From a story from The Oregonian/OregonLive.com by Maxine Bernstein:
Federal officers have “repeatedly” used unnecessary and excessive force against protesters outside the federal immigration building in Portland, a former U.S. Customs and Border Protection commissioner says in a court filing.
Gil Kerlikowske, who led the agency for almost three years to early 2017, provided the assessment in support of an ACLU-backed lawsuit on behalf of protesters and freelance journalists.
They’re seeking a court order to prohibit Homeland Security officers from firing tear gas, flash-bang grenades, pepper balls and rubber bullets against passive demonstrators – or those trespassing or refusing to leave — unless someone poses an imminent threat.
“There appears to be a pervasive pattern of misuse of force by DHS against journalists, legal observers, and protesters who have been present at the protests at or around the ICE Building in Portland,” Kerlikoske concluded. “This pattern includes failure to give warnings, using unnecessary force in the absence of danger to law enforcement, and misuse of crowd-control weapons.”
In a sworn declaration filed in federal district court in Portland, Oregon, Kerlikowske said he reached his conclusion based on his long professional experience, agency rules and law enforcement “best practices,” along with a review of available reports, court records, depositions, photos and videos.
Opinion No. 1: DHS has exhibited a consistent pattern of deploying excessive force against protesters and journalists around the ICE Building, including by using force against people who are not engaged in threatening acts, misusing crowd-control munitions and teargas, and indiscriminately using force that needlessly injures people who pose no threat to law enforcement.
He spells out his analysis of the pervasive use of excessive force in the main part of his declaration, beginning on page 9 and ending on page 23.
Screenshot
The full document follows.
Discover more from i L i n d
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Ian, I respect your work and your long commitment to civil liberties, and I agree that journalists and genuinely peaceful protesters should never be targets of force.
Where I differ is that, from what I have seen, these protests are often mixed environments. Alongside peaceful demonstrators, there are also people who cross crowd control boundaries, blast bullhorns inches away from officers’ ears, throw objects, or deliberately provoke confrontation. That may not represent everyone, but it does change the reality officers face in the moment.
In those settings, decisions are made within fluid crowds where intent varies and escalation can happen quickly. Some participants appear less interested in protest than in excitement or confrontation, similar to small groups that head into Waikiki looking for an action-filled scrappy night. That does not excuse misuse of force, but it does complicate the narrative.
I hope courts and commentators can hold space for both truths. Protecting civil liberties and recognizing the realities of crowd control are not mutually exclusive.
And I hope that by providing source documents, you can evaluate the actual conditions being described and not rely on recycled news accounts of unknown reliability.
I’m sure that when you read the actual examples of official behavior that have been documented, you’ll be as appalled as I am.
And when there’s bad behavior by protesters, they can be handled by normal policing, not by the unrestrained use of excessive force.
You’ll see in the record that many of the forceful criticisms have come from police officials who have been appalled at the overreaction by federal agents.
Do you know the difference between passive non-violent protestors and aggressive, violent demonstrators?
What came first? People don’t protest for no reason. There would be no protests if the federal agents were not violating every right we ALL hold dear as a nation. What I find hard to grasp is how easily some people throw these values out the window when the abuses are directed at others they don’t like. And not just looking the other way, but going through some serious mental and logical contortions to justify the unjustifiable. Don’t even get me started on January 6th.
The administration generated the problem that led to the outrage and protests by lying about why they are there and what they are doing. They have been going about it in the worst, most inflammatory way possible; demonizing and victimizing people who can’t defend themselves; and now they are overreacting and killing demonstrators for fighting back FOR the victims, under the guise of “crowd control.” Give me an effing break.
I can solve this problem in one word: LEAVE. I have another word for anyone who continues to make excuses for this BS, but I’ll let the imagination run wild and keep that one to myself.
If I were sadistic, I think I would definitely want to be an ICE officer based on what they get to do to people.Therefore, they need to tone it down and revert to a more low key approach.
and trump wants to go after iran for attacking peaceful protesters…