Hidden camera footage of police officers hindering citizens who try to file complaints

page: 2
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 09:45 AM
link   
reply to post by this_is_who_we_are
 


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.

Get real.
edit on 2-3-2012 by areyouserious2010 because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 09:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by areyouserious2010
reply to post by this_is_who_we_are
 


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.


The complaint will never get to Internal Affairs.

Before The Law
by Franz Kafka



Before The Law

Before the law stands a doorkeeper. To this doorkeeper there comes a man from the country and prays for admittance to the Law. But the doorkeeper says that he cannot grant admittance at the moment. The man thinks it over and asks if he will be allowed in later. "It is possible," says the doorkeeper, "but not at the moment." Since the gate stands open as usual, and the doorkeeper steps to one side, the man stoops to peer through the gateway into the interior. Observing that, the doorkeeper laughs and says: "If you are so drawn to it, just try to go in despite my veto. But take note: I am powerful. And I am only the least of the doorkeepers. From hall to hall there is one doorkeeper after another, each more powerful than the last. The third doorkeeper is already so terrible that even I cannot bear to look at him." These are difficulties the man from the country has not expected; the Law, he thinks, should surely be accessible at all times and to everyone, but as he now takes a closer look at the doorkeeper in his fur coat, with his big sharp nose and long thin, black Tartar beard, he decides that it is better to wait until he gets permission to enter. The doorkeeper gives him a stool and lets him sit down at one side of the door. There he sits for days and years. He makes many attempts to be admitted, and wearies the doorkeeper by his importunity. The doorkeeper frequently has little interviews with him, asking him questions about his home and many other things, but the questions are put indifferently, as great lords put them, and always finish with the statement that he cannot be let in yet. The man, who has furnished himself with many things for his journey, sacrifices all he has, however valuable to the doorkeeper. The doorkeeper accepts everything, but always with the remark: "I am only taking it to keep you from thinking you have omitted anything." During these many years the man fixes his attention almost continuously on the doorkeeper. He forgets the other doorkeepers, and this first one seems to him the sole obstacle preventing access to the Law. He curses his bad luck, in his early years boldly and loudly; later, as he grows old, he only grumbles to himself. He becomes childish, and since in his yearlong comtemplation of the doorkeeper he has come to know even the fleas in his fur collar, he begs the fleas to help him and to change the doorkeeper's mind. At length his eyesight begins to fail, and he does not know whether the world is darker or whether his eyes are only deceiving him. Yet in his darkness he is now aware of a radiance that streams inextinguishably from the gatway of the Law. Now he has not very long to live. Before he dies, all his experiences in these long years gather themselves in his head to one point, a question he has not yet asked the doorkeeper. He waves him nearer since he can no longer raise his stiffening body. The doorkeeper has to bend low toward him, for the difference in height between them has altered much to the man's disadvantage. "What do you want to know now?" asks the doorkeeper; "you are insatiable." "Everyone strives to reach the Law," says the man, "so how does it happen that for all these many years no one but myself has ever begged for admittance?" The doorkeeper recognizes the man has reached his end, and, to let his failing senses catch the words, roars in his ear: "No one else could ever be admitted here, since this gate was made only for you. I am now going to shut it."
- Translated by Willa and Edwin Muir
www.endeneu.com...
edit on 1/9/2011 by this_is_who_we_are because: typos



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 09:59 AM
link   
If you ask for a complaint form they have to give you one. It is none of their business of the nature of the complaint, the officer(s) being complained about, and you do not have to give up your ID or even identify yourself.

The smart thing for a legitimate complaint would be
1. Get the form
2. Fill it out and have someone with legal experience look it over/edit it.
3. Make a copy for your records
4. Send the form back through the mail via certified letter so they have sign for it(they can't say the lost the form)

While I still believe good cops far out number bad cops I fear that gap is closing and there are many local departments that are corrupt from the top down. They do make it difficult to file a complaint against them and look to protect their own, even when their own are bad cops and they know it.



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 10:03 AM
link   
reply to post by this_is_who_we_are
 



All I can say is good luck. When you're outnumbered what can you do, really? The deck is stacked, the game rigged. But of course we already knew this.

How was anyone in the video outnumbered? In the majority of the video, it was ONE person talking to ONE police officer.

So, asking questions as to who the person making the complaint is and what occurred that they want to complain about is stacking the deck or rigging the game? Stop being ridiculous.

You want a system where you walk into a police station and are anonymously handed a form to make a complaint against a police officer. False complaints and the people that have made them have made it necessary for the process to be changed. Dont be mad at the police, be made at the people who lack the integrity to file a complaint against the police.



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 10:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Starchild23
 



In any case, of course the officers will stick together. They are a brotherhood against "crime", and they have to have each others backs.

It's a dog eat dog world...when they have the guns and the training, why in the world would they turn on each other? Best to beat down on the civilians and divide the spoils.

If the guy walked into the station and said, "I would like to make a complaint against an officer," and the officer immediately told him we will not listen to your complaint, get out of the station or immediately arrested the person upon stating they wanted to make a complaint, then I would see where you are coming from.

