NH Man Arrested For Videotaping Police.. Again 666
OhPlz writes "Back in 2006, a resident of New Hampshire's second largest city was arrested while at the police station attempting to file a complaint against officers. His crime? He had video tape evidence of the officers' wrongdoings. According to the police, that's wiretapping. After world wide attention, the police dropped the charges. His complaint was found to be valid, but the evidence never saw the light of day. Well, guess what? Round two. There are differing reports, but again the police arrested Mr. Gannon and again, they seized his video camera. This time it's 'falsifying evidence' because he tried to hand off the camera, most likely to protect its contents. If there's the potential of police wrongdoing, how is it that the law permits the police to seize the evidence?"
What are these words? (Score:5, Funny)
What do you mean police wrongdoing? Can you use those two words in a sentence?
Re: (Score:2)
I think the writer got arrested for using them!
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Jackbooted Rethuglicans at work. Most "police officers", if they hadn't slipped through the academy, would be working as leg-breakers for the local Mafia. Half of them are anyways as a sideline while off duty.
It's about "power", not honor and law enforcement.
Small wonder they don't want to be videotaped. At an intersection by my house, we had a particularly egregious asshole who found a way to fill his quota: he parked his car 45 degrees down an alley to make sure his dashboard camera wasn't covering the ne
Re:What are these words? (Score:5, Interesting)
I know I shouldn't respond to trolls, but it's late... As a liberal who doesn't like Republicans, I can guarantee you that every right I've ever had to worry about in my life was in danger from Republicans and not Democrats. You seem to think that as a liberal I have faith in the beneficence of the state. What I want is the state to protect me from others, without taking away my rights. In other words, I'd like to have gay sex and smoke pot as long as I don't fuck over anyone else, and I don't want assholes to tell me I can't do these things because I'm not hurting anyone.
As far as Democrats spending too much money and "obsession with taxes" (the latest Republican catch phrase), meh. It doesn't affect me the way Republicans claim it affects people like me. I'm a upper middle class (~115K/year) so I do pay my fair share of taxes, but the extra 3% or whatever everyone is bitching about is nothing compared to a cop pulling me over to take money from me when I haven't hurt anyone, or the government telling me I can't visit my partner in the hospital, nor catching my friends with pot and treating them as if they were bank robbers or some other high profile criminals. This is not hyperbole, this is experience. And once it really bit me in the ass... I had to pay an extra $1500 in the ONE month between jobs because the way COBRA* works, my partner had to go to the emergency room in that ONE month and the federal government would let heterosexuals keep the same benefits at the same rate as the company gives them, but NOT the same rate to domestic partnerships. Yes, an extra $1500 when it would have been an extra $0 if I were straight. I hate you motherfuckers like I hate Hitler and Stalin... you and your ilk are constantly trying to take away the freedom of others.
So fuck you, and I mean that from the bottom of my heart. I love freedom and I hate Republicans for trying to take away my rights and freedoms and for God's sake not letting me live alone in peace. Don't kid yourself, asshole cops are not progressives and they are not liberal.
*COBRA is basically the law in America that allows employees who have been laid off to continue to have insurance at the same group rate as they had with the company. The company does not have to pay any money towards the monthly premiums if they paid a portion of it. In other words, the employees have to pay the full premium themselves. However, a family plan still applies even though the employee would have to pay whatever extra the company was paying. Unfortunately, domestic partnerships aren't considered families and therefore don't get to benefit from COBRA so they have to be paid as if they were individuals and not family plans.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Indeed. Hardly surprising that Rethuglicans gravitate to positions and a political party where they can tell people what to do and take away people's rights, I suppose.
Hey Rethuglicans, here's a hint:
Don’t like gay marriage? Don’t get one.
Don’t like abortions? Don’t get one.
Don’t like drugs? Don’t do them.
Don’t like sex? Don’t have it.
Don't like booze? Don't drink it.
Don’t like your rights taken away? Don’t take away anybody else's.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:What are these words? (Score:5, Informative)
If you really want people to understand, listen, and take you seriously about grievances you have with your local police, you need to back off of the political garbage and treat the problem for what it really is, cops that lie and cheat.
When one political party is a group of people who in the past few years have been strongly associated with Stormfront-level racism and thuggery, the political party seems to have more to do with it than you are willing to allow.
Looking at the rhetoric coming from the Republicans and the Tea Party in areas like Arizona, Texas, New Mexico, the secessionist nutwad fringe from California, and even in northern states like Wisconsin and Ohio, it's not hard to understand why the OP would consider the primary problem to be the association of so-called "law enforcement" with the Republican Party, especially if OP happens to be of one of the demographic or racial groups that the Republicans/Tea Party have been targeting recently.
Also, consider the cases we've had in political and police corruption in the past. Civil Rights legislation and investigations - some of cases going back 60 years or more - go on because the police were all in the same political party, were all members of the KKK, and were all complicit in that sort of behavior in the South. The fact that OP's home county is dominated by the one political party is not to be discounted in the ability for said party to be corrupt, through and through.
