Riot police break up party in Washington college town
SEATTLE — Hundreds of college-age revelers in Washington state — thwarted in efforts to continue a large party — threw projectiles at police who responded with pepper spray to disperse them, authorities said.
Multiple partiers were arrested during the melee late Saturday and early Sunday in the scenic college town of Bellingham, about 75 miles north of Seattle, police Sgt. Mike Scanlon said.
“There was drinking. It became disorderly and pretty much an out-and-out riot,” he told The Associated Press.
Scanlon said the unrest began as police dispersed a noisy party that had drawn a few hundred people.
Lauren Boushey, 20, a junior at Western Washington University in Bellingham who was at the apartment complex party, said it broke up about 9 p.m. and police officers politely asked people to go home.
“It was set up to be ... this really nice night and nothing reckless or ridiculous like it turned into,” she said Sunday, noting that the party was not connected to the ensuing ruckus. People lingered, and a crowd started forming a block away, she said.
Many of the revelers moved to nearby Laurel Park, where they were joined by even more people, Scanlon said, calling it a “large, intoxicated, disorderly crowd.”
The situation “finally boiled over,” he said. “They began hurling projectiles at police.”
Up to 500 people had converged on the park, the sergeant said.
It took about 45 minutes to clear the area and restore order.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- New York legislative Speaker Silver to give up position because of federal corruption charges
- Thieves go for the gold in San Francisco
- Wisconsin’s Walker takes first step toward possible run in 2016
- Pittsburgh travelers feel effects of Northeast blizzard
- House sales tax proposal criticized as attack on states’ rights
- Pentagon puts ‘fork’ in news about ex-captive Bergdahl
- Boehner acknowledges early House GOP ‘stumbles’
- Drone owner still unnamed, works for intelligence agency
- Slain Ga. couple known for charity projects
- Senate on track to approve Keystone XL by week’s end
- National Weather Service to evaluate work after missed call on storm