Arrested For Not Showing IDs In Ultra-Orthodox Jewish Town

...the officer tells them their being arrested for obstructing government administration, and explains that the "public safety director," Moses Witriol, had the right to forcibly detain Zwinck when he refused to show I.D...:uhoh:

[video=youtube;KpZHR_s0QLw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KpZHR_s0QLw&feature=player_embedded[/video]

[video=youtube_share;jZjGBcgj0jA]http://youtu.be/jZjGBcgj0jA[/video]

They were deemed "suspicious" for engaging in the criminal activity of photography.

www.nycourts.gov/cji/2-PenalLaw/195/195.05.pdf

The charge for which he was arrested doesn’t seem to fit the action.

OBSTRUCTING GOVERNMENTAL ADMINISTRATION
Second Degree
(A Misdemeanor)
PENAL LAW 195.05
(Committed on or after November 1, 1998)
The _____ count is Obstructing Governmental
Administration in the Second Degree.
Under our law, a person is guilty of Obstructing
Governmental Administration in the Second Degree when that
person intentionally obstructs, impairs or perverts the
administration of law or other governmental function or prevents
or attempts to prevent a public servant from performing an official
function,

Select appropriate alternative:
by means of intimidation, physical force or interference, [or
by means of any independently unlawful act]
or
by means of interfering, whether or not physical force is
involved, with radio, telephone, television or other
telecommunications systems owned or operated by the
state, or a county, city, town, village, fire district or
emergency medical service
or
by means of releasing a dangerous animal under
circumstances evincing the actor`s intent that the animal
obstruct governmental administration.
Some of the terms used in this definition have their own
special meaning in our law.

I will now give you the meaning of the
following terms: “public servant” and “intentionally.”
1 See Penal Law §10.00(15). The term “public servant” includes a person
who has been elected or designated to become a public servant.
2 See Penal Law § 15.05(1).
2
PUBLIC SERVANT means any public officer or employee
of the state or of any political subdivision thereof or of any
governmental instrumentality within the state, or any person
exercising the functions of any such public officer or employee.1
Intent means conscious objective or purpose.2 Thus, a
person INTENTIONALLY obstructs, impairs or perverts the
administration of law or other governmental function or prevents
or attempts to prevent a public servant from performing an official
function when that person’s conscious objective or purpose is to
do so.

In order for you to find the defendant guilty of this crime, the
People are required to prove, from all the evidence in the case,
beyond a reasonable doubt, each of the following three elements:
1. That on or about (date), in the county of (county) , the
defendant, (defendant’s name) , obstructed, impaired or
perverted the administration of law or other governmental
function or prevented or attempted to prevent a public servant
from performing an official function;
2. That the defendant did so
Select appropriate alternative:
by means of intimidation, physical force or
interference, [or by means of any independently
unlawful act]; and
or
by means of interfering, whether or not physical force
is involved, with radio, telephone, television or other
3
telecommunications systems owned or operated by
the state, or a county, city, town, village, fire district or
emergency medical service; and
or
by means of releasing a dangerous animal under
circumstances evincing the actor`s intent that the
animal obstruct governmental administration; and
3. That the defendant did so intentionally.
Therefore, if you find that the People have proven beyond
a reasonable doubt each of those elements, you must find the
defendant guilty of the crime of Obstructing Governmental
Administration in the Second Degree as charged in the count.
On the other hand, if you find that the People have not
proven beyond a reasonable doubt any one or more of those
elements, you must find the defendant not guilty of the crime of
Obstructing Governmental Administration in the Second Degree
as charged in the count.

[FONT=Arial,Bold][FONT=Arial,Bold]

​

​

[/FONT]​

​

​

​

​

​

Even with NY as Stop and ID state, the law governing still doesn't match what the arrest was for, no unlawfull activiy was being conducted, or observed.

http://public.leginfo.state.ny.us/L...BROWSER=EXPLORER+&TOKEN=02824101+&TARGET=VIEW

