Police Arrest Woman For Videotaping Them From Her Front Yard: (Wait till you see this tape!)

I'll point this out again:

THIS particular officer perjured himself in an official report under circumstances that indicate a premeditated criminal act.

None of the leo defenders seem to want to address this issue.

This officer clearly broke the law and leos here ignore it.

And you guys wonder why we don't trust or believe you.

Originally posted by Lemon.Fresh
Reply to post by Xcathdra

 

I would say, as an ex-officer, that the person you quoted is quite correct.

Your knowledge of the law and personal rights is abysmal.

And we wonder why people hat officers so much.

Look in the mirror, my friend.

 

Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

 

So when you find out the argument you are trying to make is wrong, you resort to the personal attacks. Typical yet not suprising in these forums.

Explain how her rights were violated please. Being an officer im sure your familiar with a 1983 violation. Please explain how that was comitted. Being your an officer I find it amazing you dont know what totality of circumstances is. Being your an officer I find it intresting that you dont understand how an officers use of force, in this case the ladies arrest, is reviewed and put into context.

The onlything abysmal is how you managed to make it this long without being shot or having a fellow officer injured or killed from your lack of knowledge on the law.

Notice this wasn't the Hamptons everyone. They are policing the little people. Everyday citizens who are having their RIGHTS taken away day by day till we have NONE. I am disgusted with it all.

Originally posted by spy66

Originally posted by Psychics
Textreply to post by Mister_Bit

 

I Really Feel That The Police Officers Were Just Doing Their Job, And They Asked The Women Politely To Go In Her House It Looks Like She Don't Like Law Enforcement

It dosent matter if the peace officer ask her politely, She has the right to stand where she is and observe. Observing is not obstructing. She didn't do anything wrong until the peace officer interfere with her being present.

The peace officer brought the woman into the event by confronting her. Making her a part of the main arrest taking place.

ugh.. only to the point where her actions intefere with law enforcement functions. In this case, standing on her lawn in such promistey created an issue for the officer present. He was within his authority to ask, then tell her to move away. She had every chance to comply, and she has the right to refuse. The momeny she refused, she failed to obey the lawful command, breaking the law.

Again, standing on private / personal property does not grant a person immunity from violating a law.

Originally posted by Observer99
Actually she did back off. Watch it again. Shortly after that she was arrested.

She was arrested for failing to obey the lawful command to move elsewhere. She argued for over a minute, and it was not until the officer started towards her that she decdided to finally move. To little to late.

Originally posted by Observer99
And he was wrong in the assertion that it was a lawful command. It was not. I feel very, very sad for you that you want to live in a nation where "arguing with an officer" is valid grounds for an arrest.

Actually he was not wrong in his assertion. Please explain how he was wrong based on the facts and the law, and not what you personally think it should be.

Being told to move elsewhere, and refusing that order while continuing to argue is grounds for an arrest. And she was arrested for it. As she should have been. How come no other people present were arrested? How come the guy who picked up the recorder was not arrested?

Why do you ignore those facts?

Originally posted by Observer99
It tells me that they already made one unlawful arrest, to serve the purpose of punishing someone who would defy any police order, lawful or unlawful. They knew what they could get away with and they got away with it. They had their pound of flesh, and had made their example of someone, to enforce their police state and culture of fear. Are these police dumber than dirt? Of course not. Anyone with half a brain would know that if they had proceeded to arrest anyone ELSE just for videoing, or caused any further stink without clear cause, it would have tipped the tide of public opinion against them.

And you would be wrong about the wrongful arrest. She was not arrested for recording. She WAS arrested for her proximity to what was going on and her refusal to move away. Instead she argued, refused to comply, and was arrested.

Originally posted by Observer99
Your argument is treasonous.

And this comment right here seals the deal that you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. You should stop while your ahead.

Originally posted by spy66
She has the right to question any command given by a peace officer.

Lol really? Please cite the source and law for this wrong claim of yours.

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by spy66

Originally posted by Psychics
Textreply to post by Mister_Bit

 

I Really Feel That The Police Officers Were Just Doing Their Job, And They Asked The Women Politely To Go In Her House It Looks Like She Don't Like Law Enforcement

It dosent matter if the peace officer ask her politely, She has the right to stand where she is and observe. Observing is not obstructing. She didn't do anything wrong until the peace officer interfere with her being present.

