Freedom of speech, but not too loud
Here's a story sent us by an alert reader with way too much time on his hands. It's about a downtown Portland lawyer who got herself excluded from Tri-Met for announcing her opinion of a fare inspector's performance a little too loudly while the inspector was in a hassle with another passenger on a MAX platform. The lawyer appealed to a hearings officer and lost, and apparently she's now suing Tri-Met in county court to clear her name.
The summary of the incident makes for some fascinating reading:
We can't say we blame her for suing. The inspector could have, and should have, ignored her. His attitude doesn't trump her right to speak.
| Posted at 10:41 AM | Permalink |
|
Comments (12)
Meh. We'll see where the case goes. Disturbing the peace and being abusive is not the same as having a "right to speak." If she demonstrated a contempt for, and unwillingness to follow, Trimet rules, than an exclusion doesn't seem that out of bounds to me.
Posted by Snards | January 10, 2012 11:05 AM
Disturbing the peace and being abusive is not the same as having a "right to speak."
But... but... but... this is PORTLAND! It certainly IS THE SAME!
'elp 'elp I'm being repressed!
Posted by EB | January 10, 2012 11:13 AM
"Big Bird" strikes again!
Posted by al m | January 10, 2012 11:27 AM
Right to Speak has been conflated with Right to Do Any Damn Thing You Want. This is bad.
Posted by dean | January 10, 2012 12:51 PM
You have to read on in the transcript to the part where the MAX operator, distracted by the proceedings, ran the train into the end of the platform and struck a bus that had stopped so the driver could harass a young mother and her crying baby.
Posted by Gannicott | January 10, 2012 1:57 PM
She may be in the right legally, but she sounds like a nutcase. And now that she's filed suit, that'll be made public. Who would want to hire this unhinged harridan as their lawyer?
Posted by CrankyOwl | January 10, 2012 5:06 PM
Wow what stalwarts of progressive personal freedoms we have here. Tri-met property? uhh...does he mean public property?
Just think about if you were dependent on trimet because you wern't a high-paid .gov employee and couldn't afford to park downtown because of the outrageous fees, registration taxes, and plethora of other taxes. You were dependent on trimet to get to your job so you were afraid and you won't speak up if you saw the police -I know it's hard to believe- shooting a 12 year old girl with a shotgun at the Max stop.
That ticket-monkey should be punished or fired for abuse of authority. This woman had a right to speak up about potential abuse.
Posted by Pistolero | January 10, 2012 8:45 PM
Tri-met property? uhh...does he mean public property?
Trimet is a private company, so its all private property.
Posted by Jon | January 10, 2012 11:20 PM
I dunno, wouldn't the facts matter here?
Note the fare inspector claims she was trying to get other people involved in the incident.
If her words and behavior could reasonably be expected to cause others to interfere, doesn't Tri-Met have the authority to order her off the platform in order to preserve the peace?
And it is unclear what wrong she was protesting and whether there was a clear and present danger to the fare jumper or whatever he was.
Could she just have identified herself as a concerned citizen, said she believed he was mistreating the person, and asked the fare inspector for his ID so she could turn him in? Or asked the fare inspector to call a supervisor to the scene.
That likely would be more effective than shouting anyway.
And I realize a fare inspector is not a full police officer, but I bet they have certain police powers, and my daddy said it is never wise to argue with a cop in the street. One should wait until later to sue the badtard.
CrankyOwl is right. This lawyer's reputation is going to take a hit. She does not seem a candidate for the bench.
Posted by niceoldguy | January 10, 2012 11:41 PM
Trimet is a private company, so its all private property.
Really now? Because my tax dollars, local, state, and federal are sure paying for it.
Of course the Trimet report would make her concerns "unclear."
Should anyone seeing a 12 y/o girl with a shotgun pointed at her just get the officers badge# and walk away? What if the officer forgot to load it with LTL rounds? What if that was your daughter and no one said anything?
I know this is shocking, but there is a clear pattern of questionable use of force in this city, well enough that the Federal DOJ is investigating.
I really enjoy this progressive liberal empathy, it's really painting a clear picture.
Posted by Pistolero | January 11, 2012 7:54 AM
On a NYC bus last year, this sort of thing took place. As the driver argued with a non-paying passenger, another confronted the driver, accused him of racism. The non-payer was black, as was the driver. He was white. He even came up with the legendary line "Do you know who I am?" Other passengers began shouting "Shut up!" to the buttinski.
Driver, in the midst of near-gridlock traffic, stopped the bus after calling cops. Then walked off the bus, when cops arrived to deal with the two troublesome passengers.
This is all true, and I felt lucky that I'd witnessed this surreal scene on my visit to the Big Apple.
Posted by Don Lief | January 11, 2012 8:05 AM
Pistolero, I completely agree with you. But our tax money goes to many private interests in this city.
Yes, Trimet gets tax money, but they can get you for trespassing on private property.
It is not "public transportation" like many folks believe.
Posted by Jon | January 11, 2012 12:18 PM