John Kroger Runs for Attorney General
John Kroger, a Professor at Lewis and Clark Law School and a former federal prosecutor, announced today that he will run for Oregon Attorney General. An announcement schedule is posted JohnKroger.com.
From a Kroger press release:
Former federal prosecutor and Lewis & Clark Law School professor John Kroger will announce his candidacy for Oregon Attorney General on Thursday, Sept. 20, at press conferences in Portland, Eugene, and Medford. He will continue his announcement tour of the state on Friday, Sept. 21 with appearances in Klamath Falls and Bend.John Kroger is an award-winning criminal prosecutor and law professor. As a federal prosecutor, Kroger won major trials against mafia killers, corrupt government officials, and drug kingpins. From 2002 to 2003, he helped prosecute the now-defunct Enron Corporation. In recognition of his work, Kroger won awards and commendations from Attorney General Janet Reno, the Drug Enforcement Administration, and the State Department. Kroger previously served in the United States Marine Corps. Kroger has long been active in the Democratic Party and served as a campaign aide to President Bill Clinton.
In Portland, Kroger will be introduced and endorsed by City Commissioners Randy Leonard and Erik Sten. Leonard said: “John Kroger has demonstrated his commitment to go after large businesses that violate the law. Oregon needs John Kroger to be the next Attorney General because of his proven record of standing up for consumers.” John will also announce the endorsement of City Commissioner Dan Saltzman, who is unable to attend.
Kroger is also announcing his endorsement by four Oregon District Attorneys: John Foote of Clackamas County, Ed Caleb of Klamath County, Dean Gushwa of Umatilla County, and Tim Thompson of Union County.
The announcement follows Rep. Greg Macpherson, who announced his candidacy last month.
More updates as they come.
Discuss.
|
September 20, 2007 |
in the news 2007 | Comments (31 so far)
| Share on Facebook |
Comments
Posted by: Kari Chisholm | Sep 20, 2007 11:14:58 AM
LT, be sure to read the full quote. His endorsements include:
John Foote of Clackamas County, Ed Caleb of Klamath County, Dean Gushwa of Umatilla County, and Tim Thompson of Union County.
Posted by: Oregon Lawyer | Sep 20, 2007 11:15:24 AM
There are plenty of people in Portland who do NOT support Kroger. Apparently, he was hoping nobody would notice that he had not bothered to become an Oregon lawyer until this year. I think his failure to mention that fact when soliciting political support was a material omission, bordering on dishonesty -- if not crossing over into it.
Kroger should have been honest. He wasn't. This is NOT a good start for somebody who wants to be Oregon's attorney general.
Posted by: Winter | Sep 20, 2007 11:26:40 AM
Oregon Lawyer, give me a break. You are constantly bashing Kroger on this site, and your accusation that Kroger was dishonest about his bar status is ridiculous. It seems like all you can come up with are provincial complaints about how long he has been in the state and nitpicking about the bar exam. Let's move on to something that actually matters - his position on the role of Attorney General and the enforcement and application of the law within the state.
Posted by: Steven Maurer | Sep 20, 2007 11:42:34 AM
Well I've met both men, Greg MacPherson and John Kroger, and while it was a tough choice for me (as picking between two highly qualified Democrats always is), I've decided my vote goes to Mr. Kroger. He brings an absolutely astounding wealth of prosecutorial experience that, quite frankly, I don't think any other lawyer in the State comes close to matching.
Insofar as "Oregon Lawyer" is concerned, when I first met Mr. Kroger a year ago, and remarked that his qualifications seemed to match him up perfectly with the A.G. spot, the fact that he wasn't admitted to the Oregon Bar was just about the first comment out of his mouth. So this idea that he "failed to mention it" is an assertion that is utterly false, and attacks on Kroger's moral credibility are wholly without merit.
All of that said, if Rep. MacPherson gets the nod from the public instead, I have no doubt that he will serve the public faithfully and well.
Posted by: lestatdelc | Sep 20, 2007 11:47:44 AM
Hear, hear Winter.
