• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Medfor Pre-crimes Unit

We-the-People

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
2,222
Location
White City, Oregon, USA
imported post

I certainly hope that there is a MAJOR factual piece of the story missing (par for the course with the Mail Tribune here). If not, just more evidence that the police state is not coming but rather, is here.

If you read that article carefully, you'll see that he was NOT arrested but instead taken into "protective custody". Sounds like they probably didn't have a search warrant, let alone an arrest warrant, and the victim was coerced/intimidated into "voluntarilly" submitting to being placed on a mental hold or some such.

Yeah, with the SWAT team outside your door and the "negotiator" saying, "please come out so no one gets hurt" the average citizen is going to "volunteer".

My door? The answer they would receive is "No warrant? Go away! I'm hanging up and calling the FBI as I fear that my civil rights are about to be forcibly violated". (to the sound of my weapons being loaded.
 

SKN

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2008
Messages
21
Location
, ,
imported post

Not enough info but I'd speculate that based on the info from his former state agency employer, combined with his purchases, he was probably contacted for the purpose of evaluating his psychiatric condition for which he can be placed on a police hold, and for which his firearms may be seized without a warrant.

You call the FBI, they over hear you're loading or you tell them that you are, and you'll be talking to their negotiator who'll relay their evaluation of your psychiatric condition to the officers on scene as they ask you to surrender to the officers outside your door. Next thing you know, your neighbors are evac'd, your neighborhood is shut down, the situational protocols are followed to resolution and the local and assisting agencies payout a lot of taxpayer money in OT. But, hey, knock yourself out. :banghead:
 

We-the-People

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
2,222
Location
White City, Oregon, USA
imported post

No warrant.....GET LOST. Without a court signed order or criminal activity, they are NOT taking me or my property. Nor my wife or her property (her words).

Showing up outside my door with a SWAT team and other armed agents of the state, without the constitutionally required warrant for my arrest, is most certainly sufficient for a reasonable person to preparethemselves against the possibility of an illegal assault.

If they had any idea of that I had weaponson hand (and that's why they were there), they certainly would not contemplate such an assault as no police force policy that I am aware of calls for storming a building, especially without a warrant, when the occupants are known to be armed and aware of your presence.

Loading my weapons, inside my home, is a perfectly normal activity which is done on a daily basis. Doing so when faced with the possibility of a home invasion is certainly a reasonable action.

Now, should these armed agents of the government have the constitutionally required warrant, I'd simply ask that they provide it to my lawyer (they're not in a hurry if they didn't kick my door down) and when my attorney informs me thattheir paperwork is in order I would step out of my home, locking the door behind me (unless said warrant included a search of my abode).

You see, the problem with this Medford story is that the officers had no probable cause, no reasonable suspicion, sure they were worried and suspicious but such things must be reasonable. Had they had probably cause or reasonable suspicion, they would have gone to a court and had a judge sign their permission slip.

But instead, while well intentioned, they intimidated a citizen into forfeiting his constitutional rights by use of unlawful force (the presence of a large body of armed government provacateurs).

It can not be allowed to stand and good men must stand up to the abuses.
 

cassterr

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2010
Messages
24
Location
Beaverton, Oregon, USA
imported post

To me it sounded like he got upset about something at work and probably threatened to kill someone. Instead of firing him, the company put him on medical leave so he could calm down. That further aggravated him causing him to tell someone he was going to buy a bunch of guns and kill everyone at work. Someone called the police and after the police saw that he had bought 3 guns like he said he was going to, they talked him into seeing a psychiatrist in a hospital so that he didn't take the next step and murder everyone at his place of work.

Maybe that theory is far fetched but I would hope the police department wouldn't take someone into custody just for purchasing firearms. I do however think it is plausible for them to take someone into psychiatric custody for evaluation if said person is telling everyone at their place of employment that they are going to go out, buy guns, and then come kill everyone. After all if the employer and or employees testified that he was "planning to retaliate against his employers" and then he started to act upon those plans I could see why the police department would be "extremely concerned" about it.
 

We-the-People

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
2,222
Location
White City, Oregon, USA
imported post

Well we can all hope. But I've really lost my ability to give benefit of the doubt to the government agents. That's a sad thing since I grew up in a law enforcement household, used to be a deputized member of a sheriffs dept., used to build and maintain cop cars, basically liked the cops and sided with them.