Of course, I'm assuming that OP lives in the South. But it's not a bad assumption. They're well-known for the whistle-stop sort of towns with cops who do crap like went on in Tenaha, TX [youtube.com], another Republican stronghold.
Re:What are these words? (Score:5, Insightful)
Wow. So I'm modded "flamebait" for linking to the Tenaha abuses by police, in a story about police misconduct? I get the feeling some republican just ran through the entire thread dropping downmods anywhere they could.
Re:What are these words? (Score:4, Insightful)
This is /. you're only supposed to complain about moderations when you're being an ironic karma whore.
Re: (Score:3)
This is slashdot. Moderation based on merit ended many years ago. I constantly see factually accurate and completely valid posts moderated to -1 while complete idiocy sits at +5 Insightful. Its literally an every day occurrence.
Now people moderate because its politically correct, or more often than not (the norm), because it validates their own personal opinion, in spite of the fact their opinion if verifiably wrong. Ignorance and political correctness prevails on slashdot everyday.
Re: (Score:3)
The republican party has on
Re:What are these words? (Score:4, Informative)
Actually, I followed that case closely and watched the arguments in the supreme court. Ohio does video tape it's supreme court sessions and plays them on one of the PBS stations for anyone to watch.
The corrupt cop was certified, he didn't bring his certificate to court. The court was very meticulous in determining this officers record on estimating speed. They considered factors like cops go through training to estimate the speed of a vehicle and this particular cop's record was something like within 5 mph over 35 of the 40 times needed to pass some part of the academy training.
So let's not make this into more then what it it. It's also not a republican thing. The most corrupt cities with the most corrupt cops in history in the US is demonstratively democrat controlled. Los Angeles, Chicogo, Denver, Cincinnati, Cleavland. And lets not forget the deputies in Zanesville ohio who were busitng people for drugs just to keep the evidence and sell themselves. And yes, Zanesville ohio, Cleavland ohio, and Cincinatti ohio are largely democrat strongholds even though they are in as you put it, "in Ohio (a Republican stronghold)". If there is any connections to republicans and this behavior, it's probably because they don't pay enough to get quality officers hired (I would suspect the same with democrats) and instead end up with these inbred john wayne syndrome asshats because it's all that is willing to work for the same amount of money as a waiter in a halfway decent restaurant. I know cops in ohio who make just over $12-14 an hour.
Re:What are these words? (Score:4, Insightful)
Ad hominem attacks: good as logic since 2001!
Insult != ad hominem. For example, if I were to say, "You're an idiot, therefore I conclude you're confusing an insult with an ad hominem argument," that would be an example of the ad hominem fallacy. On the other hand, if I were to say, "You're confusing an insult with an ad hominem argument, therefore I conclude you're an idiot," that would not. Since I don't like making fallacious arguments, I will restrict myself to the following statement:
You're confusing an insult with an ad hominem argument, therefore I conclude you're an idiot.
If Live Free Or Die are your choices (Score:5, Insightful)
... I reckon "die" is all that's left.
Re:If Live Free Or Die are your choices (Score:5, Funny)
I believe that is meant to say "or die (trying to live free)".
Re:If Live Free Or Die are your choices (Score:5, Insightful)
what man, that is terrorist talk.
I have notified homeland security
Re:If Live Free Or Die are your choices (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
No, "kill" is left.
Americans are MUCH too comfortable to exercise that option at the moment. Nothing to see here for a long time.
Falsifying evidence? (Score:5, Insightful)
Evidence of what? Evidence of him having videotaped officers? This makes as much sense as when the police arrest someone on the sole charge of "resisting arrest." He was resisting arrest. Why were you arresting him? For resisting arrest. Do they really think anyone buys that?
Re:Falsifying evidence? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Falsifying evidence? (Score:5, Insightful)
"Gannon was charged with resisting arrest, simple assault on a police officer and disorderly conduct."
The original charge seems to be disorderly conduct. Whatever he shouted at the police while they were driving by, plus whatever he said prior to being tackled is probably what the disorderly conduct was about.
If you ask me, they probably would have arrested him for saying "Booo!"
Re:Falsifying evidence? (Score:5, Interesting)
Yes a suprisingly large amount of the populations belives that if a police officer says you are guilty then you must be.
Unfortunately a surprisingly large amount of (all) judges believe the same.
"If you enter a plea of 'guilty' or 'no contest' then I will look over the sworn statements by both you and the arresting officer. In which case, I will assume the written report by the officer is true and you will be found guilty. If you enter a plea of 'not guilty,' then a meeting with the prosecutor will be arranged for a later date. You will then, at another later date, go to trial with a jury of your peers. If you cannot afford legal representation then you may apply for a court appointed attorney by submitting an application along with a $25 charge for processing the application."
Basically, 'guilty' and 'no contest' are synonymous in the eyes of the judge. The only way for police testimony to come into question is for a jury to rule against it or for a lawyer to prove it's tainted in some way. So say you're being charged with something relatively minor and the penalty is like $100 + court costs. Of course, whether you're guilty or not, it would make sense to plea 'no contest' and take the punishment b/c the damn lawyer will suck more than that out of you. Not to mention the time it takes to go through the various processes.
