Man facing possible 16 years for videotaping police

[Zebo]

"If you're not cop, you're little people" - best movie ever made

 

[Zebo]

http://www.aclu.org/free-speech/acl...-representing-motorcyclist-prosecuted-state-p

I hope your membership is paid.

And that your post wasn't sarcastic.

Thank goodness the ACLU does what it does.

No my car is plastered with FOP stickers, I sponsor FOP golf tourney and hunt and fish with cops. Best to nip it in the bud before it gets to lawyers.

If they sponsored 2nd then maybe.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Don't blame me, blame the morons who believe their guns are going to save them from a police state. You are all being cooked like a lidless pot of live frogs, very slowly.

All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.

Thomas Jefferson

 

[HumblePie]

If there was a marked car behind the motorcyclist then the unmarked cop should have done one of two things:

1. Let them uniformed officer handle the situation.
2. The plain clothes officer should have exited his vehicle with his badge held high and immediately identified himself. Gun drawn is fine so long as the badge is also out.

Imagine if the motorcyclist was legally armed and when a plain clothes person suddenly jumped out at him with a gun, he pulled his own weapon. This story would be much more tragic.

Are you telling me you would be stupid enough if legally armed to draw a gun when you KNOW there is a uniformed officer behind you with a gun that is already pulling you over? Are you that mentally unbalanced? Seriously? Just stop and think for a moment. Would it have been nice for the plains clothes officer to identify himself? Yes. But is it required by law at this point or needed in this situation? No. He has the authority to exert control over the situation before identifying himself.

This is where people around here seem confused. A cop doesn't have to immediately identify himself until a situation has been stabilized if he feels he or others are in immediate danger. Once the situation is under control then they can identify themselves.

The plains clothes cop should NOT have let the lone uniform officer handle it either. With a situation like this, you need backup. Why? The guy was doing OVER 100 MPH, weaving in and out of traffic, and popping wheelies on a freeway!!!!!! How much more clear do I have to present this situation. This is not the same thing as doing 70 mph in a 60 mph area.

Cops do not know of the motorist is a drug runner, on drugs, mentally insane, raging by trying to hurt himself and others, or whatever else that makes people do insanely stupid shit. In some states this guy is not committing a misdemeanor speeding violation but is FELONY SPEEDING. As such, for any felony it is lawful in 49 states for citizens to also make arrests. Do not make light of the severity of the situation. The motor cyclist was absolutely fucking NUTS to be doing what he was doing on a busy highway during the day. Do you still not understand the severity of the crime here? If this was a state with felony speeding, and he was committing such a crime, I as a citizen in most states can pull a gun and stop him myself if I wanted to.

Again, the actions of the cops in this video are not wrong. They were following protocols and procedures exactly in my eyes. However, it is not the actions of the cops that this debate is about during the arrest. It is the actions of the cops and judge later trying to pin him for wiretapping.

 

[Zorba]

Not when the cyclist in question is doing over a 100mph, popping wheelies on a freeway, and endangering everyone around him. If I am a plain clothes cop and I see that, I'm doing everything in my power RIGHT AT THAT MOMENT to stop the reckless endangerment of that motorist. I am not waiting 5 minutes or more for a marked car to show up.

I personally believe that does more harm to the public than good. If anyone can jump out of any car with a gun and claim to be a officer (or not in this case) then what is stopping a rapist from doing this same thing?

I feel the same way about this as I do plain cloths cops carrying out no-knock warrants. All they are doing is endagering themselves (by people not knowing they are cops and shooting), endangering the subject (since the subject has no idea it is the police, he can pull out a gun and shoot effectively signing his own death warrant) and the public (by creating a situation where it is unbelievably easy to impersonate an officer).

The motorcyclist stopped for the marked car, why the hell did the plain cloths officer feel the need to take over?

BTW: I don't really have a problem with the gun being pulled, I have a problem with it being done by an unmarked person, jumping out of an unmarked car who also didn't bother to identify himself.

 

[Zorba]

They were following protocols and procedures exactly in my eyes.

Just because it is "protocol" and "procedure" does not mean it is right or a good idea.

