News

Eugene's Paid Demons

Dishonest tactics. Unnecessary harassment. Physical violence. It's no secret that the West University neighborhood and the Eugene Police Department are at odds. What the hell is going on here?

The West University neighborhood used to be a better place. In previousyears, when the Eugene Police Department encountered a loud or unruly party in the West University area, their response had generally been to instruct the offending residents to break up the party, and to send everyone home. Only in the case of truly out-of-control situations would the city police issue tickets. This was the norm, and with exceptions, a fair standard.

On October 31st of 1996, a major riot broke out in the West University neighborhood. Everything but the SWAT team was called out, showering rioters and nearby homes with tear gas. Another riot occurred the following year, on Halloween 1997. The mass media-or what Eugene can pass off for it-immediately saw a recurring problem in action, and jumped on the issue. University of Oregon President Dave Frohnmayer and Eugene Mayor Jim Torrey put their heads together in the following weeks, and came up with the "zero tolerance" policy. Ever since, the cops have no doubt been under intense pressure to crack down on parties, including the relatively benign ones. But is this really the best way to remedy the situation-given that another riot still occurred on Halloween in 1998--and what becomes of those targeted by this policy?

Miles Shattuck, Ritchie Metzler, Ryan Montgomery, Jeremy Bradford andCharles Sharp live in the West University area. A moderately noisy party was thrown by the five housemates on April 2nd of this year; the party was attended by a number of University students. A little after 12:00am, twelve to fourteen officers in six police cars arrived, claiming they had received a noise complaint. A DJ was on hand for the party, but due to technical difficulties, no music was playing when the police arrived.Taking charge of the situation, a couple of the officers gathered the residents together and questioned them. Was there a keg on the premises? No. Had they provided minors with alcohol? People had brought their own alcohol. With little else to go on, the police issued them tickets for "Allowing Consumption by Minors on the Premises." During this time, the remaining officers issued MIP's to all minors at the party. This was about the time that the Eugene Police Department's real harassment began.

At one point, a girl tried to escape from a window at the front of the house. An officer out front saw her, pulled her out of the window, and unnecessarily dragged her through the front yard to the sidewalk. Meanwhile, another group of students hid in a locked room. When an officer knocked on the door and no one answered, he punched a hole in the door and unlocked it from the inside.

A cop told another young woman that because she was underage, she was out past her curfew. Miles Shattuck noticed that the girl seemed frightened. "I asked the cop what the curfew law was, but he wouldn't answer me." Shattuck persisted, but the officer ignored him.The officer eventually turned to another officer and said, "Cuff him." The officer grabbed Shattuck, pushed him up against a car, and restrained him with handcuffs.

Shattuck continued to ask about the curfew law. "He never answered me. He never even acknowledged the question, and he eventually put me in the back of a cop car." Shattuck was subsequently left alone in the car for ten to fifteen minutes.

After the cops had subdued the party and occupied the house for over two hours, they finally issued its residents tickets for the original noise violation. At the time it was 2:30 AM, but the cops recorded the time as being 12:20. They then proceeded to confiscate the DJ's equipment, justifying their seizure as evidence of the initial noise violation. They also took two street signs that were found inside the house. One of the signs was from Tigard, the other was a sign that the residents claimed to have found knocked down and lying in their front yard one morning. One student, frustrated with the amount of time the cops detained everyone, told the cops that they should use the telephone to "call 911 for backup and get more cops." The police responded by confiscating the telephone receiver. By the end of the night 38 MIP's had been issued and the residents had each received $312 in fines. After going to court, the roommates discovered that there was no record of a noise violation ever having being called in.Next Monday, the following article appeared in the Register Guard:

Police bust party, cite nearly 50 minorsEugene police broke up a party early Saturday
morning on Patterson Street, citing nearly 50
minors for possession of alcohol and seizing
carloads of street signs found at the residence.
Officers responded to a neighbor's complaint
about noise at 1140 Patterson St., just after
midnight. They found about 100 people in and
around the house. Four housemates were cited
for allowing minors to consume alcohol and
prohibited noise. According to the police, the
house occupants illegally possessed the city
and state street signs.

A number of questions are raised by this situation. Was it necessary to use such force when issuing MIP's? Did the cops truly confiscate the DJ equipment in order to back up their claim that there was a noise violation? What made the cops treat the party differently than they would have in the past? The above newspaper article was written from a standard police report issued to the press, so why did the cops and/or the media deem it necessary to embellish the story? After leaving the party the cops stopped at another party that had a keg and minors present, but they didn't issue any tickets. What accounts for the officers' inconsistency with regards to the two incidents?