Posted by: Stephanie V | Sep 20, 2007 11:53:40 AM
I'm sure Oregon Lawyer would acknowledge, as I and any other lawyer would, that the moment of taking and passing the bar exam is the one moment in a lawyer's life when he or she is most fully knowledgeable about the law of the state in question. That carefully-crammed-in knowledge begins to seep out almost immediately and continues that inexorable seepage over the years.
By that standard, John Kroger is by far the more knowledgeable of the two. %^>
Posted by: lestatdelc | Sep 20, 2007 11:57:04 AM
Posted by: Steven Maurer | Sep 20, 2007 11:42:34 AMWell I've met both men, Greg MacPherson and John Kroger, and while it was a tough choice for me (as picking between two highly qualified Democrats always is), I've decided my vote goes to Mr. Kroger. He brings an absolutely astounding wealth of prosecutorial experience that, quite frankly, I don't think any other lawyer in the State comes close to matching.
I would also add that he holds a B.A. Yale College graduating magna cum laude, an M.A. from Yale University and a J.D., again graduating magna cum laude from Harvard Law, and teaches as well as an associate professor of law at Lewis & Clark. He knows the law, yes Oregon law as well, enough to teach it, not just practice it. I think he is more then qualified to be an AG. OregonLawyer's baseless smear about dishonesty over an entirely pedantic non-issue borders on almost comical.
I also agree with your take that Oregon would be well served by either candiate, though I think Kroger's background gives him a clear edge.
Posted by: Pat Ryan | Sep 20, 2007 12:42:49 PM
I'd be interested to hear the positions of both cnadidates on:
Incarceration of non violent offenders
Confiscation of assets of people charged but not convicted of crimes
Anything at all on the nation's insane drug policies
But I won't hold my breath on any of the above........
Posted by: Steven Maurer | Sep 20, 2007 1:59:08 PM
Hmmm.... those are real posers, Pat. Let me restate your questions:
Should the non-violent Enron executives go to jail?
Should the death of Key Lay prior to his appeal being formally denied, mean that all his ill gotten gains should go to his wife, instead of the people he stole from?
Should the Attorney General enforce laws, even if he happens to personally disagree with them - or should he act like Alberto Gonzalez did during his tenure?
You're probably right that they won't answer any of these, unless they're actually asked.
Posted by: steve novick | Sep 20, 2007 2:28:14 PM
I am found of both men, but as I previously stated on this site, my vote goes to Kroger. One of the most important qualifications for the job is the ability to attract good young lawyers to serve in the Department of Justice. It's hard to get good people to turn up their noses at the salaries offered by places like Stoel Rives. You have to get them excited about public service. I think that if John Kroger, scourge of Mafiosi and Enron crooks, became Attorney General, the sex appeal of the Oregon Department of Justice will surge. I have great respect for Hardy Myers, and for Greg. But I remember being in the Federal Justice Department in '93. After corporate lawyer Zoe Baird (counsel for Aetna) fizzled, Bill Clinton ultimately appointed an actual prosecutor, Janet Reno, to head the Department. It felt good to have a career public servant in charge. I think current and future Oregon DOJ lawyers will be especially proud to serve under John.
Posted by: steve novick | Sep 20, 2007 2:32:24 PM
(laughter) whoops - slip of the mind - I meant FOND of both men. Sorry. By the way, John, if you are reading this, I meant to be at your announcement, but someone told me last week that you were STARTING in Medford, so I thought you were going to be up here this evening.
Posted by: Miles | Sep 20, 2007 2:59:31 PM
It's hard to get good people to turn up their noses at the salaries offered by places like Stoel Rives. You have to get them excited about public service.
You also have to pay them more than $55,000. Not as much as they would get at Stoel, but a lot more than they currently get as starting lawyers at DOJ. There are some good reasons why public servants should not expect to get market value, but the current pay is abysmal.
One of Kulongoski's legacies will be the wholesale destruction of the state's nonrepresented, professional workforce. Salaries started low, but under his administration they have plummeted relative to everyone else. Even Kroger won't be able to get top quality lawyers at the current pay scale.
Posted by: Judith | Sep 20, 2007 3:35:43 PM
I really don't understand why he's running for AG rather than a seat in the legislature.
Posted by: PG | Sep 20, 2007 5:54:39 PM
Great, just what Oregon needs is an overzealous prosecutor who wants to trample on our civil liberties. It really appears that Kroger has nothing to offer Oregonians anything more than his own political ego.
