Police State? I Was Ticketed For Trying To Protect My Son From MSM

page: 1
14
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 04:00 AM
link   
A few months ago a young girl went missing that attended the same elementary school as my son. Although the girl apparently was taken from her home and not the school, for several tense days security on campus was nonetheless increased, many more parents came to personally pick their children up after class, and of course the media was everywhere.

First, the great news is that she was found out of state after about a week having been taken by her somewhat disillusioned mother. She was returned to her father and the last information any of us were given, she is a very well adjusted and courageous young lady having had this experience.

I was struck by the impressive manner in which the local community came together to support the family, each other, and begin a daily vigilance for every kid seen in any public area. In fact, before she was discovered and as I waited outside the home of one of my son’s friends to pick him up after they walked there together, I was quite unapologetically yet appropriately approached by a gentleman who must have been in his 70s or more potentially risking his life had I been the dastardly individual looking for easy children to prey upon. After the young girl was found, I would later make the effort to return to the inquisitive man’s home to thank him for watching out for my son’s safety and encourage him to be careful but not stop caring.

Two days before the girl was located I rode with my wife to pick our son up from school. The bell rings and I notice a local television news reported pop out of his vehicle with cameraman in tow so he could video the children as they left to go home. A near terror shot through me as I realized he could be advertising which kids went which direction, which kids did not have parents present to pick them up, which kids would be walking alone, and surely many more issues of concern I couldn’t immediately identify. I just believed he should have taken his stock footage of the school before it was over-run with all of the kid’s faces. When I saw his cameraman specifically following my son and his small personal ensemble of friends, I decided to ask him not to video the children for the reasons mentioned above. I also asked him if the school administration was aware he was there and had agreed to his videoing methods (I later found out from the principle he had specifically been told NOT to be there). I was told my son and I had no rights, I couldn’t interfere with his work, and he would record whatever he wanted to because he was on a public sidewalk therefore safe from prosecution because technically he was no on premises. Attorneys unanimously have assured me he is wrong in this regard, particularly when a child’s life could potentially be endangered, but it is not an uncommon argument for absolution in such situations.

When it became clear to me he intended to video my son and possibly advertise his routine along with that of his friends I became more insistent. At the reporter’s direction, the cameraman turned his camera towards me and I found myself less than thee to four inches away staring at my own reflection in it’s lens. The reporter began aggressively attacking my “obvious” effort to prevent him from doing his job. I asked them to move the camera. No. I insisted they move the camera, No. I then helped them move the camera out of my face. Not violently and not aggressively, but assertively.
I spent the next hour waiting for the police to come cite me for assault. They took too long, so I called and asked to leave if I gave them personal information and that was OK. A few weeks later I received the expected citation in the mail, and prepared to do battle. Then, a few weeks later, the real insult: I was served with papers that I was being sued for damages and personal injury.

???????

I am not a violent person, but I am substantially larger than either of the two accusers and my first thought was that if I had assaulted them they would have called an ambulance, not the police.

Bottom line, I will have to pay thousands of dollars to defend myself against another normally hidden aspect of the MSM’s flawed and selfish agenda. I suppose I may counter sue, but the attorneys have told me I should have sued first for more believability. The advice I have for my friends at ATS is this: if you ever try to defend you children from stooped TV reporters, be sure you make sure they are idiotic enough to videotape the entire incident by putting their camera in your face and then completely incriminating themselves in the process.




posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 04:07 AM
link   
Yea kind of a messed up situation but you were in the wrong.

They have the right to videotape in public places and you got in their face. Who's really going to watch the news to find out which way kids walk home? If that was their intention they would just simply stake out the school. You did kind of overreact a bit.

I hope it works out for you though.



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 04:41 AM
link   
This search might give you some ideas.

This quote is one result:


School Districts Protect Children

States and municipalities have the right to make their own laws regarding issues such as photographing children. School districts can restrict filming and photography on their grounds and the use of images without parental consent. However, some schools might not prohibit group photos if the photographer doesn't identify any of the children when he publishes them, or photos of certain extracurricular activities such as sporting events.


State Laws Are Changing

As of 2012, at least two states have considered legislation to make it illegal to photograph children without parental permission. Georgia passed a bill in 2010 that makes it illegal for anyone but a parent to photograph or videotape a child, but the law may be revised to specifically address registered sex offenders. New Jersey began working on a similar law in 2011.

