• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

On Duty Officer convicted of brandishing

ConditionThree

ConditionThree

State Pioneer
Joined
May 22, 2006
Messages
2,231
Location
Shasta County, California, USA
imported post

I gather that the charge resulted from using his firearm in conjunction with a threat to kill the detainee if he didnt share information, and would in no way influence future commands at gun point for compliance from police (ie;" Put the gun down, or I will shoot you.")

Now I wonder what the threshold for 'rude' or 'angry' is, as those are also elements of the crime of brandishing as well. Just how rude or angry can an officer be, while handling their sidearm, before it becomes brandishing? And in some cases, as it is applied to citizens, brandishing need not even be out of the holster or handled to be a crime. Food for thought.
 
marshaul

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
imported post

I predict that as more people have the ability to easily and quickly begin recording voice and video (something which is more common outside OC circles than we may realize ;) ), police will begin to have to really watch what they do for fear of being recorded and sued.

When that happens, "rude" and "threatening" will start to become important words for a cop who wishes to draw his firearm on an unarmed individual.
 
W

wayneco

Regular Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2008
Messages
256
Location
Washoe County, Nevada, USA
imported post

There has been more than one case of a cop arresting someone for "wiretapping" him while he performed his job in public... i.e. someone getting a speeding ticket arrested for shooting him with a camcorder while writing the ticket. I think that everyone should have the right to record their interactions with LE.

Maybe the answer is for everyone to become a "member of the media."
 
C

CA_Libertarian

State Researcher
Joined
Jul 18, 2007
Messages
2,585
Location
Stanislaus County, California, USA
imported post

wayneco wrote:
There has been more than one case of a cop arresting someone for "wiretapping" him while he performed his job in public... i.e. someone getting a speeding ticket arrested for shooting him with a camcorder while writing the ticket. I think that everyone should have the right to record their interactions with LE.

Maybe the answer is for everyone to become a "member of the media."
Click to expand...
I haven't heard of such a case in CA. Then again, I don't really pay much attention to mainstream media (none at all actually).
 
marshaul

marshaul

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Aug 13, 2007
Messages
11,188
Location
Fairfax County, Virginia
imported post

To be honest I don't know the laws in every state. I do know that, in Virginia, as long as one party in a conversation (i.e., yourself) is aware of the recording it is legal to record any conversation, including one you have with a police officer.
 
cato

cato

Newbie
Joined
Oct 29, 2006
Messages
2,338
Location
California, USA
imported post

CA_Libertarian wrote:
wayneco wrote:
There has been more than one case of a cop arresting someone for "wiretapping" him while he performed his job in public... i.e. someone getting a speeding ticket arrested for shooting him with a camcorder while writing the ticket. I think that everyone should have the right to record their interactions with LE.

Maybe the answer is for everyone to become a "member of the media."
Click to expand...
I haven't heard of such a case in CA. Then again, I don't really pay much attention to mainstream media (none at all actually).
Click to expand...

The only thing close in CA is

632. (a) Every person who, intentionally and without the consent of
all parties to a confidential communication, by means of any
electronic amplifying or recording device, eavesdrops upon or records
the confidential communication, whether the communication is carried
on among the parties in the presence of one another or by means of a
telegraph, telephone, or other device, except a radio, shall be
punished by a fine not exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars
($2,500), or imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding one year,
or in the state prison, or by both that fine and imprisonment. If
the person has previously been convicted of a violation of this
section or Section 631, 632.5, 632.6, 632.7, or 636, the person shall
be punished by a fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000),
by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding one year, or in the
state prison, or by both that fine and imprisonment.
(b) The term "person" includes an individual, business
association, partnership, corporation, limited liability company, or
other legal entity, and an individual acting or purporting to act for
or on behalf of any government or subdivision thereof, whether
federal, state, or local, but excludes an individual known by all
parties to a confidential communication to be overhearing or
recording the communication.
(c) The term "confidential communication" includes any
communication carried on in circumstances as may reasonably indicate
that any party to the communication desires it to be confined to the
parties thereto, but excludes a communication made in a public
gathering or in any legislative, judicial, executive or
administrative proceeding open to the public, or in any other
circumstance in which the parties to the communication may reasonably
expect that the communication may be overheard or recorded.
Click to expand...
I'd love to read some case law if anyone knows of any. But generally, I've been taught that in CA if one is in a public place one has no "expectation of privacy" and can be recorded.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top