Mike Strickland has called on the Oregon Appeals Court to set aside his conviction for unholstering pistol to defend himself after being attacked, menaced and chased by masked and armed Antifa protesters in July of 2016.
The incident happened at a “Don’t Shoot Portland”/”Black Lives Matter” event when a group of anarchist/masked Antifa broke off from the main protest group to stop Strickland from filming the event. Just moments before, some of the same people attacked Strickland with their Antifa flag poles and fists.
Strickland feared for his life with the 300 pound Kerensa bearing down on him and others rushing the videographer.
Strickland is a working journalist who covered these events for his own news site on YouTube as well as for other national news sites.
Strickland was found guilty of ten counts of unlawful use of a weapon, ten counts of menacing, and one count of disorderly conduct in the second degree. He could have gone to prison for decades for the offenses. At sentencing, he was ordered to serve 40 days in jail.
The appeal was filed by Robert Barnes of Los Angeles and Mark Geiger of Salem.
In the discussion of the case, Barnes said that Strickland’s case was a study in ambush:
“Attack by ambush followed by trial by ambush followed by verdict by ambush.”
Among the issues that the attorneys claimed were wrongly decided were:
The trial court committed reversible error when it denied Defendant’s motion for a change of venue.
Local media about the case described Strickland in prejudicial terms which would have tainted a jury pool:
Within the articles, misinformation concerning Defendant was widespread and included falsely alleging Defendant was a “white nationalist anarchist”; falsely stating that Defendant was at the protest to instigate others; falsely describing Defendant as a “counter protestor”, “right-wing troll”, and “crazy guy”; and falsely claiming Defendant came to the protest “prepared for battle” and “nearly shot [the protestors].”
Barnes argues that the local prosecutor and police chief clearly tried to prejudice media coverage against Strickland:
At arraignment, State Attorney Katharine Molina told the press that Defendant had a past police report involving a situation wherein an attendee of a vigil for the Orlando nightclub shooting was sent harassing text messages of a race based nature after asking Defendant to leave the vigil. (ER 45) The State pushed this story to the press despite there being no proof that Defendant had anything to do with it. (ER 45) The State essentially accused Defendant of being a racist to the press, in a time where racial issues are at the forefront of American politics, despite no proof existing for the claim. (ER 45) Also, Portland Chief of Police Mike Marshman, in a memo sent to the Portland Police Bureau that was later spread by the press, described Defendant as someone who “menaced other protestors” and claimed that as a result the protest “could have turned deadly.” (ER 135.)
Those statements were not only unfair, they were untrue.
Barnes further argued that the unprovoked beating by an anti gun filmmaker, which severely broke Strickland’s arm, requiring surgery, should have been allowed into evidence to help establish his state of mind at the time of the attack at the Don’t Shoot Portland event.
The trial court committed reversible error when it granted the State’s motion to exclude evidence of an unrelated prior altercation.
A surprise use-of-force witness brought in at the 11th hour, giving defense attorneys only a few hours’ notice was prejudicial and reversible error by Judge Thomas Ryan:
The trial court committed reversible error when it allowed the prosecution to put forward a surprise rebuttal witness because the State had not properly notified the defense of said witness.
The defense attorney took issue with the way in which the ‘victims’ were labeled by local prosecutors, giving Strickland no way to object:
It also offered vague descriptions of the alleged victims, rather than naming them. The court denied the demurrer, holding that the prosecution can charge in the alternative. The trial court committed reversible error when it denied Defendant’s demurrer, although the indictment charged more than one defense not separately stated and it was not definite or certain.
Strickland’s appeals attorney took issue with the Judge’s order not allowing him to use a camera, video equipment – in other words, the tools of his trade – while under parole and probation:
In addition to the myriad of prejudicial decisions against Defendant, the trial court committed an error when it violated Defendant’s constitutional rights guaranteed by the first amendment.
The 456 page document, complete with multiple pages of exhibits and testimony, was filed in court on December 12th.
There has always been closely guarded and understandable resistance on the part of law enforcement to opening our profession to the public eye. It’s been a long standing tenet that what we do in public should be held close to the profession. The thought is that what the public wants to know should be filtered through a ìneed to know” screen.
We used to believe that law enforcement was only really understood by us cops. We believed we were the final arbiters and interpreters of events, especially those of great public interest or controversy.
That public policy is still the modus operandi. Unfortunately, it’s a presumption that prosecutors and the courts–the other major components of the criminal justice system– share and support. It’s outdated.