That is not the case in this situation. The guy stated he wanted to make a complaint and was presented with SIMPLE questions. The reason he wanted to take a form is because there was NO complaint in the first place. This is exactly why the police ask these questions in the first place.



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 10:15 AM
link   
reply to post by SunnyDee
 



Without getting into details, I did nothing wrong, but I was verbally abused for a half hour, more than anyone in my life has ever abused me.

Really? We are supposed to just believe your story at face value? Get real.


I wrote a long detailed letter, that I was prepared to take to the Sheriff's station, but then decided not to. I looked at the statistics of law enforcement that ever are reprimanded from complaints and it was only about 3% of the complaints filed.

I figured I would be targeted with stops and tickets since the sheriff worked in my area, and didn't want to put myself and my family through that.

Sad, sad, state of affairs in this area.

So, because you looked up some arbitrary statistics and irrationally feared you would be the target of some conspiracy you decided not to file a complaint?

Maybe it was because you realized that maybe the officer was not so far out of line?

This is not the "intestinal fortitude" our country was founded on. If someone REALLY wrongs you, I would hope you would have the determination to actually DO something about it.



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 10:17 AM
link   
reply to post by jerryznv
 



Public servants...not even close..."you can't complain..."!

Watch the video. Not one time did the police initially say "you can't complain." They asked simple questions and when the guy did not want to answer the simple questions, they ended the encounter.



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 10:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Britguy
 



It is not the business of the desk officer, or any other officer for that matter, to question a member of the public who wants to file a complaint.

Maybe not a desk officer, but it absolutely is within a supervisor's right to ask SIMPLE questions to a person making a complaint. That is what police supervisors are there for.

Or any other officer? What do you think Internal Affairs Detectives are?


They are not there to vet complaints against the police and to try to do so is another form of intimidation.

Not one officer attempted to "vet" the complaint or intimidate anyone. The questions asked were very basic and simple and when the encounter turned into pointless baiting of the police in an attempt to get a poor reaction, the guy was told to leave.

Also, the person attempting to file the complaint is under no obligation to identify themselves or tell the desk officer what the complaint entails. It is NONE of their business.

If there is a complaint to be made, the department wants to know about it. In order to ensure the complaint is followed up on, it is necessary to identify who is making the complaint or who the complaint form is issued to. That guy came to the police to make a complaint. It absolutely is their business to know what the complaint is and who is making it.



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 10:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by areyouserious2010

Also, the person attempting to file the complaint is under no obligation to identify themselves or tell the desk officer what the complaint entails. It is NONE of their business.

If there is a complaint to be made, the department wants to know about it. In order to ensure the complaint is followed up on, it is necessary to identify who is making the complaint or who the complaint form is issued to. That guy came to the police to make a complaint. It absolutely is their business to know what the complaint is and who is making it.


I agree, in the video the guy doesn't have a leg to stand on and is just trying to create a scene.

However those who have legitimate complaints often get stonewalled when trying to file a complaint. I should have added that you should go to the police department with a lawyer*. When the complaint is filed whoever is making the complaint will be identified on the complaint form so IDing and telling the desk officer the details of the complaint is not necessary and could even give the department a heads up so they can make up a good counter story to cover their butts.

*not everyone can afford a lawyer so the poor will have a hard time finding justice when they are victims of the police
edit on 2-3-2012 by jrod because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 10:39 AM
link   
reply to post by this_is_who_we_are
 



The complaint will never get to Internal Affairs.

That's it? That is your argument?

You are correct, this complaint will never get to Internal Affairs because the guy never had a complaint in the first place and was simply baiting the police to make a video. You are correct, it will never get to Internal Affairs because the guy refused to answer the basic questions required to file a complaint. Not because the police in this video refused to listen or take the complaint.

You're quote is ridiculous as well. If the guy mistrusts the police as much as you, why would he walk into the police station to file the complaint? Why would he not contact Internal Affairs directly? And if you dont trust Internal Affairs, because they are police officers, why not contact the State's Attorney's Office directly and not speak to the police at all? Your copied banter about a "gate keeper" is simply someone with a defeatist attitude.



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 10:42 AM
link   
reply to post by areyouserious2010
 


Are you a crank? Or a PR rep for some LEO agency? What the deuce!

That was unfair of me. And yes, that's my argument.
edit on 3/2/2012 by this_is_who_we_are because: strike, added comment



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 10:49 AM
link   
reply to post by jrod
 


I agree with you.

If someone has a legitimate complaint, do whatever is necessary to ensure the complaint is given the attention it deserves. That entails answering basic questions to file your complaint in the first place, contacting Internal Affairs directly or, if not satisfied with the response, contacting the State's Attorney's Office directly.

The lawyer issue? If you have a legitimate complaint where the department could be sued, a lawyer may agree to take their fee from the money won in the lawsuit or settlement. If the complaint is not serious enough to warrant a lawsuit, then you are probably safe not consulting an attorney if you cannot afford one.



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 11:00 AM
link   
reply to post by this_is_who_we_are
 



Are you a crank? Or a PR rep for some LEO agency? What the deuce!

