sudden valley gunner
Regular Member
? If there was something illegal say it? Was the second dude fired? I agrees the first guy who threatened him should.
Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
You didn't see any coercion and threats?
? If there was something illegal say it? Was the second dude fired? I agrees the first guy who threatened him should.
Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
You didn't see any coercion and threats?
You didn't see any coercion and threats?
There we go....
The threat to go to his work place and brother him?
And what coercion? Are you implying he was coercing him to leave by threatening to bother him at work?
Harassment is illegal in Washington State. Threatening to commit an aggressive crime is illegal and immoral. Demands made against right and backed up with threats constitute coercion.
The officer in question literally and explicitly threatened to "go to your newspaper and harass you". Therefore, the officer in question is legally and morally a criminal.
QED.
Try again.
There we go....
The threat to go to his work place and brother him?
And what coercion? Are you implying he was coercing him to leave by threatening to bother him at work?
Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
If the tables were turned, and the citizen was threatening to "bother" the cop at his building of employment, would you still hold the same position?
Or would the word "harass" suddenly become more sinister?
Please do not take this as a defense of Primus, but citizens are allowed to pester police at their place of work. It is the appropriate place to make citizen complaints. I do have a problem with some so called activists stalking the family of police officers and going to their homes to harass them.
If the tables were turned, and the citizen was threatening to "bother" the cop at his building of employment, would you still hold the same position?
Or would the word "harass" suddenly become more sinister?
Under the law, technically speaking, you could be correct, depending on the exact wording of the law and case law. But, if I stood across the street from the local cop shop, in plain view of all, and photographed that cop each time he came and went, I'll wager that I would be arrested, I'll even go as far as to almost guarantee that I would be arrested for stalking that cop.
Would a cop get arrested for stalking me, no way in hell, he is observing, doing that which he is being paid to do. Clearly a double standard.
The key to exercising this "public spaces" stuff is to steer clear of the cop's personal, off the clock, life. Do not speak with them/him, and always be passive. Record record record.
Granted, even the bear part. However, I did not address these valid points. I addressed the very specific premise that PPM posted.DS does that everyday, and has only got arrested when he interfered with actual police operations. Interjecting his opinion to suspects, getting to close to the scene and in some cases actually threatening the officers. For the most part he has only been arrested on a couple occasions. But then he does this on a daily basis, not just a few times.
Keep in mind that news agencies in large cities keep reporters on a continual basis in police depts without incident.
I would put it this way, it is not illegal for a wild bear to see you as food. It is not illegal to be in the same place as the bear. Do it as a way to make a living sooner or later the bear will have you for dinner. This happened to a wildlife journalist in Africa with gorillas. Poking a wild bear with a stick often is downrignt stupid. Add that to being a smart arse and a person could end up shot, as the cop blocker did. While it was wrong what they did they got away with it, and he now is looking at a prison sentence.
WE all should be responsible for our actions, and if they backfire we are still responsible. The reporter in this incident IMO acted responsibly, and he handled it responsibly. The person who thinks the reporters actions vindicate his stalking is a idiot. If he was such a champion he would refuse a settlement, and act like the reporter did, seek redress, not money.
Ummm he was doing exactly that. The officers were working at a scene and the guy came up to them.
He initially involved himself in their stop wanting to know why there were so many officers. Then he left and REengaged the other officers.
You are delusional. The reporter was standing 50 feet away taking pictures and the police engaged HIM.
You want to see how the police SHOULD have handled a member of the press.......watch and learn.
[video=youtube;TNTt5iBB4qY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNTt5iBB4qY[/video]
Did you watch the video? During the conversation with the officer he ADMITS he approached the officers and asked them why there were so many of them for one guy.
Ummm he was doing exactly that. The officers were working at a scene and the guy came up to them.
He initially involved himself in their stop wanting to know why there were so many officers. Then he left and REengaged the other officers.
Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
This is an exaggeration, lie...both...
"The incident occurred on a Tuesday evening in the International District. The short version: Several cops had been surrounding a man sitting on a planter box. I hopped off my bicycle and started taking photos from a distance when Saulet rushed over to say I'd be arrested if I didn't leave. He claimed, wrongly, that I was standing on private property. Even though his statement didn't sound right to me—I was standing in a Metro transit plaza—I backed up until I stood unambiguously on the City of Seattle's sidewalk. But Saulet insisted that was illegal, too, and that I would be arrested unless I left the block. I filed a complaint with King County against Saulet and another complaint with the Seattle Police Department against a nearby SPD officer (who threatened to come into The Stranger's offices and harass me at work for asking questions)."
Sounds like the fired thug had to put some effort into getting to the scofflaw photographer. Why would he need to rush.....anywhere......if the reporter was "involved" with the officers?
"Left" and REengaged. A bit of a different story than the victim tells. Wasn't he ordered to leave, the thug cop even moving his hand towards his holstered firearm, indicating what...he was willing to kill if his commands were not obeyed? "Driven off" might be more appropriate.
I love you brother
Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk