Baton Bob Strikes Back Against Police That Coerced Facebook Post From Him

McGruber (1417641) writes "In June 2013, Atlanta police arrested costumed street performer "Baton Bob" during the middle of a street performance after Baton Bob was allegedly involved in a verbal altercation with mall security guards. Now, a year later, Baton Bob has filed a federal lawsuit accusing Atlanta police of violating his constitutional rights, assault, discrimination, privacy violations and identify theft. Atlanta Police allegedly forced Baton Bob to make a pro-police statement on his Facebook page before officers would allow Bob to be released on bond. According to the lawsuit: "At approximately 3:40 p.m., while Plaintiff sat handcuffed and without an attorney, he was told to dictate a public statement to Officer Davis, who then typed and posted the message to the Baton Bob Facebook account. The message read: 'First of all, the atl police officer that responded to the incident thru security has been very respectful and gracious to me even in handcuffs. So, the situation escalated from a complaint from a security officer in the area and for some reason she rolled up on me like she didn't know who I was and like I had not been there before. For them to call police to come to intervene was not necessary. So, out of it, because of my fury, the Atlanta police officer did not understand the elements of the situation, so he was trying to do his job, respectfully and arrested my ass!!!!!!!!! I'll be out tomorrow so look out for my show at 14th and Peachtree. So now I'm waiting to be transported so I can sign my own bond and get the hell out of here. I want to verify, that the Atlanta police was respectful to me considering the circumstances. See you when I see you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!' As promised, Plaintiff was then given a signature bond and released from jail."

Comments

America: Its just completely fucked

[Anonymous Coward]

How these retards think they can claim moral superiority over a snail is beyond me, never mind the rest of mankind. >.

Re:America: Its just completely fucked

[Anonymous Coward]

And these are cops, who have special legal powers citizens don't. These cops should be fined, fired, and executed for this kind of abuse.
Make an example of them.

Re:America: Its just completely fucked

[JRV31]

The deepest circle of hell should be reserved for people who abuse power.

Re:America: Its just completely fucked

[HornWumpus]

People who engage in hyperbole are the worst scum on earth and should be executed by cheese grater.

Re: America: Its just completely fucked

[Anonymous Coward]

Oddly, if you read Dante, the deepest circle of Hell is reserved for those who dared to stand up against power: Brutus is there for assassinating Caesar and defending the liberty of the Republic, and Satan is there for disobeying God. Hell, like prison, is designed to reinforce authority.

Re: America: Its just completely fucked

[HornWumpus]

No.

The lowest circle is for those who betrayed someone. Standing up to power is something else.

Re:America: Its just completely fucked

[viperidaenz]

I'm not sure who you're calling a retard.

As far as I'm concerned both sides are retarded.
The police for being dicks and 'Baton Bob' for logging in to Facebook for them/giving them his password and making statements with no attorney present.

Re: America: Its just completely fucked

[MaskedSlacker]

Dante would not agree with you. Standing up to power IS betrayal--betrayal of your sovereign lord, which is one of the categories of betrayal Dante specifically listed.

You may disagree with that equivalence, but your parent is right. Standing up to power lands you in the deepest circle of hell, according to Dante.

Re: America: Its just completely fucked

[Anonymous Coward]

The lowest circle is for those who betrayed someone. Standing up to power is something else.

Dante would not agree with you. Standing up to power IS betrayal--betrayal of your sovereign lord, which is one of the categories of betrayal Dante specifically listed.

Yes, to those who believe in "God" it is "betrayal" to live any life besides that that has been designed
for you.

In other words, nothing but blind allegiance to authority.

Taking ownership of someone from their birth to death?

That is not "betrayal" of one's freedom or life, that is merely "a concerned Father" full of love.

You really have to understand religious definitions and words to see, such folks are not completely specious or entirely evil, in fact they are more shocking for what is implied by adhering to them.

The "good" and righteous is more shocking than any of the evil.

The world would be a better place, if this was more clear and loudly spoken, and there was less masquerading and "morals" and more "it is what it is."

You cannot have an argument concerning Hell without defining things according to "God is right."

It is no different than how "freedom" is GPL for some and BSD for others. Entirely depends on "freedom to do what" and just saying "no, but it's FREE" gets us nowhere, tells us NOTHING about what you are actually saying.

HornWumpus: Your confusion and lack of precision with words is Satanic. You should burn for that
alone.

Re: America: Its just completely fucked

[HornWumpus]

Standing up to power that you swore loyalty to, lands you in the lowest circle of hell.

Standing up to power you have no loyalty to is not a problem. It's the betrayal. Dante would also put leaders who abuse their people in the same circle.

Re: America: Its just completely fucked

[HornWumpus]

It will, no doubt, be among the charges.

Re: America: Its just completely fucked

[HornWumpus]

It should be noted: I never actually finished reading Dante. Just the much improved Niven/Pornelle reboot.

Re: America: Its just completely fucked

[bobvious]

According to that, then Washington, Franklin, Jefferson, the bunch of our founding fathers, are there with them.

Seriously?

[c6gunner]

Is there so little happening in the world right now that the best "story" you can come up with is a guy with obvious mental issues claiming police made him post Facebook comments?

Re:Seriously?

[sycodon]

Yep, I don't find his story credible.

Everyone knows that the Police would have just beaten his ass half to death and then claim he assaulted a police officer. Probably by putting his head in the way of the cop's fist.

Re:Seriously?

[ClioCJS]

There's nothing obvious about it. Why the hell do you think they didn't do this? This is par for the course for news you hear every week from American police.

Re:Seriously?

[ClioCJS]

I find your evaluation of which stories are credible to be PISS POOR.

Re:Seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

I find your evaluation of which posts are jokes to be whoosh.

Re:Seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

> a guy with obvious mental issues claiming police made him post Facebook comments?

If he's lying it would be so easy to prove that it is unlikely that it would have even become a news story.
How? Timestamps. What's the timestamp on the facebook post? If it is in between the recorded time of the arrest and his release, it's a slamdunk win for him, if the the post was made outside that window he's going to lose because cops always win unless there is incontrovertible proof to the contrary.

Re:Seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

I find your negligence of Poe's Law to be detestable.

Re:Seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

How would a mime do "whoosh"? A wave above his or her head?

Re:Seriously?

[McGruber]

Why the hell do you think they didn't do this? This is par for the course for news you hear every week from American police.

It seems to me that it would be easy to convince a jury that the Atlanta police actually did this -- the FB post is timestamped, as was the record generated when Baton Bob was actually released on bond.

Back in 2006, the Atlanta police executed a 92-year-old elderly woman, during a "botched" drug raid. They fired 39 shots at her, killing her with the 5 or 6 that hit her. After the shooting, one of the Atlanta officers planted marijuana at the house. Wikipedia: Kathryn Johnston shooting

Re:Seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

HITLER

Re:Seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, the police have certainly given us reason to believe that any accusation of misdeed on their part is probably true.

This guy is also obviously an attention-whore, so a trumped-up accusation like this suits his purposes quite nicely.

I will reserve judgment until I see evidence.

Re:Seriously?

[fredrated]

This guy is also obviously an attention-whore...I will reserve judgment until I see evidence

Oxymoron much?

Re:Seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

Back in 2006, the Atlanta police executed a 92-year-old elderly woman, during a "botched" drug raid. They fired 39 shots at her, killing her with the 5 or 6 that hit her. After the shooting, one of the Atlanta officers planted marijuana at the house. Wikipedia: Kathryn Johnston shooting

Definitely fucked up what the police did to this poor old woman. It is important to mention that the gunfire was not completely unprovoked, as she did fire one shot first.

