A Multnomah County judge sharply criticized District Attorney Nathan Vasquez for publicly condemning her earlier ruling in a widely watched reckless driving case, suggesting that his comments may have crossed into prosecutorial misconduct.
The confrontation unfolded in the case of 33-year-old Oscar Burrell, who returned to Judge Katharine von Ter Stegge’s courtroom on November 7 for a probation violation hearing. His return was triggered by a new selfie-style video he posted online—this time showing himself hanging out of the driver’s window, hands completely off the wheel, posing for the camera while in motion.
Background: Acquittals, Convictions, and a Public Clash
Burrell first went before the judge in September, facing multiple misdemeanor charges tied to a series of viral videos filmed last March. The clips showed him performing donuts in Peninsula Park, driving along a pedestrian path in Farragut Park, and exiting his vehicle to dance on Interstate 5.
Also Read
Judge von Ter Stegge convicted him of two counts of reckless driving and one count of reckless endangerment. However, she acquitted him of nine other misdemeanor charges, including five counts of reckless endangerment, saying the evidence did not meet the legal threshold for guilt.
She sentenced Burrell to 18 months of probation, ordered a 90-day license suspension, and imposed no jail time. That outcome drew public criticism from Vasquez, who said the sentence was too lenient and warned that Burrell would continue to engage in dangerous behavior.
During last week’s probation hearing, the judge noted that Vasquez’s prediction had come true—but she said his public statements were improper and risked undermining the fairness of ongoing proceedings.
Judge Warns DA: Public Comments Risk Violating Ethics Rules
In court, Judge von Ter Stegge pointed to ethical rules that prohibit prosecutors from making statements that could prejudice ongoing cases.
“I won’t tolerate statements to the press that could affect the fairness of ongoing proceedings,” she told those present.
The DA responded within hours. Vasquez issued another statement to the media urging the public to report any further dangerous activity involving Burrell.
“Mr. Burrell has demonstrated a wanton disregard for the safety of others,” Vasquez said. “This office will continue to work to hold him accountable.”
The DA’s chief deputy, Kirsten Snowden, disputed the judge’s concerns, stating that Vasquez was well within his rights to speak about public safety matters.
“The court does not control what the elected DA may say in carrying out his duties,” she said.
Judge von Ter Stegge has previously said she followed the prosecution’s own sentencing recommendation during the original trial.
What Led to the Partial Acquittal?
During the September trial, Burrell elected to represent himself and acknowledged filming the controversial videos. He insisted that his driving stunts were part of a broader message he was sharing online.
“I’ve had multiple Instagram accounts shut down because I was bringing too much awareness, speaking too much truth, doing good deeds, but also pointing out bad things that are taking place in our city,” he said during closing arguments.
The judge praised his courtroom conduct but explained that her task was to strictly apply the legal standard.
“I will say that everything I saw in those videos is 100% illegal, and that’s not the same thing as guilty beyond a reasonable doubt,” she told him.
Her ruling found that Burrell had not intended to damage park property, that bystanders shown in the videos were not in immediate danger, and that his dancing on I-5 did not impede traffic.
New Video Prompts Probation Violation Hearing
The situation changed dramatically in November. A Tigard resident emailed the judge after noticing a new video posted by Burrell that appeared to show him once again engaging in dangerous behavior behind the wheel.
Prosecutor Alexander Garcia argued that the video demonstrated Burrell’s ongoing disregard for public safety and requested a one-year jail sentence. He described Burrell as “a ticking timebomb.”
Burrell’s attorney, Christopher Behre, pushed back, arguing that the footage was not new but filmed months earlier. He pointed to foliage in the background of the video to argue the clip likely originated from March.
Judge: Burrell’s Behavior Sends a “Terrifying” Message
Judge von Ter Stegge ultimately determined that even if the video was old, Burrell intentionally posted it to imply he was continuing to drive dangerously.
She described his behavior as marked by “unrepentant glee.”
“You are terrifying to people in Multnomah County,” she said. “The average person watching these videos is concerned you’re going to kill somebody, possibly yourself.”
In response, she imposed a 10-day jail sentence with no credit for time already served. She also ordered Burrell to undergo a mental health evaluation before the end of the year.
A Case Raising Questions About Safety, Accountability, and Public Commentary
The case continues to draw attention not only because of the dangerous driving it highlights, but also because of the rare public conflict between a sitting judge and an elected district attorney. Their exchange raises broader questions about:
-
How far prosecutors can go in commenting publicly on active cases
-
The balance between public safety messaging and judicial fairness
-
The limitations of probation in curbing high-risk behavior
-
The role of social media in encouraging or amplifying reckless acts
As Burrell completes his short jail term and prepares for his court-ordered evaluation, the dispute between the bench and the DA’s office underscores the tension between legal process, public pressure, and the realities of modern digital behavior.