The peace officer brought the woman into the event by confronting her. Making her a part of the main arrest taking place.

ugh.. only to the point where her actions intefere with law enforcement functions. In this case, standing on her lawn in such promistey created an issue for the officer present. He was within his authority to ask, then tell her to move away. She had every chance to comply, and she has the right to refuse. The momeny she refused, she failed to obey the lawful command, breaking the law.

Again, standing on private / personal property does not grant a person immunity from violating a law.

The thing is she doesn't have to comply. She is just observing and is saying so.

She is not interfering in the arrest taking place, the peace officers are interfering with her being present and observing the arrest.

Originally posted by Xcathdra
ugh.. only to the point where her actions intefere with law enforcement functions. In this case, standing on her lawn in such promistey created an issue for the officer present. He was within his authority to ask, then tell her to move away. She had every chance to comply, and she has the right to refuse. The momeny she refused, she failed to obey the lawful command, breaking the law.

Again, standing on private / personal property does not grant a person immunity from violating a law.

Is there a legally defined distance from which you must stand from an arrest? What is it? If there is, you might actually have a leg to stand on. I doubt there is.

If the distance is up to the discretion of the officer, then that is a clear opening for any officer to hide and silence information about their activities. That is obviously and clearly what happened here. Are you not aware of the other recent threads on ATS where police illegally seized people's cameras, smashed people's cameras, threatened people who were filming? Are you so naive that you cannot see that this is the same thing?

And again I will reiterate, she DID move back. But she wasn't "nice" about it, she didn't jump when he said to jump, nor did she ask "how high?" and that's why she was arrested. Police state and, dare I say, terrorist state where people are subjugated by fear.

Wouldn't it be a bit of false imprisonment if she were made to stay in her house against her will with no charges?
(I really don't know.)

The police here in Georgia got in trouble for giving people a hard time that video taped them.

www.ajc.com...

Citizens HAVE to put pressure on them about this stuff.

Originally posted by Cryptonomicon
Her mistake was when she says, "I'm just video taping you to watch what you guys are doing."

The lady should have replied, "Hi officers, can I get you some coffee and muffins? I'm just so proud of you fine men getting the riff-raff off the streets. On behalf of all us on this street: Thank you! Keep up the great work!"

Everyone has the ability to "frame" the social dynamics of any situation. When you frame yourself as a confronter of authority - you are actually demanding that authority confront you.

But if you frame yourself as a grateful supporter of authority - the demands come from within the authority to keep that support by being polite.

Either way, I still support what she was doing and feel that the officer was completely out of line and violated her rights by first ordering her how to move about on her own private property, and secondly by arresting her for not obeying an unlawful order (which was in truth really just a request).

sounds to me like your afraid of the authority

Originally posted by apacheman
I'll point this out again:

THIS particular officer perjured himself in an official report under circumstances that indicate a premeditated criminal act.

Really.. please cite the perjury for us.

Originally posted by apacheman
None of the leo defenders seem to want to address this issue.

and none of the cop haters are willing to understand how the law works and how individual rights work. Instead its 24/7/265 of I hate cops, they are rutal, corrupt and get preferential treatment, yet non one can provide any evidence that all cops have this.

Originally posted by apacheman
This officer clearly broke the law and leos here ignore it.

What law was broke? Also, why are you and others so quick to jump on a law violation when its against a leo, while complately ignoring the law violations by the people being arrested?

Hypocrisy much?

Originally posted by apacheman
And you guys wonder why we don't trust or believe you.

I would say because its based on a lack of knowledge of the law and how your individual rights work which causes you to distrust and not beleive the police. Thats evident by people stating the officers actions were illegal when they have absolutely no understanding of the law.

Cops actions illegal, while you claim the females actions are legal.

If you dont know the law, how can you make the claim?

Originally posted by iLoGiCViZiOnS
Notice this wasn't the Hamptons everyone. They are policing the little people. Everyday citizens who are having their RIGHTS taken away day by day till we have NONE. I am disgusted with it all.

I love this argument. Please point out where in law a person "has the right to record the police"?

All that has been ruled is we have no expectation of privacy in public, and as such, people can record us. However, it does NOT give a person the ability to interfere with our duties.

