A D V E R T I S E M E N T
A D V E R T I S E M E N T
ADVERTISEMENTS
<< Prev. Page 1 | 2
Lawsuit no. 4: Rubio's local case
Rubio also filed a lawsuit against Officer Kalen “K.T.” Taylor in circuit court last summer, accusing Taylor of threatening Rubio during several incidents between 2004 and 2006. He seeks $100,000 for emotional distress.
Taylor declined to comment on the specific allegations made in the pending lawsuit, but speaking generally, he said in a previous interview, “There’s some stuff he’s saying that concerns me. There’s a lot of mistruths.”
Rubio’s first cited encounter was on June 25, 2004, when he responded to a supermarket parking lot where his son, 19-year-old Carlos, was with several Sandy police officers, including Taylor, during a minor traffic stop.
When Rubio arrived to assist his son, the suit claims, Taylor “screamed” at him and Carlos, “referring to them as ‘homies.’ ” Carlos later claimed that Taylor threatened to kill him during that encounter, a claim refuted by Officer Ernie Roberts, who was on the scene.
The second stated encounter with Taylor was on May 27, 2005 – the date Carlos was found guilty of eluding police from an incident the July before.
He said that while at the Clackamas County Courthouse, Taylor “screamed” at him, saying, “I’m warning you, Mr. Rubio, you’re not going to like what’s going to happen to you.”
Rubio said that statement made him “live in constant fear that (Taylor) would carry out his threats against him.” He also says that the experience made him “especially susceptible to severe mental and emotional distress” due to that fear.
The third encounter the lawsuit references was on March 10, 2006, when Rubio encountered Taylor at a grocery store parking lot. He said that Taylor, off-duty at the time, blocked his walking path with his white pickup.
Sandy Police told The Post that Rubio had traveled to Taylor’s house and frightened his wife.
Through the truck’s window, Rubio alleges, Taylor screamed for Rubio to “quit (expletive) with my wife or I’ll (expletive) you up,” and, “I’m gonna get you, you little sucker.”
Rubio says that as a direct result of his encounters with Taylor, Rubio “suffered severe mental and emotional distress, fear, humiliation, embarrassment, anxiety, loss of reputation and inconvenience,” which totals non-economic damages of $100,000.
Taylor said he will be represented by a lawyer provided by the city, and plans to countersue Rubio for unwanted contact, harassment and libelous comments.
“I’ve had a long career as a police officer,” Taylor said. “I think I need to look after my reputation.”
Merrill says he’s trying to have the trial scheduled for June 19.
Lawsuit no. 5: Woodring's federal case
In January, Estacada resident Britt Woodring filed a $3.1 million lawsuit in U.S. District Court, alleging that officers Taylor and Bergin broke the law when they arrested him outside a restaurant in Sandy on Feb. 18, 2006.
After a fight with his wife, Woodring left his Estacada home for the restaurant at 38015 Highway 26.
In his official lawsuit papers, Woodring says he hadn’t had any alcohol before arriving at the restaurant, where he ordered a rum and coke. He said was never engaged in unlawful activity nor was he under the influence of alcohol or illegal drugs that evening at the restaurant, despite witness and police reports alleging otherwise.
According to the police report, bartender Scott Conerly called the police, later telling them that Woodring “was acting strange as if he was on drugs and harassing several customers … just acting weird and being aggressive towards customers.” When police arrived, Bergin said Conerly told him he wanted Woodring removed.
Woodring’s lawsuit states that Conerly was just concerned about Woodring’s ability to drive and noted that he wasn’t causing problems or was engaged in illegal activity.
According to Woodring’s complaint, Taylor and Bergin approached him and directed him to stand by the door, “where Bergin began circling him and then asked him if he was resisting arrest.”
The complaint then alleges that Bergin “suddenly and forcibly” seized Woodring around his neck and upper chest with his police baton and his other arm, “despite the fact that (Woodring) had not yet even been questioned or warned,” nor arrested.
Woodring said that when he grabbed the baton in an attempt to release the pressure on his neck and chest he was tased on the inside of his right arm, and Taylor punched him hard in the face, which made him bleed and gave him a black eye.
He said Taylor inflicted several knee strikes upon him, and Bergin struck him on his right eye with the police baton and tased him again on the back of his left arm. Woodring said he fell to the ground, where he was tased two more times, which left permanent scars upon his chest.
The police report disputes Woodring’s account, noting that when Bergin told Woodring the bartender wanted him to leave the business, the Estacada man backed away from them.
Bergin said he and Taylor grabbed each of Woodring’s arms in an attempt to escort the man out of the restaurant. Woodring then allegedly broke an arm free from Bergin and pushed Taylor with his open hand.
Witness Andres J. Ford, said in his statement to police that the officers “started off nice” with Woodring until the man started pushing them with an open hand.
“It didn’t look avoidable to go hands on,” reflected Jordan Enos, another witness.
Taylor said he then grabbed the back of Woodring’s neck and told him to get on the ground, delivering two knee strikes to his abdomen area. When he didn’t get on the ground, Taylor punched Woodring in the face. At that point, both officers told him to stop struggling, and that he was under arrest.
When Woodring wouldn’t roll on his stomach or give up his arms, Bergin deployed the taser, striking the man four times total.
“We had given Woodring the opportunity to leave the bar and he would not,” Taylor reflected.
The officers took Woodring to the Clackamas County Jail, where he was incarcerated for about eight hours. He was charged with second-degree criminal trespass and resisting arrest, but the charges were dropped after the case was “no-complainted” when Woodring appeared for his arraignment.
Not long after the charges were thrown out, Bergin re-issued the citation at the urging of the Clackamas County District Attorney’s Office because not necessary information was included in the original citation, but about a week before the September 2006 trial, the D.A. dismissed the charges because they learned that the physical struggle occurred before Woodring was placed under arrest.
In all, Woodring alleges that he was “subjected to excessive force, unlawful arrest and malicious prosecution by two Sandy police officers,” which violated his constitutional, civil and state rights.
