- The Washington Times - Thursday, November 19, 2009

A D.C. police detective says that former police Chief Charles H. Ramsey, despite past denials, ordered mass arrests of hundreds of demonstrators who were protesting annual meetings of the World Bank and International Monetary Fund in 2002.

Now the commissioner of the Philadelphia Police Department, Commissioner Ramsey has given inconsistent statements over the years on the arrests, saying repeatedly, including twice in sworn statements, that he did not order them.

Lawyers for some of the protesters arrested said in court papers filed Wednesday that the city has improperly withheld some documents and may have destroyed other evidence that would explain who ordered the arrests of more than 400 people on Sept. 27, 2002.

The court papers ask a federal judge to order the city to pay a punitive penalty of $500,000 and to pay attorneys’ fees and costs in the 7-year-old lawsuit.

The lawyers for the demonstrators say that a running written log of what happened regarding the arrests has been destroyed and that audiotapes of the events that day have been edited.

The arrests became a political controversy in Washington because police funneled the protesters into a park, refused to let anyone out and then apprehended everyone. Some said they were hog-tied in stress and duress positions for 24 hours on a police gym floor.

The most significant disclosure in the newly filed court papers was information from a sworn affidavit by D.C. Detective Paul Hustler.

The detective said he was standing 5 to 6 feet away from then-Chief Ramsey and heard the chief say - as Detective Hustler paraphrased it - we’re going to lock them up and teach them a lesson.

In early 2003, a D.C. Council member asked Chief Ramsey, “You were not a part of that decision making yourself” to take everyone into custody?

“No,” the chief replied. “When I came up on the scene, actually, that was already practically in progress.”

Ten months later at a December 2003 City Council hearing, Chief Ramsey conceded that he did approve the decision to arrest the demonstrators.

But in a sworn deposition in the protesters’ lawsuit in September 2007, Chief Ramsey said “no, it’s not correct” when he was asked whether he had approved the arrests.

Confronted with his concession in December 2003 to the City Council, Chief Ramsey acknowledged that he had approved of the decision to make the arrests. At the same time, he drew a distinction.

“I didn’t say that I approved the arrests,” said Chief Ramsey, declaring that an assistant chief of police made the decision. “I have stated before that I approved of his decision, which is different than me approving the arrests … In my mind, I believe those to be two different things.”

This week, the city tried to block the planned questioning of Detective Hustler, but U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan ordered it to go forward. The detective’s affidavit summarizes what he would say when questioned.

On Wednesday, Jonathan Turley, one of the lawyers representing the demonstrators, said that the detective’s affidavit raises “obviously serious and disturbing questions for the court and counsel.”


Copyright © 2018 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

The Washington Times Comment Policy

The Washington Times welcomes your comments on Spot.im, our third-party provider. Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.

 

Click to Read More and View Comments

Click to Hide