Cops violate man's rights (again) while being interviewed by local news station!

In a clear case of retaliation that borders on criminally stupid, two cops stop & harass a local man in Augusta GA during an interview with the local news. July 4th 2013 (Happy Independence Day!)

Source

This is the how the beginning of that conversation went: Deputies: "Who y'all with?" News 12's Christie Ethridge: "I'm with Channel 12." Deputies: "Who are you with?" Haley: "I'm just an independent individual." Deputies: "You got any ID on you?" Haley: "Am I committing some type of crime?" Deputies: "No sir, you're videotaping the Sheriff's Office and the jail, so we just want to find out what you're doing."

This was clearly a retaliation for an earlier arrest that was made on June 2 for doing the same similar thing; filming in public & refusing to provide "his papers".

First arrest for standing up for rights

If this doesn't convince everybody that we're no longer headed for a police state, but have flat out arrived, then I got nothing for ya.

Quote from the Sheriff in interview:

"Once confronted by deputies, when you refuse to cooperate and answer any questions, you're basically asking to be locked up," McDaniel said

And then he actually laughed about it.

But ya all go ahead, and buy those "Don't tread on me" flags, and have Molon Labe in your avatars/signatures, meanwhile reality presses on.



/Nothing personal towards those that do btw, just VERY po'ed.

I'm a bit confused by this and very confused by a growing attitude I'm seeing among a segment of the public. The guy was in front of a Sheriff's Office and Jail facility. Okay, he has every right to be there and film whatever he likes. (Never in dispute). Where the confusion comes in ...where do people figure the Police have no right to even ask what they're up to or what they're recording for? (They could have had a protected witness or suspect in transit, in one of their cells at that moment, for all anyone knew. )

It the guy had handed over his ID (something I've been asked for with and without any reason given, across all 4 decades of my life) then I'll bet this would have ended on the spot and nothing more to see or film.

I had a local cop come up to me last Fall at the college, while I was ON campus with a full tripod and $2,500 pro- camera set up, obviously doing pro-photo work. This is during school hours. During my class period for photography. I was still asked to produce ID as well as College ID by a street cop who happened to be parked down the block, doing paperwork or something, and was just curious by the rather elaborate set up I had out there by myself. (He was somewhat new to the college 'beat', I think)

If I'd refused, I'd have probably been calling my instructor from jail, a few blocks away. Same as this guy refusing. What's wrong with a basic level of respect and cooperation when a basic level of respect is how the cops start things out with? The cop in my case was a nice guy .....with an edge I could tell would turn ugly quick if I became a problem in his life. I didn't. He didn't. So it became a story to tell here ..not an arrest record to show I could be a jerk and prove it?

at the 2:14 mark in the video, the sheriff says if you refuse to cooperate and answer any questions, you are asking to be locked up......wow!...I didn't know the sheriff is re-writing the law....but, let's not forget ......this is Georgia, home of the police state...and the guys white...just think if he was some trayvon look-a-like.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


I don't think most people mind the whole "who are you, what are you doing?" thing from the police. (Seriously) I believe most people despise what happens when you tell the cops "none of your business" and what happens AFTER that. (I don't feel the need to provide proof of what I'm suggesting here, it's all over YT.)

If you're in public, doing nothing wrong, doing a legitimate hobby/recreation/whatever, that clearly isn't illegal, then you should be free to not be molested by the po-po. Most reasonable people know this, which is why they get (rightly) indignant in the first place when cops ask them something that is frankly none of their business. And cops don't like this display of "freedom/independence" so they take it to the next level.

They beat the crap at you while yelling "stop resisting".

You say that you don't see the problem people have with complying, whereas I don't see the problem of the police minding their own dang business & just obeying the law they're supposed to know & enforce. (And that includes not stopping people & arresting them "just because".

We are a paranoid culture where every person is viewed as a potential threat to someone else. Now, how did cameras became guns or bombs, etc? Photographing or filming do not seem terribly dangerous but we have been taught that people taking pictures could be planning something ee-ville.