Woodring seeks a total of $3.1 million against Taylor, Bergin and the city of Sandy, plus attorney’s fees, for non-economic damages and punitive judgments. That amount is divided into four claims: Use of excessive force, unlawful arrest and two claims of malicious prosecution — one for the first charges levied against Woodring, another for Bergin’s reissued citation.
The city’s official response to the complaint — filed last month — states that police had probably cause to arrest or otherwise take Woodring into custody, noting that the officers’ physical contact with him was “legally justified” in order for the officers to perform their duties, enforce the law and preserve order.
Calling the Woodring lawsuit “frivolous,” the city’s response includes a counterclaim against the plaintiff, seeking dismissal of the claims and payment of attorneys’ fees.
Lawsuit no. 6: Contreras' federal case
Electrician Samuel R. Contreras says his arrest for possession of a controlled substance, having a concealed weapon and tampering with a witness was a set up.
Kari Kelly called Sandy police after an argument on May 27, 2006, telling police that Contreras had drugs on his person and needed to be arrested. When police showed up, Roberts searched Contreras, only finding a knife that he used for his electrician work. Contreras walked away without incident.
In his police report, Roberts said that when he discovered the knife, Contreras told him he started carrying it after 9/11.
At first, Roberts said he wasn’t sure the knife qualified as a concealed weapon. After speaking with Clackamas County sheriff’s deputy Marcus Wold and researching concealed weapons law, “I felt the knife Mr. Contreras was carrying did, in fact, qualify as a concealed weapon.”
Later that evening, when Contreras was at a local bar, Roberts showed up, searched him a second time and arrested Contreras.
Later, Roberts searched Contreras a third time — a brief examination, Contreras said — this time finding a matchbook in his trenchcoat pocket, which had a small baggie of methamphetamine inside. Contreras was then charged with possession of a controlled substance, in addition to the concealed weapon charge. He spent two days at the Clackamas County Jail.
A third search isn’t unusual, Skelton said. “Sometimes you have to do a fast pat-down when you’re at a hot scene. You just make sure he doesn’t have any weapons and then you put the guy in the car.” The third, more in-depth search takes place at the police station. And sometimes, Skelton said, officers receive information that prompts them to conduct another search.
The complaint questions the discovery of the third search, since no contraband had been found in the two previous searches.
“The only person in physical contact with Plaintiff at any time after he had been placed in handcuffs following the second search at (the bar) was Defendant Roberts himself…” So, Contreras alleges, the only way the matchbook of meth could have made it into his jacket was by Roberts placing it there during the third search.
“It’s absolutely ridiculous,” Skelton said. “It’s the attorney talking. This is just stupid. We’ve arrested him on many occasions for the possession of drugs.” He noted that Contreras has several warrants for his arrest in California related to possession of narcotics, but said those warrants aren’t executable in Oregon.
Kelly wrote several letters confessing that she framed Contreras after the incident. The compliant states that she said she planted the drugs as part of an informal agreement with Roberts to turn in three criminals to keep her out of trouble for her own illegal drug issues — a deal called “give up three, go free.” When one of those letters — which was notarized — reached Roberts, he allegedly threatened Kelly with arrest for tampering with a witness.
On June 4, Contreras got in another argument with Kelly, after which Kelly went to the Sandy Police Department. She then gave Roberts a recorded statement that she wrote and notarized the letter, but did so under threat of physical harm from Contreras, which he denies.
Officers then arrested Contreras for tampering with a witness, and four days later Contreras was indicted for unlawful possession of methamphetamine, coercion and tampering with a witness. He spent another 88 days in jail.
Contreras alleges that his Constitutional rights were violated during the incidents in that he was detained and searched without reasonable suspicion and was arrested falsely. He also takes issue with the alleged informal “give up three, go free” policy.
Taylor is included in the lawsuit because Contreras said the officer told him he was going to “make a special project” out of him, either by forcing him to leave town or go to jail.
For non-economic and punitive damages, Contreras seeks a total of $21 million plus attorneys fees in three separate claims.
Contreras’ record shows two convictions between 1985 and 2006, giving false information to police and a felon in possession of a firearm. He was charged with several other crimes, including criminal mischief, attempting to elude police and possession of methamphetamine, all of which were dismissed.
“He’s been arrested a bunch of times,” Skelton said of Contreras. “He just likes his drugs.”
<< Prev. Page 1 | 2
PS Sandy police: I no longer live in Sandy, so don't bother showing up at my door because I dared to say this. I live far enough way now to be able to speak out.
And for people who don't live in Sandy, believe it. These guys are like something from an old wild west movie. And not in a good way.
(email verified)
Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 02:34 AM
As a long time citizen of Sandy I have to say I am ashamed of our City Police, with the exception of a very few. I have seen for myself many incidents of harrasment and unnecessary force. I also personally saw Officer Taylor let a drunk woman leave Tollgate Inn after another patron had complained that she had hit their car when she parked. This woman was obnoxious and Taylor made it clear he let her go because he did not want to deal with her. Seems strange the most notorious DUI cop let a VERY drunk woman drive off in front of him!! I think that in the above incidents sometimes the cops needed to take action, but taser and punching, knees to the back etc. ?!? Maybe we should hire Barney Fife?
(email verified)
Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 02:59 AM
Read more about the killing of Fouad Kaady and find a copy of the lawsuit here:
http://masterpeace.wordpress.com/2006/09/07/fouad-kaadys-family-fights-back/
(email verified)
Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 03:29 AM
Tuesday-March 27, 2007
Jerry Atlansky-Chairperson
Oregon State Police-
Independent Citizens Review Board
Estacada, Oregon USA
SUBJECT: Top 5 cops of Oregon only protect Rouge Cops not ALL Oregonians
OPEN LETTER to all Oregonians:
In the fall of 2005 after the horrific police action against Fouad Kaady, the 27 year old man that needed medical help as he was naked, bleeding, burned,in shock, and had no weapons when he was located near the city of Sandy, Oregon a Sandy Police Officer and a Clackamas County Sheriff didn't want to get blood on them, and left a Police shotgun unsecured on his own vehicle. The Police tased Kaady twice and then both cops shot and killed Kaady with 7 bullets. The cops said Kaddy said I'm going to kill you, but many witnesses said they heard no threat from Kaady against anyone. Per the F.B.I. that is non-justifiable homicide as Kaady didn't attack anyone.
