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.

 

Police caught on tape threatening to destroy and invent evidence

page: 16
44
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 11 2007 @ 05:45 PM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 


Cool, on those levels. I think I'm going to print that out and laminate it and carry it with me in my cycling jersey. Of course once I've done that, no cop will ever stop me again, lol, a kind of reverse Murphy's?

One thing that occurred to me is the futuristic concept of implanting a 24/7 recording device in the human eye that would record a person's entire life. (See Robin Williams' The Final Cut)

With something like that, no public official would dare to be less than courteous (barring any kind of glitch, mini-EMP pulse, or MiB flashy-thing.
)

Good post!




posted on Sep, 11 2007 @ 06:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dr Love
section8citizen

Smartasses know exactly how to push your buttons, even when they're agreeing with you. The cop fell into the trap and lost control.

Maybe people living next to that parking lot are glad that suspicious cars are being checked out, who knows.

Peace


[edit on 10-9-2007 by Dr Love]


This cop overstepped his boundaries and should be reprimanded, end of story. I have several friends who are LEO and I recently applied to be a reserve deputy sheriff. Police officers are expected to live by a code.



posted on Sep, 11 2007 @ 06:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Dr Love

Originally posted by Freenrgy2
But, the FACTS do show an out-of-control police officer who was willing to BREAK THE LAW and create FALSE CHARGES because he didn't like the kid's attitude.


Let me ask you something, ever lost your cool with someone and said something you didn't really mean like "I wanna kill so and so" or "I could strangle that SOB"? IMO that's exactly what happened here.


I can tell you have no experience with or friends who work in Law Enforcement. This cop's behavior is indicative of a pattern. IMO he likely has a history of abusive behavior and has never been dealt with by a superior.

I can say with certainty, based on my life experiences, if this officer had tried this on me he would have been placed on suspension the next day. I'm 32 and have had two police officers fired in my lifetime, both for abusive actions. It helps when you know the Chief and the Prosecutor in your county.



posted on Sep, 11 2007 @ 07:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by defcon5
But if you honestly think they are going to let you walk away, or not push the matter further when you refuse to answer, your not living in the real world with the rest of us.


Its only the "real world" because we allowed it to become such. Just the same if we no longer allow them to push the matter further, being in our legal bounds to do so, then it will no longer be the "real world" but the "previous world" that we have changed for the better. I say we try to do that.



posted on Sep, 11 2007 @ 07:43 PM
link   
While nobody wants to interfere with constructive police work, we all have the right to expect some sort of reasonable oversight over the police. This is a clear example where oversight was lacking. It's funny how the cop acts when he knows hes caught on camera and that he could be held accountable for his actions. If he was right then the revelation that he was on camera shouldnt have had any impact on his attitude.

And he certainly shouldn't have been trying to destroy the evidence!!!!



posted on Sep, 11 2007 @ 08:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by billybob

Originally posted by Freenrgy2
Remember, the officer didn't break any laws either. He could have if he would have followed through with his threats to invent charges or destroy evidence.


threats are against the law. threats should be doubly against the law for those entrusted with protecting the law.

mass mind control at work, ....again. how puerile.


Wow, did you read any of my posts? Probably not. Just decided to single that one out and refer to me as some mind controlled juvenille.


I don't see where he broke the law. If he did, then he did. I strongly believe that he intimidated the individual. You need to go back and read my posts. I am CERTAINLY NOT DEFENDING THE OFFICER'S ACTION.

Dug this up

I copied some of it here.



Police Intimidation

Overzealous police officers and detectives can sometimes overstep the legal bounds of their authority by using intimidation, threats, or other coercive law enforcement tactics to get what they want. Threatening large sentences, bodily harm, blackmail, or convictions may all be forms of intimidation in a court of law.

Intimidation may be manifested in acts such as:

Physical contact
Glowering countenance
Emotional manipulation
Verbal abuse
Purposeful embarrassment
Threatening physical harm
These and other forms of threatening conduct may constitute intimidation and be considered violations of your civil rights.

Currently, there is no uniform legal definition of criminal intimidation. So each court is free to determine whether a certain type of police misconduct rises to the level of criminal intimidation.

A legal concept that is closely related to intimidation is the concept of duress. Duress describes a condition in which a person is coerced to commit a crime or course of action, usually under the influence of threats, extortion, or ransom.

We must hold the police and other law enforcement agents to high standards of due process. We must ensure that they follow the law when carrying out their duties, just as you and I are required to do.



So, even if he did threaten, the court would decide if it could be defined as criminal intimidation, if it even went that far. Certainly duress did not come into play as the individual did not commit a crime while being questioned/intimdated.

[edit on 11-9-2007 by Freenrgy2]



posted on Sep, 11 2007 @ 08:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Freenrgy2
 



The officer had no reason to use this type of intimidation. If his intimidation were in any way reasonable, he would have no reason to be afraid of the camera.

And the fact that he has to lie about why he had probable cause... He kept reaching, one reason after another. Obviously the excuses he's coming up with at the end of the video can't be the probable cause in the beginning, even if any of them were true.

If he thought the kid is a car thief then why not sit back and watch for a while? If he's a thief what good will come from confronting him unless he's in the middle of a crime?

