User not logged in - login - register
Home Calendar Books School Tool Photo Gallery Message Boards Users Statistics Advertise Site Info
go to bottom | |
 Message Boards » » Evidence of our police state Page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 ... 20, Prev Next  
smc
All American
9221 Posts
user info
edit post

Quote :
"Is this nobrainer(filming the police) legal?"


Yeah, it's "spend 23 hours in jail and be released without charges" legal.

[Edited on April 3, 2011 at 5:23 PM. Reason : .]

4/3/2011 5:18:21 PM

rockwall
New Recruit
3 Posts
user info
edit post

The cameras are legal for citizens, which is really good. We need that to balance all of the government cameras going up all over the place, scanning people's faces. The government monitoring cameras at traffic lights are a risky idea, ripe for government oppressive use.

4/5/2011 8:52:06 PM

mrfrog

15145 Posts
user info
edit post

Cameras are not ubiquitously legal for citizens

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5bFl4H-toyU

4/22/2011 6:13:15 PM

smc
All American
9221 Posts
user info
edit post

Interestingly, police take advantage of North Carolina being a 1 party recording consent state all the time. It's a safe bet that any time you talk to a detective on the telephone the call is being recorded without your knowledge or consent, as it is legal to do so. No big deal, of course, since every word you say to an officer is often scribbled in their little notebook and will be repeated more or less verbatim at trial and essentially given the moral weight of a recording anyway.

And I've always heard that jail telephones are 0-party consent. Remember that embarrassing recording of Hulk Hogan talking to his son in jail recently?

[Edited on April 22, 2011 at 9:16 PM. Reason : .]

4/22/2011 9:14:32 PM

Chance
Suspended
4725 Posts
user info
edit post

I think it's a particularly iffy situation when a dude in an unmarked vehicle not wearing anything showing he is a cop hops out with a gun drawn. For all the rider knows, he pissed some guy off for riding like a douche and that guy wants to make a point. Seriously fucked up.

4/23/2011 8:41:38 AM

smc
All American
9221 Posts
user info
edit post

Nevermind that they called in the SWAT team to raid his house a week later just to seize a video camera and "teach him a lesson".

4/23/2011 10:49:02 AM

A Tanzarian
drip drip boom
10990 Posts
user info
edit post

http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/04/23/1148579/speeding-bike-dodged-copswas-ill.html

Quote :
"To look at Bernadette Brown, standing 5-foot-2, weighing roughly 200 pounds, living through chronic neck pain, you'd never figure her for the type to barrel down the highway on a Suzuki Katana motorcycle - blowing past lawmen with her wheels on fire.

But Wayne County deputies did arrest and handcuff the then-62-year-old Goldsboro woman, and a federal lawsuit says they did it knowing that her age and condition made the crime impossible.

The suit, filed April 12 in U.S. District Court, accuses Wayne Sheriff Carey Winders and Deputy Eric Pierce of violating the constitutional rights of Brown, who was briefly jailed in 2009 on charges of reckless driving and fleeing to elude arrest.

The charges were dropped last year after officers could not identify the driver of a speeding Suzuki Katana, who was wearing a helmet and escaped the pursuing deputy.

But according to the lawsuit, deputies knew Brown hadn't committed any crime and arrested her only to exact information about her son, the suspected culprit. Being overweight, and receiving disability benefits for a cervical neck injury, Brown couldn't possibly have operated a sport bike, said Greenville attorney David Sutton.

"It's a crotch rocket," Sutton said. "She couldn't have thrown her legs over it. There is no way she could get on it without a stool."

Reached at home Friday, Winders declined comment, saying attorneys were handling the case. Pierce could not be reached. Sutton said he included a third defendant in the case, "Deputy John Doe," because he thinks unknown others were involved.

Pierce tried to stop the Suzuki on Nov. 4, 2009, the suit says. Brown's arrest report specifies only that it was traveling more than 15 mph above the speed limit, but Sutton said he heard deputies report that it was moving at about 100 mph and darting around cars.

