Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Police Disperse Peaceful Narwhallagraphic Video Showing
Three SCPD squad cars and four officers ticketed one man and dispersed a group of others watching a silent video show projected on the side of the Santa Cruz Community Credit Union. The police did not cite any complaints or crimes other than the claim that the spectators were "loitering" in violation of Mayor Coonerty's Parking Lot Panic Law.
The scene of the latest SCPD bullying and buffoonery was the Parking Lot #27 at Laurel and Front Streets on Friday night, March 21st under the full moon.
Andreas Nickolas got cited for violating the Parking Lot Panic law (technically the Parking Lots and Garages Trespass Law MC 9.64 http://www.ci.santa-cruz.ca.us/council/ordinance/2007/17.pdf ). Nickolas was projecting a silent visual mix of scenes from the withdrawn racist Walt Disney movie “Song of the South” as well as videos of presidents Kennedy and Reagan giving speeches, an American flag, and other provocative imagery. (see http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/03/15/18485843.php) The video began about 9 PM and was initially greeted by angry denunciations from several city employees in a white truck, who quickly left once video cameras were turned on them.
Nickolas had provided video shows for the previous two Friday nights. A week before he was falsely cited for "amplified sound", though his projection was silent (someone else reportedly had been playing music). The lot is several blocks away from any residence, and fronts on the San Lorenzo River. The noise from the two heavily trafficked streets (Laurel and Front) are louder than anything that came from the parking lotanyway , it would seem to me.
Police cars drove by regularly for the next hour and a half, but did not stop nor uniformed police enter the parking lot. Various passersby stopped to watch the film (illegally, since to enter a parking lot without a vehicle without passing through is an infraction under Mayor Coonerty's new law). A saxophonist provided a little musical accompaniment and some spirited discussion about the best potential court defense if the group were harassed by the cops. Several people had video cameras and documented the event. The group varied in number from 4 to 25 throughout the course of the evening.
At one point a group of bicyclists numbering about 20 showed up, bicycled around the lot, stopped to offer support. About 10:30 PM, two squad cars showed up and blocked one entrance of the parking lot, prompting the bicyclists to flee out the other entrance. A third squad car shortly arrived with a lieutenant to block the other entrance (none of the cars took the available legal parking spots). The police shined their headlights on the offending projectionist and vehicle.
A stocky officer gave Andreas the first citation I've witnessed under the Parking Lot Panic law. He offered to leave prior to the citation, but police insisted on ticketing him. They then began demanding people leave the lot, asking if they had vehicles there. People objected that they were simply assembling constitutionally. Three more police officers crossed the lot to the levy during the course of this confrontation.
Once the projectionist and his party packed up their equipment, police squad cars still blocked both entrances. At this point one squad car pulled away unblocking one entrance. As I made loud audio commentary about the unconstitutional, abusive, costly, and unnecessary police action, an officer demanded to know if I had a car in the lot. I told him that I didn't have to answer that question. He then insisted I leave within 15 minutes.
I didn't ask if there were a riot, martial law, or some other disaster or criminal behavior that demanded suspension of the constitution, since that provision had already been passed by the Santa Cruz City Council under Mayor Coonerty in spite of the lack of any meaningful evidence showing a “safety hazard” in the city's 20 parking lots and 4 parking garages. The presence of four armed and uniformed men at night, their cars blocking the exit to the lot seems to indicate a pretty high priority action. I didn't leave, however, but stayed to video the repressive police action.
An earlier successful series of daylight protest/support actions reversed police aggression in Parking Lot #4 where the Wednesday Drum Circle, playing next to the Farmer's Market, was repeatedly targeted by ticketbook wielding cops. (http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/01/23/18474460.php )
The local ACLU, absent from this and earlier protests, did issue a statement opposing the law in so far as it applied to lots (http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/01/28/18475525.php ). ACLU attorney and activist Don Zimmerman posed questions to the SCPD and SCPD spinmeister Zack Friend's response: http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2007/09/21/18448912.php?show_comments=1#18449475 .
The Public Works Department's rationale for this law: http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2007/09/21/18448912.php
Earlier police misconduct in Parking Lot #4 is documented at http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/01/24/18474462.php , http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/01/23/18474460.php?show_comments=1#18476365 ) The peaceful and legitimate nature of the traditional community activity interrupted repeatedly by police is shown in a series of photographs at http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/01/12/18471858.php .
But police are back now, in larger numbers, with officials of higher rank (Lt. Escalante, perhaps?, was the ranking police officer who oversaw this dispersal of a peaceful public assembly. The police gave no explanation that I could hear as to why they were enforcing a law they regularly overlook each Wednesday at the Drum Circle, and ignored for an hour and a half at this parking lot #27 (the map of all the public spaces where Mayor Coonerty's law bans public assemblies -- http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2007/09/21/18448912.php ).
