Case Dismissed Against Woman Arrested While Videotaping Police

reply to post by Xcathdra
The way to win it every time is to never give them your money to begin with.

I don't mind if you fellows toss stones at me, saying that I am not brave enough to intimidate the public with threats the way most cops do, but I know what I've done and what I can do.

It takes a bit of a sociopath to be a cop, so I couldn't do it, you're right. I couldn't beat a handcuffed man with a length of chain inside of a piece of rubber hose.... that's what they did to my dad.

Originally posted by Pitt
reply to post by Ryanp5555

 

Being arrested and booked and spending 24 hours locked up may be as good the same as having been put in that coffin. Now you have a criminal record, which will haunt you for the rest of your life. I know, she had a prior arrest.... for a public demonstration. She is a demonstrator.
I just feel, it's a shame, that an officer would arrest someone and use whatever lame excuse they can come up with just because she didn't obey him. She was no threat. His safety was never an issue. Honestly...
She just needs to be glad for the video. Otherwise, it would have been her word against whatever trumped up charge he decided to put in his report. His official opinion would have prevailed over her rights.

I agree. And I think I should clarify. I'm not arguing that the case shouldn't have been dismissed. The question posed that I was responding to was whether or not she could have legally been forced to comply with the officer such that her failure to do so warranted the officer in arresting her for obstruction.

I agree that ultimately the officers actions were wrong. I agree that these officers seem to have a complex. But, I think the officers could have acted in that manner and gotten away with it if it weren't for those pesky kids By kids I mean video tape.

reply to post by WhiteDevil013


Interesting story.. Food for thought. When you are involved in a traffic stop, you are temporarily "seized" under the 4th amendment. Because of that status, the driver nor the passengers in the car should really be doing anything that could be construed as a threat.

Passengers moving around in vehicles do cause concern for us. Call me paranoid, and I know people will, but it goes back to the questions. Are they hiding anything? Going for theuir purse or license? Hiding drugs? money? weapons?

Ive posted youtube video of cell phone guns etc etc etc, so I wont post them again (people complain about them and then dismiss them),.

Because law enforcement stopped you, we are responsible for not only the safety of the driver, but all passengers as well.

reply to post by WhiteDevil013

They made her kick it away from her and lay down on her stomach while they proceeded to hand cuff both of us and stomp the $%#T out of my phone, destroying it.

Yeah, it's all our imagination... they don't have anything against cameras. They have nothing to hide!

Good story, I hope you never get pulled over again.

reply to post by butcherguy


Also, I'm not sure how you think choosing to do a job and being put in a casket because of that job should be on a level playing field. What police officers do, protect us from crime, should be commended and we should give them extra protections to actually have an incentive to do the job. Imagine if a cop wasn't allowed to put a suspect in handcuffs while executing a valid search warrant. A criminal could grab a gun shoot the cops and get away with the evidence. How does that make sense?

Well obviously she's innocent and did nothing wrong. The question is now why isnt the officer being charged with assault, harassment and kidnapping?

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

The presence of 4 officers could, oh I dont know, be a clue that there

..... may be a gang mentality among police officers?

Is that what you were thinking? Maybe subconsciously?

Not at all but good guess. The number of people in the car? What occured prior to the traffic stop? Just how many people were watching the police?

Based on your last 3 posts its evident that you just plain hate cops and no amount of conversation will ever change that view.

As far as our own rules / laws - Absolutely. We are subject to the Federal Civil Rights act where as civilians are not. We are empowered by the citizens to enforce the laws, where as citizens are not (varies state to state). Under law, we are allowed to ignore certain laws during an emergency / public safety situation where as citizens are not.

The laws that cops have that civilians dont are the ones that prescribe the manner in which we are required to do our job.

Another one we have that you dont goes with Miranda Warnings. If we are being invesitgated we will be read our miranda rights. After that we are read our garrity rights. While as officers we can invoke the 5th amendment. Since we are in a rank structred setting we are subject to higher ranking officers issuing us an order to talk. We can refuse that order, however refusing it is used against us in disciplenary hearings.

Originally posted by butcherguy
I don't mind if you fellows toss stones at me, saying that I am not brave enough to intimidate the public with threats the most cops do, but I know what I've done and what I can do.

Oh im sorry.. I just figured that when you decided to call cops cowards whimps etc, that it would be ok to respond in kind.

How about we both stop stereotyping, and enage with the facts.

reply to post by Xcathdra

disciplenary hearings.

Just like at my job, if I don't answer my bosses questions, he can fire me.

That has nothing to do with constitutional rights.

reply to post by Xcathdra

Oh im sorry.. I just figured that when you decided to call cops cowards whimps etc, that it would be ok to respond in kind.

Nothing to be sorry about,

I said that I don't mind.

reply to post by Xcathdra
I couldn't help but notice that you totally skipped the part about the cops smashing the cell phone(read camera) in the post by whitedevil013.

Why would they do that?

Were they afraid the cell phone was going to jump them from behind?

woohoo good triumphs over evil!! hope she gets awarded a big fat check!

Originally posted by e11888
Well obviously she's innocent and did nothing wrong. The question is now why isnt the officer being charged with assault, harassment and kidnapping?

Because the officers actions, under New York State and Federal law, were legal.