I called the top police official in the training division of Oregon State Police and asked Lt. Fred, what must an officer do when he sees another officer repeatedly beating/kicking a restrained person? Lt. Fred said, the witnessing officer must assist in the arrest and report the incident. I said what good would that do if the victim is maimed for life or dies due to the police brutality? Not until I said I will form a citizens oversight board did Lt. Fred say, I will take two steps to make that change.
Seven months later Lt. Fred's top superior, Superintendent Rucker failed to reply to our letters and telephone calls to verify the changes we requested to amend their policy/procedures, add new training and work with our oversight board to require all officers and their supervisors to intervene when an officer clearly is using excessive force as it is their duty to do so. We notified all Oregon State Legislators of this non-response from Supt. Ruecker so they pressured his superior which forced Ruecker to send us thier code of conduct and a cover letter admitting that Ruecker has no specific data we requested of changes to protect all Oregonians from police brutality. On December 1, 2006 Supt. Ruecker resigned as he said for the betterment of members, his family and Oregonians. Lt. Fred also resigned in 2006 as he was also pressured too do so.
On March 12, 2007 Supt. Ruecker's replacement, Acting Supt. McLain said in answer to my question as we secured on video/audio tape at his senate hearing was, the person should file a complaint. If that was his family member getting beaten would that be his same answer?
Sheriff Roberts of Clackamas County, their top cop failed to respond to our registered letter for 6 months asking the same question so we contacted all the Clackamas County Commissionors and they required Roberts to respond to us. A repeat of NO changes in their policy/procedures, training and they will not work with our oversight board to protect all Oregonians from police brutality.
On July 4, 2006 Sandy Police Chief Skelton also received a certified letter from our citizens review board asking the same question of excessive force policy/procedure they had in place to protect all people and Chief Skelton has still not responded to us.
On Feb. 20, 2007 I asked Portland Police Chief Sizer at a public meeting the same question and Sizer said, I answered that question, which I replied that is a false statement! We received another video/audio tape that proves our allegation that Chief failed to respond to our police brutality question. We sent a registered letter to Chief Sizer to give her another chance to answer our dire question and she failed again to respond as we recieved NO letter or telephone calls on this matter from her.
All 5 top cops were made aware they are in violation of their sworn oaths of office, and many violations of Oregon State and United States Constitution Laws and that this data has been given to federal agencies as our very top state officials, the governor & the attorney General condone the 5 top cops wrong, illegal actions. The attorney general was pressured to author a new bill, Senate Bill 111, "Police Excessive Force" but refused to even consider our formal 3 amendments to the senate bill to protect all Oregonians as stated above to all the 5 top cops of Oregon.
We have notified federal agencies with this information and will update you as we progress on this matter at the Portland Indymedia.
It is time to end the over century old Police Blue Code of Silence & Testilying.
What happens in OREGON goes NATIONWIDE!
Jerry Atlansky
js@atlansky.com 24/366
(email verified)
Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 04:05 AM
These lawsuits are ridiculous. Frivolous is an understatement! No one is responsible for their actions anymore. Let's just SUE! All of the "plaintiffs" in these suits are lowlife losers, with long criminal histories.
And Mr. Rubio, if you were so "scared" of Officer Taylor and all the police in Sandy, then you wouldn't drive around with all that anti police advertising on your truck! Talk about fanning the flames!!! $100,000 for lost wages? Get a job like all other taxpayers!
If you don't like the way things are done here in Sandy, OR in Oregon, there are 49 other states to live in.
I am so tired of people whining about the way the police handle situations! If you're so upset over this, then get a badge and become a cop! Get out there in the trenches and see exactly what all police have to deal with out there!
Oh, but that's right...you'd rather complain.
(email verified)
Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 05:05 AM
I agree with the last comment! It's about time people stick up for law enforcement.
You hardly ever hear about any of the good things that police do. The public only likes to hear the bad. I know these officers personally and I know they would NEVER do any of the things they are being accused of. The people who complain or don't like police are the ones that like to do wrong things. Come on!! Planting drugs on you? The Sandy Police are not the maffia! Get a life! $21 million? Seriously!
It seems in todays times that criminals have more rights then Police Officers do. How are Police suppose to protect themselves? Do they have to wait to be hit or shot before they can take action? If someone is so "disabled" that they can't answer the phone, then maybe they should be in a hospital instead of a hotel room. And what kind of medicine all the sudden makes you NOT disabled? Interesting...
It is true that no one wants to take responsibility for their actions. That's the type of world we live in these days. I guarentee that if these "plaintiffs" lived in any other small community, they would be getting in trouble for the same things.
If the police are so "scary" then why is it only the scum of Sandy that are complaining? Don't you think that a lot of other law abiding citizens would be complaining too? It's just weird that it's only the people who have a bad history with the police (even in other states) that are so "emotinally damaged" and "in fear for their lives".
Get over it!
(email verified)
Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 09:36 AM
I love it when the indignant citizen can call someone
a scum but doesn't have the guts to sign his own name.
I have known Juan Rubio for 20 years. He is an honest
hard working business owner who doesn't ask anything from anyone. He does however, help anyone who has a need. In fact if one of the great Sandy Post reporters
would do a simple inquiry, they would find that Juan
received a award from the City of Portland for organizing a fund to help the family of a Portland Police Officer killed in the line of duty. Juan, then
personally dedicated all the income his business generated on the weekends to the fund. As a result
Juan was the largest contributor to the fund. When
the harrasment of the Rubio family began, Juan came to
me knowing that I had spent several years in law
enforcement. At first I was in disbelief that people
in the profession that I loved could be acting the
way that they were. As time has gone on it has become
apparent to me that Sandy PD is corrupt from top to bottom. I wish the FBI would step up and investigate
this situation. The solution is drastic. The Mayor,the
City Manager, the Police Chief,and the Officers involved, need to be fired or removed from office.