 

[HumblePie]

I personally believe that does more harm to the public than good. If anyone can jump out of any car with a gun and claim to be a officer (or not in this case) then what is stopping a rapist from doing this same thing?

And you belief is wrong. It has been statistically proven that emergency services that fail to control a situation before dealing with "pleasantries" DO cause more harm than good. That is the reason for these protocols and procedures. Whatever you may "feel" on the subject is irrelevant.

As for your strawman attempt with the rapist example. Seriously come on. What is it that stops anyone from jumping out of a car with a gun and hijacking you? Oh wait, the law. And if the law doesn't stop them that makes are criminals. And criminals are going to do what they want to do. I will state this, I know of no criminal that is going to chase down a guy doing over 100 MPH in a motorcycle to attempt to rape or hijack him. They are going to go after easier prey. That example has zero bearing upon this situation.

Another thing is the plains clothes cop may have been "off duty" and may not have had his badge on him. That doesn't mean he stops being a cop. In every state I know of, even off duty cops still have a duty to stop a crime in progress they are witnessing and/or provide backup for cops on duty.

 

[BoberFett]

Ask yourself who coined the term "Law and order Republican?" Who coined the term "tough on crime?" Who pushed the agenda of three strikes and you're out (and who opposed it) and huge increases in sentences? Then ask yourself what sort of government - and what sort of police force - it takes to implement those policies.

No, my misguided friend, "big government" is as meaningful as "activist judges:" When it's YOUR policies that are furthered, the expansion of government - and the overreaching of judges - is just fine. But when it's the policies of the other side that are getting traction, it's government out of control.

But at least the left and right on ATPN seem to be in complete agreement that prosecuting private citizens for recording videos of the actions of on-duty cops is outrageous. Leave the trolling on "big government" to another thread.

Fact: Big government will become a police state. History proves it.

 

[child of wonder]

Are you telling me you would be stupid enough if legally armed to draw a gun when you KNOW there is a uniformed officer behind you with a gun that is already pulling you over? Are you that mentally unbalanced? Seriously? Just stop and think for a moment. Would it have been nice for the plains clothes officer to identify himself? Yes. But is it required by law at this point or needed in this situation? No. He has the authority to exert control over the situation before identifying himself.

This is where people around here seem confused. A cop doesn't have to immediately identify himself until a situation has been stabilized if he feels he or others are in immediate danger. Once the situation is under control then they can identify themselves.

The plains clothes cop should NOT have let the lone uniform officer handle it either. With a situation like this, you need backup. Why? The guy was doing OVER 100 MPH, weaving in and out of traffic, and popping wheelies on a freeway!!!!!! How much more clear do I have to present this situation. This is not the same thing as doing 70 mph in a 60 mph area.

Cops do not know of the motorist is a drug runner, on drugs, mentally insane, raging by trying to hurt himself and others, or whatever else that makes people do insanely stupid shit. In some states this guy is not committing a misdemeanor speeding violation but is FELONY SPEEDING. As such, for any felony it is lawful in 49 states for citizens to also make arrests. Do not make light of the severity of the situation. The motor cyclist was absolutely fucking NUTS to be doing what he was doing on a busy highway during the day. Do you still not understand the severity of the crime here? If this was a state with felony speeding, and he was committing such a crime, I as a citizen in most states can pull a gun and stop him myself if I wanted to.

Again, the actions of the cops in this video are not wrong. They were following protocols and procedures exactly in my eyes. However, it is not the actions of the cops that this debate is about during the arrest. It is the actions of the cops and judge later trying to pin him for wiretapping.

I do understand the severity of what he was doing. By not immediately identifying himself the plain clothes officer introduced the potential for the situation to escalate further. In hindsight, he should have gotten out of his car with his badge in one hand and gun in the other.

It's difficult to tell in the video, especially with no sound, but when he turned to look behind him prior to stopping was that the unmarked car directly behind him or the marked car?

If it was the unmarked car, then he may not have even seen there was a marked car behind him when the plain clothes officer stepped out.