Brown owned the bike but had never driven it, Sutton said. The suit says she had never before been accused of criminal activity.

Pierce came to her house twice asking whether her son had been driving the bike on Nov. 4, and she replied that she hadn't been home and didn't know, according to the suit.

Eight days after the speeding incident, Brown got a call from the Wayne County jail telling her that her son had been arrested and had her laptop computer. If she wanted it, the suit says, she would have to come and sign for it.

When she arrived at the jail, she was told to go into an interview room and was asked again to name the motorcycle driver, according to the lawsuit. When she said she couldn't answer his questions, Pierce slammed down his notebook, left Brown alone for about 15 minutes, then told her she was free to leave, the suit says.

As she walked down the stairs, he ordered her to return, then told her she was under arrest, the suit says. Brown was handcuffed, placed under a $1,500 bond and taken to a holding cell with other arrestees.

"Plaintiff was terrified!" according to the suit.

At least twice, the suit says, Pierce told Brown he knew she hadn't been driving the motorcycle. She spent several hours in the cell until she could reach a relative in Ohio who wired money for her bail. At the time, the suit says, Brown's pet was stuck in her car outside the jail.

Sutton said he has never spoken to Brown's son and does not know whether he was the driver. Because Friday was a court holiday, it was unclear the status of the laptop or her son's arrest. Sutton said he did not know.

The interview room where Brown was taken is very near the sheriff's office, and he thinks that Pierce acted with the approval of higher-ranking officers.

Sutton delayed filing a lawsuit for several months, he said, at the request of the Wayne County attorney. But a settlement agreement could not be reached.

Brown is suffering from post-traumatic stress and does not want to talk about her arrest, Sutton said. He is seeking unspecified compensatory and punitive damages."

4/23/2011 10:00:10 PM

Chance
Suspended
4725 Posts
user info
edit post

Maybe I should have titled this Police State and Crony Capitalism, because this post is the latter...i see we have a Crony Capitalism thread but I am too lazy to get it bumped

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2011/05/after-approving-comcastnbc-deal-fcc-commish-becomes-comcast-lobbyist.ars

5/11/2011 5:17:08 PM

CaelNCSU
All American
6883 Posts
user info
edit post

http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/the-long-con/Content?oid=7989613

5/14/2011 12:37:21 PM

Kurtis636
All American
14984 Posts
user info
edit post

http://www.theagitator.com/2011/05/13/indiana-court-you-have-no-right-to-keep-cops-out-of-your-house/

Truly horrifying stuff here.

5/16/2011 11:43:13 AM

disco_stu
All American
7436 Posts
user info
edit post

I think the original editorial writer and the one that you linked are misinterpreting the decision. It's simply stating that the 4th Amendment doesn't support the resistance of police entry; not that unwarranted police entry is ok. Independent of the legality of the police entry, fighting them is not protected by the Constitution. My panties remain unwadded.

5/16/2011 12:36:48 PM

TULIPlovr
All American
3288 Posts
user info
edit post

Yeah, the right to resist that has only been around for 800 years or so. No reason to keep it around.

5/16/2011 12:50:58 PM

Restricted
All American
15537 Posts
user info
edit post

In NC, its legal to resist an unlawful arrest, not sure about entry.

5/16/2011 12:56:35 PM

disco_stu
All American
7436 Posts
user info
edit post

It won't be upheld anyway. It violates SC precedent.

5/16/2011 12:58:18 PM

Kurtis636
All American
14984 Posts
user info
edit post

SC themselves just shat all over the 4th amendment. Nice reasoning... so now the police have yet another tool to utilize pretty much any time they don't feel like going to the trouble of you know, investigating or compiling evidence or really anything. All they have to do now is say that it sounded like evidence was being destroyed (whatever the fuck that sounds like!).

http://www.latimes.com/news/sc-dc-0517-court-search-20110516,0,6820148.story

http://www.theagitator.com/2011/05/16/warrant-we-dont-need-no-stinkin-warrant/

5/17/2011 6:49:24 AM

smc
All American
9221 Posts
user info
edit post

If you resist an unlawful arrest or entry, you will be shot dead.