Re:Seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, when armed men come storming into your house after they break down the door, do you expect someone not to defend themselves? Also, I like that the one shot was responded to with "39 shots, five or six of which hit." That's a lot of lead flying around.

Re:Seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

> It is important to mention that the gunfire was not completely unprovoked, as she did fire one shot first.

After they came in plainclothes with guns out and busted her front door down.
(Personally, I would "score" the provocation to the other side)

Re:Seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, deep in the heart of Texas someone actually got released by a grand jury for shooting a cop who busted down their trailer home door unannounced on a no-knock warrant. Guy thought someone was attacking his pregnant wife and shot first.

First time I've seen anyone let off for killing a cop in self defense. Despite bootlickers like c6gunner, it's getting harder to find 12 angry men who assume the cops are always right and pure and can never make mistakes.

Re:Seriously?

[HeckRuler]

Hey, that story isn't all sad:

"Three officers were tried for manslaughter and other charges surrounding falsification and were sentenced to ten, six, and five years."

The entire narcotics department (that weren't in jail) was flushed with new hires replacing them and no-knock warrents are more restricted.

So far they're doing better than LA cops...

Re:Seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why the hell do you think they didn't do this?

sycodon already made a pretty good argument about why.

For a car analogy, if you knew someone big into muscle cars, who swore to only ever own muscle cars, and then one day they claimed they bought a Smart car, would you believe them? Sure, purchasing a Smart car is something some people do, but would you honestly believe that this guy, the guy who swore he'd only ever own muscle cars, had bought one?

Re:Seriously?

[tompaulco]

Unless, of course, they allowed him access to Facebook between his arrest and his release.

Re:Seriously?

[AK Marc]

Note the only claim that she fired first is by police, who were prosecuted for the act. They claim she fired after they announced themselves. For all we know, they never announced themselves, or while planting the marijuana, found a gun in a different room and fired one shot with it and planted it on her.

What amazes me is that after everything else is proven a lie, they still took the convicted criminal's words for the sequence of events.

Re:Seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

I really hate to side with the police here, but when you have someone shooting at you it tends to elicit a response indicative of someone who doesn't want to die. So I can totally see them going all trigger happy trying to get "the bad guy" (or girl as it were). Not saying it was right or justified just trying to provide some perspective.

Re:Seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

Did you try to read this in TFB? it will make it exclusive, primetime breaking news with live, special coverage.

Re:Seriously?

[HornWumpus]

Also Randy Weaver. The FBI assassin never got his justice.

Re:Seriously?

[HornWumpus]

I'll agree it isn't that sad the day I hear the ex cops were killed in prison. Until then, it was a sad day.

Re:Seriously?

[HornWumpus]

As long as the Smart has a Hayabusa engine it would be good.

Re:Seriously?

[Rakarra]

Yeah, I hate to do this too, but the chronology of events seems to be:
*) Police cut off burglar bars, smash in door.
*) Police announce themselves, then enter.
*) Grandmother fires shot.
*) Police fire back.

"39 shots, five or six of which hit." Some of those hits were on each other, further cementing their reputation as Keystone Kops.

Re:Seriously?

[Rakarra]

Unless, of course, they allowed him access to Facebook between his arrest and his release.

Why..... why would they ever allow that? What PD would think that would be a good idea?
If they did, then maybe the police should get the hammer just for sheer stupidity.

Re:Seriously?

[sumdumass]

Probably by putting his head in the way of the cop's fist.

This probably happens in real life. I got slammed against a brick wall when I was 23 or so by a cop for asking him what he just said to me as I was putting some things into the trunk of a car. I filed a complaint and he wrote in his statement that he put his hands up to signal me to stop approaching and I stumbled into them and fell back against the wall a few times.

It didn't matter that it was right after a bachelor party and there were about 4 video cameras that captured it all and the cop was obviously lying (long before cell phones had cameras in them). I was charged with obstructing justice, assaulting a police officer, disturbing the peace, in control of a motor vehicle while intoxicated and destruction of public property (he siad he tore his shirt slamming me into the wall). Luckily, he was going through a bitter divorce and my lawyer knew it. He said loudly, "we talked with his wife, she said he is a habitual liar and talks a lot about the people he screws over by claiming shit that never happened and is willing to testify for us". This was in the hall waiting for the pretrial conference to start. About 20 minutes later, the prosecutor came out and offered a deal with pleading to disorderly conduct and everything else dropped. My lawyer took it.

Re:Seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

You get arrested a lot because you're a dumbass. It's in your fucking name even. You deserved everything you got and plenty you managed to weasel out of.

Re:Seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, fuck your perspective. When a paramilitary raid is launched on a person's home it tends to elicit a response indicative of someone who doesn't want to die. Their justification for returning fire is predicated on the erroneous justification for being there in the first place.

Re:Seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yep, I don't find his story credible.

Everyone knows that the Police would have just beaten his ass half to death and then claim he assaulted a police officer. Probably by putting his head in the way of the cop's fist.

What I want to know is why he waited a year to file charges.

Re:Seriously?

[sumdumass]

they arrest him, know who he is and that he is not a threat, realise the charges are more or less for being annoying in public, put him in the holding while processing the paperwork. He asks to make a phone call, they hand him his cell phone, he makes the post while being bored.

They likely never would have allowed it. Knowing cops, they probably didn't know they were allowing it either.

That is, I have no idea how true this would be. It's just a possible scenario to how they could have allowed it without knowing they allowed it. The part that has me is, if it was posted as him, they would have had to get his user name and password else it would have showed as someone else posting it. That's possible with the crap they have to suck info from phones, but it makes the story a little more hard to digest. Of course they could have made him log in and post it. But then Facebook would have an IP set for the police department if you could ever get to the logs.

Re:Seriously?

[almechist]

they arrest him, know who he is and that he is not a threat, realise the charges are more or less for being annoying in public, put him in the holding while processing the paperwork. He asks to make a phone call, they hand him his cell phone, he makes the post while being bored.

They likely never would have allowed it. Knowing cops, they probably didn't know they were allowing it either.

That is, I have no idea how true this would be. It's just a possible scenario to how they could have allowed it without knowing they allowed it. The part that has me is, if it was posted as him, they would have had to get his user name and password else it would have showed as someone else posting it. That's possible with the crap they have to suck info from phones, but it makes the story a little more hard to digest. Of course they could have made him log in and post it. But then Facebook would have an IP set for the police department if you could ever get to the logs.

Yes, he claims they forced him to give up his password, then when they were logged into FB he was forced to dictate a statement to an officer who put it up on his page. The real question is, since when are police knowledgeable enough about social networking to realize that such a public statement would be a good idea for them in terms of insulating them from bad publicity and possible legal repercussions, while at the same time so ignorant as to think that it wouldn't be immediately obvious what had happened once the logs and online records are searched? It'll be interesting to see how this eventually plays out.

Re:Seriously?

[c6gunner]

There's definitely plenty of room for questioning police actions, but when you find yourself suggesting that they executed a grandmother in cold blood and then made it appear that she fired first ... you've probably gone a bit past the point of "reasonable questioning" and strayed into "fuck the pigs" land.

Re:Seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

In the land of the free and the home of the brave, everyone should mindlessly trust authority figures. Why, that's what the founders always wanted!

Re:Seriously?

[c6gunner]

This probably happens in real life. I got slammed against a brick wall when I was 23 or so by a cop for ... blah blah blah ...

