Posted on 03/27/2010 7:11:06 PM PDT by marktwain
A week after being taken into protective custody and having his guns seized because of police concerns, 39-year-old Medford resident David J. Pyles wants to make sure what happened to him doesn't happen to anyone else. Pyles, a planner at the Oregon Department of Transportation, wrote an e-mail to Medford Mayor Gary Wheeler and the City Council demanding that they address what he called "alleged civil rights violations."
-----------------------------cut-------------------------- Pyles said he is involved in a personnel matter at ODOT that is being handled through his union. He surrendered to the team voluntarily and was taken to Rogue Valley Medical Center for a mental health evaluation. Police said they took five firearms "for safekeeping." "What do you and my other elected officials and representatives plan to do to ensure a similar militaristic police action never happens to another resident of Jackson County, Oregon? To another Oregonian? To any U.S. citizen?" Pyles' e-mail said. The e-mail also included messages Medford police Detective Sgt. Scott Clauson and a dispatcher named Monica left during the negotiations. The messages explain that Pyles' employer had reported concerns and police knew he had firearms. Pyles' e-mail describes this as evidence of coordination or collusion and calls for an investigation, perhaps by a grand jury. Mayor Gary Wheeler said that he and the council "aren't involved in day-to-day command matters" of the police department. "I have full confidence in the department," he said.
----------------------cut-----------------------
James Leuenberger, a Lake Oswego criminal defense attorney with an interest in gun-rights cases, said he had talked with Pyles. He said he hadn't been retained, but he would like to be a resource for any attorney on the case. "What it boils down to is an employer can't just have an employee put in jail or a psych ward," Leuenberger said.
(Excerpt) Read more at mailtribune.com ...
And the MSM criticizes Sarah Palin for using “reload” as a metaphor. Sheesh!
Hmmmm ..?? If the employer “had concerns” .. then this could have ended up as another “office” shooting.
I’m not saying the guy would have done anything .. but to ignore it would have been foolish .. as many offices have discovered too late. There were red flags all over the place and they were ignored.
I hope the fact they have allowed him to be released and have returned his weapons to him does not end up being a very bad decision.
I knmow of this attorney. Surprised he hasn’t been disbarred. If I was the guy, I’d find someone else to be my attorney.
On another thread, another poster asserted that Pyles supervisor has done this to five other employees as they separated employment.
No reference was given, so I don’t know if that is true.
Certainly it makes sense to pay attention and to be concerned about possible violence. But, the actual number of “office shootings” is a tiny percentage of those who have disputes in the office. Most of the time it is after someone is fired, and most of the time they give some kind of warning.
There is a tremendous amount of information that we do not have in this case. It may be that the police had more to go on than has been released thus far, but I have not seen anything substantial. I would love to see that 20 page police report, but I have not found it on the web yet.
Do you have any connections in Medford that have better access to the report than we do? It is a 20 page report so maybe it would be more available to a local party.
My assessment is that taking them in the first place is going to be seen as a very bad decision.
“I’m not saying the guy would have done anything .. but to ignore it would have been foolish .. as many offices have discovered too late.”
So to ignore the rantings of his supervisor who has several other similiar incidents wold be foolish?
I have yet to see any report that says he made threats of any kind.
The police and city’s refusal to release the report certainly fuels suspicion.
“My assessment is that taking them in the first place is going to be seen as a very bad decision.”
“shall not be infringed” apparently doesn’t even get lip service in OR.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.