Richard Schleich
Corbett, Oregon
(email verified)
Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 01:24 PM
To mister "stop the whining"
(copy/paste-> All of the "plaintiffs" in these suits are lowlife losers, with long criminal histories <-end copy/paste)
"All"? Mr.Rubio is a business owner, small business or not, he IS a 'respectable citizen', so dont belittle him on that account, and dont you dare belittle his loss as "Frivolous" The man LOST HIS SON!!
and as for that comment about "anti-police" that is a mis-statement, as i have seen the truck, and it looks pretty exact in who he is directing those signs at, and its not as you would imply
and he is also stating his BELIEFS on them (wich is his RIGHT to do so), he is not doing anything that I would not do (and a lot less then others would, I applaud the man's restraint) were it me who lost a child under similer circumstances.
I have lived in PDX/metro aeria well over 2 decades, I have seen and expearenced EXACTLY what the police are not only capable of, but more then willing to do, and this IS a problem that is prevailent all over, not just locally,
I could go on, but my point was made I hope,
To Mr.Rubio and his faimly I say this,
"DON'T GIVE UP! You deserve answers and justice for your son!"
Alexander
(email verified)
Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 03:45 PM
And just as Mr. Rubio is a fine, honorable, decent man - so was Fouad Kaady. [I'm sorry, I don't know much about the other plaintiffs, so I'm not indicting them by leaving them out.] Fouad was no "low-life loser with a long criminal history" either. One of the plaintiffs has a drug-related charge (which sounds pretty fishy to me) - and you decide they're all below contempt.
And thank you very much, but it is not only "only the scum of Sandy that are complaining." Many of us law-abiding citizens - here in Sandy and elsewhere - are complaining. And have been for quite some time now.
And so, these close personal friends of yours "would NEVER do any of the things they are being accused of," huh? Gosh, I guess the Clackamas County judge who dismissed all those bogus charges against Mr. Rubio might disagree with you. And gee, there's not much dispute that your buddies gunned down a naked, burned and bleeding man who they found comatose in the road is there?
But you're right about one thing... sort of. It IS true that SOME don't want to take responsibility for their actions. In this case though, it's the cops.
(email verified)
Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 05:12 PM
Yes, Mr. Rubio lost his son....but it was ruled a "suicide". How is that the Sandy Police Department's fault?
Please...excuses, excuses, excuses....
And as far as listing my name on this response, Mr. Schleich....like I would give any of you bleeding hearts the satisfaction.
(email verified)
Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 12:40 AM
The cause of Carlos Rubio's death was never determined - and is irrelevant to his father's lawsuits. Regardless of what you and your buddies may believe, we all have the right to express ourselves and to be free from harassment - especially from our public servants. I suggest you and your buddies go back to school and study the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Obviously, Chief Skelton needs to, since a judge has already sided with Mr. Rubio -and roundly castigated Skelton and the Sandy PD- for violating those rights.
(email verified)
Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 04:15 AM
Dear Stop Whining and Police Supporter,
Are you Sandy police officers or their spouses? I am a law abiiding citizen. I am not scum. I have NO criminal history what so ever. I have witnessed many occasions where the police have used extreme force and harassment. They have lied to me and bragged about abusing tax payer money by doing menial tasks on holidays so they get overtime. I used to believe the the police were here to " serve and protect" and I'm sure to SOME (small) degree they do. Alot of people ARE scared to complain because the cops would target them. You personally know these officers and they would NEVER do the things they are accused of? HA!!! How proud are we that one of our former Chief of police stole from the citizens of Sandy? As far as if I don't like it here there are 49 other states? I should be able to live anywhere I want without fear of a hillbilly police department. You are in the minority, a very large population of Sandy has not much respect and alot of distain for "our" police.
(email verified)
Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 04:34 AM
Attn: STOP THE WHINING
Get your facts straight. Check with The Office Of The State Medical Examiner, and reference case number 05-1227. There was NO ruling of suicide!!!!
The finding was: Cause of death UNDETERMINED CAUSES, by Larry Lewman, M.D.
Are you a Sandy Police Officer, or the spouse of a Sandy Police Officer?
Concerned Citizen
(email verified)
Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 05:44 AM
The truth is usually somewhere in the middle.
I also believe that our Police Department is a well trained professional organization that cares about the community it serves. Most citizens really do care about the job officers do, even though they don't run up and down the street yelling it at the top of their lungs. Unlike their detractors.
Here is what I predict:
Rubio won't get jack, not a penny. Neither will all the plaintiffs with the Bend Attorney. What many do not know is the burden of proof is higher in a criminal court and all these cases that were dropped didn't have all the facts in, unlike this civil case. Once everything comes to light, he won't be vilified but he won't be cashing any huge checks.
Those other cases involving dope, guns, and alcohol. Do you really think those would be going forward if not for the ambulance chasing attorney from across the mountain? And if Rubio's case was so good, don't you think a big name attorney in Portland would take the case? Not as if Portland is shy on lawyers who like suing the police.
Kaady case will be settled out of court and the settlement will not be in the millions.
Next time you see our officers on the street, wave at them with all your fingers, tell them how much we appreciate them and for heavens sake, raise your voice in support of your law enforcement.
I am not married, related or otherwise connected to any Sandy PD, but when some meth freak is sneaking in my back door, that is who I call to take care of the problem. Don't ever forget that folks!!!! When you call 911 they come and put their life on the line to protect you and your family.
To the Sandy PD-
I know other agencies are looking for good people, but this will blow over and the rational citizens of Sandy will come to your defense and thanks again for all you do.
(email verified)
Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 06:34 AM
i think its ironic how some people can be so narrow minded to believe that just because a man is sworn to office - he is above braking the law.
how many of the accused officers have been awarded citizen of the year by vera katz - as mr rubio has?
its also stange that these same people can accuse mr rubio of being anti law enforcement when many of his own brothers are officers also.
