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: 46
143
<< 43  44  45    47  48  49 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 02:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Cito
the trial may be over but revenge has just begun.


Police are now harassing Emily Good for videotaping them


Source: boingboing.net...



A followup on Emily Good, the woman who was arrested for video-recording a police stop from her front yard: during a neighborhood meeting in support of Ms Good, Rochester Police came out with a ruler and measured the parking-distance of the attendees' cars. Cars that were more than 12 inches from the curb (even by half an inch) were ticketed. Needless to say, the 12 inch ordinance isn't normally enforced with this kind of vigor.

Police Harass Community Members Attending Meeting in Support of Emily Good



Video of harassment: blip.tv...
edit on 6/27/2011 by Cito because: (no reason given)


This just proves the stupidity of their police officers. I mean come on... They just set themselves up, and on camera.
4 police cars worth of officers with rulers?
This belongs in a Readers Digest stupid criminals article. Just because they are wearing uniforms, it doesn't make them immune to prosecution for harrassment. They must have god complexes.

edit on 28-6-2011 by elouina because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 02:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by ..5..
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Post the fatality stats for 'retail' then just for laughs post the stats for 'agriculture,'
Your job is not that dangerous (For the cops) All your blue shieleded loose cannons are very very dangerous for taxpayers.

A taxpayer is twice as likely to suffer harm or death at the hands of law enforcement than they are by criminals.
edit on 27-6-2011 by ..5.. because: (no reason given)



That shows death,not danger. Want to know why fewer police officers die in their job? They are trained to survive dangerous circumstances. You can't fight a sea, but you can defend from a criminal, especially if ITS YOUR JOB.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 03:03 AM
link   
reply to post by unityemissions
 


Not sure of the back story but in one aspect I can agree. So many times people form judgements based on a video clip without the full knowledge or context of what has occurred. Hence why I reserve my opinions of such matters.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 03:47 AM
link   
nevermind.. off topic.
edit on 28-6-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 03:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by THE_PROFESSIONAL
Just as a reminder this is the power of the videotape:



If cops don't have anything to hide, they should not worry about being video taped.


Actually its a perfect example of how the video doesnt show the entire story. What you are viewing is a portion of the entire rodney king incident. What they didnt show was the officers present using every tool available to them to get Mr. King under control and into custody. Mr. King tested positive for Marijuana as well as intoxicated (twice the CA limit for the time period) the time of the incident.

This video, the one viewed by millions, never showed the first 3-4 minutes where officers used everything they could prior to what is shown on the video.

The video does not show Mr. King throwing officers off of him like rag dolls, nor does it show the offucers using pepper spray. It does not show the officer contuinually ggiving Mr. King verbal commands to cease his actions.

So no, a video does not always show the entire story.
edit on 28-6-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

edit on 28-6-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 03:58 AM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Thank god you know the rest of all these stories so you can tell us. I have some questions about some other stuff no one saw. Can you explain those too?



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 04:10 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 04:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by Kitilani
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


Thank god you know the rest of all these stories so you can tell us. I have some questions about some other stuff no one saw. Can you explain those too?


Gee I dont know, maybe you can ask the question instead of acting like a prig? Oh, and excuse me for knowing what I am talking about. God forbid members on this site exercise intelligence.

Now, do you have a specific question you wanted to ask, or was your intent to just derail the thread?

Whats your question?


Hahaha! So first you apologize for being wrong after nonstop personal attacks against people for being unintelligent and not getting it, Americans are lazy and don't understand law like the cops do. Then within a few posts after the apology you go right back to insulting people for being unintelligent when you where the one that was wrong the whole time. Wow, that's special.


And telling that person that they are acting like a prig...how many personal attacks is one guy allowed?
edit on 28-6-2011 by The_Phantom because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 04:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra
Gee I dont know, maybe you can ask the question instead of acting like a prig?


So you did not get that at all?


Oh, and excuse me for knowing what I am talking about. God forbid members on this site exercise intelligence.


I guess you completely missed the irony in being an ATS member and then so authoritatively explaining what happened somewhere before the camera started rolling. How is it that you "know what you are talking about?" Again. Right, someone else told you what you know.


Now, do you have a specific question you wanted to ask, or was your intent to just derail the thread?

Whats your question?


Did not really have a question. I am just in awe of the people around here that know exactly what happened at times and places they were not present. I just find that fascinating.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 04:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kitilani

Originally posted by anon72
UPDATE:

Case Dismissed Against Woman Arrested While Videotaping Police
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Please go there and read the whole story, comment and whatnot.

