Frashour Fired

AIR DATE: Wednesday, November 17th 2010
POSTED BY: ALLISON FROST

The latest deadly force scandal to come out of the Portland Police Bureau was the shooting death of Aaron Campbell in January of this year. Police Chief Mike Reese has just fired Officer Ron Frashour who fired the fatal shot. Reese also suspended three others involved: Officer Ryan Lewton and Sergeants Liani Reyna and John Birkinbine. Reese said in a statement on the Bureau website that he arrived at this decision with Mayor Sam Adams and that now that the disciplinary process has been completed, the Bureau is releasing a number of documents associated with the shooting. 

Campbell was 25 years old, a father of four, and was unarmed as he came out of a northeast Portland apartment building. Officers were originally called to the scene because Campbell was reportedly suicidal and armed. Although a grand jury did not indict the officers involved, the subsequent community protest led to an unprecedented release of hundreds of pages of grand jury testimony in the case. You can listen to Think Out Loud's past shows about Portland Police here, and read more of OPB's coverage of the Aaron Campbell case here.

Have you been following the Aaron Campbell case? Is this justice? What are the short term or long term implications of the chief's actions? If you have been involved in protesting police actions — in Portland or elsewhere — are you satisfied with this result? If you're involved in law enforcement, what message do you think the disciplinary actions send?

Tagged as: police

Photo credit: davidsonscott15 / Creative Commons

if i was  a  police  officer  responding  to  a 911  call  where  the  ":actor"  had  been  identified  as  one  with  a  violent   criminal  history  and  after  confronting  him, identifying  myself  as  a   police  officer, ordering  him  to  go  to  the  ground  and  the  potentially  violent  "actor"  ran  away  from  me  and  reached  to  his  waist  band (where   suspects  keep  deadly  weapons) and  i  wanted  to  go  home  to  my  family (enen  in  the  politically  correct  liberal  environment  of   portland)  >.  i  would  have  shot  my  police  issued  weapon>>.. sam  adams    and   his  ilk  were  not  there  ..  they  never  are  ..  they  just  pass  judgement  from  the  safety  of  their  detached  offices.

VITALPAC —

but  he  was  black  >.   and  everyone  knows   blacks  never    are  violent or  commit  crimes  >.  so  this  obviously  is  a  case  of  police  over  reaction to  potential  danger of a  person   possibly  reaching  for  a  weapon  after   been  given  the  chance  to  surrender who  because  he   is  balck  should  not  bear  the   consequences  of    disregarding  a  lawful  order  of  a  police  officer>>>  if  the  "actor"  was  white  >.  it  would  be  case  closed  ..    suicide  by  cop >>.............  wise  up  portland >.    some  of  u  need  to  be  slapped  accross  the  face  with  a  burkenstock  >.  no  offense

VITALPAC —

the  libs  really  hate  me  on  this    site  >.  but  just  wait  >.  they  will  be  very  tempted  to  juan  williams  me  >.  and  ofcourse  they  can  get  away  with  it

VITALPAC —

luckley, your poorly constructed sentences and backwards syntax clearly indicate your low level of education, and everyone knows unedcuated people are never biggoted or misinformed. so obviously the case here isn't about a racist whose terrified of people who look, act, or think differently. 

smcgillis —

You sure have it in for "libs", AKA Libertarian Conservatives, don't you? What's your beef with them?

Tom D Ford —
This comment has been removed by the TOL staff.
easytrades —

　

 So Officer Ronald Frashour is finally FIRED after gunning down un-armed Aaron Campbell with a military assault rifle. And it [only] took, what, 11 monthes to come to such a decision. I suppose we all should be greatful for the "speedy" work of the PPB. However - Officer Ryan Lewton should also be fired! Lewton shot Aaron in the back with beanbag rounds where he had NO right, NO reason, & NO authority to do so. When Aaron, out of sheer reaction, reached toward the area where the beanbags made impact, it was only then that Frashour shot him. So, this makes Ryan Lewton every bit as responsible for Aaron Campbells' MURDER as Frashour. If anything, Frashour was following Lewtons' immediate lead.

 In addition, Aaron was deliberately denied medical treatment. He was allowed to bleed to death for over 30 minutes. His handcuffs weren't even removed until his body was in the morgue. This constitutes 2nd degree murder at the very least. A little two-week suspention for afew other cops is a kick in the groin, so far as anyone with a sense of decency is concerned. This is NOT justice served.