Heck, even in the UK, you can be arrested just for taking pictures in public spaces.

In this case, photographing a public building from a public position draws suspicions... and from there, anything that even mildly suggests that you don't like being questioned may lead to arrest and detention. One can stir in all the ifs, ands or buts imaginable but the flavor remains the same; paranoia and fear instilled and then reinforced.

For your convenience:

Legal definitions of Probable Cause & Reasonable Suspicion.

Once it has been established that an individual possesses a reasonable expectation of privacy in a place to be searched or a thing to be seized, the Fourth Amendment's protections take hold, and the question then becomes what are the nature of those protections. Police officers need no justification to stop someone on a public street and ask questions, and individuals are completely entitled to refuse to answer any such questions and go about their business. However, a police officer may only search people and places when the officer has probable cause or reasonable suspicion to suspect criminal activity. "Probable cause" means that the officer must possess sufficiently trustworthy facts to believe that a crime has been committed. In some cases, an officer may need only a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity to conduct a limited search. Reasonable suspicion means that the officer has sufficient knowledge to believe that criminal activity is at hand. This level of knowledge is less than that of probable cause, so reasonable suspicion is usually used to justify a brief frisk in a public area or a traffic stop at roadside. To possess either probable cause or reasonable suspicion, an officer must be able to cite specific articulable facts to warrant the intrusion. Items related to suspected criminal activity found in a search may be taken, or seized, by the officer.

Link

Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
I'm a bit confused by this and very confused by a growing attitude I'm seeing among a segment of the public. The guy was in front of a Sheriff's Office and Jail facility. Okay, he has every right to be there and film whatever he likes. (Never in dispute). Where the confusion comes in ...where do people figure the Police have no right to even ask what they're up to or what they're recording for? (They could have had a protected witness or suspect in transit, in one of their cells at that moment, for all anyone knew.

)

It the guy had handed over his ID (something I've been asked for with and without any reason given, across all 4 decades of my life) then I'll bet this would have ended on the spot and nothing more to see or film.

I had a local cop come up to me last Fall at the college, while I was ON campus with a full tripod and $2,500 pro- camera set up, obviously doing pro-photo work. This is during school hours. During my class period for photography. I was still asked to produce ID as well as College ID by a street cop who happened to be parked down the block, doing paperwork or something, and was just curious by the rather elaborate set up I had out there by myself. (He was somewhat new to the college 'beat', I think)

If I'd refused, I'd have probably been calling my instructor from jail, a few blocks away. Same as this guy refusing. What's wrong with a basic level of respect and cooperation when a basic level of respect is how the cops start things out with? The cop in my case was a nice guy .....with an edge I could tell would turn ugly quick if I became a problem in his life. I didn't. He didn't. So it became a story to tell here ..not an arrest record to show I could be a jerk and prove it?

so you're perfectly fine with being asked for your ID for no reason...that's fine...there are many of us that do not want to be regarded as being a "suspect" from every LEO we encounter. for someone that believes in the constitution, your views on the 4th amendment should be as consistant as your view on the 2nd.

reply to post by schadenfreude

Interesting how the police are so threatened by being video taped.

Yet they use police drones, dashboard cams, street cams, traffic cams, red light cams and license plate readers to record us.

Ironic isnt it?

Originally posted by schadenfreude
For your convenience:

Legal definitions of Probable Cause & Reasonable Suspicion.

Once it has been established that an individual possesses a reasonable expectation of privacy in a place to be searched or a thing to be seized, the Fourth Amendment's protections take hold, and the question then becomes what are the nature of those protections. Police officers need no justification to stop someone on a public street and ask questions, and individuals are completely entitled to refuse to answer any such questions and go about their business. However, a police officer may only search people and places when the officer has probable cause or reasonable suspicion to suspect criminal activity. "Probable cause" means that the officer must possess sufficiently trustworthy facts to believe that a crime has been committed. In some cases, an officer may need only a reasonable suspicion of criminal activity to conduct a limited search. Reasonable suspicion means that the officer has sufficient knowledge to believe that criminal activity is at hand. This level of knowledge is less than that of probable cause, so reasonable suspicion is usually used to justify a brief frisk in a public area or a traffic stop at roadside. To possess either probable cause or reasonable suspicion, an officer must be able to cite specific articulable facts to warrant the intrusion. Items related to suspected criminal activity found in a search may be taken, or seized, by the officer.