As I stated before, when the PA declines to prosecute / dismisses the charges does not mean the officer acted improperly or illegaly.

If you are on your front lawn, and a guy comes onto your property heading towards you holding a gun, and you tell him to stop and he doesnt. You pull your gun and shoot him, and he dies.

Same scenarion above, exept the person walking at you is not armed. He continues to walk towards you, you pull your gun and shoot, killing the guy.

Both examples meet the text book defintinon of Murder. Both have all the elemnts needed. However, the first scenario would result in no charges being filed against you. The second example would result in your arrest and being charged with murder.

How can that happen? There are situations that arise where actions taken act as a mitigating circumstance. Technically the first guy did commit murder. But since the guy who was coiming at him was armed, self defense claim would be valid.

In the second, with no visible signs of a weapon, you would be hard pressed to justify shooting the person.

Those 2 examples are whats going on in this topic.

reply to post by e11888


I wouldn't exactly say she was innocent. As a protestor... she knew she was "stirring a hornets nest". In this case she got stung. She was pushing what she thought were her limits. She just made the mistake of not knowing that she was dealing with an officer that didn't know what her limits were and wasn't waiting around to find out.
On top of that, now we have an officer of the law that pushed his limits and dragged his fellow officers into the mix. It'll be interesting to see what charges he has brought against him. "Criminal Confinement", perhaps? What do the officers on here feel is the worst that can be brought against him? Any lawyers on this thread?

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

I couldn't help but notice that you totally skipped the part about the cops smashing the cell phone(read camera) in the post by whitedevil013.

Why would they do that?

Were they afraid the cell phone was going to jump them from behind?

edit on 28-6-2011 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)

Sure did.. Mainly because I find it hard to beleive it actually occured. Playing along for the minute though, did he file a criminal complaint against that officer? Did he file an IA complaint?

Originally posted by Pitt
reply to post by e11888

 

I wouldn't exactly say she was innocent. As a protestor... she knew she was "stirring a hornets nest". In this case she got stung. She was pushing what she thought were her limits. She just made the mistake of not knowing that she was dealing with an officer that didn't know what her limits were and wasn't waiting around to find out.
On top of that, now we have an officer of the law that pushed his limits and dragged his fellow officers into the mix. It'll be interesting to see what charges he has brought against him. "Criminal Confinement", perhaps? What do the officers on here feel is the worst that can be brought against him? Any lawyers on this thread?

I am neither. However, I do have my juris doctor and in a few months hopefully I will be admitted to the bar.

Of course they don't want cameras there: They might show A) What buttholes some cops can be and B) just how ignorant of the law that many of them are.

My background is with affiliate news as a photog and the only thing that would have happened if I showed up and starting shooting is that they would have probably minded their Ps & Qs better. They might ask me to move somewhat, but that's about it.

Public officials--or anyone in the public arena--should be aware that cameras may be present and act accordingly. I've turned off or pointed my camera away out of respect for a particular situation many, many times, but trying to get my camera away--professionally or privately--from me is tantamount to trying to take away my right to bear arms. Gonna be trouble.

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by e11888
Well obviously she's innocent and did nothing wrong. The question is now why isnt the officer being charged with assault, harassment and kidnapping?

If you are on your front lawn, and a guy comes onto your property heading towards you holding a gun, and you tell him to stop and he doesnt. You pull your gun and shoot him, and he dies.

Same scenarion above, exept the person walking at you is not armed. He continues to walk towards you, you pull your gun and shoot, killing the guy.

Both examples meet the text book defintinon of Murder. Both have all the elemnts needed. However, the first scenario would result in no charges being filed against you. The second example would result in your arrest and being charged with murder.

So if a police officer comes onto my lawn because I am video taping him, and I ask him to stop, and he doesn't... regardless of our past. I see that he has a gun... I'm going to shoot him, I guess. If he is aware of these self defense laws, he should expect nothing else. He was under no harm until he continued to approach me with a firearm in his belt after I asked him to stay the hell off of my property.

Oh, woops... can't shoot someone with a camera after all. I guess this woman wasn't very dangerous.

reply to post by Xcathdra

Sure did.. Mainly because I find it hard to beleive it actually occured. Playing along for the minute though, did he file a criminal complaint against that officer? Did he file an IA complaint?

This is absolutely the funniest!

That's like asking the Jews if they complained to Hitler about their treatment in the concentration camps.

Haven't we seen enough about how vindictive these cops can be? Now you want people to go complain about what happened to them? They may as well draw a big target on their backs and their chests.

But you don't see it that way, because you're a cop.

Plus you didn't actually come up with a reason why they would destroy it, just that the victims failed to complain.

Here, I'll say it. They didn't want that stop to be filmed. they don't want everyone knowing how they act towards the public.

edit on 28-6-2011 by butcherguy because: (no reason given)

reply to post by Pitt

I thought, it was a bit odd that the officers issuing the parking tickets on the Good supporters were parked much further from the curbs than any of the vehicles they were ticketing. No lights to warn approaching vehicles of them doing their "duties". They were parked and measuring vehicles that were parked in a safer manner than their own. Clearly, these officers put themselves above the laws they "enforce".

Shhhh. Man, I sure hope you don't reside in Rochester.....

You just might get a visit from the Police Re-Education Bureau
[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/752ee4c291b5.jpg[/atsimg]