The National Law Center for Homelessness and Poverty weighed in on this issue as well in a letter to City Council http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/05/08/18219341.php?show_comments=1#18219371 to which Councilmembers Coonerty and Rotkin angrily replied.
The community was successful in stopping police state action in the Drummer's Circle, though initially police were successful in intimidating folks from using the public space (http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/01/03/18469844.php ). Will police fear and force be successfully overcome here as well? Time and the community's response will tell.
I will be playing an audio account of the evening on my Sunday show March 23rd at 10 AM. Tune in to http://www.freakradio.org or 101.1 FM (Free Radio Santa Cruz) to hear how police are spending city money, and the kind of activity Councilmember Emily Reilly--now running for the State Assembly) is supporting.
Andreas Nickolas got cited for violating the Parking Lot Panic law (technically the Parking Lots and Garages Trespass Law MC 9.64 http://www.ci.santa-cruz.ca.us/council/ordinance/2007/17.pdf ). Nickolas was projecting a silent visual mix of scenes from the withdrawn racist Walt Disney movie “Song of the South” as well as videos of presidents Kennedy and Reagan giving speeches, an American flag, and other provocative imagery. (see http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/03/15/18485843.php) The video began about 9 PM and was initially greeted by angry denunciations from several city employees in a white truck, who quickly left once video cameras were turned on them.
Nickolas had provided video shows for the previous two Friday nights. A week before he was falsely cited for "amplified sound", though his projection was silent (someone else reportedly had been playing music). The lot is several blocks away from any residence, and fronts on the San Lorenzo River. The noise from the two heavily trafficked streets (Laurel and Front) are louder than anything that came from the parking lotanyway , it would seem to me.
Police cars drove by regularly for the next hour and a half, but did not stop nor uniformed police enter the parking lot. Various passersby stopped to watch the film (illegally, since to enter a parking lot without a vehicle without passing through is an infraction under Mayor Coonerty's new law). A saxophonist provided a little musical accompaniment and some spirited discussion about the best potential court defense if the group were harassed by the cops. Several people had video cameras and documented the event. The group varied in number from 4 to 25 throughout the course of the evening.
At one point a group of bicyclists numbering about 20 showed up, bicycled around the lot, stopped to offer support. About 10:30 PM, two squad cars showed up and blocked one entrance of the parking lot, prompting the bicyclists to flee out the other entrance. A third squad car shortly arrived with a lieutenant to block the other entrance (none of the cars took the available legal parking spots). The police shined their headlights on the offending projectionist and vehicle.
A stocky officer gave Andreas the first citation I've witnessed under the Parking Lot Panic law. He offered to leave prior to the citation, but police insisted on ticketing him. They then began demanding people leave the lot, asking if they had vehicles there. People objected that they were simply assembling constitutionally. Three more police officers crossed the lot to the levy during the course of this confrontation.
Once the projectionist and his party packed up their equipment, police squad cars still blocked both entrances. At this point one squad car pulled away unblocking one entrance. As I made loud audio commentary about the unconstitutional, abusive, costly, and unnecessary police action, an officer demanded to know if I had a car in the lot. I told him that I didn't have to answer that question. He then insisted I leave within 15 minutes.
I didn't ask if there were a riot, martial law, or some other disaster or criminal behavior that demanded suspension of the constitution, since that provision had already been passed by the Santa Cruz City Council under Mayor Coonerty in spite of the lack of any meaningful evidence showing a “safety hazard” in the city's 20 parking lots and 4 parking garages. The presence of four armed and uniformed men at night, their cars blocking the exit to the lot seems to indicate a pretty high priority action. I didn't leave, however, but stayed to video the repressive police action.
An earlier successful series of daylight protest/support actions reversed police aggression in Parking Lot #4 where the Wednesday Drum Circle, playing next to the Farmer's Market, was repeatedly targeted by ticketbook wielding cops. (http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/01/23/18474460.php )
The local ACLU, absent from this and earlier protests, did issue a statement opposing the law in so far as it applied to lots (http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/01/28/18475525.php ). ACLU attorney and activist Don Zimmerman posed questions to the SCPD and SCPD spinmeister Zack Friend's response: http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2007/09/21/18448912.php?show_comments=1#18449475 .
The Public Works Department's rationale for this law: http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2007/09/21/18448912.php
Earlier police misconduct in Parking Lot #4 is documented at http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/01/24/18474462.php , http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/01/23/18474460.php?show_comments=1#18476365 ) The peaceful and legitimate nature of the traditional community activity interrupted repeatedly by police is shown in a series of photographs at http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/01/12/18471858.php .
