Slashdot stories can be listened to in audio form via an RSS feed, as read by our own robotic overlord.

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Privacy Government Your Rights Online

NY Couple On "Wanted" Poster For Filming Police 541

Posted by timothy
from the don't-watch-us-we'll-watch-you dept.
Hugh Pickens writes "Ben Fractenberg and Jeff Mays write that the NYPD has created a 'wanted' poster for a Harlem couple who film cops conducting stop-and-frisks and post the videos on YouTube — branding them 'professional agitators' who portray cops in a bad light and listing their home address. The flyer featuring side-by-side mugshots of Matthew Swaye and Christina Gonzalez and the couple's home address was taped to a podium outside a public hearing room in the 30th Precinct house and warns officers to be on guard against them. The couple has filmed officers stopping and frisking and arresting young people of color in Harlem and around New York City, which they post on Gonzalez's YouTube account. They said their actions are legal. 'There have been times when it's gotten combative. There have been times when they [police officers] have videoed Christina,' says Swaye. 'But if we were breaking the law they would have arrested us.' Swaye was part of a group of advocates including Cornel West who were detained at the 28th Precinct in Harlem in October for protesting the stop-and-frisk policy which Mayor Bloomberg strongly defends. "
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

NY Couple On "Wanted" Poster For Filming Police

Comments Filter:
  • by amiga3D (567632) on Sunday July 08, 2012 @01:06PM (#40583571)

    mugshots.com

  • by kmahan (80459) on Sunday July 08, 2012 @01:07PM (#40583581)

    The cops definitely get upset if you post THEIR pics and home addresses.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 08, 2012 @01:24PM (#40583701)

    Which brings me to a question: How is "stop and frisk" not a violation of rights? It seems to be CLEARLY a violation of the 4th and perhaps even the 5th.

    Unfortunately, the US Supreme court disagrees. It's called a Terry stop:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_stop [wikipedia.org]

  • by Telephone Sanitizer (989116) on Sunday July 08, 2012 @01:29PM (#40583745)

    > Seriously, why would the police care if the police are
    > doing nothing wrong?

    Guilty conscience.

    > Which brings me to a question: How is "stop and
    > frisk" not a violation of rights? It seems to be
    > CLEARLY a violation of the 4th and perhaps even
    > the 5th.

    I don't get it, either. It's so obvious a violation of due process and flagrant bigotry that it should never have been proposed. Yet, they're doing it; they've been doing it since at least 2004; they're amassing a database containing information on those people who have been subject to stop-and-frisk; they're using the database for racial profiling and harassment (some people have been stalked by the police, stopped and frisked dozens of times); and nobody is stopping them.

    The NY ACLU is only suing them over the database. Not the practice.

    The law spells out very specific circumstances for a stop and pat-down.
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terry_stop [wikipedia.org]

    The police are ignoring the law.

    This is the sort of thing that East coasters ridicule Arizona for, but it's going on right here.

    A true WTF.

  • by TooMuchToDo (882796) on Sunday July 08, 2012 @01:29PM (#40583747)

    Listen, public embarrassment and notice is a two way street. If you want to publicly post the actions of the police, I don't see why you should feel others couldn't do the same to you.

    False.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_figure [wikipedia.org]

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defamation [wikipedia.org]

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasion_of_privacy [wikipedia.org]

  • by Telephone Sanitizer (989116) on Sunday July 08, 2012 @01:41PM (#40583835)

    > To me, it sounds like there is no REASONABLE
    > suspicion of criminal activity

    A "reasonable and articulable suspicion" that the suspect is armed.

    These stop-and-frisks are not Terry stops.

    There is no basis for them under the law.

    There are some law enforcement personnel who are allowed to do stops like this in the post-9/11 era... The Customs and Border Protection arm of the DHS.

  • by gman003 (1693318) on Sunday July 08, 2012 @01:53PM (#40583947)

    For one, the right to perform an actual arrest.

    Just an FYI, a "citizen's arrest" is limited to essentially yelling "hey, stop!". No use of force, not even grabbing by the arm. No handcuffs, no restraints, nothing. So no, it is not at all the same thing.