I've seen lots of friends get slammed into a brick wall (or concrete floors) by the cops. Without fail it happened because they were drunk and belligerent and begging for a beating. If the cops hadn't gotten them first, some other guy at the bar would have fucked them up and left them far worse off than just a few bruises and having to go to court. Yet, again without fail, they all claim they were the innocent victims of police brutality.

There are certainly cases where police misbehave, and they should be held accountable for that. But the cases where idiots convince themselves that they were innocent victims of police brutality are far, FAR more common. You'll forgive me if I lump you into the latter category based on the odds.

Re:Seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

How much do the Feds pay you per post?

Re:Seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

I've been to the gun range where the APD train. I watched one officer take careful aim and empty her pistol clip into the target in a controlled fashion. She generated a grouping some three feet in diameter. FROM A DISTANCE OF SEVEN FEET FROM THE TARGET. A remotely competent marksman ought to be more or less able to put the bullets in the same hole at that range. She seemed satisfied with that performance, so I can only assume that is an acceptable standard for the APD.

Re:Seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

The APD knocked loudly on my door one afternoon (I live in a single family home in nice neighborhood north of Emory). The officer had his hand on his gun and demanded my identification. I wasn't legally required to provide it, but I did out of expidency. It quickly became apparent that the officer was at the wrong address. Rather than apologize for the inconvenience, he took the opportunity to remark "You'd better keep a good hold on that dog." (My lab had come to the door quietly and was standing behind me inside the house with tail wagging.) "If it gets closer I'm going to shoot it."

This is typical of the few interactions I have had with the APD.

Re:Seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

What's so outrageous about what he's suggesting, though? It was found that they did in fact plant Marijuana. Why, then, should their word on ANYTHING be trusted? If they were willing to plant Marijuana on her, why would you find it hard to believe that they'd make it look like she fired first?

Re:Seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

Nope, just a pragmatic viewpoint. Pray you never have to come to those conclusions yourself, it isn't pleasant.

Re:Seriously?

[AK Marc]

So you trust the cops word, even after a criminal conviction for their actions? Plainclothes police in a no-knock raid, and you still trust their professional judgment?

The "evidence" shows that the police executed an illegal raid, and executed a civilian during that illegal home invasion. They confessed to planting drugs. They didn't confess to planting a gun. So is that is proof in your eyes that they'd never plant a gun, just drugs?

I didn't see any reports of GSR on the deceased. Nor was there a report of finding the bullet fired.

And the cops hit their target 10% of the time. If they weren't fired and in jail, they could have used more time on the range, anyway.

Re:Seriously?

[wvmarle]

More likely: the killing of the granny was indeed an honest mistake, and then they tried to cover up their mistake by making her look like a criminal by planting drugs and the gun, in an attempt to justify their actions.

Not trying to say what those cops did is good. Mistakes happen, sadly, and they should take all precautions to prevent that from happening.

Firing 39 shots sounds totally excessive - the hit rate is also pretty bad indeed. That indeed leaves some 33 stray bullets, no telling where they ended up. Flying out through windows hitting some innocent passer-by maybe? A few years ago in Macau a motorcyclist got hurt by a police bullet, after an officer fired a warning shot in the air a couple hundred meters away.

All in all the police definitely had motivation for a cover up if indeed it was a mistake. The victim being dead and unable to testify against them definitely makes such a cover up easier.

Re:Seriously?

[c6gunner]

So you trust the cops word, even after a criminal conviction for their actions?

No, I weigh the evidence based on the most likely scenario. Never met a cop who would blow away grandma for no reason. If you can introduce me to some, I may change my mind.

The "evidence" shows that the police executed an illegal raid

Come again? I think these kinds of statements are why the [citation needed] tag was invented.

And the cops hit their target 10% of the time. If they weren't fired and in jail, they could have used more time on the range, anyway.

Spoken like someone who's never been in a firefight. 10% is actually well above what I would expect.

Re:Seriously?

[c6gunner]

More likely: the killing of the granny was indeed an honest mistake, and then they tried to cover up their mistake by making her look like a criminal by planting drugs and the gun, in an attempt to justify their actions.

Yes, that's quite possible, if unlikely. Thanks for being one of the fee reasonable commenters.

Firing 39 shots sounds totally excessive - the hit rate is also pretty bad indeed. That indeed leaves some 33 stray bullets, no telling where they ended up.

They ended up inside the house. The hit rate is actually quite good. Take it from me. On the range I get every round in the bullseye. In a kinetic situation I'm lucky if I get 1 out of 4 on target. And I'm a guy who has better training than the police.

Civvies seem to expect every cop to be trained to special-forces standards. That expectation is ... unrealistic, to say the least.

Re:Seriously?

[wvmarle]

Which still makes me question: why 39 shots when the victim (allegedly) shot only once?

They don't have to start shooting back (certainly not 39 times). Maybe shoot once or twice, and demand the suspect to drop their weapons and surrender to them. As you say, they have no special forces training. So if the suspect doesn't respond, they take cover, keep an eye on the suspect, don't allow him/her to leave, shoot back only when absolutely necessary (e.g. when the suspect opens fire they may fire back), and call in the special forces - including a negotiator who can talk the suspect into dropping their weapons and surrender.

But of course they won't do that. That's going to cost a lot more than 39 bullets: the wages of these special forces people, the training costs, the court costs afterwards (a suspect caught life you'll have to put on trial after all - a dead one you just put in a grave), and of course the extra work for all those cops to do the paperwork in preparing for the court case. No, just killing your suspect is much quicker and cheaper. With the added bonus of being able to claim another victory in the "War on Drugs" and showing how dangerous those dealers really are, and how important it is to get more money to wage that war.

Re:Seriously?

[c6gunner]

Which still makes me question: why 39 shots when the victim (allegedly) shot only once?

I once saw a platoon of soldiers fire ~600 rounds on a crowd of protesters who threw an egg. The first guy to fire thought it was a grenade. The rest followed suit. Luckily it was a training exercise ... but in real life shit goes sideways all the time, too. If you think you're any better, you couldn't be more wrong. If you had been there manning the perimeter, you would have fired right along with the rest.

We train hard to reduce the chances of shit like this happening in a real scenario, but no amount of training can completely eliminate it. And when you have millions of cops engaging daily in violent interactions ... it's a miracle that these kinds of fiascoes happen as rarely as they do. The only reason people find it exceptional is because youtoube is full of videos of cops behaving badly, and you can watch 50 of them in an afternoon. If you actually had to view them in proportion to normal, everyday interactions, you'd be sitting there all year. People just don't understand large numbers and selection bias.

Re: Seriously?

[Falconhell]

Of course you have- you're a US citizen. Here in .au I have never seen that happen, and I worked nights in the nightclub districts for 30 years, in fact only recently 2 police were disciplined for overly rough treatment of homeless people in my home town. It's so rare that any video of police violence would make the major TV news channels.

I'm frequently astonished by the violence used by police in traffic situations in US reality TV shows about cops- I have lived in both the UK and Australia and the only conclusion it is the national love of violence the US population has (see gun laws, Iraq etc etc etc) that results in such poor policing.

Re: Seriously?

[c6gunner]

Of course you have- you're a US citizen.

Read my sig, then try again. Thanks.

Re:Seriously?

[AK Marc]

Never met a cop who would blow away grandma for no reason.

Then you never met a cop.

Even if it played out as they describe, they weren't justified.

