Police Arrest Woman For Videotaping Them From Her Front Yard: (Wait till you see this tape!)

I'm kind of on the fence with this one. Although I almost always side with the public since I'm no fan of police or any other authority figure, this one is a little different.
1. The officer politely asked her to go in her house, where she could have continued filming without interuption. Compared to most of these altercations he seemed calm and did not scream or yell at her. The "I don't feel safe" comment, though obviously nonsense, was an indication he was instructed on what to say in this type of situation, as soon as I heard it I knew the scale had tipped.. You can be pretty sure every department in the country has had recent training on how to handle the cell phone camera problem.
2. He gave her several warnings, he told her she would be arrested, he gave her time to walk away without further incident. He never told her to stop filming, just to go in her house. Her decision to refuse was pretty much like poking a badger with a stick, it's not going to end well.
3. He indicates the woman made comments that were anti police before she began filming, if this is so and she just has a big mouth maybe she did it on purpose to get more hits on you tube.
On the other hand..............
1. The officer should have just ignored her, they were handling the arrest without incident and it would have been the most boring video ever. A non issue became a big deal only because he let her get to him.
2. If some civil rights group or attorney gets involved and it goes to court the officer will have to explain how a female with a cell phone was able to intimidate three armed police officers to the point where they did not feel safe.
3. The recent incidents in Florida and elsewhere make this a very hot topic, people will test the waters and some will try to stir the pot. Was it really worth risking public outrage just to establish who was in control?

whats the difference between an unlawful/bogus arrest for a made-up crime and a kidnapping?

I do understand what the cops are saying, but I strongly disagree with the whole concept of the cop telling her to get in her house. We need to always record cops, I despise their nazi mentallity.

Cops want power over people and HATE when we use our RIGHTS to remind them that they actually don't have the power they think they have.

That's what all these videos boil down to: Ego, Lust for Power, Personal Insecurities

The sad thing is...

That Leo could have been a normally a good cop and just let the roids get the best of him. Now his fellow cops will make fun of him with taunts of "I don't feel safe"....He will resign soon in disgrace and become a prison guard or a mall cop. Perhaps for the best.

I don't believe this...And to me it is not a question as to what can we do about this, what ARE we going to do about this????? It's obviously time to start standing up...Time to be the gad flies on the horses ass!

reply to post by NephlimKilla

I feel that the only way to solve this is to have an annual public review of all police officers records. Have the public vote on which officers get to keep their jobs, and which officers get FIRED.

Also, make it a LAW that any officer who tells someone to stop video taping their activity gets FIRED at the end of their shift.

We'd see this crap stop overnight.

I can see it no other way than "obstructing government administration" or obstructing police work. It sounds about right: there should be a law against filming police during an operation as it becomes evidence. Even if you are filming the cops just passing by on foot, they are on duty and therefore in policing operation. So it is only common sense that they will and can see this is a potential threat, whatever the extent of their knowledge of the law. Just because they are the police and we are the public all the defensive crap comes out about ego-powertripping blah blah. The country has to be have order without which etc etc

In short, it's not our place to start pointing cameras at the law enforcers just to exercise our freedom and make them look like nazis. Just my opinion anyway

Originally posted by janon
I was all for the women until she started crying while being arrested. What a way to ruin a glorious act of civil disobedience. It was like she lost her backbone when the cuffs went on...Regardless, I'm happy this film came to light.

I still applaud her. She was willing to stand up for hers--and your--rights even though getting arrested was seemingly traumatic for her. She's probably not used to getting arrested--go figure.

Then again; she may have known exactly what effect those tears might have when it was played before a jury.

However it was, it was cool! Go Girl.

The cops say they didn't feel safe with her standing behind them. She should have replied that she didn't feel safe having them out side her house. She would have been right about that.

There has been for the worse, a change in Police attitude towards the public. In the past they were part of our community, ordinary bods doing a job a bit more dangerous and so they had our cooperation and our respect.

But now, they are no longer part of our community whatsoever , they are a group completely apart. True we have the 'neighbourhood friendly one, but he's usually on the snoop.

They seem to regard people no longer as citizens whom they are paid to protect, but now we have become a collective part of the criminal world and any excuse to grab our DNA is taken. Its clear they have been trained both through their attitude and physical actions to domineer and frighten the public. With both examples, those people were on their own land, it was the police who were trespassing.

It was a mistake the UK passed the no photographing your local cop in action law, because its immediately obvious they underestimated the public completely. My camera is ever ready and I'll photo whom I please because I don't require huge civil liberties and rights but, I treasure those I have had since a child and ain't ever going to give them up.

Until we start naming and shaming those who abuse the law like these officers and those who support them as individuals as we did with Bin Laden this will continue. Name and Shame

Originally posted by PhoenixOD
The police cant get away with treating people like that in the UK. But they try anyway. This video is very funny

Film-maker Darren Pollard was clearing up flood rubbish from his front garden when he noticed the police and a teenager opposite his house. Darren retrieved his camera and this is what he filmed!

edit on 22-6-2011 by PhoenixOD because: (no reason given)

Love the video...Thanks!

Unfortunately, the difference is that the police in the US either seem unwilling or unable to confirm the laws and codes they are quoting.