Great case.


Apparently this newsflash is not as exciting as just bickering with each other in this thread.


The reason for that imo is because particular members in Law Inforcement took how long? to see what citizens saw straight off.Then after the verdict appoligize then continue on with the same your wrong we`re right because you cant understand unless you have a badge.

Which is the topic of the OP,its the same sort of attidude of just because they say so to a citizen that makes it right/lawful.

This from page 44 (it took 44 pages for this)

Originally posted by Xcathdra
An intresting decision on the part of the DA.

Either way, the charges were dismissed.

With that I would like to appologize to those involved in the debate. In this case you guys were right and I was in the wrong.


Then only one reply between that post and his next....


Originally posted by Xcathdra


I wouldnt bother trying to argue any further. The people in this thread just do not get it, and would prefer to Monday morning quarterback. They still think it has to do with the female recording and apparently nothing is going to change their minds on that.

Time to walk off the field and find the next topic and debate.

This one is dead.

Emphisis mine.

Um yeah right its all us citizens/members that just dont get it again.How long did it take for you to admit you were wrong? anyone that takes that long and has argued so much to see they were wrong on something so simple is not going to change over night for the better.

The problem is with these particular type of people in Law Enforcement is they love to think their word is the law and as it seems also when their off duty on public global forums.Similar imo to the American Gov who love to think themselves as right and be global police so I guess that stands to reason.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 05:22 AM
link   
reply to post by gps777
 


I think its wrong to judge the peace officers alone for their actions.
These people act upon how they view and understand their police education and training. And on advice from colleagues.

My personal impression of US police tactics are not very peace full. But rather very aggressive.
IT seams like some of these peace officers treat every citizen as armed and dangerous, and only have bad intentions. Even the once who are scared because of aggressive police behaviour.


It is very wrong of a peace officer to demand that a public citizen is supposed to have common knowledge about police routines. Giving proper advice in a proper manor to a public citizen, by letting them know and understand what it is taking place at a seen is a skill.
A peace officer should know that the public will react to situations like a citizen arrest. People will stop and take interest, watch/observe what is going on.







edit on 27.06.08 by spy66 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 06:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by spy66
I think its wrong to judge the peace officers alone for their actions.
These people act upon how they view and understand their police education and training. And on advice from colleagues.

My personal impression of US police tactics are not very peace full. But rather very aggressive.
IT seams like some of these peace officers treat every citizen as armed and dangerous, and only have bad intentions. Even the once who are scared because of aggressive police behaviour.


Yes and in doing so are making no friends by being heavy handed and treating innocent people as though they are criminals.

Which will continue to further the divide between the "us and them mentality",until the straw that breaks the camels back and people will revolt on mass which will be very ugly day indeed.

Dramatic changes need to happen to a least start winning back public confidence that continues to disappear.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 06:16 AM
link   
I`ve since been notified that there is the new thread running... www.abovetopsecret.com... on the out come of the case.

And in reading a couple of pages now realise why Xcathdra appoligized from THIS post in the above thread link.


Originally posted by Xcathdra

I said in the other thread that if the charges are dropped I would appologize. However, I still believe she was in the wrong. Not because she was recording, but because of her proximity to the officers and what was going on.



So I can hardly call that an apology rather than just sticking to that little word.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 08:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by DZAG Wright
 


What did he tell you for the reason for stopping you? Based on your explanation, he didnt even racially profile since there was absolutely no basis for the stop (reasonable suspicion). I am curious to hear more..




Now to finish my story...

Like I said he pulls me over, rushes my window and the first thing he asks is do I have any drugs in the car, can he search it. The reason he threw at me for pulling me over was a very brief and anyone could tell he was lying, "you ummm.....were weaving". I didn't really contest it because I knew I didn't have any drugs on me and that's what he was looking for. The reason I knew was because I was pulled over usually twice a week in the same manner for about two months.

So they take you out the car, they ask do I have any weapon of course. I say yeah but it's legal. You can tell by the looks on their face they think they've justified at least one charge. However, when they do their check for previous offenses or warrants and it comes back clean it's like they're amazed. Once one of the younger officers looks at his trainer and in a panicked manner asks, "So it's legal for HIM to have this...we're supposed to let him go!?" He was amazed that a young black male with dreads and gold teeth LEGALLY had a pistol LOL! The Sgt told him yeah and to put it back in the car...