(email verified)
Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 07:51 AM
Wow, Sandy sounds alot like Lake Oswego...constantly violating peoples rights!
It's time to look deep into all of these smaller police forces and see what is really happening...and then get rid of the bad cops!
(email verified)
Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 08:28 AM
WOW !
I just read a mountain of things from law suits to bashing police to supporting the police and the victims, As I see it there is one thing for sure some of you may know the victims and some may know the officers involved, but not one of you where on the scene! so you are all surly do your own opinon, you should remember that the only people who truly know what happened are the people that are there at the time.
I was born and raised in Sandy however I no longer live ther and it's not because of the scum bags or the police,I have also been a police Officer,I will not defend wrong reguardless of who it is done by, badge or no badge, and I will not make judgement on anyone if I did not witness it, it has also been proven that 8 of 10 eye witnesses have been wrong by the evidence at hand, sometimes the mind see's something other than what really happened, it's sad when anyone dies good guy or bad guy ,and I have never met a cop who wanted to just go out and kill people for no reason,sometime things happen fast and the fastest solution to stop something from possibly getting wrose is to have to shoot someone, I read one comment about Kaady being found comatose in the middle of the road, is there anyone out there who truly believes that to be ture and that he was gunned down while in a coma? I am not saying that sometimes the police don't make mistakes because we all do we are after all human I just wonder after all what anyone of you would do faced with the same situations knowing that not only do you have your life to protect and also be held responsible for anyone else that person may come in contact with and harm or injury to should you let him go or he gets away.And on the note of a Police Officer letting a ovious drunk driver go because he did not want to mess with her, if that truly happened the witness to that should have called 911 then and there, and reported the driver and filed a complaint on the officer. And to the officer if thats the additude you have about your responsiblity you should seek a differnt line of work, because thier plenty of young men and women out there wanting jobs in law enforcment. I first met Chief Skelton some 30 years ago his 1st nite at Sandy PD and my 1st Traffic ticket I have always thought he was fair and level headed. I believe that he is not running the gun fighters from the OK corral but a group of trained humans that do the best they can do in a given situation, all I ask is that you need to remember that things may not be what they seem and people do not alway act like we expect them to, even our loved ones.
(email verified)
Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 09:51 AM
Wow. Can those of you who so blindly support the cops read? But I guess from some of the comments here, you don't want to be confused by the facts because your mind is already made up.
"Those other cases involving dope, guns, and alcohol..."??
Guns??? Where were the guns? Did I miss something here?
And, let see, only one case involved dope (which the plaintiff claims the cops planted on him), and only one other involved alcohol (because the guy happened to have one drink at a bar). That's 2 out of the 6 lawsuits filed. Stop trying to villify the plaintiffs by painting them all as scum.
And, I guess you must have missed the part where the cops work with those meth freaks sneaking in your back door.
(email verified)
Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 09:59 AM
Don Moore-
What I wrote was that cops "gunned down a naked, burned and bleeding man who they found comatose in the road." I never claimed that "he was gunned down while in a coma." Please, is it too much to ask that people read carefully?
As a matter of fact (not opinion and not hearsay), the cops first decided to send thousands of volts of electricity through the burned, bleeding, naked and COMATOSE (in the cops' own words, mind you!) young man, never allowing the paramedics on the scene to approach - let alone treat - him. THEN they decided to shoot him SEVEN times. How in the world can anyone possibly condone two fully armed and trained, healthy young men repeatedly tazing and then shooting a critically injured and non-responsive victim? Is this the way you'd want your son treated after being severely injured in an accident? It's horrifying and there is no excuse.
These arguments supporting the police would carry much more weight if they were supported by facts - and not by musings, wishful thinking or anecdotal "evidence."
(email verified)
Thu, Mar 29, 2007 at 10:19 AM
To Mr. Whiner et al;
Regarding people "taking responsibility for themselves...."
I think that is exactly what this lawsuit is all about. See, the police keep brualizing and killing people, and they never have to face any consequences for it. They NEVER take responsibility. Take the killing of Fouad Kaady. They tazed and tortured, and then shot to death an unarmed, bleeding man. And who "investigated" this crime?" Why, the police. Unsurprisngly, they found that officers didn't do anything wrong. Didn't "violate policy." And so no one has ever had to take responsibility for what they did there. Yet.
You may be surprised to learn, officer Whiner, that we the People aren't buying that. We are tired of you getting away with all this killing, and we intend to make you take responsibility for it. We are, quite frankly, "in fear for our lives." We have the right and the obligation to protect ourselves and our communities from you. So we are in full support of the plaintiffs in these lawsuits.
Your free pass is over, officer. It's time to start taking responsibility for yourselves and your own actions. If you do not, we will force you to.
(email verified)
Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 01:07 AM
This is sad.....from both sides.
First, the loss of a family member is never easy, be it a natural death or by the hand of another. I'm sure we have all lost someone, and can agree to that.
Mr. Kaady was a young man, and that is sad in itself. But I can only go by what has been reported in the press, which was this: It was said that he rear-ended a young woman on her way to work, and pushed her into a ditch, before crashing his car and having it catch fire. Why didn't he stop after he hit her? Maybe if he would have, he would be alive today. It was also reported that he kicked a construction worker in the chest, so I'm assuming he wasn't "comatose" or "non-responsive". I for one would never want to be in the position that I would have to take another person's life, but know that the police cannot put the paramedics lives in danger until a situation is under control. I can only speculate, as any of us can, with the story as it was reported. And none of us will ever know why and what REALLY happened to cause these events to unfold.
I've seen Mr. Rubio around Sandy, although I don't personally know him. I'm sorry for the loss of his son. Whether it be "suicide" (which the press reported that the family said he had been depressed and suicidal) or "undetermined causes", his son is still gone. Does he think that the Sandy Police had something to do with it? Or is he just upset because they didn't search for him when he was reported missing? I'm still not real sure of the cause of this lawsuit. But, I do know that if he showed up at my home, and harrassed my spouse, I would probably have done the same thing that Officer Taylor did. I personally think that's stepping over the line. We, as humans, have a instinct born into us to protect our families, and we also can have a tendency to go overboard. I think BOTH sides have gone WAY overboard, and it just keeps escalating. When should it stop?
