Support BikePortland - Journalism that Matters

Video claims protestors are to blame in collision with truck driver

Posted by on February 13th, 2019 at 1:36 pm

Still from dashcam video of a collision on SW 4th Avenue on October 31st, 2018. Watch the video below.

Back in October we shared the story of Mark Dickerson, the man arrested for allegedly driving his truck through a crowd of protestors on SW 4th Avenue. Now his wife Janelle Dickerson is distributing a video that shows the protestors violating several laws. She says one man purposely walked in front of the truck and is now trying to “scam” their family via insurance fraud.

Prior to the collision, family and supporters of Patrick Kimmons, who was fatally shot by a Portland Police Officer, were standing in the street outside the Multnomah County Courthouse. Mark Dickerson, 55, was on his way to an appointment at the Courthouse. As he drove his truck northbound on 4th a group of people were standing in the street holding signs at the intersection of 4th and Main.

Advertisement

When the light turned green Dickerson drove through the intersection (his wife says he was going about 7 mph which, a speed that, “gave him permission to drive safely through the crowd”) and didn’t stop for people that were still standing in the street in front of him. He drove his large truck forward and the crowd parted. As he passed, one of the protestors pounded on the hood of his truck. Another protestor (in the lead photo), seems to have purposely walked into the path of Dickerson’s truck and was struck. The man who was on foot was not seriously injured. Dickerson eventually found a parking spot and was later found by police and arrested on charges of Assault in the Fourth Degree, Reckless Endangering, and Reckless Driving.

Yesterday we were contacted by Janelle Dickerson. She shared the video above and said, “Here’s what happened via his dashcam.” As you can see when you watch the video, Dickerson claims the protestors “attacked” the truck and violated several laws while doing so.

Now Mrs. Dickerson wants to the people in the video to be “exposed” for what she says is attempted insurance fraud. According to Dickerson, her husband has received death threats, faces a year in jail, is the subject of a civil lawsuit, has been slandered by the media and has racked up $5,000 in legal fees, “All because he was trying to park.”

— Jonathan Maus: (503) 706-8804, @jonathan_maus on Twitter and jonathan@bikeportland.org

Never miss a story. Sign-up for the daily BP Headlines email.

BikePortland needs your support.

NOTE: We love your comments and work hard to ensure they are welcoming of all perspectives. Disagreements are encouraged, but only if done with tact and respect. BikePortland is an inclusive company with no tolerance for discrimination or harassment including expressions of racism, sexism, homophobia, or xenophobia. If you see a mean or inappropriate comment, please contact us and we'll take a look at it right away. Also, if you comment frequently, please consider holding your thoughts so that others can step forward. Thank you — Jonathan

154
Leave a Reply

avatar
34 Comment threads
120 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
50 Comment authors
was carlessEl BicicleroChris IqMantraPDX Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Middle of the Road Guy
Guest
Middle of the Road Guy

Is it possible to not like ANY of the people involved?

Jason
Guest
Jason

So, explain to me how the man driving the truck is in the right for intentionally driving into a group of pedestrians.

Regardless of their intent, his conduct is not permitted. Under no circumstances can a motorist be allowed to proceed from a full stop to charging through a crowd of pedestrians. Had he not done so, his vehicle would not have been “attacked”.

True that two wrongs do not make a right, but by no means is this man on any moral high ground. He is an aggressive and violent operator of a deadly weapon.

PDXCyclist
Guest
PDXCyclist

Looks like he drove into a bunch of people knowing they were there… Hard to argue he was driving with “due care” and couldn’t have avoided that outcome considering he was fully stopped, aware of the people in front of him, then drove into them. Makes it hard to empathize at all and looks like he tried to use his vehicle as a weapon/to intimidate

SD
Guest
SD

Wow. He didn’t even turn the wheel to go around or avoid the protester.
And he was driving dangerously close to them in the first place.
This is assault. The story demonstrates the incredibly intoxicating effect of “car head,” in that one would post an incriminating video of their partner and expect sympathy.

Ben McLeod
Guest
Ben McLeod

I think he’s made a good case for the charges that were filed against him. Clearly, he drove into a crowd. He even video’d himself doing so. He’s lucky he didn’t kill anyone.

bikeninja
Guest
bikeninja

It seems that this ” auto user” and many others claim for themselves a kind of twisted version of medieval feudal law. In this bizzaro legal system the lords of the manner (motorists) have special rights above and beyond the peasants ( pedestrians) . In their view ,all the lord must do is signal his intention to proceed and if the peasants to not clear out of the way they are fair game to be run down by the lord on his steed, and woe to the peasant that so much as lays a hand on the lords steed as he stumbles out of the way, he is in for even more punishment at the hands of his masters henchmen.

