I was arrested for filming police tonight

[TechnoWeenie]

Nothing will happen until people start resisting - with force - against this tyrannical goosestepping BS.

 

[OrangeIsTrouble]

Please edit your youtube video title and description and add proper tags to make this show up on a search. (name of city, swat, any identifying tags). Turn up the heat! If this doesn't get made an example of in the right lawful way, it will be made an example of the misconception that you cannot record 'authoritah' and you must succumb.

 

[509rifas]

Please edit your youtube video title and description and add proper tags to make this show up on a search. (name of city, swat, any identifying tags). Turn up the heat! If this doesn't get made an example of in the right lawful way, it will be made an example of the misconception that you cannot record 'authoritah' and you must succumb.

Gimme a break, it's been up for about 24 hours and it's way more popular than my other videos.

 

[1245A Defender]

Well,,,

Am I the only one here that actually watched the video?

The Cop stated (at least two or three times) that you are violating HIS right to not be recorded without his consent. Thats why he arrested you. He even warned you multiple times. In California you MAY NOT record someone without their permission. Go ahead and sue, I hope they counter sue you.

first off... welcome to the forum!
out of stater,,,
out of the countrier,,,

do you really know California law?
Did you know that 509 rifas lives in Washington state?
Did you know we here are in a one party consent state?
That cop has no right to not be recorded without his consent!
Not in our country!

Oh and BTW,,, yes I did watch the vidio!
That cop put his ASS in the wringer, big time!
If 509 rifas wants to sue him for a violation of civil rights, the cop will lose, big time, their is no two ways about that...

 

[davidmcbeth]

someone needs to google GILK ....

 

[Mike_ZA]

spell check is your friend.

Removed my Post as I decided it wasn't worth it, but as I have a response just after I hit delete - here I am!

Thanks for the welcome!

I don't know California Law -- I brought it up as the Cop did. Someone in the video (not going to assume it was the Person running the camera) agreed with him. From the subsequent posts, I see that this is indeed the case:

"However, several decisions have held that that a citizen does not violate the statute if the
citizen tapes the officer’s spoken words or radio communications where the contact occurs
in a public place"


I doubt this would apply (as this was not in a public place),especially if the Cop asks him to stop.


The gentleman recording knew he was in the wrong, he even tried to fake turning the camera off. Why would he do that if he was in the right?

In the end, he baited the cop into arresting him so he could have something on tape.

All the legitimate cases of abuse and Cops overstepping the mark are overshadowed by ones like these that the media blows up to sell.

All you are doing is hurting your cause as people will eventually stop responding to these 'cry wolf' claims.

Next time try treating the cop with some respect and dignity (you know, like a person) and see the response you get then.

 

[OC for ME]

Since when do cops need civilians to manage their policy handbook? If there is no policy for 'X' then it must be OK to arrest for 'X' even though "everybody" knows that filming cops in public is lawful.

I have done my civic duty and little affect has been noted. I even followed up after a reasonable period of time. Nope, PALO continues to hold the citizenry liable for the failures of LE. PALO continues to place the burden on the citizenry to fix wayward cops. PALO is anti-liberty and anti-citizen.

PALO has not addressed my question regarding a citizen being "permitted" to OC while conducting a "ride along." If PALO is anti-tyranny then a LAC who OCs should be welcome by any cop to OC during the ride along.

As to the OP.

636. (a) Every person who, without permission from all parties to the conversation, eavesdrops on or records, by means of an electronic device, a conversation, or any portion thereof, between a person who is in the physical custody of a law enforcement officer or other public officer, or who is on the property of a law enforcement agency or other public agency, and that person's attorney, religious adviser, or licensed physician, is guilty of a felony punishable by imprisonment pursuant to subdivision (h) of Section 1170.

637.2. (a) Any person who has been injured by a violation of this chapter may bring an action against the person who committed the violation for the greater of the following amounts:
(1) Five thousand dollars ($5,000).
(2) Three times the amount of actual damages, if any, sustained by
the plaintiff.
(b) Any person may, in accordance with Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 525) of Title 7 of Part 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, bring an action to enjoin and restrain any violation of this chapter,
and may in the same action seek damages as provided by subdivision (a).
(c) It is not a necessary prerequisite to an action pursuant to this section that the plaintiff has suffered, or be threatened with, actual damages.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=630-638

Talk to a attorney. It seems that the law is not very clear on a video recording. Could go either way. But likely will go the cop's way.....it is California after all.

 

[OC for ME]

Since when do cops need civilians to manage their policy handbook? If there is no policy for 'X' then it must be OK to arrest for 'X' even though "everybody" knows that filming cops in public is lawful.

I have done my civic duty and little affect has been noted. I even followed up after a reasonable period of time. Nope, PALO continues to hold the citizenry liable for the failures of LE. PALO continues to place the burden on the citizenry to fix wayward cops. PALO is anti-liberty and anti-citizen.