As far as the other lawsuits...well, I'm a firm believer (having worked with attorneys for years) that the legal system is no longer used for the pursuit of justice. It is now used for many silly issues that waste the court's time, the taxpayer's money, and in the long run, resolves nothing. The dead are still dead, and money isn't going to bring them back.
And now people on here are calling the cops "drug planters" and "working with the meth freaks"? Wow, and I guess Elvis is alive and well and living in Florida! Well, we know what they say about opinions.
I can see both sides of this heated debate, but we all need to keep one thing in mind.....most of the people who have commented here live in Sandy, and will continue to live here, despite the issues with the police department. I for one love this town, and will continue to live here and support the department, because I was raised to respect law enforcement.
Now, you can say that is an antiquated way of thinking, but the things that my parents taught me growing up have made me the person I am today...someone who respects authority, is law abiding, and would never put myself in a position where the outcome COULD be fatal.
(email verified)
Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 02:04 AM
Matilda,
"All these killings"? Wow.....how many do you think there have been?
I guess these officers can thank their lucky stars that they are hired and not voted into office.
These comments are getting entertaining!
(email verified)
Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 02:13 AM
It's odd that you claim to be "seeing both sides" and "can only go by what has been reported in the press," yet you pick and choose among the most convenient aspects of these stories that only affirm your position.
The statement that cops are "working with the meth freaks" came right out of this article! It was not an opinion, or some strange conspiracy theory. I quote:
Nowhere in this story do the cops ever deny that. So why are you?
If you think cops don't work with confidential informers, AND that this sort of thing doesn't goes on all the time in Sandy, YOU'RE the one who is delusional.
(email verified)
Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 03:52 AM
The quote got omitted. Sorry:
The compliant states that she said she planted the drugs as part of an informal agreement with Roberts to turn in three criminals to keep her out of trouble for her own illegal drug issues – a deal called "give up three, go free."
(email verified)
Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 03:54 AM
It looks to me that Kari Kelly started the whole thing by calling the police to turn him in because she had argued with him.
Maybe he should sue HER for $21 million! :-)
(email verified)
Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 04:19 AM
I have known the Rubio family for 15+ years. They are a honest, hardworking, law abiding family who are a great benefit to our society. They possess a great deal of determination and are not afraid to stand up for what they believe is right. They have the guts to stand and demand that the city of Sandy do away with corrupt and cruel police practices and the officers who act out and encourage such terrorist acts against those each of the officers has personally sworn to protect. I do stand beside them. Do you have the guts to stand with The Rubio's to demand this change so that the citizens of Sandy no longer have cause to fear those they pay to protect them?
(email verified)
Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 07:23 AM
Dear Seeing both sides,
As far as filing a complaint against a law enforcment officer, Once I did. Almost 20 years ago. Against a state trooper regarding his conduct. The day I filed the complaint my drivers license was suspended over an issue that had been resolved 7 months prior. Without notice. That was in Portland. For 20 + years people have warned me never to cross the Sandy cops. For the person who witnessed the release of the drunk driver, the person probably did more to protect themselves and family by not filing a complaint, than getting the drunk driver off the road. I beleive the "system" could work like it is suppose to if the people involved in the many levels of goverment were ethical people, like the Rubio's, like the average honest neighbor. But unfortunatly, the majority of people in public offices are there for their own interests, not a true interest in public good.
(email verified)
Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 07:45 AM
What ever happened to the idea of "Peace Officers"? Seems to me that that attitude from law enforcment would go alot father in making this country a better, safer place.
(email verified)
Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 07:58 AM
Dear Sir and to all the people in Sandy Oregon it seems to me after reading what has been listed above it seems that everyone is quick to judge without being involved I can tell you on my side of this as being the older brother of Ernest Roberts is that you will never find a more honest person I can not speak for all the officers but I can and will for him .
(email verified)
Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 10:15 AM
Only six lawsuits? I think the FBI should be called in to investigate what the Sandy Police department has been doing for years. Gosh, does it suprise you that "their" reports of what happened differ from the people they harass? After all, they make the rules and make the reports, right. These jerks have been harassing the people of Sandy and area for years. Finally someone has the courage to take them on. I hope they all win!
I have known the Rubio family for 20 years and they are a good hard working family and have been harassed for several years by the Sandy PD!
(email verified)
Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 01:28 PM
This last comment contains a lot of truth. As an ex cop
I am not very proud f the profession anymore. Used to be that you could tell the good guys from the bad guys.
Not anymore. Now it's cops that are often the bullys and bad guys. I had to give it up after I realized that I was constantly expected to lie in my reports and in court under oath. It just never sat too well with me to see public servents having to lie as part of their job.
Also I got tired of working with a bunch of drunks and wife beaters. The public has no idea just how many cops suffer from seroius substance abuse problems and the resulting domestic abuse issues. I would have to say that about two thirds of the cops I worked with smoked dope and that never set with me too well either. There is nothing in our training that really prepared us for all the ugly stuff we saw on a daily basis and after a while it takes it's tole on you.
Anyway, if you really want to support law enforcement start demanding drug testing and couseling for cops with substance abuse problems and make sure that your elected officials have the guts to stand up to these excessive force issues. If these politicians like Linda Malone are too weak to fire the rotten apples and support everyone's constitutional rights, then they have to be the first to go.
(email verified)
Sat, Mar 31, 2007 at 10:07 AM
There is no excuse for the excessive force used within our county so often.
It reflects poor training and serious personnel problems. Anyone that really
wants to support law-enforcement needs to stand up to this abuse of power.
