False Arrest
False Arrest, Veracity and a Matter of Personal Pride
Written October 26th, 2012
Published online November 5th 2012
Poem of November 5th.
Remember, remember the fifth of November
The Gunpowder, treason and plot!
I see of no reason why the gunpowder treason
Should ever be forgot!
8D02: Does this number mean anything to you? If you know what these numbers represent, I feel sorry for you, for you have suffered at the hands of the keepers of 8D02 and similar numbers. If you don't know what the numbers mean, 8D02 is the cell number I was locked into, May 3rd, 2012, in beautiful downtown Portland. Eighth floor, cell block D, cell 02.
The view is good from up there. From the South I could see the Willamette River and part of Waterfront Park. From the West I could see 2nd avenue and some of the park blocks. To the North my only view was of the paunchy, tobacco chewing, Styrofoam-cup spitting jail deputy. “Do as you're told DuPay and DON'T BUG ME! You're new home is over there in 8D02. Lunch is in an hour!” he barked at me.
I tossed the thin mattress I had been given onto the concrete slab that served as a “bed” and tried to arrange the meager blanket and cotton sheet into a position where I didn't bump my head on the concrete wall of the cell. It was a cell just like you see in the movies, room for two to sleep. One steel, noisy, flushing toilet, a sink, some kind of polished metal for a mirror, and an overhead light that was never turned off. The Jailers took my street clothing and gave me pink boxer shorts, pink socks, pink t-shirt, blue hospital style pants and a blue pull-over shirt with JAIL stenciled on the back.
I guess forcing grown men to wear pink is supposed to be humiliating. What other reason could there be? A shortage of blue cloth dye? Street shoes were not allowed and all prisoners walked around in plastic slippers. The cell door slammed shut locking me in. Fuck, I was pissed off! I'd done nothing wrong, been convicted of nothing, but there I was...locked up!
It's amazing how easily it is to become embroiled in neighborhood nonsense when you live in the section 8 ghetto of Gresham/Portland. I lived in an 8 unit apartment complex where the landlord, man in his early 60's, solicited low-income women for sex in lieu of rent; he once solicited my former daughter-in-law, when she was short of the entire amount due. She was insulted and did not appreciate nor take him up on his offer.
This was a trouble spot apartment, where police frequently responded to family beefs and reports of shots fired. One neighbor, a troubled Samoan man, and resident of the apartment complex, was arrested for firing his 9mm in a vacant lot nearby and then threatening police with a machete. He was subdued by a taser and carted off to the nut-house. A few weeks later, when he was released, he blew his brains out with the same 9mm pistol splattering himself all over his bedroom. Another of my neighbors, a Mexican man, hung himself in the garage next door to me. The body-bag people cut him down and carted him off in full view of the neighborhood kids.
March 15th, 2012, someone in the complex must have tossed a fire cracker or two out of a window. Later, witnesses at my court hearing said they heard a “pop” or “pinging” or “clanging” noise. I heard the noise too. It awakened me from my nap and I stood up and leaned out my bedroom window to see what had happened. Big mistake on my part. Witnesses then said they saw an older "grey-haired man” or it could have been a “woman” or even a “young man with black hair” shooting a gun out the window. They called police.
Oh really? I'm older and grey-haired. It must have been me they saw looking out the window for the origin of the noise. The responding police officer, a lady cop, Scherise Hobbs, did not knock on my door, to investigate or question me, but called a phone number she thought was mine instead. It wasn't. The phone was a business phone and listed to me legally, but often kept by my son, in much the same way many family members buy and pay for a phone but allow a family member to use it instead. She did speak to a man, but it was not me. She was talking to my son. The other Mr. DuPay.
When she identified herself as a police officer, my son was uncooperative, gruff, and hung up on her. I have trained him well. He doesn't talk to police and neither should you. Too often they want only to entrap you. The lady cop, having no success with the phone call, turned the phone over to a male police Sergeant, named Richard Braskett. He also made the presumption he was talking to me. He wasn't! My son hung up on him too. Good boy!
I went back to my nap, all was quiet, and the cops didn't knock on my door to investigate further. Not even once. Ask yourself this: does that behavior constitute good police work? Or even adequate police work? Certainly not from my standpoint, as a former Portland police officer and homicide Detective! It constitutes naivety, complacency and shoddy police work!
NEARLY TWO MONTHS LATER...
