Protest Rally Turns Violent at Post Office
An unidentified woman pushes protest organizer Victoria Campbell out of the way when yesterday’s rally turned violent at the Kittanning Post Office.
by David Croyle
A rally protesting the inaccessibility at the Kittanning Post Office turned violent yesterday shortly after 3PM when several customers chose to push through the human barricade of protesters that had the post office shut down.
The seven steps from the sidewalk to the landing in front of the post office has been a target for the past four years of disability groups urging the postal service to comply with the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
The Kittanning post office allegedly received $200,000 to renovate the structure. It included a new roof, new windows, air conditioning system, and sandblasting and re-pointing of brickwork on the outside of the building, including the steps.
Protesters arrived shortly after 1PM. Organizers Bill Tatters with the Disabilities Investigative Group (DIG) in Armstrong County and Victoria Campbell with the Three Rivers Center for Independent Living (TRCIL) in Pittsburgh went into the post office and attempted to speak with Kittanning Postmaster Dan Devey. Devey refused to come out of his office and held a conversation with them through an open doorway. He said he had talked with Campbell in the past and refused to continue a conversation or to come out to address the 30 protestors gathered in front of the post office.
Campbell and Tatters returned and protestors weaved a large chain between the rails of the post office steps. Protestors then sat at the top of the steps and parked disabled persons in wheel chairs at the bottom of the steps in an attempt to turn away customers attempting to do business at the post office.
Most of the postal patrons acknowledged the efforts of the protestors and drove away, choosing to either wait until another day or do business at another post office. However, it was shortly after 3PM when a family drove up in a car and attempted to enter the post office.
A girl described as approximately in her late teens with several large packages ignored the chain and the protestors and, with a deliberate action, began to make her way up the stairs. Campbell stood in front of the doors and told her she could not enter. At that point, another woman identified as her grandmother bolted from the vehicle and began to push her way through the crowd to the doorway, physically pushing against Campbell, who is only five feet talk, and threatening to knock her to the ground. Other family members also came to participate in the altercation and gained entrance into the post office.
Kittanning Police were called by the family; however, no arrests were made. Chief Ed Cassese said there is a question concerning the jurisdiction of Kittanning’s police department since the post office is considered a federal building.
“This is federal property,” Cassese said. “I have no jurisdiction on these steps. As far as federal statutes go, this is a federal building. Starting up those steps, that is federal property. I do not have the jurisdiction to take care of that situation. It becomes federal.”
Until the decision is made, Cassese said he was not releasing the names of the individuals involved in the altercation.
Campbell denied striking the grandmother. “I have plenty of witnesses that can testify that I did not lay a hand on her,” Campbell said. “She clearly threatened me and pushed me. They are welcome to do whatever they feel they need to do.”
Campbell said this reaction has not been a normal experience in her years of advocating for disabled Americans. “They are the type of element that wants in the spotlight. We gave her the opportunity and she took it. We just asked them to leave, that’s all. The grandmother got belligerent and pushed me, and threatened to knock me out. So we let them in. I did not want the situation to escalate under any circumstances. That defeats our purpose here. I wanted it to be a peaceful demonstration. We assured Chief Cassese that it would be. We had our arms out. In no way could we have touched her.”
When asked for comment, family members declined to discuss the matter, only alluding to a potential lawsuit.
When asked if she was coming back for another round of protests, Campbell replied, “Absolutely.”
The protest followed an early celebration in Kittanning’s Riverfront Park commemorating the 20th anniversary of the Americans with Disabilities Act. County commissioners applauded the group’s efforts and read a proclamation honoring their work advocating for disabled persons in Armstrong County.
Local News, National News, Regional News | David Croyle August 17, 2010
By Delzer, August 17, 2010 @ 6:18 AM
If this grandmother became violent over not being able to enter the post office on ONE day because of an obstruction, she should take the time to think about how many of the protesters feel not being able to use the post office EVERY day. She acted with no compassion or understanding.
By cherok29, August 17, 2010 @ 8:30 AM
While I support the protestor’s rights and their cause, I think it’s ridiculous that they were physically barricading the steps/doors/entrance to the post office.
