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

page: 31
143
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 04:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by coop039
She had previously been arrested for this type of thing before.


She was arrested before for activism. How is that "this type of thing"?



She knew what was going to happen.


Is she a psychic? Did she know that there is a cop there who is going to abuse his power?



I suspect shes trying to create a situation to make money for herself.


You suspect? I guess it must be true then.



She went from tough to crying pretty quick. Again, back story?


First of all watch the video with some attention before you comment. She was never "tough". Also why is back story relevant? All that happens we see on the video.



The cops may know something about the woman that we dont. And she said it was her friend in the car, so if the plates came back registered to a known gang member and she knows said gang member the cops have reason to stop her. Notice they didnt stop the other person from filming.


May know? All that pertains to the situation is on the video. Also why you come up with these lies? Knowing gang members is not illegal and doesn't justify any action by leo's. This is strawman at best. Could've, would've...




posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra

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.



you are a servant
not a master

that good enough?



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 04:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
And if she had a gun and planned to use it, wouldnt she have done it already?


Yep. The woman even said, look I'm barely wearing anything, I only have this camera.

Cowardly, dishonorable, and tyrannical for this officer to feel unsafe and uncomfortable about an unarmed, law-abiding woman, on her own property with a camera. Where did he get his badge, as a toy store security guard? No offense to security guards, this officer is below that.

Let me say it one more time just to vent... OFFICER COWARD!!!



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 04:57 PM
link   
It's illegal in the state of Massachusetts to video tape a police officer. The law was put into effect a few years ago.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 05:13 PM
link   
reply to post by js331975
 


It is not illegal to record evidence. It is a must in a court to have evidence of any kind if you want to present your objectives within a case. But it seams as the peacekeepers don't like it very much that you have recorded evidence of their actions. It challenges their justifications of their arrest.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 05:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger

Originally posted by Xcathdra

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.



you are a servant
not a master

that good enough?


Only if the question was what is the best way to ignore the question while providing a worthless answer.

Care to answer the question now, or are you just going to play games and obfuscate?
Show me where it says she has the right to question a command given.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 05:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by PsykoOps

Originally posted by coop039
She had previously been arrested for this type of thing before.


She was arrested before for activism. How is that "this type of thing"?



She knew what was going to happen.


Is she a psychic? Did she know that there is a cop there who is going to abuse his power?



I suspect shes trying to create a situation to make money for herself.


You suspect? I guess it must be true then.



She went from tough to crying pretty quick. Again, back story?


First of all watch the video with some attention before you comment. She was never "tough". Also why is back story relevant? All that happens we see on the video.



The cops may know something about the woman that we dont. And she said it was her friend in the car, so if the plates came back registered to a known gang member and she knows said gang member the cops have reason to stop her. Notice they didnt stop the other person from filming.


May know? All that pertains to the situation is on the video. Also why you come up with these lies? Knowing gang members is not illegal and doesn't justify any action by leo's. This is strawman at best. Could've, would've...


You certainly love playing your games dont you. She was arrested at an event where she was protesting. The arrest was for the same thing she was arested this go around for.
Since you seem to be the expert, please explain to us how she did not violate the law. Pl,ease explain how the officer acted innapropriately, and please cite the law to support your argument.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 05:20 PM
link   
This is what happens when a badge and authority carries more weight than the Constitution of the United States. American men and women have died for over 200 hears not in order to protect the freedoms we charish. They have laid down their lives in foreign lands and have stood against opression that today has become all to common in our own streets. It will not be a rogue nation or a terrorist nuke that destroys this country. It will be the failure of the citizens of this country to stand strong for freedom against the power of government and those that abuse authority.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 05:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by js331975
It's illegal in the state of Massachusetts to video tape a police officer. The law was put into effect a few years ago.


and has since been struck down / refined to allow for the taping off police officers during the performance of their duties since there is no expectation of provacy in public. The only state left in the Union to make taping / recording the police a crime is Illinois, and thats going to the federal level on appeal.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 05:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by spy66
reply to post by js331975
 


It is not illegal to record evidence. It is a must in a court to have evidence of any kind if you want to present your objectives within a case. But it seams as the peacekeepers don't like it very much that you have recorded evidence of their actions. It challenges their justifications of their arrest.