Come again? I think these kinds of statements are why the [citation needed] tag was invented.

The police admitted it was an illegal raid, and the participants in it were convicted of criminal charges. That was cited previously in this thread. What are you unclear about?

Spoken like someone who's never been in a firefight.

[citation needed]

You assert a firefight. There is no "evidence" that happened. At most she fired one shot before they entered (possibly not even in their direction, hoping to scare off invaders), and they came in on a person who was, at that point, not resisting. Firing blindly until you empty a clip is what panicked idiots do. I'd hope police would have had better (or any, please) training.

Re:Seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

There's definitely plenty of room for questioning police actions, but when you find yourself suggesting that they executed a grandmother in cold blood and then made it appear that she fired first ... you've probably gone a bit past the point of "reasonable questioning" and strayed into "fuck the pigs" land.

Seriously fuck pigs, I don't know and nobody may fully know what information the cops had to begin with! IE, did they believe she was a dangerously violent women and would go down in a hail of gun fire? IE, did they see something in her hand or did she make some sort of movement? IE, was she fucking hard of hearing and the cops spooked her?. I could go on with the examples.

Now, it is also possible the cops involved that weren't prosecuted, felt guilty, or they are cowards and refused to say anything. For obvious reasons, losing their jobs, having a black mark in their record, being involved in a lawsuit.

The cops haven't done themselves any favors with public trust. In fact their more dangerous then criminals, and their actions have continued to escalate to the point of complete chaos. I'm sick of hearing the "stress" bullshit excuse, it is time from some serious reforms.

Important to note, having said all that, friends, family, other people, that claim to know someone in fact don't know them. There are a lot of reports about elderly folks that are bat shit crazy, or have some sinister side to them. In my area a 73 year old man was arrested for stabbing to elderly women who lived in the same house complex, the 2 women were also caring for the man. He does have a slightly violent history or record, but for the most part was a peaceful quiet person.

Re:Seriously?

[tarius8105]

If it were me and my dogs they would be curious and at the door. My german shepherd would be barking at him. If he said for me to "keep a good hold" on my dog. My response would be "He is doing his job, you are not" I dont live in atlanta, but here in Alexandria VA the cops arrested my elderly decorated vietnam vet neighbor for "concealment" of a bayonet. They had 6 cops come and arrest him on the street. The bayonet was in his car and not hidden. They illegally searched his car, even some of the officers refused to do it because they knew it was wrong. He isnt in the best of mobility, because of his health conditions, and they tried to make him lie face down on the ground, which is very difficult for him to do. He was not resisting, although he was talking angrily to them, as expected for something that was bullshit. I watched most of it happening and it was the first time I've seen something like that in person. And the story the cops are telling, even after the report, keeps changing. I grew up in a small town in NJ and I trusted the police officers since everyone knew them and they knew us. Even the state police that I met and have been pulled over by were decent (never got a ticket, only warnings). It was after moving out of that area that I learned that not all police officers are decent and you cant trust them to do the right thing.

Re:Seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

you seem to not understand police are being trained with military tactics and trained to get people to give up their constitutional rights, how to violate their rights, and if you think only 1 in a 100 cops is bad you're ridiculous. this country is becoming a police state, and if you think otherwise, or that most cops are honest and wouldn't lie or cover up something to justify their actions or or keep their job-then you sir are obviously ignorant to real life. cops regularly use excessive force, lie to citizens, violate citizens constitutional rights, and break laws themselves. anyone who thinks otherwise has never dealt with police before. I'm not saying all cops are bad, just like i wont say all cops are good. I've personally seen good cops go bad and plant evidence after repeatedly failing to catch a drug dealer with drugs... this is a good person i went to school with, became a good police officer, but after seeing bad people get away with it too many times this person took it upon themselves to make sure this person went down, too bad there was a video camera watching his every move.. right? wrong, regardless if the person deserved it, it WASN'T RIGHT AT ALL. this happens more than you would think in america!

Re:Seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

> So far they're doing better than LA cops...

Low threshhold.

Re:Seriously?

[sumdumass]

I probably have deserved to be lumped in there a time or two. The cops were called because of noise complaints and i was putting liquor into the trunk because we were moving the party.

Anyways, the part thay shocked me wasn't getting slammed into the wall. The cops around here have john wayne syndrome with a touch of stupidity (seriously, showed up to a complaint about a woman threatening to kill hersel with a kitchen knife and they shot her dead with 7 shots- because she had a kitchen knife) so little surprises me with them. It was the cop's explaination of the events. I would think if he was justified, he would have just said i was beligerant and resisting arrest. But they concocted a story to make themselves look innocent.

Re:Seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

Neither did the FBI/ATF POS's that started and finished Waco.

Re:Seriously?

[RockDoctor]

john wayne syndrome with a touch of stupidity (seriously, showed up to a complaint about a woman threatening to kill hersel with a kitchen knife and they shot her dead with 7 shots- because she had a kitchen knife)

And you let these knuckle-draggers walk around with guns? No wonder America is such a fucked-up society.

Re:Seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

You simply need to read the facts of the case to find your less likely scenario is indeed what happened:

There was a fake informant statement used to get the no-knock warrant.

The officers planted drugs in the house after the fact to make dead granny look guilty; they admitted to this crime.

Given the above, especially planting drugs after the fact, don't you think it is possible that maybe they lied about her firing a shot first? I'm not saying they said "hey, let's kill a granny today", but after they did it I don't doubt they would lie (and did lie about some things) to make themselves look better.

Re:Seriously?

[HornWumpus]

I've been on a few ranges with cops. What you report is about average, but the distribution is not normal. Double bump, some are very good shots, most couldn't hit the side of a barn at 15 feet.

Re:Seriously?

[HornWumpus]

Watch what happens when civilians try and cover up a fatal mistake. Criminal conspiracy, obstruction of justice, negligent homicide...

Re:Seriously?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yea, I hate to do this too, but FUCK YOU!

The police were in plainclothes, and had a no knock warrant. When a cop gets one of these golden tickets they use it. They do not announce, they do not do further follow up. They kick ass and stomp heads.

They CLAIM they announced themselves.
They also claimed to have bought cocaine at the house as well as claimed to have found marijuana in the house.

They did not buy cocaine, that is an admitted lie.
They planted the marijuana, and admitted this lie.
That is why "Three officers were tried for manslaughter and other charges surrounding falsification and were sentenced to ten, six, and five years"

I don't even know that she fired a shot. That might be a lie as well. They easily could have put the gun in her hand, fired a shot at the ground, and then CLAIM that she shot first. See! powder residue on her hands! She fired the first shot!!

With a case of stinking, lying piles of proven shit why in the hell would you believe one single thing about it?
There was no reason for a no-knock raid. No reason to be plain clothes, no reason to break down the door, and no reason surveillance would not have shown a little old innocent lady lived there. Also no reason to fire back at an innocent old lady who thought she was being robbed, you know, because no-knock raids like this are MEANT to be 'surprising, disorientating, and sudden'.. Well shit, maybe save the Cowboy swat squad shit for actual know hostage situations and this wont happen?

Too bad the old lady did not have a machine gun.. Then an innocent old lady would have lived another day and a bunch of murdering burglars would be feeding the worms they belong with. And the tax payers, who were paying these thugs for their 'work' now get to pay for their time spent in special protection in prison.. Great.

Dave Chapel..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nli6RDAWREA

Whoops, big mistake. Oh well..
Just sprinkle some drugs on them and call it a day.

Re:Seriously?