Doing things like that isn’t going to help their cause or help them get any sympathy or support from the average citizen. It just makes them look like bullies, it’s not the average citizen/post office customer’s fault that the PO hasn’t put in a ramp- but yet they are taking it out on the PO customers. I would’ve probably done the same thing as the granddaughter/grandmother did in this instance, and make my way through.
By scott_starr, August 17, 2010 @ 9:56 AM
Good going grandma, don’t be bullied.
Obstructing entrance into a public building is a crime. The police chickend out, so everyone in Kittanning, if you want to do drugs or commit a crime do it in front of the post office. Apparently it is “no man’s land”.
You have it in black and white!
By JimSpeaks, August 17, 2010 @ 10:25 AM
It is, frankly, embarassing that the Post Office access situation has gone on unresolved for so long.
City and County leaders appear to have done what they can. The Community now has a chance to register their support and to further encourage the Post Office to “do the right thing”.
Pay no attention to the crack pots whose ignorance tarnishes this effort to correct a terrible injustice! There is no glory in busting through a line of peaceful protestors in wheelchairs. I would cringe with shame if one of our nation’s newly disabled Veterans was to return home to find that his sacrifice has earned him this exclusion from his local Post Office.
By mlerner, August 17, 2010 @ 10:29 AM
The police didn’t “chicken out”. Simply put, the officer was right-it is federal property, and the local police don’t have jurisdiction over the place, only the federal government does. While I do sympathize strongly with the protestors, I don’t think they sould be blocking access to the building, and they shouldn’t be bullying anyone trying to get through. It doesn’t help their cause one bit.
By scott_starr, August 17, 2010 @ 11:58 AM
@jimspeaks:
No veteran would stop anyone from acess to a building. Those folks fought, and sacraficed so that the folks who wanted to protest can do so, and those who want to enter a building can do so.
By scott_starr, August 17, 2010 @ 12:04 PM
@mlerner:
The Police would be well within their duties to detain anyone who commits a crime on Federal Property, it is called concurrent proprietary enforcement as well as the assimilative crimes act.
By jondough, August 17, 2010 @ 6:49 PM
Protesting is fine. Bullying, what these folks were doing, is not. They have no right to block access to the PO. Their beef is with the PO, not with the customers. This is why most protesters get a bad rap. Believe it or not, there is not a single issue on this planet that every single person is going to agree on. How would these “wheelchair” people like to have their access blocked to their doctor’s office for whatever reason.
To the Vet comment, what if that person or any other person was trying to get inside the PO to send a Vet a package overseas?
Once again, their beef is with the PO, don’t mess with other people’s RIGHTS to gain access to the facility.
By walrus, August 17, 2010 @ 7:39 PM
solution: MOVE said po out of town
By John, August 17, 2010 @ 11:23 PM
With the police not taking a stand is an insult to the people of Kittanning. Especially making a false statement regarding the protecting of any good-natured citizen using the steps of the Post Office to gain access. The chief should have taken a stand, but I guess he wants to remain politically correct. People do have a right to protest, but not a right to carry out crimes just because they are on the Post Office steps. Some things are just common sense and to block people and put up chains on property that isn’t theirs is a crime, some action should have been taken.
For the Post Office not having the accessibly needed is a shame. But it is going to be more of a hardship when the rest of the 98% has to drive to who knows were to have postal service. People need to look at the good that the post office has provided for the people over the years and one of the reason that some even come into town.
So what the police are saying, as long as I’m selling drugs on the post office steps or assaulting somebody they are going to wait for the federal authorities to intercede, as they can’t do anything. Have you every heard of such crap. That really gives people a sense of security. Also, what about the people that work inside at the credit union, I guess they have no right for protection either.
By JimSpeaks, August 18, 2010 @ 12:03 PM
OK, let me start off by congratulating any and all who have registered an opinion. It shows people care. We may not all agree, but we care.
That said, I think I’ll take a stab at trying to respond to some specific statements that have been part of the follow-up commentary thus far:
cherok29 said: “I think it’s ridiculous that they were physically barricading the steps/doors/entrance to the post office.”
YOU are offended by a temporary physical blockade to your Post Office?!? Why, imagine if you were disabled – and your access was (and continues to be) blocked for all these years.
scott_starr: “The police chickend out, so everyone in Kittanning, if you want to do drugs or commit a crime do it in front of the post office. Apparently it is “no man’s land”.