Then I became "one of them"....the people that demand their rights not be trampled.

Just today I was asked for ID by a security guard no less. He wasn't happy that I wouldn't give it to him. Mind you I wasn't even carrying as I was at school. He was campus security but I was standing on the city sidewalk OUTSIDE the campus and he wanted ID because I asked some questions. When I refused, he wanted to know if I was a student. I told him I was and he then tried to say that because I was a student I had to give him ID. NOPE

Then came the story that he could call the police and I could be cited for "loitering" because I was standing stationary on the sidewalk. NOPE

Since it's finals and I was just there to work on a class project rather than being in class I was able to wait until he had to leave. I'm sure that had I entered the school he'd have then demanded ID again and I wasn't sure about declining then.

Bottom line...... I no longer trust police on the face of it. Most are quite professional but it only takes one to ruin your life.

I hope that there is a major piece missing from the story of the Medford ODOT employee, such as the threats you mentioned, but I won't hold my breath. Had there been a threat or threats, they would have shown up with a search warrant.

Those of us who live here in Medford need to stay on top of this and make sure that the PD's actions were reasonable, lawful, and NOT INTIMIDATION INTO COMPLIANCE.
 

SKN

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 24, 2008
Messages
21
Location
, ,
imported post

We-the-People wrote:
No warrant.....GET LOST. Without a court signed order or criminal activity, they are NOT taking me or my property. Nor my wife or her property (her words).

Showing up outside my door with a SWAT team and other armed agents of the state, without the constitutionally required warrant for my arrest, is most certainly sufficient for a reasonable person to preparethemselves against the possibility of an illegal assault.

If they had any idea of that I had weaponson hand (and that's why they were there), they certainly would not contemplate such an assault as no police force policy that I am aware of calls for storming a building, especially without a warrant, when the occupants are known to be armed and aware of your presence.

Loading my weapons, inside my home, is a perfectly normal activity which is done on a daily basis. Doing so when faced with the possibility of a home invasion is certainly a reasonable action.

Now, should these armed agents of the government have the constitutionally required warrant, I'd simply ask that they provide it to my lawyer (they're not in a hurry if they didn't kick my door down) and when my attorney informs me thattheir paperwork is in order I would step out of my home, locking the door behind me (unless said warrant included a search of my abode).

You see, the problem with this Medford story is that the officers had no probable cause, no reasonable suspicion, sure they were worried and suspicious but such things must be reasonable. Had they had probably cause or reasonable suspicion, they would have gone to a court and had a judge sign their permission slip.

But instead, while well intentioned, they intimidated a citizen into forfeiting his constitutional rights by use of unlawful force (the presence of a large body of armed government provacateurs).

It can not be allowed to stand and good men must stand up to the abuses.

Again, too few details contained in the story, but some points I'd ask youto consider:

There are lawful exemptions towarrant requirements. But don't take my word for it, consult an attorney or enroll in a class.

Unless you were on scene, there's no indication that the occupant was aware of the presence of tactical officers at o-dark thirty in the AM. It would be protocol to deploy covertly and establish a perimeter with an arrest team (4-6 personnel). BTDT more than a hundred times as a tactical officer for 22 years, once in a situation nearly identical to this one.

Not applicable to this incident but there are situations where tactical interventions areinitiated intostructures, based on exigent circumstances, without a warrant: hostage rescues, actively violent barricaded subjects, active shooters. BTDT more than a few times.

And based on the account, I'm not sure that the fact that he had weapons were the sole reason LE was there but certainly would have supported a more cautious approach to the inquiry into his mental condition.

And your observation of his being intimidated into forfeiting his rights is based on the presence of how many officers?

I will agree that good men must stand against abuse. I'm not sure, based on this press account,that this is.
 

We-the-People

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
2,222
Location
White City, Oregon, USA
imported post

The press account is very lacking, as seems to be any follow up.

Yes there are circumstances where warrants are not necessary but those you mentioned, and all I am aware of, require that a crime be in commission or that there is an immediate danger to someone.

It just smells fishy.

On the other hand, the local law enforcement is not known for a heavy hand most of the time. Then again, there have been incidents where they were definitely overbearing. Thankfully not to the level of some cities with their commando style entries.
 

