Google Search

Showing posts with label Citizen. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Citizen. Show all posts

Friday, January 17, 2014

South Florida Deputy on Trial for Stealing Phone From Citizen Recording Him


by Carlos Miller

Broward County sheriff?s deputy Paul Pletcher was off-duty when he got into road rage altercation with another woman, so he pulled her over, stormed up to her truck and began berating her.

Her passenger pulled out a cell phone and began video recording, clearly capturing him saying, ?give me the phone,? three times before reaching into the vehicle and snatching the phone.

Pletcher then drove off, smashing the phone in a nearby parking lot, where it was later retrieved by Plantation police officer, whom were responding to the woman?s call.

Pletcher was eventually arrested and charged with several felonies where he is facing 11 years in prison.

His trial began this week.

His defense: He thought the phone was a concealed weapon, which caused him to fear for his life.


That fear is evident from the recovered video, which captured the following exchange:

?Give me the phone!? he repeated, reaching into the car and toward the camera lens.

?No talking to me like that.?

?Give me the phone, Now!?

?Don?t touch me.?

?Give me the phone!?

?Wait! Wait!?

Despite the visual and audio evidence against him that he was committing strong-armed robbery, his attorney is still able to look the jury in the eye and state the following:
??Paul Pletcher saw somebody who was driving erratically ? Paul Pletcher took the position that when that cell phone was out and being used it could have been a concealed weapon.?
Pletcher has gotten away with stealing cameras from citizens before, so he is confident he will get away with this crime, especially considering it took authorities seven months to charge him after the 2011 incident and more than a year to fire him, which might explain his smirking mugshot and his celebratory Facebook page.


_
Carlos Miller runs the website Photography is not a Crime.


(function(d, s, id) {var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if (d.getElementById(id)) return;js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id;js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/all.js#xfbml=1";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk'));

Latest Tyranny/Police State
- Capital Punishment for Traffic Violations
- Police Shoot Man Assembling Toy Gun While Sitting In His Own Car
- Dashcam Video Shows Scene As Officer Shoots 14-Yr-Old With Toy Gun
- Father Says He's Being Jailed For Paying Too Much Child Support & Over Visiting His Son [Updated]
- San Diego Deputy Threatens To 'Shove' Camera Light Up Videographer's 'A**'
- Video captures moment PCSO who pulled over a driver was then arrested HIMSELF for being twice the drink-drive limit by police officers he called for back-up
- The Right to Resist -- and the Duty to Interpose
- Texas Game Wardens Prepare for War

Oh yea the tried and true bullshit excuse, but I am always in fear for my whinny life that, that phone looked like an anti tank weapon and I shit my pants in absolute fear. You worthless pos and that includes your sparkle pony bitch of a lawyer.

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy



View the original article here

Friday, September 30, 2011

Citizen Recording Of Police Proves Officer Lied About Arrest

by Zachary Knight

Reason.com alerts us to an LA Times article covering a recent trial in which a private citizen's cellphone video proved officers lied about an arrest, resulting in the acquittal of a young man accused of carrying a concealed firearm.

According to police reports after the arrest:

Deputy Levi Belville testified that he saw Gipson in the side yard run and toss a loaded revolver onto the roof of a detached garage. The deputy said he ordered Gipson to stop and that the suspect walked back to Belville, who then detained him.
However, the cellphone video depicted a very different chain of events:
The footage did not show Gipson running, tossing a gun or walking back to the deputies to be detained. Instead, the grainy video showed deputies arriving and walking past Gipson, who was standing against a wall of the house near the rear of the yard. One of the deputies, Raul Ibarra, returned to Gipson and escorted him to the back of the yard.
This new footage led to a change in the way the officers describe the events. This inconsistency in the officer's testimony led jurors to acquit Gipson of the charges.
Jurors said they did not find Belville's trial testimony credible and believed he changed his account of the arrest after being confronted with the video. They also questioned why a deputy with more than 10 years' experience would walk past a man who had just thrown a gun without immediately detaining him or warning colleagues.
Even as police and governments around the country are fighting the practice of the public recording the actions of the police, stories like this show the power that such recordings have in administering a fair justice system. Without this video, the trial would have been based entirely on the officer's testimony of events rather than on hard evidence.

I will close with a few words from Gipson himself in response to these events, "I never thought an officer would lie."