Child Photography or Videotaping Consent Laws Are Changing



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 05:02 AM
link   
many years ago I was arrested for disorderly conduct and resisting arrest.

Basically I was a teenager in the wrong place at the wrong time with the local cops known who knew me and did not like me. I had to cop it sweet.

But the lawyer I had listened to me when I said "I know martial arts, I could have resisted if I wanted to, but I did not." and his advice at the time was not to mention that as it implies I could have had that intent.

Makes sense, and my advice is not to use that angle in your defence.

The legal system is bent. No doubt about it.

I'd have been probably just as pissed off as you in this case, the last thing anyone needs is their child to be the attention of some freak out there, and the world is full of them...



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 05:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Spookycolt
Who's really going to watch the news to find out which way kids walk home? If that was their intention they would just simply stake out the school. You did kind of overreact a bit.


What better an opportunity for a stalker or child hunter. What if someone was being paid for particular types of kid to kidnap, long blonde hair, short curly hair etc. This would be the perfect way to see who comes out of a particular school. They don't have to know which way they are heading home, the child might not even be going home at that point, but it DOES give the hunter a location within which to find this child. The rest would be just old fashioned leg work and hanging about to watch the movements of the chosen victim until an opportunity presented itself and the hunter could close in for the taking.

It is for this reason that I don't even let the school my kids go to take their photographs/video of them if it is to be seen outwith the school building, and especially on the internet. Television is just as bad as the internet, possibly more so.

Over reaction? I don't think so.

reply to post by samstone11
 


I think your reaction was quite normal in a situation like this. The film crew should have been more sensitive and respectful and minimum should have asked if it was ok to film your child, or at least stopped filming when you said you did not want them filmed.
edit on 4-2-2013 by CthulhuMythos because: I forgot to add the reply to the OP... doh!



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 05:14 AM
link   
reply to post by CthulhuMythos
 


Certainly nothing wrong with being cautious but at the point where the reporter refused to stop filming he should have just simply left with his son and called the police.

What he did was clearly wrong although understandable and I hope the court sees his reason behind it.



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 05:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Spookycolt
 


yup the minute you lay a finger on someone, even lightly (I think even just blowing on them) is considered assault... ludicrous as it seems. Though it doesn't seem to stop the cops kicking people in the head and tasering them at any opportune moment, even when the person is not doing any resisting and is in handcuffs (or indeed an old lady lying in bed with an oxygen mask).

I hope the OP has a decent judge, as most of them seem totally bent these days.



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 06:02 AM
link   
I am so tired of people that clearly don't know what a police state is using the term. You take away the power of the term from people that are actually living in such a situation, ruin it for the rest of us if it ever actually comes about and make yourself look foolish though you have a valid complaint against the cameraman/reporter.

I'm sure saying police state and your stance against the 'MSM' will garner you lots of attention. Let's hope whatever court you end up in doesn't find out that you were stupid enough to post an ongoing legal dispute to a conspiracy website.



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 06:06 AM
link   
reply to post by CthulhuMythos
 


I actually got an assault charge for yelling at someone though it was dropped by the judge.



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 06:13 AM
link   
reply to post by samstone11
 

You should check with the school district and find out if there have any rules on media access, also check with the school. Some schools/districts do limit access and some have rules in place that a legal guardian must give consent before a child's image is broadcast.

If the district or school does not have any rules on media access use this as an opportunity to change that. Raise some awareness, get parents together and petition for a change to be made.



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 06:34 AM
link   
I understand why you were fearful for your kid and his friends, i would have done the same thing.

Name the network, post the idiot reporter's names, email, telephone numbers if you have them, and upload the lot to anti-paedo, child protection type websites.

That way, the public can personally let them know what they think of their antics.

If you ae in that situation again, simply block them, don't touch them, just block...if they push past you, then it is they who are assaulting you.

Good luck.



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 11:28 AM
link   
I applaud your efforts to do the right thing. Given what we now know this is how I would deal with the Reporter.

1. Find out where he lives (should be a matter of record if you are being sued) and proceed to film that reporter at his home. Stand outside on a public sidewalk and video tape his face, his yard, his car and his address.
2. Follow him for an entire day, video taping him in public places from public places.
3. Post your videos on You Tube. Name them "A day in the life of a MSM whore".

