Deadly Force

Family Tragedy: The police shooting of Kuan Kao, top, has sparked charges of racial discrimination and attracted several major civil-rights investigations.

Outcry over police brutality

By Paula Harris

THE FATAL APRIL 15 shooting of Kuan Chung Kao, 33, by Rohnert Park Police Officer Jack Shields and the seven other police-involved deaths in Sonoma County over the past two years are gaining fervent attention nationwide, including a glimmer of interest from one long-silent local human-rights group.

In new developments disclosed this week, the Independent has learned that the Rev. Jesse Jackson will visit Sonoma County to meet Kao’s widow, Ayling Wu, at an as-yet-undetermined date; state Attorney General Dan Lungren announced during a visit to Santa Rosa this week that his office has opened an investigation into the Kao shooting; Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., will meet with Wu on Oct. 3; and a second meeting between local law-enforcement chiefs, Bay Area civil-rights groups, and officials from the U.S. Justice Department is set for Oct. 1 to discuss ways to increase racial and ethnic sensitivity among local police.

Kao, drunk and swinging a wooden pole, was shot at point-blank range on his front lawn by an officer who later said he felt threatened by Kao’s “martial arts-style” moves. Critics point out that Kao had no martial arts training and contend that the shooting was racially motivated.

The FBI, the U.S. Justice Department, and, last week, the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights have all stepped in to probe a possible pattern of police brutality alleged in eight separate cases. Yet critics say the response from our own backyard–specifically from the Sonoma County Human Rights Commission–has been strangely absent. “I’m pretty disappointed,” says Nancy Wang, president of the Redwood Empire Chinese Association. “The commission has put this under the table–despite all the action right now, the Human Rights Commission is doing nothing.”

Under investigation by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights.

Wang–who along with 25 other local civil-rights advocates addressed the Human Rights Commission during its monthly meeting on Monday–believes the commission should help the community organize police review boards.

“The FBI is still doing an investigation, and when that’s completed we can become more involved,” responds the commission’s chair, Phyllis Rosenfield, who denies that the group is skirting the issue. The commission has written to local police officers’ associations for information about training procedures regarding ethnic issues, she says, adding that there has been no reply.

As a result of this week’s meeting, Rosenfield says the commission will hold a public forum next month to address the issue of alleged police brutality. Review boards could have the authority to evaluate allegations of police misconduct and could recommend disciplinary action. But the commission will stop short of making any recommendations to the county Board of Supervisors. “We’re not necessarily advocating one way or another,” explains Rosenfield. “We act as a forum to hear from all sides, including the police.”

Oakland attorney John Burris, who specializes in police misconduct cases and is representing the Kao family, says it’s important for federal officials to evaluate local law-enforcement training and policies “to develop police procedures more consistent with contemporary law-enforcement techniques.”

Sonoma County District Attorney Mike Mullins has said he has never encountered so many deaths involving confrontations with law-enforcement officers in such a short time, but does not see a pattern. However, some observers have pointed out that the string of cases under investigation by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights began just days after the March 29, 1995, execution-style shotgun slaying of popular Sonoma County Sheriff’s Deputy Frank Trejo, 58, by state parolee Robert Scully. Trejo was the first police officer killed in the line of duty in the county in 20 years. Some wonder if his death didn’t trigger an urge to pay back local criminals.

Mullins says any correlation between the events is pure speculation. “I wouldn’t ascribe anything to that,” he adds. But, attorney Burris says that when an officer is injured or killed, it psychologically affects all officers. “It heightens their sense of insecurity and causes them to overreact to events,” he claims. “I’ve seen times when police officers are injured and other officers retaliate against citizens.”

Police psychologist Wayne Light, who has worked as a consultant for many Sonoma County law-enforcement agencies, says that although an incident such as the Trejo killing makes officers “more conscious of how vulnerable we are,” the eight cases under investigation are merely symptoms of population growth. “We’re no longer a small wine community,” he says. “We’ve hit a population base of over 100,000 and we’re growing very fast,” he says. “While Sonoma County is bursting with new people, the number of felons and disturbed, problematic, and violent people is also going up at a higher percentage.

“It may be a sign of our society.”

From the Sept. 17-24, 1997 issue of the Sonoma County Independent.

© Metro Publishing Inc.

Taking a Stand

Michael Amsler

Sign of the times: Oona Risling-Sholl, 16, filed a civil-rights complaint that could have nationwide implications.

Local sex-harassment case breaks new ground

By Paula Harris

I NEVER CONSIDERED myself courageous,” muses Oona Risling-Sholl, 16, running a slender hand through her long, reddish hair. “This has been really hard. I’m lucky enough to have parents who listened, but a lot of my friends have been too scared to say anything.”

Her classmates may have stayed mum, but Oona–a contemplative, artistic girl with delicate features and slight frame–spoke out. As a result, her allegations of sexual harassment at a Santa Rosa school and subsequent lawsuit have packed a punch for school district employees that is being felt throughout the nation.

This groundbreaking case, the first of its kind in the United States, will test whether school officials can be held personally liable for failing to take reasonable steps to stop either teacher-to-student or peer-to-peer sexual harassment. Past cases have held that the school districts, but not the individual teachers and administrators, are legally liable.