The actions of this minority of unethical, poorly trained, and corrupt few
reflect badly on all law-enforcement and make every good cop’s job much
harder to do. Please don't be fooled by any of these idiots that try to tell
you supporting these cowardly thugs is supporting law and order, because it
just isn't true. All of these bad guys must go as soon as possible if we
wish to restore sanity and safety to our communities, and respectability to law-enforcement.
One more thing that needs to be mentioned here is that Clackamas County Sheriff’s Dept. and Sandy Police are both desperately in need of a random drug testing program. For Christ sake, every one of these
officers is armed to the teeth and somehow they have managed to escape this most
basic level of accountability that all other citizen’s face now a days. Your
Tri-met driver test, the person that assembles your car as it goes down the
line test, and most likely the driver that delivers groceries to your
neighborhood supermarket test, Why Not Your COPS?
It's time our cops put down the pipe and start living by the rules the rest
of us must abide by. Please, let's help clean up this cesspool we call
law-enforcement in Clackamas County.
(email verified)
Sat, Mar 31, 2007 at 11:02 AM
I don't know if it is intentional or not, but Marcus Hathcock has made the same serious error in reporting on the Kaady case as other journalist in the media have.
His otherwize informative article, misinforms readers that a grand jury cleared Officer Bergin and Deputy Willard of any wrong doing. This is False.
The grand jury, after many days of conflicting testimony found that there was insufficient evidence to charge Bergin or Willard with intentionally committing a crime. There is a world of difference between this and saying that they were found innocent of any wrong doing. There was a mountain of evidence and testimony suggesting wrong doing by both officers. What the grand juries decision reflected more than anything else was that Oregon laws have been prejuditially written in a way that favors law enforcement and cops rights over those of the average citizen.
Although there appears to be little chance of Bergin or Willard going to jail or ever seeing real justice for their crimes, legal experts all agree that the county has no legitamate defence for this horrific act and will lose the law suit brought by the Kaady family for the wrongful death of their son, Fouad.
(email verified)
Sun, Apr 01, 2007 at 03:05 AM
OUR FAMILY HAS KNOWN THE RUBIO FAMILY FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS. WE HAVE SEEN NOTHING BUT AN HONEST, HARDWORKING MAN. A MAN WITH INTEGRITY AND HONOR-ONLY WANTING ANSWERS TO WHAT HAPPENED TO CARLOS. OUR KIDS PERSONALLY KNEW CARLOS, HE WAS A GOOD KID. WHERE IS THE JUSTICE FOR THIS FAMILY? WHERE IS THE INVESTIGATION INTO WHAT HAPPENED TO CARLOS? DEATH-UNDETERMINED-COME ON- WE LIVE IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA....
(email verified)
Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 01:39 AM
Wow! This is better than T.V. Its got everything Drama, comedy, action suspense. Who needs a clicker???? I love all the opinions. Group hug for every one.
(email verified)
Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 05:51 AM
What is this world coming to when a bunch of low-lifes, most with criminal records, can sue the police for doing their jobs?
Sandy should counter-sue.
(email verified)
Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 09:28 AM
I too have known the Rubios for several years and have always known them to have incredibly strong morals and integrity.The loss they have endured is shared by all who knew Carlos. I personally feel proud to know the Rubios and strongly support their quest in seeking both truth and justice of the sandy police, Its about time they should be accountable.
And to those who think it is only "low lifes" and "scumbags"who are filing these complaints, you should know who you speak of before you spout off outrageous claims against people you dont even know.
Good Luck to all,you have my support in the fight to be rid of the corrupt Sandy police
(email verified)
Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 12:30 PM
Kevin;
The real "low Lifes" in our society are people who would intentionally hurt innocent people, abuse the power of their office, and pass judgment on those they don't know. You are obviously someone that doesn't give much serious thought to anything and worships authority.
I cant help but wonder who wrote your comment for you,
because I seriously doubt that anyone that takes your position has made it past the second grade.
All of these people are citizens of our country and deserving of the rights our constitution guarantees us.
(email verified)
Wed, Apr 04, 2007 at 08:12 AM
Dear M.H.
I only took your words and used them " your buddies gunned down a man they found burned naked and comatose" that sure sounds like they shot someone who was in a coma to me! the report I read from the Sandy post said that he was acting eradactly when the police arrived,Jumping up and on cars and running around that hardly sounds comatose and nonresponsive. as for the serveral thousand volts, if you don't know volts do not cause harm. It's amps that kill not volts it only cause the body to tense up and your muscles to freeze, it will not cause any long term harm, and if he was out of control how would you suggest he be be controlled? and I am not suggesting shoot him either, THE ONE BIG FACT IS YOU NOR I WHERE THERE! You also cannot even say for sure what you would have done had you been in the same postion. You also state that he was critically injured and non responsive. it seems to be a differance in what you think and what was reported by prople who there. and yes the police are trained and one of the cops is in his late 40's that's not real young, I am sure you think the police are trained like you see in the movies, well thats not the case you can be trained for every problem that araises, sometime you just have to do what you think is best and you only have a second or less to come with anwser. I have not talked to the police about this I have just read the Sandy post, and for the person who said what ever happened to peace officers they would all love that, however the 10% of the population we need the police for refuse to allow that to be possible, I'll bet the last this you want when you all call the cop to handle that unarmed crazy man who just broke into your house and is scaring the living hell out of you is a kinder gentler person, sometimes force is needed and it can not be equal it needs to be greater to overcome the problem. I suggest you ALL put on the badge and try to enforce the laws put in place by your VOTED officals in a peaceful manner.I give you 30 days on the street and you'll either quit or change your mind, Remember you want to go home at the end of your shift without injury. Oh and by the way you will be doing this for less than $35000 a year in most cases.
(email verified)
Fri, Apr 06, 2007 at 10:55 AM
Please, Please, Don;
Lets forget about parroting that same old sentimental dribble about how hard it is to be a cop or about how happy we will be when a brave cop shows up to protect us from some kind of deranged preditor. And lets get it right. M.H may have chosen the wrong word but she did get it right. FYI: When the cops arrived, Fouad Kaady was sitting still in the middle of the road moaning in what was described as a catatonic state, and presented NO DANGER to anyone. It was only after he was screamed at in "psychotic SWAT style" to roll over on his stomache, where he was most badly burned with flesh hanging, and couldn't comply that the situation deteriorated. When he didn't comply and remained sitting, this badly injured human being in need of immediate medical treatment was tazed over and over like an animal.
