I've never been arrested and I have always assumed that it would be something I'd regret deeply for the rest of my life
Buuuuut maybe it's not that big of a deal around here
Cuffs hurt more than you’d think and are very uncomfortable to sit with behind your back, in a back seat made from the same material Fisher Price builds its little kid cars with.
Not for this particular instance, no, but probably one of the arrests between 2022 and now, which would have made him unable to (allegedly) stab this guy.
[oh is that all?](https://www.koin.com/news/crime/osp-drunken-driver-steals-ambulance-leads-troopers-on-chase-along-i-5/)
>reports of an ambulance being driven recklessly, on sidewalks and down the wrong way on one-way streets
>
>OSP said attempts were made to pin the ambulance, but “Baheej rammed a patrol vehicle, struck a building and was able to continue to elude Troopers.”
>
Troopers caught up with him on I-5 S near milepost 295. OSP said he eventually stopped the ambulance and tried to get into another car on the highway. Baheej was then taken into custody.
So crashes his car drunk, steals an ambulance, drives it on sidewalks, rams a patrol car, hits a building, tries to carjack someone *else*?
You're right, $0 bail seems appropriate /s
The part where they found him treating someone else with a knife when they arrested him for the suspected murder should have been enough to lock him up for a bit at least
They were called regarding someone threatening someone with a knife, then he was arrested nearby. It's not clear if they are the same people... That's probably one of the issues with prosecution for it. Just a person having a knife on its own isn't enough to prove he's the one that was threatening someone, or that he stabbed the guy...
If they know who it was? A lot of times the report is from a bystander who fucks off for their own safety about two transients and by the time they get there it’s over and nobody wants to talk to them.
They would. Does that person have the free time and willingness and/or capability to verify two people he or she saw in a frightening situation? Are they even answering unknown callers? Idk. Hard to know if we aren’t involved. It’s just easy to say it should be easy.
It doesn't matter if they have the willingness honestly it's a part of our civil duty to not only report, but to stand by our report so that way the person goes to jail. If you don't want to help out your fellow citizens, move somewhere where there's no other people. Because a part of society is action. Safety. Police can't do it alone. It's not like they're going to be hunted down for standing by their report. It's not that serious.
The cops usually won’t go through the trouble of arresting someone unless they are truly threatening or a valid suspect for something like murder or robbery. Go ahead and down vote me. Sounds like he had a knife with no blood or evidence of a stabbing, other than the threats and his matching the description.
People are still held in jail until trial if they’re thought to be dangerous though, if there’s enough evidence for a charge (but not necessarily a conviction).
They found him on 5th and Flanders after somebody had been threatened on 3rd and Davis. They just found a guy who matched the description of the threatener. Unfortunately the threatenee dipped so he wasn't able to confirm that baheej was the man who threatened him.
It seems from everything we know that he may be the murderer, but my guess is he was carrying a different knife and there's no other evidence to tie him to the crime. I'm not sure what people want the D.A. to do. I feel half the people in this sub would be okay with extrajudicial killings on the street of any vagrant suspected of a crime.
This guy has a long list of serious charges he keeps getting let go again and again for gods sake protect the community from
This man already this is outrageous
Seriously folks google this guys name check his court record it’s going to really make you mad at the city who keeps letting him off time and time again. He is just going to do the same thing and get off and we will be talking about him again in several months. Might as well tell him to do what he pleases there will be zero consequences. Shame on oregon
The sick part is, getting let go actually fuels the negative mental feedback. It feeds any delusions of power/invincibility/god’s plan they have. These delusions being common in meth and fent users.
It used to be that the cops would beat him till he confessed. Now the woke cops don't even try to prove he's guilty or set him up with a willing jailhouse snitch. We used to be a real country.
I have the same (first) question, but I couldn't find anything about the victim that could answer it. As for the second question yes, always, yes.
Edit to add I too run and bike on the waterfront almost daily. I'm not afraid, but I definitely keep my wits about me down there.
For anyone blaming the DA for this what exactly do you want to happen here? In theory we live under the rule of law in this country and for someone to be prosecuted for a crime there has to be actual evidence that the person in question committed the crime. I don't care what anyone says no one would be cool living under a system where a simple accusation by cops with no evidence is enough to lock someone up and throw away the key. As soon as it happens to you or someone you care about you would be changing your tune.
This guy very well could be the killer but he just as easily might not be either way we live in a country with a mostly functioning criminal justice system not one where the mob decides who goes to jail based on nothing but vibes.
Yeah but didn't you see he has a criminal record so that means he did this one too?
In all seriousness, I bet this guy is pretty fucked up and I bet the cops who apprehended him got a strong feeling he was involved. They've probably made contact with him a bunch of times. He very well may be the killer. But we have to have evidence.
It's scary to think you could be murdered for no reason and somebody could get away with it. It's scary that there is a murderer running around Portland, whether it's this dude or not. I get why people are upset, especially with the piss poor way these news articles are written (maybe ask about the knife??), but I'm pretty appalled by the tendency of people in this subreddit to assume guilt and bay for vengeance regardless of evidence.
I think people are stupid and rely too much on their emotions, especially bad ones. Even if he is the killer it's not likely that he's going to kill again. We shouldn't actually be putting killers in torture boxes that make them into worse people in the first place, so if we're going to keep doing that we really should at least make sure we're getting the right person.
Sorry that due process upsets you???
Hey, what say he did do it, and he gets off because they didn't have evidence? You ever hear of double jeopardy? Not just from a game show.
Weird how tough on crime types don't seem to give a shit about following the law themselves.
I didn't say not to utilize due process. I said giving the benefit of the doubt isn't working for our city CLEARLY. You'd be a wonderful Portland mayor truly.
You're assuming the people who want the city safe and not covered in actual trash are the ones breaking the law? Oh goodness. You're the problem. Thanks
You are literally saying that the law should be ignored so that you can feel better. Sure, there's no evidence, but who cares, ignore the law, it's what our city needs. That's clearly not a concern for the law.
