car starts to weave into your lane, you knock/bang to get their attention... they are a cop...

I saw a car stoped askew and a bicyclist down when I got to Desplanes and Washington this morning. I recognized the cyclist as someone whom I had passed a bit further back on Milwaukee and who must have then passed me up again when I stopped to fidget with my chain. I was amazed to see a police office already there until I realized that the cyclist was in handcuffs. I didn't actually witness what happened but from hearing what the cyclist was saying and what the officer was telling dispatch on his cell phone and what a witness who did actually see some of this said something similar to the following must have occurred:

The officer was off duty, likely on his way home from work in his own civilian car.

the cyclist was riding in the bike lane on des planes.

The officer was weaving lanes a bit and driving a bit aggressively (according to the cyclist and the witness the officer said he was stopped and not moving to the on duty officer who arrived later but had indicated he was in motion when initially calling dispatch)

A witness showed up who said she saw the cop weaving as he drove and asked if she should stay to give her information the cop told her that he did not need her information and she could (/should) go. The cyclist said he did need her information and she should stay. This was a red flag that caused me to stick around. I got her number on two of my business cards and tried to give the cyclist one. The officer told me I could not give someone who was under arrest anything, I said its just a business card. He took the business card from me.  I told the cyclist I would post something to thechainlink.org so he can locate me if he doesn't still have her info. in the hopes of making this searchable I'm putting his name in the Tags, but I do not know if I have the spelling correct.

The bicyclist says he saw the officer weave a bit into the bike lane and knocked or banged on the car to alert the officer to his presence, the degree of force used for this knock was of some discussion ('a light tap?' 'no, loud enough that he could hear me' - 'he banged on my car hard, for no reason I was stopped')

Clearly blood was running hot, voices were raised but everyone was civil enough.

The cyclist asked what he was under arrest for the officer cited 'reckless conduct' or something vague and could not cite a statute number. The cyclist said he is a  lawyer, threats of lawsuits for improper arrest/detainment were issued.

What a mess...

For what its worth:

I don't think any cyclist bangs on windows unprovoked. Your hand is worth more than the glass and is more breakable, that's pretty clear even when road rage of getting cut off runs high.

The cop probably was tired coming off a hard shift doing thankless work and did not have any patience left.

No damage was visible to the car or the cyclist.

I'm glad no one got hurt, but what are you supposed to do when a car cuts into the bike lane... and its an off duty cop!

If you are the cyclist, and you need the witnesses phone number, call me at: tree one too, cinco quarto tres, eighty seven, 41.

I wrote this up within an hour of what I saw, but I arrived too late to see the events leading up to the arrest and even now my memory grows fuzzy... I wish my gopro hadn't been out of batteries, or that the cyclist had had one. ugh.

Streetsblog article http://chi.streetsblog.org/2015/11/09/cyclist-arrested-by-allegedly...

Most recent Streetsblog article: http://chi.streetsblog.org/2015/11/13/witness-officer-drove-reckles...

Views: 44872

Attachments:

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Ben R. on November 10, 2015 at 8:57am

Argh. I have a meeting scheduled at that precise time that I can't miss. Someone please take notes and post - I'm curious to see how this portion resolves.

Permalink Reply by Smart Bike Parts on November 12, 2015 at 5:42pm

Greetings All,

Attended the administrative hearing today and here are cliff notes on same:

1. 2 journalist, 2 cyclists and a personal friend attended this hearing. James Liu, who is an attorney, represented himself. And was also the best dressed person in the room. 

2. The off-duty police officer was present. 

3. As Lisa Curcio predicted a settlement offer was presented and James refused same. James countered with a settlement offer of dismissal and City Counsel refused. 

4. The case went to trial right before lunch and lasted approximately 30 minutes.

5. The officer's testimony was he was in police uniform in his civilian vehicle on the way to work. While he was stopped in traffic at Milwaukee heading south at Des Plaines a cyclist suddenly appeared and banged loudly twice on his vehicle. He followed this cyclist, identified himself as a police officer and then followed him, got out of his vehicle and handcuffed Mr. Liu and then called 911 to summon police.

6. James Liu then cross-examined the officer asking him for more specifics on their encounter. He presented and got admitted one exhibit into evidence which was the photo of James handcuffed with the only officer present being the off duty police officer. 

7. Trial then proceeded to final statements with the city attorney citing the definition of disorderly conduct and explaining why the off duty officer was correct in his assessment that banging by cyclist on his personal vehicle was in fact: unreasonable or offensive act, utterance, gesture or display which, under the circumstances, creates a clear and present danger of a breach of peace or imminent threat of violence. Which gave him legal authority to transition from civilian to peace officer and put James in handcuffs.

8. James Liu presented final arguments defending his actions as simply a cyclist on the way to work on the same streets he travels on almost a daily basis. He was adamant in the simple defense he had done nothing wrong.

9. Associate Judge recused himself, went into chambers for around 5 minutes; and returned with the following verdict. He found the officer more credible and felt this was a simple incident of road rage. He judged in favor of the charge and assigned James Liu $250 fine and $40 court costs and gave him 30 days (maybe 35) to appeal the verdict.

