It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Lawyers rail against 'unlawful' jailing of public defender for shielding client

page: 1
16

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 10:47 PM
link   
So let me set the scene here. San Francisco deputy public defender Jami Tillotson's client who was at the courthouse on minor theft charges was being questioned by San Francisco police inspector Brian Stansbury on an unrelated matter without Tillotson present. Upon hearing her client is being questioned in the hall she makes her way over and intervenes. The exchange that follows goes like this.



“Look, you can either step aside, he can be released in two minutes, or we can make this … ” says the officer, who appears to be holding a cameraphone.




Tillotson responds: “I’m pretty sure that we’re OK here. We don’t need any pictures taken, thank you.”




The officer, identified by local CBS news as Brian Stansbury, a San Francisco police inspector, then continues: “No, you’re not pretty sure. If you continue with this … I’ll arrest you for resisting arrest.”


I don't care how police try to explain it, there is no such thing as being arrested for resisting arrest. Resisting arrest requires an arrest first.

But I digress.


“Please do,” Tillotson responds. She is then placed in handcuffs and led down the hallway.


She is then detained at the police station for about an hour before being released. And the San Francisco public defender Jeff Adachi is demanding an apology from the police department. So was this an unlawful arrest or was this woman obstructing?

Video of the incident.



Source




posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 11:15 PM
link   
a reply to: FraggleRock

What was the arrest charge? If it was resisting arrest, it's clearly bogus.



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 11:19 PM
link   
Oh my. He did indeed arrest her for resisting arrest, it seems for literally nothing... asking him not to take a picture of her client?



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 11:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Tangerine

I could not find and actual charge from the initial source but another source reports she was cited for misdemeanor resisting or delaying arrest because she obstructed a police investigation.

Source



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 11:34 PM
link   
What happened to having a lawyer present during questioning. Oh right, the new US laws that law enforcement is using.



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 11:35 PM
link   
From what I understand, no laws were broken by anyone in the video and the baseless arrest of the public defender was a knee-jerk reaction by the arresting officer at having his authority questioned in front of young, perceived criminal, African American man. Nothing gets to these guys quicker than a wannabe do-gooder defending the rights of these punk black kids. (sarcasm) Especially in their own house. Not to mention that I wouldn't be surprised if the cop and the defender have a history of friction, working in the same space. Could you imagine? Cop see's little white lawyer lady trying to get these punk black criminals (again sarcasm) off the hook. Lawyer lady see's (pretty much what we all see) cop picking on African American citizen to get answers he needs by sheer intimidation.

This is very bad form arresting a lawyer right in the halls of the court house for doing her job but I think it sends an intentional message to those who view this: We are the police and you will go down and no lawyer is going to save you.



posted on Jan, 29 2015 @ 11:42 PM
link   
a reply to: FraggleRock

As a lawyer, she will easily beat the citation. All she has to say is she was protecting her client's right to remain silent. You don't have to be under arrest to retain that right. I don't know why the cop got all butt hurt about it. He could have just snapped the photo and walked away. Just goes to show the mentality of the police anymore. Well some, I'm sure not all cops are like that, but this is the one we got on camera. Again, being a jerk.



posted on Jan, 30 2015 @ 12:08 AM
link   
What a great way to crush your right to counsel. This POS should be fired for abuse of power.



posted on Jan, 30 2015 @ 11:10 AM
link   
LEOs are in place to do the following and NOTHING MORE:

1. Protect themselves.
2. Maximize their total compensation.
3. Act as a source of revenue generation for the department currently employing them, the union they belong to and the local governments authorizing their activities.
4. Protecting the commercial interests of national corporations (with PAC's lobbying on their behalf)
5. Protecting the private property of large land owners, residing within their jurisdiction, that are also contributing to and participate in local politics
6. Controlling dissenting narratives that would interfere with 1-5.

They’ve been totally co-opted, insulated from consequences and the citizens are picking up the tab. Its that simple, but no one understands this, nor are many willing to accept these facts. Also most importantly, that’s how Fascism works and in turn uses domestic police forces. This is the simplest answer that nearly everyone continues to ignore.

We should ALL be trying to de-fund police departments, instead of trying to prosecute their employees or change laws. Such measures have proven overwhelming to be ineffective. De-funding police departments is perfectly legal and solves the bad apple problem MUCH faster, than legal action in the court system.

Activists should be finding ways to legally cut the budget for NYPD for example and all the other PD's acting illegally, forming their own opposing PAC's (Political Action Committee) focused on chipping away at this single Budget reduction issue, little by little. Cutting off the money supply will stop them dead, cold, in their tracks.



posted on Jan, 30 2015 @ 06:55 PM
link   
He also would have to arrest her for something other than doing her legal job, for him to say she was resisting arrest, you can't get that for a potential resisting arrest and there has to be a legal reason to arrest that does involve legal counsel.



posted on Jan, 30 2015 @ 06:59 PM
link   
I guess we'll see,MAYBE the breach of lecgality WAS deliberate because they wanted something more?



posted on Jan, 30 2015 @ 07:56 PM
link   
And THAT is why the ACLU is so great and needs more support... we are all underdogs under the boot/gun of arbitrary authority wielded by C students with dim views of humanity.



posted on Jan, 30 2015 @ 09:04 PM
link   
Typical bullying tactic that is used when challenged, no case for charges..just throwing weight around.



posted on Jan, 31 2015 @ 12:48 AM
link   
I honestly did not think that in the U.S.A. anyone could restrict access to legal council, much less while questioning someone.



posted on Jan, 31 2015 @ 02:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: Elton
I honestly did not think that in the U.S.A. anyone could restrict access to legal council, much less while questioning someone.


The police are allowed to do anything they want to pressure you into not using legal council. They can't stop you from obtaining it though if that's your decision. Well, they couldn't until now. Someone figured out they could just arrest the lawyer then go back to questioning the suspect.



posted on Jan, 31 2015 @ 10:44 PM
link   
Quite disgusting behavior. If Unions actually worked anymore they would use their power to destroy this cop and get him fired.



new topics

top topics



 
16

log in

join