But police are back now, in larger numbers, with officials of higher rank (Lt. Escalante, perhaps?, was the ranking police officer who oversaw this dispersal of a peaceful public assembly. The police gave no explanation that I could hear as to why they were enforcing a law they regularly overlook each Wednesday at the Drum Circle, and ignored for an hour and a half at this parking lot #27 (the map of all the public spaces where Mayor Coonerty's law bans public assemblies -- http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2007/09/21/18448912.php ).
The National Law Center for Homelessness and Poverty weighed in on this issue as well in a letter to City Council http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2006/05/08/18219341.php?show_comments=1#18219371 to which Councilmembers Coonerty and Rotkin angrily replied.
The community was successful in stopping police state action in the Drummer's Circle, though initially police were successful in intimidating folks from using the public space (http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2008/01/03/18469844.php ). Will police fear and force be successfully overcome here as well? Time and the community's response will tell.
I will be playing an audio account of the evening on my Sunday show March 23rd at 10 AM. Tune in to http://www.freakradio.org or 101.1 FM (Free Radio Santa Cruz) to hear how police are spending city money, and the kind of activity Councilmember Emily Reilly--now running for the State Assembly) is supporting.
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
Did The National Law Center for Homelessness and Poverty ever come out to Santa Cruz as Coonerty suggested? Did they do an independent evaluation of services offered by the city above it's responsibility versus the county?
Heres the video
enjoy!
Look another edited version of brats protesting a law they don't understand. Then there is ol' Knobert injecting himself, pumping these sheep with false courage, then driving back to his house that mommie paid for. They should have arrested the producer for the video. Did someone take an internet filming class? Absolute Garbage!
If you don't like the law, do something about it other then acting like an idiot, and blaming the police for the law they were asked to enforce.
Get a petition, talk to council, do something productive.
If you don't like the law, do something about it other then acting like an idiot, and blaming the police for the law they were asked to enforce.
Get a petition, talk to council, do something productive.
Look a the clown get involved and heard the lambs to break the law. Time for someone to do his civic duty and utilize the appropriate channels to contest a law they don't like.
Enstead he pumps a special needs film student to violate the law.
Nice.
Enstead he pumps a special needs film student to violate the law.
Nice.
Would you please enlighten all of us as to what here in Santa Cruz is separate but equal that you are against?
Robert, once again, your highly, highly biased "reporting" is almost completely shattered by actual video of the event. You state that the video was initially greeted by "angry denunciations" from city workers. What I saw were two guys, whose job it is to clean up the filth that people leave behind, trying to calmly explain how their lives are impacted by people using parking lots and garages as personal living spaces. I thought they were being really cool about it, trying to reason with the punk kid who enjoys not having to earn a living while he carpetbags his way into city policy during his down time from bong hits up at his dorm.
What DID happen is incredibly telling- the moment, and I mean, the MOMENT that you showed up, they said something like "That's where you went wrong" (as in, by inviting you to the party) and immediately left as you had your recorder swinging in the wind. I could see, if I were you and as jaundiced and biased as you are, that it would seem like they were angrily denouncing these kids, when in fact they were angrily denouncing you.
And you know that I've got issues with this ordinance, but you said it best- this is the first time you are aware that an actual ticket has been given out. And the only other arrest was made during a similar purposeful confrontation. So far the law has not been used, by your own admission, as a way to go back to "Jim Crow" laws, this time against homeless as opposed to blacks.
(and by the way, for a pompous, whiny, know-it-all white kid from Orange County to use such a serious racial symbol as Jim Crow for this American Studies project-turned protest is incredibly offensive)
The rhetoric you use hurts your cause, Robert. I've said it before, but your type of "when did you stop beating your wife" questioning is something that turns everyone off from you (except for newbies like this kid who hasn't learned yet). You have your worldview ("pain compliance hold", not really, "rushed to and from the microphone", not really, "angry denunciations", not really) and you won't let go, and that's why folks run away from you like these workers did.
What DID happen is incredibly telling- the moment, and I mean, the MOMENT that you showed up, they said something like "That's where you went wrong" (as in, by inviting you to the party) and immediately left as you had your recorder swinging in the wind. I could see, if I were you and as jaundiced and biased as you are, that it would seem like they were angrily denouncing these kids, when in fact they were angrily denouncing you.
And you know that I've got issues with this ordinance, but you said it best- this is the first time you are aware that an actual ticket has been given out. And the only other arrest was made during a similar purposeful confrontation. So far the law has not been used, by your own admission, as a way to go back to "Jim Crow" laws, this time against homeless as opposed to blacks.
(and by the way, for a pompous, whiny, know-it-all white kid from Orange County to use such a serious racial symbol as Jim Crow for this American Studies project-turned protest is incredibly offensive)
The rhetoric you use hurts your cause, Robert. I've said it before, but your type of "when did you stop beating your wife" questioning is something that turns everyone off from you (except for newbies like this kid who hasn't learned yet). You have your worldview ("pain compliance hold", not really, "rushed to and from the microphone", not really, "angry denunciations", not really) and you won't let go, and that's why folks run away from you like these workers did.