Making excuses for this type of cowardly and unprofessional conduct does absolutely nothing for law enforcement Don. No we weren't there but there was sure some witnesses there and to this day they will tell you that they are haunted by the memory of the cruel brutality they witnessed. These witnesses regret very much calling the cops. As they said," we wanted to see this man get medical help, not be murdered".
You need to wake up to the fact that excessive force and brutality have slowly grown to epidemic proportions all across the country and that you don't have to be some kind of wild eyed radical to be very concerned about the direction law enforcement is heading. All across our nation ordinary citizens are reporting horrific acts of police violence. If law enforcement still protected the weak from the bulleys we could all support our cops, but thats not the case now a days.
Most of us good law abiding citizens still do support our cops when they are out there doing what we pay them to do. Let's not confuse that with supporting them when they are clearly in the wrong.
Excuse me Don, but you need to start reading the facts instead of the propaganda. You might start with doing some research on how many citizens have been killed with the wide spread use of tazers. Evidently, there is something in them nasty little volts that can kill too.
(email verified)
Sun, Apr 08, 2007 at 06:10 AM
Don:
The link below should provide some good information on the dangers of stungun/ tasers, and deaths associated with their use. While there might be some positive aspects to the use of this less than lethal technology, it has to be respected as a weapon and only used as a last resort. Unfortunately, this isn't currently the case.
(email verified)
Sun, Apr 08, 2007 at 06:32 AM
http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/2894/
(email verified)
Sun, Apr 08, 2007 at 06:35 AM
Last resort to what? Where on Use of Force should it land? Before or after taking hostile subject down to the hard concrete? Before or after they subject reaches for the officer's gun. Before or after the subject reaches for their own gun. Tasers have been proven to save lives not cause them. When you say "last resort" you really have been hoodwinked by all the anti-police rhetoric. Or should I say been part of the problem and not the solution.
Tasers save lives and prevent injuries. I assume you would rather we go back to 60's when the officer might have had mace, probably not, but had cuffs and a gun. The less lethal tools available to law enforcement now give what used to be lethal encounters a possibility in becoming non-lethal encounters. I won't change your mind and I am not trying to. Just calling BS on your last resort comment. The firearm is the last resort.
The funny thing here is the Post will let these articles go back and forth because it makes good press. Look at us, we are now debating Tasers.
(email verified)
Sun, Apr 08, 2007 at 09:59 AM
Dear Police Supporter;
Your criticism is well taken. I would much rather see someone tased than shot and I think the technology has probably saved lives. My point to Don was that it isn't the 100% safe tool he sugest it is. Though I may have chosen the wrong words when I said "last resort" what I was suggesting was that this handy new life saving tool get's used much more often than it needs to. I know that the use of force is a difficult call and that us civillians don't always understand or appreciate the percieved need for force in a given situation. Having said that though I must also say that I think most citizens have pretty good horse sense about what constitutes abuse also.
Everyday you can find an article somewhere about a woman, child or adult being tased for what seems like the slightest act of Non-Compliance. Maybe this is better than body slamming someone on to the concrete and kneeing their face into the pavement as we see on almost any episode of Cops, but it still represents excessive force and poor training. Of course there is also the separate issue of tasers used for torture on those already in custody. This seems to be happening far too often as well.
I know a number of retired fire-fighters that I discuss this excessive force issue with. Some how these guys got through thirty to fourty year careers with out tasing or shooting anyone. They were often confonted by pschotics, drunks, and other unmanageble people they had to take down and restrain but they were trained for this. I think it is obvious that there is a big difference between cops and fireman. Law enforcement attracts too many authoritarian bullies that like to throw their weight around and have an obsession for power and control. Too many of our cops join the force for the same reason that punks join gangs. It's the same psychology. We really need to stop all this hero BS about cops. If we are going to shut down an entire city for a memorial parade everytime a cop is killed in the line of duty, then we need to do the same everytime an innocent civillian is murdered by a cop.
I will start supporting and respecting my cops when they start earning it. First thing is they all need to get off drugs. The idea of cops refusing to submit to random drug testing is absolutely absurd. Give me one reason why cops shouldn't test with all the responsibility and danger their profession holds. Everyone else has to. Our society has allowed this group of unmanageble bullies to run amuck for far too long. It's time we take back our communities from bad cops. We have been duped into letting the foxes keep an eye on the chickens. If need be, I think most neighborhoods & communities could start their own crime prevention and protection programs and save the ton of tax money that is currently being extorted from all citizens.
The way I see it is that we are currently being held hostage by an unjust system that cares little for our individual rights but has homicidal thugs patrolling the streets extracting protection money much as anyother organized crime syndicate does. Our biggest problem with reform is probably figuring out what to do with one of the most dangerous and sick elements of our society once we relieve them of their duty.
(email verified)
Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 02:24 AM
Find a paper
Enter a street name
or a 5 digit zip code
Browse archive
The Sandy Post
News feed
Facebook
Digg
Del.icio.us
Newsvine
Stumbleupon
Reddit
Re: Parade of lawsuits targets Sandy Police Department
When will something be done about these people? Chief Skelton runs this town as if it were some kind of backwater, good ol' boy duchy. These people have been riding around hounding us all for LONG ENOUGH.
I can't believe this, when I read this. Because these guys just keep getting away with things like this. And usually, it never even goes this far, because everyone knows the police always win these kinds of things, and then they come after anyone who speaks up.
I really hope the plaintiffs win these lawsuits -- every one of them. We need this town to be cleaned up, and these bullies to be shoved into a box car and shipped out on the nearest rails.
"D. Bardo"
(email verified)
Wed, Mar 28, 2007 at 02:31 AM