Bicycle Civil Liberties Union Justice for Berkeley Critical Mass
BCLU perspectives on controversies over the incident:
Because of the controversies and harassment directed at this videographer, and the misinterpretation of the videos by some, a few facts corroborated by multiple witnesses are in order: 1) The bicyclists surrounded the van: NOT TRUE. The bicyclists surrounded the van as much as a fist is surrounded when it punches one in the stomach. The driver plowed into the crowd. When I saw this, it looked as if he must have struck people due to the speed and how densely packed the group was. 2) The bicyclists should have moved out of the way: NOT POSSIBLE. You can hear people calmly saying to back away from the van at the very beginning of the video I captured. Almost immediately after that, the driver hits the gas and runs into people, who become trapped and entangled as a result. A young man rushed up on his bicycle to try to pull the first person who was trapped out. As the van kept moving, this second person was trapped even as people pulled the first one out. A third person who had rushed up (a young woman) was also trapped in kind. This is how three bicycles ended up under the wheel. It allhappened quickly but I saw it. Unfortunately, as I was truly terrified that the motorist was accelerating to flee, and would be gone soon leaving bloody bodies behind, I focused on getting an image of his face as soon as possible for identification (bloody bodies *should* be ample evidence that he'd done something wrong). This is why as soon as I saw that his moving forward was captured on tape, I rushed to the window instead of filming what came next. It was a difficult but split-second decision that had to be made. 3) The video was edited to hide important elements of the attack: NOT TRUE.
We only wish we had more footage to more fully show what happened. The video starts late because this was a surprise. It takes a while to get my camera out and get it started. I (Jason Meggs), the videographer who captured the Head van crushing forward into stationary people on bicycles, started at the rear of the ride, and it took time to get up the hill to the scene. The video pieces were edited in part to conform to the media's requests in the past that we not turn over "raw protest footage." The essential elements of the attack are all there; nothing was edited out. The full video goes on for many minutes and is too long for youtube. The majority of it is the aftermath, as the police arrived. Many things were not caught on tape, such as the motorist's wife walking through the crowd cursing them angrily.
It is true that the longer video might be misused by the mass media, who are experts of spinning and editing things. The less footage they have, the more likely the full real story will be told for a change. KRON, for example, and another station, have already begun saying that a group smashed multiple windows, rather than the fact that one window was broken and the crowd did NOT fracture the window. Moreover, they say it as if that was the entire context: a group just went up to a car and attacked it. This is totally misleading (and not at all credible; it would be a major abberation for this 14+ year monthly tradition; this was the 172nd ride with no similar incident to point to, although motorist and police violence have occurred at times in the past).
It is also true that KRON, in an interview that they begged for and promised would be used to allow the bicyclists' story to be told, sprung this idea of turning over the entire video *during* the interview, in an attempt to surprise the interviewee (me, Jason Meggs), which was about as successful as it was just. The responses by Meggs are all true. The statement that the BCLU wants to make sure that the important elements of the story be told is in the context of the surprise departure from what was promised: going frame by frame through the video to show what the driver did. KRON broke that promise. They knew I was on deadline to submit final grades for my students, in finals, and had not slept for days. They took advantage of that by falsely promising to go frame by frame. What's more, KRON did not announce that they were recording. There was no recording light on their camera, which may well be illegal (although we have not taken action to press charges, it's an interesting thought on how to get some justice). This is par for the course in KRON's modus operandi these days: "try to track down the evil people who are hiding things." It's not hard to spin things that way, particularly if you're dishonest, use the element of surprise, take things out of context, and don't inform the victim (me) that you're recording while staging the frame-up. KRON also put together a bogus spin piece mis-using the footage and ignoring all the cyclists' experience, and beginning provocative online blogs claiming that bicyclists are at fault in most crashes (a typical police bias as well). Catch-22.
Of interest, I had been in the media twice recently, once on KRON, where footage of mine was used to debunk the sensationalized and misreported attack in San Francisco (similar formula: a sympathetic dempographic gets away with car violence, in that case it was a mom with her kids, in this case it's an older man going to see his daughter with cerebral palsy). Being a mother or a senior citizen is not an excuse for violence against peaceful demonstrators. KRON deleted that story from their website, evidently because it gives fair time to the other side -- something they're clearly rabidly opposed to. Clear to me at least, having had to deal with their rude and obnoxious reporter in my home. A second media appearance was in defense of Oakland Critical Mass, where I successfully spoke to the importance of supporting bicycling to meet the urgent need to avert catastrophic climate change. It's interesting that one of the most prolific harrassers in an angry phone call said to give up; he said that we would never stop climate change. (On February 2, 2007, Oakland Police, using a helicopter and numerous squad cars, blocked traffic to detain nonviolent and peaceful protesters. A large number of citations were issued.)