That was unfair of me. And yes, that's my argument.

Nope, I am just a level headed person using reason and logic to show how you are overreacting to this video.

I am showing you that this is not "proof positive" that the police are seeking to squash all complaints to protect themselves.

I am showing everyone else that this video is just a guy baiting the police into a negative encounter by refusing to answer BASIC questions.

I am showing the flip side to the argument and using simple reasoning to show why it is necessary to ask BASIC questions instead of simply issuing a form anonymously.

I am also showing that if he mistrusted the police so much as to refuse to answer basic questions, why walk into the police station in the first place? Why not take another avenue to file a complaint?

I am showing that there are other avenues to file a complaint against the police other than walking into a police station. Why would there be other avenues to file a complaint against the police if the police were seriously attempting to curtail ALL complaints against them?



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 12:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by areyouserious2010

I am showing everyone else that this video is just a guy baiting the police into a negative encounter by refusing to answer BASIC questions.

I am showing the flip side to the argument and using simple reasoning to show why it is necessary to ask BASIC questions instead of simply issuing a form anonymously.


BASIC questions that police might ask should be limited to "do you understand the process you must follow?', or"if you have any questions, please feel free to contact Internal Affairs at this number." Anything more poses the risk of tainting the investigation of the allegations made.

There is no "requirement" that complaint forms be tracked to assure all complaints are addressed, most especially by frontline or supervisory personnel. That is the job of IA. If the officer is alerted to the fact a complaint is to be filed against him, it affords him time to "get his ducks in a row", or worse, to intimidate the complainant. Take foreknowledge out of the equation, and the officers are better protected from allegations of witness or evidence tampering.

Even in most prisons, supervisors and officers are forbidden from becoming involved until IA has decided to proceed with an investigation. This protects the officer and inmate. Most IA investigator's will agree this is the most prudent way to maintain the integrity of an investigation. Worked for me, and still works for most in this field.

The officers in these clips usurped the authority and power of their positions, plain and simple.



posted on Mar, 2 2012 @ 02:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by areyouserious2010
reply to post by jerryznv
 



Public servants...not even close..."you can't complain..."!

Watch the video. Not one time did the police initially say "you can't complain." They asked simple questions and when the guy did not want to answer the simple questions, they ended the encounter.


You are correct sir...I used quotations as an inference to not being able to obtain a complaint form!

He should not have had to answer any questions...simple or otherwise...but that is my opinion and nothing more than that...you have yours...and I have mine!



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 10:22 AM
link   
reply to post by retiredTxn
 



BASIC questions that police might ask should be limited to "do you understand the process you must follow?', or"if you have any questions, please feel free to contact Internal Affairs at this number." Anything more poses the risk of tainting the investigation of the allegations made.

Again, the questions are asked to figure how to refer the complaint. If the guy said I am "so and so" and I am filing a complaint against officer "so and so" because he wrote me a ticket and I dont believe I was speeding then the supervisor can tell them that they have to settle that matter in court because the department cannot handle that complaint or do anything about the ticket.

If the guy said I am "so and so" and I am filing a complaint against officer "so and so" because he yelled at me or had a poor attitude, then the supervisor can proceed to handle that complaint because, ultimately, if it is an officer under his command then he, or another direct supervisor, is the one that is going to handle it anyways

If the guy said I am "so and so" and I am filing a complaint against officer "so and so" because he beat me up or stole my property or something more serious then they can say ok here is the form please fill it out and return it to Internal Affairs. That supervisor will then notify Internal Affairs in writing as to the nature of the complaint so they will be expecting it. If the person does not return the complaint, then most likely they will be contacted by Internal Affairs because they WANT to know about a complaint of such serious nature. The supervisor will not go into detail or try to talk the person out of the complaint.

There is no "requirement" that complaint forms be tracked to assure all complaints are addressed, most especially by frontline or supervisory personnel. That is the job of IA. If the officer is alerted to the fact a complaint is to be filed against him, it affords him time to "get his ducks in a row", or worse, to intimidate the complainant. Take foreknowledge out of the equation, and the officers are better protected from allegations of witness or evidence tampering.

There absolutely is if the complaint is going to be made at the patrol level. This ensures that the complaint actually makes it to Internal Affairs and is not simply thrown in the trash after it is filled out. In most jurisdictions, the complaint FORMS are reserved for complaints of serious nature and not ALL complaints.

And you are correct, the supervisor should not go into detail with complaints that are "serious" in nature. But, they have to know that the complaint is serious in nature to issue the form. The guy in the video was not asked for details he was just asked what the complaint is about. And he refused to answer.

The officers in these clips usurped the authority and power of their positions, plain and simple.

No, the supervisors asked BASIC questions and the guy refused to answer them.

Answer me this, if the guy in the video had all the concerns you did, why would he walk into the police station to make the complaint? Why would he not have called Internal Affairs directly? If he mistrusted the police so much, why not go to the State's Attorney's Office directly to file a complaint and not talk to the police at all?





new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 1   >>

log in

join