5/17/2011 12:39:06 PM

TerdFerguson
All American
6569 Posts
user info
edit post

^^only one dissenting opinion, thats some weak shit. It just seems like it should be a little more controversial

5/17/2011 1:56:22 PM

d357r0y3r
Jimmies: Unrustled
8198 Posts
user info
edit post

Marine Survives Two Tours in Iraq, SWAT Kills Him

http://reason.com/blog/2011/05/16/marine-survives-two-tours-in-i

http://www.kgun9.com/story/14621212/marine-killed-by-swat-was-acting-in-defense-says-family?clienttype=printable

Shouldn't have had drugs, bro. Oh, no drugs found? Whoops. Shouldn't have acted in self defense, bro. Oh, the gun was still on safety? Well, shit.

5/17/2011 5:06:51 PM

Kris
All American
36908 Posts
user info
edit post

yeah, pointing an assault rifle at police is a completely reasonable thing to do that no one should expect to be shot for doing.

I'm sure the authorities could be to blame, but I wouldn't ever suggest that pointing a firearm at police officers is a good idea

[Edited on May 17, 2011 at 5:30 PM. Reason : ]

5/17/2011 5:26:05 PM

d357r0y3r
Jimmies: Unrustled
8198 Posts
user info
edit post

He didn't know they were police officers. They didn't announce that they were police officers before they busted in. He was shot over 60 times.

[Edited on May 17, 2011 at 5:36 PM. Reason : ]

5/17/2011 5:35:47 PM

Kris
All American
36908 Posts
user info
edit post

Quote :
"They didn't announce that they were police officers before they busted in."


The Pima County Sheriff's Office denies that officers failed to identify themselves. Lt. Michael O'Connor told KGUN9's Joel Waldman that the SWAT team has a standard procedure when serving high-risk search warrants of this nature designed to prevent the suspect from confusing officers with criminal home invaders. "We will have a lot police vehicles there, with their lights and their sirens on. In this case... because it was a narcotics high risk type of a search warrant, we had our large armored vehicle there with the markings on it. It also has lights and sirens, it was going. So we do everything we can to portray the image that we are law enforcement, we are not home invaders."

O'Connor also said emphatically that this was not a "no knock" raid. "This case was, we came in very high profile, lights and sirens. We go to the door, we pound on the door. We wait approximately 15 seconds. If no one answers the door, we breach the door with a heavy tool and open the door."

The officer said that when the SWAT team got the door open, they found Guerena crouched in the hall pointing an assault rifle at them. According to O'Connor, Guerena said, ""I have something for you!" He said that Guerena "brought this all on himself by presenting himself the way he did."


That seems to still be undetermined.

Quote :
"He was shot over 60 times."


In 7 seconds.

[Edited on May 17, 2011 at 5:43 PM. Reason : ]

5/17/2011 5:42:45 PM

Chance
Suspended
4725 Posts
user info
edit post

As a matter of policy, all public peace officers should be required to have working recording devices on their person and in any instances of this type of serving of a warrant those devices should be verified working before executing the warrant.

That would settle any and all questions pretty quickly.

5/17/2011 7:04:40 PM

d357r0y3r
Jimmies: Unrustled
8198 Posts
user info
edit post

Clearly, that would be an invasion of the officer's privacy...or so the argument goes. I think you waive your right to privacy when you're given the power to kill your fellow citizens.

5/17/2011 7:08:10 PM

Kris
All American
36908 Posts
user info
edit post

Quote :
"As a matter of policy, all public peace officers should be required to have working recording devices on their person and in any instances of this type"


I agree, I might even go a step further and require them to have them on at any time they are on duty.

5/17/2011 7:22:28 PM

TerdFerguson
All American
6569 Posts
user info
edit post

Someone help me out on understanding police tactics:

what are the advantages to a home raid (either knock or no knock) as compared to arresting someone when they are leaving the house. For instance, suprising them as they walk from their house to their car and then serving the search warrant?