May 3rd, 2012, I'm walking barefooted, out to my mail box to check the morning mail, when I see this short, corpulent, beady-eyed guy wearing a bullet resistant vest that said POLICE on it and he's calling my name. Where do they get these weird looking cops nowadays? (I found out later, that this one was a transplant from Chicago) They didn't look like that back in my day! In my day, they were tall, athletic and generally attractive, many or most former military, like myself. “Hi,” he said, “I'm officer Dan Di Matteo. I have a warrant to search your residence and you're under arrest!” he told me nonchalantly.
I was handcuffed with my hands behind my back and stuffed into the back seat of a patrol car to await the results of the search. Was a barefooted old man an immediate physical threat? Did they really need to handcuff me with my hands behind my back? At 75-years-old I was completely cooperative. Amazed, but cooperative. Officer Dan Di Matteo also knew, at that time, that I was a former Portland police Detective. Would it have been too much to ask, to handcuff an old man, with his hands placed in front, in his lap?
I told Officer Dan Di Matteo that the handcuffs were too tight and they were, far too tight and painful. He came around to the back seat of the car and after opening the door, placed one finger through the loose area of the handcuff to see if they were too tight. “I can put a finger through” he told me. “They should be all right.” But they were still too tight and by the time I got to the precinct both my hands were numb, particularly my left hand.
All of that could have been avoided, by cuffing my hands in front. During my career, I recall several instances when I had to arrest older people for being drunk or people who were clearly no threat. I did so by handcuffing them with their hands placed in their lap. Not once did they try to escape or give me any shit. Its what Officer Dan Di Matteo ought to have done, considering my age, level of cooperation and my former profession, but I guess I must have scared the poor boy, despite my age, being that I'm obviously several inches taller than he is.
Turns out they were searching for the gun I must have fired and the resulting empty shell casings. I have a few firearms, long-guns and handguns I have acquired over the years. An “arsenal” according to the brand new prosecuting District Attorney girl, “one month on the job." I'm not sure what qualifies as an “arsenal” but I'm sure many sportsmen and long-time cops I've known and worked with might just have an “arsenal” of firearms far more impressive than anything I've acquired over the years.
Furthermore, my guns, if fired, would definitely not make a “popping” sound. My 12 gauge shot gun makes a big KA-BOOM. My .357 handgun makes a big BOOM. My 30-30 lever action rifle makes a big BOOM. I do have an antique .25 automatic pistol made in Spain in 1921. It might make a “popping” sound. It would that is if it could fire. It is inoperable, with no clip and no ammunition. It is an antique piece I was planning on framing and mounting on the wall, and is inoperable because parts are no longer made for that 1921 model.
My detective's mind knew there was no prosecutable case against me. No one, saw anyone commit any crime. And they certainly didn't see me commit any crime! Its not the kind of thing I would ever do! Supposed eye witnesses (on the witness stand) weren't sure exactly sure what they saw. Was it an “old grey-haired man” they saw? Or was it a “young man” they saw? Was it “dark hair” they saw? Was it a “woman” they saw? Eye witnesses are often unreliable...this Bench trial was a classic example of that tradition.
The made-up search warrant Officer Dan Di Matteo served, was a pure “fishing expedition” hoping to find what never existed in the first place! Now I had been arrested and turned over to the “safe keeping” of the paunchy, tobacco spitting, disgusting human being in charge of cell block 8D.
Since I knew and presumed there was no winnable case against me, I started to relax about that, but my detective's mind began wondering why it took them two months to decide to fuck with me. Hmmm...let me think of the possible reasons! Could it be that when I ran for Multnomah County Sheriff I was highly critical of the increasing "militarization" of the police within the ranks of the Portland Police Bureau?
With their jump suits, bald heads, endless paraphernalia (to avoid hands on police work) and jackboots? Could it be that I was a vocal and visible advocate for Medical Marijuana, appearing on a weekly cable TV program called “Cannabis Common Sense” for four and one half years? Could it be that I called tasers “electronic torture devices,” simply cattle prods with shorter handles that could not be trusted in the hands of police, both on the air and in print?
Could it be that if elected Sheriff I would have used the new but still vacant Wapato Jail as a homeless shelter, a school, a medical facility for the under served, and a safe place to legally grow medical marijuana? Or could it be because of published newspaper articles I had written, some over 15-years-ago, about the police bureau's Internal Affairs Division and how the unconstitutional “Secret Precinct” keeps law violators in blue uniforms from experiencing the same justice system you and I must face?
