have held his opinions on the police actions until after the RNC
ended and for a forum much more suited to his position. He had no need in
making his statements public other then to encite. He could do far more behind
closed doors and again, once all was said and done. His actions were reckless
and even potentially dangerous to the very people he answers to by undermining
the police. Agree or Disagree with the actions all you want. Speak out on it
all you want when its appropriate. But your first duty is to the people of the
city you were elected to represent. This is where he failed and should
apologize at a minimum to the officers directly and, taking the further issue
into account, even step down and join an organization more suited to his
emotional and/or reckless outbursts.
To offer your own police forces the benefit of doubt as a City Council Member
and withholding public condemnation for "the right place" and "the right time"
is NOT even close to your knee jerk reactionary tripe. "Blue code of silence"
and "censorship". Please.
John, I can't condone what is reported that Thune wrote. However, lets get one thing on the table. It seems that the messages that contain anything close to hate comes from posters that espouse the Conservative point of view. Generally, those on the left are open to other points of view. Its the only way to refine your position. On the other hand, very few people who post points of view from the right seem to be so closed minded. Look at the issues regarding the RNC. We live in a country that has a Constitution. Even though the President and his minions have violated many aspects of it in the guise of Homeland Security, it doesn't mean we should allow it in our back yard. We have a right to free speech. Yes it stops when you attempt to cause injury to persons or property. But we still have the right to freely espouse what we think. This first amendmest has never been questioned unlike the interpretation of the right to bear arms in the second amendment. Yet the right seems to think we don't have the right to protest. Yet there are quite a few posters who seem to think that because a few, relatively speaking, protesters intended to cause damage and injury that the police had the right to infringe on their first amendment right. Then there are mostly the same posters who claim the police were right in their reaction to plain citizens on the street. We do not have to submit to search by police without a warrant. Yet there are more than a couple of incidents where police demanded someone show them the contents of a backpack etc. Of course the most agresis action by some police officers was the intentional injury of a suspect, already in cuffs, by spraying them with mace or pepper spray or slaming their heads into the sidewalk. It is our right and obligation to object to this. Yet we seem to hear from the right that the police had the right to do this. Mike Fratto Payne Phalen Please help those who don't get enough to eat. http://oyh.org http://hungersolutions.org The future depends more on what we do between now and then Than what we did in the past.
Initially, I thought that it would be best for me to stay out of this fray, since I wanted nothing to do with the RNC in the first place and accordingly, left town for its entire run. I left, because my pre assessment of the RNC was that it would be a dismal mess, particularly for downtown residents that were living close to the convention site: It was. Ultimately, the blame should be laid at the mayor's feet. In his own words, one of the key accomplishments of his first two years in office was this convention: First Item - Winning the opportunity to host the 2008 Republican National Convention over larger cities, including Cleveland, New York City, and Tampa-St. Petersburg. http://www.stpaul.gov/DocumentView.asp ... I respect great politicians, without regard to their political affiliation. Truman was a great president and I am sure that you all remember where he believed "the buck should stop." Where am I coming from on all of this? Well, first, I happened to be in New York a couple of days for business during the 2004 RNC and it was a awful. And if it was bad getting around in New York, remember, its Central Park is bigger than Saint Paul's entire downtown, so it was foreordained to be that much worse here. Second, New York has a city police force of 38,000 officers, of which 10,000 were deployed to the RNC. There were 2,000 arrests during the 2004 RNC in New York. Saint Paul deployed 3,500 officers and the City's entire police force is less than 25% of the total number of officers deployed. If New York could not control its own officers? Post assessment: A wise man learns from the mistakes of others, so run for your lives the next time something like this is suggested. As for the Thune matter, Cicero said that "flies do not bother a lion." Thune is no lion.
In a message dated 9/12/2008 8:57:31 A.M. Central Daylight Time, <email obscured> writes: He should have held his opinions on the police actions until after the RNC ended and for a forum much more suited to his position Let's remember again what happened. Sheriff Fletcher led a raid into a hall on Smith Avenue in Thune's ward and shut the building down for building code violations. An action that is not usually done by the City of Saint Paul Police Department or the Ramsey County Sheriff's office. Code violations are handled by the City's Department of Safety and Inspections. Thune asked the head of DSI to determine if there were code violations or if this hall could continue to be rented. It was determined that the hall could be rented. If Thune would not have acted when he did and speak out at that moment then those citizens who were intending to use the hall to organize in protest to the convention would not have been able to do so. They would have lost this location to freely assemble and to freely associate. It is reasonably clear that was the Sheriff's intent. He was destroying the command and control of the anarchist and domestic terrorist... Well, maybe he was and maybe he wasn't but we have the courts to determine that. Not Lord Fletcher. If Thune wouldn't have opened his mouth and subjected himself to the abuse that will now come his way, a little piece of all of our civil liberties would have been lost. But, they weren't lost. The building was allowed to be rented and people were able to meet there. And it didn't stop the police from doing their work. It is that one person who stands up to the tank that makes a difference and I will always be proud to have once worked for Thune. JMONTOMEPPOF Chuck Repke **************Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a new fashion blog, plus the latest fall trends and hair styles at StyleList.com. (http://www.stylelist.com/trends?ncid=aolsty00050000000014)
Much has been written about Councilman Thune's using the "f-bomb" on his office
computer.
I remember a certain vice president using the same language on the floor of the
U.S. Senate a few months back. I don't seem to remember much outrage about
that moment. In fact, I remember how Cheney was lauded as being quite frank
and plain-spoken and open with his feelings. Hmmmm....
But for a real contrast, try this one: Case number one, you send an annoying
email to a St Paul city councilman and he responds with the f-bomb. Case
number two, you are a beautiful 21-year-old girl following police orders and
you get drenched with pepper-spray when you glance at the storm trooper in
front of Mickey's Diner.
So a couple of weekends ago, about 200 people had Fletcher's goons draw guns on
them for no reason. And last week a couple of hundred folks got drenched with
chemical weapons.
Which action do YOU think is worse?
If Mike Costello is so outraged by an ancient Celtic expression, would he be
better pleased to receive a face-full of OC gas, which is banned in
international warfare?
On Fri, Sep 12, 2008 at 2:39 PM, Charley Underwood
<email obscured>> wrote:
> Case number two, you are a beautiful 21-year-old girl following police orders
and you get drenched with pepper-spray when you glance at the storm trooper in
front of Mickey's Diner.
>
> So a couple of weekends ago, about 200 people had Fletcher's goons draw guns
on them for no reason. And last week a couple of hundred folks got drenched
with chemical weapons.
>
> Which action do YOU think is worse?
>
> If Mike Costello is so outraged by an ancient Celtic expression, would he be
better pleased to receive a face-full of OC gas, which is banned in
international warfare?
>
According to Charley's logic, as long as your offense isn't as bad as
pepper spray in the face it's ok. So boys and girls, if you want to
go downtown and be "aggressive" with the opposite sex, it's ok, it's
not like you are spraying them with mace.
John Harris
webber-camden, mpls
who believes that two wrongs don't make a right
JAMIE DELTON
What possible explanation can a sitting councilman offer for this abuse of
a constituent?
(AMH - Costello has abused and antagonized Thune for years. Thune's
constituents live or work in Ward Two, not Sunfish Lake or Selby Avenue)
For over a year Dave Thune clearly sided with violent anarchists and not
with a peaceful protest process.
(AMH - This is a lie, and there is absolutely no proof that it is not a
lie. "Clearly"?!)
He never once advised any protester to obey boundaries, permits, and
procedure and not to be violent.
(AMH - Another outright lie. He told me to my face not to launch
Projectiles For Peace, for example, and often advised me and other people
on numerous matters. Never has he condoned violence.)
All this support of violence at the expense of his own constituents.
(AMH - Again, there was no support of violence, only of Consitutional
Rights. The fences and Feds were more of an expense for local businesses
than any protestors. By far, the most successful business was actually
the one that catered to the protestors.)
He re-opened a violent group's anti-RNC HQ in a residential neighborhood
supported by despicable oafs from the Lawyers Guild.
(AMH - The Lawyer's Guild volunteers bravely protected people's rights.
Your name-calling is not surprising, but again, this is a lie. They were
neither despicable nor oafish.)
JOHN HARRIS
Those of you on the left sure do seem to have a lot of hate built up for
those that disagree with you. It isn't healthy.
(AMH - Most of us simply cannot tolerate all the lies and hypocrisy. Lying
is not healthy either, nor is it moral or right. Ignoring the truth is
not only unhealthy, it can be deadly. Apparently the Right is so detached
from reality that they can't tolerate Thune's right to tell someone to F
Off but think it's perfectly OK for the President to flip the bird or for
the VP to tell a Senator to F Off. If that's not a double standard I
don't know what is. During a TBM tribute to our troops last week, it was
a hateful Right Winger who told us something like "the only good liberal
is a dead liberal." All we were doing was telling the truth, and they
couldn't face it. As much as the protesters were angry with the RNC, they
did not exhibit hatred for anyone or anything.)
DEAN SHELDON
He did say the timing, "on the eve of the RNC", and in another instance
the vulgarity of Mr. Thune's official comments are not what is expected of
an elected St. Paul City Council member. He stated Mr. Thune's actions
are an embarrassment to all of us St. Paul residents.
(AMH - Speak for yourself. "All of us" do not agree with you. Many of
us DO expect electeds to speak out, at any time. Many of us are proud of
those who do, and are embarrassed when they say nothing. It sounds as
though Saint Paul's Right would rather we all just shut up and take
whatever the Feds dish out.)
WAYNE RYDER
What I AM stating is that, in his position as a City Council Member of
this city, the host city of the event, he should hold himself and be held
by the public, to a higher standard of responsibility and ethics.
(AMH - And he has, by standing up for people's rights. It's so easy for
you to get bent out of shape over someone swearing at an antagonistic,
resentful person who constantly puts off would-be customers, yet it's so
hard for you to even begin to worry about the erosion of EVERYONE's civil
liberties. That's is what is so vulgar here. If you want to see the
RNC's "high standard of responsibility and ethics," have I got a DVD for
you. Again, another glaring example of the Right's double standards.)
How can you guys even sleep, worrying and screaming about one F bomb while
others are getting their lives and limbs torn apart by real bombs? How do
you think an American soldier or an Iraqi citizen would feel if s/he knew
you were this petty and childish? This is the most unmanly, un-American
display of misplaced angst I have witnessed in ages. To paraphrase, "Your
actions are an embarrassment to many of us St. Paul residents"
What is it exactly that Saint Paul Conservatives are FOR? I thought they
were for less government, but they seem to support unidentifiable Homeland
Security Forces running roughshod over our city. I thought they were for
fiscal responsibility, but there's been no talk about the deficit, the
amount of money being spent overseas, or spending less than we take in. I
thought they were pro-life, but I saw no support for the FetusMobile
driving around town last week. I thought they were for lower taxes, but I
haven't heard anyone say the government has a surplus of money. I thought
they were for holding leaders accountable for their actions, but I haven't
heard any of them calling for the resignation of Congressmen and others
who have been sentenced with jailtime for fraud.
They appear to be against clean indoor air, freedom of expression, freedom
of the press, swearing, the truth. ... But what are they FOR? Maybe
it's time for a series of SPNN televised debates.
Andrew M. Hine
3M IATD
Industrial Adhesives & Tapes Division
3M Center 230-1F-35
St. Paul MN
55144-1000
USA
<email obscured>
Tel: (651) 733-1070
Fax: (651) 737-2003
Chuck Repke wrote:
"Let's remember again what happened. Sheriff Fletcher led a raid into a hall
on Smith Avenue in Thune's ward and shut the building down for building code
violations. An action that is not usually done by the City of Saint Paul
Police Department or the Ramsey County Sheriff's office. Code violations are
handled by the City's Department of Safety and Inspections. Thune asked the
head of DSI to determine if there were code violations or if this hall could
continue to be rented. It was determined that the hall could be rented."
The above quote is only part of the story, the complete facts are more telling:
the only code violation found during
the raid was that the rear emergency exit had a locking bar in place - a
removable anti burglary device - that was
supposed to be pulled out whenever the building was occupied. DSI went through
the bldg and there were no other violations
and no citations were issued. The claim that there were "sleeping pads
everywhere" was an observation attributed to the
Sheriff - after deputies scattered a pile of donated blankets and pillows
during their search. The tenants own posted rules
prohibited sleeping in the building.
The RC Sheriff, stepping well outside his authority, had the building entrances
screwed shut in an attempt to deny the tenants
(the building was rented by a Mpls community center, not the RNC Welcoming
Committee) the use of their lawfully
rented space. The City of St Paul, not just Mr. Thune, acted in the only manner
they could and immediately returned
the building to the tenants.
