POLICE DELIBERATELY ORDER AND ABET THE DESTRUCTION AND THEFT OF FIRST-AMENDMENT BANNER BICYCLE.

Date of Incident: September 26, 2000
Received:

Box 15071
Berkeley, CA  94712-6071
November 8, 2000

JASON MEGGS' STATEMENT 
September 26, 2000 INCIDENT

Description of incident:

On September 26, 2000, I received an emergency phone call from a fellow citizen at approximately 14:05 or 14:10 hours stating that "the police are towing your trailers". I immediately left my workplace and sprinted to the location at Bancroft and Bowditch where I had parked my bicycle (which included two trailers) several hours earlier. At the scene, I was shocked to see that my property had been partially destroyed, and was mostly loaded onto a truck. There were three UCPD officers on the scene: G.S. Folster #93, McAllister #56, and W. Sifuentes #37. There were also at least four to five workers present, one of whom identified himself as being in charge of the crew, and gave the name "Augusto Tan". I have since acquired the UCPD police report (attached) for $10 USA.

When questioned about who was responsible for the incident, Officer Folster stated that UCPD Chief Victoria Harrison was responsible. Augusto Tan stated something different, saying that the Berkeley Police Department gave the order to take the carts. In the police report, Folster states something different again, claiming that a local merchant had made the request of the workers. I have since ascertained from the director of Public Works, René Cardinaux, that his crews are not empowered to remove property unless ordered to by police.

Folster states a blatant falsehood in his report: "It [my bicycle including trailers] was clearly blocking the sidewalk." He also claimed at the scene that the bicycle was being taken because it was "blocking the sidewalk". I informed him at the scene that he was wrong. His false allegation reminds me of the harassment of people on Telegraph Avenue and downtown by police, where false citations for "blocking the sidewalk" occur. Folster made it clear that he had no regrets about his involvement with the incident. He laughed at me in a cruel fashion when I said he should be ashamed of this.

Most ironically, the UCPD police vehicles and Berkeley work vehicles (at least three vehicles were on the scene when I arrived) were completely blocking the #2 lane of Bancroft Avenue, blocking bus access for AC Transit and the campus buses, and causing some interference with crossing pedestrian traffic. In contrast, despite the big mess on the sidewalk that was created by workers and police -- which took significantly more room than my bicycle did when parked -- pedestrians were passing without any problem, including a woman in a wheelchair. The dimensions of my bicycle will prove that the bicycle was taking up little more lateral space than any normal bicycle.

Police have a responsibility to protect property from damage. In this case, even if the bicycle was "blocking the sidewalk" -- which again, it wasn't -- there was no need to take the actions that were taken. My bicycle had a phone number printed in plain view, which could have been called. In addition, the bicycle is distinctive and many people know it is mine, and know how to contact me. Indeed, Officer Folster writes that he saw me pulling it earlier. Yet my lock was destroyed ($80 lock), and rather than pull the pin to detatch one trailer, the hand-made steel hitch was cut through, destroying it (roughly $40 plus ordering fees). Damage was evidently done to the rear of the bicycle where the cart attaches, to one of the cables used to lock the trailers, and to the front tow bar of one of the trailers. In addition, the rear cart had its lower support struts broken by bending, evidently when workers were attempting to remove the banners in a brute-force method rather than simply pulling the strut (a PVC pipe) from its holder. I do not believe these banners needed to be removed to load the trailers onto a truck. Furthermore, the hand-painted banners, which are works of art, had been ripped apart and torn from their grommets, rather than being properly removed and folded up. They cannot be repaired.

If these officers were in fact giving "civil advice" as officer Folster's police report states, they would have advised the workers not to destroy property. Indeed, they would have advised them not to remove the property at all. To add insult to injury, the officers stayed and ordered me to leave at once and remove my property (which was now no longer able to be biked away), as if I have no right to stand on the public sidewalk. The three remained for some time, pressuring me to leave immediately, despite my protest that I have a right to be on the public sidewalk.

The Berkeley Police Department gave the order according to Public Works. Therefore these same allegations apply to whoever was involved in giving the order to remove and confiscate the carts. This has the appearance of being yet another example of UCPD being used as a shield by BPD -- BPD giving the order, and UCPD standing watch -- but BPD must be held culpable for giving the order and for not protecting my property once they gave the order.

Frequently, motorcars are parked completely blocking sidewalks. That, unlike my bicycle during this incident, is a true and pervasive problem which the disability community has particularly complained about as well as myself and others. We rarely get a response when we complain about these blockades. When we do get a response, police and workers do not saw through the car, break the door handles off, wrench out the ignition system, or scrape off the bumperstickers. Yet that is the analogous behavior which they inflicted illegally upon me for allegedly the same crime.

The depth of the crime inflicted upon me here is more serious than bicycle theft, property destruction, and desecration of art. The banners which were clearly the true target in this issue are free speech banners. They stated, "Appreciate Bicycles" and "Celebrate [Car-Free] Living", "September is Car-Free Month", in addition to giving a phone number and web page.

This is also a hate crime against bicycles. Only two weeks previous, one of my bicycle trailers was attacked in a similar manner, and although there is no known perpetrator, the Berkeley Police are my primary suspects. In that case, the trailer had its wheel sawed through so that only one of five mag struts was solid -- evidently in an attempt to injure or kill passengers by making them fall into traffic. Furthermore, the couch which was lashed down to the locked cart was a victim of arson, burned away where it stood. That was my friends' grandmothers' couch. The fact that only a week previous, on September 2, 2000, I was falsely accused of "arson" and "intent to injure" by UCPD officers, is a troubling indicator that the psychosis of these police forces to villianize those they wish to silence has gone far over the edge. Relatedly, I have also received death threats in association with local police, even at a PRC hearing. I consider this latest incident to be another such terrorist attack and blatant abuse of power. This is another one of many incidents of discrimination against bicyclists by police.

Sincerely,



Jason Meggs

Printed on 100% Post-Consumer Content, Re-CYCLED Paper