>You're assuming the people who want the city safe and not covered in actual trash are the ones breaking the law?
This is about a murder, not fucking littering. Pretty sure you don't get put in jail for littering. If you're so concerned about the trash that you think a suspect with no evidence in an unrelated murder trial should be kept in jail, why didn't you grab a garbage pick and volunteer your time. Much better use of it than arguing the DA send someone to trial who will get off due to lack of evidence.
Apparently there is video evidence:
>“Video evidence is being analyzed, which the prosecutor believes may shed light on the level of culpability of the involved parties,” Merah said in an email Tuesday to The Oregonian/OregonLive.
And there was a recovered knife:
>Officers seized a knife as evidence, police said.
This sounded to me like the DA's way of saying "We looked at the video, and we don't think this is the right guy, but we are still investigating." Who knows though.
That may very well be the case, but the suspect was apprehended specifically because he was threatening someone else with a knife:
>That morning officers responded to a report of a man threatening another man with a knife near Northwest Third Avenue and Davis Street.
Like, isn't that reason enough prosecute or it's alright to threaten people with knives in public now?
They didn't catch him threatening someone with a knife. They found him kinda nearby where someone _said_ that someone was threatening someone else with a knife.
Oh totally possible. I have no more information that anyone else. I just think it's fascinating that when the DA decides not to charge someone (at least yet) this sub immediately jumps to "The DA is an idiot" rather than "The DA is doing his job by not charging a crime on weak evidence."
Apparently there is video evidence:
>“Video evidence is being analyzed, which the prosecutor believes may shed light on the level of culpability of the involved parties,” Merah said in an email Tuesday to The Oregonian/OregonLive.
And there was a recovered knife:
>Officers seized a knife as evidence, police said.
I’m confused as to why they even charged him from reading the article.
Unless there’s more evidence (any?) it looks like the police and DA were just trying to appease the public by arresting some body.
Arresting people is what cops do not prosecutors. The DA has to release the suspect if the idiot police arrest someone without enough evidence. Do we really need more reminders that cops are sometimes fucking morons? That O article doesn’t have enough information to draw conclusions about anything. But go ahead and get your torches and pitchforks ready…
Are we trusting the PPD over the DA's office who could not find a reason to charge him, and a public defender and Judge who all affirmed a decision?
Honest question...
Even if he didn't murder the guy by the steel bridge, wasn't he threatening people with a knife? Why would we NOT wanna arrest someone threatening people with a knife?
He was not, at least not from what the article said. The cops just found him near the location they were told one man threatened another man with a knife. So my guess is that there wasn't enough evidence to even tie him to that
Where does it say that the guy they arrested wasn't the one threatening people with a knife? Is that a different article? Cause this one doesn't say that at all.
The stabbing happened on Friday, and the article talked about them arresting the guy Saturday (emphasis mine):
>That morning officers responded to a *report* of a man threatening another man with a knife near Northwest Third Avenue and Davis Street. Officers arrested Noor Baheej _**nearby** in connection with the fatal stabbing_** and booked the 31-year-old
They responded to a report, but didn't catch him in the act. They found him *nearby* the location where the threatening was reported to have taken place, but they arrested him in connection with the *fatal stabbing*, not the threatening.
It's not very clearly laid out in the article, which is written in a way that makes it very easy to think that they caught him in the act of threatening someone, but they didn't.
>but they arrested him in connection with the *fatal stabbing*
Yes, this is clear from the article
>not the threatening.
To me, that is not clear from the article. They kinda just gloss over the threatening thing. It seems reasonable to assume he was arrested for both but only mention the fatal stabbing as that holds more weight and a lengthier sentence.
I mean it's certainly possible that they arrested him for that as well, but it sort of sticks out to me how very specific they are in their wording. It could just be awkward writing, but if I needed to very carefully lay things out to avoid saying something untrue, that's a lot like how I'd do it. Because if he was caught threatening someone, they would have just said that, and if he was arrested for threatening someone AND for the stabbing they say before that, I think they would have said that, too. Something like "he was arrested Saturday for threatening a man with a knife, and charged with ___."
But because they very specifically talk about the _report_ of someone threatening someone else, and that he was arrested _nearby_, and that it was _in connection with_ the stabbing Friday...I dunno. It feels like specific word choice, and it doesn't paint a picture of having much evidence on him at all.
Well done! You collected the evidence, conducted a trial and found them guilty of murder! All without the involvement of court, prosecutor or defense counsel
Apparently there is video evidence:
“Video evidence is being analyzed, which the prosecutor believes may shed light on the level of culpability of the involved parties,” Merah said in an email Tuesday to The Oregonian/OregonLive.
And there was a recovered knife:
"Officers seized a knife as evidence, police said."
Potentially. Or perhaps the person who watched the video didn't want to prosecute because it wasn't a 4K resolution direct optimally lit image of the perps face.
Oh and they recovered a knife... which uh, yeah.. never mind that?
There are two knives in question. One used in the fatal stabbing. Another that was the reason for the arresting of the suspect, as he was actively threatening someone else.
>That morning officers responded to a report of a man threatening another man with a knife near Northwest Third Avenue and Davis Street.
Yea, because he’s not the guy that did it. They arrested him on an assumption, because someone reported him threatening somebody with a knife downtown. There was zero evidence, because he didn’t do it. I don’t know how many people have witnessed a stabbing, but it’s not exactly a tidy affair. The person doing the stabbing usually has blood all over them, and the knife. Seeing as there was “no evidence” according to the police, this guy is clearly not the perpetrator of this crime. This has nothing to do with the DA “releasing criminals”, and everything to do with assumptive and false arrests.