It is important to note that NO weapons, tire flattening devices, buckets of
urine etc. were found at the Smith ave bldg;
read the search warrant and evidence receipts that have been available for many
days on various sites (strangely enough Fox 9
was one of the first to post them). What they confiscated was mostly
intellectual property - all the laptops, personal electronics
such as MP3 players, cellphones, boxes and boxes of literature and handouts,
maps, poster paint and some misc junk.
Also note that no one was arrested at the hall, further evidence that there was
nothing there, yet every ID was recorded and
every individual photographed before they were released. A grandstand show by
Ramsey County that is deeply disturbing at best.
We stand up for order, Thune and others stand with violence and anarchy.
Most violent protesters had no signs or symbols - mostly black outfits.
A protester said people are not afraid of us anymore.
Another said their aim was to demonstrate police action against protesters was
too harsh.
These two sentiments and lack of signage suggest elements of a scam to which
some protesters' aspirations have devolved to, alongside those protesters
seeking riots.
The scam is to run a video, provoke the police into harsh response and collect
on a lawsuit.
Those who engage in the scam are criminals and the Lawyers Guild crowd (Michael
Cavlan et al) who, after the RNC, now seek lawsuits.
St. Paul Councilman Dave Thune has defended the antiwar groups' demands for
ever more permits and access to Xcel. St. Paul Councilman Dave Thune has
defended the scam by not recognizing, as St. Paul mayor Chris Coleman has, the
criminal elements who now conspire with the lawyers against the government.
I am aware the Lawyers Guild volunteers' business card size lit advised people
what to do upon being arrested. There was contact info.
It is not peace keeping. It is handing out your calling card.
Alan is an oaf for thinking any one involved in these post-RNC Lawyers Guild
efforts are "do-gooders". They are misguided at best. And the
volunteers aren't the ones pulling the same scam in city after city every 4
years.
An oaf is a clumsy individual who harms us unintentionally - like those
enabling the shake-down of our government by aggrieved RNC protesters who by
the way were illegally congregating according to the rules and permits Thune
himself worked out with the city.
Look again at Michael Cavlan and others in Swiftee's video and ask might they
also exemplify an oaf. Is the Lawyers Guild for 3rd rate lawyers
with tough-guy acts? What is this? comedy hour?
Constitutional rights, human rights, and the rule of law were upheld not broken
by law enforcement. If they had been broken I would have been
among the first to say so. I would have been cordial but firm unlike some on
this forum. Democrats on this site, including St. Paul City
Councilman Thune, are great defenders of human rights, law and the constitution
only in your own minds. Thune did nothing for two years but
argue the crimminals' case for RNC convention disruption for them by seeking
Xcel access and more permits for protesters. Normal protesters
were quite happy with the Monday permit they got.
Enough with the nonsense fantasy that suing the government for any resulting
RNC police action against those resisters not in the permitted
RNC marches is righteous. It is petty, despicable and costly. Let's hear Thune
acknowledge that for once.
As for conservative hatred, our response to this post-RNC scam is a normal gut
reaction to an attack on an enterprise that you are responsible
for.
Thune had better respond to the accusations instead of letting surrogates like
Hine accuse me of lying. He knows what he did.
People should be outraged about this. It occupies the city attorney's time and
we get nothing from it. But it is important some of these
victim cities start fighting back and stop releasing these people routinely so
they can do it again in 4 years.
I am proud of St. Paul for doing exactly that. I'm proud of St. Paul for
maintaining order during the convention better than any other host
city, despite Democrat Dave Thune seeking attention for himself as usual by
grandstanding as a self-righteous liberal.
I understand the city might not be able to prosecute everyone because of
resources but I would be happy to see the budget expanded for that if
the cases are strong.
****
St. Paul City Attorney - Please ignore any petitions for release! They do not
represent the majority sentiment!!
****
The anti-war websites were available to Thune and held up by the press and
others for years after the other DNC and RNC events announced
criminal intentions for the RNC. Dave Thune cannot plead ignorance. Selectively
ignoring malicious intent among the protesters and their
attorneys is not in the interest of the city and shouldn't be condoned let
alone practiced by those on the city council before or after the
2008 St. Paul RNC.
The attorneys' and street performers' whole purpose appears to have been to
shake down our government and cost us money. They have no moral high ground.
Most had no cause and held no signs. They are common vandals, thieves, or
brats. For Thune, a government representative, to side with the provocatuers
and the resulting melee victims who now sue the government is an embarrassment.
There is another element to all this and that is local gangs fostered under the
cocky Devil-May-Care Bill Ayres attitude of Thune in Ward 2
and the Lawyers Guild crowd that is destructive to the west side youth,
politics and culture of 65B. But that is another topic for another
day.
What was the Neighborhood Justice Center's involvement? Anyone?
Jamie Delton
Summit U
I don’t read this place for a couple of days and suddenly there is a topic with
a few dozen posts, theoretically concerned with how the public’s civil
liberties may have been abused by local officials. It seemed ironic since the
post was started by the councilmember who has probably been more hostile toward
civil liberties than any other.
I never knew why we wanted that convention here in the first place and whoever
decided to invite them had to know that inviting protesters good or bad is an
inherent part of making the decision to host, so we shouldn’t be so shocked
that not everything was pleasant.
I am not making any judgment on how bad things were or on what might have
happened that should not have, but anything as big as the GOP convention can
almost be assumed to have no simple answer to even easy questions. Neither
protesters nor police always act in the best and most professional manner even
in the most normal and sedate circumstances. Even though the mistakes made by
either side may not be intentional or vicious, either side may err
inadvertently or accidentally. Regardless, mistakes are bound to happen. It
would be highly unlikely that something as big as this did not have some
irregularities and unprofessionalism, especially considering that many of the
police in question were from other jurisdictions with different training
standards and less familiarity with local geography and people and protesters
don’t always do as taught, either. We need to have some way to determine how
much problem there was and take effort to make sure that the problem[s] won’t
happen again and to take whatever action is warranted against individual[s]
involved.
Ray Sammons
East Side
Payne/Phalen
Jamie, I am wondering where you ranked among the first to say the police
should not have broken into a home without a warrant?
Also wondering if 'we' got any names of those self-described anarchists, you
know, the ones in black? And if we didn't how can 'we' be so sure they were
self-described.
Wondering Al Uhl, Downtown
On 9/13/08 8:42 AM, "Jamie Delton" <email obscured>> wrote:
> We stand up for order, Thune and others stand with violence and anarchy.
>
> Most violent protesters had no signs or symbols - mostly black outfits.
> A protester said people are not afraid of us anymore.
> Another said their aim was to demonstrate police action against protesters
was
> too harsh.
> These two sentiments and lack of signage suggest elements of a scam to which
> some protesters' aspirations have devolved to, alongside those protesters
> seeking riots.
> The scam is to run a video, provoke the police into harsh response and
collect
> on a lawsuit.
> Those who engage in the scam are criminals and the Lawyers Guild crowd
> (Michael Cavlan et al) who, after the RNC, now seek lawsuits.
> St. Paul Councilman Dave Thune has defended the antiwar groups' demands for
> ever more permits and access to Xcel. St. Paul Councilman Dave Thune has
> defended the scam by not recognizing, as St. Paul mayor Chris Coleman has,
the
> criminal elements who now conspire with the lawyers against the government.
>
> I am aware the Lawyers Guild volunteers' business card size lit advised
people
oaf One entry found.
Main Entry: oaf [image: Listen to the pronunciation of
oaf]<javascript:popWin('/cgi-bin/audio.pl?oaf00001.wav=oaf')>
Pronunciation:
\f\ Function: *noun* Inflected Form(s): *plural* oafs Etymology: alteration
of *auf, alfe* goblin's child, probably from Middle English *alven,
elven*elf, fairy, from Old English
*elfen* nymphs; akin to Old English *lf* elf more at
elf<http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/elf> Date:
1625
1 *:* a stupid person *:* boob<http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/boob>
2 *:* a big clumsy slow-witted person
oafish [image: Listen to the pronunciation of
oafish]<javascript:popWin('/cgi-bin/audio.pl?oaf00002.wav=oafish')>
\-fish\ *adjective*
Well, i would say we have a perfect example of the "pot calling the kettle
black."
caty royce
ex selby, south minneapolis
Let me be the first to say:
DAVE THUNE FOR MAYOR
At least he addressed us, yep even you Jamie. Where is Coleman the cowardly?
Trying to raise money for his reelection? Telling the Strib that this is a
boom for Saint Paul that will have a powerful positive impact for years to
come? Completely out of touch with those who lost big when the circus was in
town? I say it's time for new leadership...
I'm not sure why I respond to this, but I guess I'm tired of lies and liars.
jamie dealton:
snip> St. Paul Councilman Dave Thune has defended the antiwar groups'
demands for ever more permits and access to Xcel. St. Paul Councilman Dave
Thune has defended the scam by not recognizing, as St. Paul mayor Chris
Coleman has, the criminal elements who now conspire with the lawyers against
the government........
snip>Dave Thune cannot plead ignorance. Selectively ignoring malicious
intent among the protesters and their attorneys is not in the interest of
the city and shouldn't be condoned let alone practiced by those on the city
council ...
snip> For Thune, a government representative, to side with the provocatuers
and the resulting melee victims who now sue the government is an
embarrassment.
<<<<
My post prior to the RNC:
snip> Everyone is encouraged to express his or her free speech.
You can march, rally, broadcast an anti-war message on a jumbotron, chant,
fly banners...
If your idea of free speech is to lie down in mock death. You will be able
to.
If you insist on long term blockading of streets used by residents or
businesses you will be humanely arrested.
If you throw rocks or anything else harmful you will be arrested
<<<<
Back to the neighborhood cleanup where I can release steam by hurling
garbage into dumpsters instead of insults via e-mail.
Jamie, I asked you to show me where Dave welcomed any violent protesters to come to St. Paul. You still haven't provided me your examples. I am not about to go as far as Andrew did and call you a liar, but if you can't show me where this happened it didn't happen. Mike Fratto Payne Phalen Please help those who don't get enough to eat. http://oyh.org http://hungersolutions.org The future depends more on what we do between now and then Than what we did in the past.
I don't know who you are, Mr. Delton, and I don't know where Rick Mons has
gone, but the idea that folks on this forum are supposed to behave in a civil
fashion has somehow been lost on you. Your continuous vitriol accomplishes
nothing. SPIF is a forum that represents a lot of eclectic viewpoints, although
St. Paul being a heavily Democratic city, it's fair to say that most of the
political perspectives tend toward the progressive/liberal side of the
political spectrum. That said, I've never yet assumed that any one person
speaks for all of us who identify as progressives or liberals, and you
certainly don't speak for the conservatives in St. Paul, or, from what I can
tell, anybody other than yourself. I guess you found your way to this forum
because you enjoy ripping anybody who doesn't agree that the RNC was a smashing
success and that you're un-American if you have any different perspective from
what the mayor or others may be saying about the events of September 1-4? If
so, you're welcome to depart now, because I think we'd all like a return to
some semblance of civility.
I'm not going to defend Dave Thune's alleged use of profanity in an email to
the owner of Costello's Bar, but that's between Dave and Mr. Costello. That the
latter would choose to circulate the email (which I've yet to see, by the way)
and attempt to make political hay with it is the obvious axe-to-grind motive
that you conveniently choose to ignore. Dave Thune is the only council member
that I saw on the ground responding to reports of police overreaction,
questionable tactics, and arrests of journalists, and to date he's the only
council member who has spoken publicly about being upset with the police state
that was constructed around Xcel and his concerns that citizens' rights were
being violated. Taking the risk to speak out publicly when bad behavior is
occurring is what most of us would call courage; that you would rip Dave for
wanting to see basic civil liberties protected and the city's own policies and
regulations observed shows your own disdain for the rule of law you claim to
want upheld. Arguing that laws can be disregarded because of the circumstances
or the state of fear that law enforcement has created within a community is the
very kind of mindset that led to the return of torture as a U.S. policy abroad
and the scandal at Abu-Ghirab. Maybe if we'd just let the cops beat the crap
out of those black-scarfed punks we'd all have been better off? I'm sure you
don't feel that way, so don't start ascribing to Thune all sorts of things that
he never endorsed.
As for your attacks on the National Lawyers Guild, well, no surprise there, I
guess, since that puts you in the esteemed company of other great Americans
like Joseph McCarthy and J. Edgar Hoover, who did so much to promote civil
liberties during their lifetimes. Like all organizations, the NLG isn't
perfect, but if working to end segregation and supporting protestors against
the Vietnam War is wrong, then go ahead and keep ripping them. The NLG's role
in the activities involving the RNC was to place legal observers on the ground
to document police activities in the event of arrests, violations of civil
liberties, or other actions that might lead to legal action. Given that trials
are decided by the evidence that is presented there, having legal observers on
the ground helps ensure that should someone be arrested and charged, it will be
more than just his or her word against the police should the matter go to
trial. Because, in case you don't read history, police actually have fabricated
evidence in the past or been untruthful in the courtroom. Shocking, I know, but
it does happen.
