By
Erinn Unger
February 28, 2008
Several pre-law students found themselves on the other side of the law this past Sunday, after an incident with a Washington state trooper on the I-5 freeway overpass.
State Trooper Douglas Power approached four UW students and two non-students while they were holding a banner on an I-5 freeway overpass in the University District.
The students were members of the UW’s chapter of Justice Works, a nonprofit organization for justice system reform, and the banner — about 10 feet tall and 3 feet wide — read “Education not incarceration.”
“Freeway bannering is totally legal,” said junior Jamie Brown, a pre-law student. “We had four people [so] there was more than 500 pounds holding that sign.”
The demonstrators researched laws regarding the use of banners and made sure the sign was held securely to its frame, which was constructed of PVC piping.
“We did not attach it [to the overpass] in any way; we were within the bounds of the law,” said senior Jonathan Yousling, a pre-law student and one of the demonstrators.
The demonstrators had seen a good response from drivers and pedestrians, and they were about to leave when Power arrived, Brown said.
“We heard a siren. … [The] first thing he said was that we need to get out of here,” she said. “We tried to explain to him very calmly [that] we’ve done our research.”
Power was aggressive and angry, Brown said. He grabbed another demonstrator’s arm and the situation escalated when Powers pulled the sign down and on top of Brown. Another demonstrator videotaped the scene.
“I [was] underneath this mammoth sign,” Brown said. “I think I got whacked in the head by one of the PVC pipes.”
The trooper was attempting to drag the large sign to his vehicle when other officers pulled up at the scene.
“They determined that we hadn’t done anything wrong [when shown the video] and that we had a right to be there,” Brown said. “We have the right under the First Amendment to assemble.”
The demonstrators filed a complaint against trooper Power.
Sgt. Bill Gardiner of the Washington State Patrol said the patrol did an investigation and talked to both parties.
“We determined that Power was a little rough; he could have handled the situation differently. He was concerned for traffic down below,” he said.
The situation has been documented and is being handled by the patrol’s internal affairs bureau. Power has been reprimanded and received counseling and retraining on the issue, he said.
Brown said she understood Power’s concerns for safety but that she and the other students didn’t do anything wrong.
“The only person who broke any laws was him, when he trampled over our civil liberties,” she said.
The group has contacted the American Civil Liberties Union and legal aid at the UW to see what legal recourse is available, and will use the experience as a training tool for future demonstrators.
[Reach reporter Erinn Unger at news@thedaily.washington.edu.]
22 Comments
#1 arla
on February 28, 2008 at 12:51 a.m.(Federal Way, WA | Unverified Name)
that video is so intense. I am so proud of this erinn, :)
#2 chantal
on February 28, 2008 at 9:56 a.m.(UW Campus | Unverified Name)
great article Erinn!!!!!!!!
#3 Tom Brady
on February 28, 2008 at 10:43 a.m.(Location Unknown | Unverified Name)
POWER tripping.
#4 Ihateyou
on February 28, 2008 at 10:52 a.m.(Location Unknown | Unverified Name)
Looks like they were fishing for this to happen, I'd rather not see a sign when I'm driving 60 on the freeway, what if it fell on the freeway?
#5 Damn Daily
on February 28, 2008 at 12:38 p.m.(Seattle, WA | Unverified Name)
I am sure that these pre-law students thuroughly researched their ability within the law, however, I read in other papers that the police asked the students to leave a number of times. I dislike the daily omiting certain points of a story.
#6 AaronB
on February 28, 2008 at 2:21 p.m.(UW Campus | Unverified Name)
This story is so one-sided it's almost comical. I especially like the headline. How exactly should the cop have responded after a group of five people repeatedly disobeyed his requests, and instead shouted in his face that they have a better knowledge of the law then he does?
Regardless of what the letter of the law says, hanging a large object held together with chicken wire and plastic pipe over a busy freeway isn't exactly the safest thing to do. It wouldn't have taken very much effort to simply move their sign to a different location where it wouldn't be a danger to drivers. It's nice that this group of students thinks their political statement is more important than other people's safety. I think it's pretty obvious that they were looking to provoke a confrontation with the police.