A persons rights end when they infringe on anothers.

Apparently cops filing false reports is such a common practice that it simply doesn't register on XCathedra's radar.

His unwillingness to acknowledge criminal conduct on the part of a fellow cop puts the lie to his claim to being a good cop himself.

Self-delusion is necessary when one lacks the ethics, courage, or whatever is required to enforce the laws upon your colleagues as well as the public, I suppose.

reply to post by apacheman


Show us where the officer committed perjury and falsified a police report? We have asked, but you do not provide. Way to go

Originally posted by spy66
The thing is she doesn't have to comply. She is just observing and is saying so.

Its not the observing that got her into trouble. It was her proximity to the officers and the scene that caused the issue. When the officer told her to move, he was within his authority to do so, regardless if she is on private property or not. The moment she challeneged the officer, she broke the law by failing to comply with her valid lawful command to move elsewhere.

You can keep making the same argument, but there is absolutely no law or case law that supports your claim based on this type of incident.

Originally posted by apacheman
She is not interfering in the arrest taking place, the peace officers are interfering with her being present and observing the arrest.

The moment her actions caused the officer to divert his attention, she is interfering in their duties. The officers duty at that moment was to deal with the focus of the traffic stop. Instead, he had to also deal with this lady, which is by definition interfering with his duties.

reply to post by Xcathdra


xcathedra, would you feel threatened if I filmed you in public? Why dont you make a public appearance and let everyone film you. She was on private property and the officer trespassed

Originally posted by apacheman
His unwillingness to acknowledge criminal conduct on the part of a fellow cop puts the lie to his claim to being a good cop himself.

There is no proof he is a cop.

If a person wanted to damage the reputation of the police, they would do as he is doing now. I do not believe he is law enforcement.

Don't let people pretending to be cops ruin your perception of your local law enforcement officers.

reply to post by Xcathdra


He filed a false report claiming to have stopped three criminals...the video proves otherwise.

The info was posted a few pages back...I'm sure if you look you'll find it.

reply to post by apacheman


My bad, reply not to me.

Originally posted by Observer99
Is there a legally defined distance from which you must stand from an arrest? What is it? If there is, you might actually have a leg to stand on. I doubt there is.

The distance is going to be what the officer feels comfortable with since its his scene. If you want specifics we operate on a 6-8 foot reactionary gap for people we are dealing with. From a weapons aspect the distance increase up to 21-26 feet, which is the distance a person can cover with a knife and make it to the officer and stab before an officer has time to fully react and get their duty weapon clear of the holster.

Armed legalities aside, the distance is going to be what the officer feels is safe for not only himself, but for the people he has detained, which he is liable for also.

If the lady stayed close, and things went south for the officers, and she gets injured or killed, the police can be held responsible for her death by failing to take appropriate action to ensure she is a safe distance away.

Its a gang member? Its possible there are gang members around watching. Its possibe gang menmbers are driving by to see whats going on.

You guys ignore the fact that things can go from safe to tits up in a matter of seconds.

Originally posted by Observer99
If the distance is up to the discretion of the officer, then that is a clear opening for any officer to hide and silence information about their activities. That is obviously and clearly what happened here. Are you not aware of the other recent threads on ATS where police illegally seized people's cameras, smashed people's cameras, threatened people who were filming? Are you so naive that you cannot see that this is the same thing?

Which is possible since no one is perfect, but I dont buy the argument across the board. In this case, I dont buy it because of the fact a guy picked her camera up and continued recording with no adverse action taken against him. In addition there were many witnesses present who also were not arrested.

Why?

Because they did not come close enough or perform any actions that distractred the officers from their duties.

Originally posted by Observer99
And again I will reiterate, she DID move back. But she wasn't "nice" about it, she didn't jump when he said to jump, nor did she ask "how high?" and that's why she was arrested. Police state and, dare I say, terrorist state where people are subjugated by fear.

She doesnt have to be nice about it. The Supreme Court has ruled Law Enforcement is required to have thick skin because of the people we deal with. She only started to move back when the officer reached the end of his tolerance towards her actions. That is evident.

As I said before, its not just one comment, or one refusal, its a combination of all of her actions that resulted in action being taken against her.,