You have it in black and white!”
Sorry, sir, that is not accurate. That is only your interpretation of the situation. There is nothing black and white about it. Comments like this only serve to inflame the conversation.
scott_starr: “The Police would be well within their duties to detain anyone who commits a crime on Federal Property, it is called concurrent proprietary enforcement as well as the assimilative crimes act.”
Made me do a little work on those big words! But, in my opinion, that’s just a red herring that distracts people from facing the real issue at hand.
mlerner: “While I do sympathize strongly with the protestors”
You do? Then DO something. Your sympathy is not enough.
mlerner: “No veteran would stop anyone from access to a building. Those folks fought, and sacraficed so that the folks who wanted to protest can do so, and those who want to enter a building can do so.”
Stop and re-read the original comment. It implies NOTHING like what you have said.
jondough: “Protesting is fine. Bullying, what these folks were doing, is not.”
I will acknowledge your right to label the protest as some sort of “bullying”, but I want to register my objection to that term. AND, after carefully reading all the available news reports and listening to the live radio report that Family Life issued on the day of the protest, I cannot see any evidence that reporters on the scene saw any “bullying”.
jondough: “.. beef is with the PO, not with the customers.”
Well ….. yes …. and … no. The protestors, if you care to work backwards in time and review all of the group’s efforts, appear to have nearly a decade of effort to rectify this access issue. Local politico’s are on record as supporting the protestors’ claim that the Post Office should comply with the law. Yet, the Post Office bureaucrats continue to ignore the pleas for equal access. Ultimately, the PEOPLE (i.e. “customers” aka “tax payers”) have actual ownership and responsibility for this Post Office. Perhaps the protestors are correct in attempting to get the attention of the highest authority that the Federal bureaucrats are ultimately responsible to: the Voters. After all, it is YOUR Post Office that they have a conflict with.
jondough: “How would these “wheelchair” people like to have their access blocked to their doctor’s office for whatever reason.”
About the same as the protestors with disabilities have been feeling for years when they cannot use their Post Office! The protestors disrupted access to the Post Office for a period of 2 hours. Big difference there, bud.
jondough: “To the Vet comment, what if that person or any other person was trying to get inside the PO to send a Vet a package overseas?”
1. Re-read the original comment. You have twisted it.
2. Perhaps you don’t get the point of the protest? Of course the protestors would want ANY package being brought for mailing to a member of the Armed Services to be delivered promptly and without delay. All the protestors were saying was that the postal customer needed to take the package to another, less convenient, facility for mailing during the protest. The difference is that currently, Postal customers with disabilities must do that EVERY day.
walrus: “solution: MOVE said po out of town”
Yup, that’s a solution, but it certainly is not the most reasonable. After all, the Post Office just dropped $200,000 of OUR tax money on spiffing up the building. Every protestor with a disability that was stationed out on that sidewalk was duly impressed with the shiny clean-up job on the building’s façade – they just could not get inside to pass along compliments.
john: “With the police not taking a stand is an insult to the people of Kittanning.”
They did. You just don’t like it.
john: “Especially making a false statement regarding the protecting of any good-natured citizen using the steps of the Post Office to gain access.”
You were there? You heard and saw something different than what was reported and recorded on audio, film and video?
john: “But it is going to be more of a hardship when the rest of the 98% has to drive to who knows were to have postal service.”
1. Check your facts. It is not 98%.
2. Worried about having to drive to “who knows where to have postal service”? Why, all you have to do is ask ANY of the Postal Patrons with a disability who have been sent elsewhere! (Just be glad you don’t have to make the trip in a wheelchair.)
john: “People need to look at the good that the post office has provided for the people over the years and one of the reason that some even come into town.”
AGREED! So, let’s make it accessible to all members of the community.
john: “So what the police are saying, as long as I’m selling drugs on the post office steps or assaulting somebody they are going to wait for the federal authorities to intercede, as they can’t do anything.”
They said no such thing. This is simply inflammatory rhetoric.
john: “what about the people that work inside at the credit union, I guess they have no right for protection either.”
Fact: Multiple customers of the Credit Union were ushered through the blockade. The protestors have no beef with the Credit Union. The Credit Union will benefit when the building is made accessible.