What the police usually do to pull you over is get behind you and just follow you, hoping to make you nervous to where you miss a stop sign or weave. I've learned since to just ignore them, I don't even slow down anymore.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 08:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by SFA437
reply to post by DZAG Wright
 


I'm not saying it doesn't happen. My brother in law gets pulled over every single time he crosses the Delaware Memorial Bridge. His Chief has spoken to their Chief about it- it's that nonsensical.

The point I was trying to make is that not every stop is based solely on race. In the town where I worked there were about maybe 20 white folk in total. Just about every driver I pulled was black because it was an almost exclusively black town.

These guys in Rochester might be pulling that crap or they might not. Don't know the statistics and honestly don't care enough to go look them up. If the people of Rochester are willing to put up with that nonsense it's on them.

My premise was that I do not think that the officer specifically pulled over some random black dude and somehow forced him to stop directly in front of this woman's house. I think there was just a totality of circumstances that led to this whole fiasco.




No, of course every stop isn't based on race...LOL. Only in high crime and drug areas. The police are then taking a gamble (which usually pays off) that the guy their pulling over has suspended license and drugs on them.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 08:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by The_Phantom
Hahaha! So first you apologize for being wrong after nonstop personal attacks against people for being unintelligent and not getting it,


For a few people absolutely. And I will say it again, people who are still saying the officer broke the law, are in fact, wrong. As far as personal attacks go its common in police threads, and it goes back to people not knowing how the law works, and insted of educating themselves they would rather just make coments and cite a law that has nothing to do with the topic.

Ignorance - lack of knwoeldge on a given topic.
Prig comes to mind as well for some.



Originally posted by The_Phantom
Americans are lazy and don't understand law like the cops do. Then within a few posts after the apology you go right back to insulting people for being unintelligent when you where the one that was wrong the whole time. Wow, that's special.


I went back and pointed out to people that the dismissal of the charges does not make the Officers actions criminal. I am correcting people who, as ive said before, make comments without knowing how the law works. Or would you rather I just let people make comments that are wrong and based on opinion and not fact? The theme of the site is deny ignorance, not embrace it.

If you hate the cops, thats your issue not mine. However, when that hatred becomes so blinding, people refuse to see all sides of the story and automatically go after the police, its a problem. It creates falsehoods and does nothing but drag topics of center.



Originally posted by The_Phantom
And telling that person that they are acting like a prig...how many personal attacks is one guy allowed?
edit on 28-6-2011 by The_Phantom because: (no reason given)

I ask that question everyime someone goes after me in the forums, and as of late I have been getting U2U that suiggest I hould be killed.

So before you try to lay the blame at my doorstep, maybe you should get the facts first.

If you think you can open your mind for a few minutes, see if this helps explain wha tIm trying to tell you.

The statute we are talking about lists the elements needed in order for a person to be in violation of that law. The other factor is, for lack of a better term, mitigating circumstances or totality of circumstances.

Example - We will use murder in this example as well as you benig armed with a gun - ccw).
#1 - You are in your front yard and see a person walking towards you holding a knife. The knife is blade down and is displayed in such a manner that it makes you very nervous. He refuses when you tell him to get off your property, and continues to walk at you.

You pull your gun, take aim and you shoot to stop the threat. The guy goes down, dead from his injuries.

#2 - This scenario is exactly the same as the one above, minus the knife. The guy walks onto your lawn heading towards you, just like above except he does not have a knife, he refuses to leave, so you draw your gun and shoot him. The guy goes down, dead from his injuries.

Both examples are a homicide. Both charges are exactly the same. Both incidents meet the criteria for a murder charge (intentionally causing serious physical injury an or death). Both examples are completely the same, except for the knife. The PA receives the Police report for both incidents. The PA sees that both instances meet all criteria to issue charges for murder.

What would occur -
For incident #1 the PA would most likely not file a charge of murder, or any other criminal charges, even though its clear cut. The reason for that decision? The knife being present is a factor thats taken into account.

For incident #2 the PA would most likely file charges because at the time of the encounter, the individual was not armed, and none of his actions appeared hostile.

