reply to post by mossme89
Ok, I dont know where to start.
First, the people making the video were obviously trying to get a reaction out of the police. I think it is safe to say that a person who riggs up a
hidden camera and walks into a police station to try to file a complaint is looking for a particular reaction and will do what they have to to find
it. Like being difficult to the point the police get mad and have a poor reaction.
Second, there was no "hindering" of anyone trying to make a complaint. The guy asked and the police responded with simple questions. There is
obviously a process that must be followed. No one was denied outright or told that they would not listen to their complaint.
I do not think it is out of line for a supervisor, which most of the police they were speaking to were, to ask a person to identify themselves. A
person cannot file a criminal complaint against another person in court anonymously, why should this be an different?
I also do not think it is out of line for the supervisor to ask which officer was involved. If you walk into County A's police station and you want
to complain about an officer from City B then you can be referred to the correct place to file a complaint.
I also do not think it is out of line for the supervisor to ask for a reader's digest version of what happened. This is so the supervisor knows how
to refer the complaint. If you go into a police station and complain because an officer wrote you a ticket and you disagree with it then there is no
complaint. That matter will have to handled in court. If you go into a police station and complain because an officer's attitude was poor, then the
supervisor will be the one to discipline the officer anyway. If the complaint is of a more serious nature, like brutality or other criminality, then
the case will be referred to Internal Affairs. Also, this cuts down on completely false complaints. It makes the person complaining recite the
incident from memory. That way, they can not go home and have all the time in the world to make up some story.
Third, most police department's complaint forms are for more serious matters and are tracked by Internal Affairs to ENSURE they are followed up on.
That is why it has to be documented as to who it is issued to and why they are making the complaint.
Fourth, an officer can sue a person if it is found that their brutality complaint is completely false. Believe it or not, it is a very bad experience
for a good police officer to be wrongly or falsely accused. Just like a regular person who is wrongly or falsely accused. If the complaint is found to
be COMPLETELY falsified then the person making the complaint is liable in civil and criminal court. That means that the officer CAN, but rarely do,
hold the person liable in civil court for mental anguish.
Fifth, there are other avenues to follow if you have a LEGITIMATE complaint and the police are not willing to listen (which is not the case in these
videos). You can contact Internal Affairs directly and not have to speak with supervisors at the patrol level, or you can contact the State's
Attorney's office directly and not have to speak with the police at all.
The truth is, in these videos there was most likely no complaint at all. It was a poor attempt to make a video and label it as exposing police
misconduct when really the guy just rigged a hidden camera and attempted to provoke a reaction from the police.