PALO has not addressed my question regarding a citizen being "permitted" to OC while conducting a "ride along." If PALO is anti-tyranny then a LAC who OCs should be welcome by any cop to OC during the ride along.

[strike]As to the OP.Talk to a attorney. It seems that the law is not very clear on a video recording. Could go either way. But likely will go the cop's way.....it is California after all.[/strike]

Never mind.

 

[1245A Defender]

Sooo,,,

Removed my Post as I decided it wasn't worth it, but as I have a response just after I hit delete - here I am!

Thanks for the welcome!

I don't know California Law -- I brought it up as the Cop did. Someone in the video (not going to assume it was the Person running the camera) agreed with him. From the subsequent posts, I see that this is indeed the case:

"However, several decisions have held that that a citizen does not violate the statute if the
citizen tapes the officer’s spoken words or radio communications where the contact occurs
in a public place"


I doubt this would apply (as this was not in a public place),especially if the Cop asks him to stop.


The gentleman recording knew he was in the wrong, he even tried to fake turning the camera off. Why would he do that if he was in the right?

In the end, he baited the cop into arresting him so he could have something on tape.

All the legitimate cases of abuse and Cops overstepping the mark are overshadowed by ones like these that the media blows up to sell.

All you are doing is hurting your cause as people will eventually stop responding to these 'cry wolf' claims.

Next time try treating the cop with some respect and dignity (you know, like a person) and see the response you get then.

HOW could the cop not be "not in a public place?" he was on a public sidewalk, talking loudly in front of many other people!!!
HOW about some respect and dignity for the civil rights of law abiding citizens that are doing nothing unlawful?

You are a statist and a kind of creepy guy from a country that does not share our values.
I probably wont bother to debate this issue with you anymore.
You have much to learn about freedom and liberty before you should come here to spew your views.

Come back after you graduate...

 

[sudden valley gunner]

Since my other computer crashed I lost many court cases, but an arrest/detainment is an assault and SCOTUS at one time even recognized this, sue them, it's not about the money , it is about retaining any form of justice because the system won't do it for you.

 

[acmariner99]

Removed my Post as I decided it wasn't worth it, but as I have a response just after I hit delete - here I am!

Thanks for the welcome!

I don't know California Law -- I brought it up as the Cop did. Someone in the video (not going to assume it was the Person running the camera) agreed with him. From the subsequent posts, I see that this is indeed the case:

"However, several decisions have held that that a citizen does not violate the statute if the
citizen tapes the officer’s spoken words or radio communications where the contact occurs
in a public place"


I doubt this would apply (as this was not in a public place),especially if the Cop asks him to stop.


The gentleman recording knew he was in the wrong, he even tried to fake turning the camera off. Why would he do that if he was in the right?

In the end, he baited the cop into arresting him so he could have something on tape.

All the legitimate cases of abuse and Cops overstepping the mark are overshadowed by ones like these that the media blows up to sell.

All you are doing is hurting your cause as people will eventually stop responding to these 'cry wolf' claims.

Next time try treating the cop with some respect and dignity (you know, like a person) and see the response you get then.

Dude .. no, just ... no. This thread does not apply to California!! This is Washington State we are talking about. Two, the cop has no right to not be asked to be recorded - NONE!! He had no right to ask the citizen to stop in the first place! We have already stated numerous times that case law supports cops being recorded in Washington State. The cop needed to show respect if he wanted any in return. The citizen wasn't doing anything illegal! The cop needed to treat the citizen like .. ya know, a person. I hope the cop and his department get sued up the wazzu; there is just no excuse for this kind of behavior. If a cop treated me like that, I'd keep my mouth shut and ask for a lawyer.

Three - you are new here and until you can prove otherwise, I call troll!

 

[Freedom1Man]

Dude .. no, just ... no. This thread does not apply to California!! This is Washington State we are talking about. Two, the cop has no right to not be asked to be recorded - NONE!! He had no right to ask the citizen to stop in the first place! We have already stated numerous times that case law supports cops being recorded in Washington State. The cop needed to show respect if he wanted any in return. The citizen wasn't doing anything illegal! The cop needed to treat the citizen like .. ya know, a person. I hope the cop and his department get sued up the wazzu; there is just no excuse for this kind of behavior. If a cop treated me like that, I'd keep my mouth shut and ask for a lawyer.

Three - you are new here and until you can prove otherwise, I call troll!

He has the right to ASK but not the AUTHORITY/RIGHT to demand that he not be recorded.

 

[TechnoWeenie]

(snip)

You don't know what the hell you're talking about. Period.

1. One may record ANYONE, in public. There is no expectation of privacy in public, ergo no violation of law. The state law in WA requires that there be an element of PRIVACY that was invaded. You have ZERO privacy in public, sans certain exemptions, such as bathrooms.