You shold learn the rules of evidence before speaking on the topic. As with your comment here, and in other places in this thread, you are once again wrong.

Read up on rules of evidence, collection and something called chain of custody.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 05:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by MissingRonnieR
This is what happens when a badge and authority carries more weight than the Constitution of the United States. American men and women have died for over 200 hears not in order to protect the freedoms we charish. They have laid down their lives in foreign lands and have stood against opression that today has become all to common in our own streets. It will not be a rogue nation or a terrorist nuke that destroys this country. It will be the failure of the citizens of this country to stand strong for freedom against the power of government and those that abuse authority.


The officer is not enforcing federal law, since he is not empowered to do so. He was enforcing state / local law, which he is authorized to do.

Since you are invoking the FEderal Constitution, please explain how it was violated and is relevant to the topic?



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 05:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kitilani
I am going with the law you yourself quoted so if that law does not apply here, then your reason for bringing it up to begin with is more than lacking. I never said anything about enforcing federal law. I honestly am not sure if you cannot read or just like to make things up to argue about. Should I quote the law again so it is posted a 3rd time and explain myself with smaller words?

Then you really ned to pay attention to what you type.


Originally posted by Kitilani
The fact that you think I ever wrote any such thing is pretty scary. I pointed out that the federal government is also government. That is all I said.
You need to read far more thoroughly.

Again, you need to pay attention to what you type.



Originally posted by Kitilani
I have read it twice now and it actually perfectly states exactly what I said. Distracting the mailman is covered under that law as much as anything that woman was doing. It says it right in there.

What part of mailman beingcovered under federal law since he is a federral employee do you not understand or grasp? Comparing a mailman to this female is not in the same ball park since one is local, one is federal. Please learn the difference.


Originally posted by Kitilani
You are quite right. That imaginary scenario did not happen. That is the first of your imaginary scenarios you admit did not happen though. See how sad that is? You did not understand the law you posted, nor have you seemed to understand anything most people are telling you. Do not take it out on me.

Right.. you need to pay attention to the conversation then, as you are so obviously lost its not even funny.

What you dont get is I do understand what people are saying. What you dont understand is their interpretation is wrong, which is why I am ignoring it. Its not based on the law, but their personal opinions of how the think it should be, while they completely ignore the law and how it works. When a person make a comment that is correct, I say so.

When you rech that level, I will say so as well.


Originally posted by Kitilani
You have no clue what you are talking about and we have been over this. From my first post in this thread

The thing is, when I read ATS threads about stuff like this, I have always felt so lucky that where I live now and in the 19th ward in Rochester, the cops have always been really cool. There is a ton of corruption in another nearby town but most of the damage done there is to each other. This sort of thing never happened here. The police and the people always had pretty decent relations

Like I said before, tell me what a cop hater I am. Please do go on about it because you appear to just hit reply and then babble for several paragraphs.


Cop hater - no
Ignorant about the law and how it works - absolutely.


Originally posted by Kitilani
I doubt many people believe that you are part of that "we" at this point anyway so you probably should stop worrying about how people feel about the job you pretend to have. Again, tell me in yet another post how I am a paranoid cop hater when I have clearly stated the exact opposite. We can all just attack each other if that works better.

I see once again your playing psychic. Im sorry if me being a police officer and correcting you in these forums is a source of discontent for you. Personally, I dont care. I find it annoying that you are so blind when it comes to the law that you fail to acknowledge anything releveant, while embracing opinion from people who dont know the law.

You shold try independant through instead of being a follower.


