QuickTake:

The city's independent police auditor said he reviewed radio communications, reports and video, and found no misconduct by Eugene police during the Jan. 30 protest at the federal building. But he added that the department’s Internal Affairs Unit will do a separate investigation.

A review of Eugene police actions on Jan. 30 at the federal building found the police declaration of a riot “reasonable,” according to a memo released Friday, Feb. 20, by the city’s police auditor.

The declared riot followed near-daily protests and demonstrations against immigration enforcement after the shooting deaths of two U.S. citizens in Minneapolis.

A crowd of a few hundred people gathered Jan. 30 at the downtown federal building, which takes up a full city block. Earlier in the week, Jan. 27, federal officers detained at least seven protesters at the site and used some chemical munitions, according to eyewitness accounts and statements made by activists.

As part of the review of the Jan. 30 protest, the police auditor examined “body worn video, radio communications recordings, dispatch reports, police reports, drone footage, and dash camera recordings” from Eugene police, according to the three-page memorandum by Police Auditor Craig Renetzky.

“Review of the evidence showed numerous individuals as part of a large crowd surrounded the federal building and were pounding on the building’s windows,” Renetzky wrote, along with evidence “that some windows were broken in various locations around the building adding to the alarm of those inside the location.”

The memo also noted evidence of “federal staff inside that building with no safe way to egress from the building.”

“We therefore determined that the declaration of a riot was reasonable given the circumstances,” Renetzky wrote.

No evidence of anyone entering building

Eugene police officers formed a line between protesters and building windows, but left the property after the arrival of additional federal officers.

The report referred to the definition of “riot” under Oregon law, which states: “A person commits the crime of riot if while participating with five or more other persons the person engages in tumultuous and violent conduct and thereby intentionally or recklessly creates a grave risk of causing public alarm.”

The review did not examine actions taken by federal officers because that is beyond the scope of the Eugene police auditor’s office, the memo stated. 

However, the memo noted that video “clearly showed that various munitions such as pepper spray, flash bang devices, smoke, and other chemical irritants were utilized by federal agency employees upon their arrival to the scene at 7:23 p.m.”

On the night of Jan. 30 Eugene police said a “breach” of the building had been reported by federal authorities. Police Chief Chris Skinner released a video statement that evening saying that while police received reports of a person or persons entering the building, “I can’t confirm that.”

Statements made in recent weeks by federal authorities and the FBI have emphasized damage to the building and also said rocks were thrown at officers, with the FBI requesting tips from the public to identify individuals.

The auditor’s review examined “over 200 body worn and drone generated videos, more than four hours of radio traffic, and all available dispatch and police reports,” along with some videos released by the FBI, the memo stated.

“We did not see evidence of any protesters actually entering the building, but this is not required by the statute” that defines a riot, the auditor said.

In Eugene, the police auditor position is independent of the police department and reports to the City Council.

The first complaint to the auditor’s office about Eugene police that night came at 8:27 p.m. Jan. 30, leading to the preliminary investigation, the memo stated.

“The focus of this review was to identify any actions by EPD officers that violated any laws, ordinances, regulations, policies, or procedures,” the memo stated, finding that Eugene police had no such violations.

“Based on this information we have not leveled any allegations of misconduct at this time,” the auditor stated.

Renetzky also added, however, that the complaints about police actions have been classified as an “Incident Review.”

This means the police department’s Internal Affairs Unit will conduct “a complete investigation and more thorough documentation,” with the investigation to be monitored by the auditor’s office.

“If misconduct is discovered during the process of this complete investigation, I have the authority to re-classify and proceed accordingly,” Renetzky wrote.