Another case of police brutality - for recording police activity with a cell phone

Lawsuit: Allentown police assaulted man for videotaping

I am not anti-law enforcement. There are many good officers doing a hard job.
But this problem of some law enforcement violating laws with impunity and brutalizing citizens needs to stop.

In this case, a man was videotaping the arrest of another man for being "uncooperative" and for public drunkenness. The man under arrest was face down and crying in pain, yet officers shot him 6 times with a stun gun. Other people were begging police to stop.

Officer Ammary ordered the man who was recording the incident with his cell phone to stop and leave. When the man objected, Ammary got physical with the man and threw his cell phone to the ground. The man was then arrested for disorderly conduct, but charges were dropped.

The man filed a complaint with the police department, but they claimed the officer did nothing wrong, so he has now filed a federal lawsuit. He says he wants police trained on the rights of citizens.

By the way, Officer Ammary has been mentioned on these forums before: for tazing a 14 year old girl while she had her arms up, surrendering. Surveillance Video Captures Stun Gun Incident
Perhaps this has something to do with Ammary's dislike of video?

a reply to: BlueAjah

It amazes me how some police officers still attack people with cell phones when everything they do is being recorded. Nothing like opening up a can of worms and possibly losing their job or having charges filed against them. If they're not doing anything illegal, they shouldn't be worried about citizens recording them.

a reply to: WeRpeons

It seems to me it must that deep-seated paranoia they appear to be suffering. Delusions are one of the common side effects of abuse of such chemicals. The negative behaviors we see from these guys are all easily explained if you've been around steroid abusers. In some people it doesn't even take long-term abuse for such symptoms to develop, just a big dose as is given for reasonable medical purposes.
Drug testing using wide spectrum testing needs to be part of their everyday life---like each time they are in a violent confrontation with a citizen.

a reply to: BlueAjah

S & F

What is more alarming is while LEO's get away with harming and needlessly killing people, they are regularly being held responsible for stealing from the police evidence rooms and drug crimes.

corrupt cop stories

They can get away with violent crimes against the people, but their getting punished for drug related crimes, that just seems @$$ backwards to me!

a reply to: diggindirt

Good point!

Roid Rage!

Drug testing for steroid use should be mandatory!

It would also help if the raised the IQ requirements for LEO's.

That's pretty damning for the cop.
I'd say he doesn't have the self-restraint to be an officer of the law.
He even had the nerve to call the kid "asshole" after breaking his phone and pushing him on the ground.
That is one sick man who unfortunately wears a badge for now.

originally posted by: WeRpeons
a reply to: BlueAjah

It amazes me how some police officers still attack people with cell phones when everything they do is being recorded. Nothing like opening up a can of worms and possibly losing their job or having charges filed against them. If they're not doing anything illegal, they shouldn't be worried about citizens recording them.

They have the common intellect of a gnat trying to open a blood bank.

They do not employ doctors or scientists or healers to become the army of just us. They employ grunts. "Wot you want, grunt grunt.... Jobs done.."

They want someone who will be the biomech of the future but without the mech. Just a droid, obeying orders, and you don't get that from free thinkers.

You get it from donut eating fat sons of heifers like this joke, on camera, basically saying "Hurrrr I sniff mah fingers when I scratch my butt. works better iffun I fart first!! hyuk" -- no care for anything. They are the guardians of the elite. The un-doped doped up.

This is the world today. The guards don't even have to pretend to care, the king sure doesn't. And if you dare question one of the behemoths regulations and mandatory codes, well they shoot 17 year olds for that.

I call it consciousness of guilt.

Another rage junky out of control,he actually followed the kid harassing him and then attacked him...this officer should go and seek professional help regarding his aggression ....

a reply to: BlueAjah

I am now convinced the LEOs are waging a silent war on cell phone videotakers. They know the world is watching them but they feel they can still show the world that they don't care how they are perceived and they will go to all lengths to prove it.

They are going to have their anger fits over filming caused by their own corruption? Then it's just going to continue to escalate. They don't like it when they are monitored then maybe they need a job where they are less on the edge all of the time? Should they see it as protection rather than a thread, or just feel the cycle here? Looks like that's what many of these cops want.