[Samizdata]

Look, man. I know my rights. If I am arrested I get one photo post...

That was dictated?

[Phrogz]

What'd he say, "so he was trying to do his job comma respectfully and arrested my ass exclamation point exclamation point exclamation point exclamation point exclamation point exclamation point exclamation point exclamation point exclamation point"?

Or was it more, "and then just dump a sh!tload of exclamation points down".

Re:That was dictated?

[Sockatume]

While I'm sure that most police officers are perfectly capable typists, given the amount of paperwork that comes with the job, it's not out of the question that an officer writing a Facebook post might not use the best possible punctuation.

Re:That was dictated?

[wisnoskij]

Strangely, the punctuation points match the style of the message. Both look like there were written by a 12 year old girl.

Re:That was dictated?

[mythosaz]

Why would he dictate it at all if they're typing what they want?

This (non) story reeks of lame.

Re:That was dictated?

[Anonymous Coward]

It was dictated more along the lines of "I'm going to impersonate you and you're going to like it". Theft of service, wire fraud, identity theft -- well, that'd be what he'd be charged with if he didn't have the blue wall of silence to protect him.

Re:That was dictated?

[Anonymous Coward]

Or, maybe it just didn't happen at all like he says.

Re:That was dictated?

[Anonymous Coward]

maybe the brown shirts had him dictate it so they could honestly say under oath that "yes that is what he said"

Re:That was dictated?

[PRMan]

Well, he dresses like a 12 year old girl, so I think it was him...

Re:lol mimes

[just_another_sean]

You hate everything AC! That's why we love you.

News for not nerds, stuff that doesn't matter.

[Anonymous Coward]

Great post McGruber, thanks for selecting it timothy.

Re:News for not nerds, stuff that doesn't matter.

[McGruber]

Great post McGruber, thanks for selecting it timothy.

If you don't like the stories you're reading here, then submit a better one!

Re:News for not nerds, stuff that doesn't matter.

[wbr1]

Or go to a site with a better community. IE pipedot or soylentnews

Re:News for not nerds, stuff that doesn't matter.

[Fjandr]

You've either never lived in a decently-sized city, or aren't paying attention if you really need citations to believe it happens. In my city, there are roughly a half-dozen fatal police shootings of unarmed suspects every year. Only one officer has ever been indicted, much less convicted (and is fortunately in prison currently), in the nearly ten years I've lived here.

Re:News for not nerds, stuff that doesn't matter.

[viperidaenz]

How big is a 'decently-sized city'?
My country has only had 7 fatal shootings my police officers in 14 years.
All but two of them involved the deceased threatening to kill while holding a weapon, pointing a gun at or actually shooting at police officers.
One was an innocent bystander.
One was holding a knife to someone after already having stabbed an officer.

Although... not all of our police carry guns and people require firearms licenses to keep guns.

Re:News for not nerds, stuff that doesn't matter.

[Anonymous Coward]

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Stop it, that's too much hilarious for one post!

Re:News for not nerds, stuff that doesn't matter.

[fscking_coward_2001]

Although... not all of our police carry guns and people require firearms licenses to keep guns.

That's your problem. Arm everyone and you'll have that rate up there with us in no time.

Re:News for not nerds, stuff that doesn't matter.

[Anonymous Coward]

Not a chance. Have to import some 'ethnics' too.

It's not politically correct, but beaners and blacks are much less violent in America then in their native environment.

lol mimes

[slashdice]

how does a mime have a "verbal altercation"?

3 months too late...

[Anonymous Coward]

.... April 1st was 3 months ago.

But to get us back on the subject, WTF were they doing logging into his FB account anyway??

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:lol mimes

[Anonymous Coward]

I can only wish Baton Bob was a mime.

He was performing in front of my office building and we could hear him blowing his whistle down on the street from 14 stories up.

Why

[lsllll]

I have no idea why ANYBODY would even consent to logging in to his Facebook account on a computer or unlocking his phone while in custody, let alone post a coerced message like that. I'm sure lawyers will hash all this out in court, but my according to the article

Jamerson was charged with two counts of simple assault and one count of obstruction against the officer, all misdemeanors, Lyon said.

I am for civil liberties, but I'm not sure I disagree with the charges.

Having said that, his case is about being coerced. Who's to say he didn't offer to write a nice post himself and the officers laughed and said "sure!"?

Re:Why

[Anonymous Coward]

He probably wanted that bond and then get out. I can only guess, but neither being handcuffed nor sitting in jail longer then necessary are something to look for.

Re:Why

[Br00se]

... Who's to say he didn't offer to write a nice post himself and the officers laughed and said "sure!"?

The judge and jury.

The better question is who IS suggesting that he made such an offer?

Re:Why

[mythosaz]

Lots of phones are unlocked. Slide and you're in. Facebook is already logged in.

There's just no reason to handcuff him and make him dictate something that you're typing. Why not cut out the middleman?

Re:Why

[Anonymous Coward]

charges were obviously made up, cops backing up paul blart mall cop wannabes

can't wait to see the mall cop and Atlanta pd officers sitting in gitmo where they deserve to be

Re:Why

[Charliemopps]

I have no idea why ANYBODY would even consent to logging in to his Facebook account on a computer or unlocking his phone while in custody, let alone post a coerced message like that. I'm sure lawyers will hash all this out in court, but my according to the article

Jamerson was charged with two counts of simple assault and one count of obstruction against the officer, all misdemeanors, Lyon said.

I am for civil liberties, but I'm not sure I disagree with the charges.

Having said that, his case is about being coerced. Who's to say he didn't offer to write a nice post himself and the officers laughed and said "sure!"?

You've never been arrested before have you? And by the Atlanta police? Trust me, you'd do a lot more than make a facebook post to get out of that situation.

Re:Why

[Cro Magnon]

Presumably so they can say, without totally lying out their asses, that the message came from his mouth.

Re:Why

[Anonymous Coward]

I have no idea why ANYBODY would even consent to logging in to his Facebook account on a computer or unlocking his phone while in custody, let alone post a coerced message like that.

While people are busy ignorantly demanding that NO ONE access their Facebook account and threatening to sue on Constitutional grounds, Facebook is busy whoring out every last click of your data to the highest bidder.

But hey, let's keep screaming about privacy. Might as well tweet about it too.

The only issue that should be on the table here is the issue of coercion that appears to have taken place to release a man from jail. Other than that, let's just drop the Facebook privacy bullshit. If you want privacy, then get the fuck off social media.

Re:Why

[serviscope_minor]

I have no idea why ANYBODY would even consent to logging in to his Facebook account on a computer or unlocking his phone while in custody, let alone post a coerced message like that.

Um gee, I donno. Perhape people can be coerced into doing something like that?

You know, not everyone is as awesome as you at standing up to police abuse.

Re:Why

[Anonymous Coward]

Presumably so they can say, without totally lying out their asses, that the message came from his mouth.

One would have to assume there's a reason for them to be worried about lying.

There isn't.

Re:Why

[CanHasDIY]

It's been my experience that government agents don't typically have any reservations about "lying out their asses."

If you played the "take a shot when an officer lies" game while watching COPS, everyone in the room would die from alcohol poisoning before the first commercial break.

Re:Why

[Anonymous Coward]

Instead of his hands? What's the difference?

Re:Why

[slashmydots]

"I have no idea why ANYBODY would even consent to logging in to his Facebook account on a computer or unlocking his phone while in custody"
So they can sue them later. That's why I would do it.