When asked about the experience, resident Jeremy Bradford made thefollowing observations. "The problems with parties are riots where people are out in the streets breaking things and tipping over cars. But I think that in a lot of cases the cops seem to provoke [negative situations.] They decided to contain everybody, write everybody tickets, and really created bad feelings between students and police. They really weren't solving any problems. I still see the same people at the same parties. Nobody stopped drinking because they got an MIP."Ritchie Metzler is a professional DJ; he earns his rent money by playing weddings and parties. After the party, Metzler tried to get his equipment back so that he could DJ an upcoming wedding. He was told at the party that he could call the police next week. He left messages with the officer in charge of the situation on the following Monday and Tuesday. His calls were not returned. On Wednesday, he called the police station and asked if there was anyone else he could speak to. He was given the number of another officer; once more his message was not followed up. Metzler decided to go down to the police station, but the officers were not available and the people at the front desk would not tell him when they would be in, citing general policy. Finally, Metzler left a message with the second officer in charge, saying he would be home all day, except for classes between 10-12, and to call any time before or after that. The officer subsequently called within that exact two-hour time period. "He left amessage saying I can't have it back, so stop trying," Metzler said.Metzler had had enough. He went down to the station, talked to the city council and filed a complaint. He was given the number of Police Human Resources, whom he called next. The HR department finally returned his call the Thursday before a wedding gig that he had scheduled, and was told there was no way he would be able to get his equipment back. He went down to the station on Friday and told them that it was of utmost importance that he have his equipment for the coming weekend. The station called the leading investigator at home, who told Metzler that he would not be getting his equipment back, without explanation, and that he was never to call his voice mail again. After the court date, Metzler finally got his equipmentback, but the process stalled once more because one of the investigating officers had to sign off on it. The EPD waited two more days to do so. At press time, the residents of the house have still not had their telephone receiver returned.

A few blocks away on Hilyard Street, another group of students werebarbecuing on April 24th. It was a small gathering of about 15 people:some were dancing inside and others were sitting on the porch, talkingabout, of all things, philosophy. Erica Wood, a resident of the house, was outside when four officers of the Eugene Police Department arrived on the scene.

"I asked them how they got in, and one cop said 'Well, the gate was open, so it looked like we were more than welcome to come in.'" Again, they claimed to have come to the residence because of a noise complaint. The cops proceeded to check particular attendees for ID, but in a discriminatory manner. "They targeted certain people. None of the men got ID'd," said one woman who wished to remain anonymous. The cops issued two MIP's and gave Erica a ticket for Furnishing Alcohol to Minors. During the time the cops were issuing tickets, Erica told them that they were not allowed inside the house. She asked Gina Norton to shut the door for her. An officer was standing on the porch, and Norton's account is as follows: "He had not been standing in the doorway. I wasn't slamming the door in his face. As I went to close the door the cop said, 'No you don't.' He then grabs my arm and rips me out of the house. He kept repeating, "I'm not in the house," as he held his foot in the door." At the time, the other officers claimed not to have seen Norton being pulled from the house. "I was busy over here; I didn't see it" was the going explanation, according to Erica, "yet everyone else there saw it."

Norton ended up with a deep bruise circling her arm, due to the officer's actions. Norton was then taken aside by a female officer. The officer who grabbed her came over to them in order to 'clarify the situation.' "The first thing that [the cops] had to assume was that everybody had guns. That was his justification for throwing me out of the house. If they're going to assume that there are guns, chances are-and this is a very broad stereotype-the women aren't going to be the ones carrying the guns. They should have talked to the men that were there, but they didn't." How the police decided that guns were an issue was never established. Gina's brother, Dave Norton, was not pleased with the way the cops treated his sister. "They came on a noise complaint. Now you assume there are underage people drinking, but there's no need to use physical force. Gina didn't have a gun. The officer is three times the size of her. It was unnecessary, excessive and it was rude." When asked why they felt such tactics were necessary, Dave was told that "the kids here in Eugene" don'tnecessarily like the police. This didn't surprise Gina Norton, while the officer's assumption was contrary to her prior experience. "I've never had any confrontation with any police like that. That's my first experience with the police in Eugene. What type of attitude do you think I'm going tohave?" Gina has since filed a grievance with the Human Rights Commission of Eugene. "I'd like to sit down with some cops and say, 'this can't happen.' I just want to make sure that it doesn't happen again and that things are handled appropriately. If you want us to respect you, you have to respect us."

Sargeant Rick Gilliam, who is in charge of patrolling parties aroundcampus, was unwilling to comment. The Eugene Police have developed a policy of Community Involved Policing (CIP). The CIP program is designed to get police officers more involved in the community and allow citizens to get to know the officers who patrol their area. The 1991 Long-Range Public Safety Plan, commissioned by the City Council, "identified major deficiencies with the 'reactive model' of policing which existed at the time." They hoped to change the police's"authoritative, rather than a facilitative, role with the community" and establish "close partnerships with social services, victims' services, neighborhood groups, business associations, other city departments, and charitable associations." Yet the mission statement of the CIP program still offers "tough-on-crime investigations that lead to arrests."

These seemingly contradictory ideas could be at the root of the problemcausing bitter relations between the police and the students of theuniversity. Students are not given the respect of the police. Minors are not going to stop drinking because it is against the law and the cops are not going to stop issuing tickets if minors are drinking. While it may be warranted under the law for the officers to issue such tickets, it doesn't give them the right to harass students while doing so. Were the Eugene Police Department to treat students in a more respectful manner while issuing tickets, there may be no riot come this Halloween.

Ben Nahorney, a senior majoring in Journalism, is a staff writer for the Oregon Commentator