In any event, I'm not going to say the plain clothes officer should be fired or reprimanded, I just feel his superior should tell him "you should have had your badge out and identified yourself right away. Tip for next time." That's all.

 

[WhipperSnapper]

If you are out in public, whether you're a police officer or not, you should be fair game for photography and videotaping (as long as you're not being actively stalked).

I think people who live in these areas need to vote out any local government officials and District Attorneys who prosecute citizens for this. Send a message.

 

[Zorba]

And you belief is wrong. It has been statistically proven that emergency services that fail to control a situation before dealing with "pleasantries" DO cause more harm than good. That is the reason for these protocols and procedures. Whatever you may "feel" on the subject is irrelevant.

As for your strawman attempt with the rapist example. Seriously come on. What is it that stops anyone from jumping out of a car with a gun and hijacking you? Oh wait, the law. And if the law doesn't stop them that makes are criminals. And criminals are going to do what they want to do. I will state this, I know of no criminal that is going to chase down a guy doing over 100 MPH in a motorcycle to attempt to rape or hijack him. They are going to go after easier prey. That example has zero bearing upon this situation.

Another thing is the plains clothes cop may have been "off duty" and may not have had his badge on him. That doesn't mean he stops being a cop. In every state I know of, even off duty cops still have a duty to stop a crime in progress they are witnessing and/or provide backup for cops on duty.

The problem is this procedure does not just apply to this one case, so it is fair to argue the policies and procedures beyond the scope of this case.

What is it that stops anyone from jumping out of a car with a gun and hijacking you? Oh wait, the law.

If it is a uniformed police officer I can be 99% sure it is actually a cop, if it is a plain cloths cop I have no idea who it is. So in the watching out for/defending myself sense, there is a big difference between plain cloths and uniformed police.

There are tons of cases of violent road rage and police impersonators pulling people over in unmarked cars, I guess the law didn't stop them. But I guess the next time I have some random guy pull a gun on me on the highway I should just assume he is a police officer looking out for the public good and not trying to rob me.

BTW: I've had someone pull on a gun on me on the highway before, I am very glad I didn't assume he was a cop and got the fuck out of there. But if it would've been I cop I would have gotten a felony charge for running...

Edit: By your logic, why should any police officer be uniformed or drive marked cars? If you should just know that a random dude with a guy coming at you is a cop, then why pay for the uniforms or to paint the cars to begin with? It would be a lot easier to catch speeders, etc if every police officer was unmarked.

 

[bullbert]

All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.

Thomas Jefferson

Yes, but he is remaining silent, now. The big Commie!

 

[theeedude]

The travesty is I bet the case is called "the people" vs this guy, when in fact it's the cops and DA's vs the people.

 

[bullbert]

The travesty is I bet the case is called "the people" vs this guy, when in fact it's the cops and DA's vs the people.

There needs to be a local public protest "rally" (as in obtain multiple legal permits), with 100+ citizens, all with video camera/phones/whatever, all stalking this exact specific bad cop, all "filming" (is it still called that?) the bad cop. When the bad cop busts the head of the first guy, there will still be 99+ others getting it on video. I do not know about this specific bad cop, but if he is anything like over-weight middle-aged cops I see, the guy will not have the strength or endurance to whoop all 100+ patriots, one after another after another. Heck, in the summer heat, he might even double over with a coronary. One symptom solved. Repeat as necessary.

Even if the bad cop survives, and any of these patriots are dragged into court, there will be ten thousand lawyers willing to take the case for basically free, since this will be a milestone case, making that lawyer infamous.

 

[ebaycj]

Dosent this work both ways, if you are being filmed by a cop cant you just say you dont consent to being filmed and they cant use it as evidence.

This is actually an excellent point.

If they throw my video out because I cannot legally record the officer without his consent, they also have to throw his video out because he cannot legally record me without my consent.

If he has an expectation of privacy, then it is reasonable that I do too. It's the same venue.

 

[hal2kilo]

Don't blame me, blame the morons who believe their guns are going to save them from a police state. You are all being cooked like a lidless pot of live frogs, very slowly.

Toche!