Washington State man arrested for recording Swat Team from the sidewalk.

reply to post by jamesz


They dont care. Many photographers have their rights printed out. They still go about their business like they make the laws. The point is not to get someone charged, the point is to get them detained, their info and maybe arrest them and get access to their camera.

Originally posted by Thorneblood
I take it he means this law.
WA Recording Law

Washington's wiretapping law is a "two-party consent" law. Washington makes it a crime to intercept or record a private telephone call, in-person conversation, or electronic communication unless all parties to the communication consent

edit on 11-8-2013 by Thorneblood because: (no reason given)

Funny how we can't record them but the NSA can record us?

Or ermmm....it's really NOT funny at all.

The police may know charges won't be made but they can still use the threat of arrest to try to get their way. Some people may decide to not record in order to not take a ride.

The average citizen doesn't have a means to intimidate police.

Originally posted by roadgravel
The police may know charges won't be made but they can still use the threat of arrest to try to get their way. Some people may decide to not record in order to not take a ride.

The average citizen doesn't have a means to intimidate police.

Then if the cops know charges won't stick or if what the citizen's doing isn't illegal (filming on public in the course of duties and not obstructing), but threaten and/or arrests the citizen to get them out of the cop's hair, that would constitute false arrest and a HUGE lawsuit. IF they knew it wasn't illegal but arrested them anyway (and if that could be proved).

Film the police. Always. They want constant eyes on us, put constant eyes on them.

ETA: The camera is the intimidation.

I don't see a video of him being arrested... but...

Okay, so you are a S.W.A.T. member and your like "Hey i lived through another day now I get go home- kiss my wife. Maybe read to kids." Then some dude is like "I'm going to film you!" And you roll your eyes cause you know he is gonna upload the video to youtube like a jackass (like he freaking did) and then everyone will know your identity and you don't want that. So you are like "Dude its illegal to film." And it sounds good so you stick with that. And he keeps doing it, even though the incident is already over and there is literally nothing to film. So you cave in and arrest him which was a stupid move because that was what he wanted and now the video is even more popular!

Who is the real jackass? They guy who just wants you to stop filming him. Or the guy who is intentionally filming someone in order to illicit a response?

Which brings up a good point.

So. The S.'W.A.T member WHO LITERATELY CATCHES CRIMINALS IN ORDER TO PROTECT SOCIETY is more a jackass than the guy WHO INTENTIONALLY ANNOYS COPS FOR NO REASON? Are we really going sit here and pretend this fella was doing his duty as a civilian in recording cops and interviewing witnesses? I mean, lets get real. Its not like he took the video and gave it to a freaking lawyer. No. He immediately uploaded to the internet and cried victim for the world.

Sigh.

The proper, non jackass, response when a cop WHO JUST CAUGHT A CRIMINAL IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD asks you to turn off the camera is. "Sure officer, it looks like you guys have things under control and have just removed a criminal from my now safer neighborhood. I will respect your wish to not be filmed and I thank you for the risk you take everyday as a S.W.A.T member."

It is not. "Ha ha, im filming you because i can and screw your wishes. Even though i am filming literally no action and I am , in fact, performing no service, it is my right to stand here and annoy you."

At least to me anyway.

Originally posted by TsukiLunar

Who is the real jackass? They guy who just wants you to stop filming him. Or the guy who is intentionally filming someone in order to illicit a response?

Which brings up a good point.

The proper, non jackass, response when a cop WHO JUST CAUGHT A CRIMINAL IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD asks you to turn off the camera is. "Sure officer, it looks like you guys have things under control and have just removed a criminal from my now safer neighborhood. I will respect your wish to not be filmed and I thank you for the risk you take everyday as a S.W.A.T member."

Yaasir boss I be stopping right now juss don whip me (or shoot me with your military style automatic weapons.) That's just sad.

Personally feel we have little use for these black clad, bulletproofed armored, (usually) masked, militarized buffoons. They are just shock troops and if every SWAT team was disbanded tomorrow we would be infinitely better off.

Film them all.

reply to post by Bassago

Personally feel we have little use for these black clad, bulletproofed armored, (usually) masked, militarized buffoons. They are just shock troops and if every SWAT team was disbanded tomorrow we would be infinitely better off.