Racer X
Guest
Racer X

Pedestrians, as ALL drivers know…dart out into traffic…like moths to a flame…

zach
Guest
zach

Pedestrianize downtown Portland.

Middle of the Road Guy
Guest
Middle of the Road Guy

Reasonable people would also get out of the way of a moving vehicle and not attack it.

pdx2wheeler
Guest
pdx2wheeler

Truck head!

Bjorn
Guest
Bjorn

Regardless of if someone is violating a traffic law as a driver you are still required to try to avoid a collision. Like if someone driving a car were to turn the wrong way down a one way street people going the right way are supposed to stop, not gun it and intentionally hit them head on because “they were going the wrong way”.

Emily Johnson
Guest
Emily Johnson

Has a civil suit actually been filed? I’m not seeing anything when I search for it, and I’m very interested in the “insurance fraud” issue among other things.

Charles Reneau
Guest
Charles Reneau

That driver tried to run into a bunch of people. He deserves what our legal system metes out.

Jim Richards
Guest
Jim Richards

These were PROTESTERS not Pedestrians. They do NOT benefit from Pedestrian laws and are in fact violating ORS by interfering with vehicle traffic. These are clear laws. The driver had two options: stop at their resistance line and see what was going to happen or get through the gauntlet. Remember Reginald Denny(sp?) He stopped and was nearly killed. He couldn’t turn right, he couldn’t turn left and he couldn’t go backwards. So, he should have just stopped and waited for their… for what? Yeah, right.

matchupancakes
Guest
matchupancakes

[quote]Now Mrs. Dickerson wants to the people in the video to be “exposed” for what she says is attempted insurance fraud. [/quote]
I don’t understand what is being stated here. Insurance claims are not conducted anonymously. Anyone making a claim is identified and thus exposed by default. The sentence doesn’t parse with the assertion being made here.

Mark smith
Guest
Mark smith

What gets me is, why is it so hard for drivers to understand that a blocked road means stop. Not.”drive slowly through”. ?

Jim Richards
Guest
Jim Richards

@John Lascurettes – You simply don’t understand the law. Laws are written with “intent” and how it is applied. Pedestrian laws were not written for protesters and in no way would they be considered as such. By your logic, anyone in the road regardless of intent, is protected by ORS? So, the Protesters that pulled Reginald Deny out of his truck were just Pedestrians? How about Car Jacker’s or a plethora of other people pulled out of cars by protesters, are they simply Pedestrians?

I love this comment “why is it so hard for drivers to understand that a blocked road means stop. Not.” You’re actually serious aren’t you? Since when do Protesters have the legal right to stop vehicles on the road? According to the law, you’re simply wrong.

Starting to wonder if you’re simply a protester arguing for a just cause. So, who would ORS 814.040 actually apply to? I guess was just written with no intent, right?!

grannygear
Guest
grannygear

Id me much more impressed with people blocking the streets that are attempting to keep cars frfom coming into downtown. Slowing folks down that are basically stuck on one ways in a congested area is bullying. There are so many ways to protest, why block down town traffic??? It gets nothing done but picks on people in cars. Plus slowing down combustion vehicles just seems to be against anything positive. It’s literally doing damage to the earth. Come on now.

q
Guest
q

A similar thing happened a couple years ago when the Portland Spirit tried to ram its way through a crowd of boats moored to watch the Red Bull Flugtag event at Waterfront Park.

Similarly to this driver, the captain apparently believed that since the boats were blocking the channel, they were violating this or that rule, so therefore he had the right to mow them down.

He was found to be in the wrong by a Coast Guard investigation, because (as in this case) there’s an overriding law that you have to avoid crashing into others.

It’s weird seeing people thinking that regulations will allow bizarre outcomes, to the point they feel comfortable running people over. Where are their internal moral regulators?

Jim Richards
Guest
Jim Richards

ORS 814.040 Period!

terry
Guest
terry

how does any of this have anything to do with cycling? Not one bit of this has to do with a bicycle at all, has this web site jumped the shark? Stay in your bike lane ….

mark smith
Guest
mark smith

terry
It’s not suppose to be helpful, this is a BIKE blog not a platform for unrelated Bike issues. with all that’s going on in Portland related to bikes we dwell on this?Recommended 1

You sound like a person who likes to have control of others.

billyjo
Guest
billyjo

This person really should have consulted an attorney before posting this. I’m sure the prosecutor will use it against the driver.

Dan A
Subscriber
Dan A

BP is getting more bold.

