Newsroom: (541) 346-5511
Suite 300, Erb Memorial Union
P.O. Box 3159, Eugene, OR 97403
E-mail: editor@dailyemerald.com
Online: www.dailyemerald.com
Oregon Daily Emerald
Editor in Chief:
Brad Schmidt
Managing Editor:
Jan Tobias Montry
Editorial Editor:
Peter Hockaday
Monday, April 5, 2004
EDITORIAL
EPD officers
lack causes,
abuse power
in searches
In January, newly hired Eugene Police Chief Robert M.
Lehner replaced the interim police chief after the city went
two years without a permanent figurehead.
Shortly after beginning his tenure, Lehner told the
Emerald that he considered the University "... just an
other set of neighborhoods" and emphasized his strong
desire to work and form partnerships with neighbor
hood groups in Eugene.
In February, the Emerald Editorial Board met with Lehn
er and talked about several aspects of his job and philoso
phies. During that discussion, Lehner assured us that any
policy changes at EPD would be guided by the communi
ty's priorities.
To sum up his viewpoint, Lehner explained that, ulti
mately, he wanted to strive for a community-driven po
lice force.
"I am just the driver of the bus," he said. "I don't deter
mine where the bus goes."
We sure hope Lehner can make good on his promise. Be
cause instead of being treated like any other community
group, it seems EPD's policy regarding students thus far has
been "guilty until proven innocent" along with the infamous
"sorry, the Fourth Amendment doesn't apply to you."
Consider: Roger Eugene Magana — a former EPD offi
cef who has been indicted on 51 charges ranging from rape
to kidnapping to official misconduct in separate incidents
— joined officer Melvin Thompson to investigate a noise
complaint at a students' residence.
The two officers arrived at the apartment of Phillip Piper
and Julie Dickenson on Nov. 6,2002, knocked on the door
and obscured the peephole when Piper came to answer it,
according to an official complaint. When the officers final
ly identified themselves, Piper became suspicious of their
actions and refused to open the door without a warrant or
visual identification.
The officers then contacted Eric Bradley, a tenant who
was working as a maintenance person, and demanded a
key to Piper and Dickenson's apartment. According to the
complaint, Bradley initially refused, but gave up the key af
ter the officers convinced him it was in his best interest.
Back at the scene of the "crime," the officers entered the
apartment, ordered the people inside to sit on the couch
and ransacked the rooms for more than an hour.
Nothing was found. No party was in progress. No meth
was on the cooker.
The officers cited the tenants for a noise violation, which
was later dropped in Eugene Municipal Court. The tenants,
who have since sued, said the only noise coming from their
apartment was a radio that wasn't even playing very loudly.
In June 2003, charges against University senior Patrick
McEachern were dropped after a judge ruled evidence
gathered against him was illegally uncovered. The
charges of furnishing alcohol to minors, possession of
less than an ounce of marijuana and minor in posses
sion stemmed from a party McEachern hosted at his
Ducks Village apartment. When an EPD officer arrived
at the party and couldn't get anybody to answer the door,
he climbed onto the second-floor balcony and entered
through a door. The officer then unlocked the front door
and let other officers inside.
Eugene Municipal Court Judge Alan J. Leiman ruled that
the officers lacked probable cause or a search warrant, and
therefore the search was illegal.
Fast forward to February, this time under Lehner's watch.
Undercover EPD officers, disguised as party-goers, infiltrat
ed a gathering in the West University neighborhood in
hopes of witnessing the unlawful sale of alcohol. The basis
of their suspicions? A keg, obtained legally, was registered
to the address. Their reasoning? To prevent a riot.
The fact that the students in all these examples may or
may not have been committing a crime is irrelevant. What's
important is that the police follow procedures that secure
the rights of the innocent (i.e., anybody accused of a crime
or suspected of a crime) until they are proven guilty in a
court of law. When police fail to fulfill that imperative part
of their job, they are ignoring a most basic tenant of public
safety — not to mention the U.S. Constitution.
HiiiiiiriJittaifiifigi
.T.