By scott_starr, August 18, 2010 @ 1:31 PM
@jimspeaks:
very interesting, retort.
Let’s look at this logically, Access to a FEDERAL BUILDING was blocked, that is a crime. The police incorrectly said he could do nothing on Federal Property, that is entirely wrong. to offhand dismiss this is plain old silly on your part.
You need to check many of your premise, The Police said they have no jurisdiction on Federal Property, therefore, it LOGICALLY states that local police have no jurisdiction to arrest people for crimes committed on Federal public property.
To paraphrase the items I cited for Chief Casse being incorrect, essentially on Federal Property, if no Federal Officers are present, State law takes precedence, and the local/state police can enforce state law on federal property. Second, local and state police have jurisdiction to make arrests on Federal Property. Fairly simple.
Your entire argument is a straw man argument. Essentially it boils down to let’s see how you like it! If I or most adults were treated unfairly, my reaction would not be to “see how they like it” my intention would be to stop it so no one has to experience it.
And Jim, the Post Office is an independent organization and has not received Federal Tax money since the 1980′s. This is not a government owned corporation, it is separate and autonomous from the government. The people do not own it.
Now that your inflammatory rhetoric has been once again debunked using logic, we may now look at things logically;
1. I believe a majority of people would support alternate access, such as a ramp to the post office. If the bell at the back of the building, which I believe is accessible is not enough, Fine, let’s look at getting a ramp. How about this, you and your group collect donations, and offer to pay for it? That would be tough to turn down!
2. What is not condoned is your methods, the ends do not justify the means. You have a right to protest, ask people not to go in and so on, but you do not have the right to block access.
Finally, your anger is entirely misplaced. The Federal Government has exempted itself from the ADA act and included Quasi-gov’t agencies as the Post Office as well, your complaint is with the Federal hypocrisy, not the Post Master.
By JimSpeaks, August 18, 2010 @ 4:37 PM
Scott has weighed in with additional insights:
scott_starr says: “The police incorrectly said he could do nothing on Federal Property, that is entirely wrong. ….. to offhand dismiss this is plain old silly on your part.
Look Scott, I’ll concede that maybe you have some technical underpinnings to your argument about the protestors temporarily blocking access. I still think your umbrage is misplaced, un-warranted and over-reactive. And, I will choose to continue to dismiss your argument as a red herring.
scott_starr says: “If I or most adults were treated unfairly, my reaction would not be to “see how they like it” my intention would be to stop it so no one has to experience it.”
Well, now we are getting somewhere! We AGREE on a key element: the protestors, very much, want to end this discrimination so that no one else has to experience it. Will you help them? Or will you do nothing?
scott_starr says: “the Post Office is an independent organization and has not received Federal Tax money since the 1980′s. …… The people do not own it.”
For all intents and purposes – and as you yourself say later in your post – it’s a quasi-government operation. Another red herring.
scott_starr says: “I believe a majority of people would support alternate access, such as a ramp to the post office. ……”
We AGREE! And, I believe we are both right: most people in the Kittanning community DO want to see access opened up to ALL citizens.
scott_starr says: “If the bell at the back of the building, which I believe is accessible is not enough ….”
Your belief is wrong. And, it is NOT enough. “Go around to the back of the building.” Are you kidding me? Sound familiar at all?
scott_starr says: “How about this, you and your group collect donations, and offer to pay for it? That would be tough to turn down!”
Maybe so, but, if you do a little digging for background information, I found that the protesters did in fact offer a number of alternative solutions to the Post Office – at NO or minimal cost. All were turned down by the Post Office. Go figure, huh? And secondly, don’t you feel at least a little embarrassed by the fact that they just spent a ton of money prettying up the building’s façade – but they have no funds for a ramp?
scott_starr says: “What is not condoned is your methods, the ends do not justify the means. You have a right to protest, ask people not to go in and so on, but you do not have the right to block access.”
I respect your opinion. And, if the protestors somehow figure out a way to actually shut down the operations of the Post Office for anything longer than the duration of a good old fashioned protest, you might have something of substance. Otherwise, you are simply howling in the wind of change.
I’d suggest that you consider attending the next protest. Your opinions matter. And, just maybe, if you met some of the very people who seek resolution, you’d see that they are not much different from you and I. You have substantial agreement on enough points that perhaps you can work together with the protestors to right this wrong. Unless, of course, you don’t care to.