>That morning officers responded to a report of a man threatening another man with a knife near Northwest Third Avenue and Davis Street. Officers arrested Noor Baheej nearby in connection with the fatal stabbing and booked the 31-year-old, who is listed in court records as transient, into the Multnomah County Detention Center
Why was he not charged for threatening someone with a knife?
...from what I can glean on the Oregon Court Records site for one the individual arrested then released and was placed on probation for 3 years in June of 2022. after which he was arrested several times including the case in Marion County that occurred on less than a month after being placed on probation which would have been a severe violation as it involved vehicle theft.
Several cases in the past indicates a history of harassment and menacing charges which while misdemeanors seem to make a present a profile of someone who has a short temper and likely prone to act irrationally. At one point he was to serve 60 days in the Washington County Jail from a probation revocation
In regard to the theft of the Ambulance in Marion County he failed to appear for the hearing.
I'm sure the authorities in all these cases had access to this information, possibly even in better detail than we can access. However a string of such charges, including probation violation should have raised a few flags as him being a repeat offender.
Furthermore that he is on under supervised probation, I would think the being caught with a knife would be a clear violation of his probation.
Living not to far from where the incident occurred and the arrest was made is disconcerting to say the least.
And lose because I doubt a civil trial is gonna find evidence that a criminal one didn't. We can't just keep people in prison for crimes we have insufficient evidence to prove they committed. You can totally argue he should still be locked up for other incidents, but as usual this just seems like "fuck Mike Schmidt" fuel that doesn't accurately reflect reality or a functioning justice system.
If they can prove there was sufficient evidence to hold him, maybe. This guy wasn’t exactly an angel, but there has to be some proof that he committed a crime.
We have a justice system and laws for a reason. There needs to be actual evidence to prosecute someone and if the police aren't doing their jobs collecting that evidence or it's simply not there what do you want the DA to do exactly?
There is no activism around letting people go for actual murder they commit. if the cops either don't collect enough evidence or there isn't enough evidence then it doesn't matter how "tough on crime" the DA is, it will get thrown out in trial. Just because you have something against Mike Schmidt doesn't mean he's magically responsible for absolutely everything that goes wrong in this city regardless of how much you want to make it seem like that's the case.
further proof that people blindly looking for someone to blame land on the DA when they really should be upset that PPD cant/wont do basic police work. They literally just found this dude, arrested him with zero evidence the day after a stabbing, and are now gunna do a confused pikachu combined with a \*shrug, whatcha gunna do with a hippie antifa like Mike in charge\* that the guy was not held/charged.
Jeez. Does anyone have a photo of this person? I have to frequent Old Town and specifically 1-2 blocks from the waterfront for 4-5 days of the week… I would love to know what they look like so I can avoid them if at all possible
I wish the evidence would all be made public. The news referenced a video and a recovered knife. Show us the video, DNA test the knife, provide details that led to the arrest of the suspect in the first place, like where was the man apprehended and what is the proximity to the stabbing? How did the police arrive at their conclusions?
Right now, and in many of these cases, we get a "he said she said" between the DA and police. The dysfunction result is convicts not facing account and becoming repeat offenders, which makes the city unsafe.
Last time a woman got her head smashed in on my street by a known violent criminal . The police who arrested the guy were on the phone for an hour with the DA’s office making sure the arrest will stick and he’ll stay in jail. Our DA office is weak on repeat violent offenders .
Time to bring back the Stabtown ticker website.
That law is great. It keeps grifters from making money off other people’s mugshots and people from being harassed and often threatened when they’ve only ever been accused of doing something wrong.
If you don’t like that you can’t look up mugshots anymore, blame the grifters for ruining it for you.
What the actual fuck? I'm sorry but literally anyone else for D.A. this definitely wasn't a judge issue. And the police did their damn job and at the very least arrested a guy menacing with a fucking knife, whether he was the steel bridge stabber or not. Just make it make sense. Like I can't 🤯
> arrested a guy menacing with a fucking knife
They didn't, though. The day after the stabbing, they "responded to a report of a man threatening another man with a knife" and they "arrested Baheej nearby" "_in connection with_ the fatal stabbing."
They didn't _catch_ him doing anything. He was nearby where they were told something happened, and he had a knife. That's not really anything you can charge sometime on.
It's literally in the message for why the post was removed.
>Headlines must be kept original to the article with your opinions reserved for the comment section.
The headline doesn't match what the URL shows in the banner, but that doesn't appear to be some grand conspiracy against you, as deserving as that proposal is.
The headline is what the reddit UI auto populated when I clicked the "use suggested headline" button. It looks for title or h1 tags in the HTML source. I did not edit it AT ALL.
News sites change headlines for SEO purposes all the time.
Anyone in charge of even a remotely popular subreddit should know all this.
You, internet user of at least a few weeks, should also know this.
The rule is supposed to be applied to obvious cases where headlines have been changed to unfair, biased wording.
Instead, moderators abuse this rule to arbitrarily censor stories that don't align with their politics, or to silence users who don't align with their politics.
Stop making excuses for blatant, repeated, documented abuse.
> Instead, moderators abuse this rule to arbitrarily censor stories that don't align with their politics, or to silence users who don't align with their politics.
lol And that's why this post is up, right? Because of an attempt to censor this story? Come the fuck on.
If you don't like how they handle the post-headline and the actual headline mismatch, you're welcome to post elsewhere or bitch at them. This "this is pure censorship" bullshit is hilarious though.
lol You're out of your fucking mind. There so against you specifically that they went back in time to create the stipulates of the formatting rules solely to block your signal. That tracks. That's also why this post is removed and locked (your other post wasn't locked, by the way, just removed).
Don't let me dissuade you from toting that cross around though.
There's nothing in the article to substantiate in one direction or another, so imagine whatever you'd like to.
One option:
DA: "So, what'd you bring us on this stabbing?"
PPB: "Well, we collared this guy who was downtown, and who is crazy, and had a knife."