  • by Monkey-Man2000 (603495) on Sunday July 08, 2012 @01:58PM (#40584003)
    If you look closely at the bottom of the pic it seems that it is signed by Sgt. Nicholson(?) in PCT 30 and lists a cell phone #.
  • by kmahan (80459) on Sunday July 08, 2012 @02:12PM (#40584125)

    Did you read the post?

            "The flyer featuring side-by-side mugshots of Matthew Swaye and Christina Gonzalez and the couple's home address was taped to a podium outside a public hearing room..."

    So the cops publicly posted the photos and HOME ADDRESS of these people.

  • by kamapuaa (555446) on Sunday July 08, 2012 @02:17PM (#40584181) Homepage

    Compared to other 1st world countries (which are also anti-tax and democratic, of course), the US has lower individual tax rates, and higher corporate tax rates. [wikipedia.org].

  • by Known Nutter (988758) on Sunday July 08, 2012 @02:26PM (#40584309)

    You don't live in NYC, but don't feel left out! Copy-cat policies are on their way to a city near you!

    http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/SF-mayor-considering-police-stop-and-frisk-policy-3669799.php [sfgate.com]

  • by Known Nutter (988758) on Sunday July 08, 2012 @02:33PM (#40584365)

    They should go to jail for publishing the cops home addresses.

    Excuse me, but it was the police who published the home address of the photographers. So, yeah, ummm.. yeah.

  • by NormalVisual (565491) on Sunday July 08, 2012 @02:48PM (#40584521)
    Please describe for me one 'privilege' that a police officer has that a citizen who is not a police officer does not have.

    - Various degrees of immunity for their actions under the law
    - Practically unlimited legal representation at no cost to themselves
    - Other police officers who will close ranks to protect one of "their brothers" when they do something questionable
    - Powerful unions that can exert substantial political pressure
    - Legislation that makes it a crime to post *their* addresses

    I can keep going - is this enough to start?
  • by Mitreya (579078) <mitreya.gmail@com> on Sunday July 08, 2012 @02:52PM (#40584571)

    US has lower individual tax rates, and higher corporate tax rates.

    That is gross misinformation, even if technically true.
    US may have high corporate tax rates on the books, but the effective tax rate is about 13.4% [thinkprogress.org] which is much closer to the bottom on the world scale.

  • by climb_no_fear (572210) on Sunday July 08, 2012 @02:52PM (#40584581)

    Tax rates are misleading since what is considered income varies between the countries (I know what I'm talking about, as an American in the EU, I regularly file both kinds of taxes).

    For example, health insurance in Germany is mandatory and 1/2 of the costs are deducted from your salary (employer pays the other half). Since it is mandatory, it would be counted as a tax in the table you link to. In the US, your health insurance is often (not always, I know) a fringe benefit, meaning it is hidden income. Your reported income looks lower, as do the tax rates. Also state and city taxes may not be properly reflected in the averages.

  • by Anonymous Coward on Sunday July 08, 2012 @03:22PM (#40584843)

    This is in no way a Terry stop, which requires reasonable suspicion, these are pseudo-random (read: Profiled) searches. Random stops are not allowed under the constitution. I do not care if they worked so well they effectively eradicated all violent crime they are illegal, immoral and utterly contrary to liberty. One of the great things about this constitution is that without amendment it does not allow us to surrender our liberty even if a majority wanted to. This is by far it's most important function.

  • Re:Amazing (Score:4, Informative)

    by sumdumass (711423) on Sunday July 08, 2012 @04:19PM (#40585311) Journal

    Lol.. Taxes are not the lowest they have been in 60 years. Certain taxes are, but the fees and other taxes added together are not.

    The problem isn't really taxes either. It's expecting too much from elected officials who traditionally have limited power. Most of what people expect from a federal government is more appropriately accomplished at a state level. This is somewhat obvious by the way many federal programs are implemented whereby they mandate states create the programs that comply with federal law and then pass money collected at the federal level to the states to be implemented within those programs. Food stamps, housing assistance, medicaid, education, the vast majority of highway funding, all operate this way with only social security and parts of medicare actually having the federal government in control of the entire programs or program parts.