Mike
Guest
Mike

Apparently, the video I’m seeing is different than the one most of you are seeing. I’m a cyclist with no love of big trucks, but I have more sympathy for the motorist here. When I’m riding, and I sense an impending collision, I take action to avoid it even if I have the right of way. That fella the got “hit” very intentionally and very obviously moved INTO the path of the truck.

Johnny Bye Carter
Subscriber
Johnny Bye Carter

Everybody is screaming ORS this and ORS that. Why hasn’t anybody been screaming Freedom of Movement and Right to Assemble? Those are actual RIGHTS, as opposed to the PRIVILEGE of driving. People have irrevocable rights. Drivers have an allowed privilege that can be taken away.

The take-away here is that a driver is NEVER allowed to steer their vehicle into a crowd of people. It doesn’t matter if those people are breaking state laws and you want to go where they’re at. As a driver you have to find another way.

Take the lane
Guest
Take the lane

I am a driver, a cyclist and a pedestrian and I believe that the protesters were in the wrong. They were clearly obstructing the flow of traffic while loitering in a crosswalk against the light (law). The driver slowly approached the protesters giving them plenty of time to move out of his way, which they did, although not without attacking his vehicle afterward. But then one protester decided that he should not get through so easily and purposely moved into harms way. One person’s freedom ends where another person’s freedom begins, and the protesters were clearly purposefully infringing on his freedom to move through the city in accordance with the traffic control devices.

headfirst
Guest
headfirst

terry
It’s not suppose to be helpful, this is a BIKE blog not a platform for unrelated Bike issues. with all that’s going on in Portland related to bikes we dwell on this?Recommended 7

This is an anti car blog

Jim Richards
Guest
Jim Richards

It’s fairly obvious the driver had no intention of hitting anyone, encourage them to move which they did. He was going a whole 6-7mph if you look at the video. At fist glance it might look like that but if you see him slam on his brakes as soon as the guy walks backward into his path, why would he do that if he intended to hit anyone? Illogical. As they were beating on his truck it looks like he was trying to get out of there as fast as possible. The driver stated he was going to the court house so he had a right to travel there. The protesters had absolutely no right to block the court house or the road leading there. This isn’t anything new… cars try to get through protesters all the time, all across the country. Some states have absolutely no sympathy for people blocking the roads even though some people in Oregon do. Glad I don’t live there.

Take the Lane
Guest
Take the Lane

And some people aren’t emotionally mature enough to realize that not everyone cares about their cause and that being aggressive and disrespectful will never win anyone’s support. The guy simply wanted to get to court on time.

Jim Richards
Guest
Jim Richards

GeeZus some of you people just think protesters blocking the road is A ok with you. It is illegal. Protesting on the street, blocking traffic is simply illegal. https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/814.040

This comment “Blocking the movement of vehicles is constitutionally protected speech.” is so ignorant I can only assume you’re a pro protester. You’re wrong, itis illegal and a class D Traffic violation.

Jim Richards
Guest
Jim Richards

Where did he run over people? If he intended to run over people, why did he slam on his brakes the moment someone moved into his path? It’s kinda’ obvious the driver was trying to create an opening of the illegal protesters…had they not moved, looks like he would have stopped since the moment someone did get in his path, he SLAMMED on the brakes. Who had the right to be in the road? Only the driver. Interfering with traffic in Oregon is illegal

Personally when I ride, there are some drivers that are just jerks and so are there some pedestrians that are jerks. Mostly however, I actually like seeing people out, moving about, bike riders, cars, dogs being walked, creates a good feeling. However, I have ZERO tolerance for any “pedestrians” that interrupt that normal flow. The ones that think they’re special and the law doesn’t apply to them are abhorrent.

Jim Richards
Guest
Jim Richards

You’re so biased… Did you even read the law? https://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/814.040

You call them “Pedestrians” when they couldn’t be any further from that definition. You said “The group of protesters didn’t jump in front of him…” Are you blind? That’s EXACTLY what the protester did. When the path was clear from the protesters that were violating the law, the guy walked BACKWARDS, like he was doing the moon dance or something with eyes on the driver, INTENDING to get in his clear path when the others finally complied with the law. Did you not hear them beating on the drivers truck? Did you not see them doing so? GeeZus, if the protester pulled out an axe and started swinging it at the driver, you would defend that as well, obviously.

Jim Richards
Guest
Jim Richards

The Police agreed he didn’t do anything wrong. Did you hear the cop that first came to the driver? Saying “I’m not excited about anything, I understand the frustration., I saw the whole thing, otherwise you’d be in handcuffs.” The cops apparently shot the protesters brother weeks before and on this day, the crowd was gathering, screaming for justice. It was the subsequent cops that arrested thee driver as said “our safety and your safety, were going to arrest you.” Did you protester defenders just not watch the whole video?