There were folks wearing bright yellow caps who were acting as peacemakers
during the various demonstrations and protests, but the NLG observers (in
bright green caps) were not there for that purpose, anymore than journalists
doing their job were there for that purpose. The fact that both legal observers
and members of the media were swept up in various blanket arrests shows the
lack of interest that law enforcement had in targeting only those who were
causing problems. I'm sure you believe that you're such an upstanding citizen
that you'll never be subjected to an illegal search and seizure, or that your
civil liberties will ever be threatened by the very government that you claim
to support without reservation, but I suspect that you'd be the first to scream
for justice the moment that same government doesn't treat you the way you
believe is fair. And at that moment, you'll be the same guy hoping that there's
a civil liberties organization like the NLG or the ACLU to find an attorney to
represent you.
In case you missed it, the world is no longer flat.
Peace.
Tom Goldstein
Hamline-Midway
Attorney, NLG observer during RNC
Let's tone down the personal insults such as the one below. >(name redacted) is an oaf for thinking (opposite the author's opinion) < It's a violation of the rule on civility. And -- to pre-empt the customary rejoinder -- similar requests/advisories have been/are being sent to both sides of this exchange. Rules are at: E-Democracy.Org rules: http://e-democracy.org/rules If you have questions about the rules, please post them on Feedback or send an e-mail to me (this post's address or for those reading via the Web: stpaul-fm AT e-democracy.org will work) Rick Mons Forum Manager
A bit over 50 people showed up last night at a fundraiser for Chris Coleman.
That is, about 50 people showed up to schmooze and to raise money for the
once-Democratic mayor of St Paul. Another 50 plus people showed up on the
sidewalk to protest Mayor Coleman's enabling of Sheriff Fletcher.
A number of highlights:
Councilman Thune showed up as invited guest, supporter and friend of Chris
Coleman. He had a hard time making it into the actual party, since he got
stuck on the sidewalk accepting the thanks of the citizens of St Paul.
The mayor himself stopped to speak. One outstanding statement he made was that
the Heffelfingerr/Luger commission would be investigating police brutality as
part of their enquiry. This is a direct contradiction to statements made by
former U.S. Attorney Heffelfinger, who claims that investigating police
misconduct is absolutely NOT part of his mandate. I wonder who is telling the
truth. And I wonder whether it even makes any difference, since Coleman has
already said that he believes that the police did an admirable job.
A warning to those who criticize the mayor: he doesn't have much patience with
our criticisms. He wants us to understand what a hard, hard situation he was
in. But he doesn't really want to hear our stories.
I have previously had absolutely NOTHING against Chris Coleman. But if he
thinks this sort of policing is acceptable in St Paul, then he has become part
of the problem. St Paul deserves better. But certainly St Paul has had a
string of bad luck with their majors. This makes three in a row who have been
elected as Democrats, only to change their colors once elected. What is
this...something in the water at City Hall?
Least we fail to note:
Randy Kelly
and Norm Coleman
both switched parties
and won a carreer boost to boot
thus begging the obvious question
about Chris Coleman's intensions
Mike Fratto asked: "Jamie, I asked you to show me where Dave welcomed any violent protesters to come to St. Paul." Mike, I'm looking at Thune's actions not his words. His actions are feeble grandstanding, but harmful to the government nonethless, in that people are misled into thinking there is some righteous cause behind the NLG and the people potentially suing our officers. Dave Thune: What is your position on the RNC WC? What is your position on the people being held? Should they be prosecuted fully? Will you acknowledge partial responsibility for potential lawsuits against the city or police? Did you ever advise non-violence directly to the RNC WC or those who may have been inspired by their shameless criminal intent? If not, why not? They were in direct contact with you were they not? We don't need a councilman to capitulate to criminal demands. Everyone had access to the RNC Welcoming Committee's criminal intent published here: http://www.nornc.org Yet when the RNC WC, their under-studies or other criminal groups demanded closer access to Xcel you complied. When they demanded city policy be defined for them you complied. When they demanded the rental space closed by the county be re-opened you re-opened it. All this you did without challenging the intentions of the RNC WC. Well it was the RNC WC's space, or that of RNC WC allies, that you re-opened. It was the RNC WC people, those inspired by RNC WC, and other groups that are now being prosecuted for their crimes who benefited from your actions. And it was an established local neighbor and business owner in ward 1 that you attacked in an email with profanity. So explain your past actions and your position on those potentially suing. I need more than a couple of past posts. Tom: "Arguing that laws can be disregarded because of the circumstances or the state of fear that law enforcement has created within a community is the very kind of mindset that led to the return of torture as a U.S. policy abroad and the scandal at Abu-Ghirab." I'm arguing Thune is showboating his liberalism at the expense of the city by not specifically condemning the RNC WC and other criminal groups he's been well aware of for 2 years as he crafts his redundant protesters bill of rights, fights for closer access to the Xcel, dismisses concerns of residents and propety owners, dismisses taxpayer concerns about costly lawsuits, and supports the anti-city anti-government rhetoric on this list as the lawsuits start rolling in. Thune has essentially done nothing for the liberal cause of curtailing police brutality and protecting 1st amendment rights from which you all draw such righteous fervor. I give the police 100% credit for that. Why can't you all? It was under their control more than Dave Thune's. The police did a good job of ensuring the rights of convention goers and protesters. The police were restrained considering the circumstances. Al: "Jamie, I am wondering where you ranked among the first to say the police should not have broken into a home without a warrant?" We don't know enough. "Also wondering if 'we' got any names of those self-described anarchists, you know, the ones in black? And if we didn't how can 'we' be so sure they were self-described." huh? just look at the pictures - the two by Matt Rourke show black clad criminals. Who said self-described? What was the Neighborhood Justice Center's involvement? Why were 3 green hats meeting up there before the poor peoples march Tuesday Sept 2? Jamie Delton Summit U
I got a private correspondence about my angry comments concerning Chris Coleman. Naturally, I will not quote that email without permission, but I seem to be still growing angrier about Mayor Coleman's apparent complicity with Sheriff Fletcher's violence, so I will copy my reply. (By the way, the Pioneer Press article about last night's protest can be found at http://www.twincities.com/ci_10451337?IADID=Search-www.twincities.com-www.twincities.com) So here is my reply to the reprimand concerning the mayor: Sometimes my outrage at injustice leads me to over-react. That certainly may be the case here, but I have to tell you that my rage is still growing deeper with each passing day since St Paul suffered a military coup last week. And Chris Coleman's spinelessness is a good part of the source of my rage. As you may know, I didn't even march or demonstrate in any way last week. I worked as a street medic, making myself available to give first aid to anyone who needed it. I saw some horrible things that have forever changed my fundamental understanding of Minnesota nice and of St Paul politics. I saw or saw clips or talked to a number of young girls get pepper-sprayed...one for offering a flower to a storm trooper, another who was repeatedly sprayed and pushed to the ground with a police bike while telling the officer "I love you," a 21-year-old friend of my son's who was sprayed as she was following police orders to leave (she hadn't been marching, but merely got caught up in the crowd). I have witnessed quite literally thousands of storm troopers rampaging through the streets of St Paul. I have read the same accounts you have of reporters being targeted. I have spoken to a number of people (including another 21-year-old woman from my church that I have known for maybe 6 years) who were stopped at gunpoint, handcuffed face-down, without ever being charged with anything, without even a search or any questions to her or her passengers. Perhaps two hundred people had weapons drawn on them weekend before last, including preschool aged children. Easily several hundred have been tear-gassed, pepper-sprayed, struck with less lethal weapons or with nightsticks. I have one report of a woman's fetus being aborted after the goons kicked her in the stomach last week. I would ask you what sort of political accomplishments might counterbalance Mayor Coleman's praise of such police brutality. Sheriff Fletcher is a violent, ambitious and dangerous man, yet Coleman continues to praise the police work done last week. We are all human. We all make mistakes. We all have feet of clay. But it is hard for me to understand what possible excuse we can now make for Chris Coleman's continuing support for marshall law in Minnesota. I will forgive him immediately after he apologizes for any previous support of this outrage and works for the rest of his term to investigate and isolate Bob Fletcher before any more harm is done to our democracy.
Charlie and my other sisters and brothers in outrage.
I am torn about how much energy to devote to addressing the wrongs that
occurred in St. Paul and environs a few months ago.
On one hand we have seen how the powers-that-be close ranks and are ready to
adopt drastic tactics to both squash the smallest of radical challenges and
intimidate those who might even peripherally be drawn into efforts to afflict
the powerful. People I know were directly harmed and I am heartsick by what I
observed and so many experienced.
On the other hand, police mistreatment is, unfortunately, not unknown in some
parts of our communities and it pales in comparison to what happened to the
poor people in New Orleans. Our neighborhoods fill with foreclosed homes while
taxpayers are forced to rescue the big capital institutions. St. Paul's safety
net is under more and more strain. And I will not even speak of the US
government actions around the world.
So, assess your resources, marshal your energy and think about whether St Paul
will gain or lose more if ALL of your passion remains solely stuck on the
misdeeds of September 2008.
I did hear something about an election coming along sometime soon.
Jamie Delton wrote:
"Yet when the RNC WC, their under-studies or other criminal groups demanded
closer access to Xcel you complied. When they demanded city policy be defined
for them you complied. When they demanded the rental space closed by the county
be re-opened you re-opened it.
All this you did without challenging the intentions of the RNC WC.
Well it was the RNC WC's space, or that of RNC WC allies, that you re-opened."
Jamie Delton also wrote:
"Constitutional rights, human rights, and the rule of law were upheld not
broken
by law enforcement. If they had been broken I would have been
among the first to say so."
Mr Delton,
You may wish to stop ranting about Mr. Thune long enough to check the facts
and,
as you promise, say so.
Your position that the Sheriff had any authority to deny citizens, regardless
of their
professed beliefs, lawful access to their property is beyond comprehension. The
Smith Ave raid was an intimidation tactic, a show of force and a fishing trip
for
evidence that could be used to build a conspiracy case - which they did not
find
at that location. They did not have the any authority to seal the building, and
even
if they did the idea that one city council person could just order it opened is
ludicrous; you may wish to indict the City of St Paul as a whole for that one.
Take a break from goose stepping long enough to read that Constitution before
you claim to defend it.
You know Jamie you don't respond to the issue. You claimed Dave invited these people here. You can't show that. As for his actions: What did he do again? You mean showing up at a police raid and questioned the authority of the Sheriff to close a building for code violations that no one was aware of? In fact the city inspected this location and found no code violations. It was also found that some of the charges lodged against those present came as the result of police searched for items they couldn't find. That sir is what we elect people like Dave to do. Mike Fratto Payne Phalen Please help those who don't get enough to eat. http://oyh.org http://hungersolutions.org The future depends more on what we do between now and then Than what we did in the past.
Mike Fratto, Why don't you ask Thune? He is perfectly capable of answering our questions. Why are you defending the RNC WC, and it's 35-member criminal core? When did I use the word invited? Mike when do we see the minutes for the May 5 meeting about the Charter Home Rule change some anti-Fletcher people wanted? The minutes were approved and available August 4, no? http://www.co.ramsey.mn.us/cb/charter/ma.htm Who voted to keep Fletcher's position elective and who voted to make it a county board appointment position? Ren, Mike Fratto is a former chair and current at large member of the Ramsey County Charter Commission which maintains the Ramsey County Home Rule Charter (you need that for searching on Google). He might be able to cite the municipal statute in the city code that specifically supercedes the sheriff's duty to uphold the peace in this way. I doubt there is one. The US constitution ensures no unreasonable search and seizure. Smith Ave was reasonable. No statute I'm aware of prevents the sheriff from seizing a portion of a building that numerous out-of-town criminals rented who are actively planning to violently disrupt a critical global event. Here is the county Charter: http://www.co.ramsey.mn.us/cb/charter/index.htm Here is the city code: http://www.municode.com/Resources/gateway.asp?pid=10061&sid=23 Here is the MN constitution: http://www.house.leg.state.mn.us/cco/rules/mncon/preamble.htm Here is the US constitution http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.overview.html So show me where Sheriff Fletcher over-reached in upholding the peace. You can't. And you should be ashamed for trying. Fletcher deserves accolades and gratitude. He won't get it on this list which is unfortunate. Let's all go do something productive. Except Thune - you answer my questions! Jamie Delton Summit U
Jamie you again are avoiding the issues you created by your posts. You have been asked at least twice to show proof of the statements you made regarding Dave Thune. This is the issue at hand. The vote of the Ramsey County Charter Commission has absolutely nothing to go with this issue. In fact, you are trying to muddy up the facts by bringing in an issue that has absolutely nothing to do with Bob Fletcher. As for when you get to see the minutes of the May 5th meeting. I wish I could tell you. It should be up now. I know its not. I will try to find out that information on Monday. Mike Fratto Payne Phalen Please help those who don't get enough to eat. http://oyh.org http://hungersolutions.org The future depends more on what we do between now and then Than what we did in the past.