#7 Michael
on February 28, 2008 at 2:52 p.m.(Renton, WA | Unverified Name)
Gee, I'd like a banner made with PVC pipe and chicken wire to fall onto the freeway and hit my car going 60 mph with my family inside. Looking at the video, it was obviously a flimsy piece of crap. Good for the Trooper.
#8 Ryan
on February 28, 2008 at 3:36 p.m.(Seattle, WA | Unverified Name)
What W.A.C or R.C.W states that an officer is allowed to claw at signs like an angry baboon?
The chicken wire is safe. If it were a sheet, it could act as a sail and one gust of wind could have carried it off.
The officer clearly reacted out of anger, he probably should have kept it cool and waited for other state patrol cars to arrive.
---
This is actually a big free speech issue, I want to be able to hold a bill board sign to passing cars if I want to.
the trooper "this is state property"....which is public property...which is owned by the public.
The constitution has the first amendment and a supremacy claus. any state law prohibiting this is illegal.
#9 Ryan
on February 28, 2008 at 3:38 p.m.(Seattle, WA | Unverified Name)
The video is gone. Can we get an update from the author of the article?
#10 Erinn Unger
on February 28, 2008 at 6:49 p.m.(UW Campus | Unverified Name)
All of this debate is great and your comments are appreciated.
Ryan,
As for the video, it has been deleted by the person who posted it on YouTube. Unfortunately, I can't do anything about that. I apologize. Try searching around for it, you might be able to dig it up.
I can't guarantee it, but I hope to do a follow-up on the story.
I'll take your comments into account. Thanks for the feedback.
#11 matt
on February 28, 2008 at 6:52 p.m.(Seattle, WA | Unverified Name)
http://youtube.com/watch?v=hofo9H6MKfw
#12 AaronB
on February 28, 2008 at 7:12 p.m.(UW Campus | Unverified Name)
I really don't think anyone is challenging the fact that they have a free speech right to display their sign. However, free speech isn't just a blanket authorization to do whatever one wishes, irrespective of other laws. I'm not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure it's illegal to put objects near a highway in such a way that they are a danger to the people traveling on it. Obviously, whether or not an object is dangerous is a subjective judgment, and police officers are given the authority to make that judgment. I think a reasonable person could probably conclude that hanging a flimsy metal sign over the side of a freeway overpass has the potential to be dangerous to drivers. It would have been easy for them to simply move the sign to a location where it wasn't a danger, but they chose not to.
I'm not trying to say that the officer couldn't have handled the situation more diplomatically, but, at the same time, he's not obligated to simply sit and have a verbal debate with people who are ignoring his lawful requests.
#13 Chris M.
on February 28, 2008 at 8:45 p.m.(Seattle, WA | Unverified Name)
I agree with Aaron. Getting into a legal debate with a police officer is not the best way to handle a situation. Even if they knew they were in the right, logic should tell you that arguing with a police officer is just going to create a scene in which you can't win. That girl with her annoying "I pay taxes sir!" was only fueling the fire. The people on the freeway pay taxes also, as do I. You're not special because of it, and acting like you were subjected to an injustice discredits people who are actually abused.
It's not an easy job for a police officer to try to control a situation with 5 people, and she and the others certainly didn't make it any easier. They should have taken the sign down quietly and had a civil discourse with the officer. Get his information and his interpretation of the law, and take that information and talk to an attorney or someone else in the State Patrol. When you act like a whiny child when a police officer asks you to do something, it can't be surprising when you get the response you did.
Learn to play the game like an adult.
#14 hello
on February 28, 2008 at 9:44 p.m.(Seattle, WA | Unverified Name)
The officer wasn't acting like an adult. Ripping down the sign can really hurt someone especially if she did get hit in the head by it. As a police officer, he should know better than to react out of anger.
#15 Sign like these should be Illegal
on February 28, 2008 at 10:21 p.m.(Seattle, WA | Unverified Name)
This is a public safety issue. If this is not in the law already, we should include it. These kids never have seen a sign like this driving on a freeway going 60 MPH before, eh? Yeah, it's a huge distraction. Lives are stake. There are hundreds of cars a minute driving by at high speeds and many of the drivers are trying to read whatever the stupid message has to say. Say there was slow traffic ahead of them... boom, lives lost, money lost, just for these dumb kids to spread a dumb message.