Right on man. The police are just a nuisance what with the catching potentially dangerous criminals and all that jazz. If there were no cops then there would be no arrests and then peace could flow freely. I feel ya bro. Word to your mother.

reply to post by TsukiLunar


I am speaking of SWAT not the regular police officers. We do not need paramilitary assault units running around our neighborhoods.

Originally posted by Bassago
reply to post by TsukiLunar

 

I am speaking of SWAT not the regular police officers. We do not need paramilitary assault units running around our neighborhoods.

Right on man. We all know being all tactical and # when arresting criminals is wrong. Peace out.

Never, ever be obvious when filming LEOs. It's just asking for trouble. Be secretive and sneeky and always be ready to remove the SD card from the camera if spotted.

It also works both ways. Police also perform heroic acts and that should also be recorded.

Film everything, record your world....we want to see and experience it too.

Many new channels or local TV stations pay $$$ handsomely for footage of news worthy events.

As someone that grew up skateboarding in WA, has been harassed by cops more than I can count, I can assure you cops HATE being filmed. Especially when they feel like they did something wrong and you have the evidence in your hand.

It's not illegal to film police from a public location, as long as you're not in the way of officers conducting business. The fear they've instilled on the public to believe this nonsense is very real, and has caused a lot of confusion in regards to instances such as this.

If you call a cop out on them trying to strong arm you, and let them know that the filming being done is completely within the rights of the public, then they really have no more plays and should simply walk off (albeit a bit pissed and worried about what is on that tape). Let them know you're a human being, you deserve to be treated as such, and not like some kind of animal.

It's kind of nice having the power in your hands, and letting the cops sweat a bit for not understanding the "laws" they set out to enforce.

reply to post by Thorneblood


Thorneblood, it has bee my experience that court decisions are sometimes a result of something simple, like did the Judge get breakfast in, or did he get any favors at his home, (or where ever), last night.
My time in a court room was during a divorce of twenty-nine years.
I was an over the road truck driver who stayed out for up to two or three weeks at a time.
I had no idea that I would ever be anything but married.
My now ex left, used security guards and Deputy sheriffs to keep me away from her, and told the judge she had lived in fear for the last 29 years without the possibility to escape.
Everyone present knew I was telling the truth and the whole truth.
Except for the judge.
I lost 20 acres and two home lots.
They did not go to pay her, the proceeds went to pay debt and lawyers fees.
And I do feel certain the Judge received his part on the next Golf outing with those lawyers.
I have great disdain for legal matters, and the legal system.
There is the sweat of 4 generations of us in that dirt.
A Cockeyed slobbering Judge took all my dreams away in less than 30 minutes time.
I am willing to bet that his hide on his back has became so very tough, that he did not lose one minutes sleep over his decision. Even the Bailiffs told me it was a wrong and very raw deal. So did the clerk of court.
But in feeling I was in the right, I did not hire a lawyer.
I learned something about American Justice that day, and this is it;
You are innocent until you are broke.
Period, dot dash.

reply to post by TsukiLunar


Where is the law that says you are not allowed to be annoying? Until that law gets on the books its still a free country and i applaud anybody who exercises their freedoms. This guy doesn't need a reason to record in a public area so his reasons or intentions for recording are irrelevant. I doubt this cop is annoyed by the dashboard cameras that are surely recording from each and every cop car on the scene, why does he have a problem with the guy recording on the public sidewalk? Dashboard cams end up getting released to the media or uploaded to youtube all the time, how is that any different? Maybe this cop should arrest the other cops for "annoying him" by having dashboard cams on their cars.

The point is, the guy recording was not breaking any laws and was doing nothing wrong. When we as a people enable law enforcement to intimidate people away from doing something that is lawful and well inside their rights to do, then we have a much bigger problem than the suspected criminal that warranted the swat team in the first place.

DC

reply to post by Thorneblood


And this is why my watch has a built in video camera. I recommend it to everyone, just a discreet click of a button and voila, you're capturing video (don't hold it up though) and audio. (The main reason I have it.)

Well, not to beat a dead horse here but once again SWAT has saved us from... er what? Oh yes, bad lawn care. And apparently no one was even killed during the daring police action.

According to a press release from a small sustainable organic co-op called 'The Garden of Eden' out of Arlington, Texas, they were surveilled by unmanned police drones and police helicopters in the days prior to being raided by a SWAT team for supposedly growing marijuana. A group of over a dozen police and a heavily armed SWAT team held those present on site at gunpoint and handcuffed them while they searched their property. No marijuana was found, but the cops forced them to bring their property "up to code," by among other things, forcing them to "mow their grass" and uproot their blackberries while they stood watch.

