UPDATE, 6:34pm:
From Mr.Rosenthal:
Matt — I am very disappointed in the headline and first sentence of your blog, and request that you issue an apology to me and Officer Myers. I did not compare Officer Myers to the Gestapo. You accurately quoted me in your blog, I related in court that I told the Oregonian that the most efficient police force in recent history was Hitler’s, that there was no street crime in Germany. I told the reporter that we are a long way from the Gestapo, because we have a Bill of Rights. I at no time suggested anything that would lead a responsible news reporter to use the headline you used, or say I compared Officer Myers to a nazi.
I ask that you, and the Mercury, immediately publish a correction, and apologize for your headline and the opening sentence of your blog.
Sincerely,
Elden Rosenthal
Since the quotes I used are accurate, I regret that Mr.Rosenthal feels the headline to this post is inaccurate. It was my impression as a reporter, and continues to be, that by evoking the specter of Nazism in reference to the secret list program, Rosenthal was implicitly comparing the officers behind the program to Nazis. However: By printing Mr.Rosenthal’s objection here, I hope Blogtown readers will see that there is a clear difference of opinion on the matter. I would also point out that Officer Myers seemed to feel that the implication was clear.
ORIGINAL POST, 11:14am
One of Oregon’s most prominent civil rights attorneys compared Officer Jeff Myers to a Nazi in open court this morning. The attorney, Eldon Rosenthal, was hired by the ACLU of Oregon last December to fight Myers’ secret list in court.
ROSENTHAL: “I do not want the court to think I am being hyperbolic…”
“After the hearing last month, I got a call from an editorial writer at the Oregonian, and she was very antagonistic towards me,” said Rosenthal, at this morning’s closing arguments hearing in the secret list case. “She asked me what my problem was, she said that Officer Myers is the face of community policing in Portland, and I said that one of the most efficient police forces in history was Hitler’s.”
“But I told her, we’re a long ways from the gestapo,” Rosenthal continued. “We have a bill of rights, which says that we don’t go over that fence. And this is a fence issue.”
“We are over that fence and out in the front yard,” Rosenthal said, referring to the list. “The bill of rights is supposed to protect the house, but we’re endangering the house. The principal at stake is not wanting to collect secret police lists. Secret police lists have never come to any good, wherever they are used. There’s just too much opportunity for abuse.”
The Oregonian ran an editorial supporting the secret list on January 8, accusing Rosenthal of “working off an old model, in which a secret list of names inevitably breeds abuses. The reality is that this list epitomizes community policing,” it said.
Judge Dale Koch now plans to make a constitutional ruling on the list program on March 11.
“I’m speechless when someone makes a comparison between this program and the Nazis,” said Myers, when the Mercury asked him about the comparison, after the hearing. “It seems inappropriate to me.”
MYERS (left) with secret list program manager BILL SINNOTT (right): “Speechless” at Nazi comparison…
Myers said the intent of the program is to limit people’s exposure to the criminal justice system by getting them drug treatment.
“Any kind of comparison to Hitler or the Nazis doesn’t seem appropriate,” he said.
Myers, The O, and everyone else on their side misses the point: Even if, for the sake of argument, this particular list, its intent, and its usage is leading to good, *the next secret list someone compiles might not be*. And since the point is for it to be secret, we might not ever know.
Almost everything in this context depends upon trusting the holders of a secret list to be good men doing good things. But we’re not a nation, or a city, of men, but one of laws. The point of having laws against secret lists is to make sure that when the *bad* people end up in power, we’ve increased the barriers to them doing bad things in secret.
Perhaps “fascists” or “totalitarian regimes” might have been a better choice of words, but Mr. Rosenthal is absolutely correct about the dangers of valuing efficiency over liberty.
b!X is right about our need to consider the dangers of the next list, even assuming for the sake of argument that the current list is a good thing or that Myers is a good man.
I am very concerned that Myers would suggest that “the intent of the program is to limit people’s exposure to the criminal justice system by getting them drug treatment.” It is clear that the purpose of the list is for the POLICE to avoid judcial scrutiny. Myers and his band of would-be-fascists specifically crafted this program so that people on the would not get the misdemeanor treatment afforded to other citizens, would not get the option to go to Drug Court when charged with a felony, would normally get an attorney that ALWAYS pleas his clients out, and would avoid judicial oversight of any probation. It is disingenuous at best, and outright lying at worst, to suggest that “enhanced prosecution” will limit their exposure to the criminal justice system.
The defendants in this case are lucky to have such hardworking lawyers assisting them. Keep up the good work defense team!
Good comments from #6 and b!x.
People really should just drop comparing anything that doesn’t include genocide to the Nazis. #6 had it right with saying that it would be better to compare to Mussolini and the Fascists instead.
This is funny.
Isn’t Godwin’s Law in play?
The well-thought-out comments are taken, so I’ll add to the glib: the officer in the last picture reminds me of Karl from Die Hard: http://www.burbanked.com/wp-content/upload…
B!x is exactly right.
The context of the violation is immaterial. Myers and company might see / experience the vacuum of accountability on the various parts of the social service system, and may have stepped in to solve the problem in what they understand is a straightforward strategy.
Unfortunately it’s also an unconstitutional strategy. The constitution trumps good intentions.
It’s also a way which deprives the individuals involved of their right to consent to what might result in medical practice.
Could an attorney here speculate on the potential civil damages against the city?
How about “1984”?
Myers is a shoe in for a Hollywood Nazi. Sorry bro just sayin.
You know, that bottom photo does look like Goering and Speer in the dock.
You know they aren’t actually nazis because then the ACLU would be representing THEM…Thank you folks I’ll be playing here all week.
I kid of course, the ACLU is great. I think we all get what Mr. Rosenthal is saying, even if the inflamatory word “nazi” is an unfortuate direct or inadvertant comparison. The ultimate message of the ACLU in this case is that we as a society should not do the “efficient” thing to solve what we perceive as a social problem, we should do the just and fair thing that respects liberty and treats everyone equally.
Myers and his ilk value efficiency over liberty and are willing to persecute the powerless minority to serve the interests of business and “decent society.” This makes them just plain old fascists, but not nazis.