Jamie,
Jamie Delton wrote:
> <snip>
> Why are you defending the RNC WC, and it's 35-member criminal core?
>
> No statute I'm aware of prevents the sheriff from seizing a portion of a
building that numerous out-of-town criminals rented who are actively planning
to violently disrupt a critical global event.
>
> <snip>
>
I see that you have already tried and convicted the people arrested by during
the RNC. Call them rascals, call them malcontents, but don't
call them criminals until the legal process has run its course. This is plainly
un-American to not give people their day in court.
>
> So show me where Sheriff Fletcher over-reached in upholding the peace.
> <snip>
>
I was unaware that Hennepin County and the City of Minneapolis were in
Sheriff Fletcher's area of authority.
>>> Jamie Delton wrote:
>>>>
>>
>> So show me where Sheriff Fletcher over-reached in upholding the
>> peace.
>> <snip>
and on Sep 14, 2008 Mike Schoenberg replied:
> I was unaware that Hennepin County and the City of Minneapolis were in
> Sheriff Fletcher's area of authority.
>>
IIRC, Fletcher obtained a warrant from a Hennepin County court (which
has jurisdiction) and alleged that the basis for the warrant was
based upon illegal activity that would occur in Ramsey County. I
don't think he over-reached on pursuing the warrant and believe the
court would have rejected the application if it held Fletcher didn't
have standing.
Nonetheless, there was an area of over-reaching. Again, IIRC Council
Member Thune maintained that Sheriff Fletcher over-reached his
authority by deciding the building on Smith was in violation of fire/
safety code(s) and ordering it to be vacated and barring access.
Thune pointed out that Fletcher doesn't have authority to make this
determination in St Paul but that the City's Department of
Inspections did. Inspections came out and said there was no
violation that warranted shutting down the building or denying access.
I'd assume that Fletcher realized he'd overstepped his authority
since I haven't heard that he or his office ever filed any legal
documents to preserve his initial decision.
Rick Mons as Forum Participant
Rick Mons wrote:
> Nonetheless, there was an area of over-reaching.
How did you reach this conclusion without any statement of facts?
> Again, IIRC Council Member Thune maintained that Sheriff Fletcher
> over-reached his authority by deciding the building on Smith was in
> violation of fire/ safety code(s) and ordering it to be vacated and
> barring access. Thune pointed out that Fletcher doesn't have authority
> to make this determination in St Paul but that the City's Department
> of Inspections did. Inspections came out and said there was no
> violation that warranted shutting down the building or denying access.
The Sheriff is the primary law enforcement officer of the county and is
responsible for keeping and preserving the peace. [1] He has powers
stated by tradition, common law, and statute. Because violation of the
State Fire Code is a misdemeanor [2], the Sheriff, as a law enforcement
officer, has authority to enforce the Fire Code. The City of Saint Paul
has, by ordinance, adopted the State Fire Code. [3] Notwithstanding the
designation of a Fire Chief, Fire Marshal, or other employee to enforce
the St. Paul Fire Code, [4] the Sheriff has the power to enforce the
State Fire Code throughout the county - by virtue of his county
authority and the assimilation of the State Fire Code by the City of
St. Paul.
Neal Krasnoff
Minneapolis
On Sep 15, 2008, at 12:43 AM, Neal Krasnoff wrote:
> Rick Mons wrote:
>
>> Nonetheless, there was an area of over-reaching.
>
> How did you reach this conclusion without any statement of facts?
>
>> Again, IIRC Council Member Thune maintained that Sheriff Fletcher
>> over-reached his authority by deciding the building on Smith was in
>> violation of fire/ safety code(s) and ordering it to be vacated and
>> barring access. Thune pointed out that Fletcher doesn't have
>> authority
>> to make this determination in St Paul but that the City's Department
>> of Inspections did. Inspections came out and said there was no
>> violation that warranted shutting down the building or denying
>> access.
>
Actually, you answered your own query when you wrote in your fourth
footnote:
> [4] "The chief of the department of fire and safety services
> (hereinafter for convenience of reference "chief" or "fire chief"),
> the
> fire marshal, or an authorized representative shall enforce the
> provisions of this chapter". Section 55.02, Code of Ordinances,
> City of
> Saint Paul.
>
Unless Fletcher is an "authorized representative" (and authorized by
the chief or fire chief), he has no explicit authority to make the
"findings" he did nor to block access.
Rick Mons as Forum Participant
Hey Neal:
"Green Party candidate (like Farheen Hakeem of the
anti-Semitic".....How did you reach this conclusion without any statemen to
facts??????!!!!!!
caty royce
bancroft
Jamie wrote:
"No statute I'm aware of prevents the sheriff from seizing a portion
of a building that numerous out-of-town criminals rented who are
actively planning to violently disrupt a critical global event."
"So show me where Sheriff Fletcher over-reached in upholding
the peace. You can't. And you should be ashamed for trying.
Fletcher deserves accolades and gratitude. He won't get it on this
list which is unfortunate."
(I uploaded this response yesterday but it never appeared - my
apologies in advance if it duplicates later...)
Actually Jamie, I can. And I am sure it was an oversight that
you did not write "alleged criminals" since you are such a fan
of the Constitution.
Amendment 4 of the US Constitution:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers,
and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not
be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause,
supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the
place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
You may wish to pay attention to the words "particularly described".
If you ever bother to read the warrant please show me where it provides
authority to seize the building. Oops, perhaps it doesn't....
The statement that the building was secured for a fire code violation
is little more than an attempt at a smoke screen - the ONLY violation
found was that an exit door was locked - hardly reasonable seizure.
It would be analogous to confiscating the car of a legal driver who
forgot to signal a lane change - Neal, is that how it worked when
you were an officer?
The very fact that there was immediate inter-departmental cooperation
by the City of SP to unseal the building - I mean we're talking
government here - should be all the proof you need that the Sheriff
"over-reached".
Neal, what is your reaction to this main stream video, that just won't go away? http://www.myfoxtwincities.com/myfox/MyFox/pages/sidebar_video.jsp?contentId=7364281&version=1&locale=EN-US This is what promptedmy letter in today's PPress below. http://www.twincities.com/opinion/ci_10449658 Pioneer Press Sept 15, 2008 "Convention security was overkill" "The letter, "'Under investigation' during the RNC" (Sept. 10), about riot security violence involving a young photographer, was not an unusual incident. Of the 818 citizens arrested, only about a few dozen were actually criminal "anarchists" and should be prosecuted. The rest were nonviolent resisters.... ....How much money was lost in confiscated photo, video and other equipment of innocent recorders and reporters, compared with the relatively small amount of actual damage by vandal protesters? I believe the security forces were led by someone or an organization other than our normally good local police." The main stream media, FOX 9 newswitnessed the excessive violence and the PPress acknowledged this also, as I sent this video to them. I also sent the video to our mayor asking him to explain and thatmay possibly be a reason contributing to why he acknowledged to Charley Underwood, that in the investigation would include"concerns about police violence and over-reaction during the Republican National Convention." I believe either I read or heard this comment from some other source also. Gary thompson Highland I certainly hope this will happen.
Rick Mons wrote: > Unless Fletcher is an "authorized representative" (and authorized by > the chief or fire chief), he has no explicit authority to make the > "findings" he did nor to block access. To reiterate: The Fire Chief, Fire Marshal, or other designated employee has the power to enforce the St. Paul Fire Code, however, the Sheriff has the power to enforce the State Fire Code throughout the county - by virtue of his authority and the assimilation of the State Fire Code by the City of St. Paul. Caty Royce wrote: > "Green Party candidate (like Farheen Hakeem of the > anti-Semitic".....How did you reach this conclusion without any > statemen to facts??????!!!!!! Easy. "We see Israel as an illegitimate apartheid state, and we stand in solidarity with the Palestinian struggle for justice and self-determination. We support the Palestinian right of return..." http://www.antiwarcommittee.org/resources/Palestine/index.html No mention of Jordan, the other part of the British Mandate and home to the Palestinian Arabs, nor any other of the various Muslim-Arab states carved out of the remains of the Ottoman Empire. The AWC and their followers can't accept Jewish self-rule. Israel - Zion - the homeland of the Jews - has been singled out for condemnation by the AWC. Ren Martin wrote: > You may wish to pay attention to the words "particularly described". > If you ever bother to read the warrant please show me where it > provides authority to seize the building. Oops, perhaps it doesn't.... To support your argument, Mr. Martin, produce a copy of the warrant, the complaint, or other legal process. You should also cite any law, ordinance, or rule that may require the closure of a building under the State Fire Code or other building or safety code. > It would be analogous to confiscating the car of a legal driver who > forgot to signal a lane change - Neal, is that how it worked when you > were an officer? "A/T/P/O Officer observed vehicle MN plate number 475-ZAQW s/b I-35 approaching Exit 104A in extreme left lane change course across two lanes w/o signal,169.19 sub 4. Upon stop Officer observed two bags in front right seat containing visible white powder alleged controlled substance, 152.025 sub 2(1). Defendant arrested and searched w/o incident. Prisoner in vehicle starting 25026. Vehicle transported by Tow Operator #902 to impound". In the above statement of fact, the vehicle ("conveyance device") was seized upon probable cause and impounded. Refer to Section 609.5311 of the Minnesota Statutes for the law concerning forfeiture of property associated with controlled substance offenses, and to Section 609.531 concerning forfeitures generally. The "Convergence Center" was seized, not forfeited nor "confiscated". Gary Thompson wote: > Neal, what is your reaction to this main stream video, that just won't > go away? [link to video of protester refusing to comply with police orders and subsequently receiving multiple hits from spray cannister] The purpose of this anecdote is...what? Dave Shove wrote in "after assessment [Thune]": > I find it hard to believe that the right wing zealot opponents of > Thune - and anyone else to the left of Gehghis Khan - could really > give a %%%% or a ***(YY&** about swear words. But they see an > opportunity to MANIPULATE THE PUBLIC, and replace Thune with Goering > or Himmler. Swift boaters all. I respect none of them. Spoken like a completely unhinged communist and Stalinist thug. How's that for hyperbole? You like? Andrew Hine wrote in SPIF-Feedback: > I didn't think we could call people "jackasses" or "idiots." But can > we? Can we, please?! Notwithstanding complaints received by the list moderator: as long as there are recurring analogies comparing Minnesota police officers to Nazis, the Gestapo and the Sturmabteilung ("Stormtroopers"), I will continue to exercise my discretion and refer to "whining anarchist jackasses". Neal Krasnoff Minneapolis
Neal, as i asked you directly and have not heard a response, I'll repeat the
fairly simple query here with the group: Did that quote you attribute
directly from Ms. Hakeem come from her mouth or did you lift it from the
antiwar committee website?
caty royce
bancroft
Neal wrote: "To support your argument, Mr. Martin, produce a copy of the warrant, the complaint, or other legal process. You should also cite any law, ordinance, or rule that may require the closure of a building under the State Fire Code or other building or safety code." Neal, I have tried to upload the warrant and evidence receipts a couple days back but they did not post. You can read them at: http://media.myfoxtwincities.com/pdfs/Scann001.PDF The Sheriff claimed he was seizing the bldg due to a fire code violation, not because of probable cause discovered during his search (unlike the example you give of an automobile seizure). A desperation move since the items they hoped to find at the building were not there, unless you count laptops and personal electronics, in which case we all better move to a Motel 6 and give up our homes. You claim that his authority stems from the fact that, due to Code, the tenants were guilty of a misdemeanor, however the Code also states (below) that no person can be convicted, i.e. guilty in this country, for violating the code without written notice and time to comply. No written notice was ever issued before or after the event, and time to comply was not allowed - which is about 3 seconds to unlock the exit door. You cannot have it both ways - if the Fire Code gave him authority then he must perform according to the requirements of the Code. State Fire Code: "A person who violates a provision of the State Fire Code shall be guilty of a misdemeanor. No person shall be convicted for violating the State Fire Code unless the person shall have been given notice of the violation in writing and reasonable time to comply. The notice must contain a statement explaining the right to appeal the orders".
On Sep 15, 2008, at 11:56 PM, Neal Krasnoff wrote:
> Rick Mons wrote:
>
>> Unless Fletcher is an "authorized representative" (and authorized by
>> the chief or fire chief), he has no explicit authority to make the
>> "findings" he did nor to block access.
>
Sure he can issue citations for violation of law; however, he ordered
the building sealed and inaccessible to the tenants. That's where he
over-reached as he doesn't have that authority.
Rick Mons as Forum Participant
On Sep 15, 2008, at 11:56 PM, Neal Krasnoff wrote:
> Caty Royce wrote:
>
>> "Green Party candidate (like Farheen Hakeem of the
>> anti-Semitic".....How did you reach this conclusion without any
>> statemen to facts??????!!!!!!