Link

actually, this might be a way to make a living.....make sure you are doing nothing illegal, but refuse to be some LEO's step-and-fetch-it....then sue the crap out of the department.....maybe after a few hundred of these with PD's losing millions a year in lawsuits, one bright chief of police might say...HEY!!, we have to quit harassing the general public.

reply to post by gladtobehere


Yeah but they have access to THOSE videos, which mean they can be deleted or "accidentally erased".

So it makes sense.

You would think that all the CCTV cameras we have everywhere would make this argument a null point, but apparently common sense isn't all that common.

reply to post by jimmyx


You would eventually pay with your life.

And the cops never pay personally b/c of "qualified immunity". Only the taxpayers.

Originally posted by schadenfreude
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

 

I don't think most people mind the whole "who are you, what are you doing?" thing from the police. (Seriously) I believe most people despise what happens when you tell the cops "none of your business" and what happens AFTER that. (I don't feel the need to provide proof of what I'm suggesting here, it's all over YT.)

That's honestly the only part I see the problem with for how people are coming to seek out or exploit the opportunity to create trouble, at times, when it doesn't seem to need to happen. If someone is cooperative within reason of basic requests like ID and what you're up to in whatever spot you're at (assuming that isn't self incriminating of course..lol) I've generally found encounters with cops to be positive. If a cop then goes against your own efforts to make it a trouble free encounter and CREATES the problem? It's a whole different thing. I think all that is determined in the first couple minutes of contact, too.

If you're in public, doing nothing wrong, doing a legitimate hobby/recreation/whatever, that clearly isn't illegal, then you should be free to not be molested by the po-po.

Agreed. Although if you're filming the exterior of a secure facility like a county jail or like others, you're literally in their personal space to "cover" their handling of someone else? They will react. It's their job and what society pays them for, to be honest about it. At least to that point, it is.

BTW... If I were going to film around municipal service buildings like labs, police, fire or the jail? I would (and have) said hello at whatever passes for a front desk in advance, just to be friendly and also to avoid curiosity which leads to things like this.

They beat the crap at you while yelling "stop resisting".

...and those which qualify as criminals with badges? Need put where criminals go. Jail or Prison. General Population. Heck, give them jail clothing with that badge printed on it. Let them live with what they betrayed.

You say that you don't see the problem people have with complying, whereas I don't see the problem of the police minding their own dang business & just obeying the law they're supposed to know & enforce. (And that includes not stopping people & arresting them "just because".

Fair enough.. but again, outside "their house" and their jail? They really are well within reasonable cause to at least ask what's so interesting to film on the exterior of those facilities ...or if they are just incidental backdrops to some other shot?

Either way.. I did see quite a bit of abuse from cops out of the Occupy movement and, also, some really decent things done by cops. I generally try and follow the ACLU guidelines on all this though. It works the best, I think.

If Stopped or Questioned....

YOUR RESPONSIBILITIES
- Do stay calm and be polite.
- Do not interfere with or obstruct the police.
- Do not lie or give false documents.
- Do prepare yourself and your family in case you are arrested.
- Do remember the details of the encounter.

Followed at the end by....

IF YOU FEEL YOUR RIGHTS HAVE BEEN VIOLATED

Remember: police misconduct cannot be challenged on the street. Don't physically resist officers or threaten to file a complaint.

Write down everything you remember, including officers' badge and patrol car numbers, which agency the officers were from, and any other details. Get contact information for witnesses. If you are injured, take photographs of your injuries (but seek medical attention first).

File a written complaint with the agency's internal affairs division or civilian complaint board. In most cases, you can file a complaint anonymously if you wish.