There was a time when the criminal justice system called the shots from crime to conviction–the where and when the flow of information to the public was controlled and calculated. The story was told and interpreted through the words and action of a system with a vested interest in protecting an image, and in fairness a concern for public servants. That doesn’t mean there was an unjust intent. It’s
just the way it was.
But now, the playing field, the equipment and the rules have all changed. The only thing that hasn’t changed is the police’s badly out-positioned playbook. And it’s the
police and their relationships in individual communities which now finds the profession mired in a lack public confidence and trust.
Social Media Fallout
The unrelenting onslaught of the use of social media and a profession poorly-prepared to deal with its result will continue to erode both confidence and trust in the cops.
Now, the story of the street isn’t told first by those who are quick on the draw with guns, but with the adept use of online audio and video. The story may or may not give an accurate picture as events unfold, but without argument, that becomes the ‘truth’ until it’s undone later by the facts of the event. In the meantime, and in real time, the damage is done and the ‘truth’ as told in the moment is embedded in the public eye and public consciousness. It’s not fair. Rarely is.
Police administrations across this country and political ‘leadership’ get blamed for the imagined offenses.
The criminal justice system is then ordered to ‘fix it.’
It’s time for the street cops to get back their reputations. To do that, they should just let the cameras roll. Real time. Real story. Let ’em go.
Police body cameras are only a half a decade from becoming a legislated mandate in many states in the country. It’s futile for police to believe that the outcry
for that technology as a tool in their everyday lives will somehow be a passing fad. Flatly, that will not happen.
The ubiquitous nature of street cop cams will eventually result in judges requiring them for evidence.
Excuses like bad batteries and poor lighting and ìI forgot to turn it onî will either become cause for unfavorable jury instructions, or prosecutors will be told by courts to dismiss the case for the lack of best evidence.
Go Live 24-7
But that is not enough. It’s time for a police departments with enlightened management, and a high degree of faith in the accountability of their supervisory structure, to take body cameras live and unedited to the street.
From roll call to end-of-shift letís go live everyday. Every moment. Every stop. Every call for help. Letís go tell our story in real time, streaming information to the public who wants us to be right and to support us.
Thatís right, a reality show like none other. It’s what the public pays for and it is what they admire about what we do. It’s also what they criticize but still support.
And here’s why. Prosecutors, defense counsel and courts would be in hysterics over such a proposal.
The idea that the cops would move to a live streaming relationship with the community as they deal with matters yet to be adjudicated and without the ìguiding touchî of the rest of the system is, well, to say the least, heresy.
It removes the blindfold from the figure holding the scales of justice and how can that possibly work?
But riddle me this. When the streets are burning in North Carolina,or Baton Rouge or Baltimore and the cops are taking incoming spit,rocks and bottles. When they’re being cursed in New York or assassinated in Dallas… where is the rest of the criminal justice system to support their image and protecting their lives and careers?
This will be a painful move for the police. In moving forward this way by informing the public in real time, there will be some individual casualties. What makes it worth the switch is that the public will learn truthful and timely information about the true value of quality policing.
And, can you imagine getting to watch on YouTube,Twitter, etc., the daily humdrum live-stream of one police officer helping a kid with a flat tire on a bike a ride home or giving a jump for someone with a dead battery? Soon, reality police shows would be old news.
But there’s a more important reason to bring policing live to social media. It will force the profession to fast-forward on the policy changes it needs to make to better hire, train,and hold accountable a new generation of police officers,deputies, and troopers.
This coming generation is well equipped and internally hardwired todeal with the realities of modern technology and the instant-information age that cops operate in every day.
Right now, this next generation of our protectors is at a great disadvantage. They’re just waiting for a better grade of police administrations and political leaders to give them the tools they need to win the image battle.
Let’s just cut to the chase and go live, 24-7, and let the average American see what the average cop sees live and in real time.
Bernie Giusto is a former Lieutenant and Public Information Officer for the Oregon State Police, Chief of the Gresham Oregon Police Department and Multnomah County Sheriff.
It is unfortunate that death on our streets has become the catalyst for our “angry” national conversation about the value of life in American communities. For any future policy changes addressing street violence, there’s always the tired and out-of-touch political non-leadership resigned to the misinformed position that by “fixing the police” the problem will be fixed.