>
> /replay snipped/
Sorry, folks, but discussing a specific Green Party candidate who's
running for office in Minneapolis isn't relevant to this forum. Feel
free to discuss Ms Hakeem on the Mpls Issues forum or discuss the
Green Party in terms of St Paul issues or in terms of Green
candidates, but let's keep the subject focused on St Paul.
>
> Andrew Hine wrote in SPIF-Feedback:
>
>> I didn't think we could call people "jackasses" or "idiots." But can
>> we? Can we, please?!
>
> Notwithstanding complaints received by the list moderator: as long as
> there are recurring analogies comparing Minnesota police officers to
> Nazis, the Gestapo and the Sturmabteilung ("Stormtroopers"), I will
> continue to exercise my discretion and refer to "whining anarchist
> jackasses".
Offenders have been warned ... but justifying one's behavior on the
grounds that somebody on the other side does it too isn't an
exception permitted by the rules.
And discussion of forum operations should be taken to the Feedback
forum and not on SPIF. So if anyone wants to debate this further,
please do so on Feedback.
Rick Mons
Forum Manager
Rick Mons wrote:
> Sure he can issue citations for violation of law; however, he ordered
> the building sealed and inaccessible to the tenants. That's where he
> over-reached as he doesn't have that authority.
Again, Mr. Mons, the Sheriff has wide ranging power to "keep and
preserve the peace of the county"[1]. I suspect you are trying to make
the law and the duties of the Sheriff fit your politics. I further
suspect that members of this list are trying - unsuccessfully - to
delegitimize the actions undertaken by law enforcement to prevent the
RNCWC and associated groups from committing acts of violence,
interference, and harm to public order.
Ren Martin wrote:
> The Sheriff claimed he was seizing the bldg due to a fire code
> violation, not because of probable cause discovered during his search
> (unlike the example you give of an automobile seizure). A desperation
> move since the items they hoped to find at the building were not
> there, unless you count laptops and personal electronics, in which
> case we all better move to a Motel 6 and give up our homes.
There's lots of probable cause in that search warrant, Mr. Martin.
Laptops containing evidence of a criminal conspiracy and personal
electronics suspected of being used in the commission of a crime
against public order due are fair game. Again, read the search warrant.
Context, Mr. Martin, context.
> You cannot have it both ways - if the Fire Code gave him authority
> then he must perform according to the requirements of the Code.
True, if that particular section of the State Fire Code was used. To
forgo any more speculation, a copy of the order or legal process is
needed to verify under what statute, legal authority, or exigent
circumstance the Sheriff used to close the building.
Caty Royce wrote:
> Neal, as i asked you directly and have not heard a response, I'll
> repeat the fairly simple query here with the group: Did that quote
> you attribute directly from Ms. Hakeem come from her mouth or did you
> lift it from the
> antiwar committee website?
I'll answer on the Minnesota politics forum.
Neal Krasnoff
Minneapolis
[1] "The sheriff shall keep and preserve the peace of the county, for
which purpose the sheriff may require the aid of such persons or power
of the county as the sheriff deems necessary. The sheriff shall also
pursue and apprehend all felons, execute all processes, writs,
precepts, and orders issued or made by lawful authority and to the
sheriff delivered, attend upon the terms of the district court, and
perform all of the duties pertaining to the office..." Section 387.03,
Minnesota Statutes, 2007.
Neal wrote:
"There's lots of probable cause in that search warrant, Mr. Martin."
Neal, no one has disputed that information from the Sheriff's
unnamed CI's was deemed sufficient probable cause for a
warrant to search the premises. That warrant did not allow for
seizure of the premises.
"True, if that particular section of the State Fire Code was used. To
forgo any more speculation, a copy of the order or legal process is
needed to verify under what statute, legal authority, or exigent
circumstance the Sheriff used to close the building."
What crap. Show me a section of the Fire Code that could have been
used. The beauty of this situation is that no written order was
issued or legal process followed other than an arbitrary decision by
the RC Sheriff to screw the doors shut - the building was not even
posted.
Which is why St Paul ordered it to be unsealed within a few hours.
"I suspect you are trying to make the law and the duties of the
Sheriff fit your politics."
A lot of that going around.
You know, a law enforcement officer exaggerating the truth in order to get a
search warrant is not exactly something that hasn't been done many, many times
throughout history, as any reading of a basic text on civil liberties, criminal
law, etc., will reveal, especially when law enforcement is using agents
provocateurs as many have alleged took place with the infiltration of the
so-called anarchist groups. So, given the high stakes that having a national
convention in St. Paul would have posed for a judge presented with a warrant
alleging a security risk, and given Fletcher's status as a sheriff leading
these raids, it's rare that a judge would not accept the credibility of a
sheriff absent a clear showing that he had abused his authority or proof that
the informants who provided the information that became the substance of the
warrant may also have been exaggerating the truth. Unfortunately, we'll never
get that proof unless the county, state, or feds launch a criminal
investigation into such matters, something that will unlikely happen since
nobody died and given the general lack of concern in government circles these
days about the abuse of civil liberties in this country.
The mere fact that a judge issued a warrant may give the appearance that due
process was met, but it doesn't mean that Fletcher didn't encourage informants
to stretch the truth, exaggerate what happened in the meetings where said
violence was supposedly planned, etc. Far worse police abuses have happened up
and down the spectrum of law enforcement over the years in the U.S., and given
Fletcher's brazen involvement five years ago in the Ward 5 city council race,
the idea that he'd exceed his authority this time around is not exactly an idea
out of left field. The proof will be whether any sustainable charges related to
the warrant ever come out of the raids. Based on the "evidence" produced by the
RC Sheriff, the case seems pretty flimsy to me. And the harassment of
journalists prior to the convention was an unquestionable abuse of power.
Combine this with the recent conviction of Fletcher's close friend and former
public information officer, who apparently was allowed to go on police raids
and carry a firearm even though he was not a licensed peace officer, and it's
obvious that a number of things are amiss within the RC Sheriff's office under
Fletcher's leadership. Whether anybody in authority has the guts to conduct an
investigation of that office is what remains to be seen.
Tom Goldstein
Hemline-Midway
I wrote:
> True, if that particular section of the State Fire Code was used. To
> forgo any more speculation, a copy of the order or legal process is
> needed to verify under what statute, legal authority, or exigent
> circumstance the Sheriff used to close the building.
Ren Martin responds:
> What crap. Show me a section of the Fire Code that could have been
> used. The beauty of this situation is that no written order was issued
> or legal process followed other than an arbitrary decision by the RC
> Sheriff to screw the doors shut - the building was not even posted.
> Which is why St Paul ordered it to be unsealed within a few hours.
Asking for a copy of an order or legal process, or which statute, legal
authority, or exigent circumstance the Sheriff used to close the
building aside from the State Fire Code is not "crap", it is a
reasonable and legitimate request.
You now have to prove your assertion the Sheriff's decision to close
the building was "arbitrary".
Tom Goldstein, allegedly a member of the St. Paul School Board, wrote:
> You know, a law enforcement officer exaggerating the truth in order to
> get a search warrant is not exactly something that hasn't been done
> many, many times throughout history, as any reading of a basic text on
> civil liberties, criminal law, etc., will reveal, especially when law
> enforcement is using agents provocateurs as many have alleged took
> place with the infiltration of the so-called anarchist groups.
Mr. Goldstein makes the implication the affiants on the search warrant
"exaggerated the truth" - in other words, lied and therefore committed
perjury. You are on very shaky legal ground, Mr. Goldstein.
The one or more of the groups in question used "anarchist" to describe
themselves.
<snip>
> Unfortunately, we'll never get that proof unless the county, state, or
> feds launch a criminal investigation into such matters, something that
> will unlikely happen since nobody died and given the general lack of
> concern in government circles these days about the abuse of civil
> liberties in this country.
Another sweeping accusation - with no proof.
> The mere fact that a judge issued a warrant may give the appearance
> that due process was met,
Wrong, Mr. Goldstein. Warrants are based upon probable cause, supported
by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be
searched and the person or things to be seized.
> but it doesn't mean that Fletcher didn't encourage informants to
> stretch the truth, exaggerate what happened in the meetings where said
> violence was supposedly planned, etc.
How much money do you have in your legal defense fund, anyway?
> Far worse police abuses have happened up and down the spectrum of law
> enforcement over the years in the U.S., and given Fletcher's brazen
> involvement five years ago in the Ward 5 city council race, the idea
> that he'd exceed his authority this time around is not exactly an idea
> out of left field.
Alot, apparently.
> The proof will be whether any sustainable charges related to the
> warrant ever come out of the raids. Based on the "evidence" produced
> by the RC Sheriff, the case seems pretty flimsy to me.
Read the search warrant. It's comprehensive and the information
presented reflects what the amateur revolutionaries had threatened.
Neal Krasnoff
Minneapolis
It is hard to imagine anyone's mind being changed by debating the
fine details of the Sheriff's statutory authority, no matter how long
it goes on.
Seems to me that people's views on the RNC festivities tend to be
determined by their underlying outlook--how much they value freedom
of speech vs "law and order." These probably aren't readily subject
to change.....
A question I don't see being discussed is how anybody could have
reasonably expected anything BUT a police-state lockdown. This
became inevitable once a decision was made (by whom?) to host the
RNC. This was surely obvious to the authorities who were busy
planning it. Seems that people on the other side planned their
participation in various ways--from being "good" peaceful marchers to
nasty anarchist destroyers. Regardless, were they not taking up pro
forma positions in a setup orchestrated by others? In essence,
marching to the beat of others' drums? Maybe this is effective
democracy in action but I am not so sure.....
At 07:12 AM 9/17/2008 -0500, you wrote
Neal wrote:
"Asking for a copy of an order or legal process, or which statute, legal
authority, or exigent circumstance the Sheriff used to close the
building aside from the State Fire Code is not "crap", it is a
reasonable and legitimate request.
You now have to prove your assertion the Sheriff's decision to close
the building was "arbitrary"."
Neal, Neal, Neal, how did you get there? As I and others in
this forum stated, there is no paperwork specific to this incident to
produce - the Sheriff claimed he was closing the building under
Fire Code. Since you maintain there is, the onus is on you to go
find it and prove me wrong.
Wait, since he could not work within the framework of the law,
perhaps he issued an Executive Signing Statement? Where have
I heard that before?….
While I find your blind acceptance of All Things Sheriff
as gospel somewhat amusing, it is also becoming tiresome.
So, like my cat playing with a little mouse
(and I’m sure much to the relief of others in this forum),
I will kick this carcass under the couch and move on.
Feel free to have the last word.
Ren Martin wrote:
> Neal, Neal, Neal, how did you get there? As I and others in this forum
> stated, there is no paperwork specific to this incident to produce -
> the Sheriff claimed he was closing the building under Fire Code. Since
> you maintain there is, the onus is on you to go find it and prove me
> wrong.
Once again, Mr. Martin: asking for a copy of an order or legal process,
or which statute, legal authority, or exigent circumstance the Sheriff
used to close the building aside from the State Fire Code is not
"crap", it is a reasonable and legitimate request. You have to prove
your assertion the Sheriff's decision to close the building was
"arbitrary".
It is *your* burden to prove *your* assertion.
> Wait, since he could not work within the framework of the law, perhaps
> he issued an Executive Signing Statement? Where have I heard that
> before?….
You ignorance of the duties of a Sheriff is abysmal.
The Sheriff is the primary law enforcement officer of the county and is
responsible for keeping and preserving the peace. [1] Sheriff Fletcher,
as the chief peace officer of Ramsey County, is responsible both by
common and statutory law to keep and conserve peace and good order
within his county. [2] Sheriff Fletcher has a general responsibility
for enforcing the criminal laws throughout his county, and it is his
duty, so far as available means permits, to take the initiative -
without waiting for complaints - to investigate conditions respecting
observance of the law. [3] He has powers stated by tradition, common
law, and statute. [4] A sheriff has the duty to prevent breaches of the
peace. [5]
The Sheriff has wide ranging powers to preserve the peace of the
county. With probable cause established concerning the anarchists,
Sheriff Fletcher had the authority to prevent injury to persons
attending the Republican Convention, prevent loss of life, destruction
of property, disruption of lawful activities and commerce, and prevent
the disintegration of public order. Having probable cause and being
responsible for the peace of Ramsey County, he had both the authority
and duty to detain persons necessary to conduct an investigation, and
to execute a search warrant issued by a court of competent
jurisdiction. Additionally he had the authority close the "Convergence
Center" as a public nuisance. [6]
> While I find your blind acceptance of All Things Sheriff as gospel
> somewhat amusing, it is also becoming tiresome. So, like my cat
> playing with a little mouse (and I’m sure much to the relief of others
> in this forum), I will kick this carcass under the couch and move on.
> Feel free to have the last word.
Read the narrative and legal cites.
