Unlawful Arrest by YNP Rangers? You be the Judge...

Nov 12, 2014 - 12:21pm PT
Regardless of the outcome of this case I do feel that the rangers are more aggressive and show less diplomacy in YNP than in other parks that i have visited.
While i am aware that YNP deals with issues more complex than many other NPs, i still feel that there is a culture within the ranger force in YNP that contributes to the many confrontations between rangers and visitors.
Around eight years ago i arrived with my partner in late afternoon at Camp 4. We were looking for a place to sleep before hiking up to the NW Face of Half Dome. Luckily, we ran into some Chilean climbers who had additional space in their campsite. I purchased a $5 permit as per camp regulations.....i was doing everything by the book.
It was perfect weather so i decided not to pitch my tent and slept out in the open instead. I attached my permit to my sleeping bag and fell asleep. At 4:00 am i was awakened by someone kicking my bag. I awoke in the pitch dark and was blinded by a bright light beam shone directly into my eyes. Surprised and confused i quickly started getting out of my bag to defend myself only to have the perpetrator identify himself as a ranger and threaten me. I calmed down when i realized i wasn't being assaulted and asked him what the problem was. He told me that he couldn't see my permit ( i had rolled over while sleeping) and thought that i was sleeping in Camp 4 illegally.
Why he had to confront me in such an aggressive way in the middle of the night is beyond me. Had he come by at first light i would have still been in my bag and he could have checked my permit. He would also have been able to find those persons, if any, that were there illegally.
I travel extensively to climb and always obey the rules set by land managers. Yosemite....by a large margin, is the most unenjoyable venue i use in regards to camping. Something should be done.
Culture....be it a corporation, small business, non profit, or National Park is set by those in charge.

This is not true, at least in CA (maybe in a federal jurisdiction but I doubt it.)

FACTUAL BACKGROUND3

From the FAC, on July 26, 2011, Mazzetti was in a Yosemite National Park campground with friends. Yosemite National Park rangers approached Mazzetti's campground to address complaints that someone had been driving a vehicle too quickly through the campground and acting disrespectfully. The rangers had information that those who had been driving too quickly and acting disrespectfully were all males. Mazzetti is a female. When the rangers approached the campsite, there was no indication of criminal behavior or disorderly conduct, and Mazzetti and her friends were calm.

Ranger Defendants Christopher Bellino ("Bellino") and David Sanchez ("Sanchez") rounded up Mazzetti and her friends around a picnic table, questioned the group about the conduct being investigated, told the group that they were not free to leave and threatened to use handcuffs. Within minutes, a male member of the group admitted to being the driver of the vehicle. Mazzetti advised the rangers that she had just walked up from the river, she had not been in the vehicle, and that she did not wish to participate in the investigation. The rangers ordered her to sit down. Bellino then asked for identification, but when Mazzetti got up to go get her identification, she was grabbed by Bellino and Sanchez.4 Bellino threatened to handcuff Mazzetti, pulled a Taser, and threatened to use the Taser against her.

Other park rangers began to arrive on the scene, including Ranger Smith and Defendant Ranger Brendan Bonner ("Bonner"). The rangers spread out around the campsite to keep Mazzetti and her friends from leaving. The rangers physically and verbally threatened Mazzetti to keep her from leaving the picnic area. The rangers had no reasonable suspicion that Mazzetti had engaged in any criminal conduct, and the behavior that the rangers were investigating had ceased and was no longer a threat to anyone.

An audio-video recording of the incident made by a Park Ranger shows that Bellino conferenced with Bonner sometime after Bellino had threatened Mazzetti with a Taser. It can be heard that Bellino described Mazzetti as "uncooperative," and when asked if he was going to arrest her, Bellino responded that he was going to do something but that he did not yet know what. Bonner asked if Mazzetti had since been cooperative, and Bellino said that she had been "cooperative since." Bellino and Bonner then agreed to arrest Mazzetti and take her to jail.