Posted by: Stephanie V | Sep 20, 2007 5:57:47 PM
Hey PG, where are you getting the "overzealous" and "wants to trample on our civil liberties?" I haven't seen anything like that posted here, and those are pretty serious criticisms if they are valid.
Posted by: lestatdelc | Sep 20, 2007 6:02:03 PM
Posted by: Stephanie V | Sep 20, 2007 5:57:47 PMHey PG, where are you getting the "overzealous" and "wants to trample on our civil liberties?"
I could venture guess, but... oh wait.. shoud have used another t there.
;-)
Posted by: a rab | Sep 20, 2007 6:29:49 PM
PG,
Kroger made protecting civil liberties part of his principle agenda - along with a new approach to the meth problem, environmental protection, improved child support, and consumer protection.
Posted by: a rab | Sep 20, 2007 6:34:53 PM
It is in the AP story:
http://www.kgw.com/politics/stories/kgw_092007_politics_oregon_ag_kroger.f287a587.html
Posted by: lestatdelc | Sep 20, 2007 6:39:22 PM
Posted by: a rab | Sep 20, 2007 6:29:49 PMKroger made protecting civil liberties part of his principle agenda - along with a new approach to the meth problem, environmental protection, improved child support, and consumer protection.
What a fascist!!!!
;-)
Posted by: Jonathan | Sep 20, 2007 6:50:05 PM
"John Kroger, a Lewis & Clark Law School professor, also said he would work to protect civil rights he says have been endangered by conservative judges and federal officials, noting that he has been "an outspoken critic of the Bush administration warrantless wiretapping program."
From the Ap.
Posted by: Working Stiff | Sep 21, 2007 8:37:15 AM
To: a rab
I think you mean "principal" agenda, unless you're talking about an agenda of principles.
In any case, this working stiff liked the fact that Kroger invoked the name of Eliot Spitzer (one-time pro-active state AG) now governor of NY in announcing his candidacy. Myers has been a competent AG, though one could never accuse him of being pro-active when it comes to protecting consumers. I would like to see Macpherson remain in the legislature and continue to push for pro-consumerism (OR is abysmal when compared to other states in this regard). Kroger gets my vote.
Posted by: David | Sep 21, 2007 9:58:01 AM
Although it makes for good press to talk about criminal prosecutions, the next attorney general should be someone who can exercise sound judgment in decision making and successfully manage a department of varied functions (much of which concerns advising agencies on administrative law matters and defending them in civil litigation). Importantly, too, the next attorney general will have to develop a good working relationship with the legislature in order to secure the funding necessary for successful operations of the department. As a voter (and having formerly worked as an attorney at DOJ), I'm less impressed with a lengthy resume and more impressed with a candidate who can demonstrate some or all of these qualities.
Posted by: paul | Sep 21, 2007 11:41:58 AM
PG is not Paul Gronke. Just a note. Thanks. I post as "paul".
Posted by: C. Mixson | Sep 21, 2007 1:53:03 PM
As a former student of "Professor" Kroger's at Lewis & Clark Law School, I have to say that I am excited about seeing him run for AG. The only downside to his candidacy from my perspective is that I can't vote for him since I'm not longer an Oregon resident!
Posted by: C. Mixson | Sep 21, 2007 1:55:38 PM
As a former student of "Professor" Kroger's at Lewis & Clark Law School, I have to say that I am excited about seeing him run for AG. The only downside to his candidacy from my perspective is that I can't vote for him since I'm not longer an Oregon resident!
Posted by: Bill Maurer | Sep 24, 2007 12:33:33 PM
I've known Greg Macpherson (although admittedly, not all that well) for over 35 years and recently offered to help him in his election bid for attorney general.
However, the tenor and content of that discussion reminded me all too well of his career in the relatively safe and fairly narrow area of law representing large business clients of a huge law firm. It showed me very little of the prosecutorial experience, watchdog perspective and associated aggressiveness that I look for in an attorney general who can and will stand up to the power of the purse here in Oregon as well as to represent the interests of all Oregonians regardless their social/economic class, political affiliation or other attributes.
