Case Summary

What happened?
I was rudely accosted, assaulted with battery, and tased at Minneapolis St Paul USA international airport by Airport Police, simply for choosing to leave the airport by bicycle. I had broken no laws. I use a bicycle as a significant part of my daily mode of travel. I have legally cycled to and from airports internationally including 3 of the 4 major London airports, with no problems. I was using my bicycle completely in accord with MN Statutes and Metropolitan Airport Commission Ordinances.

When did this happen?
Sept 7 2006, approx 6:10pm

Where did this happen?
On the Outbound Roadway (also called Glumack Drive), just east of the post office and west of the highway.

Who would have witnessed it?
Many people. It was full daylight, and in view of the "A" concourse. Anyone leaving the airport would have passed the scene of the incident. The extensive 800+ CCTV video camera system at the airport, fully updated since 9-11, must have recorded everything, and with multiple viewpoints.

What are the details?
I arrived on a flight from California, retrieved my folding bike and left Lindbergh Terminal. Legally riding on Outbound Road (same as Glumack Dr) a squad car pulled up alongside. The speed limit along the road is initially 15mph, eventually becoming 30mph (the same as residential Minneapolis). The Officer in the passenger seat began yelling at me ('what are you doing?' 'Get off the road' 'You're blocking traffic' etc) It was indistinguishable from what regular cyclists occasionally experience as road rage. I was not stopped in a normal way with siren and/or flashing lights for any kind of violation, but was being distractedly yelled at while traveling down the road. I slowed and pulled to the curb. The commanding officer jumped out and told me to get up 'on' the curb, or I would be maced and tased. I respectfully but very firmly protested the way I was being treated. I specifically said that I was happy to abide by whatever laws applied to the situation, but I did not have any idea why I was even stopped or what law I had broken. I was told 'you can't ride here'. I said that I knew of no signs, and asked where it was posted. I was vaguely told that there was a sign prohibiting bikes "back there", with a general wave in the direction of the Lindbergh terminal (there were in fact no such signs). When asked for the specifics, I was told 'I'm telling you you can't ride here' and was again threatened with mace and taser. At no time did I raise my voice, use profanity, or make any threatening gestures. I simply stood for my civil rights and asked questions. Twice, I specifically had to tell Officer Wingate, the commanding officer, that he was being rude to me. I did not acquiesce to the mistreatment. I asked questions regarding the legitimacy of my having been stopped at all. I asked to speak to Officer Wingate's supervisor. I questioned the overall tone of the interview for its belligerence. In spite of having done nothing other than speak out, I was threatened again with mace and taser. I was given a series of contradictory, unlawful, and increasingly unsafe and punitive orders clearly designed just to intimidate and humiliate, including being told " you're going to walk your bike back to the terminal and take public transit"- this, against lanes of oncoming traffic with no sidewalks, no pedestrians allowed, and dangerous blind, walled curves. When I protested the safety and legality of this I was bluntly told to get on my knees. When told I was 'wasting their time' I agreed that it was a waste of time for all of us. I actually wished them a good evening, 'hoping the rest of it goes better than this has gone', and noted that I was not being cited for any violation. I said I would take the side road as earlier ordered by Officer Wingate (the safest and most reasonable of the several contradictory orders given to me, though one-way going the wrong way), and took the initiative in closing what was an altogether illegitimate stop and interview. Officer Wingate's anger at this and perhaps embarrassment and sense of not having been able, through threats of violence, to force the upper hand in the situation then led to a series of spontaneous actions on his part that were an egregious escalation of police force and a clear violation of my person.

And then?
Immediately as I was leaving and without any warning whatsoever I was thrown off my bicycle onto the pavement. I sustained abrasion wounds to chin and arm. My helmet casing sustained a new crack, but otherwise prevented a direct blow to my head. My glasses were thrown off by the force of the impact and bounced several feet away. Officer Wingate moments later would smash them into the pavement with his boot. But first, I was jerked into an upright position, and Officer Wingate jumped to the side and ordered me tased by his officer in training. This, too, happened immediately and without any warning or choice whatsoever. I was then handcuffed, body searched, and luggage searched. Three additional squad cars soon arrived, including Officer Wingate's supervisor. However, my conversation with Sergeant Karsnia was abruptly cut short on the grounds that I had allegedly 'tried to take a swing' at Officer Wingate. I was handcuffed and transferred to Hennepin County Hospital, then to Hennepin County jail where I was held without charges and without bail.