No other shallow posturing could be less accurate, carelessly shortsighted, or a more harmful to the desperate need for a meaningful overhaul of the criminal justice system. Political pandering about ‘reform’ is nothing more than dangerous inaction. This inaction continues to threaten the safety of everyday-life in American communities in the short term, and erodes public trust in the long term.
The criminal justice “system” that impacts equity and fairness is a system, less dependent on the actions of ethical cops on the street, than on outdated public safety policies and ‘broken-record’ political practices.
Think of it as a pyramidal maze where the marble gets dropped into the top and then through a series of twist and turns comes to the end and drops out of the bottom. The sound of the police making an lawful arrest places a person at the top of the pyramid. From there the roll through to bottom is the remainder of the criminal system.
The undeniable truth, however, is that the perception is cops control the system. As if the entire system falls to the police who have little control of the maze. The police unquestionably are the most visible part of the system. Yet, they often lose all influence after that life is subject to individual state and federal bail requirements, criminal charging practices, and court determined release decisions. Sworn to protect and serve goes only so far. Yes, policing in many communities in this country is in crisis of confidence. The most dangerous part for all, however, is when police lack community confidence and fear the loss of public trust. Without both there is a great risk to act not fairly and ethically at all.
Improvement is needed:
Yes, there needs to be a clear and renewed focus on accountability on a number of levels within police agencies and is an urgent priority.
Yes, policing leadership and the quality of many police administrations desperately require a complete overhaul
Yes, the failure of police agencies should be understood to be a clear failure of the unintelligent political leadership. The real failure to Black Lives Matter and all lives begins long before a police contact drops that life into the maze of the criminal justice system.
Sadly and unfairly, any resulting anger gets targeted directly at the police.
Really, the fix is in often before the police come into the picture. They’re the first decision-maker by virtue of the arrest, but have so little effect on the final disposition of a case. They’re left out on a the limb by themselves to absorb the anger of a system (that works better when you have money than when you don’t).
We need to completely overhaul the bail system in this country. States need to legislate new bail laws that focus equal access to justice. The net effect now is that a poor person is in jail longer than a rich one because they can’t make bail.
Here’s what that might look like. Crimes-against-persons wouldn’t qualify for no-bail, but property crimes without a criminal history might. Drug crimes for possession and low level sales would be a ‘yes’ for no bail.
We should also do away with certain charging enhancements, such as higher penalties for most drug sales within 1000 ft of a school as the sole reason for enhanced bail.
We might agree crimes need to be referred to the criminal justice system. But the system doesn’t guarantee justice will be better served when those arrested remain in jail only because they don’t have a bank account that matches.
Yes, our poor excuse for political leaders need to shoulder their share of the responsibility for not only Black Lives but for all economically underprivileged lives.
Yes, we need to recognize that there will be no end to the guaranteed downward spiral of ‘stay in jail, lose my job, lose my car, lose my family and lose my hope for justice’ in a system that is perceived to be stacked against them.
Anger boils over at police because access to equal justice and a return to a productive life depends on the size of a law breaker’s bank account. Does that excuse the individual responsibility to respect the rule of law? Of course not. However, that is not the argument here. The point is, that the rule of law is not only about being arrested, it is about equal access to it.
If we have devolved to a discussion of “Cops” versus “Color”, don’t blame the cops and dont’t blame our communities of color. The fault, and there is fault, falls squarely on those who should be smart enough and committed enough to demonstrate Black Lives Matter long before the two find themselves again with deadly irreconcilable differences –differences not always of their own making.
Since the Black Lives Matter protest in which citizen journalist Mike Strickland drew a pistol on protesters “bee lining” for him, the Portland media has done everything it can to depict him as something he’s not.
Strickland was freed on $250,000 bail one day before a bail review hearing last week.
Willamette Week insists on called him a “counter protester.” The respected weekly rag has made up this characterization out of whole cloth. On what is this based, exactly? No idea.
Strickland has been on the scene for years now as a citizen journalist. He will goad people into giving him a comment, but that doesn’t make him anymore a “counter protester” than George Stephanopolous is when he goads politicos with whom he disagrees to answer questions.
Worse, both local alternative papers, WW and “The Portland Mercury” have depicted Strickland — a legal gun owner — as some sort of nut because he drew his weapon in self defense.
Lefty videographer Mike Bluehair notes that the alternative media are trying to force this narrative with their own news boxes. He sent this video to me last week to make the point:
The Oregonian tried to make an issue out of Strickland carrying ammo for his pistol:
What, exactly, is the correct amount of ammo to carry, Oregonian? One magazine, two, six? And, as long as we’re on that, please define “extended clip” and prove Strickland had one.