 But even such a pitiful & long delayed level of punishment begs one to wonder: if it's good enough for these cops, then why not the cops who murdered James Chasse? The 3 cops who murdered James Chasse in 2006 - Kyle Nice, Brett Burton, & Christopher Humphreys - have never been disciplined in any way. No, wait... i believe (former Chief) Rosie Sizer "recommended" a little 2-week suspention for Humphreys back in 2008, my bad. Otherwise, Chasses' killers all remain cops to this day.

 There are many un-resolved issues in Multnomah Co. where it concerns the police. One cop losing his job for gunning down a citizen is one thing - but i don't see any of these other issues being addressed.

DamosA —

I  agree  that  the  killers of James Chasse  should  be not  only  fired  but  charged  with  a crime  ..  but  he  was  a  white  male>.  so he  has  deminished  protection  from  the  ruling  class.

Cops  are  human,  some  are  power  tripping  psychpaths  made  worse  by  having  to  constantly  deal  with  the  dreggs  of  society,  and  to  err  is  human.

VITALPAC —

Ok, first off I'm going to apologize if this comes off as a bit of a rant. That said here are my comments ,queries and concerns.

First off I want to address the seeming lack of emotional/adrenaline checking . More and more as of late I see this thick wall of blue at incidents and I'm sorry that much blue at a scene can only add to the confusion and not have a positive outcome.

This goes back to basic traiining. You are or should have been trained to lead with your training not your emotions. The minute you allow fear or adrenaline to make up your mind for you you have failed to perform your duties as you have been sworn to do.

In my estimation having poured over every available piece of information in the Campbell case I feel that every officer in this matter should be terminated. We can no longer allow the excuse of fearing for ones life or safety to be the defacto excuse for deadly force. Hardly any protocols were followed in this case and the citizenry of Portland has been left dangling as this case has been dragged out. The PPB union is now seeking to block the disciplinary action via the suspensions. EXCUSE ME? Don't get me wrong unions are a good thing in large part but when you seek to assist officers who were wrong, did not follow incident protocol and basically took it upon themselves to handle the situation you don't have a leg to stand on and standing up for them only sends the message to other rank and file officers that they can act with impunity.

You screw up as a police officer and you should consider yourself lucky if the least you lose is your job.

For too long now we have allowed the Bureau to ride rough shod over the citizenry in general and the black community as a whole. Duly sworn officers of the law work for the citizens. Not the union and not each other.

I see by in large decent hardworking individuals in the Police rank and file but these high profile cases only erode what little faith we originally had in the bureau when the union seeks to stonewall or point accusitory fingers of blame at anyone other than themselves this only adds to the loss of faith on the citizenries part.

thatchickencoopguy —

I don't feel like that is a rant at all. I don't feel like enough people have taken the time to read through all the available documents available to them. That being said, I hope that I am wrong about my next statement but this is coming from past decisions. I think Adams and Reese made this decision of disipline to make it look like they were doing something to change the bureau's direction knowing full well that it will go to an arbitrator and will be over turned. Shame on you PPA. Please start looking past yourself's and see that your rank and file officers are not always innocent. I hope that I am wrong about my above statement and that the PPA will back down and see that this was a just decision. After taking the time to read all the documents that were made available to me,  I feel like the decision made was right and took into account many different, very hard circumstances that led up to it.

JerryGarcia —

The Portland Police work for the citizens of Portland, when they shoot and kill a citizen of our city, they must be held accountable, even "when things don't go right." If you are a police office and you shoot and kill an unarmed citizen, you should be fired. And the guest fromthe police association is right; this is a political issue: the people demand action. And perosnally, I have faith in our leaders when they take the bold move to fire police officers that shoot and kill citizens.

smcgillis —

"If you are a police office and you shoot and kill an unarmed citizen, you should be fired."<<<<<<,,,  easy  for  you  to  say   what  if  the "actor"  points  a  toy  gun >.  or  an  unloaded  gun??  should  the   police  wait  till  he   has  a  bullet headed  in  his  direction>>???  is  it  politically  correct  to  shoot  an "actor"  in  self  defense  if  the  actor  is  a  bad  shot??  should  cops  even  carry   guns?

/////lets  face  the  facts  >.  if  this emotionally  irrate  suspect  had  complied  with  police  orders  this  would  not  have  happened  ..  but  since    the  lack  of  rationality  due  to  the  smaller  prefrontal  cortex  of  this  person  .. it  happened>>> the  pandering  liberal  politicians  just  want  to   placate  the  negroid  community

VITALPAC —

@VITLALPAC

The key to sleeping well at night is to be proud of what you have done during each day.  All of your generalizations about people - that put you in a superior position at the expense of many innocent individuals, (that do not fit your generalization) - is not going to be a very sustaining diet.

