Do recent SCOTUS cases in videoing cops allow cameras in courtrooms now?

onus · Jan 29, 2014

Story about filming in a court room......

Today I went to court with a friend who routinely films police. (some posters think its me)

He has been arrested 5 times on CA pc148 charges while filming and so far 4 have been dismissed or fail to file.

Todays court appearance is for his last remaining charge.

I had filed the necessary papers 2 weeks ahead of time for permission to film the trial. I was denied.

When we entered court today there were 3 cases ahead of ours. We had just sat down and my friend noticed a police officer from a jurisdiction that he films a lot and has won two lawsuits against for illegal arrests.

About 10 seconds after we sit down, the police officer who is sitting 3 rows in front of us is talking to the bailiffs and he says loud enough for everyone to hear "that's Daniel saulmon, he makes his living suing police and being a parasite".

My friend tells him to shut up and mind his own business. The cop turns back to him and says "we are in a courtroom now and you cant film and put me on the internet so i'll say whatever I want to you. YOU shut up".

At that point my friend and the cop start to argue and exchange insults. Believe it or not, the bailiffs told the cop to be quite and respect the court !!!

There was a break in the court proceedings so everyone went outside in the hallway and the cop starts in again with my friend and they almost come to blows.

The whole time the cops kept ranting about how my friend is a wuss when he cant film people and too bad they are in a court room where he cant film.

The joke is going to be on the cop though because the courtroom has security cameras all over so we filed a public records request for them.

The government doesn't want you to know what goes on in their extortion chambers.

color of law · Jan 29, 2014

Fallschirmjäger said:
The Supreme Court has not ruled that eating a peanut butter and mayonnaise sandwich is a constitutional right either, what's your point, Onus?
The Supreme Court has refused to hear appeals from Circuit Courts rulings that filming/photographing the police was legal. That means they see no need to address the issue as the lower courts decisions were considered proper.

The U.S. Supreme Court has refused to review a federal appeals court decision finding it unconstitutional to enforce an Illinois state law that makes it a felony to videotape police officers working in public if a microphone is turned on.

Supreme Court rejects plea to ban taping of police in Illinois

The United States Supreme Court sided with a lower court decision protecting the rights of Americans when it comes to privacy under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

The Supreme Court has addressed the issue and they said, paraphrasing, "Get that :cuss: outta my face, homie, it's legal."

The Justice Dept. thinks you can video tape the cops......

http://www.justice.gov/crt/about/spl/documents/Sharp_ltr_5-14-12.pdf

eye95 · Jan 29, 2014

onus said:
Story about filming in a court room......

Today I went to court with a friend who routinely films police. (some posters think its me)

He has been arrested 5 times on CA pc148 charges while filming and so far 4 have been dismissed or fail to file.

Todays court appearance is for his last remaining charge.

I had filed the necessary papers 2 weeks ahead of time for permission to film the trial. I was denied.

When we entered court today there were 3 cases ahead of ours. We had just sat down and my friend noticed a police officer from a jurisdiction that he films a lot and has won two lawsuits against for illegal arrests.

About 10 seconds after we sit down, the police officer who is sitting 3 rows in front of us is talking to the bailiffs and he says loud enough for everyone to hear "that's Daniel saulmon, he makes his living suing police and being a parasite".

My friend tells him to shut up and mind his own business. The cop turns back to him and says "we are in a courtroom now and you cant film and put me on the internet so i'll say whatever I want to you. YOU shut up".

At that point my friend and the cop start to argue and exchange insults. Believe it or not, the bailiffs told the cop to be quite and respect the court !!!

There was a break in the court proceedings so everyone went outside in the hallway and the cop starts in again with my friend and they almost come to blows.

The whole time the cops kept ranting about how my friend is a wuss when he cant film people and too bad they are in a court room where he cant film.

The joke is going to be on the cop though because the courtroom has security cameras all over so we filed a public records request for them.

The government doesn't want you to know what goes on in their extortion chambers.

A story about two people being jerks.

Fuller Malarkey · Jan 29, 2014

eye95 said:
A story about two people being jerks.

Isolated incident 88,691.

eye95 · Jan 29, 2014

Fuller Malarkey said:
Isolated incident 88,691.

The cop did not violate any rights by being a jerk. Not an "incident," good or bad, just a silly interaction between two jerks, neither of which was exercising power over the other.

BTW, you don't have to interact with a cop to have a jerk exercising power over you to his own advantage!

arentol · Jan 29, 2014

eye95 said:
A story about two people being jerks.

Three people actually.... now.

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk

davidmcbeth · Jan 29, 2014

eye95 said:
The cop did not violate any rights by being a jerk. Not an "incident," good or bad, just a silly interaction between two jerks, neither of which was exercising power over the other.

BTW, you don't have to interact with a cop to have a jerk exercising power over you to his own advantage!