I have done something very similar and it drives them nuts. If nothing else it will make him afraid to open his door unarmed.

Good luck, IMHO if you are gonna face assault charges you shoulda just punched him.



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 12:35 PM
link   
Sorry Sam but you could have just taken the hand of your child, turned your backs to the camera and walked away. That would have been my first choice, only considering confrontation if the cameraman jumped in front of us again insisting to film my childs face.

I hope you don't face any harsh penalty as I understand your emotions about the filming going on in the context of your story. I guess you've learned a lesson out of it all though - always think carefully before using any force against someone who hasn't used force against you, especially when they have a camera running.
edit on 4-2-2013 by grainofsand because: Typo



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 12:36 PM
link   
It would be ashamed if said reporter/TV crew was allegedly linked to child pornography/trafficking in the area. Allegedly, of course..



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 12:41 PM
link   
It is called freedom of press.. It is not illegal sir...

Should be ashamed of yourself for messing with a guy just trying to do his job...

You should have instructed your child to wear a hoodie and cover his face and friends
when exiting the school...

You had no right to do what you did..



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 12:41 PM
link   
So you think that a news footage endangers children? That's just pure paranoia. You need to talk to new "attorneys". The moment you laid your hands on them you broke the law and were rightfully cited for it. Also this MSM nonsense is bs. It's a 1st amendment issue, not msm.

Also you shouldn't listen to the advise on stalking the reporter. You'll just end up with felony charges.



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 12:48 PM
link   
reply to post by samstone11
 



Get a good lawyer. NO joke.


I just retired from the PAs office a few weeks ago, so Im familiar with the law. A few months ago I go to my moms rez where there was a counsil meeting concerning a bunch of BS that was going on and I got mad. I have a notorious temper... but what happened next was absurd. I got mad and pulled my CDIB card out, crumbled it and threw it on the table where the 4 members were sitting. It didnt touch any human being and was a card the size of a drivers license. They actually motioned for the cop to arrest me for assault
Yes.. whiners have the upper hand.. initially. Needless to say, it was dropped and they look like the dumbasses they are now. GET A GOOD LAWYER.

For everyone that actually HAS been assaulted.. these sort of frivolous BS things make a mockery of the victims of real assualts and a joke of our legal system. Beat them. They know theyre being whiners and are betting on you not wanting to fight. Prove them wrong.



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Spookycolt
reply to post by CthulhuMythos
 


I actually got an assault charge for yelling at someone though it was dropped by the judge.


That's just bloody ridiculous. What a total waste of police and court time not to mention your time too. Let's face it you wouldn't be yelling at someone if they had not done something to really get your goat in the first place.
The most a commotion or stooshie should be is disturbing the peace and even then usually police tend to be sensible and give people warnings to stop or else before they lift them.
Meanwhile real bad ass criminals are running about causing mayhem.
edit on 4-2-2013 by CthulhuMythos because: I forgot a bitty



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 01:25 PM
link   
In my opinion you did the right thing. The school said that the camera crew did not have permission to be filming at the school so regardless of if you "pushed" the camera out of your face or not. They were breaking the law by being there and filming after the school specifically told them they don't have the right to be filming at that time/place. I really hope for your sake you can get the charges dropped. Things like this really do suck because I was actually assaulted and it took almost a full year for the case to actually get resolved. Hopefully you can get a speedy trial and a good judge. Regardless of what all these people are saying about you being in the wrong. I can guarantee if any of those people were at the school and asked the reporters not to film their children then the camera gets shoved in their face instead they would react the same way if not worse. You have a right to protect your childs privacy. If you don't want your child on tv you have a say as to whether or not they put them on tv. Why are most shows required to have waivers signed in order to air most of the footage they shoot?



posted on Feb, 4 2013 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Criticalthinker99
I can guarantee if any of those people were at the school and asked the reporters not to film their children then the camera gets shoved in their face instead they would react the same way if not worse.

For a critical thinker, any guarantee of knowledge about the reaction of unknown people in a situation such as the OP would certainly appear questionable.
People are different, and your own emotional bias is not necessarily representative of the population.





top topics
 
14
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join