EUGENE, Ore. (AP) — A Eugene man says he will defy a court order to provide a grand jury with video he shot during a May 30 anti-pesticide rally.

The rally included the controversial stun-gun arrest of 18-year-old Ian Van Ornum, which some witnesses described as police brutality. The grand jury is deciding whether Van Ornum or anyone else at the rally should be charged with a crime.

The sought-after footage was shot by Tim Lewis, a self-described independent journalist who for years has videotaped police activities for public-access shows. [...]

Lewis said he plans to invoke a journalistic privilege provided under state law that shields reporters from being forced to produce evidence against others.
"I don't have a whole bunch (on the tape) that would interest them, but I can't set a precedent by giving it to them," he said in an interview with The Register-Guard newspaper.

Lewis, 52, said he didn't start recording Van Ornum — who was accused of disorderly conduct and resisting arrest — until after he had been subdued by the stun gun. Scenes of the University of Oregon student laying on the ground while handcuffed are included in footage Lewis has already posted online.

The subpoena issued to Lewis orders him to provide the grand jury with both released and unreleased video.

It's unclear if Oregon's shield law applies to independent online reporters. If a judge decides it does not, Lewis could ultimately be jailed for contempt of court.

A San Francisco videographer, Josh Wolf, spent nearly eight months in jail after refusing to surrender footage he shot during a 2005 demonstration. Wolf was released in April 2007 after finally turning over the tape to prosecutors.

Lane County District Attorney Doug Harcleroad declined to comment about the Lewis subpoena.

Back in 1999, Lewis was arrested while videotaping a protest-turned-riot in downtown Eugene. Police seized his tape, and charged him with disorderly conduct and interfering with an officer.

—Ore. videographer says no tape for grand jury

As you may recall, in Brutal Questions, I reported that a deputy police auditor (Cristina Beaumud) was assigned to the case to look into community allegations sprung from witnesses on the scene of Police Brutality.

Several rally participants told councilors that Van Ornum did not deserve to be “tased.” Some said they watched a police officer discharge a Taser three times at Van Ornum as he was being restrained on the ground by officers.

“This is a clear case of police brutality,” Shannon Wilsonsaid. [...]

University of Oregon student Isobel Charle said the incident was “the most cruel and savage act that I have ever witnessed in my entire life.”

Van Ornum did not attend the council meeting. After hearing 20 people complain about the incident, councilors indicated that they will discuss Taser use by police. “The council needs to discuss the use of Tasers, and see if the policy needs to be modified,” Councilor Betty Taylor said.

A police statement on the incident said Van Ornum, a rally organizer, was standing in a street blocking traffic. Some speakers told councilors that Van Ornum was spraying water on flowers along the sidewalk, and that he was not blocking traffic.

Van Ornum was charged with resisting arrest and disorderly conduct. Two other men were arrested, prompting supporters to dub them the “Kesey Three.”

Twelve people have submitted witness statements to Beamud, the police auditor. Several witnesses have provided photos and video taken at the scene, Beamud said in a press release.

Following city policy, Van Ornum’s complaint will be investigated by the police department’s internal affairs division. The investigation report is due Aug. 29. Beamud then will review the findings and make a recommendation to Police Chief Robert Lehner. The civilian review board also will review the investigation.

Witnesses to the incident are asked to call Beamud or Deputy Auditor Dawn Reynolds at 682-5016.

—Council agrees to review Taser use

But the Lane County District Attorney Douglass Harcleroad has squashed this quickly growing community concern, and has refocused attention on, instead, the criminality of Ian Van Ornum.

Lane County District Attorney Doug Harcleroad said Monday that his office has launched an investigation to determine if any of the three men should face state charges in Circuit Court. Prosecutors are not looking into whether police did anything wrong in making arrests at the rally, Harcleroad said.

—Panel votes to weigh in on Taser use at rally

For what do they claim Van Ornum was arrested and the police justified in physically assaulting him?

According to a Eugene Police release, Van Ornum was blocking traffic near Kesey Square and spraying an unknown liquid on the sidewalk at the protest.

—Community members seek Taser investigation - The formal complaint alleges police officers acted illegally in their actions toward a student

Their is disagreement on whether Van Ornum said to undercover officers "Do you know you are being poisoned?" (Witnesses claim these were his words; he was demonstrating against the use of herbicides along highways and parks by the state) or whether he said "Do you want me to spray poison in your face?" (Police claim this was Van Ornum's words to them.)

Surprisingly, not only the police's but the District Attorney's priorities and perceptions are at odds with much of the community.

