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.

 

Case Dismissed Against Woman Arrested While Videotaping Police

page: 4
83
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Lemon.Fresh
 


As I said, a dismissal of the charge doesnt automatically create a false arrest. You and a bunch of toher people are making leaps of logic based on a lack of understanding of the law.

A decline to prosecute does not mean the officer broke the law. Speaking of brick walls...

The qualified immunity you are talking about has attachments. The officer has to be in violation of local state or federal law, or departmental policy, to lose his qualified immunity. I know your view is she didnt break the law, but as an officer you apparently refuse to accept the fact that its not based on 20/20 hindsight, but the offciers actions and perceptions at the moment.

If your neighbor across the street has a camera out front that catches part of your yard in its view. From that view we see you gunning down a person for what looks like no apprent reason, how would you react to people who were not even present telling you you were not within the law, and that your actions were that of a coward, and not someone exercising self defense or common sense?

Your argument is going to be - you werent there. The video doesnt show the entire story, etc etc etc.

Has it not occured to you that its possible the people on the block decided to screw the cop over by repeating the same story, regardless if the facts are correct or not? If thats the case, as the PA would you go forward with the charge, knowing that every person you call could lie on the stand, putting you into the situation of being forced to file additional perjury charges against those people.

Or would you dimiss the citation and just move on?

What part of innocent until proven guilty in a court of law do you not understand?
edit on 27-6-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)

edit on 27-6-2011 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 04:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bob Sholtz
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


how was she interfering? video taping him from her own property? that's illegal now? sounds more like the police officer didn't want to be taped by a citizen, so he arrested her, knowing he wouldn't really be punished. he had no probable cause or evidence.


Did you know that a police officer can write you a ticket for "unsafe speed" for doing 40 in a 40?



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 04:47 PM
link   
reply to post by CobraCommander
 


no didn't know that. does it have something to do with road conditions like rain? i'm not surprised. apparently if you're in uniform you can get away with anything, as long as you "believe" you did the right thing.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 04:48 PM
link   
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...



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 04:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bob Sholtz
reply to post by CobraCommander
 


no didn't know that. does it have something to do with road conditions like rain? i'm not surprised. apparently if you're in uniform you can get away with anything, as long as you "believe" you did the right thing.


That is the whole problem with our current justice system and modern policing, it had been reduced to utter arbitrariness thanks to the encyclopedic volumes of statutes.

When people say that police can do whatever they want, yeah, pretty much. There's an app for that.

EDIT to add: And this is why I am against it every time police are given new powers. Like the right to continue an interrogation without your lawyer, even after you have asked for one. Which basically nullifies your right to a lawyer at all when in police custody.
edit on 27-6-2011 by CobraCommander because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 05:39 PM
link   
reply to post by anon72
 


Excellent, now is the time for her to counter-sue and make an example out of that cop.

Sue for harassment, false imprisonment, anything you can think of.... Show them that we will not just stand there and roll over..... We will not be pushed around illegally.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 05:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Manhater
 


with what standing in her yard? thats clown shoes level insanity if she had had a camera mounted out side her house set to record or stream events could they have arrested her for that? this is insane if shes on her property she can do what she wants as long as shes not threatening people or being a safty risk,glad she got off on this and hopefully the cops get fired and get sued by this nice lady,get your film makers lisence and film everything and anything it might just save your life some day or in her case get her out of jail because a jackbooted control freak couldnt take the fact that some one didnt do exactly as he commanded so he had to violate her rights and arrest her



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by THE_PROFESSIONAL
 


i dont know how it works in her state but for me when i was arrested for something i wasent convicted of they had to give me my dna finger prints and my Property back(federally illegal property) so she might not be in the system but thats how it worked for me in ca and this was a while ago....so dont just take my word on it



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 05:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Manhater
I am pretty sure, we will see her again. I think she should of been charged or at least have a fine.
edit on 27-6-2011 by Manhater because: (no reason given)



What?Why? She didn't even do anything wrong...... Which is why the case got thrown out, she violated no laws.


So.... Why should she be in trouble



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 05:57 PM
link   
reply to post by CobraCommander
 


There was a warrant for OJ's arrest. It was done properly and legally.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 06:01 PM
link   
reply to post by anon72
 


" She was charged with obstructing of governmental administration."


How in da World was this Woman Charged in the first place Obstructing Govermental Administrations by Filming them on her Own Private Property on a Routine Traffic Stop ? Talk about a Lame Excuse to Harrass a Citizen in that Town ! Geez......