Q.E.D.
Neal Krasnoff
Minneapolis
I find Neal's references to Sheriff Fletcher trying to "keeping and preserving
the peace" to be outright absurd. During the weekend prior to the actual
convention, around 200 people (including preschool children) in both Ramsey and
Hennepin counties had weapons drawn on them during raids lead by Sheriff
Fletcher. I personally know young girls who were pulled over and handcuffed
while face-down on the sidewalk, all the while covered by drawn weapons. (No
charges or arrests occurred as a result of most of these raids.) They were not
enforcement actions in any way; they were designed for intimidation.
Anyone who saw the state of siege in St Paul during the RNC would be
hard-pressed to describe the situation as peaceful or orderly. There are
dozens and probably hundreds of people who were arrested without cause or
pepper-sprayed without cause. Journalists, street medics, pacifist members of
the Minnesota Peace Teams, passers-by and nonviolent protesters were arrested
according to the most capricious criteria. And those eventual legal
settlements will be a tax burden to the citizens of St Paul for many years.
Anyone who followed the events of the RNC would more likely to conclude that
Fletcher's actions inflamed the entire protest situation and created greater
violence and danger that I, for one, would have thought possible anywhere in
Minnesota. We have had a long tradition of measured police response to even
civil disobedience. There has been a respectful relationship, by and large,
between peace protesters and the police. That trust and respect is now
shattered.
Let's be clear. Law enforcement is essential to civil society. But let's also
be clear that law enforcement was not at all what Fletcher was doing. He was
directing a series of raids for the purpose of intimidation, followed by a
display of paramilitary force that chilled and shocked nearly all who saw it.
The man is dangerous to our civil liberties. If we actually want to be
physically safe in our persons, Fletcher is absolutely the last person for the
job. Fletcher must be replaced, if we are to have even a small chance at
healing after this massive trauma.
You older SPIF-ers are so proud of the duration of this list throughout the life of of the internet but sometimes I wonder if your concept of civil rights isn't also from the 1990's. Modern thinking about civil rights can be found in the 5PM 9/15/08 Jason Lewis Podcast, where he talks about the recent Golden Plump case, the civil rights act of 1964, the flawed 1971 Griggs v. Duke Power, the first use of the concept of "disparate impact on minority groups" against private (not just public) entities, and the 1991 civil rights act which codified it. http://www.ktlkfm.com/cc-common/podcast.html I have to hand it to Neal he really states the government's case for Ren. Jamie Delton Summit U
I know at a certain point the debate on this issue is one that there will never be closer on but this last post of Neal's just was more than I can stand. No, no the Sheriff does not have the ability to on his own make a determination that a lawful assembly in a rented public hall makes the rental hall a public nuisance. That is so far beyond the boundary of what has ever been determined to be a public nuisance that those who have the NORMAL responsibility to enforce the statute in the City of Saint Paul immediately reversed the inappropriate and illegal interpretation of the statute and allowed the rental hall to continue in the normal course of its business practices. People who own rental halls in Saint Paul have the right to expect that if they are abiding by state law and City ordinance that they should be able to run their business. Their business is to rent their hall. Mr. Fletcher may not have liked the reasons why the RNC Welcoming committee was assembling and he may have had the authority to on an hourly basis ask for warrants from judges to pursue whatever suspicions he had as to an unlawful activities or evil thoughts (which appears to be the crime that may have been committed... having evil thoughts) that individuals might be involved in inside the hall, but he did not have the right to take away the owner of the buildings livelihood because he thought at some future date someone that they may rent to might do something against the law. Its a RENTAL HALL by definition it is available to people to rent for lawful purposes. The hall is responsible to make sure that the use inside the hall is a legal use, but it would be impossible for the owner to know if the people inside the hall would be having thoughts that would be upsetting to Sheriff Fletcher. He had no authority to declare the hall a public nuisance, the hall owner was acting lawfully no matter what Fletcher felt about the RNC Welcoming Committee. Just My Opinion Not Those Of My Employers, Past, Present Or Future Chuck Repke Ward 2 In a message dated 9/17/2008 8:48:27 P.M. Central Daylight Time, <email obscured> writes: ] Section 821B, Torts 2d. "A public nuisance is an unreasonable interference with a right common to the general public [...] Circumstances that may sustain a holding that an interference with a public right is unreasonable include [...] [w]hether the conduct involves a significant interference with the public health, the public safety, the public peace, the public comfort or the public convenience, or [...] whether the conduct is proscribed by a statute, ordinance or administrative regulation, or [...] whether the conduct is of a continuing nature or has produced a long-lasting effect, and, as the actor knows or has reason to know, has a significant effect upon the public right". At 87. In view of the activities of the "RNC Welcoming Committee", it would be reasonable to classify Smith Avenue Hall, 627 Smith Avenue South, St. Paul as premises used in furtherance such activities as a public nuisance, and therefore, subject to closure. **************Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a new fashion blog, plus the latest fall trends and hair styles at StyleList.com. (http://www.stylelist.com/trends?ncid=aolsty00050000000014)
RNC: Were the Police Promises to the Community Kept?
Trust is a fragile thing. Especially if you send someone to a community meeting
about something as important as the Republican National Convention (RNC) which
I reported here. I trusted. I believed. I know better now!
Here is a reminder of what was promised:
The St Paul, Minnesota model of community policing will be used where we do
things differently here
* only arrest individuals who do something wrong, no "scooping" of groups
for mass arrest
* police will be in police uniforms, no special gear, no looking like an
invading army
* the whole city will be a free speech zone, no Boston model of free speech
in cages
* wants to communicate and plan immediately with all groups who wish to
have event or parade permits while having to acknowledge and respect that city
council & mayor have and control the 180 day rule for parade permit
* wants to work out a security operational plan with each group that wants
to have event or parade permits, even willing to have police officer walk
within the group. Comments from the audience indicated a range of plans from
peace groups providing their own monitors to my own plan of pointing and taking
video.
* reassures us that no contract security will be used. All police officers
from other groups will be partnered with a St Paul officer or supervised by a
St Paul officer. All training done here in St Paul using St Paul model.
* the size of the super security fortress zone should be smaller than the
previous RNC convention. Traffic will have to be changed, which has yet to be
worked out.
* if arrests made, only people without IDs should expect to be held a long
time
* no plans to embed or provoke with secret police in local groups
* enforce only local jurisdiction laws, the St Paul police do not have the
authority to enforce federal or international law
* a communications core group will try to use all methods of communications
(even blogs) to let everyone know about traffic delays and other convention
issues
http://www.mnblue.com/node/802
So lets go through this, point by point:
* There was definitely handcuffs and police car rides to the jail, although
technically some of those people were only "detained" for up to 32 hours, not
all were charged. Which means there was "scooping" of groups for mass arrest.
In the Uptake videos, one can hear the response, "We'll sort you all out
later". One can clearly hear someone asking quite clearly, "How can I peaceably
leave?".
* The police definitely looked like an invading army. There was special
gear, even snow plows called up. One would have thought that there was a
teenager giggling operator somewhere, thinking this was a video game, except on
the streets, it looked a war was about to begin on civilians.
* The whole labor day march was done in a freedom of speech cage. Every
march looked like that. At one point, I wanted to stop and eat, yet I was
afraid to cross the police line, even though I should have been able to. People
were maced or worse crossing police lines.
* I can't comment on working out security with marching groups, because I
was not involved in that.
* It did appear that no contract security was used - yeah, one promise
kept.
* The super security zone was either smaller than previous RNCs if you
consider the fenced area or larger if you felt the whole downtown was a police
state.
* Both detentions-without-arrests and arrests took a very long time - days
to process. Having an ID did not mean a reasonable time release.
* Very definitely police were embedded in every possible police group. Long
term neighborhood peace groups suddenly had enthusiastic new people.
* Funny how the police would not enforce federal law, until that applied to
protesters.
* Communications ahead of time was good, although the communications about
RNC current traffic problems were very poor.
And then there was and still is the question of who is in charge. Here is what
I wrote after the community meeting:
"Who will be in charge? This is the question on everyone's mind. Matt
Bostrom said the National Special Security Act of 1998 makes RNC, a security
event with control by Secret Service, FBI, and FEMA. It sounds like that
changed to basically just be Secret Service. Matt's understanding is that the
Secret Service is partnered with a local group which is the St Paul police. The
Secret Service position is to let the local government work on out the issues
like parades and events, meeting the "site" and "sound" rule of the courts. The
levels of local control will be 1) St Paul local police 2) State Patrol 3)
Minneapolis police department with Rob Allen, who handled the bridge disaster
and the latest Critical Mass bike ride 4) state facilitator for resources. It
sounds like the Sheriff's giant holding pen leadership is not in the chain of
command."
http://www.mnblue.com/node/802
Sheriff Fletcher received his giant holding pen, with its many "alleged"
abuses, with no observers allowed inside. In fact, Sheriff Fletcher received
the authority for the "preemptive" arrests and search warrants for ordinary
stuff.
Trust broken.
Grace Kelly nicknamed Kelly
Curmudgeon from Merriam Park
On Sep 18, 2008, at 9:29 AM, <email obscured> wrote: > Mr. Fletcher may > not have liked the reasons why the RNC Welcoming committee was > assembling and > he may have had the authority to on an hourly basis ask for > warrants from > judges to pursue whatever suspicions he had as to an unlawful > activities or evil > thoughts (which appears to be the crime that may have been > committed... > having evil thoughts) that individuals might be involved in inside > the hall, but > he did not have the right to take away the owner of the buildings > livelihood > because he thought at some future date someone that they may rent > to might do > something against the law. Well perhaps Sheriff Fletcher was acting on a higher authority, like the authority of Sarah Palin's pastor, Thomas Muthee, who apparently Palin credits with her rise to the office of the Governor of Alaska. Pastor Muthee also hunts witches according to this blog in the Times from 'across the pond': http://tinyurl.com/68ccgr I'm certain that evil thoughts fall right into the line with witchcraft and Fletcher was acting in the best interest in shutting this Smith Avenue coven down. Perhaps divinity school and more witch hunting is in the cards for this man.
RE: the rental hall:
While the recent posts have been great reading and
certainly address important central issues regarding
the Sheriff's authority, when discussing the seizure of
hall on Smith Ave remember that the reason given for
the seizure was a Fire Code violation, and a minor one
at that. There was no mention of public nuisance until the
last posting by Mr. Krasnoff.
Jim Marcotte
West Side
Charles Underwood wrote:
> I find Neal's references to Sheriff Fletcher trying to "keeping and
> preserving the peace" to be outright absurd.
<snip>
"The sheriff shall keep and preserve the peace of the county, for which
purpose the sheriff may require the aid of such persons or power of the
county as the sheriff deems necessary. The sheriff shall also pursue
and apprehend all felons, execute all processes, writs, precepts, and
orders issued or made by lawful authority and to the sheriff delivered,
attend upon the terms of the district court, and perform all of the
duties pertaining to the office..." Section 387.03, Minnesota Statutes,
2007.
If you don't like the law, Mr. Underwood, you may petition the
legislature to repeal Section 387.03 and strike all common and
statutory law empowering the Sheriff. After you do so, when your
political opponents show up at a Green Party Convention with baseball
bats, steel pipes and tire irons - and you beg the Sheriff to protect
your democratic rights, he will just stand there, for he and his
deputies will only have the authority and liabilities of a citizen.
Sorry, Charlie.
Chuck Repke wrote:
> No, no the Sheriff does not have the ability to on his own make a
> determination that a lawful assembly in a rented public hall makes the
> rental hall a public nuisance. That is so far beyond the boundary of
> what has ever been determined to be a public nuisance that those who
> have the NORMAL responsibility to enforce the statute in the City of
> Saint Paul immediately reversed the inappropriate and illegal
> interpretation of the statute and allowed the rental hall to continue
> in the normal course of its business practices.
Reiterating:
The Sheriff is the primary law enforcement officer of the county and is
responsible for keeping and preserving the peace. [1] Sheriff Fletcher,
as the chief peace officer of Ramsey County, is responsible both by
common and statutory law to keep and conserve peace and good order
within his county. [2] Sheriff Fletcher has a general responsibility
for enforcing the criminal laws throughout his county, and it is his
duty, so far as available means permits, to take the initiative -
without waiting for complaints - to investigate conditions respecting
observance of the law. [3] He has powers stated by tradition, common
law, and statute. [4] A sheriff has the duty to prevent breaches of the
peace. [5]
The Sheriff has wide ranging powers to preserve the peace of the
county. With probable cause established concerning the anarchists,
Sheriff Fletcher had the authority to prevent injury to persons
attending the Republican Convention, prevent loss of life, destruction
of property, disruption of lawful activities and commerce, and prevent
the disintegration of public order. Having probable cause and being
responsible for the peace of Ramsey County, he had both the authority
and duty to detain persons necessary to conduct an investigation, and
to execute a search warrant issued by a court of competent
jurisdiction.