The article, “The Secret Precinct” published in 1995, in the Portland Free Press, is now available on my current website, located here...https://sites.google.com/a/pdx.edu/don-l-dupay/home Doesn't the 14th amendment to the constitution guarantee “Equal justice for all,” not special justice for police? Or could it be the lingering smudge on the bureau's integrity over the murder of Zebedee Manning, a 16-year-old black youth whose death I was assigned to investigate back in 1975, when I was a homicide detective; a murder written off by my racist, bigot supervisor as a suicide?
His killer is still out there and there is no statute of limitations on murder even if the killer might have been a cop! Author and newspaper columnist Phil Stanford, has written about Manning's suspicious death on more than one occasion as well. Are we both in danger from retaliatory police now? Stanford has received numerous death threats, from anonymous sources over his writing career. Who would benefit from Stanford not investigating the police corruption and official police misconduct that occurred all during 1975, other than retired or former law enforcement in general?
And there I sat in jail! All in all, there were a multitude of reasons the police might want to cause me grief, upon learning who I was. But the main reason, I think, was simply to make me look bad. Cops are like that, competitive, petty and often mean spirited. I learned that well in my nearly 18 years on the force!
On October 24th, 2012, (the day of the Bench Trial) my excellent trial lawyer Mr. Brandon Calhiem and I agreed that a bench trial would indeed be the best option for me. Multnomah county Judge Marilyn Litzenberger heard an older, feeble and confused witness mumble on the stand, trying to recall, which of the many second floor windows he may have seen someone fire a weapon. He admitted he could not identify anyone or remember exactly which apartment window it may have been. Another witness, decided the person in the window could have been a man or “a woman” with “grey hair” or maybe it was “black hair.” He also couldn't be sure. The third witness, a middle-aged woman could not identify me or anyone, and could not claim to have seen anything, but rather only "heard" what she presumed were gun shots. None of the three witnesses could positively identify me or anyone and none could say they had seen a face full-on where they could even identify the gender of the person!
Judge Litzenberger heard officer Dan Di Matteo, now dressed in a loose, ill fitting suit, but still corpulent, balding and beady-eyed trying to explain to her, (in his best imitation of a boy scout) and my attorney Brandon Calhiem, just why it took nearly “two full months” to arrest me. Astoundingly he told the court he was trying to “formulate a plan” that would be “safe” for all concerned. And yet, at no time, could he provide an explanation for what that plan entailed. He stammared for nearly five minutes, trying to defend the two month interval before an arrest was made, but could not provide any manner of explanation as to why it took so long or what was accomplished investigatively. When questioned by my attorney, he also admitted that no shell casings were ever recovered from my home or the back yard area. He stumbled over his words and was unconvincing, struggling while on the witness stand, through a faltering attempt to explain how he was trying to “formulate a plan” to arrest “Mr. DuPay” that would "protect the neighborhood, Mr. DuPay and the police themselves." A total of three times, Officer Dan Di Matteo stated that they needed to protect “the community” and “the neighbors” and “Mr. DuPay himself.”
Wow! His explanation was almost funny because I doubt it took “Seal Team 6” two entire months to figure out how to take down Osama Bin Laden, once they knew his whereabouts or exact location. Ultimately, the insinuation and condescension in those remarks were insulting. Did I have a history of violence to police or others? No! Did I have a history of mental disorder or any mental episodes or outbursts? No! Did I have a history of ever threatening anyone with violence or lethal weapons? No!
When Sgt. Richard Braskett was called to the stand he was asked by the prosecutor what "Mr. DuPay's demeanor" had seemed like while presumably speaking with him via the telephone. “He just seemed really unconcerned.” Yes, you read that correctly. Braskett stated Don DuPay was “unconcerned” with the phone call. Then the prosecutor asked, without missing a beat, “He wasn't in any way confrontational?” to which Sgt. Braskett replied “Well, I guess he was slightly confrontational.” So, you can be “unconcerned” about a telephone call and “slightly confrontational” at the same time? This statement by Sgt. Richard Braskett defies LOGIC! The essential point he failed to comprehend however, was that the Mr. DuPay he was speaking to was my son and not me!
During his initial testimony Officer Dan Di Matteo was asked by the prosecutor to explain what happened as he knew it. He provided the court with a simple explanation saying there were reports of shots fired in the neighborhood. “Did you question Mr. DuPay and what did he tell you?” asked the prosecutor. “He said he didn't do it,” at which point, Officer Dan Di Matteo paused and then added after a moments hesitation, “He said it must have been the Samoans shooting.” Once again, this statement was made with the wide-eyed demeanor. An excellent imitation of an earnest Boy Scout on the witness stand.