It's Only a Matter of time before a Group of Citizens get together , call themselves the People's Paparazzi , and decide to Videotape the Police All around the Country En Masse as a form of Protest against the Violation of their First Ammendment Rights . Can you Imagine Hundreds or Thousands of People Videotaping Cops every day they are seen somewhere ? LOL , Good Luck Arresting them All Coppers ! ...........

edit on 27-6-2011 by Zanti Misfit because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra

Originally posted by butcherguy
reply to post by nerbot
 



And who picks up the bill for all the wasted resources and possible payout? Taxpayers.

That's right.

It should come out of the arresting officer's paycheck.



Explain why it should? The officer did not violate the law. You guys seem confused on that point.


I'm not confused one bit. The reason it should come out of his check is because he was just being an A-hole, who abused his authority in order to show the lady who was "in charge." He KNEW that she was not violating any law, but because she stood up for her civil rights and refused to stop taping he wanted to show her he could MAKE her stop.

At no time was she anywhere near enough to the officers to "interfere with government administration." As evidenced in the video, the police officer was shining a bright light on her so it should have been obvious to the officer that she was in her pajamas, and holding nothing but a camera. If he still felt threatened by a little girl in her PJs, then he is a coward who has no business wearing a uniform in the first place. He even said that he was arresting her for not following his (unlawful) order.

As noted in the police chief's statement, the officer's conduct "raise(s) issues with respect to the conduct of Rochester Police Officers that require an internal review. A review into both matters has been initiated." For a police chief to say even THAT, indicates that was was done to Ms. Good was a terrible breech of her civil liberties.


A subsequent post by Xcath - Again I find some of the comments in this thread humerous. People scream about the ladies rights, and how those rights were violated, how she is innocent until proven guilty etc etc etc. Yet I see absolutely no one making the same argument for the officer. All I see is he should be fired, sued etc etc etc. Is he not innocent until proven guilty in a court of law? Or do citizens get preferential treatment over the Police in the minds of the people in the thread?


The police have a crappy job to do for even crappier pay. I've said many times here and elsewhere that I have nothing but the utmost respect and admiration for those officers who do their duty with honor and integrity; however, those officers who use (abuse) their authority to violate the civil liberties of the very people they are paid to protect deserve nothing but scorn and a pink slip.

Perhaps if he has to shell out $50 of his paycheck every week for the rest of his tenure as a LEO (I think he should be fired,) he'll think twice before violating the rights of another law-abiding citizen. It might even serve as a warning to other officers who think that just because they wear a gun and badge they can do whatever they like.

I don't envy LEOs, not one bit. They perform a dangerous job on a daily basis, BUT that doesn't give them the right to violate the law themselves.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 06:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by Xcathdra, why did he take the time to tell her to back of multiple times? He could of just as easily nipped it in the bud at the begining of the video instead of playing point - counter point with her.


He didn't because of the camera. He had to concoct/trump up charges against her.It took a minute or two to come up with something he thought he could get away with. He was not all together stupid. If she didn't have the camera it would have been a completely different story.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 06:10 PM
link   
Personally, I think it is disgusting that some of you continue to defend this cop who clearly violated an innocent woman's rights. I am done discussing this issue. Some people will never understand the true meaning of liberty and freedom. See you in another thread.
edit on 6/27/2011 by Sparky63 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 06:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


beause most of the people see the cops actions as limiting her rights why should he have the right to not have people stand near him acting peacefully she didnt want that cop to pull over that guy infront of her house probaly but she didnt have a say so how come the cop gets the special treatment and if you realy think the officer who had what 3-4 other officers there with him was in fear of what looked like a 130 pound woman standing in her yard watching the events unfolding infront of her with out her say in the matter at all.so to the private property comment so just because one person acted crazy on there own propety ALL citizens should be suspected of being killers or capible of such......sounds kinda like our opinion were tired of the illegal acts of police not only being tolerated but often encouraged and so we are being taught by police to FEAR all of them as being corrupt murdering army in blue.see my view is this if your doing nothing wrong or embarassing why are you worried about being filmed if your doing nothing wrong you should encourage people to tape your actions as a police officer that way you can be vindicated if any one says you planted drugs or the like on a suspect it wont matter what they say because YOU will have it on tape and you wont have to worry about alegations of racisim or planting evidence.if police stopped training there officers to instill fear into any one and every one people might react to them better and more importantly not all humans react to fear the same way,for example say you run into some one whos not afraid of dying and who realy truely wants to do officers harm you think hes gonna care that some citizns fear you?no hes gonna do what that crazy guy did who walked into the police station with a 12 gauge and start shooting now all that fear you have been traiend to instill in every day people would not have effected this situation as this was one man wanting to die and not careing about who he took with him your fear avails you not it looses you the respect of the masses and that is far more important to have then them fear you

i understand cops have a diffuclt job and its statisticly impossible for ALL of them to be bad and corrupt and honestly i dont quite blame most of them for being wary on the job its how they stay alive.sorry for the rant i have just been harrased in the past until i got one of them on tape saying he was gonna plant evidence on me since that i havent been picked on by the police since so if its legal to record it do it but rember try not to be a donkey when recording them otherwise it just makes u look bad



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 06:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by navy_vet_stg3
I am a supporter of law enforcement (in general), and I believe that the vast majority of them are good people, doing a crappy job for a crappy salary, and trying to do it to the best of their ability. However, there is a segment of police that think they're above the law and that they are "better" than the civilian population. That being said, I am extremely happy that this woman had the charges dropped, and I really hope there is some type of disciplinary action taken against the officer.