> those who have the NORMAL responsibility to enforce the statute in
> the City of Saint Paul immediately reversed the inappropriate and
> illegal interpretation of the statute and allowed the rental hall to
> continue in the normal course of its business practices.
The Sheriff of Ramsey County, as any Sheriff, will respect the
authority of a city or municipal corporation to enforce local
ordinances and employ it's own police force to patrol the city. The
authority of the City of St. Paul does not abrogate the authority and
power of the Sheriff.
In view of the common law and statutory law citations affirming the
power of the Sheriff of Ramsey County, Mr. Repke should state which
statute to which he is referring, and then prove his assertion that
Sheriff Fletcher's interpretation of the statute in question was
"inappropriate", and that Sheriff Fletcher's action was "illegal".
> He had no authority to declare the hall a public nuisance, the hall
> owner was acting lawfully no matter what Fletcher felt about the RNC
> Welcoming Committee.
The Sheriff has the authority to declare a public nuisance. [6]
Grace Kelly wrote:
> Trust broken.
Ox gored.
Bill Kahn wrote:
> Well perhaps Sheriff Fletcher was acting on a higher authority, like
> the authority of Sarah Palin's pastor, Thomas Muthee, who apparently
> Palin credits with her rise to the office of the Governor of Alaska.
Religious tests are prohibited in the United States [7] and in
Minnesota. [8]
You were implying...what?
Neal Krasnoff
Minneapolis
[1] "The sheriff shall keep and preserve the peace of the county, for
which purpose the sheriff may require the aid of such persons or power
of the county as the sheriff deems necessary. The sheriff shall also
pursue and apprehend all felons, execute all processes, writs,
precepts, and orders issued or made by lawful authority and to the
sheriff delivered, attend upon the terms of the district court, and
perform all of the duties pertaining to the office..." Section 387.03,
Minnesota Statutes, 2007.
[2] In re Olson, 1941, 211 Minn 114, 300 N.W. 398.
[3] Op.Atty.Gen., 733, July 14, 1947. "A sheriff has a general
responsibility to...take such actions as certain statutes may require
for the prevention of violations, to arrest offenders when sufficient
grounds appear, to swear to criminal complaints when he has sufficient
knowledge of the facts, and to investigate criminal cases and secure
evidence for the prosecution thereof, and anyone may make a report to
the sheriff, who should make such investigation and take such action as
the case may require".
[4] See, generally, 80 Corpus Juris Secundum 74. "[The Sheriff]...must
enforce the laws enacted for the protection of the lives, persons,
property, health, and morals of the people". At 164. "As a peace
officer, it is the duty of a sheriff...to preserve the peace or act as
conservator of the peace within [his] county, using such force as may
be necessary to preserve the peace. At 164, 165. See, also, Sheriffs,
Police and Constables, 70 American Jurisprudence 2d.
[5] Ibid, at 165.
[6] Ibid.
[7] Article VI, clause 3, United States Constitution. "...no religious
test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public
trust under the United States".
[8] Article I, Section 17, Minnesota Constitution. "No religious test
or amount of property shall be required as a qualification for any
office of public trust in the state. No religious test or amount of
property shall be required as a qualification of any voter at any
election in this state; nor shall any person be rendered incompetent to
give evidence in any court of law or equity in consequence of his
opinion upon the subject of religion".
In a message dated 9/18/2008 7:24:46 PM Central Daylight Time, <email obscured> writes: The Sheriff has the authority to declare a public nuisance. [6] No, he has the authority to enforce the law concerning public nuisances. Which in this case would have been the City ordinance. To declare the building on Smith Street to be a public nuisance is an action against the building owner NOT THE RNC welcoming committee. You clearly have no idea of the City ordinance or who declaring a public nuisance is an action against. The same thing is true of the code violation, it is an action against the rental hall owner not the RNC welcoming committee. The alleged code violation is to have the door barred when occupied and to have blankets on the floor. Those are not violations that would constitute a violation that would allow the City or anyone enforcing the code for the City to shut a building down. What Neal is suggesting is that the Sheriff has the power to create law on the spot by interpreting the law however he choses. Sad. JMONTOMEPPOF Chuck Repke **************Looking for simple solutions to your real-life financial challenges? Check out WalletPop for the latest news and information, tips and calculators. (http://www.walletpop.com/?NCID=emlcntuswall00000001)
Chuck Repke wrote:
>> Neal Krasnoff wrote:
>> The Sheriff has the authority to declare a public nuisance. [6]
> No, he has the authority to enforce the law concerning public
> nuisances. Which in this case would have been the City ordinance. To
> declare the building on Smith Street to be a public nuisance is an
> action against the building owner NOT THE RNC welcoming committee.
Wrong, Mr. Repke. Because Sheriff Fletcher has the duty to preserve the
peace within Ramsey County, he has the authority - using such force as
may be necessary - to preserve the peace. If you don't want to accept
my cite from Torts 2d, perhaps Section 609.74 of the Minnesota Statutes
will be sufficient. [1]
> You clearly have no idea of the City ordinance or who declaring a
> public nuisance is an action against. The same thing is true of the
> code violation, it is an action against the rental hall owner not the
> RNC welcoming committee.
You are wrong. See the citation for Public Nuisance at [1].
> The alleged code violation is to have the door barred when occupied
> and to have blankets on the floor. Those are not violations that
> would constitute a violation that would allow the City or anyone
> enforcing the code for the City to shut a building down.
Reread the search warrant. It has probable cause written all over it.
> What Neal is suggesting is that the Sheriff has the power to create
> law on the spot by interpreting the law however he choses.
It is illogical to suggest that one law can be instantaneously created
by simultaneous interpretation of another. The powers of the Sheriff
have already been discussed. Review them if necessary.
Neal Krasnoff
Minneapolis
[1] Public Nuisance, Section 609.74 Sub. 1, Minnesota Statutes, 2007.
"Whoever by an act or failure to perform a legal duty intentionally
does any of the following is guilty of maintaining a public nuisance,
which is a misdemeanor [...] maintains or permits a condition which
unreasonably annoys, injures or endangers the safety, health, morals,
comfort, or repose of any considerable number of members of the
public...".
OK, now I am officially beating a dead horse... but... Neal, the Sheriff took action against a building owner, not the RNCWC. What offense did the building owner commit? The Sheriff has no way of knowing with any certainty that the owner wasn't going to use the building for a wedding the next day. He attempted to shut down the building not the RNCWC. Even if you believe all of your concerns about the potential actions of the RNCWC shutting down the building does nothing to the RNCWC, they get out of paying for a hall and move on down the road. The Sheriff took an action that could only adversely affect a building owner. What part of that don't you get? JMONTOMEPPOF Chuck Repke In a message dated 9/19/2008 6:36:24 PM Central Daylight Time, <email obscured> writes: >> Neal Krasnoff wrote: >> The Sheriff has the authority to declare a public nuisance. [6] > No, he has the authority to enforce the law concerning public > nuisances. Which in this case would have been the City ordinance. To > declare the building on Smith Street to be a public nuisance is an > action against the building owner NOT THE RNC welcoming committee. Wrong, Mr. Repke. Because Sheriff Fletcher has the duty to preserve the peace within Ramsey County, he has the authority - using such force as may be necessary - to preserve the peace. If you don't want to accept my cite from Torts 2d, perhaps Section 609.74 of the Minnesota Statutes will be sufficient. [1] > You clearly have no idea of the City ordinance or who declaring a > public nuisance is an action against. The same thing is true of the > code violation, it is an action against the rental hall owner not the > RNC welcoming committee. You are wrong. See the citation for Public Nuisance at [1]. > The alleged code violation is to have the door barred when occupied > and to have blankets on the floor. Those are not violations that > would constitute a violation that would allow the City or anyone > enforcing the code for the City to shut a building down. Reread the search warrant. It has probable cause written all over it. > What Neal is suggesting is that the Sheriff has the power to create > law on the spot by interpreting the law however he choses. It is illogical to suggest that one law can be instantaneously created by simultaneous interpretation of another. The powers of the Sheriff have already been discussed. Review them if necessary. Neal Krasnoff Minneapolis [1] Public Nuisance, Section 609.74 Sub. 1, Minnesota Statutes, 2007. "Whoever by an act or failure to perform a legal duty intentionally does any of the following is guilty of maintaining a public nuisance, which is a misdemeanor [...] maintains or permits a condition which unreasonably annoys, injures or endangers the safety, health, morals, comfort, or repose of any considerable number of members of the public...". Neal Krasnoff Loring Park, Minneapolis Info about Neal Krasnoff: http://forums.e-democracy.org/p/nealkrasnoff
Neal wrote:
"The Sheriff has the authority to declare a public nuisance."
Chuck wrote:
"No, he has the authority to enforce the law concerning public
nuisances....."
Neal wrote:
"Wrong, Mr. Repke. Because Sheriff Fletcher has the duty to preserve the
peace within Ramsey County, he has the authority...."
Actually, Mr Krasnoff, he is right. Since you are such a fan of quoting
statutes,
but apparently don't take the time to fully understand them, here's several
for you:
The application of public nuisance law, like the Fire Code, is governed by
a very specific process of notification, allowance for abatement and then
if needed, enforcement action.
MN 617.81 specifies that ONLY a prosecuting attorney may bring
an action to stop nuisance activity from occurring. A “prosecuting attorney”
is defined by Sub 9 as either a city attorney, county attorney, or the state
attorney general.
If a prosecuting attorney has reason to believe a nuisance exists in any
building
he or she may bring a civil action to put an end to the nuisance activity.
Before
filing the action, the prosecuting attorney must send a written notice by
personal
service or certified mail to the owner of the property and all other known
interested
parties (MN 617.81 Sub 4)
If the owner ends the nuisance activity or enters into an abatement plan with
the
prosecuting attorney within 30 days of receiving notice, the prosecutor cannot
file the nuisance action. (MN 617.82)
The law further states (MN 617.81 Sub 2) that a public nuisance only exists
upon
PROOF ("clear and convincing evidence" 617.81 Sub 2-9C), not allegation, of two
or more separate incidents within a 12 month period.
You wrote:
"It is illogical to suggest that one law can be instantaneously created
by simultaneous interpretation of another."
My point exactly.
Jim Marcotte
West Side
Chuck Repke wrote:
> Neal, the Sheriff took action against a building owner, not the RNCWC.
Refer to the search warrant.
> What offense did the building owner commit?
If the owner voluntarily, knowingly and intelligently rented his
building to the RNCWC or other party with the knowledge of their
activities and plans to commit unlawful acts, the owner could be held
liable.
> The Sheriff has no way of knowing with any certainty that the owner
> wasn't going to use the building for a wedding the next day. He
> attempted to shut down the building not the RNCWC. Even if you
> believe all of your concerns about the potential actions of the RNCWC
> shutting down the building does nothing to the RNCWC, they get out of
> paying for a hall and move on down the road. The Sheriff took an
> action that could only adversely affect a building owner.
The Sheriff's actions obviously affected the RNCWC. The Sheriff has a
duty to preserve the peace of the county. This has already been
discussed. Refer to the legal cites as noted.
> What part of that don't you get?
Jim Marcotte wrote:
> Actually, Mr Krasnoff, he is right. Since you are such a fan of
> quoting statutes, but apparently don't take the time to fully
> understand them, here's several for you:
Before you start condescending, you had better read the very statutes
you quoted. Section 617.81 sub 2(a) states the acts constituting a
public nuisance are for FOR PURPOSES OF SECTION 617.80 TO
617.81(emphasis mine). [1] Sheriff Fletcher had the authority to act
pursuant to his general duty to preserve the peace, investigate alleged
criminal activity, execute a search warrant issued by a court upon
probable cause, and prevent criminal acts by the RNCWC and their
collaborators. I assert the existence of a nuisance abatement law in
Section 617.80 et. seq. does not relieve the Sheriff of his duty to act
against a public nuisance and to prevent interference to the Republican
Party's right of peaceful assembly.
> The application of public nuisance law, like the Fire Code, is
> governed by a very specific process of notification, allowance for
> abatement and then if needed, enforcement action.
Abatement of an illegal condition by a landlord is quite different than
a Sheriff's duty to prevent crime. I assert the "Convergence Center"
and it's occupants met the definition of a public nuisance in Torts 2d
[2] and by statute [3]. Sheriff Fletcher had a duty to preserve the
peace in Ramsey County. If the Sheriff had not performed his duty, he
would be liable for failure to act.
In response to Charles Underwood, I wrote:
> If you don't like the law, Mr. Underwood, you may petition the
> legislature to repeal Section 387.03 and strike all common and
> statutory law empowering the Sheriff. After you do so, when your
> political opponents show up at a Green Party Convention with baseball
> bats, steel pipes and tire irons - and you beg the Sheriff to protect
> your democratic rights, he will just stand there, for he and his
> deputies will only have the authority and liabilities of a citizen.