Sadly, many police/court systems are nothing but legalized extortion. Justice is an afterthought.
Re:Falsifying evidence? (Score:5, Interesting)
Also consider the following regarding "traffic stops" and "minor tickets":
If you show up to "just pay it" or "take defensive driving", they give you a "break" and it costs you around $150-200 after court costs.
If you want to plead not guilty, then you have to burn:
- The cost of your lawyer.
- At least one half-day (if not a full one) of leave from work to show up and plead not guilty.
- At least one half-day, if not full day, to "meet with the prosecutor."
- A large amount of time subpoenaing whatever you need to subpoena, taking your own measurements of the area, photographing. And half the time the corrupt police won't deliver the things requested as evidence (like the officer's dashcam record, radar gun calibration records, etc) and you'll have to fight for those, which means you have to show up in court and burn MORE leave time to get the judge to issue the subpoena for discovery.
- At least one half-day, if not full day, to actually be in court and empanel the jury.
- At least one half-day, if not full day or even more, to be in court to actually argue your case.
And at the end of it, you have to be prepared for the possibility that if you're found guilty, the corrupt judge is going to throw the book at you and the Prosecutor is going to tack on a bunch of miscellaneous bullshit charges, whatever they can come up with, to punish you for "wasting our time" by actually asserting your constitutional right to plead innocent and have a trial by jury.
The whole system is rigged. Cops know it; they're the corrupt underpinning of it.
Re:Falsifying evidence? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I used to drive a 'sporty model' and the local shit-kicker cops use to like to stop me and cite me for stupid crap.Young guy in an aerodynamic car with loud pipes, must be doing something wrong, never mind the minivan that just blew past me.
I started taking the tickets to trial, taking the opportunity to drill the officer on physics and math, velocity v acceleration, sin vs. cos, at 9pm( municipal court times ) It was pointless but entertaining, the cops didnt know how to respond to this type of questioning
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
that's not the legal definition of arrest by any stretch.. depending on the circumstances it's either consensual contact or if there exists reasonable suspicion of a crime, a detention (aka terry stop, see terry v. ohio.) if there exists probable cause for an arrest, you are taken into custody -- probably physically restrained with handcuffs -- and booked. there is a huge difference.
also, there's no need to get loud or rude when a cop approaches you to ask questions.. ask if you are being detained, the o
Re:Falsifying evidence? (Score:5, Informative)
If you ever have any question, make sure you're in view of the dashcam and ask the cop the following, verbatim:
"Officer, am I under arrest or am I free to go?"
At that point, the officer must make the determination. The two options you have given them are the only two options available to them legally, and are mutually exclusive. If they choose to arrest you, they'd better have a damn good reason. If they don't, and they simply want to ask you questions, you are well within your rights to say "As I am free to go, and I choose not to answer your questions, I will now leave."
Re: (Score:3)
Assuming you are NOT under arrest, and they don't seem to be digging on you (eg "did you see such and such back over there") not being an ass and actually being helpful is the nice and ethical thing to do.
Unless you have drugs on you or something stupid like that, then you're fine. Cops are people too.
Now, if you DO have something on you or you DID do something, then you should be careful. I'm not going to get into the whole "wtf were you doing/thinking" aspect as this really doesn't matter. Just because yo
Re: (Score:3)
Being helpful is stupid. Unless you actually do know every law whose jurisdiction applies and that you have not broken any of them - which seems rather unlikely.
All you can do is incriminate yourself.
And of course some cops aren't beyond just making shit up so reducing the time spent with them is good in itself.
And yes it would be nice to live in a society in which helping the police made sense, but we don't.
Re:Falsifying evidence? (Score:5, Informative)
Being helpful is stupid.
Yes, it is.
Don't Talk to Cops, Part 1 (in which a lawyer tells you why you should never talk to the cops)
www.youtube.com/watch?v=i8z7NC5sgik
Don't Talk to Cops, Part 2 (in which a cop agrees with the lawyer)
www.youtube.com/watch?v=08fZQWjDVKE
Re:Falsifying evidence? (Score:5, Insightful)
Disclaimer then: some of my family are cops, and some are soldiers.
Perhaps things are just different from this perspective.
It's the bad apple effect.
Risk = Severity x Probability. The amount of damage a bad cop can do to an innocent civilian's life is enormous, so it only takes a few bad apples on the force to make the risk of naively cooperating with a random cop too high. It's different if you have a personal relationship with the specific officer because, chances are, you know if he's a douche or not. But when all you know about the guy is that he has a badge, the risk is pretty high.
I have cops in the family too and I'd be extremely surprised if you hadn't heard a tale or two from them about either their own exploits or that of another officer on the force, that in the sober light of day, was at least ethically wrong if not outright criminal. Part of the problem is that "good" cops let other cops get away with shit and that undermines public confidence. A little less of the "brotherhood" and a little more of the "duty" and things might eventually get better.
Re: (Score:3)
"Part of the problem is that "good" cops let other cops get away with shit and that undermines public confidence."
Right there is the problem. But remember, a good cop that ignores the actions of a bad cob is JUST AS BAD as the bad cop.