Originally posted by Kitilani
Please read at least one of my posts and then respond with something that makes at least a modicum of sense. Or stop responding. That is all I am asking.

I have time and again, and you just ignore it because it doesnt fit into your little world of ignorance is bliss. Maybe you should find a person who cn read and comprehend and have them explain it to you so you arent so lost in this conversation. I can use smaller words if it helps you out.


Originally posted by Kitilani
No, you just have done nothing but attack me. Stop crying because I give it back and grow a pair. Or you could try not attacking people and see how they respond to you then.

No, have done nothing but constantly correct your mistakes. I have corrected your wrong interpretation of the laws. I have corrected your incorrect statements about how the laws work and how the officers actions are actually legal and not illegal as you state.

Sorry you take being corrected on your mistakes as a sign you are being verbally attacked.


Originally posted by Kitilani

Just so I know for future reference, when you make disparaging remarks and insults towards people, I am assuming you prefer they just keep quiet insted of responding back to you?


Tell me what an ignorant cop hater I am again.

Again, your not a cop hater, your just ignorant.


Originally posted by Kitilani
No hurt feelings. I just give it back. You are the one crying about it.

and yet you keep commenting on it and bringing it up. You shold really work on that issue of yours. While your at it, learn the law and how it works.


Originally posted by Kitilani
I have provided sources, where as you have not.

Your opinion is not a source, nor is it valid. nice try though and way to deflect. Please proivide your sources. Ive gone back through your posts and have found none.


Originally posted by Kitilani
That is complete bull. I provided links with my facts and there are not sources for my opinion. All you have done is make up stories about what might have happened before the tape started rolling and repeat a phrase you do not seem to understand "lawful order." Really not much in the way of facts that I can see.


No... al you have done is whine and complain about the officers actions while ignoring the law and the fact the officers actions were valid and legal. You have whined about the offiers actions without a full and complete understanding of how his job works, and have done nothing but offer your opinion whil ignoring facts and law.

Youhave not provided any sources that support your opinion. Its not a hard concept to understand.
You make a claim, you support it with the site you got it from. You have failed to do this. Once again, ive gone back trhough and you have not provided any sources.


Originally posted by Kitilani
Oh now I am accusing you of things?
Get real.

So then your answer is no, you cannot provide any material sources or facts or law that shows what I have been telling you is wrong.


Originally posted by Kitilani
That she was wrongfully arrested? Prove me wrong.

I have, multiple times now. This goes back to my comment about finding a person who can read as well as comprehend it so they can explain it to you.

She was told to back away from the scene. She refused to comply. She argued for over a minute, causing the officer to divert his attention to deal with her refusal. She broke the law by failing to comply with a lawful command.

Simply stating thats not the case because thats what you think is not valid. Show me where she has a right to do what she did, and show me where the officer does not have the authority to act. Since you are so right on this, providing this info should be a cake walk for you.


Originally posted by Kitilani
Grow up please. This is a straightforward issue, not some grand conspiracy based on a subversion of civil rights.


It is a straightforward issue, yet you fail to understand it in such a spectacular manner its humerous.


Originally posted by Kitilani
You cannot start a post with "umm yeah" and tell me to grow up. You cannot post nasty little digs and then cry when I do not respond politely. Yet you do these things. What is your point? I expressed my opinions because this was my neighborhood and these are the cops I still deal with more than any other department in the county. You do not like how I feel about it and that is just kind of really too bad for you. You have not proven anything to me. If you still feel like a champ anyway, give yourself a cookie.
edit on 23-6-2011 by Kitilani because: (no reason given)


Actually I can when its in repsonse to your comments and digs.

Thank you for proving my point though, where you stated this is your opinion because you used toi live in the neighborhood. Your entire argument to date has been based on noting but your opinion and is not supported by law. This has been pointed out to you time and time and time again, yet you ignore it because you dont like the answer.