What's wrong Charlie? Nothing more to say?
Neal Krasnoff
Minneapolis
[1] Section 617.81 Sub. 2(a), Minnesota Statutes, 2007. "For purposes
of sections 617.80 to 617.87, a public nuisance exists upon proof of
two or more separate behavioral incidents of one or more of the
following, committed within the previous 12 months within the
building..."
[2] Section 821B, Torts 2d. This section describes a public nuisance
as an unreasonable interference with a right common to the general
public. Interference with a public right is unreasonable include
whether the conduct involves a significant interference with the public
health, the public safety, the public peace, the public comfort or the
public convenience; or whether the conduct is proscribed by a statute,
ordinance or administrative regulation; or whether the conduct is of a
continuing nature or has produced a long-lasting effect, and, as the
actor knows or has reason to know, has a significant effect upon the
public right. At 87. In view of the activities of the "RNC Welcoming
Committee", it would be reasonable to classify Smith Avenue Hall, 627
Smith Avenue South, St. Paul as premises used in furtherance such
activities as a public nuisance, and therefore, subject to closure.
[3] Public Nuisance, Section 609.74 Sub. 1, Minnesota Statutes, 2007.
"Whoever by an act or failure to perform a legal duty intentionally
does any of the following is guilty of maintaining a public nuisance,
which is a misdemeanor [...] maintains or permits a condition which
unreasonably annoys, injures or endangers the safety, health, morals,
comfort, or repose of any considerable number of members of the
public...".
Neal wrote:
"I assert the existence of a nuisance abatement law in
Section 617.80 et. seq. does not relieve the Sheriff of his duty to act
against a public nuisance and to prevent interference to the Republican
Party's right of peaceful assembly."
The State Public Nuisance Law is set forth in Minnesota
Statutes Sections 617.80 to 617.87.
If you are going to invoke public nuisance law as justification
for the Sheriffs act of prior restraint – seizing the building - then
the statutes apply and your wishing it were not so does not
make it so. And if you are going to quote 609.74 you may wish
to emphasize INTENTIONALLY, which is key to the meaning
of the text.
This is all very interesting (or not) but has little or no relevance
to the building on Smith Ave as it was not declared, or even
alleged to be, a public nuisance. You may want endlessly
debate points and procedures of MN public nuisance law but
this is not the proper forum – perhaps there is a theory of law
discussion somewhere in which you can wish and assert
ad infinitum.
What I do find…interesting…is your position that the sheriff has
a sweeping mandate to keep the peace and this allows him/her
to work outside the law when necessary. Where exactly are you
going to draw the line when granting that authority?
Jim Marcotte
Jim Marcotte wrote:
> The State Public Nuisance Law is set forth in Minnesota Statutes
> Sections 617.80 to 617.87.
The Public Nuisance statute is set forth in Section 609.74. Sections
617.80 et. seq. concerns abatement. Again, the existence of an
abatement statute does not abrogate the Sheriff's responsibility to act
against a public nuisance.
> If you are going to invoke public nuisance law as justification for
> the Sheriffs act of prior restraint – seizing the building - then the
> statutes apply and your wishing it were not so does not make it so.
> And if you are going to quote 609.74 you may wish to emphasize
> INTENTIONALLY, which is key to the meaning of the text
If you are using "prior restraint" in the context of political speech
in the 1st Amendment, you are mistaken. The Sheriff executed his duty
to prevent criminal ACTS. The abatement statutes does not apply to the
Sheriff's duty to prevent acts that constitute a public nuisance or
crimes. The state of mind requirement of intent will be proven in a
court of law.
In the case of individuals in the RNCWC at Smith Avenue Hall:
"RNCWC Defendants, by an act or combination of acts, violated Section
609.74 Subdivision 1 of the Minnesota Statutes in that RNCWC defendants
intentionally maintained a public nuisance in that defendants
maintained or permitted a condition which unreasonably annoyed, injured
or endangered the safety, health, morals, comfort, or repose of a
considerable number of members of the public in the City of St. Paul
and in the County of Ramsey..."
In the case of the owners of the building:
"Defendant Building Owners, by the voluntary, intelligent and knowing
act of renting Smith Avenue Hall to the RNC Welcoming Committee
(hereafter referred to as "RNCWC") Defendant Building Owners violated
Section 609.74 Subdivision 1 of the Minnesota Statutes, in that
Defendant Building Owners intentionally maintained a public nuisance by
permitting a condition which unreasonably annoyed, injured or
endangered the safety, health, morals, comfort, or repose of a
considerable number of members of the public in the City of St. Paul
and in the County of Ramsey..."
If you really want me to take the time to write out an entire sample
prosecutor's information for the RNCWC defendants and for the building
owners, I will do so.
BTW, are you the same Jim Marcotte that owns the Smith Avenue Hall?
Neal Krasnoff
Minneapolis
Doing a little people research Neal? Since you ask, I am a principal in
the corporation that owns the building on Smith Ave.
Neal wrote:
“If you really want me to take the time to write out an entire sample
prosecutor's information for the RNCWC defendants and for the building
owners, I will do so.”
Write out a sample prosecutor’s information? If I thought you had
a sense of humor I would assume you are joking - I think you
should save the fiction for the classroom. Since you missed it
the first time let’s try it again….a little slower this time….
T h i s...h a s....n o....r e l e v a n c e to the seizure of the building
on Smith Ave as it was not declared, or ever alleged to be, a
public nuisance.
“If you are using "prior restraint" in the context of political speech
in the 1st Amendment, you are mistaken.”
On this one you have a point, I am guilty of using words that
conveyed meaning different than what I intended, this being real
estate after all – “restraint” alone, while not grammatically correct
would have been more accurate. (Although I am sure there will be
much discussion regarding whether confiscating and holding the
tenants boxes of literature does constitute prior restraint – but
not by me).
This subject has become a bore for all and I for one am going to be
done with it. Please go find something constructive to do.
Jim Marcotte
West Side
“When you argue with a fool...be sure he isn't similarly engaged.”
Jim Marcotte wrote:
> Write out a sample prosecutor’s information? If I thought you had a
> sense of humor I would assume you are joking - I think you should save
> the fiction for the classroom. Since you missed it the first time
> let’s try it again….a little slower this time….
> T h i s...h a s....n o....r e l e v a n c e to the seizure of the
> building on Smith Ave as it was not declared, or ever alleged to be, a
> public nuisance.
It is apparent that you have no valid counter argument, as you have
resorted to condescension - again. Or you could be just defensive,
considering that you are a principal in the corporation that owns Smith
Avenue Hall. I have asserted that due to the facts presented about the
RNCWC, Smith Avenue Hall could be designated as a public nuisance, for
the occupants maintained or permitted a condition which was defined as
a public nuisance. If - and I emphasize IF - the building owners had
knowingly rented their property to persons or a group whose unlawful
intentions were a matter of public record, it would be evidence that a
condition which qualified as a public nuisance was permitted to exist.
My argument stands that Sheriff Fletcher had a legal duty to act
against Smith Avenue Hall and it's occupants. I have documented the
legal justification for his duty and the exercise of his power as
Sheriff of Ramsey County. I have provided legal justification for his
acts pursuant to the Minnesota Statutes, common law, and legal opinion.
You - as well the others who have argued for the RNCWC - have provided
no counter argument based upon objective fact.
> This subject has become a bore for all and I for one am going to be
> done with it. Please go find something constructive to do.
Don't be so presumptive that you speak for everyone here - especially
not me. Obviously you can't defend your argument, so you can only
dismiss mine. You condescension is noted - again.
> “When you argue with a fool...be sure he isn't similarly engaged.”
Or perhaps that fool - whoever you were referring to - wasn't engaged
in renting his property to anarchists who had announced their intent to
interfere with the political rights of citizens.
#/bin/sh/thread -stop
Neal Krasnoff
Minneapolis
Mr. Thune,
Thanks for giving a voice to those among us who were mistreated by both the
police during the RNC. My account is from Minneapolis, where even less review
of police actions during the RNC is taking place.
I'll start with my suggestions since that's why you started this forum to begin
with.
I would highly recommend the police department puts a moratorium on "mass
arrests". I don't see how that can possibly be constitutional. Second, if
you're going to commit unconstitutional arrests, at least have the common
courtesy to give your employers, the public, enough warning. Then, when
warning is given, it is confusing when the only way to leave is through police
lines, and anyone who goes near the police are beat and maced.
I was at the Rage Against the Machine concert in downtown Minneapolis, and went
to a nearby bar / restaurant nearby just after the show. When I left I was
still near the Target Center and saw police lines blocking three sides of an
intersection. I went to take some pictures of the situation. One side of the
police lines opened up, and the crowd cheered, interpreting that as a signal
that they were being allowed to march, with the permission of the large police,
in that direction. I followed along on the sidewalk. About one block into it,
a line of police on bikes came by and basically turned most people back and
herded the rest of the protesters onto the sidewalk. It was at this time that
it was clear the police did not want us in the streets and this was not a
sanctioned march, so I immediately complied and moved to the sidewalk. There
was no violence or aggression exhibited by any of the protesters or observers.
There were absolutely no warnings that arrests were imminent. If there were, I
would have left immediately. My mistake was that I assumed that if I didn't do
anything illegal (stay out of the streets, don't harass cops, destroy property
etc.) then I had nothing to worry about. After taking a couple more pictures,
the situation really seems to deescalate. At this point no one was in the
street except for the police (I have pictures to prove this). Most people in
the crowd (including myself) decided any major events were over and made
attempts to leave. By this point the police were on all sides of us. They
were extremely intimidating to anyone who approached them, even to leave the
area. By this time it was too late. They had decided to arrest everyone
between the police lines, no matter where they were or what they were doing.
The treatment we received was awful. We were sitting on the pavement in
extremely tight ziplock handcuffs for 1 - 1.5 hours. A couple in their 70's
were also cuffed and sitting near me. After that we were processed and loaded
onto city buses, to sit for another 1 - 1.5 hours. Both of my thumbs are still
numb from this treatment. I told an officer the handcuffs were much too tight.
He examined them and did nothing. They took us to the county jail, where we
were cited for "public nuisance" and "obstructing vehicular and pedestrian
traffic".
I had no interest in hurting anyone or damaging anything, let alone being
arrested. I was a guy on the sidewalk taking pictures of the event. It was
the most absurd, surreal experience of my life. I didn't think things like
this could happen in this country (at least outside of Gitmo).
Before that night, when I would read accounts of people being brutalized at
protests I thought they must have done *something* to warrant that kind of
response. I now have an entirely different perspective on the matter. While
the protesters remained peaceful, I saw the police mace people who had nothing
to do with the protest because they wanted to cross the street. I saw them
mace and shove a knee in the back of a woman in her 50's because she wanted to
get to her car on the other side of the street to leave - and that was before
the mass arrest.
The following file was added to this topic:
Today's Pioneer Press carried what I consider a very thoughtful analysis and commentary (op-ed) on the RNC's aftermath. "The RNC has come and gone, so it is important to focus now on critical questions for democracy: # Who was responsible for the militarization of law enforcement in a city known for community policing? # Will the Constitution be the greatest casualty of the RNC's visit?" http://www.twincities.com/opinion/ci_10540160
Constitutional,
Civil
Criminal Issues
Case in point September
2008 Republican National Convention
Saint Paul Minnesota
List by <email obscured>
The following are (true or false) statements of observed activities
(overtly ) occurring with in the confines of the United States Of America;
first, there were for two years in my city (St.P.) undercover city, county
other states and national as well as international police personnel actively
investigating local citizens who peaceably assembled or were in their homes.
Two, there were pre-emptive raids on homes and businesses where papers and
effects where taken unreasonably and no known signed or published oaths, to
back up said search and seizures (Judge Joann Smith, Second Judicial District)
Three, The Secret Service (SS) assigned to the president of the United States
by US statue declared RNC a Special National Security Event and there was a
military style force of close to 4000 occupation police personnel from multiple
jurisdiction including other states of the union in St. Paul for well over a
week during the RNC. Four, there were search and seizure of persons and
belongings of people on the street. Five, over 800 people were arrested and
more detained but not arrested. Six, close to fifty media / news people were
arrested and more kept or cordoned off, disallowed access for reporting news of
the event. Seven, there were compounds established and private buildings
commandeered, military personnel quartered, concrete barriers placed, high
fencing and special processing pens built for detention of local citizens as
well as visitors to the city. Eight, There was public, private, and corporate;
government film documenting most of this event plus verbal testimony/written
items of same given inside St. Paul’s City council chambers. Nine, There are
possible law suits and court tests of constitutional issues, civil, criminal,
ongoing to be played out in Ramsey County for some time to come. TSH
Need help? Please contact technical support and we will follow-up in 24-48 hours.
Hosted by E-Democracy.Org. Powered by OnlineGroups.Net using the open source web-based mailing list manager GroupServer.