The only good cops I know are no longer on the force. One friend was SHOT "accidentally" in the head by another cop that was a friend of another cop he turned in for drugs and stealing.
Re:Falsifying evidence? (Score:5, Informative)
Completely wrong. The problem is that police officers have shown time and again that they are NOT ethical. Keep in mind that a cop is ALWAYS gathering evidence. Sure you know you didn't do anything, but you were nearby. Now you're a suspect. Wait, you were by yourself, so now no alibi. The cop will then of course make stuff up like you looked nervous or seemed anxious. Suddenly you're a prime suspect. At this point all it takes is an eye witness (people see things incorrectly all the time, police can pressure someone to talk) which carry way more weight in court than they should and you're going to jail.
You may think this sounds crazy, but just look at people finally being proven innocent by DNA years later. Turns out the cops and prosecutors got a bead on them and simply make stuff up to make the case work. Don't think police make stuff up? Read this [denverpost.com].
A friend of mine is a lawyer. His advice, never speak to the police without your lawyer present. First, he can obviously advise you and second the cop can't later lie in court about what was said.
Re: (Score:3)
Unfortunately your legal system (see a lawyer, I'm not one) means that helping the police waives your Miranda rights. If you aided the police at one point, and then they decide to switch off and start questioning you about something you don't want to answer, its too late.
You're always best off to not answer anything.
Is this in the best interest of public security? no. Should the law allow someone to be helpful then shut up? yes, imho. Does it? no.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Falsifying evidence? (Score:4, Informative)
The correct response, dipwad, is:
1. "Officer, am I under arrest?".
2. If the officer says yes, demand to know what for, state that you are exercising your 5th amendment right, and shut up.
3. If the officer says no, ask "Then am I free to go?".
4. If the officer says yes, leave.
5. If the officer says no, that's the wrong answer. Rreturn to step 1.
Repeat until you are either told you're under arrest or free to go. You must be one or the other, and they know it.
Re:Falsifying evidence? (Score:5, Informative)
the guy is arrested for TRESSPASSING, "the owners want you gone, if you don't go, that's trespassing, if you haven't done anything wrong talk to the owners or call a lawyer after you have left the premises." could avoid the scuffle that you so clearly enjoyed.
instead you antagonized the situation by downplaying the legal rights of the owner and up-playing your authority.
I've seen thousands charged with resisting arrest in my country, and more often than not, the courts dismiss the charges.
People don't and won't ever like to involuntarily give up their own safety and ability to protect themselves and put complete trust into an absolute stranger who (as been proven) have almost 0 recourse for unlawful action unless caught on tape. It's reasonable to expect that a reasonable person may fight this on a purely instinctual level.
Re: (Score:3)
When I was a teenager partying in San Diego in the 80s, our finest used to regularly take us in on phishing expeditions, with the most awesome charge ever: conspiracy to loiter.
Naturally no charges were ever filed for that, but possession of a controlled substance, goodness me, look what we found on the loiterer in the Iron Maiden shirt... Bad loiterer.
Meh.
Re:Falsifying evidence? (Score:5, Insightful)
I will have to agree with you on that one, for I am truly in awe.
Conspiracy to loiter. Wow.
Well, from the 'teenager in the 80's' bit, I reckon I've about a decade on you (I graduated high school in '76), but I'm going to say something that I never imagined I would ever say:
In view of current happenings, I miss that era sometimes.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I never said it wasn't.
I didn't address the made up story about rent-a-cops and trespassing, I was addressing the part where he said "people who aren't ignorant of the law buy it" -- around here, it is used only when the prosecutor doesn't think anything else will stick. It's actually a pretty good indicator of how much of a case the local prosecutors have; if they didn't include that charge, they have a pretty solid case. If they include it, you can bet they'll come offering a plea bargain, and if you te
A Fair Word of Warning (Score:3)
Re:A Fair Word of Warning (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:A Fair Word of Warning (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:A Fair Word of Warning (Score:5, Insightful)
No, we are 100% IN a police state right now.
The final brick in that particular wall was the aftermath of 9/11, when the nation as a whole suddenly became obsessed with safety.
Re: (Score:2)
Good morning, Mr. Van Winkle! You already live in one.
Re: (Score:3)
We need "broadcast" 'net connected video and photo cams. That stream LIVE into hosting services in realtime.
Smash my camera. Take it away.
The goods are already distributed.
Re: (Score:2)
We need "broadcast" 'net connected video and photo cams. That stream LIVE into hosting services in realtime.
Smash my camera. Take it away.
The goods are already distributed.
I use "DailyRoads" on my Nexus S. It's a dash cam for cars that can stream to a host. I haven't actually caught anything worthwhile yet... but who knows. It's a great application and I'm not saying that just because it's free.
http://www.dailyroads.com/voyager.php [dailyroads.com]
Re: (Score:3)
We need "broadcast" 'net connected video and photo cams.
That stream LIVE into hosting services in realtime.
Qik [qik.com] is one.
Re: (Score:3)
the Google+ mobile app does that: it automatically uploads your photos to our google account, if you have a net connection.