I think Greg can best serve Oregonians as a legislator and wish him continued success in his long and distinguished public service and private industry career.
I will begin performing my due diligence today on John Kroger to determine whether and how to support his campaign for Oregon Attorney General.
Posted by: Bill Maurer | Sep 24, 2007 12:46:27 PM
FYI,
I'm no relation to Steven Maurer although I do appreciate his comments to this story and applaud his willingness to post under his actual name.
Although there may be individuals who have a legitimate need to remain anonymous due to their jobs, e.g., governmental employees prohibited from making public statements, I've noticed a strong correlation here between the use of aliases and the proffering of unsupported innuendo and other cheap shots.
Got spine?
Posted by: Jerry Atlansky | Oct 3, 2007 4:42:27 PM
Wednesday-October 3, 2007
Jerry Atlansky-Chairperson
Oregon State Police-
Independent Citizens Review Board
Subject: Who will WE THE PEOPLE, support for the next Attorney General of the Great State of Oregon?
With a whirlwind of 2 years of researching and investigating the law enforcement agencies we will post here and via hundreds of e-mails most every day who we will endorse for the next attorney general.
We welcome all people to contact us for extra data on effective law enforcement reform that is making progress to be proud that Oregon will be the first in the country
to make major changes as noted below to be successful.
UPDATE: Governor Kulongoski will hire the next Attorney General with anyone that will NOT protect the public from out of control cops. With Attorney General Myer's resignation, "why would the governor leave these matters for the public to elect the next Attorney General?" Myers term expires Jan. 2009 the governor will hire his replacement Jan. 2008. "We The Government, For The Government!"
Please read the following data which is a condensed view of our organizations work to bring civility to policing, by starting at the heart of most illegal use of excessive force by the hands of out of control law enforcement officers as witnessed by other officers.
Will you support our efforts by contacting the superiors of the 6 top law enforcement officials named in this report to require them to comply to our requests of three steps to save physical/mental brutality, lethal force by rogue cops against in many cases completely innocent people?
1. Amend the Police "Code of Conduct" policy/procedures to include:
(A) Law enforcement supervisors and line officers are required to intervene when an officer uses excessive force.
(B) when officers are repeatedly beating/kicking a restrained person supervisors and line officers must stop the excessive force and arrest the offending officers.
(C) If a person is not attacking anyone the FBI state that if officers use lethal force against a person that is unjustifiable homicide.
2. Train/re-train specific step by step , minimum to maximum force to the highest use of force in attempts to deescalate violence when time and situations permit officers to apply them.
3. Work with our organization to improve on the trust the public has for law enforcement by monitoring, offering other alternatives to methods and equipment to lessen stress and risk situations. Jerry Atlansky-Chairperson
Oregon State Police-
Independent Citizens Review Board
js@atlansky.com 24/366 Portland, Oregon 97213
Last Subject: Randall Edwards-Oregon State Treasurer refuses to take any action to save lives and millions of $ each year. United States Law Enforcement is two major steps towards a "Secret Police State!"
On July 24, 2007 Oregon Treasury Division responded to our Letter To All Oregonians with Randall Edwards full response, below is our reply to his response and two months later Mr. Edwards failed to take any action to save lives every year and many millions of dollars. Our final determination is Mr. Edwards is derelict of his duties to save money of the states funds whenever possible which would also make the law enforcement bureaus more effective and help stop the rogue cops illegal actions.
Oregon Treasury wrote:
Mr. Atlansky,
Thank you for your email message to the State Treasurer Randall Edwards.
> The State Treasurer's authority and scope of duties do not extend to law
> enforcement at the local or the state level. It would be inappropriate
> for the State Treasurer to become involved in this issue.
> Thank you.
*PLEASE read to the very end of this e-mail Many thanks! Jerry Atlansky
-----Original Message-----
> From: Jerry and/or Susan Atlansky [mailto:js@atlansky.com] Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2007 10:23 AM
> To: Oregon Treasury
> Subject: Update: Washington County Sheriff Rob Gordon refuses to protect
> the public from rogue cops
>
> Saturday-July 7, 2007
>
> Jerry Atlansky-Chairperson
> Oregon State Police-
> Independent Citizens Review Board
>
> State Treasurer Randall Edwards
> Oregon State Capitol
> Salem, Oregon
>
> Subject: United States Law Enforcement Is Two Major Steps Towards "A Police State!"