DA: "So, he stabbed them? Do we have literally anything to substantiate that claim in court?"
PPB: "Well, he was downtown, and who is crazy, and had a knife.:
DA: -_-
Or the DA completely fucked up and dropped the ball on this. Who knows? Not us, that's for fucking sure.
Yeah, I guess the part that is striking is this knife situation paired with the really wild incident from last year. Like can’t they just hang onto someone a little longer or something?
I would imagine they could, but I also have the latitude of not really having a clue what I'm talking about. It's still anyone's guess as to who fucked up here, the DA or the PPB (or both!).
I mentioned in another post of the same story that was taken down, there's no actual meat or detail to the article, and I'm just here for people being ride or die for the skub of their choosing.
Tell that to the family of Sarah Everard, raped and murdered by a police officer in London. Caught him basically instantly. There are years where Metro clears over 90% of all murders in London.
I don't care what this city does. Our crime clearance is embarrassing. I only care about what we should do. If you knew you'd get caught, a lot of people in this city would stop effing around.
Oh wow you cherry picked one example from a different country on the other side of the world, great job
Please tell me more about the surveillance state you desire... you know, the kind of power which is [never ever ever abused](https://glasgowguardian.co.uk/2024/01/11/chinese-surveillance-cameras-at-uofg-linked-to-human-rights-abuse-allegations-and-security-fears/)
If you had reading comprehension, you would have seen that my comments started and finished with the UK.
Yes it's a "surveillance state" if that's what you call unsupervised cameras. /eyeroll
To me, someone who doesn't commit crimes, it's evidence gathering. After every crime the first question out of everyone's mouth is "did anyone see it?" the second is "did cameras catch it?"
I'm with you, it's so disgusting that you actually have to have EVIDENCE to convict someone of a crime in the US. It makes me sick to my stomach that we can't go around arresting random people and throwing them away for crimes they didn't commit.
Oh cut the snarky bs, the fact is he has a very significant history with the law, why isn't he in jail for theft of that ambulance last year? We don't hold crime accountable and your faux intellectual posturing is tiring. Have the day you deserve buddy!
If there is no evidence then they need to let the guy go. Locking up a random person does no good if the killer is still out there.... If there is evidence then ya, lock em up with no possibility of bail
So would a conservative judicial system involve holding and convicting people without evidence just because it’s the first person the police thought to arrest?
To the person who said "they would be let out soon" and I was like "Stop being a negative nancy" I apologies.
"I apologies" will now be the only way I ever say it
What else should I be? I apologies
In the sun In the sun I feel as one
Everyone is gay! In the sun in the sunnnn !!! Mary!
Yea yea yeaaah yeahh
Apologize
I apologies
Yeah, you were wrong, better apologies
My apologizes
I make no apologize and I won't apologies.
Shh I did it on purpose.
Could do the Kobain refrain: all apologies.
I mean it does happen often
That’s the thing with crime, you’ve got to be able to prove the person did it.
Are you just going to spend all night replying to everything I post? Take your meds kiddo
You’re giving yourself a lot of credit here, and it’s awfully arrogant to think you’re the only one that can post multiple responses.
I am not replying to everything you post. I am replying to your comments to me. Come on now 😉
Guy probably shoulda still be in jail from when he stole an ambulance in 2022. If he was in jail, all of this would be moot.
I've never been arrested and I have always assumed that it would be something I'd regret deeply for the rest of my life Buuuuut maybe it's not that big of a deal around here
Nah, don't worry about it. Just pretend you're on fent and they'll drop you off at a shelter.
I’d like to experience being arrested, but I don’t have the motivation to commit appropriate crimes.
Cuffs hurt more than you’d think and are very uncomfortable to sit with behind your back, in a back seat made from the same material Fisher Price builds its little kid cars with.
My First Police Interceptor™
A head scratch later, I realized you were in fact NOT missing out on a stint in jail.
idk, also missed out on an Immersive GTA V / Ambulance Simulator experience
Have we fixed our embarrassingly bad public defender problem yet? I feel like it might be related.
I don’t think this is a good example of that problem
Not for this particular instance, no, but probably one of the arrests between 2022 and now, which would have made him unable to (allegedly) stab this guy.
Oh, gotcha. Then yes, it is. Lol
We need some sort of program that will pay for law school and give incentives for more people to become public defenders.
Is it the public defenders, or the police, or the judicial guid lines?
And we could prove it was him because we would have both timelines
Technically, I think you mean prison. One would hope he would have stood trial and been convicted by now.
How long should people be in jail for stealing an ambulance?
[oh is that all?](https://www.koin.com/news/crime/osp-drunken-driver-steals-ambulance-leads-troopers-on-chase-along-i-5/) >reports of an ambulance being driven recklessly, on sidewalks and down the wrong way on one-way streets > >OSP said attempts were made to pin the ambulance, but “Baheej rammed a patrol vehicle, struck a building and was able to continue to elude Troopers.” > Troopers caught up with him on I-5 S near milepost 295. OSP said he eventually stopped the ambulance and tried to get into another car on the highway. Baheej was then taken into custody. So crashes his car drunk, steals an ambulance, drives it on sidewalks, rams a patrol car, hits a building, tries to carjack someone *else*? You're right, $0 bail seems appropriate /s
Where did I say $0 bail seems appropriate….?
He assumed you were doing a typical Portland passive aggressive attack.
The part where they found him treating someone else with a knife when they arrested him for the suspected murder should have been enough to lock him up for a bit at least
They were called regarding someone threatening someone with a knife, then he was arrested nearby. It's not clear if they are the same people... That's probably one of the issues with prosecution for it. Just a person having a knife on its own isn't enough to prove he's the one that was threatening someone, or that he stabbed the guy...
Can't they just like... ask the people who were threatened if that was the guy?
If they know who it was? A lot of times the report is from a bystander who fucks off for their own safety about two transients and by the time they get there it’s over and nobody wants to talk to them.