The rangers reapproached Mazzetti and her friends, segregated Mazzetti, and walked her over near a ranger's vehicle. Bellino, Bonner, and Ranger Hastings physically restrained and handcuffed Mazzetti. Mazzetti verbally protested being handcuffed and asked "why are you arresting me?", but she did not physically resist. Mazzetti was wearing shorts, a bathing suit top, and a loose fitting t-shirt that had its sleeves cut off. Hastings was sent back to watch the other members of Mazzetti's group at the campsite. Bellino then asked Bonner if there was a female ranger on duty, and Bonner responded that one would be on duty shortly. Bellino and Bonner then moved Mazzetti again. According to the video, these rangers moved Mazzetti in order to "do a search behind the vehicle."

Mazzetti was walked to the other side of the ranger's vehicle so that she was out of view from her friends. Bellino and Bonner then began to taunt and touch Mazzetti. They began poking in her hair with a pen-like object, and running their hands through her hair. Bellino then told Mazzetti, "I have to search your breasts." Mazzetti told them not to search her breasts and complained that the rangers were hurting her. Mazzetti was placed in a stress-hold, and Bellino and Bonner then groped Mazzetti's breasts. Mazzetti screamed for assistance and to make the rangers stop, and also kept screaming "stop hurting me." Bellino told Mazzetti that he was going to search her groin area. Mazzetti was then taken to the ground. The video shows Bellino and Bonner grabbing Mazzetti's bare knees and prying her legs apart so that they could touch her groin. Mazzetti screamed in protest and pain. Bellino and Bonner removed Mazzetti's shoes, and then locked Mazzetti in the back of the ranger vehicle. Mazzetti screamed to be released. Bellino and Bonner had singled out Mazzetti, "attacked and humiliated her, groped on her breasts, groped on her groin, and sexually assaulted and battered [Mazzetti] . . . because of her gender." FAC ¶ 56.

While Mazzetti was screaming for help, Sanchez, Hastings, and Smith kept Mazzetti's friends away from her. Mazzetti's friends pleaded with the three rangers to help Mazzetti. The three rangers witnessed what was happening to Mazzetti, but did nothing reasonable to prevent the violation of Mazzetti's rights. The rangers also sent away potential witnesses.

Mazzetti was taken to jail, where she was forced to stay the night. Mazzetti was released the next day.

Bellino, Bonner, and Sanchez drafted false and misleading reports, failed to provide exculpatory information, and failed to identify witnesses who could support Mazzetti's version of events, even though the rangers had such information. Bellino recommended charging Mazzetti with violations of 36 C.F.R. 2.32(a)(1) (interference), 36 CFR 2.32(a)(2) (failing to obey a lawful order), 36 CFR 2.34(a)(2) (disorderly conduct), and 36 CFR 2.34(a)(3) (unreasonable noise). Based upon the rangers' reports, Mazzetti was charged with and prosecuted for violations of the above Class B misdemeanors.

A bench trial was conducted before Magistrate Judge Seng. Magistrate Judge Seng ruled that the rangers had no reasonable suspicion to stop Mazzetti and that Mazzetti was unlawfully arrested, that Mazzetti's Fourth Amendment rights had been violated, that there was no grounds for threatening Mazzetti with force, and that Mazzetti had engaged in constitutionally protected speech. Magistrate Judge Seng acquitted Mazzetti of all charges except for a violation of 36 CFR 2.34(a)(3), based on Mazzetti's continued screaming after she had been placed in the rangers' vehicle. However, on appeal, the U.S. Attorney dismissed the 2.34(a)(3) charge against Mazzetti.

well, did she have a gun in her vagina???

they didn't have probable cause to search in the first place.

What were they searching her groin and breasts for? Obviously not weapons. My guess is that they were looking for drugs. Then it would have gone down differently. What was their probable cause, though? It sounds like she was scantily dressed.

Cops have to interact constantly with the public, and when they get called out, there is usually some kind of drama going on. They have to remain disciplined. If they can't, then fire them.

In this case, if any of you were physically doing those things to that woman, you would be rapidly convicted of sexual assault, do 5 to 10 years in federal prison, and then have to inform your neighbors that you were a sex criminal for the rest of your lives.