Re:Why

[EvilJoker]

There is a very big difference between the two scenarios - There was a major shitstorm recently when someone (may have been Facebook itself, I don't remember) was falsely claiming endorsement from people.

It's one thing for them to gather all sorts of data about me. It's quite another to make it up.

Re:Why

[Anonymous Coward]

I have no idea why ANYBODY would even consent to logging in to his Facebook account on a computer or unlocking his phone while in custody, let alone post a coerced message like that.

Under coercion, consent is meaningless. That's why it's called coercion.

Re:Why

[TheCarp]

This is the drinking game that deserves to turn into a drunken mob crime spree....if for no other reason than so someone can enter a statement into the official record about how the incident started.

Re:Why

[TheCarp]

And boy can they be dicks when they want to be. Never been arrested myself, but a friend of mine was and called me to bring him some cash for bail. At 3 am, I am in a waiting room, 2 cops come out and let me know "its going to be a while, it could take all night" and "you should just leave, he can get home".....

Never mind that he was about 40 miles from home and his car wasn't being released....they just wanted him to have to walk. How long was the "long time" I was going to have to wait for the bail bondsman to show up? About 30-40 minutes.

Re:Why

[Maxo-Texas]

Had a friend who was arrested and there was a $15 filing fee.

They wouldn't make change.
They wouldn't accept $20's.

Seriously.

Re:Why

[Wookact]

Who's to say he didn't offer to write a nice post himself and the officers laughed and said "sure!"?

What flipping universe are you from?

Re:Why

[Anonymous Coward]

The better question is who IS suggesting that he made such an offer?

lsllll, apparently.

The even better question is, what reason should lsllll have to suggest this?

Re:Why

[Anonymous Coward]

"Members of the jury, the cops say they spoke to my client, and he dictated a message for them to put on his FB page. but I have here the testimony of several other prisoners proving that they never even bothered to speak to my client at all. This is backed up by video footage showing he was tossed into the holding cell and not spoken to again by the police...."

At least if they spoke with him, they have evidence they spoke with him. They can lie about the details.

Re:Why

[TheCarp]

So that story was a few years back, a few even before that, I had a friend at my house who was a pot dealer. Now when I say friend, I mean, he pulled out his wad and asked me to count it for him while his hands were busy. Which, is of course, the only reasons I know this story is fact, I counted his wad with my own two hands and eyes.... it was exactly $1000 in $20 bills. Exactly, and ALL 20s.

After he left my house, he managed to get arrested. The exact details of how this happened are not as important. The key facts are that it was night, the place he was heading was the absolute nearest place to my house where one could spend any money, and he never made it even that far.

Now where this gets interesting is.... the police report actually said he had $850. Not $840 or $860 but, in fact, $850, an amount that one cannot make with $20 bills....meaning that they did, in fact, make change.

Re:Why

[Anonymous Coward]

The thought crossed my mind as well. What if this guy is just trying to extend his 15 minutes on the backs of this department? I know there are plenty of examples of corruption among LEOs, but that doesn't necessarily make every accusation the automatic truth.

Re:Why

[AK Marc]

I have no idea why ANYBODY would even consent

Consent to torture? He was threatened with violence if he didn't do what they ordered.

"I'm going to kidnap you and hold you indefinitely unless you sign into Facebook in my presence" is signing in "consent"? Sounds like rape isn't rape unless she fought back hard enough.

Re:Why

[Maxo-Texas]

Sounds more like a bribe took place than a bail bond filing fee.

Re:Why

[Anonymous Coward]

It's unlikely he would have been arrested, had a bribe taken place.

Re:Why

[viperidaenz]

So they gave change for the bribe?

Re:Why

[AK Marc]

"I don't need change" didn't work? I'd have followed that up with "OK officer, you are refusing to accept cash for this fee. Is that right?"

Of course, I may have ended up sitting next to your friend.

Re:Why

[Spamalope]

There's just no reason to handcuff him and make him dictate something that you're typing. Why not cut out the middleman?

So it's in his own words, phrased the way he would. If he's a bit crazy, then they wouldn't get that right themselves.

Re:Why

[TheCarp]

I am pretty sure that if he paid a bribe for anything, he would have just told me that. Honestly, he wasn't that smart. He still isn't that smart almost 20 years later, but at least now when he gets into trouble its for the right reasons fighting his psycho ex and her psycho mother for custody....which the courts gave him.... knowing how stupid he is, and how hard it is for a man to win custody, you can imagine what a situation that is.

When he told me about it, I didn't believe him until I saw the report of what he had on him at the time of arrest. Sure enough, it said 850.

Re:Why

[TheCarp]

It was pretty clearly neither. If there had been a bribe, then there would be no arrest or report, and that cop would have a hard time explaining his bloody nose (my friend apparently elbowed him on the way down). If it had been a filing fee, the full amount would be on the report of what he had, and then it would be paid after.

Instead, the money just "dissapeared" between him being arrested and the report being filed. Funny thing with cash, how bills dissapear from stacks seemingly....of their own volition.

Re:Why

[TheCarp]

Doubtful but it wouldn't really help. Funny thing about the "accepting cash" thing is, that the law only specifies cash must be accepted for debt. So if you owed money as a debt, and they refused to accept cash, and subsequently tried to bring you to court for payment, their refusal can be used to nullify the debt.
(whether this applies to situations where money is owed to the state is unclear, I assume it would work like it does for anyone else but, it might not)

So a store, for example, could operate without using cash at all, but, a resteraunt couldn't because they would be required to accept cash for payment of the debt created by rendering the service. Since no service is being rendered until after payment.... its unclear that they are under any requirement by that.... however there may be other regulations, I am not familiar with what they might be.

Re:Why

[AK Marc]

I was thinking about trial/appeal for the thing he was arrested for, not prosecution for refusal to take cash. "I tried to pay the fee in full, and they refused. At that point, he was being held unlawfully."

Re:Why

[Maxo-Texas]

Nope.

They had a sign up to that effect. A small number of People were going out to find change all evening. Usually from cab drivers apparently.

Pretty sure it was the $15 in (2) below...

Sec. 103.027. MISCELLANEOUS FEES AND COSTS: GOVERNMENT CODE. (a) Fees and costs shall be paid or collected under the Government Code as follows:

(1) filing a certified copy of a judicial finding of fact and conclusion of law if charged by the secretary of state (Sec. 51.905, Government Code) . . . $15;

(2) cost paid by each surety posting the bail bond for an offense other than a misdemeanor punishable by fine only under Chapter 17, Code of Criminal Procedure, for the assistant prosecutor supplement fund and the fair defense account (Sec. 41.258, Government Code) . . . $15, provided the cost does not exceed $30 for all bail bonds posted at that time for an individual and the cost is not required on the posting of a personal or cash bond;

Re:Why

[Maxo-Texas]

Remember- the person being refused was a friend who wasn't charged or arrested.

The only effect of the officer refusing to accept a $20 was that your friend remains in jail until you bring $15.

It was very enlightening. If you miss the cutoff time (which I made only because my friend managed to get a message out to me as they were being arrested), then they ship you from the central jail to some other jail where you could be stuck for another 24 hours minimum before you are released.

Apparently there, they make sure you get all your normal non narcotic prescription drugs. The food is slightly better (apparently it was bologna and stale bread) and the cells warmer (apparently in the 60's in the first jail for germ/health reasons and perhaps to make it miserable*) and the beds softer (bare wood or metal vs a cheap mattress).

You cant make or receive calls for a long time after being arrested- about 8-10 hours. At that point extremely expensive collect calls are possible.

