Slashdot Mirror


Man Ordered At Gunpoint To Hand Over Phone For Recording Cops

HungryHobo writes with this excerpt from a story at Pixiq: "Miami Beach police did their best to destroy a citizen video that shows them shooting a man to death in a hail of bullets on Memorial Day. First, police pointed their guns at the man who shot the video, according to a Miami Herald interview with the videographer. Then they ordered the man and his girlfriend out of the car and threw them down to the ground, yelling, 'you want to be f****** paparazzi?' Then they snatched the cell phone from his hand and slammed it to the ground before stomping on it. Then they placed the smashed phone in the videographer's back pocket as he was laying down on the ground."

19 of 983 comments (clear)

  1. Ahhh crime. by Qatz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Theft, destruction of private property, destruction of evidence, assault, and I'm probably missing a few.

    1. Re:Ahhh crime. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Seriously, think before you go castrating the public's protective services just because you want to be a dick to a cop and not get punched.

      Videotaping cops or anyone else in a public place is not "being a dick." It's not even illegal in a two-party state like Florida unless there's a reasonable expectation of privacy.

      The cops should not be disempowered from performing their duties, but they should always be mindful that there are serious consequences for breaking the laws they're supposed to be enforcing.

    2. Re:Ahhh crime. by Man+On+Pink+Corner · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If you're a US citizen, one estimate I've seen is that you're subject to 40,000+ pages of Federal, state, and local laws. You may absolutely rest assured that you have broken more than one of them today, probably before you even got out of bed this morning. As have I.

      Now, who has "something to hide," and who doesn't?

    3. Re:Ahhh crime. by mvdwege · · Score: 5, Insightful

      So, filming a public servant in public doing his job is 'being a dick to a cop' and deserves a punching.

      Good to know that the Gestapo would have had a nice informant in you.

      Mart

      --
      "I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
    4. Re:Ahhh crime. by bmo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That's OK. I will be sure not to record your beating or shooting when it comes to you.

      Fair enough?

      --
      BMO

    5. Re:Ahhh crime. by PyroMosh · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I had trouble Googling the incident myself until I added "Raymond Herisse" (the name of the man who died) to my searches.

      It turns out he's been IDed as the suspect in an armed robbery attempt from earlier in the weekend and police tried to pull him over (no idea if it's because of the robbery or another reason), but rather than stop, he rammed a police cruiser and tried to run over at least one officer on foot.

      So considering him a threat? Sure. I buy that. If what they say is true he demonstrated that he was a threat.

      But from the video I saw, it seems that they shot at him on a crowded street. The car stops, and cops approach it. Then a few seconds later the 6 or so officers I could see all appear to not just fire, but unload their guns into the car.

      Did the suspect draw a weapon? That would explain that kind of action, but the video I saw doesn't show that.

      I can imagine a scenario where the cops do everything right and bystanders get hit when shots are fired. I can perhaps even forgive them for unloading their weapons. Adrenalin, and all that. I've never been there. Still, all the stars have to be aligned perfectly for me to believe that 4 bystanders got hit and it happened with the cops doing everything right.

      Nothing however explains the confiscation of cameras and assaulting of bystanders. There *is* no reason I can dream up that is anything other than a criminal act on the part of the police.

      The ACLU is investigating apparently, and rightly they should.

      Even more troubling, is I can find no evidence that any officers have even been suspended. Though apparently there were officers from multiple departments involved.

  2. I wish there were a law by dachshund · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What we need is a Federal law with two components:

    1. Establish that it's perfectly legal to film the police doing their job in a public place.
    2. Make it a crime, punishable with serious jail time, for a police officer to intimidate a photographer, confiscate their camera, or return the camera without the images.

    This law should have no exception for "accidents" like phones being smashed or evidence being lost --- any more than we tolerate "accidents" involving children being lost or killed. Police should know that the minute they confiscate a private individual's camera they are putting their careers and their freedom in the balance should anything go wrong.

    Of course none of this would be workable; if Congress actually passed any kind of law it would almost certainly protect the police and not the citizenry; and half of Slashdot would probably object to this being a Federal law rather than a state law or would propose that we adopt a technological/market solution instead.

    1. Re:I wish there were a law by White+Flame · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There's nothing that should be specific to police officers. Any public servant is accountable to the public for their actions, and has no claim of privacy from the public eye. This needs to be cast in stone, no matter which role the servant is in.

  3. Not an iPhone by afortaleza · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When it says he removed the SD card, you know it's not an iPhone.

  4. What we need are cops who aren't thugs by msobkow · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's not illegal to film them, so you don't need a law explicitly making it legal. What you need is for these thugs to be charged with assault and more.

    --
    I do not fail; I succeed at finding out what does not work.
  5. Re:Any laywers here? by skywire · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When pigs fly.

    --
    Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
  6. Re:Been there, done that? by JonJ · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Have you ever been in a high adrenaline situation that ended in you shooting and killing someone? Have you ever voluntarily ended someones life? Have you had someone film you whilst you do this? Unless the answer to all of the above is "yes", how about you keep your damning judgements to yourself.

