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."
the cops could have avoided all that trouble, and then it would just be a he-said/she-said scenario. Neat. Clean.
Dog is my co-pilot.
Theft, destruction of private property, destruction of evidence, assault, and I'm probably missing a few.
By the time our porcine "protectors" figure out that smashing up the instrument rarely destroys the recording, we'll all have real-time internet-connected video cameras.
Yet another example of a government agent stomping on the Constitution. What type of country has this become? One where the government can track, monitor, record, and harass citizens, yet citizens can't even record a public event without being treated as terrorists. Just disgusting.
Now they should sue and we can all pay for it with an ever increasing tax burden.
...and cops wonder why we hate them?
It definitely is and assuming that this is a somewhat accurate description of what happened, the police officers involved could easily find themselves behind bars for witness tampering, destruction of evidence amongst other things. And police officers do get sent to prison from time to time for this sort of behavior.
If there's enough of the phone to recover images, then the cops have made their situation worse. It looks like that's the case, but it's from an SD card, not a SIM card - given how Sprint's phones work.
Another point - how about apps that instantly stream to an offsite location? The cops would still be thwarted, and still have to pay.
Hopefully the cops end up paying tons of cash to replace the phones, along with whatever criminal penalties come from their actions.
Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
Record it online, not on your phone. Although I suppose it won't be long before cops carry cell jammers as a regular thing.
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.
...can be found here. Rather chilling.
When it says he removed the SD card, you know it's not an iPhone.
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.
When pigs fly.
Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.
Since I was born in this country I have never seen so much lawlessness by financial institutions, politicians and law enforcement.
If this continues the USA will break up. If the USA becomes politically unstable we could see civil war.
There are already indications of this as state legislatures ignore their constituents and yield to the criminals in Washington.
We have states desperate to save the currency Washington is destroying, by declaring new issues of monetary and economic rules in their own states.
Meanwhile you have Federal powers trying to make it illegal to put anything other than Federal Reserve notes and arresting anyone who dares try.
A confrontation is coming between those who have looted and stole everything in this country and those who have been stolen from.
Be sure you pick the correct side when the crap hits the fan, because it is going to get very very ugly.
-Hack
Got Geometrodynamics? Awe, too hard to figure out? Too bad.
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
You're forgetting the police have helicopters.
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.
It's not legal.
The problem is that we have a fascist minority in the populace, and a fascist majority in government, who believe that government employees, police in particular, are above the law. For a shockingly high percentage of the population, the whole concept of law and order is absent or incomprehensible, and instant subservience and obedience to the uniform is substituted instead.
This belief is, unsurprisingly, strongest amongst the police themselves. So they break the law, what are you going to do? Call the police?
You cant even get a prosecutor to file charges against them with clear proof of the crime. I remember one prosecutor that did try to discharge her duties faithfully by prosecuting a cop, and found herself unable to function in her position at all because the entire damn police force made a point to louse up her cases and refuse to work with her. Every time someone says 'it's just a few bad apples' I have to think back to her. It seems closer to the truth, today, to say as Adam Kokesh recently did "it's a few bad apples that give the other 5% of cops a bad name."
Now to be fair, police pay is relatively low, and the ability to kill and/or abuse their fellow citizens with impunity is the only clearly exceptional perk they get. Given that, it shouldnt be a surprise that the bad-apples come to outnumber the good ones over time.
I've known some very good people who were cops - note the past tense. They had a very rough time of it. I also knew a guy that told everyone he was going to join the police so he could kill someone and get away with it when he was in high school. Last I saw him he was wearing a blue uniform and a big smile.
Getting rid of bad cops is probably going to continue to be an intractable problem until and unless we as a nation realise that police should, yes, be held to very high standards - but they should also be paid commensurately for their services. No, poor pay in no way justifies lawlessness in the uniform - but if the police were actually held to the law, most of them would be in prison in short order and the people that we really want to take their place will be somewhere else, making more money and dealing with less stress.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
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
I didn't ask them to protect me. They took it upon themselves. They coerce their keep from my paycheck. They can damn well be held to the highest standards of conduct in those circumstances.
http://www.gandhicam.org/
Meldroc, Waster of Electrons
Here in the US we fought a very bloody and painful war which all the oddsmakers gave us absolutely 0 chance of winning to gain our independence, and one of the major reasons we did that was because of warrantless searches. We have a fourth amendment for a reason. If a law is impossible to enforce without warrantless searches (laws attempting to regulate peaceful private behaviour generally are) then it's a bad law and it shouldnt be enforced anyway.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Friends don't let friends enable ecmascript.
Don't think he was.
"Non-electronic", and on a public way.
From http://www.rcfp.org/taping/states/florida.html.
Its events like this that are the reason I have Qik on my phone. I've never used it, but give me 15 seconds to get started and I'll be uploading live video to a remote server. Go ahead and take my phone. Its already in the cloud.
It definitely is and assuming that this is a somewhat accurate description of what happened, the police officers involved could easily find themselves behind bars for witness tampering, destruction of evidence amongst other things. And police officers do get sent to prison from time to time for this sort of behavior.