One of the first things you learn as a police officer, when going to court is never to offer information. You answer the questions presented to you with a “yes” or a “no” and you do little else. Here Officer Dan Di Matteo had provided a very good reason for the judge to believe that other individuals may have been involved in the possible shooting of guns, other than me. Apparently, there was also no attempt, to my knowledge, to contact my Samoan neighbors or others. These people (the police officers) had already convicted me in their minds! Get DuPay!
The whole debacle left me unarmed, a man too old to run and too old to fight with no way to protect either family or self. They unjustly locked me in jail for 5 days and released me only after I signed an “Emergency Population Release agreement.” At 2:30 A.M., a few hours earlier I'd asked a female deputy when I was going to be released. She told me, "I have no release date for you DuPay." Then a couple of hours later, I was released at 2:30 AM, with no money and no way to secure a safe ride home.
What kind of “emergency” puts an old man out on the street in the middle of the night, in very cold temperatures, with not enough money to prepare for a lift or even get home on the train? I waited for almost two hours on the steps of the Justice Center, in the cold, with only a thin jacket on, for my ride to finally come and pick me up. Is there any practical or humane reason why inmates are released at 2:30 am, when all public transportation has ceased operating? Particularly when they are 75-years-old with no way to get home?! Is this the proper way to release vulnerable young women for example or elderly people, with no money or no way to get home? What practical reason would there be for allowing this, other than as an unspoken punitive statement to the accused? This is all you deserve. Take that!
While in jail cell 8D I contracted a severe case of head lice, either from the pink clothing they gave me to wear, or from the disgusting cell itself. Clearly, those objects and/or areas were/are not properly sanitized or cleaned, or I would not have contracted a common Oregon parasite as a result. After my release, I did what I felt was my duty, and called the jail to complain I'd caught lice from the cell or the clothing I'd been given. I told them they should change or improve their cleaning policies, to insure future inmates did not also contract head lice. I was told someone from the jail would get in touch with me, to discuss my experience, but no one ever contacted me back. It wasn't important.
I was subjected to the insolence and bad attitude of more than one unprofessional, tobacco chewing, obese, miserable-with-his-job jail deputy who continually referred to all of us as “bad boys.” I reminded the most abusive of the bunch that I had not been “convicted of any crime” and deserved to be “treated with respect.” “Don't BUG me DuPay!” he told me sarcastically, spitting into his styrofoam-cup like an animal.
For three days, while unjustly incarcerated in the county jail, I was denied one of my very important medications and was not given it. For three days?! Maybe a few hours, I could understand that but not three days! Medication is vitally important for a man 75-years-old with high blood pressure and a history of bleeding ulcers. Some people could die after being denied important medicine for three days! I complained about it and repeatedly asked for my complete medication and was told that that bottle had not been “approved by our doctors yet.” Well, it had been approved by my doctor and it was something I needed to take! The jailers acted like it was no big deal. It was simple. They didn't care!
On October 25, at exactly 8:15 A.M, the day after the Bench trial, Judge Litzenberger concluded, while in her courtroom, that after reviewing the evidence (or gross lack of it) she would find me “not guilty on either count, due to lack of evidence.” I was found "not guilty" and she ordered all my firearms returned to me, which can only occur, after conducting a background check, which I obviously passed! Besides my personal inconvenience and acute embarrassment, at being arrested and accused of such a ludicrous crime, ask yourself, how much money did this futile attempt at petty vengeance cost the police bureau for Officer Dan Di Matteo's investigative and surveillance time?
I personally believe Officer Dan Di Matteo should pay the money back! How much did it cost the District Attorneys office to prepare and try this case? Officer Dan Di Matteo should pay the cost! What is the fee to try a case in court with clerks and Judges time? Officer Dan Di Matteo should pay the cost for that too!
How much does it cost to house and feed a person for 5 days in jail? Tax payers should not have to pay any of this expense. Officer Dan Di Matteo and his miscreant supervisors should pay it all! But I know that will never happen. At the very least, being exposed as the incompetents they are is good enough for me! What they did to me was wrong, based on ignorant supposition and an example of shoddy, lazy police work. Someone allowed Officer Dan Di Matteo to do what he did to me and those PPB supervisors are complicit in the series of faulty decisions that led to my unconstitutional arrest!