The more I see these stories the more I realize we need a separate party to review the actions of these officers. Every time an incident like this occurs, the department finds no wrong doing on the part of the officers. It's a conflict of interest and a slap in the face of American citizens, who ironically pay the salaries of these brutes.

Here we see an officer telling the man filming to stop and to "leave the block". The man is not interfering with the police. He's not in their way or in their faces with his camera. He's not even talking, just recording. When told to leave, he briefly objects but does start to leave. The officer then goes out of his way to follow the man, intimidating and threatening him, and ultimately assaulting him, calling him an asshole in the process.

Tell me how the man was being disorderly. This was clearly a trumped up charge out of anger simply because he was recording their actions. How could someone reviewing that not conclude that, at the very least, the complaint had some validity.

This divide between citizens and police will only grow.

On the one hand, it seems that we are firmly in the "us vs them" mentality here on ATS. I mean, i am a major critic of police. But its not "them" and "they". These are all individual people, doing individual actions.

"They" and "them" is your soft entry into hate. And no matter how angry you may be....there is no room for hate.

On the other hand, it cannot be denied that this nation is becoming less and less willing to be policed in the manner they are being policed.

Tell me, has any politician Republican or Democrat introduced a single freaking bill to stop police from attacking people who are filming them? Anyone? Please tell me someone in our government is doing something to stop this.

originally posted by: Bone75
Tell me, has any politician Republican or Democrat introduced a single freaking bill to stop police from attacking people who are filming them? Anyone? Please tell me someone in our government is doing something to stop this.

I think a few have tried, but they face sharp resistance. Any bill that seeks to limit police powers or in any other way be "soft" on crime is political suicide.

originally posted by: Bone75
Tell me, has any politician Republican or Democrat introduced a single freaking bill to stop police from attacking people who are filming them? Anyone? Please tell me someone in our government is doing something to stop this.

funniest post ive read all in a long time.

originally posted by: Bone75
Tell me, has any politician Republican or Democrat introduced a single freaking bill to stop police from attacking people who are filming them?

No, but FOP is pushing for introduction of "anti-recording laws" across the country.

Jason Villalba in Texas introduced a bill that was physically written by the Dallas Police Officers Association (a local union), just "here, introduce this" and he did. Basically, it was "you have to be x distance from any officer to record anything, either by video, audio recorder, or on paper". It's supposed to sound good, he was told to sell it with "It's for the safety of the officers...so they can go home at the end of the shift" and so on, but oddly, it was ok for THEM to record, there was some out for anyone that the DPOA said was ok, so they could be on COPS, and another one for 'traditional journalism' that required an FCC license or a fairly large subscription and delivery of media so the local TV and newspaper could give them adulation.

And, of course, they tried to hand wave the fact you therefore couldn't record your OWN stop by the police, since you can't really be 25 feet away from yourself. And you couldn't write down names and badge numbers.

So Villalba got his butt stomped when he tried to get it to a vote. Even some of the cops broke ranks to oppose it.

At the moment, the same boilerplate is being pushed by the Boston police commissioner.

eta: You might wonder why the police want something like this, since there are already laws on the books for interference and obstruction. Well, those actually require some sort of proof that cops aren't likely to get in most cases. This law allows them to convict you of a felony, and all they have to do is agree that you were less than (x) feet away. Or wrote down their names. And who's to say you were or weren't? Was there a tape measure in play at all times? No? Then all that has to happen is that they BELIEVE (ha) you were too close. Now you're a felon. Or one of them can just walk toward you until you're less than (x) feet, or they think you are, and you are automatically a felon.

This is a type of legislation that has no purpose but to protect the police from being recorded. It's not for their safety, unless you're counting the safety to break the law and not get caught.

a reply to: BlueAjah

I didnt hear the officer complain about being recorded. I also didnt see the phone get thrown to the ground. The kid was told to get out of the area. He dawdled and dicked around being a smartass and got himself arrested. The other video with the 14 year old is also inconclusive at best. I call em like i see em.

This appears to be another instance in which a compliant individual still gets attacked by a police officer. This officer exhibited predatory characteristics. He followed the individual even though that individual was doing what he was told to do. And when he gets him away from the scene he attacks.

a reply to: Jaellma

Agreed. This is all about witness intimidation and evidence suppression.