Nov. 1st, 4AM – 10 Arrests at Terry Schrunk Plaza

November 1, 2011
By

PORTLAND, ORE. — Early Tuesday morning, after reportedly consulting with decision makers in other parts of the country, Federal officials enlisted the help of Portland Police to remove Occupy Portland protesters from federally owned Terry D. Schrunk Plaza. The move came around 3:45 AM after most supporters had gone to sleep and news crews had left.

Look-outs for the protesters gave the camp warning about the coming officers using a drum signal, and the officers lined up on SW Madison Street, blocking protesters from exiting, then engaging them in dialogue. Shortly afterwards they arrested 10 people in the park, taking about 15 minutes to do so.

“The Federal government occupies 700 bases in 136 nations around the world,” Micaiah Dutt, a veteran of the United States Marine Corps and one of the protesters arrested in Schrunk Plaza, said after. “But they refuse to allow us to peacefully assemble in a Federal park? I allowed myself to be arrested in order to make a statement.”

One of the individuals who moved to the park mentioned that they didn’t believe there was a valid Federal law to arrest them under, mentioning they were a law student. By late Sunday evening, people involved with Occupy Portland decided to set up tents in Schrunk Plaza due to the lack of available space in Chapman & Lownsdale Squares.

“We were running out of space at camp,” Illona Trogub, a protester who observed the arrests, commented. “Newly arriving politically-minded folk are unable to find a tent spot, which prevents committees from being refreshed by new energy and enthusiasm.”

Many Occupiers were skeptical about what Federal law was being violated. When asked directly, no enforcement agency or representative was able to provide an answer, leaving it an open question. The arrestees were given a citation for “failing to comply with a lawful direction” and released without any other action taken.

“Does that mean that they were arrested for not doing what they were told instead of for violating a law?” Jordan LeDoux wondered afterward. “That’s not the sort of thing you expect in this country.”

The situation is further muddled by the recent decision of a Federal Judge in Nashville, TN, to issue a restraining order against a curfew ordinance. Judge Aleta Trauger said she issued the order because the curfew was a “clear prior restraint on free speech rights.”

“The didn’t give a Miranda warning, nor did they tell us why we were being arrested,” Former U.S. Marine Sgt. Micaiah Dutt recounted. “They said, ‘because you were being blatantly illegal, there was no need for explanation.’ After that we were taken to Hatfield Courthouse.”

The arrestees found out their charge when they were handed their citation, and were told that their court date was set for January.

As with Jamison Square, Occupy Portland believes that the First Amendment provides people with legal protection to peacefully assemble in political protest at any time of the day in any public space. The vagueness of the charges and the lack of specific statutes being violated lends some credibility to that position, at least in the Federal park.

At Occupy Albany, NY, the police refused an order to arrest from the Governor and the Mayor on the grounds that it was a violation of law, and that it was necessary to public safety.

“Freedom to assemble was put into our Constitution so that people could come together and talk about what’s wrong, then figure out solutions,” Ms. Trogub said. “How does an anti-camping ordinance supersede that right? If we don’t have that right, how are the people supposed to participate? How do we fix anything?”

 

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/01/occupy-nashville-officials_n_1068795.html

21 Responses to Nov. 1st, 4AM – 10 Arrests at Terry Schrunk Plaza

  1. Daniel Keller on November 1, 2011 at 12:10 pm

    Do you agree with the police action at Schrunk Plaza?

    YES

    NO

    GO VOTE!

    ( http://www.kgw.com/news/Occupy-Portland-expanding-to-federal-park-132944703.html)

  2. ral on November 1, 2011 at 3:21 pm

    Pay attention to the commentary “out there”. Pay less attention to “in here”. The labeling is getting fragmented and you are becoming disenfranchised from the very people you want to represent…and they would welcome a voice, if it indeed represented. Gotta be bi-partisan if this is going to work, gotta speak the languages if this is going to work, gotta “seek to understand” if this is going to work.