Youhave failed to show any supporting evidence that I am wrong. You have failed to provide any evidence that supports your opinions.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 05:46 PM
link   
Wow another not so friendly neighborhood cop.... It's amazing that the bad guys where the badge nowadays.



edit on 23-6-2011 by imitator because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 05:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger

Originally posted by Xcathdra

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.



you are a servant
not a master

that good enough?


Only if the question was what is the best way to ignore the question while providing a worthless answer.

Care to answer the question now, or are you just going to play games and obfuscate?
Show me where it says she has the right to question a command given.


Is that a serious question? Do you really believe that you have to do anything and everything a police officer tells you to do? What if the cop had told her to stand on her head for ten minutes followed by 20 jumping jacks and a jog around the block running backwards? Does she have a right to question that command and refuse to do it?

Frankly, if I was that cop I'd feel very safe being filmed by her doing my job because I would do it according to the rules and the filming would only support the propriety of what I do. I'd feel safer being filmed by her from a position where I can see what she's doing than sending her inside her home where I have no clue what she might do next.

edit on 6/23/2011 by dubiousone because: Grammar and clarification



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 05:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger
reply to post by ManBehindTheMask
 




you are mincing words, go check my threads,


"you are dismissed"


mincing words? how am i mincing words? I believe you are using the wrong terminology..........besides I dont have to check anything, I posted EXACTLY what you said..........



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by dubiousone
Is that a serious question? Do you really believe that you have to do anything and everything a police officer tells you to do? What if the cop had told her to stand on her head for ten minutes followed by 20 jumping jacks and a jog around the block running backwards? Does she have a right to question that command and refuse to do it?
edit on 6/23/2011 by dubiousone because: Grammar.


Are you really that stupid? What part of lawful command are you and everyone else not understanding? A lawful command is when an officer, in the performance of his duties, orders a person to do something legal.

Hence the term "Lawful Command"

Ordering a person to run around the block is nowhere near our authority in that sense.
Ordering a person to do uumping jacks is nowhere near our authorty.

You guys really are grasping at any straws here arent you.

A lawful command in this thread is where the officer told the lady to back off / move away from them. She refused, and went to jail, as she should have, for failing to obey that command. The fact she is on private property is a non factor - period. The fact she made no physical contact with any officer is a non factor - period.
Her actions, in this case her proximity to what was going on with the officers, was the issue. Its what caused the officer to take notice of her. He asked her to move away multiple times, then ordered her to, which in this case is a lawful command.


Its simple and straightforward.

The Officer articulated why he wanted her to move. End of scenario.

If the lady feels she was in the right, then she can have her day in court. As has been pointed out time and time again, officers do not dictate innocenmce or guilt, a court of law does. Arguing with an officer over the finer points of enforcment of laws is pointless, since we dont detemine guilt or innocence.

You guys are missing the point that the Prosecuting Attorney filed the charge against the female. How do you keep coming back to the officer being at fault for that?
edit on 23-6-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 06:01 PM
link   
I don't usually post here just randomly read but I had to post on this one. Pathetically...thats where I live.
Maybe 5-10 minutes from my house...Welcome to Rochester NY.



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 06:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by ReverendCrow
I don't usually post here just randomly read but I had to post on this one. Pathetically...thats where I live.
Maybe 5-10 minutes from my house...Welcome to Rochester NY.


Out of curiosity, what is the local media saying about this? Its been reported she has pulled the same stunt in the past )recordingto be arrested). Has that been verified? Anything else about this lady, or the officer, coming out?



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 06:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Not sure about her but you can read this should inform you about the situation.

www.democratandchronicle.com...|topnews|text|Home



posted on Jun, 23 2011 @ 06:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by ReverendCrow
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Not sure about her but you can read this should inform you about the situation.

www.democratandchronicle.com...|topnews|text|Home


Thank you...

intresting.. She never filed formal complaint against the officer for his actions. That makes no sense if she claims she was within her righs.



new topics




 
143
<< 28  29  30    32  33  34 >>

log in

join