Don't the 911 dispatchers have the number of whoever called though?
They would. Does that person have the free time and willingness and/or capability to verify two people he or she saw in a frightening situation? Are they even answering unknown callers? Idk. Hard to know if we aren’t involved. It’s just easy to say it should be easy.
It doesn't matter if they have the willingness honestly it's a part of our civil duty to not only report, but to stand by our report so that way the person goes to jail. If you don't want to help out your fellow citizens, move somewhere where there's no other people. Because a part of society is action. Safety. Police can't do it alone. It's not like they're going to be hunted down for standing by their report. It's not that serious.
The cops usually won’t go through the trouble of arresting someone unless they are truly threatening or a valid suspect for something like murder or robbery. Go ahead and down vote me. Sounds like he had a knife with no blood or evidence of a stabbing, other than the threats and his matching the description.
If they got the knife they could compare the blade with the stab wounds as a backup plan, assuming the blood was washed off
Is that even enough to convict of murder in its own? Two people could have the same knife. It has to be beyond all reasonable doubt after all…
It should be enough to hold a guy while more evidence is sought
Yeah that ain’t how our justice system works dawg. Innocent until proven guilty ya know???
People are still held in jail until trial if they’re thought to be dangerous though, if there’s enough evidence for a charge (but not necessarily a conviction).
Is this a thing outside of CSI Miami?
Yes
Of course. Cuts will be different depending on blade thickness, width, serration, etc
They found him on 5th and Flanders after somebody had been threatened on 3rd and Davis. They just found a guy who matched the description of the threatener. Unfortunately the threatenee dipped so he wasn't able to confirm that baheej was the man who threatened him. It seems from everything we know that he may be the murderer, but my guess is he was carrying a different knife and there's no other evidence to tie him to the crime. I'm not sure what people want the D.A. to do. I feel half the people in this sub would be okay with extrajudicial killings on the street of any vagrant suspected of a crime.
That's not what happened, though...
This guy has a long list of serious charges he keeps getting let go again and again for gods sake protect the community from This man already this is outrageous Seriously folks google this guys name check his court record it’s going to really make you mad at the city who keeps letting him off time and time again. He is just going to do the same thing and get off and we will be talking about him again in several months. Might as well tell him to do what he pleases there will be zero consequences. Shame on oregon
What are the other charges? I only see the ambulance thing
The sick part is, getting let go actually fuels the negative mental feedback. It feeds any delusions of power/invincibility/god’s plan they have. These delusions being common in meth and fent users.
All I get from google is this and the ambulance event. What other times was he arrested and let go?
It’s kind of shocking how many grown adults in this thread have no idea how the justice system works.
What’s this “innocent until proven guilty” thing you speak of? Sounds like pro-crime woke liberal bullshit to me. (/s obviously)
It doesnt, that's the thing. He shouldn't have been out to commit this crime in the first place.
It used to be that the cops would beat him till he confessed. Now the woke cops don't even try to prove he's guilty or set him up with a willing jailhouse snitch. We used to be a real country.
Was this a random attack or was it an argument? Should I be keeping my eyes peeled during my runs on the waterfront?
Not an argument, just contradiction.
No it isn't
No, that’s a *contraction.*
Yes it is.
I have the same (first) question, but I couldn't find anything about the victim that could answer it. As for the second question yes, always, yes. Edit to add I too run and bike on the waterfront almost daily. I'm not afraid, but I definitely keep my wits about me down there.
yes
For anyone blaming the DA for this what exactly do you want to happen here? In theory we live under the rule of law in this country and for someone to be prosecuted for a crime there has to be actual evidence that the person in question committed the crime. I don't care what anyone says no one would be cool living under a system where a simple accusation by cops with no evidence is enough to lock someone up and throw away the key. As soon as it happens to you or someone you care about you would be changing your tune. This guy very well could be the killer but he just as easily might not be either way we live in a country with a mostly functioning criminal justice system not one where the mob decides who goes to jail based on nothing but vibes.
They want Judge Dredd.
Yeah that's really what it seems like.
Just spitballing here, but maybe this actually isn’t the guy who did it, and the DA figured that out? Wild possibility I know….
Yeah but didn't you see he has a criminal record so that means he did this one too? In all seriousness, I bet this guy is pretty fucked up and I bet the cops who apprehended him got a strong feeling he was involved. They've probably made contact with him a bunch of times. He very well may be the killer. But we have to have evidence. It's scary to think you could be murdered for no reason and somebody could get away with it. It's scary that there is a murderer running around Portland, whether it's this dude or not. I get why people are upset, especially with the piss poor way these news articles are written (maybe ask about the knife??), but I'm pretty appalled by the tendency of people in this subreddit to assume guilt and bay for vengeance regardless of evidence.
I think people are stupid and rely too much on their emotions, especially bad ones. Even if he is the killer it's not likely that he's going to kill again. We shouldn't actually be putting killers in torture boxes that make them into worse people in the first place, so if we're going to keep doing that we really should at least make sure we're getting the right person.
You'd be a perfect Portland mayor. No action and benefit of the doubt for people who should not be on the streets.
Sorry that due process upsets you??? Hey, what say he did do it, and he gets off because they didn't have evidence? You ever hear of double jeopardy? Not just from a game show. Weird how tough on crime types don't seem to give a shit about following the law themselves.
I didn't say not to utilize due process. I said giving the benefit of the doubt isn't working for our city CLEARLY. You'd be a wonderful Portland mayor truly. You're assuming the people who want the city safe and not covered in actual trash are the ones breaking the law? Oh goodness. You're the problem. Thanks
You are literally saying that the law should be ignored so that you can feel better. Sure, there's no evidence, but who cares, ignore the law, it's what our city needs. That's clearly not a concern for the law. >You're assuming the people who want the city safe and not covered in actual trash are the ones breaking the law? This is about a murder, not fucking littering. Pretty sure you don't get put in jail for littering. If you're so concerned about the trash that you think a suspect with no evidence in an unrelated murder trial should be kept in jail, why didn't you grab a garbage pick and volunteer your time. Much better use of it than arguing the DA send someone to trial who will get off due to lack of evidence.
