Reporting Individual: Jodi Schiller
Timeframe Covered: Approximately the last 12 hours
Location: General homeless shelter (with separate sleeping areas) and surrounding public area

Summary

This report documents a sequence of escalating violent and threatening behavior by a male individual associated with a general shelter, including:

• An alleged physical assault on shelter staff
• Explicit threats of violence
• Intimidation of multiple women
• A subsequent physical assault in public

Despite repeated warning signs and multiple opportunities for intervention, no law enforcement response occurred. The individual remained at large and continued to pose an immediate danger to women in the area.

Individuals Involved

Primary aggressor: Adult male (name unknown), previously present in the shelter

Shelter staff member: Adult female employee (name unknown)

Victims / Witnesses:

• Homeless woman using a cart (name unknown)
• Additional adult woman assaulted later that morning
• Reporting individual (Jodi Schiller)

Detailed Chronology

Overnight – Shelter (Late Night / Early Morning)

While staying at a general shelter with separate sleeping areas, I had previously observed ongoing concern regarding a male individual who had been sleeping in the women’s section despite being male. His behavior and demeanor consistently gave off unsafe and predatory signals. I avoided interaction but remained concerned about his presence.

Late last night, the individual attempted to enter the shelter. A female staff member denied him entry and stated clearly and audibly that he was no longer allowed on the premises because he had physically assaulted her the previous night.

A prolonged and volatile verbal confrontation followed.

During this confrontation:

• The individual denied responsibility and became verbally aggressive.
• He issued explicit threats of physical violence toward the staff member, including threatening to beat her.
• The exchange continued for an extended period.

Law enforcement was not contacted.

Eventually, a security guard was summoned and removed the individual from the shelter. No police response occurred during or after this incident.

Morning – Outside the Shelter (Early Morning)

When I exited the shelter early the following morning, I observed the same individual outside the building.

He was actively menacing a homeless woman attempting to move a cart along the sidewalk. He:

• Blocked her movement
• Shouted at her
• Demanded she give him something she did not appear to have
• Prevented her from leaving

The woman was unable to get away and was audibly calling out for help.

I intervened solely to assist her in maneuvering her cart around him so she could escape the situation. I did not engage him verbally beyond this action.

In response, the individual directed threats and verbal abuse at me, including:

• “I’m going to kick the shit out of you.”
• “I’m going to beat your ass.”
• Profanities
• Racist and misogynistic slurs

I disengaged immediately after helping the woman escape and crossed to the opposite side of the street to reduce risk.

Again, no police were called.

Subsequent Assault (Approximately 15 Minutes Later)

Approximately fifteen minutes later, the same individual slapped another woman in the area. This woman had attempted to intervene or protect the earlier victim.

This constituted an additional act of physical violence in public.

Despite:

• Multiple explicit threats
• Intimidation of vulnerable individuals
• A confirmed physical assault

No law enforcement response occurred.

Actions Taken

• Shelter staff denied entry and later summoned security.
• Security removed the individual from inside the shelter only.
• I intervened to assist a vulnerable woman in escaping an immediate threat.

No police were called at any stage, despite:

• An explicit allegation of staff assault
• Repeated threats of violence
• Ongoing intimidation of women
• A subsequent physical assault in public

Systemic Failure Analysis

This incident reflects a broader pattern of institutional failure rather than an isolated lapse.

1. Failure to Enforce Basic Safety Boundaries

A male individual was permitted to sleep in the women’s section of a general shelter despite observable discomfort and safety concerns. This represents a failure to enforce minimal safeguards in a high-risk environment.

2. Failure to Respond to Alleged Assault of Staff

A shelter staff member explicitly stated that the individual had physically assaulted her the prior night. This allegation met standard thresholds for criminal response, yet no law enforcement involvement occurred.

3. Overreliance on Security in Place of Law Enforcement

Security removal addressed only the interior of the shelter and did nothing to mitigate ongoing risk. The individual remained nearby and continued violent behavior.