> Washington County Sheriff Gordon refuses to protect the public from rogue cops
>
> 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 top of a police vehicle. The Police tased Kaady twice and then both cops shot and killed Kaady with 7 bullets. The cops said, Kaady 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 Ruecker 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 is using excessive force as it is
> their duty too do so. We notified all Oregon State Legislators of this
> non-response from Supt. Ruecker so they pressured Ruecker's superior which
> forced Ruecker to send us their code of conduct and a cover letter
> admitting that Ruecker had setup no specific data that 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 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 Commissioners 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 we sent a registered letter to the Police Chief, Skelton
> of Sandy, Oregon again asking for the same documents; policy/procedure,
> training and reporting to our oversight board as stated above and
> without any surprise to us NO response from the the police chief.
>
> On Feb. 20, 2007 I asked Portland Police Chief Sizer at a public meeting,Chief's Forum the same question, what would you do if you saw one of your officers repeatedly beating/kicking a restrained person? Chief 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 received NO letter or telephone call on this matter from
> her.
>
> On June 18, 2007 Washington County Sheriff Rob Gordon replied to our, Open Letter To All Oregonians that he respects all the five top cops we named even though he doesn't know any of them, current policy/procedures
>
> are working just fine, training in place is extensive and well thought out, and police oversight boards are too political to do an effective job. Sheriff Gordon failed to address our three steps to reform law enforcement until we asked him direct questions and amazing as it may seem he was the first of all the top cops we have highlighted that states, his supervisors, deputies and himself would intervene if an officer is repeatedly beating/kicking a restrained person. Will Sheriff
>
> Gordon amend his Code of Conduct policy/procedures, add new training and
>
> work with our oversight board, not in this lifetime.....he talks the talk but refuses to walk the walk.
> Since the Nixon White house we have had a meltdown in personal
> integrity.
>
> All 6 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 6 top cops wrong, illegal actions/inactions. 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 6 top
> cops of Oregon.
>
> The amendments we are requesting to the Code of Conduct should read:
> 1. Law Enforcement supervisors and line officers are required to intervene when an officer uses excessive force as it is their duty.
> 2. When officers are repeatedly beating/kicking a restrained person supervisors and line officers must stop the excessive force and arrest the offending officers.
> 3. If a person is not attacking anyone the F.B.I. state that if lethal force is used against a person that is unjustifiable homicide.
> Without specific policy/procedures we will continue with police reports final determinations on excessive force use as, "No Department Police/Procedures violated."
>
> WE THE PEOPLE, are convinced that from the very top Oregon State Officials, Governor Kulongoski, Attorney General Myers, former and current O.S.P Superintendent's Ruecker & McLain, Sheriff Roberts Clackamas County, Portland Police Chief Sizer, Police Chief Skelton City
> of Sandy and Sheriff Gordon Washington County not only refuse to protect
> all Oregonians from Rogue Cops, they don't care about the people that were killed in unjustifiable homicides by out of control cops which stole about 130 years away from Rubio, Kaady & Chasse men & shattered their families and friends lives. In the last 10 months these 3 cases were filed in the federal courts of Oregon and are expected to exceed over $100 million which will drain the funds to operate effective law enforcement agencies.
>
> The contempt for law and the contempt for the human consequence of lawbreaking go from the bottom to the top of American society. Margaret Mead
>
> State Treasurer Mr. Edwards, will you please assist us to help stop the over
>
> 150 years of "Police Code of Silence & Testilying?"
>
> What happens in Oregon goes Nationwide.
>
> Jerry Atlansky
> js@atlansky.com 24/366
Randall Edwards-State Treasurer
Oregon State
Salem, Oregon
Dear Mr. Edwards,
We thank you for responding to our letter to all Oregonians giving many facts that 6 top cops in Oregon refuse to protect the public from rogue cops when other officers are witnessing unjustifiable brutality and lethal force. If one of your staff members submitted a very well thought out plan to save the state $100 million a year would you tell them you don't have the authority to act on that project? We are not asking you to fire anyone, demote anyone nor force anyone to take action, what we are asking is if you care about the safety of all Oregonians and their tax money it is your duty to advise the superiors of all 6 top cops to honor their oaths of office as they are making over $600 thousand dollars a year and breaking the civil rights of our citizens.
