Street Roots • Feb. 24-March 2, 2017
News
Stunned: Matt Klug's
saga with Portland
police finally ends
Klug vs. PPB
March 13: Klug files a tort claim. The claim is against city and
county agencies and individual officers, seeking $5 million in
damages for alleged psychiatric injury and emotional distress from
his interaction with police, and lasting physical ailments from
being Tasered and contracting MRSA in the county jail. As a
former paralegal, he was able to compose the documents himself.
He could not find an attorney that would take his case. This
triggers the police department’s Internal Affairs to conduct an
investigation into the altercation.
BY EMILY GREEN
S T A F F W R IT E R
T ^ \ o r the first time in 14 years, Portland City Council
was called upon Wednesday to issue a decision in
a citizen complaint against the Police Bureau. This
only happens when the Citizen Review Committee and
police cannot come to a consensus.
The complaint stemmed from an incident on Sept 17,
2014 when Matt Klug was involved in a road-rage-fueled
altercation with a motorist while he was riding his
bicycle in Northwest Portland. He began yelling at a
PHO TO BY EM ILY GREEN
female motorist after she allegedly struck his bike. A
member of the police bureau witnessed the incident
findings to exonerate, but this decision doesn’t mean the
The Citizen Review Committee challenged Police
officer definitively broke from policy either.
Bureau findings to exonerate officer Bradley Nutting
Commissioners felt they didn’t have enough evidence to
who used a Taser on Klug following the incident,
draw a conclusion either way and there was no
claiming the officer used excessive force. The motorist
recommended discipline.
declined to press charges.
Commissioners found it difficult to decipher exactly
Klug has epilepsy, a diagnosed mental illness and a
what was happening in a witness-provided grainy video
traumatic brain injury.
reviewed at the hearing.
According to witness statements taken on the scene
Mayor Ted Wheeler and Commissioner Dan Saltzman
and during a follow-up investigation, Klug was exhibiting
were the two dissenting votes, sticking by their earlier -
behavior that led them to believe he was in the throes of votes to exonerate?
a mental health crisis immediately before Portland
T his com es one day after W heeler released a
police deployed the Taser multiple times. W itnesses also sta te m en t th a t said, “I ra n on a p latfo rm o f police
stated they believed the use of a Taser was unnecessary.
accountability and lintend to see itthrough.”
X
R ecords show th e T aser discharged six tim es, b u t it
remains unclear whether Klug was Tased four, five or six
times. What is known is that at least three of the
discharges occurred while he was on the ground, pinned
down by three officers who were attempting to handcuff
him.
The entire incident occurred over the course of
approximately 15 seconds. After being pulling over on
his bicycle, Klug began yelling and throwing the
contents of his pockets on the ground. Three police
pushed him against a wall to cuff him. He struggled,
with arms flailing, so they used a Taser citing that he
appeared like he might try to strike an officer. He fell to
the ground, and as he kicked, they continued to
discharge the Taser.
The final charge was accidental, and Police Chief
Mike Marshman said it was due to the poor design of
the Taser model, which was being tested in the field at
that time. Since then, the bureau has fully adopted that
model. Because the Taser probes were still attached to
Klug’s back, it can be concluded the accidental discharge
made contact
The Citizen Review Committee felt that because the
bureau’s Taser directive clearly prohibits the use of a
stun gun on a handcuffed or otherwise restrained
subject, “for example a subject being held to the ground
by multiple officers,” the use of the Taser went against
|
Sept. 17 Matt Klug is Tasered. Matt Klug has an altercation with a
motorist, and then police pull him over on his bike and use a
Taser on him repeatedly.
Officers Taser a m an with epilepsy and a
diagnosed mental illness at least fo u r times,
commissioners vote against exoneration
,
Page 7
Com m issioner F ritz w as th e only com m issioner who
voted to sustain th e decision of th e Citizen Review
Committee, but changed her vote so the council could
come to a decision - otherwise the bureau’s findings
would stand by default.
Both commissioners Nick Fish and Chloe Eudaly
voiced concerns about the number of times the Taser
was deployed. Fish said he was struck by the history of
this case.
“This case has become the poster child for delays
with the CRC process,” Citizen Review Committee Chair
Kristin Malone told commissioners.
It’s been nearly two and a half years since the incident
occurred.
S
Street Roots began following Klug’s case to see how
the city was handling a complaint that appeared to
mirror the issues the Department of Justice said it >
needed to fix.
In 2012 the U.S. Department of Justice found
Portland police had a “pattern and practice” of using
excessive force, including unjustified stun gun use,
against people .with mental illness.
