* 2
Tough Shit.
Amendment 4 - Search and Seizure.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
until you have had the experience, Do ou have the right to protest those in harms way? Don
No. I do have a right to be secure from unreasonable intrusion upon my rights by any part of government. I notice you ignored my next sentence where I said "If he's patrolling in a bad part of town can he order everyone off the street who makes him feel unsafe?"I love this: "He has no Constitutional right to feel safe." Do you have a constiutional right to feel safe?
No. That does not mean my opinion is less valid. I have a right to criticize unlawful actions by soldiers without having had to be one. Same with police or politicians, or any other employee of my government. Or for that matter, anyone else.Did you ever serve on the front lines in battle, or do law enforcement?
Everyone does.Do the cops have a right to go home to their families at the end of their shift?
But note that she's the only one he arrested.The cops don't know what is happening in her head. I did not hear them say that she couldn't film them,...
ORDERED her to go into the house, under threat of arrest.... just requested that she goes into the house.
ABSOLUTELY. A constitutional right.until you have had the experience, Do ou have the right to protest those in harms way? Don
The one arresting her was facing her. The one with his back to her said nothing. From where could she record them without being behind one? The best she could have done is get them from their side, and what if one turns away? Plus, police cars were in the way of that angle, and it would have put her in the street, not nearly as safe as her own front yard.They tried very politely to explain that someone behind them was at best uncomfortable. Why didn't she walk out and film them from in front of the officers? That would have solved the problem. Don
Sorry to hear that. It's just pathetic that they would do something so petty. It certainly doesn't win the PD any supporters.As an update to the OP, the news tonight reported that supporters of the woman are being harassed. This was reported on Rochester's channel 10 TV on the 5 O'clock news. Basically, they were having a support meeting for her and while in the meeting, their cars were ticketed for being parked too far from the curb. They were interviewed on TV and the police were shown giving the tickets and measuring the cars wheel distance from the curb with a ruler.
PE
As an update to the OP, the news tonight reported that supporters of the woman are being harassed. This was reported on Rochester's channel 10 TV on the 5 O'clock news. Basically, they were having a support meeting for her and while in the meeting, their cars were ticketed for being parked too far from the curb. They were interviewed on TV and the police were shown giving the tickets and measuring the cars wheel distance from the curb with a ruler.
PE
While everybody seems to focus on Rochester here, the problem police has with smart phone cameras seems to be a more widespread issue, at least Arizona seems affected by this as well. These omni present cameras created a new situation for cops and they seem to struggle with this a lot. I have the impression that a lot of folks will be unlawfully arrested, a lot of these cases will go up to higher courts before this whole issue is sorted out.This reminds me that Rochester New York was the first place to have race riots in the '60's. That was triggered by a climate of police excesses as investigations showed.
Statement from the Mayor, Council President and Police chief:
"We believe that the incident that led to Ms. Good's arrest and the subsequent ticketing for parking violations of vehicles belonging to members of an organization associated with Ms. Good raise issues with respect to the conduct of Rochester Police Officers that require an internal review. A review into both matters has been initiated."
WTF?
As of today, Ms. Good has announced a civil liberties lawsuit against the police. It will most likely be a Federal suit.
There was quite a bit of TV coverage tonight.
PE
As an aside, a colleague of mine had clients who were in court a lot and never seemed to do well. I wonder if the fact that their surname was "Crook" had anything to do with it ....
As of today, Ms. Good has announced a civil liberties lawsuit against the police. It will most likely be a Federal suit.
There was quite a bit of TV coverage tonight.
PE
I'm ambivalent, as I have to pay her via taxes. Oh, I do support her, but the one point they made in our newscast is that everyone here will pay. And, there is not much we can do about it.
PE
The police officers exceeded their authority, therefore:
- The city of Rochester should neither pay for their defense nor their law suite liabilities.
- The police officers should pay for their defense and their law suite liabilities.
It's not really like they are going to up the sales tax tomorrow because of this (not even if the police department keeps running into these situations). The first thing that will happen after an expensive settlement is that the money they are ordered to pay will be missing somewhere else. Some affected people in the administration will be extremely unhappy about this and will try to make absolutely sure that their budget is not wasted on expensive and lost lawsuits.I'm ambivalent, as I have to pay her via taxes. Oh, I do support her, but the one point they made in our newscast is that everyone here will pay. And, there is not much we can do about it.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?