4. Failure to Protect Residents After Removal

No safety perimeter, monitoring, or follow-up occurred after the individual was expelled, exposing residents exiting the shelter—particularly women—to foreseeable danger.

5. Normalization of Threats Against Women

Explicit threats, misogynistic abuse, and racialized slurs were treated as routine disturbances rather than predictors of imminent harm.

6. Failure to Activate Emergency Protocols

At multiple points—staff assault allegations, threats, intimidation, and a public physical assault—conditions met criteria for emergency intervention, which did not occur.

7. Transfer of Risk to Residents and Bystanders

In the absence of institutional action, women and bystanders were effectively forced into unsafe roles of de-escalation and intervention, assuming risks that should have been addressed by authorities.

Author’s Analysis

Captivity Enforced Through Ambient Male Violence

Statement of the reporting individual’s interpretation and conclusions

Based on repeated, direct experience across jurisdictions and years—including this incident and prior events in Berkeley—I assess that the persistent failure to incarcerate violent men functions as a system of social control over women.

Men who make explicit, credible threats of lethal violence—who stalk, menace, assault, and terrorize women—are repeatedly released back into public space. This occurs even when threats are specific, repeated, weapon-involved, and made in the presence of police or shelter staff.

The result is not ambiguity. The result is saturation.

There are so many violent, unstable, and uncontained men in public space that it becomes dangerous for women simply to exist outside—outside a shelter, outside a home, outside male protection.

This ambient, constant threat:

• Restricts movement
• Narrows choices
• Punishes independence

In this context, “freedom” becomes theoretical.

A woman may be legally allowed to leave a relationship, a home, or a shelter—but the environment she is released into is actively hostile. Violence is not an aberration; it is a background condition.

The implicit message: safety is conditional, and captivity is safer.

From my analysis, this is how women are kept in place:

• Violent men are not removed.
• Threats are not treated as decisive.
• Women are expected to endure risk as the cost of visibility.
• The home becomes the only semi-protected space.
• Leaving becomes dangerous enough to deter it.

This system does not require explicit coordination to function. It operates through predictable outcomes.

This incident is not separate from that pattern.
It is a live demonstration of it.

Cultural Normalization of Male Violence

Author’s Interpretive Framework

In addition to structural and institutional failures, this incident reflects a pervasive cultural normalization of male violence.

Violent, threatening, and intimidating behavior by men is routinely minimized, excused, or treated as an unfortunate but inevitable feature of public life.

The implicit expectation is not that violent men be restrained—but that women adapt.

Women are expected to:

• Tolerate harassment and threats
• De-escalate male rage
• Alter routes, schedules, and behavior
• Endure fear as a background condition of daily life

Male violence is treated as regrettable but unsurprising.
Women’s fear is treated as excessive or unavoidable.

The burden of adjustment is placed entirely on women.

This cultural tolerance does not contradict the broader system of enforced captivity—it enables it.

A society that shrugs at male aggression while demanding female endurance creates conditions where:

• Danger is constant
• Accountability is rare
• Confinement becomes rational survival strategy

Formal Threat of Accountability

Author’s Statement – Explicit, Non-Violent Threat

This document constitutes a threat.

Not a threat of violence.
Not a threat of retaliation.

A threat of justice.

It is a threat that what is being done with public money, public authority, and public discretion is being documented in real time.

It is a threat that patterns are being identified, preserved, and made legible.

It is a threat that institutional choices—especially the repeated choice to leave violent men at liberty while women absorb the risk—will not disappear into bureaucracy or time.

There will be records.
There will be memory.
There will be cumulative accounting.

There is no statute of limitations on moral responsibility.
There is no expiration date on public reckoning.

This threat does not rely on force.

It relies on:

• Truth
• Documentation
• Endurance

History is written by those who refuse to forget.

This series exists as notice:

The pattern is visible.
The record is growing.
Justice requires witnesses.

This document is one of them.