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 Confiscated Cell Phone Cameras After Shooting Unarmed Man On Miami Beach

page: 1
9

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 31 2011 @ 06:31 PM
link   
This one is quite confusing. There is a video attached to this and in it we see the car being shot first and then a barrage of shots when it is not moving and doesn't appear to be reving up the engine either. However police say they shot him because he trying to run over officers with his car. Then they also say that he didn't have a gun either. Four people were injured by gunfire and now it remains to be seen if it is from the officers guns. Also there has been complaints that the police confiscated video evidence on the scene and destroyed recording devices as the PINAC article shows.

Source: PINAC

Miami Herald




posted on May, 31 2011 @ 06:32 PM
link   
This is rediculous. If there's nothing to hide, why confiscate them?


Here is a terrific follow up on this issue:


The War On Cameras (ATS THREAD)



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 06:59 PM
link   
shooting unarmed suspects seems to be the way america does business.



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 07:07 PM
link   
reply to post by PsykoOps
 


More and more states are making it illegal to film or audio record police activity. Namely Kentucky and Virginia that I know firsthand but am hearing more and more every day. I understand that police make mistakes, sadly, and that videos can shape public opinion... But with so many police engaged in shady practices, using too much force, or going outside the lines with the public, the public needs some recourse because the second the police (not all) are questioned, the first thing they say is the little old lady or child had an AK . Police left with no public scrutiny for a long time get very scary... little towns in KY for example.



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 07:10 PM
link   
I think you may be mistaken. As far as I know only Illinois isn't admitting that is not illegal to film police. That is being currently challenged on a federal level. Can you show me links to these other states making it illegal?



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 07:17 PM
link   
reply to post by rogoeiefar
 



And the outcome of these things is usually always bad in the case of the victims. There was a case here in D.C. about 8 years ago where the FBI pulled over two teens in a car, the first thing they did was shoot the male driver, no questions asked, turned out it was mistaken identity(!) The family got nothing and it was one of the starts of "good shot" coming into our language.

There was another one in D.C. about 5 years ago where the police cornered a man on his doorstep, he didn't resist, and they asked for his ID, he reached in his coat (this is fairly understandable) but they thought gun, and shot him 35+ times, they shot him so many times that he had alot of entry wounds in the soles of his feet.
The family lost the case in court, and got nothing.

Recently, and I'm not sure if this was local or national, but there was a 70 year old woman who was suspected of selling her medication, one police officer accidently fired, and the rest followed. No weapons were found and the woman was just sitting on her couch. Case was lost, family got nothing. I personally feel that recording these kinds of things is not at all a negative thing, I would love to see a day when stuff like this doesn't happen and it's called out publically when it does, especially so public opinion can help the families of the victims of this kind of stuff.



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 07:22 PM
link   
I am sure the police spokesperson will say....
"Umm we ahhh confiscated ummm said recording devices for ummmm aaaah evidence to build our case yeah, evidence".
I would say L.A. would be the first community to finally straight up attack the crooked police but, there are some neeighborhoods where the police dare not go as they are not the dominant law force.
I wonder what city will be the first to declare open war on the police?



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 07:37 PM
link   
They cant just take that as evidence. They need a warrant first. So if they'd say that they'd be admitting to committing a crime



posted on May, 31 2011 @ 07:39 PM
link   
reply to post by PsykoOps
 


Then apparently they have commited a crime.
Now let's see if anyone is prosecuted.



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 01:13 AM
link   
Probably not. It's their word against the guy whose camera they smashed unless the footage can be recovered. Btw, even if they have a warrant they only get that for the footage. Not for the whole device to begin with.



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 01:15 AM
link   
reply to post by PsykoOps
 


Why would they have any right to confiscate them?

theft is theft no?



posted on Jun, 1 2011 @ 02:11 AM
link   
They dont. Where do you get that?



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 03:45 PM
link   
Update. Now they do say that they've found a gun in the car. Two and a half days later??? Wow.

Source:
Miami Herald
Via
PINAC



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 04:49 PM
link   
Clearly confiscating and destroying cameras is destruction of evidence. The officers should be investigated and fired. Plus the owners need to be reimbursed for the cost of the destroyed equipment. Also for cell phones a good feature to add would be a instant save to email address function. Let them take the equipment. It will still wind up on you tube in a couple of hours anyway.



posted on Jun, 2 2011 @ 05:05 PM
link   
There are direct streaming solutions however I'm not sure if those are available for cell phones. I know they are for normal cameras and some people who have been "black listed" by cops have setup such in their cars etc.



posted on Jun, 3 2011 @ 02:04 AM
link   
Update: Police arrest a guy for filming on gunpoint. Destroy his camera but he is smart and removes the card so the footage survives. Smart move.

From
Miami Herald

Via
PINAC




top topics



 
9

log in

join