Police War on Truth: The Next Chapter

[Andy9o8 0]

You have to read it to believe it.

http://reason.com/blog/2012/01/05/seattle-sues-attorney-for-requesting-pol

Quote

Seattle Sues Attorney For Requesting Police Dash-Cam Footage

January 5, 2012

Seattle has a brilliant solution to their many police problems — refuse to release police dash-cam footage, then sue the person requesting said footage.

[jgoose71 0]

Quote

But Seattle City Attorney Pete Holmes, who filed the lawsuit, says the city is caught between two conflicting laws.

"There's a plain conflict in the laws between the Public Records Act (and) the Privacy Act. The city will pay dearly if it makes the wrong choice," said Holmes.

I don't know this one could be close. If I was a judge looking at this case involving a public servant, acting in service to the public, in plane view of the public, I think I could see how his privacy may need protection........

It would be comical if it wasn't scary.

"There is an art, it says, or, rather, a knack to flying. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss."
Life, the Universe, and Everything

[Southern_Man 0]

Very sad, predictable but sad.

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[Skyrad 0]

Police State.

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[rushmc 18]

My brother-in-law had something similar happen to him

His lawyer requested the dash cam for a stop made on him
The tape was provide but never with any sound (which usually included the radio traffic)
They requested it 3 times asking for the sound
Three times they got the video with no sound

Well, my brother-in-law had a friend in the cop shop
He got him a copy with sound
Three days later the County attorney dropped the case because the radio conversation proved that this was a set up

Tampering with evidence charges are being considered

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Southern_Man 0]

Quote

Tampering with evidence charges are being considered

Good, please let us know if they proceed.

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

Tampering with evidence charges are being considered

Good, please let us know if they proceed.

The main officer in this story is the mayor of another town close by

It has been about 6 weeks since this all happened
It has just gotten very quiet

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Andy9o8 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Tampering with evidence charges are being considered

Good, please let us know if they proceed.

The main officer in this story is the mayor of another town close by

It has been about 6 weeks since this all happened
It has just gotten very quiet

Local news outlets have a way of disrupting that kind of quietude; and reporters are always looking for a story. Hint, hint.

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Tampering with evidence charges are being considered

Good, please let us know if they proceed.

The main officer in this story is the mayor of another town close by

It has been about 6 weeks since this all happened
It has just gotten very quiet

Local news outlets have a way of disrupting that kind of quietude; and reporters are always looking for a story. Hint, hint.

Ya

There are a couple of other options he and his lawyer are looking at

One thing is for sure
The County and the cops would just like this to go away

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[lawrocket 3]

I, for one, have little doubt that the City Attorney has a point. I have little doubt that the City attorney has been put between a rock and a hard place. It’s not the cops that passed the law giving them immunity. These are laws passed by legislators (of course, police unions are mighty powerful, probably proposed (and drafted!!!) the law, and the public LOVES anything that gives cops, firemen and teachers a break.)

So there is a law put in place to protect cops. The City is torn between two laws. There being a controversy, the City has to go to Court to figure out which law to follow.

As much as I don’t like cops or prosecutors, I cannot say that I have a serious problem with them in this case.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[popsjumper 2]

What a great law!

You can have the evidence against me but only after it gets to the point that you can't touch me.

Too bad it only works one way....for THEM and not for US.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

What a great law!

You can have the evidence against me but only after it gets to the point that you can't touch me.

Too bad it only works one way....for THEM and not for US.

There's a certain asshole cop in Canton OH that would beg to differ, as I'm sure there are others that have been caught out by their own dashcams or other recordings.

Conversely, people recording the cops have to realize that, by doing so, they've made themselves into material witnessess and their recordings into evidence that has to be preserved.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[popsjumper 2]

I'm not sure what that case has to do with this topic but...OK

Maybe you missed the huge element of sarcasm in my post.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

I'm not sure what that case has to do with this topic but...OK

The 'roid rage' cop was busted from video evidence...which shows that it doesn't always work 'for them and not for us' as you claimed.

Quote

Maybe you missed the huge element of sarcasm in my post.

Sorry, looked like one of your usual rants against the po-po.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Southern_Man 0]

Quote

Quote

I'm not sure what that case has to do with this topic but...OK

The 'roid rage' cop was busted from video evidence...which shows that it doesn't always work 'for them and not for us' as you claimed.


Right. let's pretend that this case was in Washington. There is also another defendent, arrested by the same police officer for a similar offense. He states he fully informed the officer he was carrying, complied with all applicaable laws etc. but the officer went apeshit and arrested him and charged him with assault and brandishing. That's his defense. As part of his defense, he wants access to other complaints or similar cases against the officer including the dash-cam footage. This case the county is saying the defendant can't access dash-cam footage from any other similar case because that would violate the officer's privacy rights.