By fledgling, August 18, 2010 @ 7:25 PM
The protesters were in violation of Federal Law by impeding entrance and exit from the building.
5 CFR 232.1 (e) Disturbances. Disorderly conduct, or conduct which creates loud and unusual noise, or which impedes ingress to or egress from post offices, or otherwise obstructs the usual use of entrances, foyers, corridors, offices, elevators, stairways, and parking lots, or which otherwise tends to impede or disturb the public employees in the performance of their duties, or which otherwise impedes or disturbs the general public in transacting business or obtaining the services provided on property, is prohibited.
By fledgling, August 18, 2010 @ 7:30 PM
also 5CFR131.1(4) The blocking of entrances, driveways, walks, loading platforms, or fire hydrants in or on property is prohibited
By fledgling, August 18, 2010 @ 7:30 PM
correction 5CFR232.1 (4)
By fledgling, August 18, 2010 @ 7:34 PM
Also echoed on Poster 7 posted in all postal facilities:
Specific Restrictions
Disturbances
Disorderly conduct, or conduct which creates loud and unusual noise, or which obstructs
the usual use of entrances, foyers, corridors, offices, elevators, stairways, and parking
lots, or which otherwise tends to impede or disturb the public employees in the
performance of their duties, or which otherwise impedes or disturbs the general public in
transacting business or obtaining the services provided on postal property, is prohibited.
SO the protesters are in the wrong, have no right to impede entrance/exit from the building.
nuff said
By scott_starr, August 18, 2010 @ 7:41 PM
@jimspeaks,
Look I will state it here and now, I’m for a ramp or access to the post office, my “beef” is not with your “beef” it is with the way it was done. Frankly, I don’t go to the Post Office, Shop N Save does fine by me.
I will not join your protest when you block access to a building, or try to intimidate others. I’ll gladly sign a petition, write letters whatever, but I WILL NOT engage in brutish behavior, on this issue.
I find it rather funny, your dismissals. Hey we only blocked access for a little bit,(does that make it less illegal?) the police saying they can not stop illegal activity is a “redherring” (it’s a darn big issue, ignorance of the law is no excuse), quasi-government and redherring ( you really need to understand what Quasi-government means) going to the back of the post office is ( if I understand you) beneath you, well if you want access and it’s available then…. I’m missing something. (and comparing to what you alluded to is frankly disgusting).
So your issue is that you have to go around to the back of the building? Really is that the issue?
I don’t feel ashamed that they spent money sprucing up the building, if you work in private industry you would see idiotic stuff like that all the time. I’ve worked for companies who explained there was no money for raises, or small raises and spent a great deal of cash on a “company outing” I would have rather had the money.. go figure.
Quite frankly, and this is my opinion, I think this group is just looking for something to bitch about.
By dawgfood, August 19, 2010 @ 8:19 AM
Between the inept police force who is typically on a power trip and the jobless protestors, I’ve just been given 2 more reasons to add to the already 9078 others not to do business in Kittanning. Save the taxpayers some money and just shut the PO down.
By cherok29, August 19, 2010 @ 9:19 AM
Just logged back in to say, “I love scott_starr”. Dude, I have no idea who you are, but I agree with you 100% on this issue.
And I still stand by my comment that barricading entrance to the PO is entirely the WRONG way to go about getting sympathy from the community. I think we all agree that the PO needs a ramp. We all agree that it’s bad that the PO did all their remodeling just to pretty the place up- and didn’t add a ramp. We all agree about that.
But I still don’t see the point in deliberately blocking access to other citizens who want to use the PO. It is not OUR fault that the PO didn’t add a ramp. It’s nothing more than mis-placed anger, and that is the type of crap that isn’t going to win you any/many supporters or friends. The protestors could’ve very easily protested to each side of the steps- even on the steps would’ve been ok- but as soon as you put up the chains and locks and block entrance to the building, that’s crossing a line. As “fledgling” pointed out above- it’s ILLEGAL.
It’s pretty simple- you don’t cause a scene and “anger” the people who you are trying to get on your side… because all it’s doing now is creating an “us vs them” mentality, instead of bringing everyone together “against” the PO…