Michaels' criminal complaint alleges four separate cases of assault by the officers against Van Ornum. These include a "hair hold take down," which caused a concussion when Van Ornum's head hit the ground. Additionally, Van Ornum was hit with two Tasers after being immobilized, according to the complaint.

Currently the DA's office is conducting a criminal investigation against the three protesters who were arrested at the pesticide rally for various charges, including resisting arrest and assault against a police officer.

Harcleroad said that part of this criminal investigation is reviewing the conduct of the police officers who made the arrest.

Before viewing the complaint, Harcleroad said that there will not be a need to conduct a separate investigation into the officer's conduct other than what is already being done.

"We are going to do what we are doing - investigate the incident," Harcleroad said. "We follow where the facts take us."

Michaels said that despite many formal complaints made to City Police Auditor Cristine Beamud, the EPD has refused to investigate the arresting officers because a criminal complaint was not filed by witnesses of the event before.

—Community members seek Taser investigation - The formal complaint alleges police officers acted illegally in their actions toward a student

Despite the passionate flood of photographs and video and testimony that the Deputy Auditor has received from Eugene voters and taxpayers, the community's input has been put on hold for the moment.

"I have done what is in my authority to do, and that is accept the complaints, classify them as excessive force complaints, and send them to be followed up on," Beamud said.

—Community members seek Taser investigation - The formal complaint alleges police officers acted illegally in their actions toward a student

Beaumud sided with the community immediately as to the importance of these matters having such follow-up.

Beamud said the investigation merited the review board’s attention, and she requested that board members designate it as a “community impact case.”

The designation gives the board an opportunity to review the misconduct investigation and make a recommendation to Lehner on how he should decide the excessive force allegation. The board could also compel police to reopen the investigation if it deems the probe incomplete.

—Panel votes to weigh in on Taser use at rally

However, the D.A., Harcleroad, claims that the Eugene Police are capable of investigating themselves on this matter, and will do so when the protestors have first been charged and tried.

Harcleroad "hopes" that the investigation against the three protestors will be satisfactorily concluded by August, "at which time the EPD can begin the administrative investigation in response to the large number of complaints made to the police auditor."

The community does not think the Police capable of doing so and want an outside eye on such important matters, and ones involving allegations of Police brutality. These things do have a history in Eugene.

In Eugene, Oregon, police used OC spray against peaceful environmental protesters in June 1997. One man in a tree was videotaped being hit repeatedly by police officers and sprayed on his legs and genitals after police cut open his trousers; he reportedly required hospital treatment for burns.

—CHAPTER 3 POLICE BRUTALITY: A pattern of abuse

Brian Michaels is the attorney representing the Eugene community members who are requesting an investigation into the allegations of Police brutality.

Michaels and his clients are requesting that the separate criminal investigation against Warden and Solesbee, "be conducted by someone other than the Eugene Police and the Lane County District Attorney's Office given that their statements and actions in this matter, to date, reveal their bias towards the officers and reflect an inability to be fair and impartial," according to the complaint.

—Panel votes to weigh in on Taser use at rally

With my limited knowledge of law, I understand that the District Attorney represents the State in cases against the People. And it stands to reason, as the People of Eugene are at stark odds against the EPD investigating themselves on matters such as these.

But should the People speak up? Sadly, the mood seems to be changing even here in Eugene, a town known for its involved, activist citizenry.

David Owen, who along with Van Ornum was arrested at the May 30 rally, alleged Monday night that he, too, is a victim of police brutality.

Owen, 50, of Elmira, said a Eugene officer “judo-flipped me to the ground” when he tried to find out from police why they were treating Van Ornum harshly.

“All I did was ask, ‘Why are you hurting him so much?’  ” Owen recalled.

—Panel votes to weigh in on Taser use at rally

Think about it. A 50 year old man sees a Police officer dragging a young kid by the hair, the kid is helpless, the cop slams his head into the concrete and shocks him at least twice with a portable electrocution gun, and the young man is completely out of it, limp, twitching, spazzing out, face on the concrete.

And so the 50 year old man says "Why are you hurting him"? and for his concern he gets thrown to the ground by a cop.

What is this? Is this to Protect and Serve? Is this Public Service? Is this Justice?

If so, it is a strange and ugly breed, and I fear it cares not for whom it sentences. We must stop its spread now.

We have already seen that the People will accept torture perpetrated on other peoples in other lands, or even on US Citizens in other lands. If we keep accepting it here on our own streets, we will also soon accept that it is just better not to speak up at all.

That might be understandable as a protective instinct. But it is not the United States of America, and it is not Freedom.