§ 140.50 Temporary questioning of persons in public places; search for
weapons.
1. In addition to the authority provided by this article for making an
arrest without a warrant, a police officer may stop a person in a public
place located within the geographical area of such officer's employment
when he reasonably suspects that such person is committing, has
committed or is about to commit either (a) a felony or (b) a misdemeanor
defined in the penal law, and may demand of him his name, address and an
explanation of his conduct.
2. Any person who is a peace officer and who provides security
services for any court of the unified court system may stop a person in
or about the courthouse to which he is assigned when he reasonably
suspects that such person is committing, has committed or is about to
commit either (a) a felony or (b) a misdemeanor defined in the penal
law, and may demand of him his name, address and an explanation of his
conduct.
3. When upon stopping a person under circumstances prescribed in
subdivisions one and two a police officer or court officer, as the case
may be, reasonably suspects that he is in danger of physical injury, he
may search such person for a deadly weapon or any instrument, article or
substance readily capable of causing serious physical injury and of a
sort not ordinarily carried in public places by law-abiding persons. If
he finds such a weapon or instrument, or any other property possession
of which he reasonably believes may constitute the commission of a
crime, he may take it and keep it until the completion of the
questioning, at which time he shall either return it, if lawfully
possessed, or arrest such person.
4. In cities with a population of one million or more, information
that establishes the personal identity of an individual who has been
stopped, questioned and/or frisked by a police officer or peace officer,
such as the name, address or social security number of such person,
shall not be recorded in a computerized or electronic database if that
individual is released without further legal action; provided, however,
that this subdivision shall not prohibit police officers or peace
officers from including in a computerized or electronic database generic
characteristics of an individual, such as race and gender, who has been
stopped, questioned and/or frisked by a police officer or peace officer.

Cop- "What's your name in Michigan?'

Suspicious photographer- "Same as it is here."

:lol:

I doubt the officer even cares if the charge sticks or not.
He isn't rated on how many arrests result in convictions, but he does get paid for his time in court and then he goes home and eats a nice steak dinner while you re-budget and see how long it will take to recoup the expenses you incurred defending yourself from a bogus charge.

"You can beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride," which I'm sure almost everyone has heard means that even if the officer cannot get a conviction he still gets the satisfaction of causing trouble and expense.

Where did this take place? Not much info aside from the NY State Police being called for some reason.

Gunslinger said:

Where did this take place? Not much info aside from the NY State Police being called for some reason.

Click to expand...

Kiryas Joel, New York.

Thanks for the link. Never heard of it, but quite interesting place.

Fallschirmjäger said:

"You can beat the rap, but you can't beat the ride," which I'm sure almost everyone has heard means that even if the officer cannot get a conviction he still gets the satisfaction of causing trouble and expense.

Click to expand...

And now his pretty picture is all over the Internet with his own actions painting him as the "sort of person" he really is. I'll bet his momma is so proud of him!

Off to puke, now...

since9 said:

And now his pretty picture is all over the Internet with his own actions painting him as the "sort of person" he really is. I'll bet his momma is so proud of him!

Off to puke, now...

Click to expand...

As I understand the situation: guy resists being coerced/forced into doing something he does not want to do. There is no law requiring him to do what others are trying to coerce/force him into doing.

You jump all over him, implying that the "sort of person he really is" is something bad.

What would your response be if the issue had been getting hassled over OCing when/where there was no law violation regarding OCing?

stay safe.

Gunslinger said:

Thanks for the link. Never heard of it, but quite interesting place.

Click to expand...

It gives me pause to look at the statistics of that area and the dependency on social services.

I think those "police officers" were feeling a little vulnerable and scaaaaared because they weren't wearing their magical, coveted pieces of government-issued costume jewelry.

Until people start resisting these unlawful arrests, nothing will change.

TechnoWeenie said:

Until people start resisting these unlawful arrests, nothing will change.

Click to expand...

Although an arrest may be unlawful, resisting arrest remains both illegal and dangerous.

The best time to resist and stick it to the man is after the cuffs are removed and you're free to go. Take that freedom to go file suite against a city that violated your civil rights.

since9 said:

Although an arrest may be unlawful, resisting arrest remains both illegal and dangerous.

Click to expand...

Untrue on the first count, undoubtedly on the second, but I maintain that being restrained and removed to another location, under the threat of lethal violence from the state's armed enforcers, represents an imminent threat to life...and that is before you even hit the jail or are subjected to the criminal "justice" system. Prudence should always be the order of the day, but the right to resist unlawful arrest has been a part of the Anglo-Saxon common law tradition for thousands of years and has been recognized by the SCOTUS in John Bad Elk v. U.S. and affirmed in numerous state court decisions which may be found at the link below.

John Bad Elk v. U.S., 177 U.S. 529: “Where the officer is killed in the course of the disorder which naturally accompanies an attempted arrest that is resisted, the law looks with very different eyes upon the transaction, when the officer had the right to make the arrest, from what it does if the officer had no right. What may be murder in the first case might be nothing more than manslaughter in the other, or the facts might show that no offense had been committed.”

http://www.constitution.org/uslaw/defunlaw.htm