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

Originally posted by PsykoOps
Btw show me where there is a law for getting trouble with your mouth and attitude?

Not to start the whole goatrope over again but...

Disorderly conduct

Gonna hide behind the couch now...

Originally posted by SFA437

FYI,

I-Team 10 has learned she’s no stranger to police. She was arrested in March with a group of others who tried to block a home on Ravenwood Avenue from foreclosure. Ironically, police videotaped Good and other protesters while arresting them that day.

michaeljmaxim.com...

In his arrest report, Masic wrote that Good was "holding something in her hand" and "did make officers extremely nervous and posed an officer safety risk." By refusing to agree to return inside her home Good "did obstruct our official investigation," Masic wrote.

www.democra... tandchronicle.com/article/20110624/NEWS01/106240356/Emily-Good-case-goes-viral?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|News

Video: Emily Good talks about her arrest

Poor RPD. Shame.

Side note, saw this on the same page.

Off-duty East Rochester officer accused of DWI in crash that injures 3 teens

Paul Monachino, 39, of East Rochester crashed his pickup into a minivan on Fairport Road near Marsh Road about 12:30 a.m., said Cpl. John Helfer of the Monroe County Sheriff’s Office.
Monachino, a sergeant with the East Rochester Police Department, will be out of work “for an extended amount of time,” said East Rochester Police Chief Steven Clancy. He has worked for the department for more than 15 years

So when a cop in E. Rochester gets drunk and hurts some people, he gets a vacation. And people still have distrust?

Originally posted by SFA437

Originally posted by PsykoOps
Btw show me where there is a law for getting trouble with your mouth and attitude?

Not to start the whole goatrope over again but...

Disorderly conduct

Gonna hide behind the couch now...

Oh please. we all learned from indiana jones, the fridge is the way to go! Jk, but yea, some people dont seem to understand that

reply to post by Xcathdra


The officer's 'feeling of fear' was at face value unfounded if not silly. She pointed out that she was lightly dressed and unarmed, and did step back when told to do so. She was no where near physical obstruction and was in the confines of her own property. This was not in 'the hood' or skid row. It was a residential area and her address was right behind her. Was she going to open up with an Uzi and trade life in the burbs for a cell in a Federal Penitentiary? The appropriate action would have been to ignore the lady with the camera and allow her to continue with her lawful business. Next day they move in four cars, get out the rulers and ticket everybody who is parked more than 12 inches from the curb. This is a pitiful and petty response that sheds further light on their actions of the evening before. I know, they were within the law. I guess when they were there and the neighbors gave them # they noticed: "Jeez a lot of these people may be parked more than 12" from the curb. We better get half the squad over here tomorrow because this is unlawful. Friends, this is why you need to organize your neighborhood militia. When that steeple bell rings like in the Amish community in Harrison Ford's movie 'Witness', everybody drops everything and goes to the aid of their community member. Here in Canada the police murder in cold blood and have the support of the 'Crown'. I wonder if they tazered her, did a body cavity search for humiliation value, or became so frightened of her that they felt they had to beat her into submission. Certainly it would have been lawful for them to use pre-emptive force if they felt threatened. There is no doubt the officer was distracted from his duties, however it was entirely his doing when he refused to accept being videoed and began to contrive an excuse to punish her for recording the events.

Originally posted by Exuberant1
reply to post by TribeOfManyColours

 

But the cop didn't feel safe.

His feelings of safety are more important than her rights.

The other two cops were fine, but Masic was scared and his right to not feel fear trumps her right.

Such is life in 21st century USA.

reply to post by smack48


The officer's feeling of fear does not trump her rights. There was no reasonable or substantial basis for him to feel fear. Perhaps he ran out of his psychiatric medication. Three armed officers and a woman too lightly dressed to conceal, holding a video camera. Does the officer need to 'prove' that his fear was justified? This is pretty subjective and vague. Her rights on the other hand are well defined. "Bob, get Frank over here will ya. I need an excuse to take this lady down and I know Frank is scared of turning his back on a women." Give me a break. She was 'bludgeoned' with the law and no one was served by it. Whether it can be argued to be lawful and part of the officer's broad sweeping powers is not the point. It was arrogant, disgraceful and unmanly conduct on the officer's part, as was the parking citation raid the next day.

He told her to back up a foot, just a tad notch and she refused several times and became argumentative. He didn't order her until she kept refusing his request. As for the parking tickets, I think all the neighbors need to get together and SUE her for the BILL, since, she's the one who started the whole thing. None of those parking tickets would of even been issued, had she just not respected the officer's command. And, she failed to.

Cops are like, if you want to play games, so can we? May be childish at best. But, she wanted to make an uproar, now, she can reap what she sewed. They made their bed, now they can lie in it. The judge won't be too happy, he might throw some out, he make them pay the fine. Because, it will be one big headache for him.

They didn't arrest the other two in the yard, and the officer didn't arrest the lady filming when he was giving out the parking tickets. And, her camera, was never confiscated. So, blaming it for the videotaping, is pointless.

Originally posted by SFA437

Originally posted by PsykoOps
Btw show me where there is a law for getting trouble with your mouth and attitude?

Not to start the whole goatrope over again but...

Disorderly conduct

Gonna hide behind the couch now...

I say good luck with this one in a jury trial - this officer was simply overstating the threat to himself so he could make the woman do as he wished. Plain and simple case of him getting his ego crushed when she didn't cringe in fear of his awsomeness.

Massachusetts Disorderly Conduct/Disturbing the Peace

Arrested in Massachusetts for Disorderly Conduct or Disturbing the Peace?

Under Massachusetts law, if you cause a disturbance which creates a public hazard, and serves no legitimate purpose, you can be charged with a disorderly person offense, also known as disorderly conduct.