Maybe that's how they do it in Chicago, where Officer Dan Di Matteo is originally from but not generally here in Portland. And now I'm positive he needs to go back! Portland doesn't need another half-assed Chicago Cop!
As is my right, on October 30, 2012 I filed a formal complaint with the Independent Police Review board, in City Hall, charging that “an inadequate investigation into a suspected shooting incident” led to my “improper arrest and imprisonment.” I believe that I was retaliated against due to my “political views and involvement” with regard to my medical marijuana activism and my long-term criticism of the police in Portland. I stated as much to the investigator and explained to him that my history as a Portland Police officer and former PPB Detective, has everything to do with that!
Now let's see how they whitewash this one taxpayers!
**********************************************************************************************************
ADDENDUM TO ORIGINAL ESSAY: Published online, December 20th, 2012
OFFICER SCHERISE HOBBS: Several weeks after the case had been thrown out of court, by Judge Litzenberger and kissed off twice by the so called "Independent Police Review Board" I conducted my own investigative work, via the internet, and other sources, to investigate the moral character of the officers involved in the fiasco that became their investigation of me. What I discovered should have surprised me but didn't. I found that Scherise Hobbs had been suspended from duty, with the Portland Police Bureau, for 7 and 1/2 weeks, without pay, and that this transpired twice. Each suspension, occurred due to official police misconduct, stemming from incidents in 2002 and in 2005. Her misconduct, according to the Oregonian Newspaper, and official police sources, was that she was found to have had, "...sex with another Portland cop while one of the two was on duty and using police mobile computer e-mails to facilitate the relationship. She was set to face the same discipline for continuing to use work emails to arrange on-duty clandestine meetings with the same colleague in 2005."
To view this Oregonian story, written by Maxine Bernstein, click the active link below...
http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2010/11/portland_council_pays_nearly_2.html
In a letter, regarding her suspensions, police chief Mike Reese, wrote, "You and (then-Sgt. Eric) Torgerson, arranged for meetings under the Morrison Bridge and at NE 42nd and Sandy. You admitted that the meetings were personal. You admitted using bureau equipment to communicate with Torgerson and to arrange for meetings with him. You also admitted your use was inappropriate and a continuation of the conduct for which you were previously disciplined."
Police department wags, that have communicated with me, smirked that this woman has been referred to as "Hot-pants Hobbs" due to her history of inappropriate sexual misconduct with willing male police officers. This conduct makes me wonder, what Officer Scherise Hobbs was thinking about and what was her state of mind when she began this so-called investigation of "shots fired." It was not sound police work that was in her mind, in my opinion. Since when does a police officer make no attempt to contact a readily available accused suspect? Why does a mere phone call suffice for an in-person contact?
In 2005, a performance review board recommended terminating Officer Scherise Hobbs, AKA "Hot-pants Hobbs" citing "her continued misuse of time and equipment. The board said it was concerned by the similarity between the misconduct in 2002 and 2005, her "evasiveness and inability to answer questions directly" and her "rationalization and minimization of her conduct."
I would have concurred with the board, that she be terminated, because this woman is an insult to my former profession and clearly has a history of dishonesty and defiance to authority, as the official records indicate. If all she wanted to do was have sex with a policeman she didn't have to join the police department to do it! There were a lot of women that wanted to "fall into the arms of the law," back in my day, lots of perfectly respectable 'fender lizards' in the world, though they were usually employed as waitresses, bar maids or secretaries.
Even despite her history of misconduct, this woman has been protected by the Union. After risking her job and coming close to being fired, on two occasions, the city decided to reimburse Officer Scherise Hobbs for 61 hours of work, at $32. 28 cents per hour, which is almost $2,000. This occurred, at the insistence of the Union, who filed a grievance Feb 5th, 2007, claiming the Bureau's second proposed 7 1/2 week suspension, without pay, for Hobbs 2005 offence, was "too severe." The Union argued it was "disproportionate to Hobbs offence" and "out of keeping with the standards of discipline in the Bureau" along with being "in violation of progressive discipline principles."
This woman needs to be held accountable for her bad judgement, in order to prevent her from further inflicting her dishonesty and lack of judgement on innocent civilians. In the letter to Hobbs, Chief Reese, writes, "This is the second time you have allowed your intimate relationship with Eric Torgerson to overshadow your professional responsibilities and negatively impact your conduct at work." And yet, this woman has been protected repeatedly by the Union. Why?