“Strickland had an extended clip in what appeared to be a Glock 26 that he swept at chest level multiple times in front of protesters and a plain-clothed Portland police officer, the prosecutor said.”
Where is the “extended clip”? The world awaits your answer, media.
Of course, the mainstream news outlets find the delicious irony in a person pulling a gun at the BLM protest, locally called “Don’t Shoot PDX.”
I’ll tell you what irony is. Irony is at a so-called ‘peaceful’ protest the New Black Panthers held a pre-rally pep talk calling for violence:
I’ll tell you what irony is. Irony is that at a supposedly ‘peaceful’ protest, protesters intentionally assaulted Strickland. Where’s that cutline in the media coverage?
The media swallowed whole the story from a protester who said Strickland tried to “incite or instigate others” at the protest he was covering — when it was they who assaulted Strickland, frightening him so much that he was compelled to pull his pistol in self defense. Now, that’s irony.
The media certainly have their preconceived — and wrong — narrative that they’re wedded to. The real question is, when confronted over and over with the truth of this case, will they bother to inform the public or will they stick with their false narrative?
If what happened to citizen journalist Mike Strickland last Thursday on the streets of Portland, Oregon looked familiar it’s because it’s happened to other reporters.
Strickland, whose YouTube nom de guèrre is “Laughing at Liberals,” was filming a Black Lives Matter protest last Thursday in downtown Portland. Protesters included anarchists, Occupy acolytes, Black Lives Matter activists and — now we know — self described Black Panthers who called for violence at the protest. The crowd surrounded the 36-year-old videographer as he tried to cover the event.
There are some who believe he shouldn’t have pulled his pistol, but as you can see from the video nearby, he was deeply fearful of the crowd. And, in one of my previous posts, I talked with four police officers of various ranks, three of whom who said what he did was legal and the other said it was arguably legal.
Strickland sits in Multnomah County jail on $250,000.00 bail because when he arrived at his first hearing, the DA increased the charges and bail. He’ll be in court again July 18th.
The District Attorney’s office appears to have sided with the thugs instead of a citizen journalist who was in fear for his life.
The DA’s overcharging and outsized bail puts all journalists and protesters on notice: Some people are more equal than others.
Yesterday, I demonstrated conclusively that Oregon-based citizen journalist Mike Strickland had a defensible reason for drawing his weapon at advancing anarchists and Black Lives Matter protesters that surrounded him on the street during a protest. The incident, which subsequently videotaped an assault against Strickland, occurred near the federal and county courthouses in downtown Portland.
Strickland now sits in a Multnomah County Sheriff’s jail cell on a felony charge. His bail has been set at $250,000.00. To say that’s excessive for one with no police record is an understatement. Kevin Starrett of the Oregon Firearms Federation calls him a “political prisoner.”
But, now, thanks to video posted by a Twitter user who goes by the name “Prison Planet,” we know that protesters were amped up in advance with a pep talk at Pioneer Courthouse Square by non other than self described “Black Panthers.”
As we’ve since learned, the Dallas shooter responsible for shooting 11 people, killing five white police officers last week, was an erstwhile member of the Houston New Black Panther Party, an organization which has called for violence against the police, among other things.
Here’s the “pep talk” these New Black Panther Party members gave to the Portland Professional Protester crowd. H/T to John Trudel for tipping me off to this video:
The self described Panther admonished the crowd that if things got violent,
“You pull your pistol out and bust it.”
He referred to others as “the enemy.”
There was the wind-up. Now for the delivery:
“When we move with the Panthers, trust when you see me move, I’m moving in violence!”
“We’re tired of asking y’all to help us! We need action! We need to fucking take action.”
“I don’t give a fuck if you fucking knock them over. You run up on ’em, whatever! Whatever you do, you’d better fucking take action!”
Now, as discussed yesterday in the break down of the video tape, after pulling his weapon, the mob was held back. But then a breakaway group followed Strickland as he fearfully backed up the street. He kept telling them, “I’m leaving, I’m leaving!” The photographer told the crowd to leave him alone.
Look who the leader is: Sideways hat. He follows Strickland up the street:
While everyone else has been implored to leave Strickland alone, sideways hat comes at him, sometimes seemingly to be a calming force, but definitely there to intimidate.