    If the police officer can't handle these situations, I highly suggest they go for an alternate career. Maybe as a garbageman or something that shouldn't involve weapons. Seriously, it might be an extremely stressfull situation when he's shooting at the alleged drug dealer, who allegedly shot back at them. But when this innocent bystander, only being guilty of having a camera, gets guns shoved up in his face, then you aren't fit to take care of justice. If your job as a public servant can't take the scrutiny of someone video taping you as you perform your job, then you have no business being in the line of duty. Please, let the people be able to weed out the bad cops. We need the good ones. So your arguments are basically not relevant, as criticism isn't dependant of having to be in the persons shoes.

    --
    -- Linux user #369862
  7. Re:Crooks chasing crooks... by The+Dawn+Of+Time · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I guess we should wait until they are the Nazis, huh?

  8. How is that being a "dick"? by khasim · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Seriously, think before you go castrating the public's protective services just because you want to be a dick to a cop and not get punched.

    Strange, I don't see anyone being a dick to the cops in that story.

    A guy RECORDING cops ON DUTY during an action ON A PUBLIC STREET ends up with a cop smashing his phone and pointing a gun at him.

    Yeah, blame other people for being dicks to the cops. That makes a lot of sense.

  9. Re:This is not a police state. by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 5, Insightful

    We are free, except for the millions of people who are behind bars; in fact, the US imprisons more people than any other country, including China, and the only countries to even imprison more people than the US were the USSR and Nazi Germany. As if that were not shameful enough, we also imprison a higher proportion of our black population than South Africa did during Apartheid.

    Shameful.

    --
    Palm trees and 8
  10. Re:See with that Apple patent by asdbffg · · Score: 5, Insightful

    the cops could have avoided all that trouble

    Yes, by not shooting people or threatening witnesses at gunpoint.

  11. Re:See with that Apple patent by MagusSlurpy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    the cops could have avoided all that trouble

    Yes, by not shooting people or threatening witnesses at gunpoint.

    But then why would anyone bother to become a cop?

    --
    My sister opened a computer store in Hawaii. She sells C shells by the seashore.
  12. Re:See with that Apple patent by History's+Coming+To · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The real trick is to post everything directly to "The Cloud". Yes, yes, I hate the term as much as the average /.-er, but in this case it's extraordinarily useful. Destroying the device doesn't destroy the data, and you also have a record of the destruction. There's a good reason for decent systems to keep off-site (ideally off-continent) records.

    --
    Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
  13. Re:See with that Apple patent by Artifakt · · Score: 5, Insightful

    See, you were making a pretty good argument, and then you threw in this:

    Is anyone willing to *personally* take a good working-over by government thugs in exchange for another social program? (emphasis mine).

    It's not the social programs that empower the goon squads. The US government currently has 17 civilian agencies that have agents empowered to carry fully automatic weapons. There is a line item in the federal budget equal to about half the overall FBI budget, and it goes just to pay for the FBI running rifle, grenade launcher, and even rocket launcher training ranges for all the other security related agencies. Those are not the social services agencies that have the police like powers. A person from the department of health and human resources may be able to take one of your kids away, but at least he or she can't shoot you in the head to stop you from getting a lawyer and fighting it. The BATF, DEA, and 15 other police/security related agencies most definitely can.

    Right now, you can take the amount that goes to Israel out of the foreign aid budget, and half the rest is directed by the DEA. For example, we give multiple squadrons of assault helicopters to Columbia to 'help stamp out Cocaine trafficking, add attack helicopters and air to ground Hellfire missiles to protect them, current elite grade scrambling to keep the drug lords from overhearing their communications, and many other forms of support, and then all their neighbors worry about what happens if Columbia uses all those neat toys for something besides the war on drugs, so we have to give the rest of Central America weapons too. If they don't have enough Cocaine growers to justify putting it in the DEA budget, we put it in foreign aid, earmarked to be spent only buying weapons from US based corporations. Then we have right wing radio show hosts frequently stress how foreign aid is all a liberal waste of money. (Yeah, because the Liberals are the ones who support a huge war on drugs.). Many of us strongly suspect there's still funding for covert ops hidden in the social services side of the budget, but it's a pretty safe bet nobody in, say, the National Endowment for the Arts is hiding money in the Military/Security part of the budget. The reverse however, is false - it has now been openly admitted that the CIA funneled money through the Nat. Endowment for the Arts for covert ops in the 1950s and 60s.

      Please don't fall for the idea that we have to cut social services to control the government - the power and arrogance they contribute to the whole is so trivial compared to the effects of all those agencies grouped under homeland security that eliminating all social spending would probably have less effect on the nation's slide into fascism than finding out why anyone else in the Treasury department, besides the Secret Service, needs full auto weapons training. (I'm willing to grant we need something like a Secret Service to protect various officials from nutcases - but why does a guy who's full time job description is to investigate insider trading, a guy who is required to be a CPA before qualifying for the job, but need have absolutely no military or law enforcement background, need to qualify on a M16-A4 assault rifle with under-mounted M203 grenade launcher?). Multiply that by all the agents for BATF that are not investigating firearms or even the few remaining old fashioned stills in the Kentucky hills, but need them for all those cases where someone is smuggling cigarettes without tax stamps - surely a few pistols or assistance from a federal marshall or two would be enough to handle such cases. Multiply by all the small towns that now have used federal grants for SWAT teams even if the most serious crime in a typical year there is likely to be a bar fight.

    --
    Who is John Cabal?