By Investigative Reporter, Linda Sutter – January 9, 2024
On January 2, 2024, at the Crescent City Harbor District, item 3 on the agenda involved the adjudication of an appeal from Andrew Evanow Sr., who sought to overturn a trespass and slip revocation order. In a conventional court of law, the prosecuting attorney must present sufficient evidence to prosecute someone before proceeding to trial, as the defendant is considered innocent until proven guilty. Unfortunately, due process seemed to be absent within the Harbor District.
Mr. Evanow found himself accused of using threatening language, destroying a ramp gate, and leaving an oil trail behind by rolling a generator up the ramp. However, he arrived at the hearing well-prepared. Armed with a collection of pictures showcasing his boat, the electric generator, and the gate, Mr. Evanow aimed to present his side of the story. Surprisingly, the Harbormaster had no evidence to support the allegations. No tests had been conducted on the mysterious substance that left a trail on the ramp, and no pictures were provided by the Harbor District’s individuals who filed the complaints.
The proceedings felt nothing short of a kangaroo court, seemingly attempting to unjustly remove a fisherman who regularly paid rent for his slip. Despite the lack of substantial evidence, the Harbor Commissioners acknowledged that the burden of proof had not been met. However, they decided to document the occurrence for future reference.
In this case, the story highlights the absence of due process and the questionable conduct within the Harbor District. The appeal hearing lacked the necessary evidence to support the accusations against Mr. Evanow, emphasizing the unfair treatment he faced.