2. Actions taken by a PUBLIC official, while ON DUTY, are by their very nature, PUBLIC, ergo, no privacy.

(for both cites, see State V. Flora)

Hmm... brand new member.... bogus location.... trying to scare the OP into thinking he was wrong...


Methinks someone is afraid of a pending lawsuit....and trying to save their ass.

 

[Ajetpilot]

Methinks someone is afraid of a pending lawsuit....and trying to save their ass.

I hadn't even thought about that. Brilliant!

 

[jhfc]

I hope the OP sues the LEO and LEA to the maximum extent possible. A promise of an apology or new "training" are empty words.

Money is the only thing bureaucracies understand.

 

[slapmonkay]

68 Wn. App. 802, 845 P.2d 1355, STATE v. FLORA [pdf] is the court case that should be reviewed for those of you that do not believe an individual has a right to record an officer while he is performing his duties.

 

[carolina guy]

Sorry to hear you are going to have to go through the hasssles, but the circus of trying to show how your filming hindered, delayed or obstructed the police from raiding your neighbor's house (again?? :uhoh ought to be quite entertaining for those of us not so personally involved.

Seems to me they were doing quite well in spite of you until the camera-shy guy left his assigned post and duties to come over and hassle you. (There is a hint buried in there. Can you find it?)

stay safe.

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=9A.76.020

I would suggest to the prosecutor that they charge the police officer with obstructing, since clearly, HE was the one keeping a police officer from performing his duties.

 

[rapgood]

<snip> <snip> <snip...>
But for people who want to DO SOMETHING vs. wank on the internet- I've outlined something that people can do. If an agency hasn't addressed this critical issue, they MUST in roll call training and in general orders manual. And you, as the average citizen can very well insure that your local PD DOES so. You can prevent people's rights from being violated...
<snip>

Bzzzt! Wrong answer! Just as SPD Sgt. Rich O'Neill was WRONG when he stated that SPD LEO union members would have to vote on whether or not to honor the rights enumerated in the Constitution as required by the DOJ's instructions (really, it's NOT subject to collective bargaining), you are wrong when you imply that LEOs must be trained and/or have an entry in their general orders manual before they are required to not interfere with LACs First Amendment rights to film LEOs in the performance of their duties. (See slapmonkey's link to State v. Flora, above and in the quote below.

The existence of the Blue Wall of Silence, alone, proves that even the so-called good cops tolerate and enable the rights-violators.

Or, they get on the stand, get sworn in, and then proceed to testilie (sic).

It takes quite a bit of arrogance to diminish the indignity of seizing an innocent equal. It goes far beyond "hurt feelings'. Restricting a man's freedom by seizure is a huge imposition. The government reveals its arrogance every time it pretends seizing a person is only a minor inconvenience.

Most of us find it much more than a minor inconvenience to be arrested and put in jail for simply exercising our Constitutional rights, not to mention the emotional impact it has on our families, particularly when the arrest and jailing is unlawful.

Did you know we here are in a one party consent state?

Actually, we are in an "all party" consent state. However, public officials in the performance of their duties do not enjoy that protection. It is a protection they knowingly waive when they put on the badge. And if-and-when they threaten to (or actually do) arrest you, they are committing the crime of Abuse of Office -- Official Misconduct (a gross misdemeanor).

68 Wn. App. 802, 845 P.2d 1355, STATE v. FLORA [pdf] is the court case that should be reviewed for those of you that do not believe an individual has a right to record an officer while he is performing his duties.

(and that pesky First Amendment)

 

[Jeff Hayes]

I trust them because I know in the overwhelming majority of incidents they do the right thing. In cases like this, where they appear to clearly have done the wrong thing, they deserve to be punished. As I have stated in other threads, agencies vary widely in training and written policies involving people filming them. I have suggested to people to contact their local PD, get a copy of their policy manual and see what, if any policies they have vis a vis people filming them. If they don't have a policy, suggest one consistent with law, so that then cops can be held accountable for violating same. Without training or policy, it is difficult if not impossible for individual cops to be held accountable (qualified immunity, failure to train etc.). That's not opinion. That's fact. I'd rather see policy enacted that PREVENTS these kinds of misconduct than see it happen and people have to sue after the fact.

I have filmed with impunity and never been hassled. Youtube has literally thousands of videos where people filmed the cops and weren't hassled. These jerkmunches who interfere with this sacred 1st amendment right need to be held accountable.

I'll say it again - contact your local PD and research this. It's a simple way citizens can get involved and make positive change. Imo, we get the govt. we deserve. If people aren't willing to get involved, you get crappy govt. My agency I work for , as well as the agency that polices where I live both have excellent crystal clear policies establishing the right of people to film us, and making it crystal clear that officers who interfere with filmers will be held accountable.