5/17/2011 7:32:07 PM

smc
All American
9221 Posts
user info
edit post

It's more badass and you get to buy and use lots of cool assault rifles. Duh.

5/17/2011 8:38:29 PM

Restricted
All American
15537 Posts
user info
edit post

Quote :
"He was shot over 60 times"


60 times or 6 times...whats the difference? Deadly force by nature cannot be unreasonable.

5/17/2011 8:43:59 PM

rbrthwrd
Suspended
3125 Posts
user info
edit post

it's incredibly silly to me when people mention the number of shots as some type of proof that someone overreacted.

5/17/2011 9:46:34 PM

smc
All American
9221 Posts
user info
edit post

OMG SOMEONE'S SHOOTING I SHOULD BE SHOOTING TOO HEY GUYS WHY ARE WE SHOOTING TOO LATE I'M ALREADY SHOOTING TOO

5/17/2011 9:48:36 PM

adder
All American
3901 Posts
user info
edit post

Quote :
"it's incredibly silly to me when people mention the number of shots as some type of proof that someone overreacted."

I think it does a better job denoting how little discipline was used during the raid. Every extra round fired increases the chance of collateral damage and there were (obviously) many extra rounds fired.

5/18/2011 11:42:07 AM

smc
All American
9221 Posts
user info
edit post

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=481_1305659194

5/18/2011 7:59:29 PM

TerdFerguson
All American
6569 Posts
user info
edit post

^ahahaha

5/18/2011 8:19:27 PM

smc
All American
9221 Posts
user info
edit post

My favorite part is at the end when the white cops and the black cops are fighting over who gets to take the money they stole from that mexican.

5/18/2011 9:15:51 PM

Kurtis636
All American
14984 Posts
user info
edit post

More about the Pima, AZ shooting.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/25/jose-guerena-arizona-_n_867020.html

5/26/2011 4:44:45 AM

AuH20
All American
1604 Posts
user info
edit post

Arrested for dancing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jUU3yCy3uI

5/28/2011 6:03:20 PM

smc
All American
9221 Posts
user info
edit post

DEATH TO AMERI...it's already dead.

5/28/2011 6:50:22 PM

A Tanzarian
drip drip boom
10990 Posts
user info
edit post

I thought that was going to be a clip from Footloose.

5/28/2011 7:28:14 PM

d357r0y3r
Jimmies: Unrustled
8198 Posts
user info
edit post

And at the Jefferson memorial, of all places. Appropriate.

5/28/2011 8:47:16 PM

Kurtis636
All American
14984 Posts
user info
edit post

Pima, AZ shooting video.

http://www.theagitator.com/2011/05/26/video-of-the-pima-county-swat-raid/

I never heard them announce. I saw and heard a very brief knock, then they breached, then lots of firing.

I also find it interesting that they then felt the need to breach AND SEARCH 2 other homes because they were worried that they might have accidentally shot someone else. Breaching to check on the safety of the occupants, ok I can see that. Tossing the homes without a warrant or any reasonable suspicion seems waaaaaay unconstitutional.

5/29/2011 12:09:49 PM

A Tanzarian
drip drip boom
10990 Posts
user info
edit post

Quote :
"The Tactical Emergency Medical Support element provides emergency medical support to the entire SWAT team and suspects or victims requiring emergency medical services. TEMS is staffed by paramedics from the Pima County Sheriff's Department. The paramedics are fully integrated into the Tactical element and respond to all missions where SWAT is involved."


They can't be too integrated if it takes an hour to respond to a shooting.

Quote :
"The goal was to create one of the largest, most capable tactical team in the Country; this goal has been accomplished."


Why is being the largest a goal? Being capable? Sure, everyone wants to be good at what they do, but what does being large have to do with it?



Real professional guys.

http://pimasheriff.org/about-us/organization-charts/operations-bureau/support-operations-division/tactical-response-section/s-w-a-t/

5/29/2011 12:51:54 PM

AuH20
All American
1604 Posts
user info
edit post



Not sure whether to laugh or cry at the "offense description".