    Started out as Occupy Wall Street, The 99%, Occupy Portland

    Now is The Other 1%, The 5%, Tent People, Occupiers, anarchists, “kick rocks you hippies”, Occupiers, drug addicts, street people, homeless, road warriors, tweakers, the assembly…

    None of this is good and I am worried you’ve lost everyone

    • Cecilia on November 2, 2011 at 10:43 pm

      As he said, it would be a good thing to pay attention to what ‘outsiders’ are saying about the actions. I’m sure that random march around the East side tonight annoyed a lot more people than it brought in.

  3. lori on November 1, 2011 at 3:31 pm

    ffPost’s Ryan Grim and Zach Carter here.
    Share this:
    12:32 PM – Today
    Open Letter To The Citizens Of Oakland From The Oakland Police Officers’ Association: ‘We Are Confused’

    The entire text of the letter follows below:

    1 November 2011 – Oakland, Ca.

    We represent the 645 police officers who work hard every day to protect the citizens of Oakland. We, too, are the 99% fighting for better working conditions, fair treatment and the ability to provide a living for our children and families. We are severely understaffed with many City beats remaining unprotected by police during the day and evening hours.

    As your police officers, we are confused.

    On Tuesday, October 25th, we were ordered by Mayor Quan to clear out the encampments at Frank Ogawa Plaza and to keep protesters out of the Plaza. We performed the job that the Mayor’s Administration asked us to do, being fully aware that past protests in Oakland have resulted in rioting, violence and destruction of property.

    Then, on Wednesday, October 26th, the Mayor allowed protesters back in – to camp out at the very place they were evacuated from the day before.

    To add to the confusion, the Administration issued a memo on Friday, October 28th to all City workers in support of the “Stop Work” strike scheduled for Wednesday, giving all employees, except for police officers, permission to take the day off.

    That’s hundreds of City workers encouraged to take off work to participate in the protest against “the establishment.” But aren’t the Mayor and her Administration part of the establishment they are paying City employees to protest? Is it the City’s intention to have City employees on both sides of a skirmish line?

    It is all very confusing to us.

    Meanwhile, a message has been sent to all police officers: Everyone, including those who have the day off, must show up for work on Wednesday. This is also being paid for by Oakland taxpayers. Last week’s events alone cost Oakland taxpayers over $1 million.

    The Mayor and her Administration are beefing up police presence for Wednesday’s work strike they are encouraging and even “staffing,” spending hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars for additional police presence – at a time when the Mayor is also asking Oakland residents to vote on an $80 parcel tax to bail out the City’s failing finances.

    All of these mixed messages are confusing.
    We love Oakland and just want to do our jobs to protect Oakland residents. We respectfully ask the citizens of Oakland to join us in demanding that our City officials, including Mayor Quan, make sound decisions and take responsibility for these decisions. Oakland is struggling – we need real leaders NOW who will step up and lead – not send mixed messages. Thank you for listening.

  4. RemiMedic on November 1, 2011 at 5:36 pm

    Correction.

    It’s Terry Schunk Plaza. Not Schrunk

    • Cecilia on November 2, 2011 at 10:44 pm

      Terry D. Schrunk Plaza

      Google is your friend.

  5. RemiMedic on November 1, 2011 at 5:38 pm

    NVM. Disregard. I looked it up and it turns out that myself and about 50 other people have been mispronouncing it for three weeks. Go fig.

  6. john gardner on November 1, 2011 at 6:44 pm

    you guys are the best. your the only hope. may saturn keep you warm tonight while you in the belly of the beast at shrunk plaza.

  7. john gardner on November 1, 2011 at 6:50 pm

    you guys are the best. your the only hope. may saturn keep you warm while sleeping in the belly of the beast at shrunk plaza.

  8. Irish Guy on November 1, 2011 at 9:11 pm

    Inheritance and estate taxes
    Figures on inheritance tell much the same story. According to a study published by the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland, only 1.6% of Americans receive $100,000 or more in inheritance. Another 1.1% receive $50,000 to $100,000. On the other hand, 91.9% receive nothing (Kotlikoff & Gokhale, 2000). Thus, the attempt by ultra-conservatives to eliminate inheritance taxes — which they always call “death taxes” for P.R. reasons — would take a huge bite out of government revenues (an estimated $253 billion between 2012 and 2022) for the benefit of the heirs of the mere 0.6% of Americans whose death would lead to the payment of any estate taxes whatsoever (Citizens for Tax Justice, 2010b).