*Apparently the first jail is intentionally miserable to dissuade casual offenders from wanting to be arrested again.

Re:Why

[AK Marc]

The only effect of the officer refusing to accept a $20 was that your friend remains in jail until you bring $15.

The law you quoted indicated the cost should be $15. It doesn't require that they be held until it's paid, or that $20 would be refused, and exact change is required. That's all done by the local cops trying to punish people beyond the scope of the law.

Re:Why

[Maxo-Texas]

lol.

you are hysterical man.

And I mean that in both senses of the word.

Thanks for the laugh.

Re:Why

[Maxo-Texas]

You are probably right. It's odd that they kicked in $10 to make change for money they stole instead of stealing $140 or $160.

Some "unwritten" rule I guess.

Re:Why

[Maxo-Texas]

So they gave change for stealing?

Still stealing is more likely than a bribe for reduced charges and then you don't tell your friend about it.

The weird thing is that they made change for whatever occurred.

Re:lol mimes

[NotDrWho]

Well, it was either post the pro-police statement or face indefinite detention in an imaginary glass box.

Re:lol mimes

[ArcadeMan]

He looked at the police and gave him the finger?

Re:Longtime resident

[retchdog]

familiarity breeds contempt.

Freedom of speech

[Anonymous Coward]

I knew they were taking our freedom of speech. I wasn't aware that they had granted themselves the freedom to speak in our stead.

He's lucky they didn't kill him.

[pubwvj]

He's lucky they didn't kill him.
In our state the cops have killed people with their batons, tasers, pistols and assault rifles for less than this. Of course, every time this happens the cops get off scott free without even a reprimand and with full paid leave during the "investigation" into the "incident". Cops are killing citizens left and right. These are not isolated incidenses but a problem with police mentality. Kill first, ask questions later.

Re:He's lucky they didn't kill him.

[Anonymous Coward]

And when it comes out in discovery that this never happened at all, I will look forward to your public apology. More likely, though, it will be "well, they didn't do anything THIS time, but trust me, they do bad shit all the time!" And if a cop ever helps out, feel free to show your gratitude by shitting all over him as I'm sure you likely will. I can't imagine why they'd have an adversarial relationship with helpful citizens like you around.

Re:He's lucky they didn't kill him.

[the eric conspiracy]

Citations needed.

Re:He's lucky they didn't kill him.

[Anonymous Coward]

when it comes out in discovery that this never happened at all, I will look forward to your public apology.

Ha! Joke's on you: He won't be able to apologize, because the police will have already killed him.

Re:He's lucky they didn't kill him.

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.reddit.com/r/Bad_Co...

Re:He's lucky they didn't kill him.

[Nyder]

He's lucky they didn't kill him.
In our state the cops have killed people with their batons, tasers, pistols and assault rifles for less than this. Of course, every time this happens the cops get off scott free without even a reprimand and with full paid leave during the "investigation" into the "incident". Cops are killing citizens left and right. These are not isolated incidenses but a problem with police mentality. Kill first, ask questions later.

oh, you must live in Washington State.

Re:He's lucky they didn't kill him.

[Anonymous Coward]

Try reading the newspapers or watching TV. Cops are abusing people left and right. There are cases of this all over the country. And they get off scot free.

Re:He's lucky they didn't kill him.

[AK Marc]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K...

Among hundreds more.

Re:He's lucky they didn't kill him.

[Anonymous Coward]

"Left and right" you say? Interesting. However, I'm not so sure that is the news you're watching every night. Remember, those police dramas come on BEFORE the evening news.

Re:He's lucky they didn't kill him.

[Anonymous Coward]

This one person got killed "left and right"?

Re:He's lucky they didn't kill him.

[AK Marc]

Give me a number for how many cases it would take. I don't think there's any number I could give you that could satisfy you. One proves at least one. There could be millions, and you'd still dismiss them. Why?

Re:lol mimes

[JavaLord]

Street Performer is a euphemism for public nuisance.

Re:lol mimes

[spacepimp]

They are a public nuisance with the same rights we afford assholes like myself and yourself. No one, even a mime, can be coerced into a public statement like this...

This is a highly illegal method of reputation modelling by the Atlanta PD.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:tl;dr or because it's about Rights

[just_another_sean]

Just because this is about a guy in a tutu doesn't mean that a story concerning a citizen of the USA being forced to post something online against his will isn't interesting (and alarming!). I've never heard of this guy and wouldn't look twice if I saw him on the street but I will follow this case now to see if his side of the story is revealed to be accurate and what the eventual outcome is. If these cops are proven guilty and punished than I call that a win for YRO.

Well IMO he got what he deserved he let his anger

[Stan92057]

"So, out of it, because of my fury"

Well IMO he got what he deserved he let his anger get the best of him and we all know the police will not stand for anyone flipping out and whatever he said, did to the cops. And were are all the home videos of police brutality we normally see with this kind of acts? And he pussied out by making a statement he didn't want too or that he they scare a lot of kids and women who want zero part of there acts lol

issue is FB post

[silfen]

He said he had parked in the mall parking lot and had a confrontation while through the mall to the street with security guards who objected to his attire. The guards told police that Jamerson had trespassed on mall property.

His arrest wasn't for speaking at a street corner in a tutu, it was trespassing on mall property, which he arguably did (that was for a judge to sort out).

However for the police to force him to make a FB post is unacceptable. A court might have ordered that, but police shouldn't be allowed to coerce people in this way.

Re:issue is FB post

[Anonymous Coward]

but police shouldn't be allowed to coerce people in this way.

And they probably didn't.

Re:issue is FB post

[Anonymous Coward]

So... the police handed him a computer for his leisurely pleasure while being booked / in jail and before they released him? Yea- that makes a lot more sense. Why would he all the sudden change his mind about the cop if not for the fact he was coerced/forced?

If the records show he was in custody at the time of the post then in my mind this is beyond a reasonable doubt particularly given the other collaborating evidence and circumstances.

Re:issue is FB post

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, were you there or do you just enjoy talking out your ass?

Re:issue is FB post

[Wookact]

I believe the petty criminal before I believe the organized criminals.

Re:issue is FB post

[silas_moeckel]

You mean the private property that was probably taken with eminent domain and built with huge tax breaks? Few malls are what any fair definition of private property should be.

A court should not be allowed to force you to make a public declaration either.

Re:issue is FB post

[Obfuscant]

So... the police handed him a computer for his leisurely pleasure while being booked / in jail and before they released him?

If by "a computer" you mean the ubiquitous "cellphone with FB app", you have a great question.

If the records show he was in custody at the time of the post then in my mind this is beyond a reasonable doubt

Cellphone. Reasonable doubt. The questions to ask are "what was the source of the posting (IP address/client) and did he have his cellphone at the time?"

particularly given the other collaborating evidence and circumstances.

Evidence cannot "collaborate".

Re:issue is FB post

[Anonymous Coward]

Taking private property by eminent domain to enrich developers is evil. But your lynch mob mentality is far more evil.

As for courts, they can't force you to post on FB, but they can sentence you and then give you the option of reducing your sentence through public service and showing contrition. Seems like a good option to have.

Yup, sounds legit

[wonkey_monkey]

Now, a year later, Baton Bob has filed a federal lawsuit

I guess street performing didn't turn out to be the goldmine Bob was hoping for.

One thing's for sure, we can be absolutely certain he's not doing it for the attention.

Re:Yup, sounds legit

[EvilJoker]

The system as a whole moves slowly. A year is actually a fairly short amount of time to try (and fail) to work it out within the system, and then get a lawyer to file suit.