Please send us copies of your communications so we will be made aware progress is being made on this dire matter.
Failure to do so and we will add your name and inaction to the hundreds of letters we are sending to all Oregonians each day.
Best regards,
Jerry Atlansky
js@atlansky.com 24/366
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Wednesday-September 12, 2007
Jerry Atlansky-Chairperson
Oregon State Police-
Independent Citizens Review Board
Subject: Randall Edwards-Oregon State Treasurer refuses to take any action to save lives and millions of $ each year. United States Law Enforcement is two major steps towards a "Secret Police State!"
On July 24, 2007 Oregon Treasury Division responded to our Letter To All Oregonians with Randall Edwards full response, below is our reply to his response and two months later Mr. Edwards failed to take any action to save lives every year and many millions of dollars. Our final determination is Mr. Edwards is derelict of his duties to save money of the states funds whenever possible which would also make the law enforcement bureaus more effective and help stop the rogue cops illegal actions.
Oregon Treasury wrote:
Mr. Atlansky,
Thank you for your email message to the State Treasurer Randall Edwards.
> The State Treasurer's authority and scope of duties do not extend to law
> enforcement at the local or the state level. It would be inappropriate
> for the State Treasurer to become involved in this issue.
> Thank you.
*PLEASE read to the very end of this e-mail Many thanks! Jerry Atlansky
-----Original Message-----
> From: Jerry and/or Susan Atlansky [mailto:js@atlansky.com] Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2007 10:23 AM
> To: Oregon Treasury
> Subject: Update: Washington County Sheriff Rob Gordon refuses to protect
> the public from rogue cops
>
> Saturday-July 7, 2007
>
> Jerry Atlansky-Chairperson
> Oregon State Police-
> Independent Citizens Review Board
>
> State Treasurer Randall Edwards
> Oregon State Capitol
> Salem, Oregon
>
> Subject: United States Law Enforcement Is Two Major Steps Towards "A Police State!"
> Washington County Sheriff Gordon refuses to protect the public from rogue cops
>
> 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 top of a police vehicle. The Police tased Kaady twice and then both cops shot and killed Kaady with 7 bullets. The cops said, Kaady 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 Ruecker 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 is using excessive force as it is
> their duty too do so. We notified all Oregon State Legislators of this
> non-response from Supt. Ruecker so they pressured Ruecker's superior which
> forced Ruecker to send us their code of conduct and a cover letter
> admitting that Ruecker had setup no specific data that 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 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 Commissioners 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 we sent a registered letter to the Police Chief, Skelton
> of Sandy, Oregon again asking for the same documents; policy/procedure,
> training and reporting to our oversight board as stated above and
> without any surprise to us NO response from the the police chief.
>
> On Feb. 20, 2007 I asked Portland Police Chief Sizer at a public meeting,Chief's Forum the same question, what would you do if you saw one of your officers repeatedly beating/kicking a restrained person? Chief 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 received NO letter or telephone call on this matter from
> her.
>
> On June 18, 2007 Washington County Sheriff Rob Gordon replied to our, Open Letter To All Oregonians that he respects all the five top cops we named even though he doesn't know any of them, current policy/procedures
>
> are working just fine, training in place is extensive and well thought out, and police oversight boards are too political to do an effective job. Sheriff Gordon failed to address our three steps to reform law enforcement until we asked him direct questions and amazing as it may seem he was the first of all the top cops we have highlighted that states, his supervisors, deputies and himself would intervene if an officer is repeatedly beating/kicking a restrained person. Will Sheriff
>
> Gordon amend his Code of Conduct policy/procedures, add new training and
>
> work with our oversight board, not in this lifetime.....he talks the talk but refuses to walk the walk.
> Since the Nixon White house we have had a meltdown in personal
> integrity.
>
> All 6 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 6 top cops wrong, illegal actions/inactions. 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 6 top
> cops of Oregon.