Re:A Fair Word of Warning (Score:5, Funny)
Who's gonna pay for that? You?
Good call. It is inconceivable that anybody would pay for a mobile, net connected technology.
On another matter, can anyone tell me how this Amish Anonymous Coward managed to make this post on Slashdot?
Re: (Score:3)
We pay for police at the city, county, state, and federal level. Not to mention, we have several police at the federal level. Add in a sprinkling of police at weird levels, like constables.
Then people are being payed to make new laws at the HOA, city, county, state, and federal levels.
Not much room for liberty in that mix.
lulz (Score:5, Insightful)
It's quite obvious. Cops are here to serve and protect, themselves, above all else. You don't take videotaped evidence of police wrongdoing to the police, that's the last thing you do. You think there would have been riots in LA had there not been a helicopter overhead filming police beating the shit out of Rodney King? Dashcam footage of that beating would have never seen the light of day. First thing you do when you have video evidence of police wrongdoing, you upload it to the internet. Plain and simple.
Re: (Score:3)
Pretty soon ... (Score:3)
... we'll have sufficient bandwidth that video shot from a mobile device can be uploaded straight to the web, with only a brief "buffering" stop on the actual filming device. Then they can confiscate the device as much as they like, but the video will be beyond their grasp due to the technical difficulty of 1) figuring out where it went, 2) getting the host to take it down, and 3) doing so before the original filmer (or friends) can spread copies of it all over everywhere.
Shortly after that, some bright l
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
It's called legal realism. (Score:2)
I've learned not to yell anything at cops (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:I've learned not to yell anything at cops (Score:5, Insightful)
I've learned not to yell anything at cops.
I guess we were lucky we didn't get beat up, tazed, maced and put in jail like this guy.
That's the wrong lesson. What you should have learned is that people with power tend to abuse it, even for the most trivial of things.
Re: (Score:3)
What you should have learned is that people with power tend to abuse it, even for the most trivial of things.
Yes, hence my long-standing tradition of passive-aggressive revenge tactics against authority figures.
Re: (Score:3)
True. On the other hand, if random people were yelling insults at me while I was at work I'd be pretty tempted to fuck with them too.
But you aren't a cop. You know, entrusted with the public good and all that "with power comes responsibility" stuff.
If a cop can't brush off a little name calling then he might as well just be a member of gang that uses guns and blue gang-colors.
Re: (Score:3)
That reminds me of a good to protect and serve story. I was at college and I was in the labs until about 3am on a weekday. I was driving back to my apartment on an lonely little dark road on campus where I could see the whole road. I took a few turns aggressively blowing off some steam, there were no cars in sight. Except for the cop car parked in the dark. These two guys pulled me over and I unfortunately didn't know my rights so when they asked to search my car I said ok. They pulled everything out that w
Re: (Score:3)
What's funny is that you were being a douche, got called on it, and somehow feel you're the victim.
You weren't tazed, shot, jailed, beaten, or anything.
You were INCONVENIENCED. Oh noes!
Here's a test: drive by, and shout a random comment to a bunch of MS-13's in Los Angeles. Trust me, you won't merely be 'inconvenienced' by their response.
Perhaps your post should have been titled, "I've learned not to be a dick that yells at people as they/I drive by"
Re: (Score:3)
Police state (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
If people, especially authorities can't be recorded when in public, then there is nothing to prevent them from abusing their authority, doing anything they wish, and lying about it.
That's the way it is right now. Cameras, especially internet connected cameras, threaten the status quo.
Re:Police state (Score:5, Funny)
If people, especially authorities can't be recorded when in public, then there is nothing to prevent them from abusing their authority, doing anything they wish, and lying about it
The police report says he was yelling a lot just before he fell down a bunch of stairs filled with tasers, mace, boots and car hoods and that when officers helped him up, he tried to pass his camcorder off to someone standing nearby, who also fell down the stairs. I find it really hard to understand why you're blaming the police for defective stairs...
Re:Police state (Score:4, Insightful)
If people, especially authorities can't be recorded when in public, then there is nothing to prevent them from abusing their authority, doing anything they wish, and lying about it.
We've had C-SPAN for decades and it hasn't done anything to restrain congress from abusing its authority.
But of course I agree, we do have the right to monitor our employees.
Re:Police state (Score:5, Informative)
In Austin, Texas, when the police shoot someone they've pulled over, they are allowed to review the dash camera [theppsc.org] before having to give a statement or answer any questions about the incident. This policy was instituted by police chief Art Acevedo to ensure that the descriptions of the incidents given by officers would align with the video taped evidence. Civilians are not afforded this privilege, however.
Seth
Re: (Score:3)
Actually, they are. It's called the Fifth Amendment. If you assert it long enough, it becomes moot bec
Re: (Score:3)
"the moment you give random assholes the ability to ruin my career and get me locked up for trying to do my job to the best of my ability is the moment I find something less dangerous to do"
Being accountable is a bitch, ain't it?
National Record The Police in Public Day (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
We need a "National Record the Police in Public Day". I think that a public event like this would enforce the point far more strongly that the police losing an occasional lawsuit.