I think you will find that if you drop the put downs and the generalizations it will be more work but you will still have something to say.

dirtguy —

The little union punk that was just on is unbelievable.  Do you expect that PPB officers can continue to murder and kill unarmed citizens and NOT be held accountable? Accusations of this being political are coming from a VERY politically active union. Kettle, meet Pot.  For far too long no one speaks out against the PPB – you know why? Cause if you do you end up harassed or SHOT and killed.  It is way past time for there to be wholesale changes to the way police forces in Oregon act, train and conduct themselves.  It is an embarrassment nationwide.  To those union leaders and members who don’t like being held accountable for making mistakes and costing lives – you are free to quit and leave the city, county, state or country.  But in America, EVERY citizen regardless of color, creed, national origin, religion, even socioeconomic status is INNOCENT until proven guilty in a court of law.  The time of believing a white police officer’s life and livelihood is more valuable than anyone else is long, long over.  It is time to abide by the Constitution of the United States of America, and the Oregon Constitution. 

echolynch —
I'd like to know from the union: when do they think it is okay to shoot an unarmed person in the back? Who gave the order to shoot? Also I agree with one of the callers police everywhere need to look at who they are hiring and what type of behavior they are looking for in a police officer.
spikelopez —

I  dont  like  cops  ..  but  i  think  they  need  to  be able shoot  if  they  feel  their  life  is  in  danger  >.  obviously  this  cop  didnt  wake  up  that  morning  thinking  ..  im  gonna  go  and  kill  somebody

VITALPAC —

No. They should be able to shoot if they deem the suspect dangerous at multiple levels irregardless of their own personal feelings. According to your logic, if an ordinary citizen raises their voice at a cop and the cop feels threatened, the cop has the right to shoot? Wow. Anything can make the cop scared. Heck, you looking at him funny can make him suspicious and scared. What if you had an itch of all a sudden and have to scratch your privates while he/she is telling you to not move, that will make them scared thinking you're reaching for a gun. And you want the response to that to be bullets?? Your lack of logic is apalling. The cops are not out there to respond to their feelings. They are out there to resolve a situation using skills in situations that most of us are not trained for. If they cannot hadle a situation professionally then they should not have that job.

pdxcitizen —

In regard to the former police officer who served, I wonder if fear, not only a lack of training, plays a role in officer's reactions to situations they are in.  We, as a culture, are continually inundated with reasons to be afraid or to fear for our families through the media.  Officers, being human as well, must also be affected by this and thus their reactions result in some part due to this exposure.

Just a thought

jsunb —

someone at TOL please remove the racist remarks from vitalpac? Thank you.

echolynch —

I've been asking them to do something about him and his inflammatory remarks, which seem to be aimed at anyone and everyone who is anything other than a conservative, white, heterosexual male. He certainly seems to be an "equal opportunity offender." As someone who truly values her First Amendment Rights, I am usually next to last (right before ACLU lawyers) to propose abridging anyone's free speech or free expression.

Penny From Eugene —

1.  I wonder if Portland police officers are trained that if they have to shoot they can shoot to disable and not to kill.  Could they not protect themselves by hitting an assailant in the shoulder or legs?

2.  If the Police Bureau followed the advice from the retired officer who called from Nehelem only to fire when the officer saw a weapon this would probably reduce the number of unarmed suspects killed to near zero (unless there are a lot of people running around with toy guns).  There are probably sudies that show whether officers in jurisdictions that adopt this policy are injured more frequently than they are here in Portland.

canetti —

Years ago this was indeed the training they received. Speaking as a child growing up in a police family (father, two uncles and both grandfathers) The thinking behind the shoot to wound training was it's easier to make someone think about and change their behavior  if they live to do so. and besides the paperwork involved in a fatal shooting was unimaginable. Seems just saying "i feared for my life and safety" has taken the place of any  further decision making procedures and further seemingly absolves the involved officer  almost completely. this sadly reinforces the idea that hey I can act with impunity and will only get a slap on the wrist and maybe some sensitivity training.  Officers basically go by this playbook of situations that has no wiggle room for independant thinking I.E. suspect did x now I must do y. Back when my family was in law enforcement. If they had a sketchy stop they would 1. tell a driver if it was a car involved stop to shut off their vehicles engine and drop the keys out of the car window. 2. exit the vehicle move 5 paces back to rear of vehicle and lay down in a prone (face down) position. This while it may appear extreme completely took the driver out of his protected enviroment and away from any possible weapons hidden. they did this via the p.a system they had installed in their vehicle  they still have em installed in vehicles but sadly they are rarely used in this creative manner. end result? no one hardly ever got hurt no gun fire was involved and everyone lived another day.