Oona claims she suffered both types of harassment five years ago as a sixth grader at Santa Rosa’s J.C. Fremont Elementary School during the 1992-93 school year. She and her parents want to sue the individuals she claims were accountable.

The teenager says she was sexually harassed by a student teacher and by boys in her class. Her civil-action suit alleges that the student teacher fondled her, that male students called her slang terms for “whore” and referred to her body parts as “melons” and “beaver,” and that one boy struck her across the face and told her to “get used to it.”

“[The defendants] had individually failed to protect Oona’s civil rights under Title IX. It was clear they had certain duties that they failed in doing, and also intentionally chose not to respond,” says Oona’s attorney, Desiree Cox. “They never identified the complaints as sexual harassment, which would have triggered their policy.”

Eventually, Oona’s parents sent an official complaint to the Office of Civil Rights in San Francisco. The OCR found severe procedural problems and a hostile environment at the school, says Cox, adding that she hopes the suit will raise awareness. “Hopefully, this will help teachers take their responsibility more seriously, identify sexual harassment, and take steps to stop it.”

Michael Senneff, attorney for the defendants (including sixth-grade teacher and current principal Patricia McCaffrey, former principal Gerald Hill, ex-student teacher Drew Ibach, and director of elementary education Ronald Lundy), did not return a call for comment. However, Bob Henry, legal counsel for Sonoma County Schools and Colleges, says the situation is complex because there are several gradations of liability in federal Title IX provisions. “So it’s a difficult proposition to predict where the law will land,” he explains.

LAST MONTH, a three-judge panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco unanimously ruled that the Fremont School officials are not entitled to qualify for immunity from the suit, because it was clearly established they had a “duty . . . to prevent sexual harassment of students.” But, a week later, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals handed down a contradictory decision.

“We’re still studying whether to take an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court,” says Henry, adding that lawyers, the school district, and the insurance company will decide within the month whether to proceed with an appeal.

A similar case, involving a Petaluma school counselor 18 months earlier, established that the counselor was not personally responsible for failing to prevent alleged sexual harassment. Title IX advocates say that ruling was a warning, and that in the intervening time, the law has become clear enough to implicate individual school officials in current cases.

Oona’s mother, Kate Sholl, claims that after the alleged incidents her daughter became increasingly withdrawn, abandoned her art hobbies, complained of stomachaches, and didn’t want to go to school. When she heard Oona’s claims of repeated sexual harassment and retaliation, Sholl sent several letters complaining about the problem to school officials. She claims that officials told her they would be “on their guard” but didn’t conduct an investigation or write a report. Sholl says that, like most parents, she didn’t how to file a complaint. “I didn’t know there was an official sexual harassment policy and a seven-page form [to complete],” she says.

Linda Purrington of the Petaluma-based Title IX Advocates says one of the main problems is that schools have been suppressing sexual harassment reports. “There are often situations where the school administration does not actually set down complaints on paper, but then everything comes out afterward as more victims come forward,” she explains. “All schools have a sexual harassment policy in place, but there is a tendency to treat sexual harassment as trivial.”

Purrington says it’s important that parents also make a report, documenting the incident, the time, and the date. “The element of documentation is absolutely crucial. In school systems they often know who the problem kids are, but they decide, ‘Let’s not muck up this kid’s record,'” she says. “Sometimes it’s just onerous paperwork. Who wants to be officious and pushy? But it’s crucial, and a dated set of reports becomes a legal document, and a diary is a presentable form of evidence in court.”

Attorney Bob Henry admits there have been problems with schools dragging out complaints and not adhering to procedures. “If they build documentation into the process and build it quickly, they can have a better record to look back on,” he says.

He adds that several school district workshops have advised school officials to act quickly, disciplining or even removing a student, if they become aware of harassment. “I believe the schools in the North Coast have turned an important corner,” he says. “At one time–a year or two ago–there were sexual harassment complaints [within the Sonoma County School District] almost every week. Now, I’m seeing a decline, and administrators are doing a better job of dealing with it quickly.”

Purrington is happy things appear to be changing on the legal front. “We now have tight surveillance in day-care and health-care systems, but schools have escaped the scrutiny. Now the standard of responsibility is getting raised and it’s a good thing,” she observes.

Oona’s father, Ken Risling, agrees: “Children should be given a direct message that there is such a thing as sexual harassment and it will be taken seriously.” If the case goes before the U.S. Supreme Court but is sent back to the Northern District Court, Cox says, it can then be scheduled for trial. She adds that the school district has refused to discuss a settlement.

Meanwhile, Oona has abandoned the public school system and is being home-schooled. She has taken up the cello, regained her interest in art–she’s been invited to design the official logo for the Sebastopol skate park–and is one of the editors of Windchime, a student-produced literary magazine. She says the continuing legal wranglings have been worth it.

“My personal goal was to get the word out that it’s OK to speak your mind,” she says. “It’s scary, but definitely worth it to tell people they’re wrong.”

From the Sept. 11-17, 1997 issue of the Sonoma County Independent.

© Metro Publishing Inc.