>
> The amendments we are requesting to the Code of Conduct should read:
> 1. Law Enforcement supervisors and line officers are required to intervene when an officer uses excessive force as it is their duty.
> 2. When officers are repeatedly beating/kicking a restrained person supervisors and line officers must stop the excessive force and arrest the offending officers.
> 3. If a person is not attacking anyone the F.B.I. state that if lethal force is used against a person that is unjustifiable homicide.
> Without specific policy/procedures we will continue with police reports final determinations on excessive force use as, "No Department Police/Procedures violated."
>
> WE THE PEOPLE, are convinced that from the very top Oregon State Officials, Governor Kulongoski, Attorney General Myers, former and current O.S.P Superintendent's Ruecker & McLain, Sheriff Roberts Clackamas County, Portland Police Chief Sizer, Police Chief Skelton City
> of Sandy and Sheriff Gordon Washington County not only refuse to protect
> all Oregonians from Rogue Cops, they don't care about the people that were killed in unjustifiable homicides by out of control cops which stole about 130 years away from Rubio, Kaady & Chasse men & shattered their families and friends lives. In the last 10 months these 3 cases were filed in the federal courts of Oregon and are expected to exceed over $100 million which will drain the funds to operate effective law enforcement agencies.
>
> The contempt for law and the contempt for the human consequence of lawbreaking go from the bottom to the top of American society. Margaret Mead
>
> State Treasurer Mr. Edwards, will you please assist us to help stop the over
>
> 150 years of "Police Code of Silence & Testilying?"
>
> What happens in Oregon goes Nationwide.
>
> Jerry Atlansky
> js@atlansky.com 24/366
>
>
> Tuesday-July 24, 2007
Randall Edwards-State Treasurer
Oregon State
Salem, Oregon
Dear Mr. Edwards,
We thank you for responding to our letter to all Oregonians giving many facts that 6 top cops in Oregon refuse to protect the public from rogue cops when other officers are witnessing unjustifiable brutality and lethal force. If one of your staff members submitted a very well thought out plan to save the state $100 million a year would you tell them you don't have the authority to act on that project? We are not asking you to fire anyone, demote anyone nor force anyone to take action, what we are asking is if you care about the safety of all Oregonians and their tax money it is your duty to advise the superiors of all 6 top cops to honor their oaths of office as they are making over $600 thousand dollars a year and breaking the civil rights of our citizens.
Please send us copies of your communications so we will be made aware of progress is being made on this dire matter.
Failure to do so and we will add your name and inaction to the hundreds of letters we are sending to all Oregonians each day.
Best regards,
Jerry Atlansky
js@atlansky.com 24/366
Posted by: holly | Dec 23, 2007 11:59:05 AM
Dear Mr. Atlansky,
I happened across your post just today, Dec. 23, 2007 and felt the need to point out to readers your attempt to pass off incorrect and twisted information as the truth. I would think as passionate as you seem to be about the subject matter you would have done your homework in order to present accurate information and come across as creditable.
I’d like to point out to the readers of your post the misleading and less than honest information, you attempted to pass off as truth.
You claim to be:
-Chairperson
Oregon State Police-
Independent Citizens Review Board
Portland, Oregon
1. Readers should know that the OSP has no affiliation with you or your OSP Independent Citizens Review Board. When you formed this citizen’s oversight board, you were the only member perhaps that’s still the case. After completing the board, you then proclaimed yourself the Chairperson. Don’t you feel using the title of Chairperson Oregon State Police-Independent Citizens Review Board leads readers to believe that you work cooperatively with the OSP? When in fact you do NOT?
2. There is no Lt. Fred with the Oregon State Police nor has there ever been. Perhaps a Lt. Fred ______.
Your lack of respect is sorry. Just too lazy to try to obtain this individuals first and last name?