There are a lot of the days that are meaningless. But this I could really get behind. +1
Re: (Score:3)
We need a "National Record the Police in Public Day". I think that a public event like this would enforce the point far more strongly that the police losing an occasional lawsuit.
Watch as a few of the more corrupt departments announce a "Put the picture and name of anyone filming us into NCIC tagged as a troublemaker Day."
Stranger than Fiction (Score:5, Insightful)
This time it's 'falsifying evidence' because he tried to hand off the camera
Preserving it is falsifying it? Orwell had nothing on this.
Douchebags (Score:4, Interesting)
NASHUA – Maybe Michael Gannon shouldn’t have given lip to two police detectives that afternoon.
But Gannon claims he wouldn’t have said a word on July 1 if a detective – unprovoked, Gannon said – hadn’t shouted something at him as their unmarked police car passed by on Canal Street.
Sounds like a couple of douche bags yelling at each other. The police should not be yelling anything at anyone unless it is part of their job and Mr. Gannon should just learn to ignore stupid comments. If either of these two people had the slightest bit of decorum, it would be a non-issue.
However, Mr. Gannon will win. The police don't seem to have much of a case to stop him in the first place. And while being a douche is dumb, it is not against the law.
Re:Douchebags (Score:4, Insightful)
Couldn't agree more. The justice system is very fond of claiming that harsh punishments deter crime. We should make them put their money where their mouth is and punish cops who break the law by having mandatory additional jail time on top of the normal sentence for whatever crime they committed. You could implement it as an 'abuse of authority' law. You break the law while acting in the capacity of your job as a police officer (I am aware there are some jurisdictions where cops are 'on duty' 24/7 in which case this would apply 24/7) and it's an extra 2 years + half the sentence length for the crime committed.
I think similar should be done for prosecutors. If you say something in your role as prosecutor about a defendant that turns out not to be true, even stating that the defendant is guilty if they are acquitted, you should have to serve time. How many people's lives have been ruined because of public perception brought on by a mouthy prosecutor? There should be punishments for doing that.
New app (Score:3)
I wonder how long before there will be iphone and android emergency apps which record a video
and instantly upload (stream) it to the internet. I suggest the names: Evidence, Police Check Mate, Truthful
Police, Little Brother.
If you develop this app please *do not* credit me with the idea...
Re:New app (Score:5, Informative)
Re:New app (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:2)
Gandhicam is for android only and not yet available through the marketplace. But thanks I will give it a try!
"Currently Gandhicam for Android is a beta version, meaning it is still under active development, and not yet considered ready for widespread use. However, it is installed and working on several project-members' handsets, and has yet to cause a single issue. It also does nothing which could potentially cause data-loss or corruption, so it should be perfectly safe to install and play with, regardless
Re: (Score:2)
DA's office? (Score:2)
Fuck The Police (Score:3, Informative)
Fuck The Police
Re:Fuck The Police (Score:4, Funny)
Sting's handsome, but not thathandsome. And don't get me started on the other guys.
Things have to change (Score:4, Insightful)
Among these are abuse of "wire tapping" laws which must be reformed in states that require two party consent. Recording public events is not and should never be considered wire tapping. Where is the wire? Where was it being tapped?
This case needs to go to trial and speedily. Police dropping charges only means that they are free to continue their harassment and terrorizing.
People need to make copies of their videos before presenting them as evidence anywhere. One should go to the FBI, others to news organizations and still more somewhere online. (There must be a service somewhere that allows hosting of large encrypted files which can then be made available to all with a key file kinda like the wikileaks thing.)
All of this wrong really gets under my skin sometimes. When you have to defend yourself against police, things have gone way too far.
Ahh, New Hampshire (Score:2)
I like New Hampshire. "Live Free or Die". New Hampshire used to stamp it into the license plates on every car. I liked that. I also liked The Old Man of the Mountain [wikipedia.org].
Now, i like this guy. Balls made of granite.
He's asking for it (Score:3)
Sorry but this dude is asking for it. He has a similar last name to the bad guy from the Zelda games. The cops are doing us a favor. Think of the children!
Wiretapping? How? (Score:3)
Wiretapping? Why not call it tax evasion, or driving while under the influence of drugs? They all have absolutely nothing to do with videotaping police.
What "wire" was "tapped"?
Issue the police offical masks (Score:3)
The current situation in New Hampshire is only a difference of degree, no a difference of kind, from anonymous officers. If it the word of a uniformed cop against a civilian, and there is no other evidence, then the cop wins. It takes either a lot of witnesses, or a video to show that a cop is lying. If you let the cops stop video, you have no effective rights.
Easy Fix..... (Score:3)
The way to get around all of this "wiretapping" crap, aside from a judge who beats some common sense into police chiefs with his gavel, is simple:
A small red led, either flashing or continuous, on the recording device, or.....
A t-shirt that says "Audio / Video Monitoring In Progress", or both.
If you want to cover your ass while driving, place a reflective sticker right next to your license plate that reads: "This vehicle equipped with active audio / visual recording devices.". The officer won't be able to claim, unless he is blind, that he didn't see the duly posted notice. Hell, you'd even be able to see it on the officer's dashcam recording. Be vague yet accurate and truthful to the officer if he asks you about being recorded (don't be a total dick, especially if you really did run the stop sign and are trying to cover your ass, as it will look bad in court).