I understand that a police officer has the right to come home to his/her family at the end of a shift, and I also know that cop's don't lose. Those are 2 fundamental truths that us civilians need to understand. Police will protect themselves, and yes, you may have the "right" to do whatever it is you're doing, but you also need to understand that things could go downhill for you rather quickly if you don't do what you're told. Now, don't get me wrong, I'm not saying to be a lemming, but there are some (not necessarily this one) circumstances where you "can legally" do something, but by doing so, you're going to have to pay the piper, so to speak. It's no different than crossing a crosswalk. Yes, you can walk out into traffic, and they're supposed to stop, but are you going to risk life and limb to prove a point? Not me. I'll make damn sure it's safe to cross. The same thing with the cops. Yeah, I may be filming in my front yard, but what exactly am I out to "prove" by continuing to film? Am I intentionally baiting the cops? We'd scream "entrapment" if it were the other way around.

As for the cops not losing, they don't. You may get one, or two of them, but in the end, you're going to be a slab of meat on a stainless steel table. So, remember these truths, because whether they're right or wrong from a physiological standpoint, they are accurate from an outcome standpoint. But, like I said, I'm glad this turned out well for the woman, and I hope the officer learns a lesson over this, and that he goes on to become a better cop, serving THE PEOPLE, and not his own ego.


That is a pretty disgusting synopsis. You are pretty much saying that even if Cops are doing wrong, we should ignore it or they will get us in the end. So you better let Cops do what they want and listen to everything they say? And if they do always get us in the end how you can posssibly say that most Cops are good people? If most Cops were good people it wouldn't end that way ..it would end with proper justice.

The first time Cops look away from fellow officer's behavior, they stop being good people in my book. 100% or nothing.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 06:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Xcathdra
 


You're right. The video leaves out 3 hours of things that aren't relevent. Because the video isn't 4 hours long, it's irrelevent.


I saw a cop meassuring a car tire from a curb being 12 and a half inches away and thus justifying a ticket.


That might be the most absurb thing I've ever seen. Furthermore, you're arguement of claiming "you weren't there" is getting a bit tired.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 06:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by gimme_some_truth
reply to post by anon72
 


Excellent, now is the time for her to counter-sue and make an example out of that cop.

Sue for harassment, false imprisonment, anything you can think of.... Show them that we will not just stand there and roll over..... We will not be pushed around illegally.


Sadly, she will lose. Nothing he did was illegal. She arrested her for a valid charge, or what he believed were genuine grounds for such a charge.

If he had said anything about her taping them, or arresting her for taping them, she would have him by the balls. He didn't. In fact, she engaged the police verbally before she started filming. Depending on what she said, that alone is grounds for an obstruction charge. You can't interfere with police duties.

Her major mistake was saying ANYTHING to the police.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 06:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sparky63
reply to post by CobraCommander
 


There was a warrant for OJ's arrest. It was done properly and legally.


This arrest was perfectly legal too. His warrant was his PC. I wouldn't go so far as to call it "proper." But then again, I don't think it's proper for the police to NOT respond to a 911 call pleading for help when a gang of rapists breaks into your home either. But the fact is that the police are not required by law to respond to calls for help or to intervene when they see a crime in progress.



posted on Jun, 27 2011 @ 07:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by Zanti Misfit
reply to post by anon72
 


" She was charged with obstructing of governmental administration."


How in da World was this Woman Charged in the first place Obstructing Govermental Administrations by Filming them on her Own Private Property on a Routine Traffic Stop ? Talk about a Lame Excuse to Harrass a Citizen in that Town ! Geez......

It's Only a Matter of time before a Group of Citizens get together , call themselves the People's Paparazzi , and decide to Videotape the Police All around the Country En Masse as a form of Protest against the Violation of their First Ammendment Rights . Can you Imagine Hundreds or Thousands of People Videotaping Cops every day they are seen somewhere ? LOL , Good Luck Arresting them All Coppers ! ...........

edit on 27-6-2011 by Zanti Misfit because: (no reason given)


Her filming and standing in her lawn were aggravating factors of the initial crime. She verbally interfered with the police conducting a traffic stop before she began filming.







 
83
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join