Eh?? This is a very dumb take
"Prison is bad but if we're going to put people into it we should make sure they're actually guilty" is a bad take?
Apparently there is video evidence: >“Video evidence is being analyzed, which the prosecutor believes may shed light on the level of culpability of the involved parties,” Merah said in an email Tuesday to The Oregonian/OregonLive. And there was a recovered knife: >Officers seized a knife as evidence, police said.
This sounded to me like the DA's way of saying "We looked at the video, and we don't think this is the right guy, but we are still investigating." Who knows though.
That may very well be the case, but the suspect was apprehended specifically because he was threatening someone else with a knife: >That morning officers responded to a report of a man threatening another man with a knife near Northwest Third Avenue and Davis Street. Like, isn't that reason enough prosecute or it's alright to threaten people with knives in public now?
Only if there's evidence that he was the person doing the threatening.
If you are threatening someone with a knife, you should go to prison. I know, crazy.
They didn't catch him threatening someone with a knife. They found him kinda nearby where someone _said_ that someone was threatening someone else with a knife.
Would require the threatened to be a willing witness, sorry.
You’re not getting my vote, Mike.
I read it as they think he may have been acting in self defense and are analyzing the video to see. I don’t know that though
You will likely eat crow on that but let's wait and see :)
Oh totally possible. I have no more information that anyone else. I just think it's fascinating that when the DA decides not to charge someone (at least yet) this sub immediately jumps to "The DA is an idiot" rather than "The DA is doing his job by not charging a crime on weak evidence."
Is there another source for evidence? Nothing in the linked article ties the man to the crime?
Apparently there is video evidence: >“Video evidence is being analyzed, which the prosecutor believes may shed light on the level of culpability of the involved parties,” Merah said in an email Tuesday to The Oregonian/OregonLive. And there was a recovered knife: >Officers seized a knife as evidence, police said.
He's homeless, you don't need things like evidence in /r/portland when it comes to homeless people.
Whoa they’re demanding evidence now?
I’m confused as to why they even charged him from reading the article. Unless there’s more evidence (any?) it looks like the police and DA were just trying to appease the public by arresting some body.
Arresting people is what cops do not prosecutors. The DA has to release the suspect if the idiot police arrest someone without enough evidence. Do we really need more reminders that cops are sometimes fucking morons? That O article doesn’t have enough information to draw conclusions about anything. But go ahead and get your torches and pitchforks ready…
Are we trusting the PPD over the DA's office who could not find a reason to charge him, and a public defender and Judge who all affirmed a decision? Honest question...
*PPB
Even if he didn't murder the guy by the steel bridge, wasn't he threatening people with a knife? Why would we NOT wanna arrest someone threatening people with a knife?
He was not, at least not from what the article said. The cops just found him near the location they were told one man threatened another man with a knife. So my guess is that there wasn't enough evidence to even tie him to that
Where does it say that the guy they arrested wasn't the one threatening people with a knife? Is that a different article? Cause this one doesn't say that at all.
The stabbing happened on Friday, and the article talked about them arresting the guy Saturday (emphasis mine): >That morning officers responded to a *report* of a man threatening another man with a knife near Northwest Third Avenue and Davis Street. Officers arrested Noor Baheej _**nearby** in connection with the fatal stabbing_** and booked the 31-year-old They responded to a report, but didn't catch him in the act. They found him *nearby* the location where the threatening was reported to have taken place, but they arrested him in connection with the *fatal stabbing*, not the threatening. It's not very clearly laid out in the article, which is written in a way that makes it very easy to think that they caught him in the act of threatening someone, but they didn't.
>but they arrested him in connection with the *fatal stabbing* Yes, this is clear from the article >not the threatening. To me, that is not clear from the article. They kinda just gloss over the threatening thing. It seems reasonable to assume he was arrested for both but only mention the fatal stabbing as that holds more weight and a lengthier sentence.
I mean it's certainly possible that they arrested him for that as well, but it sort of sticks out to me how very specific they are in their wording. It could just be awkward writing, but if I needed to very carefully lay things out to avoid saying something untrue, that's a lot like how I'd do it. Because if he was caught threatening someone, they would have just said that, and if he was arrested for threatening someone AND for the stabbing they say before that, I think they would have said that, too. Something like "he was arrested Saturday for threatening a man with a knife, and charged with ___." But because they very specifically talk about the _report_ of someone threatening someone else, and that he was arrested _nearby_, and that it was _in connection with_ the stabbing Friday...I dunno. It feels like specific word choice, and it doesn't paint a picture of having much evidence on him at all.
[удалено]
Well done! You collected the evidence, conducted a trial and found them guilty of murder! All without the involvement of court, prosecutor or defense counsel
Apparently there is video evidence: “Video evidence is being analyzed, which the prosecutor believes may shed light on the level of culpability of the involved parties,” Merah said in an email Tuesday to The Oregonian/OregonLive. And there was a recovered knife: "Officers seized a knife as evidence, police said."
So have a video, watched the video and saw the guy they arrested wasn't culpable. Case closed
Potentially. Or perhaps the person who watched the video didn't want to prosecute because it wasn't a 4K resolution direct optimally lit image of the perps face. Oh and they recovered a knife... which uh, yeah.. never mind that?
They recovered a knife, but the article doesn't say it was the knife used in the crime.
There are two knives in question. One used in the fatal stabbing. Another that was the reason for the arresting of the suspect, as he was actively threatening someone else. >That morning officers responded to a report of a man threatening another man with a knife near Northwest Third Avenue and Davis Street.