James - I thanked you for your commitment and courage outside the court to standing up for your (and our) rights as cyclists to the road we share with other forms of transportation. If you wish to appeal, I would implore you to consider getting your witness to attend the appeal and reaching out to your community of cyclists to see if you could not get a like minded legal mind to provide you pro-bono legal representation as it is very difficult to be the defendant in this highly charged and emotional legal dispute and damn near impossible to be the defendant, attorney and witness. 

At the end of the day, I'm damn glad I went and damn proud of James.

Ride on,

Eric Puetz

Permalink Reply by Carter O'Brien on November 13, 2015 at 3:41am

Thanks Eric, sorry I wasn't able to make it.  It's really unfortunate the witness didn't attend, DNA Info quotes the judge as saying the below, which is not consistent with the witness' account of the off-duty cop's reckless driving:

The judge said that Liu's actions were likely an incident of road rage or "overreaction to a traffic situation."

"If a Chicago police officer is in uniform on his way to work, he really just wants to get to work, check in and do his job," Berbas said. "I don't think that while in his personal vehicle he's going to be looking to instigate or start anything."

Permalink Reply by Ben R. on November 13, 2015 at 4:42am

I hope this isn't the final chapter in the matter. I understand that in general the judicial system needs to favor the testimony of peace officers rather than those they charge and arrest. I think the obvious issue here is 'credibility' which is to say that if the officer's first instinct is to 'go to work and not cause trouble' so is it James' first instinct.

The sad fact is that some how people believe a hand touching 3000 lbs of glass/metal is 'threatening and abnormal' but 3000lbs of metal and glass veering in to a protected lane that a cyclist is in is normal driving behavior in Chicago rush hour and thus not threatening. The sad fact is, that we all know this driving behavior is not uncommon, but is VERY threatening (and actually a danger, not just perceived as one).

Winter is coming, and that means holiday gifting, I recommend everyone put a portable weather proof video camera  with plenty of extra batteries and storage on their list, or pick one up for a friend.

Permalink Reply by Steve G on November 13, 2015 at 4:54am

The statement the judge made,  "I don't think that while in his personal vehicle he's going to be looking to instigate or start anything.",  is based on his own personal opinion, not the facts in the case. It appears that he shows a prejudice about the emotional and mental state of any police officer on his way to work, which of course he has no way of actually knowing. 

The judicial system should be impartial, and does not have any need to favor the testimony of any person over another, except when there is a factual reason to do so, and especially in case where police wrongdoing is cited as mitigating the offence of the defendant. 

The most unfortunate part of this to me is that the witness did not show up to corroborate James' testimony. 

I have an unobtrusive looking camera on my helmet and it's always recording when I'm riding. That creates testimony that is hard to refute. I hope more and more cyclists start riding with cameras, imo this is a case where the outcome could have been turned around.

Permalink Reply by Ben R. on November 13, 2015 at 5:09am

I feel bad for not being able to make that time slot. The only notice I received that it was even happening was that I saw it posted here the day before. I also did not witness the police officer driving, and so likely nothing I could testify to would have been considered material (only hear-say).

Permalink Reply by Steve G on November 13, 2015 at 5:52am

Of course, Ben. I was referring to the woman who saw the SUV weaving about. Anyway there are many things that make a person unable to attend a hearing during the workday...

It was you who made this event known, it might have slipped completely under the radar had you not. Thanks for that.

Permalink Reply by Ben R. on November 13, 2015 at 6:35am

I really wanted to go, if only just to see the thing unfold. I'm not sure of the legal procedural issues, but it might have been good for James to arrange to meet with Rachael (and myself?) before hand to get a deposition during non-work hours.  That could have been entered as evidence (like the photo) to back up the fact that the 'road rage' probably started and ended at the cop with only 'self defense' on James' part in the middle.

Permalink Reply by Sean Newby on November 13, 2015 at 6:59am

From now on camera mounted, on and recording at all times, not just on way to/from work. Have to start thinking of it as a necessary piece of safety equipment and not a "toy" for my amusement.

Permalink Reply by Steve G on November 13, 2015 at 7:11am

yeah, gotta be.

Permalink Reply by Ben R. on November 13, 2015 at 7:41am

Toward the point of a couple other people on the site, I've found that having the camera on, and filming has caused me to be more conscious of my own cycling behaviors and to be 'a good ambassador'  there camera is unbiased and if something does go down but on that same reel of footage is me blowing through stop signs and lights (even Idaho stops) the other side is going to rewind to that spot and use it to say, 'well so what if I weaved into his lane, he blew that right of way a few blocks before with no regard to the rules he now want me to have followed so precisely'... so be sure to make sure if you do get footage that is as sterling as possible, those in the position to decide these matters are not necessarily going to be sympathetic to the little guy.

Permalink Reply by Lisa Curcio on November 10, 2015 at 10:05am

You probably already know this, but be prepared to have the Assistant Corporation Counsel make you an offer for a settlement agreement.  You probably already know this, too, but I will say this for the general public:  The City's description of the hearing process is here.  Note that the city only needs to introduce the violation as evidence.  It does not need to bring in the "complaining witness".

RSS

Groups

© 2008-2016   The Chainlink Community, L.L.C.   Powered by

Disclaimer  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service