They should have waited for a female ranger in that type of search, but they didn't have probable cause to search in the first place.

2. Unreasonable Noise

Defendant was also charged with making unreasonable noise. The relevant subsection states:

(a) A person commits disorderly conduct when, with intent to cause public alarm, nuisance, jeopardy or violence, or knowingly or recklessly creating a risk thereof, such person commits any of the following prohibited acts:

(3) Makes noise that is unreasonable, considering the nature and purpose of the actor's conduct, location, time of day or night, and other factors that would govern the conduct of a reasonably prudent person under the circumstances. 36 C.F.R. § 2.32(a)(3).

The briefing of neither party identifies the particular conduct giving rise to alleged violation of this regulation. The Court will assume the charge is leveled at Defendant's conduct during and following the search incident to arrest in which Defendant continuously screamed in protest.

The subsection appears to be a facially valid, content-neutral, time, place, and manner restriction. See Rosenbaum v. City & County of San Francisco, 484 F.3d 1142, 1158 (9th Cir. 2007). Defendant has not challenged its constitutional validity nor suggested that the Court should refuse to apply it to the facts of the case at hand.

With regard to location and time of day, one reasonably would expect relatively loud noise in a campsite during the day from, for example, music, singing, game playing, generators, etc. See e.g., 36 C.F.R. §§ 2.10, 2.12 (noise up to 60 decibels is acceptable, unless during quiet hours from 10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.). There is nothing about the location or time of day that would create a need for heightened restriction of noise.

It is significant here that noise was made at a time when Defendant was being subjected to an unlawful arrest. Also, as noted, Defendant testified to a not insignificant history of abuse and reacted to what she perceived as a sexual assault by a federal law enforcement agent. (RT 118-19.) It is difficult to determine how a reasonable person should react to such circumstances; screaming may well have been an appropriate response. On the other hand, the Court cannot rule out the possibility that the screams were designed solely to disrupt and/or discourage the search. The fact they continued long after the search ended is at least an indication of such a calculated objective. However, that possibility is insufficient to support a finding of guilt. Considering all of the circumstances, the Court cannot find beyond a reasonable doubt that Defendant's verbal response to the search was unreasonable or unlawful.

However, Defendant continues what might be described as blood-curdling screams for a significant period of time long after the search was completed. The screams continued at a time when she was isolated in a vehicle and no longer suffering the assault which initiated her vocal reaction. While the Court gives Defendant the benefit of the doubt in finding her initial reaction to have been spontaneous and perhaps irrepressible for her and not violative of the law, it cannot do the same to the continuation of the screaming. The circumstances and the audio recording convince the Court that the continued screaming had, and served, no purpose other than intentionally to disrupt. It was loud enough even from inside the Ranger's vehicle to accomplish such disruption and violate the regulation. Defendant is guilty of having violated 36 C.F.R. § 2.34(a)(3).

U.S. Magistrate Seng:

It's OK to scream really loud if you are a young woman being unlawfully arrested and having your breasts and vaginal area groped, and especially if it is during the daytime and you have been abused in the past.

But if you keep screaming after they do all of that, handcuff you and lock you in a patrol car and leave you there, then "beyond a reasonable doubt" you are committing a crime and deserve to be punished.

Really? That does not make any sense to me. It's a flaw in what is otherwise is a courageous opinion.

We need more judges like this man. I hope he remains in Yosemite for a long time.

Yes, fascinating. It's hard to fault the judge too much since he seemed to, for the most part, do the right thing.
But the part of his decision about upholding the unreasonable noise seems more than just wrong, it seems outrageous. What can you say--some of these things are just weird personal idiosyncrasies.

Here is what I what like to know:
Upon a judicial finding that the arrest was illegal, why weren't the LEOs charged with some sort of crime (assault, perhaps other things)?
Perhaps LEOs have immunity if their actions are "illegal," but not too illegal (I have no idea and am just making that up).

Failing that, I'd like to figure out some kind of legal challenge to the prohibition on (free) backcountry camping.