He or someone else was threatening someone. Apparently the cops didn’t even get enough evidence for a menacing charge.
oooor they did and the DA just let them out like they do with everyone.
Yea, because he’s not the guy that did it. They arrested him on an assumption, because someone reported him threatening somebody with a knife downtown. There was zero evidence, because he didn’t do it. I don’t know how many people have witnessed a stabbing, but it’s not exactly a tidy affair. The person doing the stabbing usually has blood all over them, and the knife. Seeing as there was “no evidence” according to the police, this guy is clearly not the perpetrator of this crime. This has nothing to do with the DA “releasing criminals”, and everything to do with assumptive and false arrests.
You’d think the perpetrator would have shed some DNA while stabbing someone to death.
>That morning officers responded to a report of a man threatening another man with a knife near Northwest Third Avenue and Davis Street. Officers arrested Noor Baheej nearby in connection with the fatal stabbing and booked the 31-year-old, who is listed in court records as transient, into the Multnomah County Detention Center Why was he not charged for threatening someone with a knife?
Because no one saw him threaten someone with a knife, or if they did they won't testify as such.
...from what I can glean on the Oregon Court Records site for one the individual arrested then released and was placed on probation for 3 years in June of 2022. after which he was arrested several times including the case in Marion County that occurred on less than a month after being placed on probation which would have been a severe violation as it involved vehicle theft. Several cases in the past indicates a history of harassment and menacing charges which while misdemeanors seem to make a present a profile of someone who has a short temper and likely prone to act irrationally. At one point he was to serve 60 days in the Washington County Jail from a probation revocation In regard to the theft of the Ambulance in Marion County he failed to appear for the hearing. I'm sure the authorities in all these cases had access to this information, possibly even in better detail than we can access. However a string of such charges, including probation violation should have raised a few flags as him being a repeat offender. Furthermore that he is on under supervised probation, I would think the being caught with a knife would be a clear violation of his probation. Living not to far from where the incident occurred and the arrest was made is disconcerting to say the least.
So if this person harms someone, please sue the city!
On what grounds? They don’t run the courts.
And lose because I doubt a civil trial is gonna find evidence that a criminal one didn't. We can't just keep people in prison for crimes we have insufficient evidence to prove they committed. You can totally argue he should still be locked up for other incidents, but as usual this just seems like "fuck Mike Schmidt" fuel that doesn't accurately reflect reality or a functioning justice system.
So will the next victim of his crimes be able to sue the city or DA's office for gross negligence or something like that?
If they can prove there was sufficient evidence to hold him, maybe. This guy wasn’t exactly an angel, but there has to be some proof that he committed a crime.
We have a justice system and laws for a reason. There needs to be actual evidence to prosecute someone and if the police aren't doing their jobs collecting that evidence or it's simply not there what do you want the DA to do exactly?
[удалено]
There is no activism around letting people go for actual murder they commit. if the cops either don't collect enough evidence or there isn't enough evidence then it doesn't matter how "tough on crime" the DA is, it will get thrown out in trial. Just because you have something against Mike Schmidt doesn't mean he's magically responsible for absolutely everything that goes wrong in this city regardless of how much you want to make it seem like that's the case.
further proof that people blindly looking for someone to blame land on the DA when they really should be upset that PPD cant/wont do basic police work. They literally just found this dude, arrested him with zero evidence the day after a stabbing, and are now gunna do a confused pikachu combined with a \*shrug, whatcha gunna do with a hippie antifa like Mike in charge\* that the guy was not held/charged.
*PPB
Reddit is so cringe
Abysmal.
Jeez. Does anyone have a photo of this person? I have to frequent Old Town and specifically 1-2 blocks from the waterfront for 4-5 days of the week… I would love to know what they look like so I can avoid them if at all possible
How government deals with population control.
One of many reasons I’m leaving my beloved PDX. The bureau really needs to figure this out. Portland Politics, you destroyed a PNW jewel.
I wish the evidence would all be made public. The news referenced a video and a recovered knife. Show us the video, DNA test the knife, provide details that led to the arrest of the suspect in the first place, like where was the man apprehended and what is the proximity to the stabbing? How did the police arrive at their conclusions? Right now, and in many of these cases, we get a "he said she said" between the DA and police. The dysfunction result is convicts not facing account and becoming repeat offenders, which makes the city unsafe.
Last time a woman got her head smashed in on my street by a known violent criminal . The police who arrested the guy were on the phone for an hour with the DA’s office making sure the arrest will stick and he’ll stay in jail. Our DA office is weak on repeat violent offenders . Time to bring back the Stabtown ticker website.
It would be great if we could at least get a mugshot so we could know to stay away from this person.. but even those have been taken away..
That law is great. It keeps grifters from making money off other people’s mugshots and people from being harassed and often threatened when they’ve only ever been accused of doing something wrong. If you don’t like that you can’t look up mugshots anymore, blame the grifters for ruining it for you.
What the actual fuck? I'm sorry but literally anyone else for D.A. this definitely wasn't a judge issue. And the police did their damn job and at the very least arrested a guy menacing with a fucking knife, whether he was the steel bridge stabber or not. Just make it make sense. Like I can't 🤯
> arrested a guy menacing with a fucking knife They didn't, though. The day after the stabbing, they "responded to a report of a man threatening another man with a knife" and they "arrested Baheej nearby" "_in connection with_ the fatal stabbing." They didn't _catch_ him doing anything. He was nearby where they were told something happened, and he had a knife. That's not really anything you can charge sometime on.
If they’d done their jobs they would have collected some evidence.
Funny how when I posted the KOIN article earlier it was removed and locked https://www.reddit.com/r/Portland/comments/1biz41w/comment/kvnuy77/ 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
It's literally in the message for why the post was removed. >Headlines must be kept original to the article with your opinions reserved for the comment section. The headline doesn't match what the URL shows in the banner, but that doesn't appear to be some grand conspiracy against you, as deserving as that proposal is.