I have seen so many videos of police in the US stating that a law is being broken with no clear proof of said law. They just state that it's against the law and when questioned about what the law is, have stated that they are not required to provide that information.

A good example that happens all too often is when a cop tells someone to stop filming, that it's illegal. Or when asked for their ID and the cop states that they don't have to.

It's getting past the point of ridiculous and is very clear to see that the cops these days are only carrying out their own agendas...and that is to instill terror into the people.

reply to post by Trublbrwing

He indicates the woman made comments that were anti police before she began filming, if this is so...

The cop's statement about something that hadn't been recorded, basically put him "on record" as saying there was good reason to do what he was doing.

Doesn't mean she said ANYTHING "anti-police" before, and the exchange they were having actually suggested otherwise. She asked for clarification of exactly what she had said. Why didn't he come right out and say what she said, such as, "You damn cops...I'm getting you in trouble now! Got me a camera!" Nope. He was rather vague, as if he had just come up with the idea, that he could insinuate some "history" that didn't make it on camera.

Why would he feel the need to "invent" some previous indication of an adversarial situation? Because he knew quite well that everything on that tape suggested exactly the opposite.

Listen folks. Cops lie, like anyone else. They lie, their buddies cover for them when they do, their bosses are with the same "program" too.

I'm not against cops, they have a tough job. But too many aren't smart enough for their own good. Every now and then, one gets caught being stupid. That's what I think we have here. And if he worked for me, he would be in trouble.

JR

Unfortunately, for anything to ever be changed, something DRASTIC needs to happen. By drastic, I mean that someone needs to protect themselves, with a firearm.

I cant wait for THAT youtube video.

POS Cop: "you cant video here, because I said"

Camera person: "sure I can"

POS Cop: "I said you cant, so you cant, or I am gonna arrest you"

Camera Person: " I will protect myself from unlawful detention"

POS Cop: "Get on the ground you filthy criminal"

Camera Person: "Last warning"

PC steps towards CP...
"Bang, Bang"

PC laying on ground, dead.

THEN, SCOTUS will look into this, for the "officers protection" what "needs to be done" which will result in stricter gun laws..

There is no fix to this

how was she obstructing government administration. she could have been video taping to make sure the administration of government was conducted properly.

to obstruct: " to block, to hinder from passage, action or operation."

as you can see in the video, the police had no problem at all and were not obstructed from arresting the suspect, placing the handcuffs on him and performing the rest of their arrest.

the only way she could have obstructed the administration of government is if that particular part of the administration of government can't be filmed.

the only reason something can't be filmed in a free society is because it is against the law.

so if her filming prevented the police from beating that suspect silly, then beatings have to be part of their administration of justice. that's the only way she could be charged.

welcome to the police state. good or bad.

reply to post by JR MacBeth

You're probably right, she more than likely did not make a statement off camera, if she did she would have already been arrested, but as you pointed out the cops know how to make the law work for them.
You're right about the police lying as well, I have experienced this myself and actually had a police officer taunt me with "I've been doing this for years, I know how the system works".
So again, I don't support them, but why make it easy for them? The end result here is that the woman will be afraid of being arrested again and probably never film another police action. You have to pick your battles and consider the risk/ reward ratio.

Here is a copy of the section of the law she is being charge with for breaking:

S 195.05 Obstructing governmental administration in the second degree.

A person is guilty of obstructing governmental administration when he intentionally obstructs, impairs or perverts the administration of law or other governmental function or prevents or attempts to prevent a public servant from performing an official function, by means of intimidation, physical force or interference, or by means of any independently unlawful act, or by means of interfering, whether or not physical force is involved, with radio, telephone, television or other telecommunications systems owned or operated by the state, or a county,
city, town, village, fire district or emergency medical service or by means of releasing a dangerous animal under circumstances evincing the actor`s intent that the animal obstruct governmental administration. Obstructing governmental administration is a class A misdemeanor.

Source: ypdcrime.com...

And this is really good (be sure to read it all-this is just an part of it-if you're interested):
New York Defense Attorney Explains the Crime of “Obstructing Governmental Administration.”

Obstructing Governmental Administration seems to be committed most when street encounters between police officers and civilians go wrong. There are two scenarios where the charge is applied with the most frequency, the first being where civilians try to stop police officers from placing third parties under arrest, either by standing in between officers and the third parties, or by assaulting police officers and/or jumping on them to foil the detention (which also subjects the intervening person to the additional charge of resisting arrest, also a class “A” misdemeanor). Charges can be elevated to a felony if a person uses pepper spray or mace on the officer, or causes physical injury to the officer.

Source: newyorkcriminaldefenseblawg.com... %9D/

I dont think people realize just because its your house, you still have to listen to the officer. The officer didnt feel safe, I wouldnt. She should have just gone inside. Its none of her business that the guy was being arrested.

People need to quit screaming FASCIST! HE TOLD ME TO DO SOMETHING! Theres a reason, people.

i felt a little sorry for the girl, but she brought this onto herself. the cop clearly and politely asked several times to go back into her house, she just ignored him.
how would you like some stranger filming you whilst you work?
why would you film cops doing a traffic stop? its outside your house? so what, mind your own business.

i'm siding with the police on this one.