SWAT Team Raid Sustainable Organic Co-Op For Drugs, Find None, Force Them To Mow Their Lawn

Originally posted by Bassago
Well, not to beat a dead horse here but once again SWAT has saved us from... er what? Oh yes, bad lawn care. And apparently no one was even killed during the daring police action.

According to a press release from a small sustainable organic co-op called 'The Garden of Eden' out of Arlington, Texas, they were surveilled by unmanned police drones and police helicopters in the days prior to being raided by a SWAT team for supposedly growing marijuana. A group of over a dozen police and a heavily armed SWAT team held those present on site at gunpoint and handcuffed them while they searched their property. No marijuana was found, but the cops forced them to bring their property "up to code," by among other things, forcing them to "mow their grass" and uproot their blackberries while they stood watch.

SWAT Team Raid Sustainable Organic Co-Op For Drugs, Find None, Force Them To Mow Their Lawn

Wow, this is extremely important:

Here we have Big Brother using drones to surveil a property they suspect has marijuana, and SWAT to force private citizens to bring their property up to code by DESTROYING their FRUIT (blackberries) and mowing their grass. This is, once, another frightening example of the encroaching police state.

including the mother of a 22 month old and a two week old baby who was separated from her children during the raid. The police enforced activity on the day of the raid included mowing the grass, the forcible destruction of both wild and cultivated plants like blackberries, lamb’s quarters and okra, and the removal of other varied materials from around the premises such as pallets, tires and cardboard

Now I can understand the issue with having pallets, tires, and other things just laying around and being unsightly, but it's a private citizen's property that is not harming anything (except perhaps property value, or aesthetics) and I would like to know HOW a warrant was obtained for suspected marijuana growth, when NOTHING drug related was found. This is fishy as hell, but sounds like the government using the issue to "drugs" to force property owners into code compliance.

What evidence was presented to award this drug warrant? What was the judge shown or told and by whom? Why did the judge sign it when NOTHING was found?

Intimidation by SWAT and police, the new norm for nonconformity and noncompliance.

Welcome to the Police State.

Originally posted by GrantedBail
You want to tell me why the cops are ignoring a USSC ruling??

The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear an appeal of a controversial Illinois law prohibiting people from recording police officers on the job.

By passing on the issue, the justices left in place a federal appeals court ruling that found that the state's anti-eavesdropping law violates free-speech rights when used against people who audiotape police officers.

I guess they are gonna make everyone fight it out in the courts. We are gonna need a website full of pro-bono lawyers because there are gonna be a bunch of people that WILL have standing to sue.

S and F

edit on 12-8-2013 by GrantedBail because: (no reason given)

Your exactly right. That law ruled on by the court is just as valid in Washington state as it is in Illinois or any other state that uses wiretapping laws to harass citizens exercising their rights.

The case will be dropped but if this guy is smart, he will file a civil suite which should be an easy win.

Against what law? Public sidewalk law? Never heard of any law.

reply to post by Auricom


Thats sounds pretty handy. You should drop a link for it

Originally posted by TsukiLunar

...The proper, non jackass, response when a cop WHO JUST CAUGHT A CRIMINAL IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD asks you to turn off the camera is. "Sure officer, it looks like you guys have things under control and have just removed a criminal from my now safer neighborhood. I will respect your wish to not be filmed and I thank you for the risk you take everyday as a S.W.A.T member."
...

Except for the part where cops spend an inordinate amount of time enforcing victimless crimes. (Hint, they use SWAT teams for drug raids-- mostly unnecessarily, I might add) as well as harassing innocent citizens and violating peoples' rights. Happens every single day.

So people want to fight back, and people want to be protected from that. Considering that a cop's word is usually taken as truth over a civilian's slightly more than 99 times out of 100, the only defense citizens have is direct recorded proof of how things actually transpired.



Maybe if cops stopped being so corrupt, as well as stop acting like egoistic little children who throw a temper tantrum any time their authority is questioned (or perceived to be questioned, I should say) often violating citizens' rights in the aftermath of their temper tantrum, then perhaps citizens would have little to no need to record the police.