Nearly 800 people were arrested. Pepper spray and flash-bang grenades were repeatedly used to disperse crowds. Store-front windows were smashed and vehicle tires slashed. If nothing else, the four days of the Republican National Convention certainly succeeded in bringing some excitement to the normally sleepy streets of downtown St. Paul.
Before a sometimes rambunctious public audience today, a seven-member panel, led by former U.S. Attorney Tom Heffelfinger and former Assistant U.S. Attorney Andy Luger, presented an 82-page report on policing during the Republican National Convention to the St. Paul City Council. While the panel generally concluded that the St. Paul police acted appropriately in overseeing security arrangements during the four-day gathering, it did offer numerous criticisms of the department’s preparations and tactics. Among the shortcomings outlined in the report:
• The cops should have done a better job of preparing the public for the police presence during the RNC. In numerous community events leading up to the convention, police officials emphasized that they intended to utilize a friendly and low-key approach to law enforcement. In reality, there were scores of cops in riot gear lining parade routes and protests on all four days of the convention, leading many observers to characterize it as a police state. “We take fault with the city for not preparing the community better,” Luger told the city council.
• The St. Paul Police Department was slow in working out “joint-powers agreements” with more than 100 outside law-enforcement agencies deemed necessary to staff the event. This led to uneven training for officers and a “slow and disjointed response to anarchist activities” on the first day of the convention.
• There was no established protocol for dealing with journalists who got swept up in unlawful assemblies and other events. This led to the arrest of more than 40 reporters who were attempting to do their jobs. “Both the media and the SPPD struggled with the question of who was a journalist and whether journalists (however defined) should be afforded some form of special treatment should they find themselves detained or arrested,” the report concludes.
• The use of “mass arrests” to deal with disturbances should be further reviewed. In particular, the report raises questions about the detainment of roughly 350 people on the Marion Street bridge during the final night of the convention.
Despite these criticisms, the panel concluded that the threat of violence from protesters during the convention was significant and that there were credible plans to shut down the convention. “These were sophisticated, organized and tenacious activists intent on committing repeated and highly dangerous acts of violence,” the report states.
During the one-hour presentation, a packed house of observers often laughed, jeered and offered unsolicited criticisms of the report’s findings. While the outside review was intended to placate critics of the police’s handling of the convention, it was clear that many who showed up were unimpressed by the process. Heffelfinger and Luger were repeatedly interrupted by cries of “lies” from the audience as they gave their testimony. On a couple of occasions city council president Kathy Lantry threatened to shut the meeting down if the audience did not desist from disrupting the presentation.
The seven-member panel was hired in October by the City of St. Paul to review police preparations and tactics during the four-day gathering. The group interviewed more than 50 people involved in RNC protests and policing, reviewed thousands of pages of planning documents, and watched hundreds of hours of videotape. All exhibits, including videos and photographs, can be reviewed on the city’s web site.
Despite the criticism, St. Paul Mayor Chris Coleman expressed satisfaction at how the four-day gathering proceeded.
“I still believe at the end of the day it was a successful convention,” he told the city council. “We will take this report very seriously and we will act upon it where appropriate.”














15 Comments »
Comment posted January 14, 2009 @ 11:20 pm
I think Chris Coleman is a decent man, but he seems so out of touch. The image of St. Paul especially, but the Twin Cities in general, was damaged. Same for the image of the police. Downtown became an armed camp. No distinction was made between masked vandals, peaceful protesters obeying police orders and following prescribed routes, journalists trying to cover the event, and medics helping the injured. I saw a side of local law enforcement I never thought I’d see in the Twin Cities.
Sheriff Fletcher seemed to seek out the cameras at every chance, and seems to be the mover behind the raids before the convention. I would have liked an accounting of his actions especially, but none of these reports deal with the sheriffs department.
Comment posted January 15, 2009 @ 12:05 am
I went to the St. Paul City Council meeting to hear about the RNC police tactic report.