Steve Baggs Illustrator
Check your hat at the door
Growing up outside Atlanta, the only
time I was allowed to wear a hat at school
was when the local baseball team was in the
playoffs. It seems rather humorous to me
now, but you have to consider the time I was
in middle school and how bad Atlanta had
actually been in the past. When the team
played the Pirates, everyone showed up with
their rally caps. It was a privilege to wear a
hat because school policies forbade it. That
was the rule No game, no hats.
Now people are calling to question pub
lic schools' rules about dress codes, saying
such rules violate religious freedom. In
Muskogee, Okla., an 11-year-old girl was
suspended for continuing to wear her
Muslim head scarf to school. But have no
fear, the federal government stepped in to
side with the young girl, saying the policy
infringes on the girl's civil rights.
After the suspensions were upheld by a
district hearing, the girl's parents decided
to sue the school district for $80,000, and
now the federal government wants to
make sure her parents get that money.
What a wonderful use of tax dollars. I sup
pose $80,000 is a good amount for reli
gious discrimination, but I don't really
think that occurred.
. The school stands by its interpretation
of the policy, with good reason. First of all,
the school is not discriminating based on
religion. Headdresses of any religion are
not welcomed. This is not discrimination;
it's the rule. Second of all, the policy is in
place because hats and bandanas are seen
as distracting in the classroom. Also, they
are often linked to current problems of
Marissa Jones
Cry me a river
gang activity in schools. Religious groups
might not be viewed as gangs, but can you
think of anywhere in the world where peo
ple kill each other because of different reli
gious viewpoints and fight over religious
territory? Starting to resemble gangs?
So what is the answer? If Nashala gets to
wear a hijab (head scarf), then Abraham
will want to wear a yarmulke and who
knows, maybe John will want to wear a
thorny crown. That should make for a fun
recess. Now, if little Suzanne wants to wear
her Atlanta cap, assuming it's not a playoff
day, she'd be out of luck. That's fair, right?
The question, really, is why does religion
not play by the mles? The policy applies to
all children, except those with a religious
affiliation that has "head gear" as part of
its belief system. That is discrimination.
The rule either applies to all or none,
and in this case, the Muskogee Public
School District chose to apply it to all. Of
course, the school district has a little bit of
a battle. The state of Oklahoma passed the
Religious Freedom Act in 2000, which
states "no governmental entity shall
substantially burden a person's free exer
cise of religion even if the burden results
from a mle of general applicability."
Many states began to pass these reli
gious freedom acts as a result of schools
taking out phrases from the Pledge of Al
legiance, such as "one nation under God."
In Oklahoma, prisoners were being pun
ished because of their religious belief
against haircuts. The RFA provided relief
for these criminals.‘Was Oklahoma really
looking to become a sanctuary for all reli
gions or trying to prevent prison beatings
and get the Bible back in schools? Let me
also note that in the RFA it is stated that in
terpretations of the act are not to be mis
construed to "authorize same-sex mar
riages." Well if that doesn't say "freedom,"
I don't know what does!
Maybe the Muskogee School District is
out of luck because of the RFA, but the art
lends itself to more questions about the
mixture of religion and state. You don't
need a religious affiliation to get married,
so why should same-sex marriages be
shunned in a governmental document
outlining religious freedoms?
It is time to let rules be rules and to not
allow religion to be an exception. The bad
news is sometimes you have to work on
Sunday, you don't get religious holidays
off (remember, it's called "winter break"),
and sometimes you have to leave your hat
at home.
Contact the columnist
at marissajones@dailyemerald.com.
Her opinions do not necessarily
represent those of the Emerald.
ONLINE POLL
Each week, the Emerald runs an online
poll and publishes the results, along with
next week’s question, in this space.
Visit http://www.dailyemerald.com to
vote.
Last question: What was your reaction to
President Bush’s humorous references
to the hunt for weapons of mass
destruction?
Results: 62 votes.
I was offended, it isn’t a joking matter:
61.3 percent or 38 votes.
I don’t care, it was politics as usual: 14.5
percent or nine votes.
I thought it was funny: 24.2 percent or
15 votes.
This week: Will you be voting in the ASUO
primary elections this year?
Choices: Yes - So few people vote that I
know my vote will count; Yes -1 support
the democratic process; No -1 don’t
know enough about the issues; No - Why
waste my time?