5/31/2011 9:51:38 AM

rbrthwrd
Suspended
3125 Posts
user info
edit post



[Edited on May 31, 2011 at 9:59 AM. Reason : .]

5/31/2011 9:59:19 AM

wlb420
All American
9053 Posts
user info
edit post

http://www.cnn.com/2011/TECH/mobile/05/31/warrantless.phone.searches/index.html?hpt=Sbin#0_undefined,0_

make sure you lock your cell phones, kids!

5/31/2011 10:02:45 AM

mrfrog

15145 Posts
user info
edit post

^^^

Quote :
" (g) Demonstrations and special events(1) Definitions. (i) The term demonstrations includes demonstrations, picketing, speechmaking, marching, holding vigils or religious services and all other like forms of conduct which involve the communication or expression of views or grievances, engaged in by one or more persons, the conduct of which has the effect, intent or propensity to draw a crowd or onlookers. This term does not include casual park use by visitors or tourists which does not have an intent or propensity to attract a crowd or onlookers.

(ii) The term special events includes sports events, pageants, celebrations, historical reenactments, regattas, entertainments, exhibitions, parades, fairs, festivals and similar events (including such events presented by the National Park Service), which are not demonstrations under paragraph (g)(1)(i) of this section, and which are engaged in by one or more persons, the conduct of which has the effect, intent or propensity to draw a crowd or onlookers. This term also does not include casual park use by visitors or tourists which does not have an intent or propensity to attract a crowd or onlookers."


correct?

5/31/2011 10:32:40 AM

AuH20
All American
1604 Posts
user info
edit post

There are really two things to argue here, due to the absurdity of the situation. And that's just on the "legal"/philosophical side of things (clearly there was more with what actually happened, like the officer refusing to say what they would be arrested for, or bodyslamming someone who didn't pose a threat to them).

1) Dancing in the manner that anyone there was certainly does not constitute "intent or propensity to attract a crowd or onlookers", thus shouldn't have been an offense. I can prove this because THERE WAS NO FUCKING CROWD OR ONLOOKERS prior to the arrests.

2) It shouldn't even be a law in the first place. Proactive laws with jail time for a "crime" that has no victim is so ridiculous. Something might happen if someone "expresses their views", so we may as well lock their ass up!

5/31/2011 10:58:55 AM

Restricted
All American
15537 Posts
user info
edit post

Were you cited because you were dancing or because you were in a restricted area?

5/31/2011 11:13:44 AM

mrfrog

15145 Posts
user info
edit post

It would seem that the cited law makes no mention of restricted area. So how does that work in court? Can they just say "no, now you're on trial for law xxx, being in a restricted area"?

5/31/2011 11:22:30 AM

smc
All American
9221 Posts
user info
edit post

They can do whatever they want. Who is going to stop them?

6/1/2011 12:17:43 AM

AndyMac
All American
31919 Posts
user info
edit post

^^^^

He didn't bodyslam him because he was dancing, he bodyslammed him because he was resisting arrest. And they arrested them because he wouldn't stop dancing when they told him to.

I'd wager they told them to leave several times before the arrest (despite what the dancing couple say) that were edited out of the video. There were like 20 park cops there, you think they were all just hanging out in the memorial chamber when this happened?

And why do you think there will be jail time for that?

[Edited on June 1, 2011 at 11:42 AM. Reason : ]

6/1/2011 11:42:24 AM

smc
All American
9221 Posts
user info
edit post

It was an illegal arrest. Any commands given by those officers were illegal.

6/1/2011 12:32:01 PM

 Message Boards » The Soap Box » Evidence of our police state Page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 ... 20, Prev Next  
go to top | |
Admin Options : move topic | lock topic

© 2024 by The Wolf Web - All Rights Reserved.
The material located at this site is not endorsed, sponsored or provided by or on behalf of North Carolina State University.
Powered by CrazyWeb v2.38 - our disclaimer.