A "disorderly person" is defined as one who:

• with purpose to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or
• recklessly creates a risk thereof
• engages in fighting or threatening, violent or tumultuous behavior, or
• creates a hazard or physically offensive condition by any act which serves no legitimate purpose.

If you are convicted of disorderly conduct in MA, it is punishable by up to 6 months in jail.

Disturbing the peace also falls under Chapter 272, with similar penalties. Some Massachusetts towns also have specific ordinances relating to disturbing the peace.

Disorderly Conduct Legal Defense Strategies

A disorderly conduct arrest is usually a discretionary decision by a police officer. If we can show that the officer may have been mistaken and overestimated any potential disorder created, we can get the case dismissed. The prosecution must establish beyond a reasonable doubt that your action created a dangerous situation, and served no legitimate purpose.

Her actions did not cause a public inconvenience as there were others present that you can clearly hear in the video that were also standing around but didn't get arrested.

She was not violent or threatening (speaking ones displeasure with police is not a threat there is no implied harm). One's presence in proximity to a police officer is in and of itself not a threat especially if that place is one's lawful residence.

She did not create a physical hazard - she was on her property and within her rights to be there. Again there were many others there at the scene (you can hear them in the video) he chose to make an example out of the woman who spoke up and resisted his authority in front of all his peers and the other civilians.

This is further proven after the fact by the little intervention at the citizen’s lawful meeting to discuss the issue. The local police are just proving they will resort to any abuse of discretion using the letter of the law to intimidate the citizenry into compliance by making their lives difficult if they chose to resist their authority.

Simple thugery - nothing more.

I usually side with the police but this is just silly twisting the letter of the law to the advantage of the police. No better than a person who claims sexual harassment by a co worker for an off color joke. They know that one is a simple talking to or repremand the other is a firing offence. People manipulate the rules - even police in this case.

reply to post by Manhater

In his arrest report, Masic wrote that Good was "holding something in her hand" and "did make officers extremely nervous and posed an officer safety risk." By refusing to agree to return inside her home Good "did obstruct our official investigation," Masic wrote.

I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest it was a camera she was holding, and they clearly knew that. It is starting to sound like they will need some trauma counseling through their employee assistance plan.

Originally posted by smack48
reply to post by Manhater

 

In his arrest report, Masic wrote that Good was "holding something in her hand" and "did make officers extremely nervous and posed an officer safety risk." By refusing to agree to return inside her home Good "did obstruct our official investigation," Masic wrote.

I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest it was a camera she was holding, and they clearly knew that. It is starting to sound like they will need some trauma counseling through their employee assistance plan.

watch in the video at the end, he did pick something up. He did not pick up the camera. He picked up something near the camera.

Also, if your eyes are bad re-watch the video again, and look how close she is to them.

She was on the sidewalk and the officer clearly states that. "Hey sweety, not from the sidewalk". She was close. She had the option to back up and chose not to.

reply to post by Xcathdra


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.

Her actions did not present any threat or interference or cause the officer to divert his attention. He clearly chose to occupy himself with a person removed from the situation who was lawfully videoing the events from her own yard The officer contrived to interfere with her lawful business and issued commands that were inappropriate to the circumstances.

BTW,

She can't complain now, that she wasn't part of the action.

She wanted to see what was going on, wanted to be nosy, get into other people's business, wanted to be part of that action taking place and she got it.

She even got her 15 minutes of FAME on YOUTUBE and plenty of forums. She will go down in history as being remembered.

reply to post by smack48


smack48 it took me a bit to understand your post,because your not using the quote function.

The top paragraph was by Xcathdra and the second was your own.

If you click on the quote button of this post you`ll see the quote tages that need to be put in at the top and bottom of what you wish to quote.

post by Xcathdra
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.

posted by smack48
Her actions did not present any threat or interference or cause the officer to divert his attention. He clearly chose to occupy himself with a person removed from the situation who was lawfully videoing the events from her own yard The officer contrived to interfere with her lawful business and issued commands that were inappropriate to the circumstances.

And end up like that,so people dont get confused.

I also agree with your post.

Clearly the officer is not cut out to be a cop. If a young woman standing peacefully in her own yard makes him scared then he's in the wrong line of work. I think Internal Affairs should be notified of this. The officer is risking his health and sanity along with the well being of the public. Anyone with such a strong phobia might just freak out at any moment and shoot everyone nearby.

I think that he'll be fine as long as he's sedated and restrained under the care of a doctor at psychiatric facility that's convenient for his family to visit while he recovers over the next few years.

reply to post by LazyGuy

Yep

I think some officers have reverse farted their badge so deeply it would be hard for a team of surgeons to remove it so that they might be let back into society.

I wonder, if this was filmed in the middle east or a 3rd world country would it have got so many replies

reply to post by anon72


Welcome to the American Police State. Right Wing "law and order" demands got us here.

Here's your hero, my apologies if anyone has already posted this video.


Emily Good talks about the arrest

So, because she wasn't prepared to be arrested this time she's gonna whine & throw a fit? She knew what she was doing as she admits here this isn't near the first time she has been arrested. Probably not this cops first run-in with her either. There's a fine line between civil disobedience & annoying + obstructing anyone, much less the police, from doing their job. I'd love to stage a civil disobedience rally at her place of employment(if there is one) just to show her how it feels while your trying to perform your job duties.

Back to the original video, I find it funny that at around the 2:17 mark she says the cop never told her to move away. Yet, at :59, 1:07, 1:25, 1:28, 1:38 & 1:55 of the video he did just that. She has no shot of getting anything IMO. She is a prior & the video clearly shows she was told at least 6 times to move back away from the scene.