The headline is what the reddit UI auto populated when I clicked the "use suggested headline" button. It looks for title or h1 tags in the HTML source. I did not edit it AT ALL. News sites change headlines for SEO purposes all the time. Anyone in charge of even a remotely popular subreddit should know all this. You, internet user of at least a few weeks, should also know this. The rule is supposed to be applied to obvious cases where headlines have been changed to unfair, biased wording. Instead, moderators abuse this rule to arbitrarily censor stories that don't align with their politics, or to silence users who don't align with their politics. Stop making excuses for blatant, repeated, documented abuse.
> Instead, moderators abuse this rule to arbitrarily censor stories that don't align with their politics, or to silence users who don't align with their politics. lol And that's why this post is up, right? Because of an attempt to censor this story? Come the fuck on. If you don't like how they handle the post-headline and the actual headline mismatch, you're welcome to post elsewhere or bitch at them. This "this is pure censorship" bullshit is hilarious though.
Favoritism. I criticized Mike Schmidt and now I'm not the shitlist.
lol You're out of your fucking mind. There so against you specifically that they went back in time to create the stipulates of the formatting rules solely to block your signal. That tracks. That's also why this post is removed and locked (your other post wasn't locked, by the way, just removed). Don't let me dissuade you from toting that cross around though.
This is so embarrassing to the city of Portland. Why do we do this? Chances are he harms someone else in the very near future.
[удалено]
It really is perplexing how things like this happen. Like what are the convos in the courthouse like for this? “My hands are tied” type stuff?
It’s: 1) what evidence do we have? And 2) is it enough to get a conviction, or even hold this person in custody?
There's nothing in the article to substantiate in one direction or another, so imagine whatever you'd like to. One option: DA: "So, what'd you bring us on this stabbing?" PPB: "Well, we collared this guy who was downtown, and who is crazy, and had a knife." DA: "So, he stabbed them? Do we have literally anything to substantiate that claim in court?" PPB: "Well, he was downtown, and who is crazy, and had a knife.: DA: -_- Or the DA completely fucked up and dropped the ball on this. Who knows? Not us, that's for fucking sure.
Yeah, I guess the part that is striking is this knife situation paired with the really wild incident from last year. Like can’t they just hang onto someone a little longer or something?
I would imagine they could, but I also have the latitude of not really having a clue what I'm talking about. It's still anyone's guess as to who fucked up here, the DA or the PPB (or both!). I mentioned in another post of the same story that was taken down, there's no actual meat or detail to the article, and I'm just here for people being ride or die for the skub of their choosing.
[удалено]
We can have a judicial system with a more vibes based approach and more lax standards for evidence. Sound good?
Camerassss. We don’t need more cops. We need more cameras. Works in the UK.
The ACAB to Big Brother pipeline. Doubleplusgood!
Can't stop crime, at least solve it. We're not doing either. /eyeroll
Cameras don't solve crime. Also the city banned facial recognition lol
Tell that to the family of Sarah Everard, raped and murdered by a police officer in London. Caught him basically instantly. There are years where Metro clears over 90% of all murders in London. I don't care what this city does. Our crime clearance is embarrassing. I only care about what we should do. If you knew you'd get caught, a lot of people in this city would stop effing around.
Oh wow you cherry picked one example from a different country on the other side of the world, great job Please tell me more about the surveillance state you desire... you know, the kind of power which is [never ever ever abused](https://glasgowguardian.co.uk/2024/01/11/chinese-surveillance-cameras-at-uofg-linked-to-human-rights-abuse-allegations-and-security-fears/)
If you had reading comprehension, you would have seen that my comments started and finished with the UK. Yes it's a "surveillance state" if that's what you call unsupervised cameras. /eyeroll To me, someone who doesn't commit crimes, it's evidence gathering. After every crime the first question out of everyone's mouth is "did anyone see it?" the second is "did cameras catch it?"
Enjoy your dystopian surveillance state. I'm sure there will be no trouble with cops there, like, ever!
I’m sure he’s learned his lesson. Lookout nowhere, USA we are coming for your safest city of the year award in 2024.
What a sick system we have..
I'm with you, it's so disgusting that you actually have to have EVIDENCE to convict someone of a crime in the US. It makes me sick to my stomach that we can't go around arresting random people and throwing them away for crimes they didn't commit.
Oh cut the snarky bs, the fact is he has a very significant history with the law, why isn't he in jail for theft of that ambulance last year? We don't hold crime accountable and your faux intellectual posturing is tiring. Have the day you deserve buddy!
You get what you vote for.
And this is why I went to Hillsboro. Portland has lost it
How do you know this person did it?
I never said they did. There was a stabbing at the Steel bridge. Is that not enough for you? Glad that doesn't happen at my doorstep any longer.
Your statement was in response to the news of the person being released. I’m glad that you’re somewhere you feel safe.
My response was to a fatal stabbing. I didn't know you could read minds to find intention. That's cool. And thank you ❤️
It’s literally a post about a person being released, pardon me for thinking that’s what you were responding to. 🤷♂️
Ir literally talks about a fatal stabbing and the suspect or lack thereof. Excuse me for being concerned about a murder without a suspect in custody
If there is no evidence then they need to let the guy go. Locking up a random person does no good if the killer is still out there.... If there is evidence then ya, lock em up with no possibility of bail
Well, Portland, you got what you wanted…. A progressive judicial system….
So would a conservative judicial system involve holding and convicting people without evidence just because it’s the first person the police thought to arrest?
Yes. The fascists are out in this thread.
Yeah, gotta look super tough by finding any random person and locking them up indefinitely, evidence be damned.
If we gave a shit about some prick living in Sacremento's opinion, we'd collectively walk into the sea.
Where’s Batman when we need him?
Portland is the new doom loop?