Of course, this is assuming his claim is legit.

Re:Longtime resident

[Anonymous Coward]

"Oh, my*. Memories.

Decades ago, I was involved in a fundraising event, a "parade in reverse" where sponsored walkers proceeded past booths and artistic displays and street theater. The director put *me* on a ladder, wearing a swimsuit, reading from a telephone book and blowing my whistle at passersby. With a lit candelabra.

The street theatre aspect was only enhanced because a mayor's funeral procession was planned for the same day, with all the cops out in force lining the route. As I set up, the nearest copes spoke among themselves, but spluttered into absolute confusion as I walked over and asked them for a light for the candelabra.

The mere opportunity to *confuse* ordinary police that much was worth the sweltering heat and mild sunburn I got doing that.

His story doesn't add up

[tomhath]

We're only getting one side of the story, and that side doesn't add up. This guy is an attention whore from way back.

Re:His story doesn't add up

[AK Marc]

What part of his story doesn't "add up"?

Re:lol mimes

[Hotawa Hawk-eye]

how does a mime have a "verbal altercation"?

Sign language.

Re:lol mimes

[Noah Haders]

He's not a mime. He walks around downtown Atlanta wearing a wedding gown or a tutu. en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baton_Bob

Re:lol mimes

[PopeRatzo]

They are a public nuisance with the same rights we afford assholes like myself and yourself.

Mimes are people, my friend.

Sort of. Though I'm not exactly sure if the right to free speech covers pantomiming being behind bars in a very small imaginary cell with a very sad face.

Re:lol mimes

[PopeRatzo]

He's not a mime. He walks around downtown Atlanta wearing a wedding gown or a tutu.

There was a parade last Sunday with like a thousand guys like that.

Re:Longtime resident

[retchdog]

well he has to breed something!

ba-dum-pish.

South, black gay... luck he's not dead

[tekrat]

This guy's first mistake was to assume he had any "rights". Is he "Baton Bob LLC"? Only corporate rights are respected by the law. Individual's rights are whatever the police feel like letting you get with at that moment, which is rapidly less and less.

Secondly, this is Atlanta Georgia, the deep south, and this guy is black and probably gay as well -- two strikes against him in the eyes of the police. Georgia is notoriously gun-happy as well, the governor having just recently signed a bill that allows open carry just about everywhere.

Frankly, this guy's lucky he wasn't shot dead on the spot for "resisting arrest". He seems to think we are living in a free country where the people have guaranteed rights. That hasn't been the situation for some time, he'd better get with the program or he'll be assigned to a gulag.

Re:South, black gay... luck he's not dead

[clovis]

You've obviously never been to Atlanta where the mayor is black as well as almost the entire city government is black.
The police department is 57% black.

As for gay being a second strike, well it does turn out that Atlanta is no longer considered the gayest city in the USA.
http://thegrio.com/2012/01/11/...

Re:South, black gay... luck he's not dead

[Anonymous Coward]

Man, you histrionic morons get tiresome. "We're as bad as East Germany!" "We're as bad as Soviet Russia!" "We're as bad as Nazi Germany!!!" Huff, puff, puff.

Those who do not know their history are doomed to sound like whiny little bitches on the Internet.

Re:South, black gay... luck he's not dead

[radarskiy]

"this guy's lucky he wasn't shot dead"

The day ain't over yet.

Re:South, black gay... luck he's not dead

[Anonymous Coward]

There's no difference. There are just people. The burden is on you to prove otherwise, not the other way around.

In fact, the entire idea of the Constitution is that EVERYWHERE and ANY government is "just as bad as East Germany" and "just as bad as Soviet Russia" and "just as bad as Nazi Germany"

Those who do not know history indeed. Pull your head out of your ass.

EVERY nation is doomed, that's the point.

Just because you enjoy being raped, doesn't mean you should bitch when others fight back.

Baton Bob Sighting 2 Min. Ago

[Anonymous Coward]

Holy shit I think I just saw this guy at the corner of Peachtree and Pharr, dressed as a "sexy Statue of Liberty", swinging a shiny silver stick and yelling at passing hecklers. This was literally two minutes before I read TFS.

He might want to consider moving again...

[damn_registrars]

The wikipedia entry suggests he likely lives in or near Atlanta. We saw a while back that murder is legal in nearby Florida, and now Georgia just passed a "carry wherever the hell you want" bill into law. If he doesn't want to be shot for being a perceived threat he might want to consider living somewhere else.

Yes, I know that slashdot's conservative majority will moderate this down because they don't like the truth. They can do their worst, the moderation of this comment won't move my karma.

Re:Well IMO he got what he deserved he let his ang

[Anonymous Coward]

Wtf? You're quoting the coerced statement as evidence?

Are you retarded?
I hope you're never put in charge of anything more important than a mop and bucket.

DNA, should'a eaten less bacon...

[Anonymous Coward]

I find the daily minute of rage quite cathartic, and coducive to a well-adjusted, relaxed and totally unf*cked-up personality

Re:lol mimes

[clickety6]

how does a mime have a "verbal altercation"?

Sign language.

Rude sign language

password?

[Anonymous Coward]

if he was handcuffed how did he log in without telling the cops his password? maybe getting that was the real reason for having him post something.

Re:Longtime resident

[meerling]

I hate the sound of those whistles

Re:Well IMO he got what he deserved he let his ang

[Stan92057]

dumbass! you need to learn how to read BADLY.

Re:lol mimes

[niado]

I disagree. They are providing a performance and many people like it. if you don't like it, you don't have to pay. Only Obama makes you pay for things you don't want or need.

Yes, only Obama.

Thanks Obama! >:(

Re:Longtime resident

[HornWumpus]

Whistles are the second worst thing about raves/dance clubs etc. (the worst being the music)

If someone blows a coaches whistle in my ear, they will be spitting teeth.

Re:Well IMO he got what he deserved he let his ang

[Mr. Slippery]

you need to learn how to read BADLY.

Wouldn't it be better to learn to read well, than to learn how to read badly?

And it would be good also to learn to write well. Your prior post is utterly incomprehensible.

Re:Well IMO he got what he deserved he let his ang

[Stan92057]

get over yourself Nazi. go play ball now yes error left on purpose.

Re:lol mimes

[Anonymous Coward]

Only Obama makes you pay for things you don't want or need.

Are you including or excluding the invasion of Iraq in the early 21st Century?

Re:Well IMO he got what he deserved he let his ang

[Anonymous Coward]

Use of language, so I'm told, is an indicator of intellectual ability.

You appear be intellectually challenged, not simply as a result of your use of language but also your ability to reason..

Failzorz

[Anonymous Coward]

*sigh* Just screaming "HITLER" doesn't invoke Godwin's Law. It's in the fucking handbook even.

Re:Well IMO he got what he deserved he let his ang

[Anonymous Coward]

Use of language, so I'm told, is an indicator of intellectual ability.

Then you are misinformed. We don't even understand intelligence, and nor do we have a precise definition of it.

Re:tl;dr or because it's about Rights

[Anonymous Coward]

And what happens when it turns out that the story is all contrived or exaggerated bullshit? Maybe a "oh well, we'll get them next time" perhaps? You know those bastards are guilty, you just know it!

Coerced statements

[billstewart]

It was much more traditional for police departments to coerce people into making statements like "Yeah, I done that crime", whether they did or not. At least this clown's not in jail, and good luck to him in his lawsuit.