Cop Seeks Wiretapping Charges For Woman Who Videotaped Beating

An anonymous reader writes "A police officer who was disciplined for his role in the beating of a Massachusetts man (many broken bones in his face and permanent partial blindness) is looking to bring criminal wiretapping charges against the woman who caught much of the incident on video. The officer received a 45-day suspension for the beating. He does not appear to deny anything that happened in the video, but he apparently thinks it shouldn't have been filmed."

Comments

This guy is just blowing smoke.

[intellitech]

The full video being available in the second link, but it looks it's being taken on a public street, where police officers should have no expectation of privacy.

On another note, the individual referred to in the summary (identified in the stub-of-an-article as Michael Sedergren), was not the guy who beat Jones senseless, but in my personal opinion, he's just as dirty, and should have been fired, too.

FTFA:

“They’re really just trying to intimidate and silence her, but whether she’s charged or not (the tape) can still be used in court,” said attorney Shawn P. Allyn, who represents Jones in a civil rights lawsuit against the police in U.S. District Court.

Case and point. Guy is a complete dirtbag.

Re:This guy is just blowing smoke.

[Anonymous Coward]

There's no such phrase as "case and point". What you're thinking of is "case in point", and providing a direct quote from an article covering the case already under consideration isn't, in fact, a case in point. It's just a quote.

Re:This guy is just blowing smoke.

[itchythebear]

I would like to point out that the cop who did the actual beating was fired and is facing criminal charges. The cop who is filing the complaint (and who received the 45 day suspension) is one of the officers who stood by and watched.

Massachusetts laws are fucked up

[_xeno_]

He'll win, easily.

It's illegal to record audio of people without their express permission in Massachusetts. Period. Doesn't matter where.

About the only exception is if it's blatantly obvious that you're being recorded, which has been taken to mean "news team" - in other words, an absolutely gigantic, impossible-to-miss camera, or a large microphone, like TV reporters carry with the station logo on it.

Otherwise, it's "wire tapping."

Ridiculous? You bet. Going to change? Hah!

Incidentally, as far as I know, you're allowed to take video of people in public places. Just not the audio.

Re:What freedom are you interested in?

[reasterling]

It's because of poorly raised excuses of humanity like you that we need cops.

I do not think you know me well enough to make this statement

I further wonder if you have ever been pulled over when you were breaking no laws at all. I HAVE. I have been stopped for no other reason than that I was out driving past midnight (I was taking my brother back to college). I watched as the cop walked around my vehicle twice looking for anything he could stick me with. Of course there was nothing so he rudely told me not to speed and sent me on my way.

My licence plate numbers and other personal information went out for anyone with a police scanner on to hear. I had people at work the following day (I worked as an x-ray tech in the local ER) ask me if I got the ticket or not.

During that time I lived a block away form the hospital and would frequently get paged out at all hour of the night to x-ray someone. Because I live so close to my work I would walk to the ER. On multiple occasions while walking only a block to work I would have the local cops stop me and ask my business. Let me be abundantly clear about this. I respect cops when they do "keep the peace". However in my life I have never had a cop around when I felt threatened unless the cop was the reason that I felt threatened.

You may have only have had good experiances with cops. Good for you. But do not dare criticize my upbringing. YOU DO NOT KNOW ME!