4) The bicyclists put their bicycles under the van: NOT TRUE. This is absurd, yet the motorist and the Berkeley Police, in their unending corruption, have made this claim. The only way those bicycles could have conceivably gotten there is the way that is (partially but clearly) shown on the video. The fact that people tried to pull their bicycles out and could not budge them attests to the fact that (a) nobody wanted to have their bike under a car and (b) nobody could move a car to get a bike out, let alone put one under it. (Yes it was very unwise for them to get in harm's way to rescue a bicycle -- I have no control over that.) 5) The police report: BOGUS.
Many witnesses were refused the opportunity to make a statement, including motorists not connected to the event who saw what really happened. The police did not take action to press charges despite the request of the injured bicyclists that they do so. The police refused to execute a citizen's arrest, denying the demonstrators their Constitutional rights in that manner as well. The police evidently did not run a sobriety test on the motorist (it was Friday evening after dinner and both appeared intoxicated to many observers). The police are once again framing the demonstration with lies, abusing their power. Sadly, this grotesque inequity is something that bicyclists and pedestrians, including people who use wheelchairs, experience on a regular basis in everyday life. 6) The motorist or his wife suffered from some disability: NOT EVIDENT.
The motorist drove with an insignia for people with disabilities on his license plate. Yet he and his wife were able to walk, and he was able to operate a motor vehicle as a weapon as well as brandish a knife-like tool. If anything, the motorist suffered from an inability to control his anger and to operate a vehicle safely, and as such his driving privileges should be revoked. Some have suggested that, due to the high instance of fraud for disability privileges, which are also associated with aggressive/selfish motorist syndrome, that the driver's disability placard is a fraud. BCLU has no proof of this and makes no such claims. However, it is also unfair for people to accuse the demonstrators of attacking people with disabilities.
Harlan Head yanked his wife and dragged her away from the scene, with no evidence of physical disability. People in wheelchairs, or who use a bicycle as a crutch, or who cannot drive because of disabilities, come on Critical Mass and are welcome there. Critical Mass Berkeley has gone to the site of the killing of Fred Lupke, killed by automobile while travelling as a pedestrian in a wheelchair, to protest the Berkeley Police report which faulted him.
There has also been confusion about the motorist's daughter having cerebral palsy (the passenger he identified as his wife said this when she stepped out of the van (it's on the video), although KGO Ch. 7 misreported that *she* (the wife) had cerebral palsy).
The motorist had the full use of his foot on the gas pedal. He was able to push people and wield a knife-like garden tool. He was able to walk away from the van like an able-bodied person without assistance. BCLU has *always* included people with disabilities in its mission, and senior citizens as well. Anyone who is unable to drive for any reason needs their right to travel safely and comfortably protected. This driver stands against that mission by attacking bicyclists. We are so very fortunate that the injuries were not worse and that he did not create another person with a disability with his actions. For more information about the Lupke case, see this page regarding the BCLU response: http://bclu.org/projects/wheelchairrights.html 7) Why are you picking on old people? NOT TRUE.
Nobody knew the driver's age when he barelled into the crowd. As you can see in the video, his windows were tinted; it was near dusk. Some people have written us, even claiming "elder abuse." The group we were monitoring didn't react to his age. They reacted to his actions. His car, used aggressively as a weapon, is the only persona that presented itself, a persona all too familiar -- big, pushy, angry car, disrespecting life.
The driving-first policies of this country *do* discriminate against our elders, in so many ways. Loss of license due to "age-related" issues affecting the ability to drive strands millions without viable transport. The elderly are disproportionately likely to be struck and killed by motor vehicles (as are the young, who also suffer lack of accessibility due to motor vehicles -- and automobile crashes are the #1 preventable cause of death for people under 31 years of age). Designing cities for everyone would save and improve lives in numerous ways while greatly protecting the environment. The false portrayal of this incident is being used as a smoke screen to hide the true killing and suppression of us all, particularly those young and old, and people with disabilities. 8) Critical Mass Demonstrations ask for what they get because they block traffic: NO.