I did except the report to be bias, as it was led by two Prosecutors, but I had no idea how unprofessional it was. I’m over 40, professional, currently work in business, church going, Democrat, supporting member of Veterans for Peace.. and I was so embarrassed and saddened by the words and comments made by Heffelfinger. I could not believe this guy was FEDERAL Prosecutor. He sound a bit like Rumsfield and a bit like Katherine Kerstner. I couldn’t stop shaking my head as he made the absurd comments of what went down during the RNC. Some comments where even juvenile. When describing the police on day 4 terrorizing the protesters in the Sears parking lot (my description).. he said the police where doing “whack a mole”.. if you saw the film “Terrorizing Dissent” you will see what “whack a mole” looks like. Another weird thing.. he gave a blanket name for those arrested as Anarchist.. I lost count of how many times he said “Anarchist”… He would mention how the “anarchist” came to do Violence on St. Paul and the RNC.. and ruined it for the Peaceful Protesters. Yet when showing the pictures or videos I saw images of kids in black/dark colors and bandannas, mixed with older people in various types of clothes, those “peacekeepers” and legal watchers in their neon hats. Just like I am ashamed for our national when Rumsfield would talk, I was ashamed when Heffelfinger and Luger gave their report. It was unbelievable.
It is too much to ask for the truth? They have a narrative.. no numbers, no real facts or evidence of what protesters do, or for that matter what law-enforcement did.
They both recited rhetoric that Bob Fletcher and St. Paul Police Chief John Harrington made about arrests and raids.. I couldn’t believe it. He might as well just said “they did a Heck of a Job Brownie”. It was clearly a waste of 100,000 of tax payers money.
While there you could help but laugh out loud in disgust to their comments, or shout out. Maybe the video will pick that up. We had to be silenced several times but you have to remember we where not allowed to ask questions or have a representative make comments. Even Councilperson Thune did not ask any questions.
I would like to write more but I am too tired and disgusted. St. Paul really needs to find some better city leaders because these people do not care about civil rights, or that their city was used by the GOP, by Secret Service and Homeland Security to terrorize those who spoke out.
There needs to be a REAL independent investigation of the attack on Civil Liberties. Things where so bad, that even Amnesty International called for an Independent hearing.
The St. Paul City Council website probably will have a video of the City Council meeting
Comment posted January 15, 2009 @ 12:25 am
Heffelfinger/Luger: state apparachiks attempting to smooth over MSP elites 2008 welcoming of international terrorists.
give the Heffelfinger/Luger report, the city councils and the police thug/gang loving mayors the extended Heffel finger. the people are fed up with brutality and lies.
Comment posted January 15, 2009 @ 4:40 am
“There needs to be a REAL independent investigation of the attack on Civil Liberties”.
In other words, one that agrees with your apparent view that Republicans should to be able to assert their political rights without interference, terroristic threats, or acts of violence.
“Progressives” cannot rationalize this away. You are on the wrong side of law and history on this one.
Comment posted January 15, 2009 @ 4:42 am
Correction:
In other words, one that agrees with your apparent view that Republicans SHOULDN’T be able to assert their political rights without interference, terroristic threats, or acts of violence.
Comment posted January 15, 2009 @ 7:40 am
Certainly I agree with the comments, but I find the Independent’s coverage disturbing.
This article is as bad as any mainstream media article in its presentation in the first paragraph of the demonstrators as violent–the broken window is now like a broken record, and the tire-slashing–
two incidents where thousands of nonviolent demonstrators tried to exercise their civil liberties and rights.
The article itself is not much better–it makes the people who packed the courtroom sound irresponsible. Maybe they were in the great American tradition of “throw the bum out,” but the threat to our civil liberties is serious, and they know that.
And since all those demonstrators were there, why not interview some of them and make this a balanced article.
In other words, this coverage is business as usual. It’s all I would expect from the mainstream press. But from the Independent I expect more.
Sue Ann Martinson
Comment posted January 15, 2009 @ 8:19 am
The first paragraph is factual, Sue Ann, not editorialized. As for our coverage, I suggest you go back to the on-the-ground reportage we provided during and following the convention. A few of our most-read pieces are here, but you can also follow our RNC tags.
Comment posted January 15, 2009 @ 8:20 am
Nachman,
I think you’re missing the point of Ann G’s comments.
Of course, Republicans should be able to assert their political rights without interference (assuming you are not defining “interference” to mean any and all dissent or protest), terroristic threats, or acts of violence.