Not only did Hobbs lie about her illicit relationship with Torgerson, to PPB supervisors but she also claimed to have worked hours she did not and was given money for hours worked, that she hadn't worked. This is THEFT. Why does PPB retain officers of this low moral caliber? Why does PPB retain and promote thieves and liars, like "Hot-pants" Hobbs?
There are definite losers in this situation, due to Hobbs illegal and immoral conduct, carrying on an illicit relationship with a co-worker, Eric Torgerson was fired from PPB, due to several domestic violence episodes, after the story became public. This suggests he was married, with a wife, who may have and probably did object to her husband sleeping with another police officer. Did Sherise Hobbs conduct a long-term relationship with a married man? The online rumor is that she had sexual relationships repeatedly with supervisors since the early 1990's. "This woman has been having inappropriate relationships with her supervisors since the early nineties when she was an explorer with Mult. Co. Sheriff. This isn't a new trait of hers."
How can the citizens of Portland trust that an officer repeatedly guilty of immoral and dishonest conduct, won't further jeopardize future investigations with her lack of judgement, or willingness to do real police work? How can the citizens of Portland trust a woman who lies and steals overtime pay? How can the citizens of Portland trust an officer who cannot do police work that entails such things, as walking to an apartment door and knocking? Something apparently, she was unable to do when there were reports of shots fired in March of 2012, and someone mistakenly claimed an individual who resembled me, was leaning out a window and endangering others with a pistol.
Portland Oregon deserves better than 'Officer' Sherise "hot-pants" Hobbs! My personal prediction, having experience with 'officers' of her inferior caliber is that she will not retire but rather will either be fired or go out on a disability claim. We will wait and see, won't we taxpayers?
SGT. RICHARD BRASKETT: In my investigation into Sgt. Richard Braskett, my findings found him equally unsavory. The same police department wags, who have communicated with me before, refer to Sgt. Braskett as "Vicodin Dick." According to an Oregonian article, also written by Maxine Bernstein, published August 10th, 2012, Sgt. Richard Braskett has been investigated by his own supervisors, of the Portland Police Bureau, for suspicions of domestic violence and drug abuse, going back to 2010.
To read the online article, also written by Maxine Bernstein, please go to the active link below...
http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/index.ssf/2012/08/portland_police_sergeant_claim.html
According to Bernstein's article, in April of 2010, a friend of the couple, reported to the Bureau, their concerns that Braskett was engaging in domestic violence and beating his wife. Along with allegations of domestic violence toward his wife, also the mother of his children, were allegations that Sgt. Braskett was abusing drugs. Prescription pain killers. On April 12th, 2010, the Bureau took Sgt. Braskett off the street and stuck him behind a desk, doing desk duty. Desk duty is generally reserved as punishment, for officers that need to be evaluated, after possible misconduct, before they can return to street duty.
Later that night, Detective Celeste Fender and Officer Nathan Tobey, who both worked the Bureau's Domestic Violence Reduction Unit came to the Braskett home. No one answered the door. Returning the next day, they identified themselves, to Braskett's wife, as PPB police officers and told her they wanted to "make sure she and the children were safe." The wife invited them in and spoke with them at the kitchen table, confiding, that she believed her husband was abusing drugs. She told them she'd asked him to leave the family home, and "move out" a couple of days before.
The wife denied there was any violence, despite the accusations from the "family friend," that had started the initial investigation, who claimed Braskett was beating his wife. The wife also confided that her husband was stressed out from police work and had begun to abuse drugs, to such an extent, that she had to hide her own prescription Vicodin, pain killers, that she was using for an undisclosed ailment, that apparently was causing her serious pain. Perhaps from previous injuries, from all that domestic violence she had endured?
During this visit Fender and Tobey searched the home, including Brasketts medicine cabinet, removing Braskett's handgun from his bedroom and several empty bottles of Vicodin pain killers, that he had hastily attempted to dispose of in the garage trash can. They were told by Braskett's wife they could search the home. Apparently, when Braskett learned of this search, he did not believe the search to be legal and attempted, surprisingly, to sue his two co-workers in Federal court during 2011. After over a year of legal red tape, the case was thrown out of court, by U.S. Magistrate Judge Dennis J. Hubel, ruling that "the legal consent of Braskett's wife was valid and sufficient."
In August of 2012, Judge Hubel ruled that Braskett's lawsuit could not proceed to trial. "There is no material issue of fact that Mrs. Braskett had 'common authority' over all areas of the residence, and thus was able to validly consent to the defendants' search of the residence," Hubel wrote in his ruling.