Officer: Am I being recorded? .....
Driver: Yes, that is why I posted the sticker on my car, right next to my license plate.
Officer: You do realize that it is interfering with my investigation and traffic stop, don't you?
Driver: No, I don't. How is it interfering with your investigation and traffic stop?
Officer: You might use the recording improperly.
Driver: Like how?
Officer: Where is the recording?
Driver: It's being streamed to servers in Havana, Cuba, with the added bonus that they don't have an extradition treaty with the U.S. It's also available streaming from Hulu, but people only watch the good ones the whole way through.
Officer: Good ones?
Driver: You know, where the cop goes ballistic about being videotaped by some bystander from 50 yards away, and then confiscates his phone and tries to arrest him on charges of wiretapping, invasion of privacy, interfering, tax evasion, lion taming, etc., then simultaneously "loses" both the phone recording and the squad car's dash cam tapes. It only works because those idiots didn't post any notice that they were recording the cops. Which is why I posted notice.
Wait until the boys get home from the war. (Score:3)
When this war is over, and the vets get home, how long before some kingshit cop pushes the wrong one around? How are our troops going to like the fact our freedoms are in the toilet in spite of the fact they went to fight a war to preserve them? I am starting to think they are keeping them overseas on purpose, so that they don't have to worry about them revolting or aiding insurrections or starting them here. Our military is sworn to uphold and defend the Constitution of the United States. That means if politicians start trashing the Constitution, they have not only the right, but the duty to put a fucking bullet in their heads.
These dipshits in office keep fucking around, they will have a military coup. My generation is obviously a bunch of pussies, or else we would have lynched these fuckers ourselves. I don't know about this new generation though. The brainwashing that goes on in this country is intense as fuck. This article is yet another example of how one just stands in awe at the balls of all authority figures these days. The system is a good one, but corruption is so rampant in it, it's sickening. We are seeing corruption from the lowest levels of government to the highest.
Don't think so? Take a look at Britain with this hacker scandal. Britain has always struck me as being a bit more reserved and cultured and for that much corruption going to the highest parts of it is dismaying. We KNOW we have super ambitious, money grubbing, stab your kids in the back with a butter knife for a dime, kind of people here in power. To think it's not 100 times more corrupt here is living in La La Land. We literally ARE the wild west.
Here is how I see it playing out. Dumbfuck Republicans and Democrats will fuck this up and the government will go fucking broke belling up. This is going to threaten the sovereignty of the United States in way you can't fucking imagine. I hope to fucking shout that we still have some people in high command in the military that Constitutionally say "FUCK YOU", arrest the entire lot of them, and we hold emergency elections to replace them. In the mean time, they lock the entire country the fuck down. Meaning nothing comes in, we tell ships coming this way, fuck off or we sink you. Planes, everything has to be turned back unless the military O.K.s it.
The economy will go WTF as Wall Street pisses it's self. But it will prompt local manufacturing to start up. Which will be good for the economy of the little people. The multinational cocksuckers will be fucked, Wal-Mart will not get to fuck us with all the cheap shit from China. We can uncap untold amounts of oil wells here and gas will be so fucking cheap even I will not bitch about the prices.
The bad news, lots of people will die. There will be panic, riots, more riots, cultural clashes if not mini-wars. There will of course be a split in the factions of the military, so probably up to half of it will be fighting with the other half and the UN. Fuck the UN, they will be here trying to beat down OUR military that is doing the coup. So the UN troops will come to know the horror of what we do to foreign troops in our land. If any survive they will tell horror stories for hundreds of years about our savagery, making anything out of darkest Africa, or South America, or even Hollywood, look pale in comparison to. I am talking about shit that would give Hannibal Lecter and Colonel Kurtz a nervous breakdown.
The whole world will collectively piss it's self. After all, when it comes to nukes we invented the game, which means we have plenty of them around. And we have plenty of crazy fuckers who would use them on OURSELVES in a heart beat. That means when we are over the rainbow, batshit crazy, fighting it out with each other, that if you fuck with us, we will probably nuke you shitless, then get back to the business of fucking each other up.
People have been seething pissed for decades now. Cops are under some impression that they could survive the public deciding to off the entire lot of them. Frankly they don't h
The case for "security" cameras (Score:5, Interesting)
I run a youth program. We have HD security cameras covering all of our premises (not the bathrooms). We have caught police misconduct more than once with those cameras.
Back in May we had a police officer from the next town over come in to "talk" with one of our teens about a crime that "they may have witnessed". When I got this call, my next call was to 911 to put on record that this was going to go on (standard policy for us, any time a police officer calls to interview a kid in our program, a staff member calls 911 to put it on the record. We find this stops a lot of police abuses, along with our ready access to lawyers). When the police officers came, the two of them tried to strong arm the kid out the door. We flatly refused to allow the teen to be taken to the police station to be questioned, and told the police officers that they would need to arrest the teen and read them their rights before we would allow them to leave (and that the teen was then invoking the right to a lawyer). They were not happy - they even accused me of not 'playing ball'.
