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.

 

Baltimore police can't arrest people who record them, so they bust them for "loitering" instead (

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 13 2012 @ 02:50 PM
link   
So, new orders were issued to the Baltimore police that they CANNOT arrest people for recording them. So to get around that they are arresting the people who record them for loitering (just hanging out in the area with no defined purpose, other than recording them). This is ridiculous of course, this is where our tax money goes, this is what the police feel is a priority. When it is a priority to discourage people from recording you then it is very obvious there is a problem. It implies over anything that they don't want to be recorded because they aren't doing right.



It is not illegal to record them, everyone needs to try to make it a point to get out their camera/phones when they see police action of any sort. You see the cops pulling someone over on the street, record them. They stop you, have a passenger record them or just set the phone with the audio on in the seat.

I am not suggesting this to get anyone in trouble, or to cause the cops anymore of a hassle, but because it is for your protection. They have cameras constantly running for a reason, to protect them. You deserve the same right. Especially with all the abuses of power that have been occurring in the last few years. Cops are not what they used to be.

Here is the source for the Baltimore Police' new orders - HERE

And here is the story about cops making arrests for loitering to discourage people from recording them:

A fellow named Scott Cover noticed a group of Baltimore Police standing over a man handcuffed on the ground. He remembered reading that morning that the Baltimore Police department had told its officers they couldn't arrest people for taking photos or videos of them while they worked, so Cover pulled out his cell phone and began taping. One of the officers spotted Cover and order to him to leave, because he was "loitering." He argued with her a bit, but started to walk away, taping the officers has he left. That wasn't good enough for the officer, so she stopped him and asked for his ID. The video ends there.


From BoingBoing.net
edit on 13-2-2012 by GogoVicMorrow because: to add video.




posted on Feb, 13 2012 @ 02:58 PM
link   
Why can't the offender simply use as his defense that he wasn't loitering, but exercising his freedom as an American to practice the time old profession of citizen journalism? Loitering would suggest nothing is happening or being done by standing there. Like a crack head thinking up new ways to score more.. How can that be the case when someone is filming a clear event of public interest???

WHO it's of interest to is where that freedom part comes in. It's NONE of their BUSINESS. The fact an event is happening (Police activity) and a citizen is recording it for their own reasons..should be plenty to put the loitering charge to the test and BURY it!

edit on 13-2-2012 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2012 @ 03:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


I have no idea. I am sure that the judge throws all these cases out, but it discourages people from recording because they don't want to be taken in. I was almost arrested earlier this year and I suppose the cop intended on arresting me on a charge similar to loitering. My friends were talking to the police because one of them was very (VERY)drunk (this was new years eve/morning) and his wife was driving him to the hospital. They cops called the ambulance even though she was saying they could follow her to the hospital and she couldn't afford the ambulance. She was screaming for them to just let them go and I was standing by waiting for whatever was going to happen to happen because I was D.D. I commented to someone else in our party that the cop was "being a prick" because he was. He stopped doing his job, got in my face and said, and I quote "Really? You know, I am a prick, and I am the authority here, so unless you want to go to jail shut the hell up." Of course I was very curious what he thought he could take me for as I was completely sober and the designated driver and they were dealing with my friends.

I suspect they are high on their own authority just as that cop said to me and those were his honest to god real words, verbatim.

That coupled with the lower IQ's that are now sought out when they are hiring officers. I would actually love to know how much the average IQ of American cops has dropped in the last 50 years.
edit on 13-2-2012 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 13 2012 @ 04:42 PM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


Loitering is usually accompanied with a qualification of some sort, like loitering with intent. I see that Baltimore is using, (at least) what is really possible trespass, (standing on steps) as a form of loiter IOW, an excuse to stop you filming, so stay on the pavement and be mobile with your mobile/cell at all times if you are using it, and not be in a gang would help.



posted on Feb, 13 2012 @ 05:04 PM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 

Geeze... That is an absurd story of your experience and shows how absurd the Police are getting. It seems the mentality of absolute authority has shifted from one that is necessary to do their job to what drives their thoughts and decisions with all they do in contact with the public. Perhaps that is where a Police Force becomes a Threat to the public rather than a service we all need?

My Father had a saying he'd tell me growing up and he lived it during his career as a cop. Contempt of Court is petty and trivial. That simply upsets a judge and costs money. Contempt of Cop, now that is a whole different matter. That gets people hurt or killed and has lead to more than one lengthy jail sentence on something that never would have been known without the initial contempt problem.
It isn't right...but he sure wasn't the only cop living with that attitude and this was back in the mid 90's and before. It sounds like a quaint way of Policing compared to the garbage these days.



posted on Feb, 13 2012 @ 05:32 PM
link   
Loitering by law in maryland does not apply unless there is a business entrance or something nearby. He is standing in a street corner. So the cops screwed up there.



posted on Feb, 13 2012 @ 05:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Wrabbit2000
 


Yep. We have had a lot of problems with the police here. A bunch were busted and fired a few years ago for all having an affair and giving/using drugs with one woman. There have also been experiences with cops flirting with my girlfriend and pulling her over unnecessarily to do so. Another cop pseudo stalking a female friend of mine that turned him down, and so forthe. That's the bad thing about smaller cities. Cops remember you.

Also, one of my friends dad was killed by two cops in the neighboring city (where my new years cop incident happened). They shot him twice in the head, and he was unarmed. They had to award his family money over that.



posted on Feb, 13 2012 @ 05:44 PM
link   
reply to post by smurfy
 


I know, but I think they are stretching the definition. They are getting people on public ground.







 
5

log in

join