This is exactly what a tort claim filed by Klug in
March of 2015 alleged.
A string of dubious setbacks in his case (see timeline)
not only illustrate failures in the city’s handling of an
excessive force complaint against its police bureau, but
also the bureau’s detachment from people on the other
policy.
.
end of the stun guns it deploys.
Marshman argued that Klug was exhibiting active
According to targets set by the Department of Justice,
aggression - which allows for stun gun usage - and that
Klug’s
case should have been closed in October 2015.
the officers did not have him in their control. It became
Malone told commissioners that Klug’s case “is an
clear at the hearing that there is a gray area between
example of how much of that timeline is out-of Citizen
what constitutes resisting arrest and active aggression.
Review Committee control.” She pointed to the length
Marshman also argued that a Taser is a step below
of time the investigation sat with the bureau, how it was
more escalated actions such as punching or striking a
the police bureau that didn’t show up to one of the
subject with a baton, which have residual effects, where
appeal hearings causing it to be rescheduled, and that it
a Taser does not.
,
was the bureau that supplied the wrong Taser directive,
Commissioner Amanda Fritz said some people would
which led to another vote in which the Citizen Review
argue that Taser’s do have residual effects and that its
Committee reversed it’s original decision to agree with
impact should not be minimized.
(
•
bureau findings to exonerate.
City Council voted 3-2 to not sustain the bureaus
April 28: Portland’s Independent Police Review starts its
investigation. According to targets set by the Department o f.
Justice settlement, the case should be resolved within 159 days of *
this date, or if there is an appeal, within 180 days.
May 5: Klug agrees to drop his lawsuit in exchange for the
Multnomah County District Attorney’s Office dropping the charqes
against him.
June 30: PPB Internal Affairs completes its investigation. The
only third party witness it re-interviewed was a security guard.
Other witnesses that originally said they though police used
excessive force were not contacted. Internal Affairs determined
that both officers involved should be exonerated, and then sent its
conclusion to the Independent Police Review Board for review.
The next month, both Internal Affairs and the IPR approved the
investigation.
Oct. 7: Klug goes before the Citizen Review Committee to
appeal the decision to exonerate the officers. The police bureau
supplied the CRC with an outdated version of the Taser rules -
which contained no dates - for consideration. At this hearing,
Klug’s advocate noted that investigators failed to interview the
three civilian witnesses', some of whose statements were not
consistent with the police reports. The committee then sent the
case back to the police bureau for further investigation.
Oct. 26, 2015 - Target date for the completion of Klug’s case.
This, includes the extra tirng^lattgd fgr an appeal. ■ . <
> ,,
A pril 20: Klug has his second appeal hearing; No one from fhe
police bureau showed up, citing safety concerns following a CRC
meeting where an audience member threw water at a CRC
member on March 30. The appeal hearing was rescheduled.
May 4: Klug gets his second appeal hearing. Back from its
second investigation, the bureau has determined that while both
officers should be exonerated, one should be debriefed. Klug has
brought with him the correct copy of the Taser rules, repeatedly
telling the committee they were considering his case while looking
at an outdated version of the rules. The committee refused to look
at the evidence he had brought with him, assuring him that the
bureau had given them the correct paperwork. When a Police
Bureau lieutenant offered to list the dates the rules had been
revised - which would have indicated Klug had the correct version
- acting committee Chair Julie Ramos said no.
May 6: The mistake is acknowledged and the police bureau said
that the incorrect directive was used. A new review is initiated.
June 22: Exoneration upheld.
Sept. 7: Klug’s final appeal. Klug comes before the CRC for the
fourth time to appeal the exoneration of the officer he alleges
used excessive force against him by repeatedly using the Taser.
This time, when looking at the correct Taser rules, the CRC
agrees that excessive force was used, and voted to challenge
police findings, sending it back to internal affairs.
Dec. 7: Citizen Review Committee challenges police findings.
Police Chief Mike Marshman tells the committee that it stands by
its findings of exoneration with debriefing. The committee
disagrees, particularly because it has been revealed the final
“accidental” deployment of the Taser was due to inadequate
training on a new model the department was “experimenting” with.
Because no consensus can be reached, the case is sent to
Portland City Council for a final decision. The hearing is
scheduled for Jan. 19.
Dec. 27: The Independent Police Review reschedules the
hearing.
Feb. 22: City Council Hearing. Portland City Council votes 3-2 not
to sustain the bureau’s findings to exonerate, but declined to
suggest any discipline in the case. Citizen Review Committee
Chair Kristin Malone told the city commissioners that the case
“has become the poster child for delays with the CRC process.”
E rd