Sideways hat makes up the distance with gray hoodie guy who assaults Strickland:
Here he is again. First, at Pioneer Courthouse Square holding his hat:
And later walking toward Strickland wearing his hat:
Did Mike Strickland see the pre rally pep talk by the New Black Panthers? Probably. This was a dangerous crowd. Strickland was smart to carry his pistol.
Mike Strickland was arrested and charged in Portland for pulling a gun at a Black Lives Matter/anarchist protest when a mob converged on him. But now he sits in jail. As one person put it, “[Mike Strickland] is now a political prisoner in Multnomah County.”
First, it’s been awhile since I’ve posted here. But this video of Laughing at Liberals unholstering his gun and pointing in the direction of Portland anarchists and protesters awoke me from my VictoriaTaft.com slumber. It’s time to sound off.
Second, I’m well acquainted Mike Strickland and his work. Since at least 2010, the videographer has been on the scene in Portland and the northwest chronicling important stories about the organized left. I’ve used the fruits of his labors on my radio program in Portland, on this website, and in my current radio and other work.
We’re not besties, but I should tell you that when I was asked to design an online news platform, he was the one guy I sought to be on my team. Later, when I had a chance to suggest a videographer for a California state wide candidate, I suggested Mike Strickland. He’s talented and knows when a set of facts equate to a story. I’ve been impressed by his work for himself and also for Jim Hoft’s “Progressives Today” and “Gateway Pundit” where he has done some painstaking and important work — especially on gun rights.
Third, you should know that about a year ago Strickland was attacked by an anti-second amendment filmmaker named Skye Fitzgerald and so badly hurt he was hospitalized and out of work for months. His arm was broken in three places. Though charged with a felony, Fitzgerald was never prosecuted by Multnomah County prosecutors.
Here is the video that I’m told was presented to Multnomah County prosecutors showing the beating. It has not been made public until it was shared on VictoriaTaft.com:
Even with this evidence, the DA chose not to prosecute the filmmaker, though he clearly assaulted and robbed Strickland of all his cameras (which he later returned with erased flash drives/data cards).
Reports from the left and media to the contrary notwithstanding, Strickland’s not a nut or a kook. He’s a serious young man who is fulfilling a calling to expose the manipulations of the left and the media that proliferate and quite literally shout down the voices of opposing points of view in Portland and Oregon. There are probably several things with which I disagree with Mike, Ron Paul fandom comes to mind, but he’s no ‘winger.’
So here’s what I’m going to do. I’m posting the video from a guy named “Mike Bluehair” who trained his camera on the mob surrounding Strickland in the seconds leading up to the unholstering of his gun and the aftermath. I don’t know “Mike Bluehair,” but the protesters apparently do and trust him (except the Crabbe and Goyle* of the anarchist set, who threatened him for being Strickland’s friend. No idea if that’s true.).
Please do these things:
Watch the video.
Watch my breakdown of the video.
Read for yourself what four cops and one very knowledgeable pro-second amendment activist had to say about the incident.
Share this around please. Post this link to your Facebook pages. Tweet this link to your friends. Email this link to your buddies. Instagram the link. Snapchat your reaction and include the link.
And remember: You do not have permission to copy and paste any/all of the content from this post. Use the link or use nothing at all. Contact me for permissions: Victoria@VictoriaTaft.com.
Now, let’s go over the video (I apologize for the differently sized GIFs, but apparently it can’t be helped).
The mob begins to surround Strickland:
The mob keeps coming:
Angry looking man and person with green coat converge with crowd:
Green jacketed person presumably sees gun and runs:
Strickland draws his weapon to back them off and backs away from the mob:
Strickland is asked to holster his weapon by someone off camera and complies:
“Mike Bluehair” tells mob to back off to let Strickland back away from the scene:
Angry man has to be held back by person in green jacket:
Angry man has to be restrained by another protester. Note that green jacket person has now put on Guy Fawkes mask:
Strickland tells mob to stop anarchists advancing on him:
The mob follows Strickland as he backs his way up the street:
Sideways hat advances while gray hoodie guy advances to the side and assaults Strickland:
The Crabbe and Goyle * of the anarchist set threaten the photog:
Angry man is back, this time with his anarchist kerchief, and advances toward Strickland:
The rest of the video involves police arriving, arresting Strickland and people being questioned. No one says they were menaced by Strickland.
It’s quite serious to draw your weapon, but if you fear for your life or fear great bodily injury, it’s a defensible thing to do. But that’s just my take. I decided to go to the experts.