Critical Mass demonstrations have evolved to get their message out, and provide a positive experience for participants, in an efficient and safe manner. They function much as a parade or procession does, as is codified in law. The Berkeley City Council should move to make such demonstrations explicitly legal (see below). While the demonstrations are not always perfect (anyone can come, and not everyone has learned the long-time principles and tactics of a successful ride), the mission of the group as a whole is absolutely not to antagonize or instigate. Motorists who cannot see this are invited to participate and see for themselves, or at least take a hard look at themselves. For one of many examples of how bicyclists get the word out to themselves to behave well, check the Peace in the Streets homepage, now almost 10 years old. (Note, that's a link to the archive.org backup and so it doesn't have all its formatting. Unfortunately xinet.com recently lost a large compendium of late 90's bicycle rennaissance web presence without a backup.)
As a group, motorists have a Criticial Mass of cars everyday. They run red lights by the millions; mow down pedestrians; cause noise pollution that harms health; pollute the air which damages lungs and causes cancer; recklessly waste our inheritance of stored solar energy (fossil fuels); pour trillions of tons of carbon into the atmosphere, risking catastrophic climate change which can kill billions of people and collapse the economies of the world; have created a steady rise of big brotherism and the architecture of a police state, as more and more mechanisms are used to track and control drivers (do you really feel free in a car? don't you want more choices?); and so much more. This paragraph could go on for millions and millions of lines. The fact that many bicyclists and potential bicyclists say they won't ride because motorists make them feel too scared, shows who the real bullies are here. Critical Masses happen once a month on a Friday evening in just one part of the city, on a regular schedule. The roadway network has plenty of redundancy; motorists can simply go around. It's rare that Critical Mass creates more delay than a traffic light, with the exception of San Francisco where up to 10,000+ people sometimes ride together. In short, how can anyone participating in the system of automotive transport have any criticism of this demonstration and celebration of alternatives? Share the road and respect the groups' Constitutional right for the redress of grievances.
9) Critical Mass demonstrations are illegal: NO.
Bicyclists have a right to the road. Citizens have a right to demonstrate. It is true that Critical Masses stay together as a group through red lights, after entering on a green light. This is the safest and most efficient way for the demonstrations to proceed; to deny this would be to make the demonstration impossible. This is also the same practice for as parades and processions, as codified in law. It is true that the demonstrations do not get permits, and refuse to. There is case law to support this. A sane response for government would be to pass laws codifying the right to ride in groups. This would help everyone with not only critical masses, but other, unrelated rides including tours and races. 10) Aren't you hiding whoever broke the window? The police know who broke the window; he admitted to it. While it is terrible that a window was broken, the demonstrators as a whole did not break the window, one individual did. If he did so improperly, he can be held accountable. It is clear that the window was not broken before the driver attacked the crowd, causing injury and much more property damage. It is also clear that the broken window was not an attempt to injure or attack the driver or his passenger. There have been many irresponsible, inflamatory and threatening comments posted on youtube by anonymous individuals. They are making the public as a whole look bad to the world. Most troubling, some people have claimed that an african american bicyclist broke the window, based on a reflection in one person's footage (not mine). They are wrong; I spoke with the person who told the police he broke the window and the person was not black.
11) Unauthorized repostings: illegal There have been unauthorized repostings of the video to various sites such as break.com and youtube.com. These repostings have often been presented with inflamatory/libelous language and misrepresent what really happened at this incident. This is ethically and legally wrong & is a copyright infringement. BCLU has been contacting these individuals to cease and desist. 12) Making this public was harmful to the bicycle cause: MAYBE NOT The free publicity for the fact that bicycle demonstrations do exist, even in this car-dominated country, may be a service to the public despite the efforts to lie, libel and defame. One hopes that people can think for themselves and not be swayed by inflamatory and false rhetoric. Bicycle issues are so suppressed in this country that perhaps only a situation like this can lead to any kind of a dialogue about the very serious issues that are being ignored, and the very serious inequities which pervade. May it lead directly to a productive dialogue. 13) What may have motivated the driver?
The driver has previously published his hopes that the police will target pedestrians in a letter to the editor. Many bicyclists feel the media misrepresentation and targeting of bicyclists makes them feel more at risk -- that violence is being instigated by media sensationalism and highly biased reporting. 14) Youtubers Exposed! The problem of motorist violence which bicyclists and pedestrians see all too often, has been captured by some students in one incident on youtube (see below). The comments on youtube continue to be inflamatory, defamatory, prejudiced, vile and violent. The news report itself covers the fact that the police officer wouldn't have believed the cyclist. It's yet another parallel incident, and it shows how sick the people representing the car companies are.
To see their comments, go to: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8H0Pb_qjj6k
It's really quite amazing that the Berkeley Daily Planet was at all influenced by creepy anonymous comments like these. E.g., "God bless the driver. I LOVE when drivers run over these sissys on their stupid bicycles. BAN THE CRITICAL MASS IDIOTS. I hate those stinking hippies."