We-the-People

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
2,222
Location
White City, Oregon, USA
imported post

New details on the incident. Two articles via KMED radio and the Bill Meyers show. Since the victims name was released in the media (the acticles themselves) I did not redact it.

http://www.kmed.com/pages/landing?3-9-10-EX-ODOT-EMPLOYEE-TAKEN-INTO-PROTE=1&blockID=194001&feedID=133


3-9-10 EX-ODOT EMPLOYEE TAKEN INTO PROTECTIVE CUSTODY AFTER MPD & SWAT MONITOR HIM SUNDAY FOR BUYING GUNS

Concerns about an Oregon Department of Transportation employee who purchased several guns after being placed on leave prompted law enforcement across Southern Oregon to step in. Negotiators and a SWAT team from Medford police safely took a man whose name wasn't released into protective custody Monday morning. He was taken to Rogue Valley Medical Center for a mental-health evaluation. The man recently had been placed on administrative leave from his job and was "very disgruntled," . ODOT Communications Director Patrick Cooney said there were administrative, personnel matters involved that limited what the department could discuss. Medford police Lt. Bob Hansen said in two days, the man bought a Heckler & Koch .45-caliber universal self-loading handgun, a Walther .380-caliber handgun and an AK-47 assault rifle, . All of those firearms were purchased legally, with required record checks by the Oregon State Police. Authorities were "extremely concerned" that the man may have been planning to retaliate against his employers.



AND http://www.kmed.com/pages/landing?3-11-10-ODOT-WORKER-ASKS-POLICE-FOR-RETU=1&blockID=195693&feedID=133


3-11-10 ODOT WORKER ASKS POLICE FOR RETURN OF SEIZED GUNS

David Pyle, the Medford man involved in Monday's SWAT team action, is requesting the return of his seized firearms. In the Monday morning incident, Pyles was taken into custody for a mental health evaluation, and later released. His firearms were seized by Medford police, however no charges were filed.

Pyle was reportedly placed on administrative leave from his position at the Oregon Department of Transportation, and has been working from home. Law enforcement officials had expressed concerns regarding his mental state after the work action, and that he had purchased a number of handguns shortly thereafter.

Kevin Starrett of Oregon Firearms Federation tells KMED news that Pyle explained to him that he had received a tax refund, and had been in the market for the firearms for some time.

The following is the email text:

Dear Detective Sergeant Clauson & Detective Ford:

I am writing to respectfullyrequest and demandthe immediate return of the personal property I understand and allege was taken from my residence on Monday, March 8, 2010 by the Medford Police Department. I would appreciate the MefordPD's returning my personal property to me today at my home at your earliest convenience. If it is more convenient for you and the public tax payer's dime, I am also available after 5 p.m. today, to come down to the Medford Police Station to acquire my personal property.

I appreciate the Medford Police Department's immediate attentionto this request. Please replyby a written statement tothis correspondence,if you have questions regarding this e-mail. Thank you.

Respectfully,
David J. Pyle
 

We-the-People

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
2,222
Location
White City, Oregon, USA
imported post

Okay, here are the links to all the sources I could find, in chronological order,including a Medford PD "media release" at 10am the morning they dragged this man from his home and illegally seized his property.

Also a radio interview with Kevin Starrett of Oregon Firearms Federation with Bill Meyers (local talk radio host). Apparently the victim called Kevin for help finding legal counsel.

Medford PD “Media Release” dated March 8, 2010 @ 10:03am by Lt. Bob Hansen[/b]

http://www.ci.medford.or.us/News.asp?NewsID=2800



Bill Meyers (KMED Bill Meyers show) talks with Kevin Starrett of Oregon Firearms Federation about the incident.[/b]

http://www.kmed.com/common/global_audio/51/17296.mp3



Medford Mail Tribune, March 9, 2010, by Anita Burke[/b]

Police act swiftly after gun purchases[/b]

ODOT worker who'd been put on leave is mentally evaluated after buying handguns, AK-47[/b]

http://www.mailtribune.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100309/NEWS/3090315/-1/NEWS