I asked four cops to tell VictoriaTaft.com what they saw in this video. I’ve given all of them anonymity because of the explosive nature of this case and, after all, they have to live in the area. The only editing is for clarification and brevity.
First up is a 30+ year veteran who’s still on the job in Oregon:
“Clearly the man was afraid of the crowd. There is no crime committed, the man seemed obviously alarmed by the crowd and was backing away from the threat. Whether the threat was real or not is irrelevant, he felt threatened.”
“There is no crime committed”
Next is a long time cop in Oregon:
“Didn’t see what was going on to cause him to point a weapon initially. Clearly he was being menaced by a crowd hostile to him, who they seem to know. Many wearing full or partial masks, one holding a smoking object toward the gentleman, who was trying to back away.
At one point while backing, one of them got behind him and grabbed at him. Officer repeatedly ask if they felt menaced and he says no. Not sure why he was charged with menacing and disorderly, no victim was identified and a reasonable and prudent person might conclude he feared for his safety.
[N]ot a attorney, but his past assault and circumstances with the crowd might make a case for feeling threatened and he was attempting to leave, the videographer was shouting “If you want to be safe leave”
Menacing is a catch all misdemeanor charge, you might want to review ORS 161.205(5) A person may use physical force upon another person in self-defense or in defending a third person, in defending property, in making an arrest or in preventing an escape, as hereafter prescribed in chapter 743, Oregon Laws 1971. Oh and ORS 161.219(1) Applies to use of Deadly Physical Force.”
“Clearly he was being menaced by a crowd hostile to him, who they seem to know.”
Next is a retired police investigator who was on the job in Oregon:
“Here’s anonymous (please) take. It’s LOL. I have no idea who the videographer is, but he’s got a great set of lines. My impression is that he’s in cahoots with L[a]l, but he’s also asking the cops not shoot him, and I recognize that as leftie bullshit. He said straight out the HE didn’t feel threatened by L[a]L, so there goes a serious charge where HE is concerned and leaves (if unjustified) a charge of pointing a firearm at another.
The stinkin’ Justice Center and Federal building are teeming with cameras which might show what happened earlier, before this video started, which is about the ONLY evidence I would consider AGAINST L[a]L, because this film shows assholes following him and surrounding him in spite of the videographer’s urging them not to.
For a criminal case, it is incomplete and ends with the videographer coaching a man with the words it takes to GET a complaint issued rather than merely asking the questions and listening to the answers.
Beats me, but given the facts of the personages in the crowd and L[a]L’s long history without similar trouble, the most he’d likely face if I was heading this up is a trip to the Grand Jury along with all the “witnesses” (who likely wouldn’t even show up).”
“[G]iven the facts of the personages in the crowd and L[a]L’s long history without similar trouble…”
And finally, a politically connected, retired police administrator in Oregon pointed out the untenable political situation in which the Portland Police Bureau now finds itself:
“It’s difficult to know where to start. [Laughing at Liberals] came ready for trouble because he was armed. It might be that he carries a firearm all the time [editor’s note: Strickland has a legal concealed carry permit and frequently carries].
Generally, provide the kind of calm and strength a community needs circumstances more than anything else. It is here where the confidence in the police force pays huge dividends. That’s one reason why Dallas, for the most part, remains calm even though this shooter was black and the victims were white.
Yes, and Portland, Oregon is in very sad shape in terms of political and police leadership at this point. I don’t understand how it is that the city has gotten so far out of control and lost the respect of its citizens.
The cops are doing their best under the circumstances, however when there is so little confidence in the mayor, the city council and their guidance and leadership choices for the Police Bureau, troops on the street are under a great deal of pressure every day.”
I asked former police executive if Strickland had broken the law:
“Tough call. On its face maybe not.”
Then came the political rationale for arresting Strickland in the first place which was to appease the anarchists:
“[O]ften the decision to arrest on the street other than the intent of the law is to address the larger issues in this case: restore or maintain the peace and also to re-establish that the police are in control.
I am not sure there was any choice in the moment given the facts and the and the need to end the situation. What you to ask yourself is: can we allow the perception that guns drawn in these situations between the citizenry should be the new norm? That is not to say that the charges will stand when the DA has a chance to review the entire set of facts. Of course, by that time, the street has returned to some kind of calm and the situation ends safely.
Unfortunately, once in awhile the probably cause to make an arrest to keep the peace trumps the interest of the individual. In the end, the question becomes proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
A reasonable person may think [Strickland] broke the law but that doesn’t mean his actions will be judged to have been [unlawful].”