Source: ACLU: Know Your Rights

Citizen Review boards (where they exist) exist just for real abuse and internal affairs are the cop's cops. They like busting THEM as much as many of THEM like busting all of US. Use them, if it's legit.

It the guy had handed over his ID (something I've been asked for with and without any reason given, across all 4 decades of my life) then I'll bet this would have ended on the spot and nothing more to see or film.

I had a local cop come up to me last Fall at the college, while I was ON campus with a full tripod and $2,500 pro- camera set up, obviously doing pro-photo work. This is during school hours. During my class period for photography. I was still asked to produce ID as well as College ID by a street cop who happened to be parked down the block, doing paperwork or something, and was just curious by the rather elaborate set up I had out there by myself. (He was somewhat new to the college 'beat', I think)

If I'd refused, I'd have probably been calling my instructor from jail, a few blocks away. Same as this guy refusing. What's wrong with a basic level of respect and cooperation when a basic level of respect is how the cops start things out with? The cop in my case was a nice guy .....with an edge I could tell would turn ugly quick if I became a problem in his life. I didn't. He didn't. So it became a story to tell here ..not an arrest record to show I could be a jerk and prove it?

Ok, I agree. How about a basic level of respect to my constitutional rights by the cop? It shouldn't even have been an issue in the first place.

Just because you gladly submit to the bullies, doesn't mean I have to. I'm standing up for my rights and yours and you are undermining my, and other citizens', fight by empowering them.

You've obviously never stood up to a bully. It's not that hard for me because I'm a bit intimidating,(which draws those pigs like flys) but you should.

reply to post by wirefly


I guess picking my battles matters more than picking fights with guys who have the society granted authority to do things, up to and includng kill me, depending on circumstance.

If they're friendly, open and not pushing a fight...why start one? When did being asked for an ID in a public area, particularly....outside their own building..become something worth feeling offended over? I don't recall the outrage 20-25 years ago when I was getting "ID checked" in California all the time, as a teen? Part of life sometimes...and always has been.

That's honestly the only part I see the problem with for how people are coming to seek out or exploit the opportunity to create trouble, at times, when it doesn't seem to need to happen. If someone is cooperative within reason of basic requests like ID and what you're up to in whatever spot you're at (assuming that isn't self incriminating of course..lol) I've generally found encounters with cops to be positive. If a cop then goes against your own efforts to make it a trouble free encounter and CREATES the problem? It's a whole different thing. I think all that is determined in the first couple minutes of contact, too.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


I've only been before a judge 4 times in my life, all traffic non-moving violations, so I can't speak of my extensive experience with cops. Having said that, if you aren't doing anything wrong, there shouldn't even be an encounter with cops in the first place. A good example I implore you to look up is in NH. They're a "free carry" state, which means you don't need a license to carry a weapon, as long as it is out in the open. On various YT vids you see a cop stopping a citizen, disarming him, and they all say "we got a call about a guy walking around with a gun on his hip", hence why you were stopped. It's perfectly legal! How about stopping guys b/c they were wearing blue jeans? It's complete nonsense.

Agreed. Although if you're filming the exterior of a secure facility like a county jail or like others, you're literally in their personal space to "cover" their handling of someone else? They will react. It's their job and what society pays them for, to be honest about it. At least to that point, it is. BTW... If I were going to film around municipal service buildings like labs, police, fire or the jail? I would (and have) said hello at whatever passes for a front desk in advance, just to be friendly and also to avoid curiosity which leads to things like this.

But this didn't start at the beginning of the jail, this started n June when this guy (for whatever reason) was taping ppl rolling through a stop sign. That's what started all of this. The guy was being interviewed before a local news crew, how many CRIMINALS do you see being interviewed not wearing an orange jump suit? (Politicians don't count) BTW this exact same thing/principle happens with these "border checks" 100 miles inside the border. We have the right to not be molested in our travels. Whether it is in a car, or by foot, this is the same exact principle.

...and those which qualify as criminals with badges? Need put where criminals go. Jail or Prison. General Population. Heck, give them jail clothing with that badge printed on it. Let them live with what they betrayed.