3. ”” We notified all Oregon State Legislators of this non-response from Supt. Ruecker so they pressured Ruecker's superior which forced Ruecker to send us their code of conduct and a cover letter
admitting that Ruecker had setup no specific data that we requested of changes to protect all Oregonians from police brutality.” ” It would frighten me to think that professional law enforcement officials would make changes to their policies because some citizen with no experience in law enforcement requested them to do so. How can you possibly rationalize such a thing? There is no amount of pressure or ability to force a top law enforcement official to change their training procedures as suggested by a citizen furthering placing officers and citizens in harm’s way. The DPST would have the most influence, as they are the agency that monitors the certification of all police officers in Oregon. MOST INTERESTING is your statement that your notification to all Oregon State Legislators of the Superintendents non-response resulted in them pressuring his superior forcing him to respond to your request. Apparently, you do not know who the superior of the OSP Superintendent is or you would have used the appropriate title of Governor. The Governor is not exactly the Superintendent’s superior either. The Superintendent of the OSP is appointed by the Governor for a four-year term. The Superintendent is part of the Governor’s cabinet. The election of a new Governor and the appointment of the Superintendent are offset by 2 years.
3. You should be ashamed and embarrassed by the following twisted and inaccurate information you wrote …”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 pressured too do so…
A simple Google search would have provided you with accurate and honest information. However, making your case as having power and influence with the Legislators and the Superintendent’s “superior” would have been futile.
As printed in many Oregon Newspapers and reported on local news broadcasts the following is the accurate information. First let me provide you with the definitions of retire and resign.
Retire (verb) to stop work willingly intransitive verb to leave a job or career voluntarily, at or near the usual age for doing so.
Resign (verb) to accept something reluctantly reflexive verb to come to terms with something and acquiesce in it reluctantly
You state that: ” 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 pressured
too do so. ”
Your last sentence would as you intended lead the reader to believe that both resigned under pressure.
I don’t know the specific circumstances of the Lt. However, I can speak to the appointment of a Superintendent and the dismissal of a Superintendent. The dismissal of a Superintendent has never occurred in the 75-year history of the Oregon State Police. The Superintendent can’t be dismissed during their appointed term, except perhaps in the case of a conviction for criminal wrongdoing and murder would be about the only crime that would justify dismissal. Ruecker’s appointment as Superintendent would have expired November of 2007. He could have retired at age 49 but was committed to the department to make sure there would be enough future leaders within the department to carry on the traditions and mission of the OSP.
Below is the accurate information regarding Ruecker’s retirement:
”On Wednesday, October 25, 2006, Oregon State Police Superintendent Ronald C. Ruecker notified Governor Ted Kulongoski of his intention to RETIRE effective December 1, 2006. ”
You further misquote and mislead readers with the following:… ” as he said for the betterment of members, his family, and Oregonians.”
Below is the accurate information:
”One of our responsibilities of leadership is keeping a watchful eye on the needs of the organization, its people, and its mission. Based on our sense of the organization's needs, we respectfully ask that you consider this letter as notice of our intent to retire from the Department effective December 1, 2006. We feel this decision is in the best interest of the membership, our family, and the public. “
You have every right to say what you have to say only a sleazy person would intentionally mislead the public with twisted statements. Especially pitiful is to make false statements about a native Oregonian who selflessly served the citizens of this state for over 31 years, from an entry-level dispatcher position to the leader of the OSP. I have worked with and for the former Superintendent and have known the family for many years. I have the utmost respect for him and his family.
Moreover, just what are your achievements and dedication to serving the citizens of Oregon?
Posted by: david peltier | Apr 25, 2008 11:00:58 PM
Dear Oregonians, I am very upset that criminals are being let out of jail in Lincoln County, Oregon. Sheriffs arrested Nickolas Jesse, 23 years old for drug possession and a.45 caliber pistol. He was jailed briefly and LET OUT! Whereupon Nickolas attacked a 61 year old father and stole two guns from an RV in the Waldport neighborhood of Legion Road. Nickolas Jesse is on the run from the law. He allegedly stole a car in Medford, OR and I consider him a threat to the people of Oregon. I'm asking anyone to e-mail info on his whereabouts. Thanks! David Peltier djcpeltier@yahoo.com P.O. Box 2002 Waldport, OR 97394 4/25
Posted by: LT | Sep 20, 2007 11:04:11 AM
I look forward to hearing Kroger speak on Oregon issues. So far it seems to be "friends of Kroger want you to support their friend the former federal prosecutor".
Also, he apparently has lots of friends in Portland. It will be interesting to see who supports him in the rest of the state.