The editor of the Planet published an editorial attacking me (Jason Meggs), entwining claims that I'm like George Bush, her passions for Israel v. Palestine, and mistakenly claiming that I've been a City of Berkeley commissioner. (2011 update: I have never taken a public position on the Israel/Palestine controversy, and it was truly wrong for her to invent one for me. That said, I've since been personally affected by the Israeli military for shooting a longtime friend and fellow bicycle activist in the head, nearly two years later in March 2009.) When I called her to work this out she expressed her long-time displeasure with the name BCLU, evidently believing that bicyclists shouldn't assert their civil rights and that "bicycle" is not an adjective. For the bicycle people and their bicycle rights, the Bicycle Civil Liberties Union continues (see elsewhere for why the name was chosen). This is but another example of the need to stop the institutionalized bias and exclusion of bicyclists and bicycling, which costs lives, quality of life, freedom, health, and the sustainability of this planet (and everything else, including the 'economy'). As always, the BCLU seeks to resolve such issues and extends the offer of mediation to all parties, and continues to appreciate the past coverage by the Planet which was generally favorable to bicyclists, despite a media environment funded first and foremost by automotive interests (to say nothing of petroleum company influence). The BCLU presented an award for just reporting to the Planet on its first anniversary, with a group of some 70 bicyclists. (The award was given after the BDP's first year, when it was under different management. Ironically, thepaper later came under fire as having an opposite bias (see NY Times article. 15) Wasn't this a waste of resources? YES Harlan Head's actions and the many repercussions had very harmful effects.
This reporter, for instance, was working on a completely different media issue: to assess worker and nearby residents' exposure to dust as a result of the rapidly mobilized demolition and construction taking place due to the collapse of an I-580 segment caused by a tanker truck fire. This study was to be done through the Environmental Health Sciences Divison of the School of Public Health at UC Berkeley. These plans were scrapped due to the perceived need to set the story straight in the media on this event. (Worth mentioning that bicycle lanes were removed, and major dollar investments were made, including a free transit day, to help motorists affected by this temporary infrastructure gap, showing extreme bias and preferential treatment for motorists over alternative modes. When do non-drivers get any mobilized response for the major gaps and ongoing emergency they face?) A tally of all the hours spent on this issue including attempting to hold the police accountable, and to assess the opportunity costs (all the other things the time could have been spent on) is an important exercise. Moreover, the ripple effect of this incident surely harmed the public good in myriad ways. Harlan Head's actions and the police's aiding and abetting those actions certainly have widespread impacts. The message to motorists was that violence is okay, the car is king, and the Constitution is expendable.
16) When is it okay to run people and/or bicycles over? Never. Even if the driver had a green light, the street was full of living human beings. There is never an excuse (legal or otherwise) to run into people. The car is not more important than life, and its destructive tyranny over free expression, stewardship of the land and the use of public space is an affront to the freedoms embodied in the founding of this country and every principle of human rights. The fact that there are so many people who believe otherwise, who bicyclists and pedestrians (and everyone, including other motorists) encounter daily, and the fact that these values have been embedded in the legal system, the built environment and the institutions that control our built environment, is strong testimony as to the ability of the motor vehicle system to beget violence and oppression and to pervert and distort the health of communities and cultures.
17) Were the demonstrators hippies? Irrelevant. The hate speech coming from a small but vocal band of youtubers repeatedly casts the world into "hippies" and non-hippies, as well as along narrow two-party political system lines, issues of sexuality, age, and so on. Presuming what others think is fallacious. Moreover, all people deserve equal protection. For just one example of this kind of hate speech, read this exchange received July 26, 2008 (15th month after the incident). 18) Were the driver's witnesses really "independent"? QUITE POSSIBLY NOT! Independent witnesses in a car who saw the incident and were willing to testify that the motorist was at fault were not interviewed by police. Only two "independent" witnesses were interviewed, who police claimed were not with the driver. However, there is reason to believe both witnesses knew the driver and may even have been traveling with the driver. Here is one person who seemed quite familiar with the driver and his wife:
19) More debunking and clarification to come, I'm sure.
![]()
IMAGES:
The attacker. He barelled across a large intersection into the demonstration,
which was proceeding in an orderly fashion after passing through a green light.
These poor children, who had been traveling in a bicycle trailer, were
traumatized by the attack, which was a terrifying assault against the group.
Earlier, the demonstration traveled without incident through Berkeley.
This ongoing event is now in its 15th year of monthly rides.
Email: