We have another case of police arresting a citizen because he filmed them in public. This one however is with a twist (and a flip).
Charles Ross, 18, in this video does a pretty remarkable flip over an officer sitting on a bench. Ross runs the YouTube channel Ross Creations featuring his pranks.
It was an impressive but dumb move to be sure. The officers at first appear to be taking the stunt in admirable stride, warning the kid that if he did that again they would have to do something in response. I am not sure what that is precisely since I do not see the crime in the stunt. The officer however appears to be thinking of something other than an arrest in saying “Next time you do this I will break your freakin neck.”
However, the officers go from reasonable to rage when one asks if he filmed the stunt. When he says that it was filmed, the officers state that they intend to “ruin his day” and proceed to tackle and arrest him. The fact that it was filmed is no basis for an arrest since that is a protected act under the first amendment. The arbitrary basis for deciding whether to arrest raises serious questions of abuse and false arrest for these officers.
Here is the video.
This is a Polizeistaat. The Polizei ARE the law. Whatever they say is the law — is the law.
Use a camera – that is breaking THEIR law.
Amerika the beautiful …
Keep publicizing these abuses.
Public pressure against police abuses has to build.
Please include the jurisdiction so that your readers can call the department and register their disgust.
I’m curious as to why the officers’ faces are pixelated in the video.
Name the law breaking cops, show their faces, identify their agency.
These officers need to be arrested for assault and they should be looking for new jobs.
Thugs with badges and guns, again. Police departments need to start screening OUT these kinds of people, instead of all too often screening FOR them.
When did we become a police state?
Eyewitness: Police Shot Kimani Gray While The 16-Year-Old Was On The Ground
By Ryan Devereaux Mon., Mar. 18 2013 at 11:44 AM
http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/2013/03/kimani_gray_4.php
Another OT posting regarding police misconduct:
Bloomberg’s Sneaky Fix For All Those Stop-and-Frisk Lawsuits
By Graham Rayman
Wednesday, Mar 13 2013
http://www.villagevoice.com/2013-03-13/news/bloomberg-s-sneaky-fix-for-all-those-stop-and-frisk-lawsuits/
Thugs with badges.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/15/mark-stone-china-detained-sky-news_n_2885139.html
Mark Stone, Sky News Reporter, Detained Live On Air In China
Compared to this story, the Chinese were quite dignified in the way they went about handling a “foreign” reporter (and from their perspective one that was potentially agitating political issues? Foreign journalists must be suspect generally as to motives and covert intentions being at least a possibility). What is most interesting is not only did the Chinese allow the reporter to continue filming, but filmed the reporter and filmed the filming themselves. The reporter thinks “they don’t know it was live…” but that is rediculous…they obviously wanted it to be seen and filmed it themselves to provide assurances that the incident had both sides accurately depicted. it is interesting to note that our police from Chicago to Florida have been much more brutal to our own citizens and the “law” is being shaped to place offenders in jail simply for filming police in action. We might expect it from the Chinese government but how is it that we have allowed direct suppression of “accountability” by film in America and not kicked and screamed about political oppressive regimes against the Constitution itself?
Everyone goes wild about the abuses happening in Egypt and I read things like this and I wonder why all those with the beef against everything in the MENA region doesn’t recognize the police abuses, rapes, domestic violence and everything that goes on in THIS country. This kind of thing is mentioned EVERY DAY in these posts.
Thugs with badges. -mespo727272
Too many of them.
http://www.aclu.org/militarization
Thugocracy.
I believe the arrest was unlawful but I am on the fence as to whether this could legally be considered and assault. Here is why:
About half way from the bench to where the camera was, the three begin walking toward the camera. The man then starts to run and the officer picks up on this and then takes him down. In general in this situation, where someone starts to run when they are about to be arrested, the officers have a legal right to use reasonable force to effect their arrest. It is also a safety issue in that bad things have happened during or at the end of foot chases.
Sorry for not having the case to cite as a reference but there was I believe a supreme court decision (it was either WA or US) that declared a suspect does not have a right to resist arrest even if the arrest is based upon evidence that is insufficient to secure a PC hearing on arraignment.
Given these two issues I don’t believe the assault charge against the police would fly but I do have a concern in another arena.
If the officers willfully or recklessly violated the civil rights of the defendant, such as in this case filming the police, would this then change the game and the force used against the defendant be considered part of the civil rights violation?
Two examples:
Officer receives report of a suspect involved in an assault named John who is wearing blue pants and a striped red and white shirt. The officer sees a man with this clothing description and calls out “John” to him, the person turns around, sees the officer and runs. Even though in actuality this man is named Steve but he mistakenly believes the police are looking for him. The officer chases the man and tackles him, cuffing him up.
In this example the officer could articulate assault crime, matching clothing description, responding to the name John, then fleeing upon seeing the police as suspects often do. Once it was sorted out and Steve was released the officers would have qualified immunity both civilly and criminally because they were acting in good faith.
But in the example that is the supect of this blog, I am not so sure it would apply.
Darren,
In light of the police abuse that seems to be on the rise, I would have run if the cops were walking towards me as I was filming them. Especially after the threat that they had uttered. I would have run to save my camera and the possible evidence of abuse on it, and prevent a tasering or beating that would likely go unpunished. When the police overstep their authority and face little or no consequences, citizens cannot assume that they will be handled professionally and properly can they?
I think people don’t get up in arms for the same reason they don’t about the wars, it does not effect them personally so heck, can’t be all that bad.
Lawrence:
I understand where you are coming from. Yet, there is the issue of whether any run-of-the-mill crook then claims he believed he was about to be beaten by the police and then it becomes the standard defence to running from the law.
It would certainly be better to just clean up police abuse and then this type of defence would not be believable.
In this case it is apparent the defendant in this article was just trying to make a joke of the thing, not to scare or harm the officers. They needed to lighten up. People do this once in a while, and when I was at the S.O. we did this often with each other. It’s generally not a big deal.
Reblogged this on euzicasa and commented:
Filming can, yes it can land you in Jail! Why? Because YOU did it in FLORIDA!
Reblogged this on Jesse Talks Back and commented:
Amazing, sad that cops are doing this. But I guess it is to be expected
I understand Darren, but we are seeing evidence of an increased tendency for the police to take these extreme positions and abuse citizens who are doing nothing wrong and are not held accountable. Anyone can claim police abuse, but they have to prove it. Of course, it is tougher to prove when police are trying to confiscate legally obtained videos of their actions. I don’t think anyone would disagree that we need to root out police corruption, but we seem to be losing that battle.
Darren: Would the judge get to decide he “good faith” defense or would the jury get to decide it?
I would argue, mockingly, “Its not fried chicken daddy, its Shake n Bake.”
I would plead, in the Complaint, that the pltifs were “petitioning their government for redress of grievances, through the filiming of the event; that they planned to show it to the public, to City Council and to the State Legislature. The grievance is the over policing of sidewalks by opCays who will not allow acrobatics.
42 United States Code, Section 1883 suit against state actors infringing on pltfs constitutional right under the First Amendment to assemble, exercise free expression of speech and acting, for liberty interests, under the 14th Amendment, add sectin 1988 for attorneys fees. The municipality is a defendant. Punitive damages against the individual opCays and their Superiors. Cant get puns vs. the city. Make em pay member of the jury or they will do it again and do it to your kids.
http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/15214-alec-is-now-deciding-what-you-eat
Tuesday, 19 March 2013 15:07 By The Daily Take, The Thom Hartmann Show | Report
“ALEC is now parading around bills in six states that would make it a crime to film animal abuse at factory farms, or lie on job applications in order to get a job in a factory farm with the goal of taking pictures. All of this is to stop animal rights activists who infiltrate slaughterhouses to expose their deplorable conditions.
The bill proposals pushed by ALEC require all evidence of animal abuse at factory farms be turned over to law enforcement authorities within 48 hours, or those who took the pictures face a financial penalty.”
http://truth-out.org/opinion/item/15214-alec-is-now-deciding-what-you-eat
Sun, June 3, 2012 http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/cndy/2012-05/26/content_15392452.htm
Human Rights Record of United States in 2011
Updated: 2012-05-26 09:02
(China Daily)
Editor’s note: The State Council Information Office of the People’s Republic of China published a report titled “The Human Rights Record of the United States in 2011″ Following is the full text:
Sun, June 3, 2012 http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/cndy/2012-05/26/content_15392452.htm
1. “Tracking Journalist Arrests at Occupy Protests Around the Country”: http://act2.freepress.net/go/7343?t=6&akid=3545.9813228.KUbm1W
2. “The Police, the iPhone and Your Right to Record,” Huffington Post, May 18, 2012: http://act2.freepress.net/go/10331?t=8&akid=3545.9813228.KUbm1W
Photo by Kate Harnedy
http://reason.com/archives/2012/04/05/7-rules-for-recording-police
7 Rules for Recording Police
Courts are expanding rights but cops are cracking down. Find out how to keep your footage, and yourself, out of trouble.
Steve Silverman | April 5, 2012
Last week the City of Boston agreed to pay Simon Glik $170,000 in damages and legal fees to settle a civil rights lawsuit stemming from his 2007 felony arrest for videotaping police roughing up a suspect. Prior to the settlement, the First Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously ruled that Glik had a “constitutionally protected right to videotape police carrying out their duties in public.”
ohn Ensslin, SPJ President, 719-650-0877,
(contact link @ article)
Abby Henkel, SPJ Communications Coordinator, 317-927-8000 ext. 215,
(contact link @ article
INDIANAPOLIS – The Society of Professional Journalists calls on New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and city administrators across the country to drop charges against journalists arrested while covering the Occupy Wall Street and related protests.
According to The Associated Press, at least six journalists have been arrested or detained while covering the protests in New York City and Chapel Hill, N.C. Reporters have also been arrested in Atlanta, Nashville, Milwaukee and Richmond, Va.
http://spj.org/news.asp?ref=1091 (read all)
Josh Stearns
Associate Program Director
Free Press
1. Brian Stelter, “Reporters Say Police Denied Access to Protest Site,” New York Times, Nov. 15, 2011: http://act2.freepress.net/go/7342?akid=3054.9813228.Czvkwf&t=7
2. See a list of all journalists arrested at Occupy events since September, plus related videos and articles. http://act2.freepress.net/go/7343?akid=3054.9813228.Czvkwf&t=9
SaveTheNews.org
Free Press
http://www.freepress.net
http://redtape.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/06/01/11998060-first-amendment-rights-can-be-terminated-when-cops-cameras-dont-mix?lite
‘First Amendment rights can be terminated’: When cops, cameras don’t mix
Video from March 2012 shows Chicago police taking members of the media into custody.
By Bob Sullivan, Columnist, NBC News
The video is chilling, but it’s also a sign of the times.
“Your First Amendment rights can be terminated,” yells the Chicago police officer, caught on video right before arresting two journalists outside a Chicago hospital. One, an NBC News photographer, was led away in handcuffs essentially for taking pictures in a public place.”
I was talking to a guy yesterday that I paid to post on YouTube….apparently his feed is about 7k a month ….. I never heard of such a thing…. Apparently you can get paid to post playing games on line…..
In this situation…. The officers should be reprimanded for stupidly while on duty….
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2013/03/19-11
Published on Tuesday, March 19, 2013 by Common Dreams
Ignoring First Amendment Attack, Judge Dismisses Animal Rights “Terrorism” Case
- Lauren McCauley, staff writer
On Tuesday a federal judge threw out a lawsuit that challenged the constitutionality of the federal Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (AETA), without addressing the central Freedom of Speech question in the case.
“The Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act (AETA) specifically targets animal rights activists by labeling as an act of “terrorism” any kind of “obstruction” for the purpose of “damaging or interfering with the operations of an animal enterprise.”
Critics charge that AETA is written so broadly, “it could turn a successful labor protest at Wal-Mart, which sells animal products, into an act of domestic terrorism,” with non-violent protesters charged under the law facing up to twenty years in prison—depending on the amount of profit loss that results from their actions.”
raff
if the kid was downloading and not storing the video in the camera/cellphone the officers can’t do anything as long as he can break connection before the officers get to it.
but, other than resisting arrest, what else can they charge him with? unlawfully passing over the head of an officer?
Looks like the police are pretty much identifying themselves as enemies of the public. What a conflict of interests, huh?
Florida Statutes 784.05 (1) – “Whoever, through culpable negligence, exposes another person to personal injury commits a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082 or s. 775.083.”
It’s a crime to commit an act which recklessly exposes another person to the potential of personal injury without their consent. One wrong move and one of those cops could have easily gotten a knee to the head, or something. Then, of course, it would have been a felony assault.
It’s difficult for me to think of a more stupid thing to become a felon for.
No sympathies for the guy.
He causes embarrassment and potential harm to people, just so he can videotape it. It is breach of the peace. It is disorderly conduct. And if I were the cops and realized he did his action deliberately, just so he could film the event, I would have busted him, too.
You pick your fights. This isn’t one of them.
If he increases his fixation on these kinds of stunts, he’s going to hurt someone.
http://www.mysuncoast.com/news/local/prankster-arrested-after-videoing-himself-jumping-over-deputy-s-head/article_9b3bdfca-900a-11e2-ad14-001a4bcf6878.html
Bruce Woych, the AETA is an abysmal act, but the case was dismissed for standing. Not unexpected.
The only enemies of the state these days are our own govt and police forces
This “prankster” needs to learn that people have a right to be left alone… before someone gets hurt.