As mentioned in Bernstein's article, Braskett agreed to complete treatment for alcohol and drug abuse. "By January 2011, members of a police review board, recommended a 20-hour suspension without pay after he admitted to consuming drugs that were prescribed to another person. The board found he also failed to notify his supervisor that he was taking prescription pills that might interfere with his work. Its not clear from police records whether Braskett ever faced the suspension. Despite the recommended discipline, the board commended Braskett for seeking treatment." My question is, did Sgt. Braskett offer to undergo drug treatment before or after he got in trouble with his own co-workers, at PPB, who were investigating him for drug use and domestic violence?
The ingredients in vicodin are a combination of acetaminophen and hydrocodone, which is synthetic codeine, available through prescription only, due to its many dangers. Vicodin is a 'downer' and can cause drowsiness, which can degrade mental concentration and the ability to use proper judgement. My feeling is that a police officer using or abusing drugs should not be driving a car or carrying a deadly weapon. Citizens have a right not to be accosted by a police officer under the influence of vicodin or other drugs.
An officer, like Sgt. Richard Braskett, with a history of abusing drugs, domestic violence and lying or dishonesty, regarding what drugs he was using, cannot be trusted to perform proper police work duties. Given that history, I also wonder at his frame of mind, when he attempted to assist, "Hot-pants Hobbs" with the call, of shots fired, March 15th, 2012.
This question is best answered by the fact that Judge Marilyn Litzenberger threw the sum total of their investigative work out of court, with her ruling of "not guilty on either charge, for lack of evidence."
The conclusion to all this is as clear to me, as it is to some of my former police buddies, that I've communicated with. Two of Portland's not so 'finest' were called to investigate reports of "shots fired" March 15, 2012 and did not perform adequate police work. In their efforts to locate whoever or whatever was responsible for the "popping" or "clanging" or "pinging" noise that neighbors had heard, including myself, they made two, maybe three cell phone calls and that was the extent of their "police work." They did not knock on my door and did not make any other attempts to contact me.
Calling cell phones that are registered to one person, but used by another individual is a very common occurrence in today's economy. Many people do this, in order to help struggling relatives. These two PPB police officers failed to knock on my door to inquire if I knew anything. Instead they waited almost two full months to make an arrest. This tells me their motives for my arrest were motivated more, due to who they discovered I was, than whether or not they felt I was actually guilty of any wrong doing. There never was any case against me. I knew it and Judge Marilyn Litzenberger knew it too.
As I've written, Portland citizens deserve better than these two chronically dishonest, and/or chemically altered police officers, such as Scherise "Hot-pants" Hobbs or "Vicodin Dick" Braskett!
OFFICER DAN DI MATTEO: After investigating the character of Dan De Matteo, I was surprised to learn nothing of any value. He does not show up on the internet and I could not dig anything up. The fact that he made up a search warrant to come after me, tells me he has probably done it before. Working ten years with the Chicago Police Department, I'm sure he has some skeletons there. Present misconduct as demonstrated in this investigation, usually means previous misconduct, and makes me wonder what compels a man to move from the impossibly large and notoriously corrupt Chicago police department to Portland Police Bureau. What did he run from? Is it possible to fool the test administrators and the police shrinks before joining the Portland Police? "Hot-pants" Hobbs and "Vicodin Dick" succeeded, and I think Dan Di Matteo did too. The next time I'm in Chicago...
By Don DuPay
Conclusion...
TWO TIMES WRONG! (AND IT DIDN'T TAKE LONG)
Published online January 29th, 2013
The Independent Police Review office is a total misnomer. It is neither Independent, nor does it Review. Is is a defacto rubber stamping office, merely the official minion of the Portland Police Bureau used to cover and gloss over, violent, immoral or questionable activities by Portland cops. It is a layer of additional bureaucracy designed to insulate police from their wrong-doing, while fooling the citizen-victim of that police wrong doing, that perhaps, just perhaps, appealing to their particular office might right that wrong.
After being wrongfully arrested as a result of vindictive and sloppy police work, by Portland Police officers Cherise Hobbs, and Sgt Richard Brasket, both of whom themselves have been disciplined by the Police Bureau for lying and drug use, (boy are these a pair to draw to) I was the victim of Officer Dan DiMeteo's made up search warrant which resulted in my unlawful arrest and imprisonment in the Multnomah County Jail for 5 days.