However, what Ann G., who was there, is asserting is that the police cracked down with excessive force on persons who were merely protesting and who were NOT engaging in improper interference, terroristic threats, or acts of violence.
Comment posted January 15, 2009 @ 10:55 am
Although many of the knuckleheads that showed up didn’t need any help making asses of themselves, I agree with the reports finding of fault with the city’s “leadership” (you’ll have to download your own copy to follow me since Mr. Demko failed to provide any mention of anything not pointing fingers at the police).
City councilman Dave Thune, during several pre-convention public meetings, clearly gave protesters the impression that they would be free to do as they chose.
Keeping in mind the limited comprehension skills of many of the players, Thune had the responsibility to make it clear that when he said the whole city was a “free speech zone”, that didn’t mean protesters would be allowed to throw human waste and chemicals at visitors, nor does throwing signs and sand bags onto busses from overpasses constitute “free speech”.
Thune knows these people well, he’s one of them. But he was also privy to the knowledge that the RNC would not be declared a free for all zone.
I understand why our local domestic terrorists feel betrayed; and I can well imagine that by the time they are released from prison, they’re going to be downright peeved.
Comment posted January 15, 2009 @ 11:46 am
I guess I don’t understand what constitutes “free speech”. As I have read people we arrested for doing nothing other than attending a gathering of people. There was noting that they did, it was only that they were there. Then, for those who did shout, speak, demonstrate carry signs, and gesture – why isn’t that “free speech.” If they are not entitled to do that, then why are those inside the RNC convention entitled to do what they do? Isn’t what’s good for the goose is also OK for the gander? Or is the RNC waging its own class warfare by oppressing “free speech of the masses?
Comment posted January 15, 2009 @ 6:20 pm
“However, what Ann G., who was there, is asserting is that the police cracked down with excessive force on persons who were merely protesting and who were NOT engaging in improper interference, terroristic threats, or acts of violence”.
I am a former police officer, and I observed what happened in St. Paul. The police acted with restraint and professionalism. Riot control has become an art.
Your compatriots were *very* lucky to have had Minnesota law enforcement, and not have cops the way my department was trained for riot control. It would have been a phalanx of police in a flying v formation and nightsticks. The outcome would have been very different, with you on the losing end.
I was *very* impressed with Minnesota law enforcement. FWIW, you step into a war zone, expect to eat tear gas and get your head knocked in. That’s what riots are.
Tell those brave revolutionaries to stop whining and man up.
Comment posted January 15, 2009 @ 11:29 pm
>> I am a former police officer, and I observed what happened in St. Paul. The police acted with restraint and professionalism. Riot control has become an art. <<
State-of-the-art, from the Boston Globe, October 22, 2004:
An Emerson College junior, drawn to Fenway Park to toast the first Red Sox pennant in 18 years, was killed yesterday, shot in the eye by a projectile fired by police seeking to disperse revelers who authorities said threatened to spin out of control.
Victoria Snelgrove, a 21-year-old journalism student from East Bridgewater, was struck by a pepper-spray-filled plastic ball at about 1:30 a.m., some 90 minutes after the Red Sox celebrated on the infield at Yankee Stadium, provoking an estimated 80,000 jubilant and mostly young fans to converge on Kenmore Square.
Comment posted January 16, 2009 @ 7:11 am
I was specifically writing about the RNC riots.
Your argument, then, is what?
Comment posted January 16, 2009 @ 9:55 am
Whatever. If a cop manages to successfully flush a toilet, people are impressed and get a hard-on for their professionalism. Yeah, a good number of cops did show restraint during the RNC, as much as they could at least, when their orders appeared to be arrest everyone in sight regardless of actual crimes. There were also a good number of stupid thug cops I had the pleasure of dealing with during the four days of the RNC. Not surprising given the character of the Ramsey County Sheriff.
Comment posted January 21, 2009 @ 3:12 am
i live out-of-state but,by God,i’m still an American.i watched,what coverage was made available,not much, but enough to recognize a fiasco.if this sorry display of fascism is the rnc’s version of America,then we have a serious enemy of truth,justice,and the American way!don’t let them get away with it folks.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
Leave a comment