I would have disagreed, with the "parasite" comment but apprarently not..
http://scholar.google.com/scholar_c...asite+defamation+"parasite"&hl=en&as_sdt=8006

Here, as in the above cited cases, certain of the words and phrases used by Toussaint to describe Greenky on her MySpace blog of December 1, 2006, and in particular that he is "a leech," "a sleazy male worm" "a showbiz reject" "a parasite" "a loose cannon" fall into this category and constitute constitutionally protected opinion regarding Greenky's performance of his duties as a manager. Likewise, certain words and phrases in the second posting on the MySpace blog on April 11, 2007, arc also not actionable since they are constitutionally protected statements of opinion. These include Toussaint's statements that Greenky is a "parasite manager" "patholical (sic)" "lazy" "unethical and sleazy."

I learned something new today.

eye95 · Jan 29, 2014

arentol said:
Three people actually.... now.

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk

Make that four.

Moving on.

notalawyer · Jan 29, 2014

eye95 said:
Make that four.

Moving on.

No, it's still just three. The fourth was just funny (and honest).

eye95 · Jan 29, 2014

Oooo...FIVE!

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

1245A Defender · Jan 29, 2014

Wowwie!!!

eye95 said:
A story about two people being jerks.

eye95 said:
The cop did not violate any rights by being a jerk. Not an "incident," good or bad, just a silly interaction between two jerks, neither of which was exercising power over the other.

BTW, you don't have to interact with a cop to have a jerk exercising power over you to his own advantage!

eye95 said:
Make that four.

Moving on.

eye95 said:
Oooo...FIVE!

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

A day late,, and a dollar short...

Just another day on the forum with eye95.

Nothing on topic to add,,, just another opportunity to behave like an a$$!!!

I was recently told that I am not better that that,
I said, I know I am not better than that, but I am better than You!!!

Fake edit to add....
I showed up for jury duty,, they saw my spy pen,,, Kicked me out!!!

onus · Jan 29, 2014

eye95 said:
The cop did not violate any rights by being a jerk.

eye, I am sure you are aware that people do NOT have freedom of speech inside a courtroom.

the police officer was inside the courtroom to get a warrant signed.

my friend was inside the courtroom for his criminal case.

there is no reason the police officer should have said anything to my friend. it was rude, unprofessional and ILLEGAL.

maybe you should read up on behavior inside courtrooms and the law regarding it.

eye95 · Jan 30, 2014

onus said:
eye, I am sure you are aware that people do NOT have freedom of speech inside a courtroom.

the police officer was inside the courtroom to get a warrant signed.

my friend was inside the courtroom for his criminal case.

there is no reason the police officer should have said anything to my friend. it was rude, unprofessional and ILLEGAL.

maybe you should read up on behavior inside courtrooms and the law regarding it.

And the cop behaved like a jerk to your friend. And your "friend" behaved like a jerk to the cop.

The cop did nothing illegal. Neither did your "friend." If the judge had determined their behavior to be in contempt, that would be different. He didn't. So both behaved legally, but like jerks.

sudden valley gunner · Jan 30, 2014

One was a public servant the other was not.

Fuller Malarkey · Jan 30, 2014

.....and if one of them was a public servant using their badge as authority......to act like a jerk......

We are looking at an abuse of power. It's hard to find a citizen guilty of such, isn't it? Retaliation for "contempt of cop" falls into that "opinion enFORCEment" thing, which frequently is referred to as an "isolated incident".

eye95 · Jan 30, 2014

sudden valley gunner said:
One was a public servant the other was not.

Neither was acting in the role of a public servant. Both acted like jerks.

Saulmon is a jerk. Since he is not a poster here

, it is not a rules violation to say so!

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

onus · Jan 30, 2014

eye95 said:
Neither was acting in the role of a public servant. Both acted like jerks.

The police officer was in uniform and in court to get a search warrant signed.

eye95 · Jan 30, 2014

onus said:
The police officer was in uniform and in court to get a search warrant signed.

And, based on the narrative as you wrote it, the officer was not acting under color of law, so he was a private jerk, just like Saulmon was and is. Remember, since you insist that Saulmon is NOT you, I can say that without calling you a jerk!

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk.

<o>

onus · Jan 30, 2014

eye95 said:
And, based on the narrative as you wrote it, the officer was not acting under color of law, so he was a private jerk, just like Saulmon was and is. Remember, since you insist that Saulmon is NOT you, I can say that without calling you a jerk!

lol.

always good for a laugh

sudden valley gunner · Jan 30, 2014

eye95 said:
Neither was acting in the role of a public servant. Both acted like jerks.

Saulmon is a jerk. Since he is not a poster here , it is not a rules violation to say so!

<o>

Fuller Malarkey said:
.....and if one of them was a public servant using their badge as authority......to act like a jerk......

We are looking at an abuse of power. It's hard to find a citizen guilty of such, isn't it? Retaliation for "contempt of cop" falls into that "opinion enFORCEment" thing, which frequently is referred to as an "isolated incident".

My employees don't get to act like jerks to people who pay my bills while on the clock.

Do recent SCOTUS cases in videoing cops allow cameras in courtrooms now?

Regular Member

Accomplished Advocate

Well-known member

Regular Member

Well-known member

New member

Banned

Well-known member

Regular Member

Well-known member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Well-known member

Regular Member

Regular Member

Well-known member

Regular Member

Well-known member

Regular Member

Regular Member