As a former Portland Police Detective, having drafted dozens of search warrants myself, Dan DiMeteo's search warrant to find evidence of a crime that never occurred was pure fabrication on his part. Dan DiMeteo is a transplant from the Chicago police department. Perhaps that's how they do it in Chicago. Here too, making up illegal search warrants has historically been a consistent problem with the Portland Police, famously so, resulting in the dropping of dozens of cases by DA Mike Shrunk in the not so distant past.
The rationale on the part of the police officer, being “if you don't have the evidence, why just make it up.” The judge that signs the “search warrant,” believes, as they should, that the presenting officer is legitimate and being truthful. DiMeteo's warrant was made up, my arrest therefore improper and illegal, a fact easily understood by my excellent attorney Brandon Calheim and the honorable Circuit Court Judge Ms. Marilyn Litzenberger.
Judge Litzenberger, concluded after an 8 hour Bench trial that I was "not guilty" of any charges, for “lack of evidence.” I then filed a formal complaint with the Independent Police Review, in City Hall, October 30, 2012. Several weeks later, by letter, I was informed that the IPR would not proceed further with the case, as they determined that the police involved had engaged in no apparent wrong doing, nor they claimed, had they engaged in an "inadequate investigation" as I had accused them of doing. Inadequate because they had not attempted to communicate with me in any standard investigatory fashion, after merely making two telephone calls. No knock on my door, nothing. That kind of 'police work' would have been laughed at, in my day as an investigator!
After the first denial, I filed an appeal; a second formal complaint and was then sent a letter by mail, a few days later, once again stating that in their opinion, the IPR believed that no wrong doing had occurred on the part of the PPB or the officers involved in my unlawful arrest and imprisonment.
The confounding part for me is, how is it possible for the “Independent Review” to come TWICE to the opposite conclusion of a competent defense attorney and a sitting circuit court Judge? There can be only one answer to that question, and that is that the Independent Police Review exists only to placate the irate and violated citizen and protect the police at all costs and for no other reason. This seems very evident to me.
Steven Morrow of the IPR first interviewed me concerning my initial complaint. Morrow is friendly, smiling, and his head of gray hair and out stretched hand belie his true intent. It is possible to initially believe that he may be on 'your' side, due to that genuine seeming demeanor. That is, until he begins to talk about and suggest, as he did with me, during that first interview, that turning this "problem" into a “learning situation for police” might be an option and was I interested? I told him no, I was not. My feeling was that the IPR is not a “peace circle” and should have taken my complaint more seriously.
Steve Morrow must have forgotten he was talking to an old detective, with more experience at interviewing and interrogation than he. From that point on I could see that Mr. Morrow was merely trying to slide the problem out the door. He assured me that no one was safe from their “investigation,” and that the IPR would go to all lengths, advising me later of the outcome of their investigation.
The truth is that they could not conduct an in depth investigation and come to a different conclusion than Judge Litzenberger. But they did! When I requested the "appeal" they promised me it would be conducted by a different investigator. Surely they would correct their mistake the second time around I thought. But they didn't! Incredibly, astoundingly, Rachel Mortimer, IPR management, said, “I am upholding the decision to dismiss this case. We will not be taking any further action on this case." In other words, White wash complete! Just as I had predicted weeks earlier. Police did nothing wrong again, according to the IPR.
The only justice left to me is to expose this misnamed and pointless office for what it is, via the internet, my writing website and the reality of modern 'transparency' as its called. The fact is, the Independent Police Review is a red inked, rubber stamp designed only to place another layer of injustice between a citizen that has been wronged and the police miscreants involved.
Unless a cop shoots you, possibly killing you, don't waste your time talking to the “Independent, (no they're not) Review, (no they don't) office. This office is a tool of the police, a tool to fool. The space in city hall dedicated to this office could be better used to support a worthwhile community effort, like a drop in tutoring center for kids or a counseling center for abused and battered women.
One thing that has escaped these good folks of the Independent Police Review, Steven Morrow, Constantin Severe, Rachel Mortimer et al, is that the police could do the same thing to them.
Who then would they appeal to?!
By Don DuPay
If you'd like to contact Don DuPay, you can find him at facebook here...https://www.facebook.com/dondupay
or you can email him at his PSU email, at ddupay@pdx.edu
ABSOLUTELY NO PORTION OF THIS PERSONAL ESSAY MAY BE REPRODUCED OR DISSEMINATED WITHOUT EXPRESS PERMISSION FROM THE AUTHOR, DONALD LEE DUPAY, UNDER PENALTY OF COPYRIGHT LAWS!!