• 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.

Milwaukee Police officer shot on north side

MKEgal

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
4,383
Location
in front of my computer, WI
I know what you mean, but when I see:
Milwaukee police officer shot on north side
I wonder where on the body that is. :rolleyes:

As for them finally being kept in jail/prison for a while, if police can convince a jury that they harmed an officer it'll probably happen.

when they arrived they encountered two suspects who began arguing with the officers.
That led to a physical struggle
Arguing (might or might not have actually been an argument; all we're getting is the winner's side) led to fighting (you can imagine my thoughts on that), which led to an officer being shot?
It's not right that he's injured, but I want more information.
 
Last edited:

twoskinsonemanns

Regular Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2012
Messages
2,326
Location
WV
"She also said a relative captured the incident on video that was confiscated by police."

How is this allowed to continue?
 

MKEgal

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2010
Messages
4,383
Location
in front of my computer, WI
Wouldn't it be wonderful if there were other neighbors who also got video?

The two suspects in custody are 24- and 39-years-old and both have arrest records.
Big whoopte-do.
An arrest record doesn't necessarily mean that the person actually did anything wrong.
(Go ahead, ask me how I know.) :mad:
If they'd been convicted of anything, or spent time in jail/prison, that might be a bit more convincing (except that I know people who have been wrongfully convicted).

"The police actually have my son down on the ground... He was not resisting arrest. From what the videotape shows is how the police started beating him in the head."
That sounds awfully familiar... Isn't that what happened with the Lamborghini (sp?) guy?
Luckily, there were too many bystanders for the police to be able to take all their phones, so that video got out.

Milwaukee Police Assistant Chief Patrick Mitchell
He's been in trouble before, too. Cost the city some money to settle lawsuits.
Wonder why the article didn't mention that?
 
Last edited:

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
"Our investigation shows the suspect while armed with the weapon of Milwaukee police officer discharged the weapon one time striking the officer in the leg," said Milwaukee Police Assistant Chief Patrick Mitchell during a press conference Friday.

The two suspects in custody are 24- and 39-years-old and both have arrest records.

Their family claims that the officers attacked them and that one of those officers accidentally shot himself. They say cell phone video taken of the incident corroborates these claims.

"The police actually have my son down on the ground," said Jacqueline Cole, who is the mother of the 24-year-old suspect and the sister of the 39-year-old suspect. "He was not resisting arrest. From what the videotape shows is how the police started beating him in the head."


Sounds like we have 2 conflicting stories ... should the police be able to take witness videos (as "evidence" as the po po states?). I don't think that they should be able to do this under our 1st amendment rights. They should have to ask a judge and get a warrant and allow copies to be made.

Citizens are under no obligation to make evidence for the police but citizens are allowed to video tape government activites.

And arrest records? Does not impress me ... show me convictions, not arrests. Innocent until proven guilty. How many on this board have been arrested and had charges either dropped or found not guilty in court?
 

HandyHamlet

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2010
Messages
2,772
Location
Terra, Sol
Sounds like we have 2 conflicting stories ... should the police be able to take witness videos (as "evidence" as the po po states?). I don't think that they should be able to do this under our 1st amendment rights. They should have to ask a judge and get a warrant and allow copies to be made.

There is no "should" about it. Police need a warrant to seize cell phones and cameras. Multiple cities around the country have been forced to publicly release new policy with regards to cameras and phones over the last few years. However this has had no positive effect on the war on photography and the Constitution. Philanderin' Flynn's Keystone "troops" are a prime example.
 
Last edited:

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
There is no "should" about it. Police need a warrant to seize cell phones and cameras. Multiple cities around the country have been forced to publicly release new policy with regards to cameras and phones over the last few years. However this has had no positive effect on the war on photography and the Constitution. Philanderin' Flynn's Keystone "troops" are a prime example.

Any cite on this? And I agree, has had limited effect on our first amendment rights .... some, but very little ... nowhere near where it should be. Cops take them now as "evidence" .. before it was just "gimme gimme gimme"
 

HandyHamlet

Regular Member
Joined
Nov 17, 2010
Messages
2,772
Location
Terra, Sol
Any cite on this?

http://webcache.googleusercontent.c..._states_letter_re_photography_5_14_2012_0.pdf

US Department of Justice
Civil Rights division
Special Litigation Section - PHB

DJ-207-35-10 (google for PDF file)

Mary E. Borja
Wiley Rein LLP

May 14, 2012

Re: Christopher Sharp vs Baltimore City Police Dept, et. al.

page 5
Section 2 - Guidance on Right to Record Police Activity
Subsection B - Policies should describe the range of prohibited responses to individuals observing or recording the police.

(paragraph 1)
"... policies should instruct officers that, except under limited circumstances, officers must not search or seize a camera or recording device without a warrant."

(paragraph 2)
"Policies should prohibit officers from destroying recording devices or cameras and deleting recordings or photographs under any circumstances. In addition to violating the First Amendment, police officers violate the core requirements of the Fourth Amendment procedural due process clause when they irrevocably deprive individuals of their recording devices without first providing notice and an opportunity to object. "
 
Last edited:

davidmcbeth

Banned
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
16,167
Location
earth's crust
"Don't interfere with anything in the Constitution. That must be maintained, for it is the only safeguard of our liberties."
Abraham Lincoln

Abe was not the best source for quoting .. a guy who suspended our constitutional rights whenever is was best for himself
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
"Don't interfere with anything in the Constitution. That must be maintained, for it is the only safeguard of our liberties."
Abraham Lincoln

Abe was not the best source for quoting .. a guy who suspended our constitutional rights whenever is was best for himself

Regardless of who said it, it does fit the current thinking. A signature line is a matter of personal choice/opinion and a user should not be criticized for exercising that. Jus' sayin'
 

LESGTINCT

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2012
Messages
127
Location
Connecticut
There is no "should" about it. Police need a warrant to seize cell phones and cameras. Multiple cities around the country have been forced to publicly release new policy with regards to cameras and phones over the last few years. However this has had no positive effect on the war on photography and the Constitution. Philanderin' Flynn's Keystone "troops" are a prime example.

Incorrect, police may seize the phone as evidence in this case. They would get a search warrant for the contents of the phone (the video).
 
Top