now sadly it's escalate beyond comprehension and someone loses a life or at least this is the perception

thatchickencoopguy —

This case is only one of a long line of murders by Portland police who claim that they feared for their lives or safety. There was the young man, naked, ranting, and acting "crazy" on top of a burning car; what did his killers think he was going to do to them? There was the mentally ill man ranting and waving a broken porch rail at more than one cop; why did the officers think deadly force was required to contain him? There was the black woman who drove away while being cited by a Portland policeman: as she started to drive off, the officer standing next to her car was knocked down. Claiming that she had attempted to muder him, cops shot her in the back of the head. And on and on. . . .

Damn right it's political. Haven't we had enough? In my view, firing Frashour is not enough. Discipline by the Police Bureau is not enough. "Investigation" by the Police Bureau is ridiculous. The citizenry fears for it's life and safety. And we're grateful for every decent, courageous, honest cop.

manypup —

I think the procedures and training need to be changed for Police officers. It is unconscionable to shoot an unarmed person no matter what the belief of the Police Officer.

I think that no officer should be able to shoot to kill unless they are physically injured themselves, first.

They need to train for restraint. If that means that more of them get injured, that is part of what we pay them for.

The problem is the training has no room for restraint. If they feel threatened they shoot to kill. This is not appropriate behavior.

I also think they should automatically loose their job for killing an unarmed person. I applaud mayor Sam Adams for firing the policemen who violated the city rules.

paxton —

Listening to this program I am reminded that in such instances, I find the line between a just resolution and retribution is very blurred.  It is common for those feeling most hurt or damaged by another’s actions to seek far more than a just fairness, but look to also inflict maximum hurt and damage on those alleged to have perpetrated the action.  This revenge is intended to somehow quell their disquiet and rarely does.  An eye for an eye does not replace the loss of either of them. I do not know the circumstances here, but it seems very likely that the demands of your interviewee go beyond a just and fair resolution. This sounds also like a need for revenge.

Secondly, the public needs to be reminded that those harmed by a loss (such as a wrongful death) have legal recourse to make their claims for compensation before a municipal court. The cost to investigate and punish wrong-doers, beyond those punishments meted out to date, need not be paid by the public.  If the interviewee believes that justice has not prevailed by these public actions, he can initiate a private lawsuit against the alleged perpetrators; uncover any crimes to be punished under evidentiary and witness disclosure and seek a judgment for compensation – without making this an expense to the public.  The private suit against O.J. Simpson is such an example.  And in this Oregon case, proving crime and loss in a private case would provide the evidence for a public trial against those who were found, in the private case, to have committed crimes against municipal law.

localresident —

I respect your answer. However you are speaking with the distant  calmness of somebody who has not been affected by a loss of a loved one due to somebody elses lack of judgement. This somebody else happens to have legal backing, a deadly weapon and a flawed judgement. Who cares about the legal recourses after the fact? The loved one is gone. Nothing will bring them back whether "justice" (if there is such a thing) is done or not.

pdxcitizen —

 I have to commend Adams, Chief Mike Reese, & espesially the cops' "token" union boss Daryl Turner for being brave enough to appear on todays' show - even if all they really did was make excuses.

 I still feel that these tiny measures of discipline fall faaar short of any sort of TRUE accountability where it concerns the Portland Police. And i still don't understand how Officer Lewton gets off with a 2-week suspention when HE was every bit as responsible for Campbells' murder as Frashour. And why hasn't  Officer Jeffery Ellias been punished? Isn't this the cop who sicced a canine on Aaron that night, symotaniously as he was being shot in the back by Frashour?

 To this day, noone has explained why it was nessesary for a cop to have a military assault rifle.

 And what is it with these grand juries? They always find "no wrong-doing" on the part of the cops. So if a GRAND JURY declared earlier this year that cops did nothing wrong, what's Frashour being fired for?! What is the pending civil suit for?