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

I'm not sure what that case has to do with this topic but...OK

The 'roid rage' cop was busted from video evidence...which shows that it doesn't always work 'for them and not for us' as you claimed.


Right. let's pretend that this case was in Washington. There is also another defendent, arrested by the same police officer for a similar offense. He states he fully informed the officer he was carrying, complied with all applicaable laws etc. but the officer went apeshit and arrested him and charged him with assault and brandishing. That's his defense. As part of his defense, he wants access to other complaints or similar cases against the officer including the dash-cam footage. This case the county is saying the defendant can't access dash-cam footage from any other similar case because that would violate the officer's privacy rights.

If you're offering this as a rebuttal to my post to Andy, kindly note that I am not offering a comment on the actions of the police in the case mentioned, but rebutting the premise that "it's always for them (the police) and not for us" regarding video evidence.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

I'm not sure what that case has to do with this topic but...OK

Quote

The 'roid rage' cop was busted from video evidence...which shows that it doesn't always work 'for them and not for us' as you claimed.

I was talking about the conflicting laws that allowed the DA to withhold the videos..not the actual use of the tape.

Yes, you pointed out that the video can be used to the detriment of the officers.

However, your instance had nothing to do with this one because in this case, the video tapes are being withheld (which, BTW, is what the thread is discussing)...maybe up to the point of where the officer can no longer be prosecuted for his conduct....hence "What a great law!...etc." (note sarcasm)

Quote

Sorry, looked like one of your usual rants against the po-po.

Sorry, looked like one of your usual misdirect attempts.


As far as rants against the "po-po"....well, when they fuck up, they need to be called out. When they do well, they need to be supported. It goes both ways....just like any other public service group.


edited to ad: Ahhh...I see where the disconnect is.
You are "rebutting the premise that "it's always for them (the police) and not for us" regarding video evidence"

Again, I was sarcastically talking about the conflicting laws that they are using to avoid releasing the videos. I was NOT saying that any/all video evidence is good for THEM and not so good fur US.

Does that help?

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

I'm not sure what that case has to do with this topic but...OK

Quote

The 'roid rage' cop was busted from video evidence...which shows that it doesn't always work 'for them and not for us' as you claimed.

I was talking about the conflicting laws that allowed the DA to withhold the videos..not the actual use of the tape.

Yes, you pointed out that the video can be used to the detriment of the officers.

However, your instance had nothing to do with this one because in this case, the video tapes are being withheld (which, BTW, is what the thread is discussing)...maybe up to the point of where the officer can no longer be prosecuted for his conduct....hence "What a great law!...etc." (note sarcasm)

And I wasn't speaking to the direct case, but the statement that the evidence was always to the cop's favor.

Quote

As far as rants against the "po-po"....well, when they fuck up, they need to be called out. When they do well, they need to be supported. It goes both ways....just like any other public service group.

Agreed.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

And I wasn't speaking to the direct case, but the statement that the evidence was always to the cop's favor.

I edited the post near the bottom...if that doesn't help, then so be it. You misread the post and I no longer feel the need to explain.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

I, for one, have little doubt that the City Attorney has a point. I have little doubt that the City attorney has been put between a rock and a hard place. It’s not the cops that passed the law giving them immunity. These are laws passed by legislators (of course, police unions are mighty powerful, probably proposed (and drafted!!!) the law, and the public LOVES anything that gives cops, firemen and teachers a break.)

So there is a law put in place to protect cops. The City is torn between two laws. There being a controversy, the City has to go to Court to figure out which law to follow.

As much as I don’t like cops or prosecutors, I cannot say that I have a serious problem with them in this case.

Maybe it's time to re-visit those laws and maybe this case will get it all straightened out, eh?
For the life of me, I can't understand the desire to protect thugs of any type wearing public service uniforms. Seems to me that laws should be enacted that would promote the idea that public servants should be held to a higher standard.

But that's just the hippie me coming out, I suppose.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

And I wasn't speaking to the direct case, but the statement that the evidence was always to the cop's favor.

I edited the post near the bottom...if that doesn't help, then so be it.

No, that makes it clear that you understood why I posted what I did.

Quote

You misread the post and I no longer feel the need to explain.

Or, maybe it wasn't so clear after all... wtf, dude?

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

Or, maybe it wasn't so clear after all... wtf, dude?

OK..I'll accept that. Done.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239