    It is noteworthy that some of the richest people in the country oppose this ultra-conservative initiative, suggesting that this effort is driven by anti-government ideology. In other words, few of the ultra-conservative and libertarian activists behind the effort will benefit from it in any material way. However, a study (Kenny et al., 2006) of the financial support for eliminating inheritance taxes discovered that 18 super-rich families (mostly Republican financial donors, but a few who support Democrats) provide the anti-government activists with most of the money for this effort. (For more infomation, including the names of the major donors, download the article from United For a Fair Economy’s Web

  9. Nighttime Updates, Nov. 2nd on November 2, 2011 at 4:49 am

    [...] of #OccupyPortland’s camps was raided around 4am Tuesday morning. 10 arrests were made. Lookouts in the streets used a drum signal to alert those sleeping at the camp of the incoming [...]

  10. [...] Ten more Occupy Portland demonstrators were arrested yesterday at 4AM. When they asked what the charge was, they were told they had “failed to comply with a lawful direction: “‘The didn’t give a Miranda warning, nor did they tell us why we were being arrested,’ Former U.S. Marine Sgt. Micaiah Dutt recounted. ‘They said, ‘because you were being blatantly illegal, there was no need for explanation.”” (Thanks, Jordan!) [...]

    • Spencer Neal on November 3, 2011 at 1:11 pm

      Miranda warnings are only required if the police have you in custody and want to ask you questions. They have nothing to do with whether you can be arrested.

      Nor do the police have to tell you why you are being arrested.

      Sorry, that is just the law.

  11. Rose M on November 2, 2011 at 10:24 am

    I suggest Occupy Portland use the “Couch Surfing” approach to getting more Occupiers into Portland. Many supporters of the Occupy movement do not camp at the parks because they have jobs, families, & responsibilities. Why not set up a couch surfing area on this site to allow those w/ homes/not camping to offer up their couch or spare bedroom to those would would like to join Occupy Portland for a bit? Google “Couch Surfing”, check out their sites, see how it’s done & do the same thing… Couch Surfing for Occupiers!

    • Cecilia on November 2, 2011 at 10:40 pm

      Would you let random unknown people stay on your couch while you’re off at work? Really?

  12. [...] Ten more Occupy Portland demonstrators were arrested yesterday at 4AM. When they asked what the charge was, they were told they had “failed to comply with a lawful direction: “‘The didn’t give a Miranda warning, nor did they tell us why we were being arrested,’ Former U.S. Marine Sgt. Micaiah Dutt recounted. ‘They said, ‘because you were being blatantly illegal, there was no need for explanation.”” (Thanks, Jordan!) [...]

  13. JC on November 2, 2011 at 6:57 pm

    The federal law in question.

    § 101–20.304 Conformity with signs and
    directions.
    Persons in and on property shall at
    all times comply with official signs of
    a prohibitory, regulatory, or directory
    nature and with the lawful direction of
    Federal Protective Officers and other
    authorized individuals

  14. [...] Occupy Portland: The didn’t give a Miranda warning, nor did they tell us why we were being ar… [...]

  15. [...] we don’t have that right, how are the people supposed to participate? How do we fix anything?”Via occupyportland.org Share and Enjoy: Category: Demand [...]

  16. eastern oregon on November 5, 2011 at 8:06 am

    Time to occupy the jail with all the protesters make the world a happy place

Engage OPDX

Community Assembly
What's this?


April 2, 7:00 pm

99 Unite Civic Forum
What's this?


April 16, 7:00 pm

OPDX Office - 1131 SE Oak

OPDX Office

St. Francis, 1131 SE Oak
*Note: Office may be closed for events, lunch, emergencies

Please call: 971-258-1006
OPDX Info Team Site

E-Newsletter

* = required field

powered by MailChimp!