It seems clear that the officer was over zealous to instigate a problem.



posted on Sep, 11 2007 @ 09:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Freenrgy2
I don't see where he broke the law. If he did, then he did. I strongly believe that he intimidated the individual.


i'm sorry, but making up crimes just so you can arrest someone is not intimidation, it is perjury, a potential false arrest, and abuse of power. a cop saying he will make up nine reasons to arrest you is not 'merely' intimidation.

what it is, besides plain old despicable, is malfeasance.



posted on Sep, 11 2007 @ 09:18 PM
link   



posted on Sep, 11 2007 @ 09:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Squatch
you stand up for yourself you get shot down by authority... you become brainwashed into obeying into fearing horrible and sometimes realistic consequences. What can we do? How can we do it?
[edit on 11-9-2007 by Squatch]


You start out by knowing what your rights are and finish off by insisting that your rights be respected.

I've taken several law courses in college. Try it...then you'll know a lot more about what a cop can legally do and what he/she can't.

Under no circunstances should one just play roll over...that's how you get sc***ed.

Furthermore, if we don't stand up for our rights, they will eventually be completely taken away.



posted on Sep, 11 2007 @ 09:46 PM
link   
It's made rounds to the local media.

www.kmov.com...
www.stltoday.com...
www.myfoxstl.com...
www.ksdk.com...


It needs to hit mainstream media into the big players, hopefully the FBI can throw an investigation against the PD if this guy has been there for 20 years and no one has done anything against him yet.



posted on Sep, 11 2007 @ 09:57 PM
link   
It appears that even more people are coming forward about this cop. It would appear that there are numerous people that have had run-ins with him in this same parking lot.

www.myfoxstl.com...



posted on Sep, 11 2007 @ 10:20 PM
link   
Nice post.
I made a thread about some guy in NYC who's received one too many parking tickets and is now using his video camera to make life a living hell for NY City traffic cops.
Pretty entertaining stuff and I'm sure he will have an impact and inspire others. www.belowtopsecret.com...



posted on Sep, 11 2007 @ 10:35 PM
link   
I am seriously surprised at how many people find this incident in any way surprising... You didn't know the cops harass certain subgroups of people constantly?

Hmm that German minister from WW2 would be disappointed at the reactions of people to things like this.

Bottom line is if you don't say anything when you see cops harassing the fringe groups today you don't deserve one whit of pity when they start interfering with your life too.

The truth of the matter is I tend to question the motives of people who go into the law enforcement field these days.



posted on Sep, 11 2007 @ 10:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by billybob

Originally posted by Freenrgy2
I don't see where he broke the law. If he did, then he did. I strongly believe that he intimidated the individual.


i'm sorry, but making up crimes just so you can arrest someone is not intimidation, it is perjury, a potential false arrest, and abuse of power. a cop saying he will make up nine reasons to arrest you is not 'merely' intimidation.

what it is, besides plain old despicable, is malfeasance.



First of all, I'm not a lawyer. And frankly, I'm man enough to admit if something I said was wrong. I'm making a statement based on what I know. If I'm educated in the process, so be it. What I do not appreciate is people like you who don't bother to read any of my previous posts where I made it abundantly clear that I did not support nor condone the officer's actions. In fact, I was quite clear in what I do believe.

Now, that being said, why do you feel the need to pick apart my posts and attack as if I am trying to get this officer off the hook. Please go back and read and you will see that I don't state this.

If the officer broke the law with his actions, I'd like to know which ones. And don't try and twist this statement as again stating that I am supporting the officer, because I'd truly like to know, since it seems that police officers usually walk from these types of situations with little or no punishment. You can say it was malfeasance, but will this go to court and be prosecuted that way. It's not a matter if it could, but if it would.



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 12:01 AM
link   
i think drlove just got a new pair of scissors and a copy of the constitution
i don't see where the police have a problem photographing or videotaping citizens. i believe that not only should the police be wired,but there should be cameras in the police stations and gps indicators on their cars that tell where they go when they leave their jurisdiction,or are stopped for long periods in one place. scrutiny should be INVITED by the police if they're so upstanding.there should be nothing to hide if you enforce the law



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 01:37 AM
link   
Some on rights from the ACLU


1. It's not a crime to refuse to answer questions, but refusing to answer can make the police suspicious about you. If you are asked to identify yourself, see paragraph 2 above.



back to the topic at hand.
As to those sayin that this kid was out looking for trouble or trying to bait this cop did any of you ever stop to think that maybe this kid knew the cop would react like this from previous encounters with him and wanted to prove how this cop was behaving towards the citizens he swore to protect and serve?



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 02:04 AM
link   
Well golly gee isn't this a surprise

FOX2NEWS





Uhrig is upset because he hoped to see a second version of what happened, from the in car camera in Kuehnlein's cruiser. But Uhrig says for reasons he can't explain, there is no tape from the officer's car.


Don't you just love how that always happens when it's the cop in question but when it's one of us the tapes are there.

[edit on 12-9-2007 by Simon_Boudreaux]



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 02:24 AM
link   
If the tape is missing, it might not be due because of the officer in question. The cameras in the cruisers record to a secure area in the car which requires a key to open. From the officers I've spoken to, only their superiors have the keys to the video.



posted on Sep, 12 2007 @ 05:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by ringo_shells

Originally posted by Kruel
It's because of jerks like this that cops are often called 'pigs'. 99% make the rest look bad.


did you mean 1% make the other 99% look bad?

or that 99% of cops are bad?

or possibly that .99% of cops make the other 99.01% look bad?


LMAO, nice ringo.

I agree, this cop makes the 1% of cops that are actually not bastards look bad.



This cop should be fired and the guy should sue him. He has violated the Constitution of the United States and is a traitor.

[edit on 12-9-2007 by Mindzi]

[edit on 12-9-2007 by Mindzi]



new topics

top topics



 
44
<< 13  14  15    17  18  19 >>

log in

join