So you have 2 identical cases. Both meet the definition and elements of murder, yet only one is charged. The reason being is totality of circumstances. Both broke the law, but because one incident had a knife present, it created a factor that has to be weighed

The charge being dismissed against Good had nothing to do with the officer not having the authority to take that action in the first place. The PA reviewed the evidence and weighed all the info - and decided in this case the actions of the female (being on her property, identifying herself when the officer asked, stated she was recording) outweighed the evidence submitted with the charge by the officer. The PA felt in this case that the Scales of Justice, when all evidence and totality of circumstances are taken into account, favored the female and not the officer.

Having a charge dimissed / declined to prosecute does not imply criminal wrong doing or a civil rights violation by the officer. What occurs is the weighing of all available evidence, seeing all the sides of the story, and then deciding if Justice would be served by going forward.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 09:00 AM
link   
At what point can you envoke the local castle laws and shoot and kill the armed man approaching you on your property while you film him?

In Minnesota, you technically could have killed the cop when he was on your property within 10 meters of yourself since he was armed if you feared for your safety.

Don't think for a second I wouldn't fire.



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 09:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kitilani
I guess you completely missed the irony in being an ATS member and then so authoritatively explaining what happened somewhere before the camera started rolling. How is it that you "know what you are talking about?" Again. Right, someone else told you what you know.


Care to point out where I stated so authoritatively what occured prior to the camera footage. You really should read and quit seeing what you want while ignoring the rest. As far as knowing what im talking about, I do. If you dont beleive me, thats not my problem.

If you and some others actually took the time to pull the laws in question and read them, then follow up those laws with any attached case law, then you might have the answers as well.

Also, you seem to kepp making the same comment about me not knowing what im talking about. If that is so, then please provide the information that shows im wrong. Also, please provide the names of the people that you are falsely accusing me of getting info from.


Originally posted by Kitilani
Did not really have a question. I am just in awe of the people around here that know exactly what happened at times and places they were not present. I just find that fascinating.


Yeah that does seem to be a problem that you and some others have in this thread. Unless your insinuating that the leos in this thread dont know, and everyone else who is not leo does know? Please clarify that for me.

The issues I poiint out with other peoples answers / comments etc is based on how the law works.
In the post above I gave 2 examples and showed how the process can work with those examples. The example can be applied to this case as well.
Having a charge dimissed / decline to prosecute does not make the Officers actions illegal, nor does it violate the ladies civil rights.

If you shoot someone who is walking towards you with a gun in their hand, you committed murder.
If you shoot someone who is walking towards you with nothing in their hand, you committed murder.

The difference between the 2? Both scenarios allow for the arrest of the person. The actions by both meet all state criteria to meet the charge requirements.

The first example contains a mitigating circumstance, namely the gun and the actions of him walking towards you. No charges would be filed since it would be self defense (justifiable Homicide).
The second example would go forward with the prosecution because the actions of the shooter were disproportionate based on the circumstances. No immediate threat.

Thats my argument in this thread.
edit on 28-6-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 09:14 AM
link   
reply to post by gps777
 


You miss the point of my arguments.

Yes, people are stuck on a non issue because they dont understand how the law works. Weve tried to explain it over and over, and you guys refuse to accept it.

Dismissal of charges does not make the officers actions illegal, nor does it violate her civil rights. Why do you and others have such an issue accepting that? How come when we point stuff out to clarify, that you and others just ignore it and continue with the same verbal assault on the topic?

Are you guys not intrested in the truth or how the laws work? Or is it because the info underminds your argument, so you just choose to ignore it. Or is it because the clarification is coming from law enforcement, and your inclination is to just ignore any and all law enforcement because you stereotype?



posted on Jun, 28 2011 @ 09:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by gps777
I`ve since been notified that there is the new thread running... www.abovetopsecret.com... on the out come of the case.

And in reading a couple of pages now realise why Xcathdra appoligized from THIS post in the above thread link.


Originally posted by Xcathdra

I said in the other thread that if the charges are dropped I would appologize. However, I still believe she was in the wrong. Not because she was recording, but because of her proximity to the officers and what was going on.



So I can hardly call that an apology rather than just sticking to that little word.


Why, because I appologized and then stated I felt the PA was incorrect? I was not aware that I couldnt agree with the decision to dismiss the charges.

You do understand that people charged with the same crime, with one of those charges having a mitigating circumstance, can result in charges being dropped for one, and prosecuted for another.

Since you seem big on research do me a favor.

If you think I am absolutely wrong, then please provide sources to support that accusation.
edit on 28-6-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
143
<< 43  44  45    47  48  49 >>

log in

join