It wasn't the most civil way for the trooper to handle this situation, but lives were at stake, and this was resolved as quickly as possibly since his requests were just shooed off. Thank you officer.
#16 Chris M.
on February 28, 2008 at 10:54 p.m.(Everett, WA | Unverified Name)
RE: hello
But the whole thing would have been avoided if the students just did what he said to begin with. He didn't immediately run up and rip the sign down, he gave them plenty of chances. They just had to argue, which as I pointed out rarely if ever leads to anything constructive.
#17 ashamed to be a UW alum
on February 28, 2008 at 11:10 p.m.(Seattle, WA | Unverified Name)
Ooh, you know the law -- so effing what? ANYONE can find out a particular law, it's called being able to navigate the RCW successfully. INTERPRETING the law is completely different and is largely a judgment call when it comes down to it. Clearly these law students didn't have the best judgment holding up some stupid sign (seriously, how many people paid mind to your message? Go out and volunteer or raise money to help support your belief that education should make incarceration obsolete) and throwing a tantrum when a man in a uniform asked them to take down the sign repeatedly. I'm pretty sure most people would react in a frustrated manner if a bunch of self-righteous law students repeatedly disregarded your requests to do something and talked down to you.
#18 Ryan
on February 29, 2008 at 7:25 a.m.(Seattle, WA | Unverified Name)
You know if it were an American flag, the cops would not have taken an aggressive initiative. they probably would have left the students alone.
Our student legacy has gone from this:...
http://www.historylink.org/essays/out...
...to agreeing with authority when authority is clearly in the wrong.
#19 Romy
on February 29, 2008 at 9:38 a.m.(Renton, WA | Unverified Name)
It is interesting...the students whined and cried about the sign falling / getting tangled on the girl. Had that same sign hit a car, or god forbid a motorcycle, imagine the impact and consequences. Chicken wire and PVC pipe have absolutely no place within the area of a freeway overpass.
#20 JeffMo
on February 29, 2008 at 3:18 p.m.(Harrisonburg, VA | Unverified Name)
Aaron B asked a very important question:
"How exactly should the cop have responded after a group of five people repeatedly disobeyed his requests, and instead shouted in his face that they have a better knowledge of the law then he does?"
Aaron, the news stories on this subject have confirmed so far that the people did in fact have a better knowledge of the law than the officer, and the reaction by the patrol’s internal affairs bureau support this conclusion.
If neither the protesters' presence nor their sign was illegal, then the officer's "requests" were not lawful police orders. The illegal and childish pulling down of the sign might even be a crime, depending on the applicable statutes of that state.
I would say that the officer should respond by apologizing to those who clearly had superior knowledge of the law, asking for forgiveness, and getting some education and training on how to better perform his job. (The news stories seem to indicate that the officer's superiors agree with at least the latter recommendation.)
#21 Rod
on March 1, 2008 at 2:12 a.m.(Renton, WA | Unverified Name)
At the very beginning, just prior to the chirping of the siren, you can see the one student running along the overpass trying to get motorists attention; looking like a baboon in heat. I'm also curious to see the *full* version..kind of convenient how it has been edited down to suit the students needs. But alas, that is par for the course for this university.
#22 Rhianna
on March 1, 2008 at 10:41 a.m.(Seattle, WA | Unverified Name)
JeffMo -- I would hope that the "people" knew more about the law than the state trooper, they are LAW STUDENTS and it would worry me about what kind of lawyers we are producing if they didn't know the law well. But just because something is legal doesn't mean you should do it. It's not illegal to skateboard on park railings but how many idiots have gotten hurt doing that?
Honestly these students remind me of the "don't taze me bro!" guy down in Florida. They purposefully set out to do something that they knew wasn't necessary illegal (just like badgering a former Presidential candidate) but would cause some heat that would give them the perfect platform to overreact. The trooper has already been reprimanded and gone through counseling for his actions, BUT OF COURSE THE STUDENTS ARE NOW TRAUMATIZED AND MUST CONSIDER LEGAL RECOURSE TO NURSE THEIR WOUNDED HEARTS. Give me a break! What is wrong with my generation???
Post a comment