And guess what? Because of that, I've never heard of a single detail in either agency where cops interfered.

If you don't trust cops, that's sad. I;'m glad polling data confirms that the overwhelming majority of the public considers us both professional and honest.

But for people who want to DO SOMETHING vs. wank on the internet- I've outlined something that people can do. If an agency hasn't addressed this critical issue, they MUST in roll call training and in general orders manual. And you, as the average citizen can very well insure that your local PD DOES so. You can prevent people's rights from being violated

Many will wank and say "it's not my job". Policing the police and being responsible for those who are given powers to seize, arrest, search etc. us IS EVERYBODY's responsibility imnsho. I'm tired of arguing this point, but hopefully responsible people (vs. whiners) will take this to heart and effect positive change. The overwhelming majority of cops want to do the right thing, and the policies they work under should explain the right thing vis a vis filmers and DEMAND they do so. And imnsho, if an agency has such a policy/training, THEN ofc's in that agency who pull this kind of chicanery can and will be held accountable imo and also I believe that likely qualified immunity may even be lifted.

I personally welcome people to film me. I'm out injured right now because yesterday, a guy I Terry stopped assaulted my partner and took off on foot . I caught up with him and had to tackle him and then deal with his whinging about how his back hurt and of course the x-rays came out negative after 4 hours at harborzoo and he's comfortably in jail with a vehicular assault warrant and assault on a PO charges. Did we do the right thing? Heck yea. Remarkable restraint in chasing and tackling the guy where he suffered only minor scrapes on his knees after he punched an officer in the face and fled. That's how it works ALMOST every time and it's why I trust cops. Because for every overreaction you have scores of incidents like this where cops exercise commendable restraint while reeling in dangerous assaultive felons.

I *hope* there is video of this incident (he punched my partner in a gas station parking lot, but it appears it happened outside the view of their cameras) either the assault or my tackling him because it will just help protect me from bogus complaints AND help convict him, and he already has burglary conviction etc at 19 yoa and also his outstanding vehicle assault and now assault III charge to deal with.

I also suggest if you don't trust cops, to do a ride along with your local pd. You might be surprised and impressed with the professionalism and honor your local cop brings to the job. I've done many ridealongs, before I became a cop, especially, and I've seen some stellar police work.

It's all of our responsibility (not just the cops) to defend ourselves from criminals and to keep an eye out for criminal behavior, to be a good witness for same, to come forward if we have information about crime (REAL crime. I don't believe in the war on drugs and other victimless crime rubbish, but ymmv. I of course enforce those laws because I believe in rule of law although drug crimes are a TINY TINY percent of what I do). It's also our responsibility to come forward if we witness police misconduct and if you can effect positive change you should. Police work for you. Check out your local PD policy regarding filmers and effect some positive change.

Cheers.

PS When I tackled that violent felon, I did it in full view of a half dozen people sitting on their porch having a barbeque. Force , even when entirely justified is not pretty, but because I did (as cops almost always do) THE RIGHT THING and used reasonable force to tackle him and wrestle him into cuffs, we got a standing ovation of sorts from the peanut gallery. I didn't know, until after I got him in cuffs that I had an audience, but if as a cop you assume you do, and you do the right thing, you have little to worry about. these people are statistically likely to be in the overwhelming majority that trusts cops and after seeing our restraint and skillz in busting this perp, it's only logical to assume they remain in this majority camp. If I had gotten in cheap shots /used excessive force, I would have sullied the image of the police in these members of the public's eyes. And getting a standing ovation and comments like "man, that was awesome." gives me a warm fuzzy. It's people like that, that make the cop haters , the tiny minority so easy to handle. I know they are just that, a minority and I know that when push comes to shove, the average joe respects us and they've got our back!

Palo First off I do not hate Cops, I have had several good friends that were Cops over the years. Its just that my freedom is on the line and because I seldom know who I am interacting with I feel the need to protect my self until I know who I am dealing with.

I have copies of several PDs training bulletins on various subjects so yes I agree with you there 100%.

As far as getting involved I am and have been for quite some time and will continue to be in the foreseeable future.

Sorry to hear you are hurt and that your partner took a shot. It sounds like you used the proper amount of force for the circumstances. Trust me when I say you have an absolute right to defend your self and like you said force is always ugly even when it is necessary.

I am not interested in a ride along but I understand the point you are making and agree.

I would have supported you as well under the circumstances you describe glad you were there to take care of it.

 

[509rifas]

Removed my Post as I decided it wasn't worth it, but as I have a response just after I hit delete - here I am!

The gentleman recording knew he was in the wrong, he even tried to fake turning the camera off. Why would he do that if he was in the right?

In the end, he baited the cop into arresting him so he could have something on tape.

Next time try treating the cop with some respect and dignity (you know, like a person) and see the response you get then.

See you next tuesday I trust you'll show up for the hearing?