    I'm going to ignore your 1% rhetoric as it is meaningless dribble in comparison to reality.

  • by mbkennel (97636) on Sunday July 08, 2012 @06:25PM (#40586271)

    Healthcare in USA is 18% of GDP, the next highest developed country is France, with 12%.

  • Re:Amazing (Score:3, Informative)

    by BlueStrat (756137) on Sunday July 08, 2012 @11:05PM (#40588139)

    You do know that the right to bear arms is related to the forming of a militia to fight tyranny. Funny how when people talk about their constitutional rights they leave off that part.... So given there are no militias, then you don't need arms. America's fascination with guns always seems bizarre to me.

    Every man is already part of the militia by virtue of being a citizen.

    But here, let me allow a few people with more authority on the subject add their thoughts.

    "A well regulated militia, composed of the whole body of the people, trained in arms, is the best most natural defense of a free country." - James Madison

    "The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference--they deserve a place of honor with all that is good." - George Washington

    "When firearms go, all go. We need them every hour." - George Washington

    "Americans have the right and advantage of being armed--unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." - James Madison

    "The great object is that every man be armed." - Patrick Henry

    "The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the U.S. from keeping their own arms." - Samuel Adams

    "The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed." - Alexander Hamilton

    "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." - Thomas Jefferson

    "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." - Thomas Jefferson

    "Laws that forbid the carrying of arms disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants." - Thomas Jefferson

    And finally, my reply just wouldn't be complete without adding these two:

    "Do not separate text from historical background. If you do you will have perverted and subverted the Constitution." - James Madison

    And:

    "Timid men prefer the calm of despotism to the tempestuous sea of liberty." - Thomas Jefferson

    Seems like those gentlemen disagree with your holding on the 2nd Amendment.

    You'll forgive me (and most other Americans) if we defer to them instead of those like you who wish to disarm the people and render them defenseless. As you can see, we were warned long ago that those like you would come.

    Sure, I'll hand over my firearms to the government. I'll deliver the ammo first, however.

    Strat

  • Re:Amazing (Score:5, Informative)

    by Genda (560240) <mariet.got@net> on Monday July 09, 2012 @02:57AM (#40589077) Journal

    There are 535 member of Congress. There over 10,000 registered lobbyists [opensecrets.org] and the real working number exceeds that by between 3x and 4x. That means that there are nearly a 100 lobbyists for every single person in Congress. Considering these people go after the largest number of representatives possible, that means every person in Congress is beset by a virtual HOARD of lobbyist, hundreds even thousands of people representing mostly corporate interests (though everyone from AARP to the Sierra Club has folks wandering the halls of the Capitol.)

    Now consider that huge PACs can openly influence political campaigns and billions of dollars will be thrown at candidates for this fall's elections thanks to the Supreme Court's decision, and what part of what I say to you sounds like nutty conspiracy. Have you not been watching your government at work over the last 12 years? Have you been avoiding the news? Are you not clear about what's at stake and the erosion of your Constitutional rights? This is no conspiracy, these thieves are working in broad daylight, and self absorbed, apathetic, weenies are too involved in their GameBoys and iPads to bother with the fact that our collective Freedom is going down the toilet.

  • Re:Amazing (Score:4, Informative)

    by Reziac (43301) * on Monday July 09, 2012 @11:36AM (#40593085) Homepage Journal

    Before the rise of socialized medicine (and HMOs are just that, under a private label) and before health insurance became more or less mandated (via employer programs etc.) .. I spent a day in hospital for $90. I went to a specialist for $10 (no waiting, I just called and came in). I had a procedure by a specialist for $60 (same day as I consulted him, no waiting). I got a whole bottle of meds for $3. Tell me how that was so much worse than $900/month for health insurance (remember, what doesn't come out of your wallet comes out of your paycheck, one way or another) and an uncertain wait to see a specialist?

The use of anthropomorphic terminology when dealing with computing systems is a symptom of professional immaturity. -- Edsger Dijkstra

Working...