When they started shoving the teen and talking about how the teen had just hit the officer (to be clear, the teen never touched the cop, the cops flatly made it up), and that was grounds for arrest, I physically stepped between the cops and the teen (I am 6'1, 220, a third degree black belt in Tie Kwan Do and like to lift weights) and informed them that the interview was over, and they were to leave. My volunteer assistant (who works part time as a judge at the state Department of Education!) called 911 at that point - calling 911 also activates the audio recording of all of our cameras, as well as an auto backup of our cameras to the law office next door.
Long story short, it was a weird stand off until local police arrived - the two cops having their hands on their guns, my telling them they had to leave or be escorted out. When local police arrived (with whom we have a generally good relationship) we informed them that our security cameras had caught the whole thing and we wanted the two cops arrested for assault. The first thing the local cops wanted to do was take the recording device and arrest the teen. When I said that it was no problem, our system recorded to three redundant devices, one of which is at our lawyers office, suddenly they didn't want to take the teen, and couldn't get out of their fast enough.
We sent a copy of the video to the DA's office, asking for an investigation, another copy went to the lawyer we set the family up with to represent this kid, and a third to the police department of the next town, with a letter from our lawyer stating that we would not allow any officer from their department to enter our premises or interview any of our kids without the programs lawyer present.
Re:The case for "security" cameras (Score:5, Insightful)
I run a youth program. We have HD security cameras covering all of our premises (not the bathrooms). We have caught police misconduct more than once with those cameras.
Back in May we had a police officer from the next town over come in to "talk" with one of our teens about a crime that "they may have witnessed". When I got this call, my next call was to 911 to put on record that this was going to go on (standard policy for us, any time a police officer calls to interview a kid in our program, a staff member calls 911 to put it on the record. We find this stops a lot of police abuses, along with our ready access to lawyers). When the police officers came, the two of them tried to strong arm the kid out the door. We flatly refused to allow the teen to be taken to the police station to be questioned, and told the police officers that they would need to arrest the teen and read them their rights before we would allow them to leave (and that the teen was then invoking the right to a lawyer). They were not happy - they even accused me of not 'playing ball'.
When they started shoving the teen and talking about how the teen had just hit the officer (to be clear, the teen never touched the cop, the cops flatly made it up), and that was grounds for arrest, I physically stepped between the cops and the teen (I am 6'1, 220, a third degree black belt in Tie Kwan Do and like to lift weights) and informed them that the interview was over, and they were to leave. My volunteer assistant (who works part time as a judge at the state Department of Education!) called 911 at that point - calling 911 also activates the audio recording of all of our cameras, as well as an auto backup of our cameras to the law office next door.
Long story short, it was a weird stand off until local police arrived - the two cops having their hands on their guns, my telling them they had to leave or be escorted out. When local police arrived (with whom we have a generally good relationship) we informed them that our security cameras had caught the whole thing and we wanted the two cops arrested for assault. The first thing the local cops wanted to do was take the recording device and arrest the teen. When I said that it was no problem, our system recorded to three redundant devices, one of which is at our lawyers office, suddenly they didn't want to take the teen, and couldn't get out of their fast enough.
We sent a copy of the video to the DA's office, asking for an investigation, another copy went to the lawyer we set the family up with to represent this kid, and a third to the police department of the next town, with a letter from our lawyer stating that we would not allow any officer from their department to enter our premises or interview any of our kids without the programs lawyer present.
Yea, and just yesterday I was having sex with a dozen of my girlfriends when Santa and The Easter Bunny dropped by to do blow and jerk off unicorns. I have quite a few unicorns. Their barn is right behind the lake where my pet Pleseosaur hangs out.
Re:And people wonder why they want guns protected? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Well Duh! its a gun!
Videocameras dont kill people at the push of a button, or press of a trigger.
Google+ (Score:5, Interesting)
The feature I love most about Google+ is that, as soon as I take a picture or a video on my Android phone, it is immediately uploaded to my Google+ account, without any further action on my part. Suddenly, having control of the device isn't enough to guarantee that you have control of the data.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The feature I love most about Google+ is that, as soon as I take a picture or a video on my Android phone, it is immediately uploaded to my Google+ account, without any further action on my part.
I can see that biting you in the ass sooner or later....maybe not you personally but people in general.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
It needs a way to specify at session start what you want to do with the recordings, and do it via easy-to-pick "profiles" so you could have your "taking naked pictures of the girlfriend" profile which won't auto-upload anything and the "oh shit" profile that uploads everything immediately and makes it 100% public too.
Re: (Score:3)
if you get 'caught with drugs' while driving, they can take your car.
if you have money on you, they will 'associate' that with drugs and take it.
this is legalized theft.
I hope, some day, that they DO take cops' houses and cars if they are found guilty of abuse under color-of-law.
in the new revolution (yeah...) this will happen. up against the wall!
someone will snap, someday. a citizen will be pushed too far and then he'll go terrorist on the local 'law enforcement'. its been long coming, too. how long w