What about the taser?
The gun shoots two darts into the body, penetrating up to 1/2 inch. It applies five seconds of 50,000 volts that attacks the central nervous system. One falls without muscular control, thus I struck the pavement for a second time without being able to check my fall. The pain is by all accounts excruciating. The use of this weapon can only be considered barbaric. Note that it is not considered by the police to be a non-lethal weapon. It is considered a less-lethal weapon because hundreds of deaths worldwide have been attributed to its use (see Amnesty International's statistics). A pre-existing medical condition could lead to death. Officer Wingate could not have had any knowledge of my medical history, yet risked the use of the weapon on me. To use this weapon for convenience and/or forced compliance in non-threatening situations is an astonishing abuse of authority, and is also specifically against the MN police policy for escalation of force. To use it simply out of anger is clear police brutality.

In your view, what factors caused the conflict?
There are probably many combined factors. It must be understood that from the onset that I was treated disrespectfully and as a second class citizen. My presence on the road, though absolutely legal, must have been an annoyance to Officer Wingate. I was clearly profiled simply for being a cyclist, a clear violation of civil rights. Officer Wingate, the officer primarily responsible for the incident, was comparatively inexperienced in years having taken his oath of office less than 2 3/4 years before. Officer Bryant (who played only a minor role in the incident, but was made to write the bulk of the police narratives) had taken his oath of office only 2 1/2 weeks before. Officer Wingate seemed to me to be demonstrating his prowess to the younger officer-in-training. I felt that I was being used as educational fodder- perhaps in how to intimidate and take quick control of a 'suspicious' person through threats of mace and taser. Also, perhaps to 'teach a lesson' and discourage travel by bicycle using the weight and threat of police authority.

As another factor, and as most air travelers can attest, the U.S. homeland security color-coded alert system has only created an absurd mania at airports with no specific or tangible benefits.
Despite many excellent officers doing difficult and taxing work, some officers and/or departments may feel a certain entitlement to take matters into their own hands, above and beyond the law. A possible example with the same MSP Airport police department just a few months before my incident:
70 year old Paul Casperson in the summer of 2006 recovered his bicycle, cut to pieces, from MSP Airport Police. There was no explanation given. As Mr. Casperson said in a Star Tribune interview 'Some people don't like bicycles or the people who ride them'.
MSP airport workers who are cyclists have also experienced harassment by MSP Airport Police.
Overall, I question what conversations have occurred within Airport Police to lead to such vindictive actions.

What does this case mean for civil rights and protections provided by the Bill of Rights?
Many, many things.
It is a matter of unfair profiling and discrimination of cyclists.
It has to do with the fair treatment of innocent civilians who have posed no threat. (By law, an officer must have probable cause to stop a person and detain them.)
It has to do with certain officers feeling entitled to take the law into their own hands, to create laws on the spot, and to introduce an unlawful escalation of force where none is warranted. Even worse, it has to do with the precedent of certain police departments supporting and concealing police misconduct using the criminal court system against innocent people.
It has to do with the Constitutional right to free unrestricted passage and equally easy access given to those who choose to travel by bicycle. (Are auto drivers stopped for driving under the speed limit? Or for causing traffic?)
Although I have no criminal history, I was put in jail without charges and without bail. I was ordered held without bail specifically "to prevent further criminal conduct". Bill Gates could not have written a check to get me out of jail.
The police narratives are clearly concocted. Review of the video evidence by Airport Police supervisors would show that there was no struggle or physical threat to the officers at any time.
I can also say from experience that the entire jail circumstance is one designed to intimidate and demean the individual human being. Circumstances within jail can easily impact one's morale. My booking into Hennepin County Jail itself took over eight hours, no doubt to assure that I would be held the maximum legal length of time.

How could this happen?
If this survives the test of law, it would be one case that justifies the mistreatment of anyone, simply for speaking out for their rights or disagreeing with a police officer.
I question the education of officers, a curriculum which takes very few months beyond an undergraduate degree, if even that.
I question the wisdom of MSP Airport Police Deptartment management in having a comparatively inexperienced officer training a new recruit.
I question overall, the preponderance of violence and the tacit acceptance of it in so many aspects of our society.

What are the charges?
It took the prosecution over a month to decide charges against me:

COUNT 1 Gross Misdemeanor, 'Obstructing Legal Process' by force or violence or threat thereof, maximum 1 year in prison
COUNT 2 'Obstrucing Legal Process' misdemeanor
COUNT 3 'Failure to comply with a lawful order', misdemeanor
COUNT 4, 'riding a bicycle opposite adjacent vehicle traffic', misdemeanor
COUNT 5, 'failure to obey official traffic control signal', misdemeanor
COUNT 6, 'Failure to travel in correct direction on one-way roadway', misdemeanor

None of the charges are true. An absurd case is being framed against me.
ALSO NOTE: none of the charges are for 'fleeing' or for taking the initiative in ending the interview. This was absolutely legal given my circumstances. Yet, the violent acts were apparently done to me because of this.