“Q: Did he break the law? A: On its face maybe not.”
“I can’t think of a situation that is more appropriate for defensive use of a weapon…”
He says the way in which the prosecutors increased the charges at the arraignment, raised the bail to $250,000 when they would have let anyone else go, the bizarre hearsay entered as ‘fact’ at the hearing, and the fact that the organized left has made Strickland a target with websites have basically made Strickland a pariah:
“[Mike Strickland] is a political prisoner in Multnomah County Jail. That is absolutely the case.”
Starrett says even some gun owners believe Strickland should not have been at the protest in the first place. He’s in that camp. But, he says, “he had every right to be there.” Furthermore, the head of the OFF told VictoriaTaft.com:
“[I]f I were approached by a crowd like that, that I believe intended to do me harm, a deranged mob mentality — can you win in that situation…probably not. But I can’t think of a situation that is more appropriate for defensive use of a weapon. He had a right to be there. Was it a great idea? No. He went into enemy territory. But there are war correspondents in the same situation.”
Starrett says the videographer’s own footage could exonerate him:
“The only video that counts is the one he shot. But I wouldn’t be surprised if it disappears [in prosecutors’ custody].”
And it’s the way forward that has Starrett concerned as well:
“What’s happening now with him is part of a grander thing. They’re determined to make an example out of him. He’s the easiest bone to throw them [the leftist power structure of Portland].”
Starrett told VictoriaTaft.com that OFF is ready to help with attorneys fees, but starting out with an outsized bail is going to sap valuable resources. This issue is bigger than their war chest can cover.
Starrett, who teaches firearms law and self defense law, told VictoriaTaft.com:
“I have only the videos to go on, but as an instructor I believe that after drawing his firearm, he holstered as soon as he thought it was safe and we tell people to do that.”
Starrett doesn’t hold out much hope that a pro Second Amendment person will get fair treatment in Portland:
“In any rational county they would have carted him off and cited him. Multnomah County is still predisposed against him. After all, he was attacked on video and his attacker was able to walk.”
And then he revealed his worst fear:
“A conservative person cannot expect justice in multnomah county.”
A private Facebook page has been set up to give support to Strickland and keep track of his case.
To help defray the costs of Strickland’s defense case, Oregon Firearms Federation is continuing to take donations at its Foundation with a credit card or via snail mail. Checks to the 501c3 organizations can be made out to Oregon Firearms Federation Foundation (marked Mike Strickland defense) and mailed:
PO Box 556 Canby OR 97013503-263-5830
*Draco Malfoy’s thuggish friends from the Harry Potter series.
And remember: You do not have permission to copy and paste any/all of the content from this post. Use the link or use nothing at all. Quotes will be attributed to VictoriaTaft.com. Contact me for permissions: Victoria@VictoriaTaft.com.
‘Hands Up’ ‘cops’ threatened bad guys with ‘pistol-whipping’ and shot ‘unarmed’ suspect in the back.
Hands Up, Don’t Shoot/Black Lives Matter/Occupy activists Fahyim Accuay and Jesse Sponberg took on KXL’s challenge to undergo police training at the Clackamas County Sheriff’s training center to get a taste of what it’s like to be a cop. Sadly, they ‘died’.
Don’t feel bad, fellas, when I took some of that same training, I ‘died’ too. But, unlike Sponberg, I came away from the experience with a bunch more respect for a cop’s job.
KXL reporter Jim Ferretti posted his well done and exclusive report Life and Death Decisionshere. He ‘died’ a couple of times too.
Ferretti posted video of both activists in their scenario training.
First up: Fahyim Accuay:
Then Sponberg showed his prowess which included trying to grab a perp when he was beating a victim with a crowbar shouting death threats. After the bad guy chased and hit Sponberg with the crowbar, the perp began running away and Jesse shot him in the back (2:43 in the video).
In the after action meeting with the Clackamas County Deputies, Sponberg made a good point about cops having too few options to subdue bad guys. Often, they have only the choice of life and death, complained Sponberg, who, during his training tried to scare would be killers with his fists (yeah, doesn’t work), threats of a taser which was deployed (and ripped out ) but didn’t use his ‘gun’.
Cops don’t have four hands. They can’t simultaneously deploy a night stick, pepper spray, taser and a gun. They have to choose which one will keep them safe. Yes, that’s right, cops lives are worth more because they’re under the color of authority and have been authorized with state police powers.
