Comments

1
I'm not sure where to start with this document.

Line 11 is peculiar. Why do you think they want the list to be confidential? They're not revealing medical information or providing medical services, so I would think withholding this information is their preference - not the law. They're posting it to their internal sites, so it's not HIPAA.

I'd like an opinion about the viability of line B 1 B from Norm Frink or one of his JDs. How does this affect the trial budget for the County? How about a comment from Stephen Kanter at NWLC, or better yet John Kroger, about how this will look to the OSSC? From a addiction treatment professional like Sarah Goforth at CCC or Shelley Dixon at TPI, is this a policy which supports recovery?

But the shucking and jiving makes it clear is the orientation of the police is still punishment, not treatment.
2

Arrestees? Does that include detox holds, mental health situations, any old person the cop decides to arrest? Or situations where the cop was found to have acted illegally and the results of the arrest were later supressed? Or cases where they were arrested and not charged by the DA?

What kind of justice is based on arrests rather than convictions? This is a disgusting assault on the right to be considered innocent until proven guilty. Which, last time I checked, even applies to drug addicts and users. The City of Portland and its citizens should be ashamed.


3
I'm speechless. Which, for me, is a huge thing.

I can't believe that we keep secret lists of people--REGARDLESS of what the list is for.

Next up: Portland Police Bureau sets up checkpoints coming into and out of downtown. "Papers, please."
4
Obviously the reasoning behind prosecuting these "arrestee's" charges as felonies is for these people to end up on formal probation, instead of being given straight jail or bench probation where they'd have little supervision or access to resources. Okay, good intentions...but how PPB gets there is ludicrous.
These people end up with FELONY convictions (yes, some of them already are felons, but not all), with all of the limitations and social stigma of being a convicted felon--including, of course, extreme difficulty finding a job or housing once they get off probation and don't have access to these resources--when anyone else would only have a misdemeanor conviction. They also don't qualify for drug diversion court which would result in dismissal of charges if they successfully complete a very intensive treatment program. What?
These resources could have easily been allocated among the people that need them in other ways...perhaps a more extensive probation intake system that would get them on formal probation without a felony conviction.
The logic here is ridiculous.
5
I really can't understand how this isn't a violation of "arrestee's" 14th amendment rights. The U.S. Constitution limits the ability of STATES, including their muncipalities, to infringe on procedural and substantive due process rights. This sounds like harsher penalties without due process, putting people on a list they can't get off of or may not even know they are on (no fly list, anyone?), and changing the rules of evidence. I wonder what the state legislature thinks of the City of Portland changing its laws?

But, I didn't go to Liberty Law School so maybe I'm mising something about how the law doesn't apply to certain groups of people...
6
I'd like to see names.
7
To play the role of devils advocate/ a person that apparently needs enlightened...

Did this person on the list commit a felony? If so, why shouldn't they be charged with a felony?

8
In Multnomah County, under the policy of the elected DA, residual amounts of drugs (the left over coating in crackpipe, a trace amount of heroin in a syringe after use) are charged as misdemeanors. Therefore the person would be eligible for the Community Court and/or a misdemeanor conviction if guilty. If your name is on the list, you get charged with a felony. Therefore, two people standing side by side, with the same amount of drugs, would get two separate charges and be treated differently depending on if you have priors arrests (not convictions)and have been placed on the list.

So the issue is one of equal treatment. The DA could charge everyone with a felony instead of treating residues as a felony, but they probably can't afford to do that because it would overwhelm the system.
9
This isnt surprising at all...the list I mean...but the fact they the PPB is stupid and arrogant enough to have an actual procedure written down...Well we all know PPB puts his best goose step forward AGAIN.

Please wait...

Comments are closed.

Commenting on this item is available only to members of the site. You can sign in here or create an account here.


Add a comment
Preview

By posting this comment, you are agreeing to our Terms of Use.