What is the photographic evidence against you?
This is also absurd and shows that Airport Police do not know, or are choosing not to acknowledge, the legal difference between a cyclist and a pedestrian. There are (9) police photographs total, taken the evening of the incident. Seven of the photos feature 'NO PED XING' signs. Needless to say, I was not a pedestrian. I was a cyclist. I was no more a pedestrian than the drivers of cars were pedestrians. MN Statutes 169.01 clearly defines a bicycle as a vehicle, and a pedestrian as someone afoot or in a wheelchair.
The remaining two photos are of an 'AUTHORIZED VEHICLES ONLY' sign, buried in the middle of the airport at the transit hub, and not even visible from the Outbound road. All (9) sign photographs by the police are completely irrelevant to a cyclist leaving Lindbergh terminal. It is astonishing to me that in 8 months this case has not yet been dismissed simply for the absurdity of the evidence and the lack of probable cause.

What are the police claiming?
That I "struggled" while tased, that I "forcefully shrugged my shoulders", that I was 'resistent',
that I prevented a "take-down maneuver" by a trained officer. For the record, I weigh less than 140 pounds.

What motive is there for the police to frame a case against you?
Because of the unlawful violations against my person they must be concerned of a backlash civil rights lawsuit.
It is an embarrassing case for Airport Police because of the many absurdities in narrative and evidence, and the transgressions of officer behavoir. They will fight for a conviction of any kind rather than see this proceed further.

What about the video evidence?
Airport Police, in control of the CCTV system, have notified the prosecution that all video footage was ‘written over’ because I didn’t show up on any of it. Yet there is a margin note on the video request page 27 to ‘Burn 1800-1835’, representing the full time of the incident with substantial margins on either side (the entire incident only took 18 minutes by police records, from initial stop to leaving by ambulance.)

If evidence has been destroyed, I consider this a deliberate destruction of evidence.
Assuming a DVD was burned as ordered by Sergeant Karsnia #11, it must exist somewhere.
If an incident of this seriousness occurred, why would video evidence not be saved? If police allegations are true, it could only assist in the prosecution of a crime. For lawsuits it could only help protect officers from claims of mistreatment.

RE: requests for video footage, Airport Police have responded via the prosecution that:
"While the cameras at the airport record the outbound roadway, they do not record the periphery of that roadway such that none of the incident wherein Mr Orsak rode his bike or engaged in interactions with the officers was recorded. As a result, there was never any footage constituting evidence of the incident in the possession of the MSP Police Dept. As a result, the footage from that date and time, which did not contain evidence of the incident, was not saved but rather written over pursuant to the routine policies and procedures of the Metropolitan Airport Commission."

Is this plausible?

Note: The CCTV surveillance system was substantially upgraded after 9-11. Over 800 cameras of sophisticated pan/tilt/zoom technology are in daily use at MSP International Airport.

What about the new signs?
Four months after the incident, around Jan 5 2007, Airport Police, without the knowledge of the Metropolitan Airport Commission, installed (4) new signs prohibiting bicycles. I have extensive before/after photo and video documentation of this.

Tell us more about yourself-
I frequently use a folding Brompton bicycle in conjunction with air travel. I try at least to make my ground transport environmentally sensitive. On the day of this incident I was looking forward to getting off the plane, retrieving my bike, and taking a late afternoon ride through Fort Snelling state park on the way to see my granddaughter and family in St Paul.
Professionally I am currently a violinist playing principal with the Minnesota Opera and have performed for 30+ years in many independent projects. Vocationally I am also a dedicated visual artist and researcher. In the Twin Cities I have played with both the Minnesota Orchestra and the St Paul Chamber Orchestra and have collaborated with colleagues in many concerts with the self-directed chamber orchestra Philomusica. I have been a teacher to many hundreds of students here and abroad, and in Minnesota was once named a MacPhail Center Outstanding Teacher. I have been fortunate in my career to have worked with many great pedagogues, and with many outstanding performers and artists. I have met inspired people doing great work in countless areas. I have served on the board of directors of several non-profit arts organizations and assisted many others in their development. I take seriously the principles in the Bill of Rights and the fair treatment of individuals worldwide. I am a vegan and non-violent person and applaud and support many peaceful and progressive causes.

What happens next?
The next hearing is tentatively scheduled for May 25th at Hennepin County Courthouse.

Schedule updates will be posted here at www.greencycles.blogspot.com

I invite you to post your comments on this, even if brief, and invite all who are able to attend the trial. Together we can strive for positive change to arise from this ordeal.

With many thanks, and hope for the peaceful resolution of all such issues,

Stephan Orsak


/////////////////////////////////////////////
U.S. Constitution Bill of Rights Amendment IV:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

U.S. Constitution Bill of Rights Amendment VIII:
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.
////////////////////////////////////////////