But he also repeated the canard about how every ‘couple of days’ an unarmed black person is killed by a police officer.
Sponberg is wrong. Instead of doing his own homework (and while you’re at it, Jesse, check out the whole lie about Hands Up, Don’t Shoot) he would have known the claim has been debunked multiple times. It was first uttered by activists–one prominently featured in a debate with Larry Elder on CNN– and based on a ‘study’ if you can call it that, by the Malcolm X Grassroots Movement.
I have little use for Politi’fact’ but here’s what the fact check outfit found:
The report is not an academic, unbiased representation of these deaths. It was put together by one volunteer researcher and details 313 deaths based on news clips and police reports. It arrives at one death “every 28 hours” by dividing the number of hours in a year, 8,760, by the number of deaths, 313.
[N]ot all of the “unarmed” people are analogous to Brown’s case or were killed by police.
Included in the unarmed tally, for instance, is Trayvon Martin, the Miami Gardens teen who was killed by a neighborhood watchman named George Zimmerman. In other cases, whether someone was really “unarmed” may depend on your definition. In nine cases, police said they shot at suspects because they were charging at them from behind the wheel of a vehicle.
Another case to make the list is Rudy Eugene, the Miami man who attacked a homeless man and gnawed his face before police shot him to death.
We also found several “unarmed” deaths that were due to accidents, many car crashes as officers sped to a scene. In another example, one woman was killed at her birthday party, hosted by an off-duty police officer, when she hugged the officer from behind and somehow set off his gun.
To those people like our, uh, ‘friend’ who flipped off Citizen Journalist Daylight Disinfectant for simply asking these folks a few on-point questions about cop killing chants, these facts will be ignored.
But my message to these cause du jour protesters is this: You’re less like iconoclasts and rebels and more like sheep. You’re being used by professional protester organizers and big money backers. See my piece for IJReview about it here.
Do you know how unarmed blacks can stop being killed by cops? Stop attacking police officers. Let’s start there.
I’ll give them one thing: These protesters were willing to at least try to find out what it’s like to be in the shoes of the people they consider the enemy.
A Duo of Black Killers Who Killed White Teens Appealed for Sympathy and a Little Pre-Prison Street Cred by Invoking ‘Hands Up, Don’t Shoot’ Before Sentencing
When he had a chance to apologize for the robbing, torturing and murdering two white teens who had been in Detroit trying to buy drugs two years ago, Fredrick Young didn’t bother. Instead ‘apologized’ to the families of Michael Brown and Eric Garner, according to Fox News Detroit:
“I’d like to say sorry to the families of Aiyanna Jones, Michael Brown, Eric Garner,” Young said. “And I want to apologize to them for not being able to get justice for their loved ones who was murdered in cold blood – and in respect for the peaceful protest, I want to say hands up don’t shoot. Black lives matter – that’s it your honor.”
People in the courtroom reacted in disbelief. But still – the message from the families of Jacob Kudla and Jourdan Bobbish was one of forgiveness.
The parents of the victims talked of sorrow and forgiveness–to the backs of the killers who refused to turn and face them.
“Everything just aches and it’s just a totally senseless crime,” said Mike Bobbish, Jourdan’s father. “And how you could march someone out in the middle of a field and execute them – we’re not a third world country. Sometimes I wish it did happen in a third world country because it would be a lot different outcome of this whole thing.”
Virgie Kudla, Jacob’s mother then spoke.
“Not only did the defendant take away my son’s future,” she said. “He took away my future – my future as a mother – my future as a grandmother.”
“I have sorrow in my heart, soul and every fiber of my being today and I will carry that with me for the rest of my life here on earth,” said Carrie Bobbish, Jourdan’s mother.
The Grand Jury and now reportedly the Eric Holder Justice Department itself have found Officer Darren Wilson was within training protocol when he shot Michael Brown. In fact, according to witnesses who were not friends of Brown, he never raised his hands in the‘Hands Up, Don’t Shoot’ manner. That is a bald faced lie. The man who used it in a Detroit courtroom is the very symbol of this vacuous bunch.
Too bad, too. The wholesale take over of this ‘Black Lives Matter’ astro turf group by the Lisa Fithians and George Soroses of the world, has meant the lost the support of people who have always believed–and still believe– in citizen involvement and the need to push back on government overreach, whether it happens on the street by cops or by the IRS going after conservative groups.