3-9-10 EX-ODOT EMPLOYEE TAKEN INTO PROTECTIVE CUSTODY AFTER MPD & SWAT MONITOR HIM SUNDAY FOR BUYING GUNS
[/b]http://www.kmed.com/pages/landing?3-9-10-EX-ODOT-EMPLOYEE-TAKEN-INTO-PROTE=1&blockID=194001&feedID=133

KMED March 11, 2010[/b]

ODOT WORKER ASKS POLICE FOR RETURN OF SEIZED GUNS [/b]

http://www.kmed.com/pages/landing?3-11-10-ODOT-WORKER-ASKS-POLICE-FOR-RETU=1&blockID=195693&feedID=133
 

cassterr

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2010
Messages
24
Location
Beaverton, Oregon, USA
imported post

The scenario they depicted in that audio file is scary. Especially how they say this could be the "new face of gun-control." Clearly my theory giving the police department the benefit of the doubt was wrong. We need names. We need numbers. I'm ready to write some letters and make some calls to demand justice. It is wrong to arrest without probable cause. It is wrong to search and seize without a warrant. It is wrong to force someone to take a mental health evaluation without a lawyer. It is wrong to have the option of forcefully drugging you if you don't cooperate.

If you call 911 for help and the person on the other end of the line is standing outside your home with 50 other people who are all pointing guns at you, who do you call?
 

We-the-People

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
2,222
Location
White City, Oregon, USA
imported post

I posted an alert on my Southern Oregon Second Amendment Supporters web site last night with all of the contact info. Since it's only for Southern Oregonians (and PRK folks who come here) I'll just paste it here.

For anyone in the Southern Oregon area (Grants Pass and South though not set in stone) interested, drop me a PM and I'll get you the link to check it out of join up.

Here's the contact info (if it pastes properly). Phone numbers are all 541 area code.

CONTACT INFORMATION:



CITY OF MEDFORD

Mayor Gary Wheeler WORK: 541-779-2095 Mayor@ci.medford.or.us

Council members [email]council@ci.medford.or.us[/email]

-----Chris Corcoran CELL: 449-1552

-----Al Densmore WORK: 770-5115

-----Dick Gordon WORK: 779-0328

-----Greg Jones HOME: 770-5020

-----James Kuntz HOME 770-5515

-----Jill Stout HOME: 282-5896

-----Bob Strosser WORK: 608-2034

-----Ben Truwe HOME: 773-8369

CITY MANAGER – Michael Dyal WORK 774-2000 citymanager@ci.medford.or.us



Jackson County Sheriffs Department
SHERIFF: Mike Winters winterms@jacksoncounty.org

UNDERSHERIFF: Rod Countryman countrrl@jacksoncounty.org

ADMINSTRATION PHONE: 541-774-6818
PHONE: (541) 774-6800
FAX: (541) 776-7699
WEBSITE: http://www.co.jackson.or.us/SectionIndex.asp?SectionID=19

Medford Police Department
CHIEF: Randy Schoen

PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER: Lt. Bob Hansen PH: 541-774-2217
PHONE: 541-774-2200
PHONE: 541-774-2250
FAX: 541-774-2570
WEBSITE: http://www.ci.medford.or.us/SectionIndex.asp?SectionID=7
MISC INFO: Police@ci.medford.or.us


Oregon State Police (local barracks) Central Point Area Command
CHIEF: Lieutenant Brian Powers Lieutenant Brian Powers
PHONE: 541-776-6236
FAX: 541-664-8762
WEBSITE: http://www.oregon.gov/OSP/offices.shtml
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,331
Location
Valhalla

beavertonfirearms

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2010
Messages
18
Location
Aloha, Oregon, USA
imported post

Grapeshot wrote:

The mayor told the Mail Tribune newspaper he has complete confidence in the police department. What does that mean?


Yata hey


I read that as "I know they effed up, but I don't want to get my hands dirty because I want to be re-elected."
 

We-the-People

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
2,222
Location
White City, Oregon, USA
imported post

beavertonfirearms wrote:
Grapeshot wrote:

The mayor told the Mail Tribune newspaper he has complete confidence in the police department. What does that mean?

Yata hey


I read that as "I know they effed up, but I don't want to get my hands dirty because I want to be re-elected."
I think he's "standing behind them" hoping the stinky stuff doesn't get to him when it hits the fan.
 
Top