It doesn't happen Wrabbit! That's one of the key things here that most ppl understand. There is ZERO accountability! It's NEVER the cops fault! I could send you 50 instances that the common laymen would say at a minimum the cop that killed someone should be charged with involuntarily manslaughter, bit not even those charges were filed. The most famous case that can be easily argued? The Oscar Grant shooting. How many years did that cop get for shooting an unarmed man in the back while ziptied? TWO YEARS. And that's the exception, not the rule.

Fair enough.. but again, outside "their house" and their jail? They really are well within reasonable cause to at least ask what's so interesting to film on the exterior of those facilities ...or if they are just incidental backdrops to some other shot? Either way.. I did see quite a bit of abuse from cops out of the Occupy movement and, also, some really decent things done by cops. I generally try and follow the ACLU guidelines on all this though. It works the best, I think.

It's not "their house" though! MY tax dollars paid for that. And what about those that live near CCTV? Did the cops ever ask if they were allowed to film THEIR houses 24/7? No. Does it matter, will anyone do anything? No.

BTW I noticed you mention Occupy. You do realize that the white shirts who beat ppl & maced those girls in that orange detainment area we're "cleared" too, right? Supervisor Bologna. Yeah, I know his full name & it aint Oscar Mayor. And those ppl arrested for going onto the bridge, like they were TOLD to by the cops, only to be arrested for trespassing? I dunno how anyone can use Occupy like it was some kind of good example.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


You can't sincerely be confused. The police can ask out of curiosity, but they have no right to know unless they suspect you of being guilty of a crime. They can ask, but you aren't required to say. Why are cops concerning themselves with someonne doing an interview in front of a public building. The station isnn't a cops house. It's just ridiculous harrassment on the cops part.

reply to post by schadenfreude


Well, a couple points... First. in some ways, you're preaching to the choir. We simply don't see things in such absolute black/white terms for circumstance and guilty/blame to cops for everything they do. Case in point was a recent Thread I did on the subject. I took a bit of heat over that one too and from unexpected directions. Whatever tho... People try and pigeonhole each other into broad general beliefs and that doesn't fit for everyone. I try and look case by case, example by example.

In terms of Occupy? I never got into New York or Zuccotti Park. The New York Police Department went overboard, to say the least (and Boston, and Oakland and Los Angeles and Richmond ..and and and), in more than one instance.

In others, they didn't go far enough and allowed some crime inside the camp, by agreement to stay out, which I believe was unforgivable. Not EVERY Camp was a failure though. The one I was living in for a time had clear and open liason to the local city Police Department with a specific Officer assigned for the purpose. It helped too.

Unlike some, we handed over a couple criminal scumbags directly to them. It's what civilized folks do when criminals are found among them ...and it's what some Occupy camps DID do ...just don't tell the media that. A Huff Po reporter was IN camp during one incident and you never heard a peep about it. (They sure covered the drunk moron who was the camp problem child when he got wild and out of hand tho.)

That's how I use it as an example of both the best and worst of what cops can be for how Occupy had it on display.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


FWIW I don't blame cops for "everything", but I don't buy this "few bad apples" excuse either.

Look at what happened to Serpico.

If you're a cop & your partner is breaking the law (pick one) it's your duty as a LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER to bust him. Reality? Never gonna happen b/c of the Thin Blue Line.

Isn't it ironic when you aid a criminal it's called "aiding & abetting" and it's against the law, but when they do it...

Oh to hell with it, you get my meaning I'm sure.

reply to post by schadenfreude


I absolutely do get your meaning. I get and agree with that part, without reservation. It's what my thread linked above was ranting about here recently. The only true solution to police corruption is for the good cops to DO something and treat the criminals among them as they would any criminal on the street. Until that happens, it's fighting the core problem from the outside and nipping buds as they appear ...never the roots.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


So if I come up to you and ask for your ID you're just going to give it to me? Cops without a cause have 0 right to ask for persons ID.