One, I believe CJ Stock got a ticket under this law first, homeless and had been playing downtown for 20 years. I will have to double check.
Regardless the only reason they have given out only one or two tickets is due to the large amount of support around the drum circle. The police did waste your money surveying the drummers, giving out numerous warnings, but in the end it was the Trash Orch, the people from the market, protesters and supporters that stopped citations every week, where the law is broken consistently. Our mayor says he cannot tell the police not to selectivity enforce a law he voted for. He can tell his concerns to the DA and to the police, if had he any balls. Selective enforcement is against the law. These people simply did not have the numbers to stop the dispersement. Wasn't my kind of thing but they were not shooting up dope or drinking. One of the City Workers first question was " Have you served in the military?" and had spoken to them before. I think they know where he is coming from.
The lack of tickets also shows the concerns about the homeless and other concerns for which this law was aimed, was never as big of a problem to begin with. Another huge waste of resources and tax money. The costs of the signs, time, money, surveillance is ridicules. Had this been aimed at a real threat to public safety, you would see lots of tickets. Or when they get the A-OK to go and use brute force to cite people in numbers for doing nothing wrong.
But those of you who seem to support this law, which has done nothing but waste money, and disperse a peaceful event that was not loud nor violent take joy in its selective enforcement. It seems are police can only handle kids in small numbers.
Regardless the only reason they have given out only one or two tickets is due to the large amount of support around the drum circle. The police did waste your money surveying the drummers, giving out numerous warnings, but in the end it was the Trash Orch, the people from the market, protesters and supporters that stopped citations every week, where the law is broken consistently. Our mayor says he cannot tell the police not to selectivity enforce a law he voted for. He can tell his concerns to the DA and to the police, if had he any balls. Selective enforcement is against the law. These people simply did not have the numbers to stop the dispersement. Wasn't my kind of thing but they were not shooting up dope or drinking. One of the City Workers first question was " Have you served in the military?" and had spoken to them before. I think they know where he is coming from.
The lack of tickets also shows the concerns about the homeless and other concerns for which this law was aimed, was never as big of a problem to begin with. Another huge waste of resources and tax money. The costs of the signs, time, money, surveillance is ridicules. Had this been aimed at a real threat to public safety, you would see lots of tickets. Or when they get the A-OK to go and use brute force to cite people in numbers for doing nothing wrong.
But those of you who seem to support this law, which has done nothing but waste money, and disperse a peaceful event that was not loud nor violent take joy in its selective enforcement. It seems are police can only handle kids in small numbers.
yes i made a typo meant to say "Our police"
Lets get passed the name calling, the countless childish comments and talk about the law. You say the kids don't understand it. I agree. but for different reasons I am guessing. I have watched you post anonymously for a long time. I have never heard any real reason for your comments, accept to put some person down. You imply you understand this law. Thats good. That means we can have real dialog. A fair debate, or possible agreement. So, are you for or against this law and why? Is it constitutional and why? If your against the law, but just don't like Robert and other people against it, then please tell us why so meaningful dialog can replace childish remarks and we can talk about a law that must have some meaning to you, since you spend so much time working yon it.
I would rather see some dialog come from these posts, agree or not, it doesn't mean we cant debate and even come up with new ideas rather then put people down and stray from the real issue. Remember, any publicity is good publicity. So, even when you talk bad about Robert, your still helping him in a sense. Lets get into some intelligent dialog about this law. Are you capable?
Tim Rumford
I would rather see some dialog come from these posts, agree or not, it doesn't mean we cant debate and even come up with new ideas rather then put people down and stray from the real issue. Remember, any publicity is good publicity. So, even when you talk bad about Robert, your still helping him in a sense. Lets get into some intelligent dialog about this law. Are you capable?
Tim Rumford
Give it a rest, hecklers, until you've tried those "proper channels" yourself. Not only are those channels -- petitions, appeals to council, letters to reps, letters to the Senile editor -- put there to channel your energy away from direct action in the face of violations of your constitutional rights, they are simple ineffective.
If those "proper channels" were actually effective in changing the status quo and who holds power, do you believe they would still be the institutional prescription for disgruntled citizens?
Also, admit for the merest moment that you sitting behind your computer in your cushy office job or home, may not be the usual targets for the laws that curtail the rights we all supposedly share.
If those "proper channels" were actually effective in changing the status quo and who holds power, do you believe they would still be the institutional prescription for disgruntled citizens?
Also, admit for the merest moment that you sitting behind your computer in your cushy office job or home, may not be the usual targets for the laws that curtail the rights we all supposedly share.
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$75.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network