Every once in a great while when there is a massive public outcry and there are no other politically viable alternatives, yes, they do. This is far, far less often than it should happen. Of the instances of police overstepping their bounds I have heard of exactly one police officer being fired, and that was for a clear case of murder that was committed on camera and the victim was a homeless person who was well known and liked. The officer's excuse was that the man (who was known as 'the woodcarver' by locals) had a knife, and he did not put it down in the 2.5 seconds between the time the officer told him to and the time he fired. The man made no threatening gesture with the knife.
I have never heard of a police officer going to jail.
Need a Python, C++, Unix, Linux develop
No, you misunderstand.
Yes, he was driving a weapon. But you clearly misunderstand the narrative that makes this not make sense unless he drew a weapon or made some other overt threatening action.
Here is the video:
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ef7_1306812064
The video sucks though, so let me explain what I see blow by blow. I may be wrong, about some of this as it's hard to see.
The video starts, and I can't even see the car.
At about 3 seconds shots ring out. The source of them is unclear, but there is on report of shots coming from anywhere other than the officers.
At about 5 seconds the car halts near the intersection on the right.
Men approach the car cautiously with guns drawn. Presumably they are the police.
The officers surround the car which is now stopped. There is no additional sign of activity. The car doesn't move any further.
Then at 1:13ish many, many shots ring out. Far more than the number of shots that rang out before. Definitely multiple officers discharging lots of rounds.
The question is why? What were they reacting to?
Reiterating what I said before: If what the suspect supposedly did is true, and the cops are telling the truth that he fled and tried to run them over and refused to stop one can make the argument that the shots at 0:03 could have been justified.
But no shots were fired again until 1:13, and then they unloaded. What changed? If he didn't draw a weapon or make an overt threat, there's no reason. He had been stopped. The shots at 0:03 either hit him, or scared him into stopping.
I have no idea what the first half of your second paragraph is talking about. Sadly, I suspect that there have been too many journalists killed in war zones recently to know which "Reuters guy" you are referring to.
That said, I suspect your analysis of why this happened may be pretty close to the mark. Something along the lines of:
Stressed cops from this big, hard to control event get confronted with a real threat: an officer is nearly run down in a motor vehicle stop. Everyone's on edge, and the suspect is trying to get away. A gunfight ensues. Everyone is keyed up. And bad calls get made.
Further evidence of this is that there was another shooting later in the same night. A female officer who claims a different suspect was trying to run her over too.
It's not an excuse, or a defense. But I think this didn't just happen. These cops were driven to an edge. They did what they thought they had to do, but then they took things too far. I suspect a lot of these things happen in similar ways.
Touch everywhere, even when inappropriate.
No, poor pay in no way justifies lawlessness in the uniform - but if the police were actually held to the law, most of them would be in prison in short order and the people that we really want to take their place will be somewhere else, making more money and dealing with less stress.
Poor pay?? I will never understand why this misconception cannot be stamped out. That concept was true decades ago, but not today. Many Miami Police Beach Patrol Officers make well over $100K.
Never go to sea with two chronometers; take one or three.
Just wondering, you said in your first comment that a cop came in over a noise complaint, and you also said:
I ran into the kitchen where there was like 20 people.
So the kitchen had 20 people already - were you partying? How late was it?
What I'm trying to get at, was the noise complaint, by any chance, justified?
Even well intentioned cops will do a lot of weird shit if they think they are rightfully protecting others from you .
The real trick is to post everything directly to "The Cloud". ... Destroying the device doesn't destroy the data, and you also have a record of the destruction.
This is what happened at the Democratic Convention protests in Chicago in 1968.
Chicago was a machine-run city and the police were able to keep pictures of their misdeeds out of the newspapers by seizing and/or smashing the photographers' cameras. In preparation for the convention (and the pre-announced protests) the machine's unions had prevented the stringing of video cabling to likely protest sites.
But this was the first serious deployment of the "minicam" by the three networks' news operations. It was a massive shoulder-mounted camera, feeding a backpack full of electronics and batteries, radio-linked to a truck full of equipment within a block or two that relayed it to the studio. But it worked. And Chicago was a main switching/mixing/studio center for all three networks' transcontinental feeds.
So the police, with orders to keep things out of the media, did their standard smash-the-camera number (like they did when the local newsies got ouf-of-line and tried to report on them). And when the police batons smashed a camera lens the image, from the lens' viewpoint, was already out of the camera and into living rooms nationwide.
With the improvements in video camera technology - first the personal portable video camera, then the inclusion of cameras and video-record functionaltiy in most modern cellphones - the bulk of the population has been in a position to play Chicago News Cameraman. "Who watches the watchmen?" can now be answered "All of us!" Since the Rodney King incident the police have been hunting for ways to suppress this coverage. And this bunch seems to have settled on the pre-minicam Chicago Police approach. In this case the camara man managed to extract and protect the "film". But the real solution is the same as it was in '68: Real time upload to external archive and/or live publication. You hit it dead-on.
Fortunately the pieces of that are now available as stock products (minor assembly required). Smartphone plus applet for live streaming to archive and/or social-network/video publication. The readers' letters attached to TFA name at least two such applets: QIK (and QIK Plus) and Ustream.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way