DamosA —

Very true. How often do you hear of a cop being treated with the same harsh penalties as everybody else? What happened to fairness? It's interesting how cops like to back one another when there is serious wrongdoing involved (i.e. police union) when the rest of us go through our lives tiptoeing so we don't go 2 miles over the speed limit? If we have to fear the law, then the cops need to do so as well. They are no better and no worse then every other citizen. Everybody is equal. If you ask me, getting fired is a pretty light sentence for killing somebody.

pdxcitizen —

A friend who just finished a career with the State Police told me that Police work attracts some of the best and some of the worst in society.  This, I think,  leads many people  to 'profile' policeman just to be on the safe side.

I have also known enough policemen to know that there are quite a few shades of grey.

I also remember a police commissioner, from a big city, commenting  on 'Police Abuse', saying that every police force has an officer who can arrest someone for a serious crime and have the arrested person thanking him when it is all done....  And another officer that can write a simple  traffic ticket and start a riot.

Perhaps another window to keep in mind is that posed by the adage about power corrupting.  Traditionally this has been interpreted as a result of either opportunity for self enrichment  or isolation from adequate supervision/consequences.  I think there is at least one more angle on the problem, and that is that scoundrels with selfish interests will use any socially sanctioned source of power as cover.  Thus you always find some of the worst element taking cover with the superficial trappings of Patriotism, the Priesthood, or a Police uniform.  

There is always going to be a need for constant vigilance and renewal.  And the people we elect need to know why.  If our officials are only at a level where they generalize the police force, the constant maintenance and supervision wont happen.  Likewise the camaraderie that develops between diverse policeman who share in dangerous work, needs to be seen as the constant that it is, and remember that our standard for  police behavior can be compromised by it.

dirtguy —

The Portland police union needs to realize that police officers are not above the law and that it is normal for them to suffer the repercussions of their actions. They also should not forget that firing the officer had the backing of a lot of Portland citizens. Instead of appearing partial with the old "defending one of us" adagio, the union needs to stop taking this personally, respect it and work towards making sure that this never happens again.

pdxcitizen —

I was a criminal justice major before choosing another path. In the various classes I took over a year a couple of things were pretty obvious:

1. most of the guys (the vast majority of students were men) looked like they came right off the local high school's athletic field.

2. given the above, you can imagine how animated and engaged these guys would be to learn unarmed restraint, or firearms etc, and how un-engaged they would be when we'd cover the material on civil rights, Miranda etc. During those discussions, it would literally be me, and the three female students doing most of the talking.

Some of the instructors were peace officers with the local Police Departments, and I also did a good number of ride-alongs in actual patrol cars. These active duty officers, while teaching civil rights in the classroom, would actual coach students on how to circumvent them, explaining how to use car brakes to launch a handcuffed rear passenger into the car's partition, and using "squirrel" if anyone questioned an injury. In the end, there was one officer (and only one) who impressed me. He actually did all the things we were being taught at the outset of his shift, consistently treated everyone with real respect (even some really onerous/foul folks we were literally taking to the county jail) and was very effective every situation as a result.

In short I really appreciated the magnitude of the public (selfless) service this career demanded, and how hard it would be to keep that foremost when day after day is spent dealing with people that, lets face it, are NOT particularly nice people. I did not think I could do it and lead a happy life. I really don't think most of my classmates gave that kind of thing much thought, as their focus was clearly on the power and the authority (and the guns) that a law enforcement career would seemingly impart to them. How does it go, the people who seek power are seldom the people who should wield it . . . 

EthanPDX —

 Neill Franklin, a policeman, offers these 10 rules as a protection from those policeman [and there will always be some out there] who would abuse their power. He recomends we actively teach these to everyone.  The message is, don't be an opportunity for the opportunist that always find a way into the ranks.

1. Always be calm and cool: a bad attitude guarantees a bad outcome.

2. Remain silent: what you don't say can't hurt you.

3. You have the right to refuse searches: saying no to searches can't be held against you.

4. Don't get tricked: remember, police are allowed to lie to you.

5. Determine if you're free to go: police need evidence to detain you.

6. Don't expose yourself: doing dumb stuff in public makes you an easy target.

7. Don't run: they'll catch you and make you regret it.

8. Never touch a cop: aggressive actions will only earn you a more aggressive response.

9. Report misconduct: be a good witness.

10. You don't have to let them in: police need a warrant to enter your home.



dirtguy —

yea, your poorly constructed sentences and backwards syntax clearly indicate your low level of education, and everyone knows unedcuated people are never biggoted or misinformed. so obviously the case here isn't about a racist whose terrified of people who look...thanks !

relaxamento diabetes acompanhantes serviços automotivos

relaxamento —

Comments are now closed.



Become a sponsor