Latest Tyranny/Police State
- A Tale of Two State-Sponsored Killings
- Child rapist to get less time than pot grower
- SWAT Teams Execute Man's Farm Animals With Shotguns
- It's Been Quite a Day in the Police State!
- Columbia MO police officer fired for excessive force
- Cops Vs. Cameras: The Killing of Kelly Thomas & The Power of New Media
- Kelly Thomas begged for his life from 'menacing' officer, D.A. says
- Charges Dropped Against Man Who Faced Life In Jail For Recording Cops

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened..." - Winston Churchill


View the original article here

Saturday, June 25, 2011

Cop harasses citizen for open carrying, backs off due to videotape

Chris | InformationLiberation

This is a great video. A costume clad taxfeeder approaches an ex-vet who was open carrying an unloaded gun in Oceanside, California, and starts to harass him for exercising his rights. The cop asks if he's a marine to which the man says yes, the cop says he is a vet too and he's OK with him open carrying, but he's 'just doing his job.'

The cop then demands the man's ID to which the man refuses (he said he wasn't carrying any, but earlier he said his name was "Jeremy"). The cop says that's fine, but he needs his full name, which Jeremy then refuses to give. The cop says he knows the video is going up on YouTube, and says "that's fine" to the man refusing his name, but he still tries several times to get "Jeremy" to give him his last name. The cop fails because Jeremy holds his ground and consistently refuses. It's pretty clear the cop didn't want to be a YouTube star, because he drops demanding the guy's last name and 'pals around with him' before finally leaving him alone.

It's rather nice to see a government gang member having some small sense they may be held accountable for their actions, cheers to "Jeremy" for posting the great video.


Latest Tyranny/Police State
- Campus police officers caught using security keys to steal food from cafe
- The New FBI Powers: Cointelpro on Steroids
- Lawsuit: Union tells cops to "lie" about beatings
- Police Demand Video Camera.. Owner says NO
- When cops are the reckless drivers and try to instigate high speed chases for TV
- "No Knock Raid" by Lindy - A song about the drug war's deadliest tactic
- Kids Lemonade Stand At U.S. Open Fined $500 And Shut Down By Montgomery County
- Video shows Julian Assange's life under never-ending house arrest

I don't see this as harrassment. The cop is doing his job. Without any sort of identification there is no validation that this guy really is a marine. ANYONE can say they are....especially those that are mentally unstable.

Bottom line....cop doing his job.

The headline for this video ?Cop harasses citizen for open carrying; backs off due to videotape" should be changed. We can only wish all cops were as good as this guy. The headline should be changed to "A Few Good Cops"... Cops like this should be praised, not condemned. Sorry, but I don't think cops should be praised for *not* killing random people. This cop's job is to harass innocent strangers. "Just doing his job" is predominantly "just harassing innocent people for non-crimes," as he did in this case.

Did he kill the man? No, he didn't. Did he tase the man? No, he didn't. Did he harass the man for his last name? Yes, he did. Did he treat him like a criminal for legally open carrying? Yes, he did. If the cop's job was to get his full name, he failed at doing his job because the guy didn't give it. The cop doesn't even know if his first name is Jeremy. If you think the cop's job was to ID the guy, he didn't do his job.

I'm not in the excuse making businesses and I'm not of the belief experiencing mild harassment from government goon-squads is "good enough."

The fact of the matter is the cop is multiple times more likely to kill someone than any random stranger open carrying. See: http://nevergetbusted.com/2010/articles/police-twice-as-likely-to-murder The cops are the ones who should be under extreme scrutiny, not random citizens.

I disagree with this headline. This officer Actually followed the law here. The Officer also clearly identified himself and gave his badge number. He also did not object to being recorded.

As long as the officer is protecting the community and not assaulting citizens, then he is doing his job.

More officers should use this as their model in protecting civil rights and protecting the community in which they serve.

Let's recognize when the police do something right and praise that behavior. Let's support officers who follow the law and actually do the job the citizens want them to do.

I am not a law enforcement officer. I hate criminals who wear badges and pretend to be peace officers. I do not work for the government (other than my indentured servitude of the tax farm). I hate tyranny and want this country returned back to the constitutional government it was originally intended to be.

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened..." - Winston Churchill


View the original article here

Wednesday, June 22, 2011

SWAT Team Mania: The War Against the American Citizen

by John W. Whitehead

"He [a federal agent] had his knee on my back and I had no idea why they were there." - Anthony Wright, victim of a Dept. of Education SWAT team raid

The militarization of American police ? no doubt a blowback effect of the military empire ? has become an unfortunate part of American life. In fact, it says something about our reliance on the military that federal agencies having nothing whatsoever to do with national defense now see the need for their own paramilitary units. Among those federal agencies laying claim to their own law enforcement divisions are the State Department, Department of Education, Department of Energy, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and the National Park Service, to name just a few. These agencies have secured the services of fully armed agents ? often in SWAT team attire ? through a typical bureaucratic sleight-of-hand provision allowing for the creation of Offices of Inspectors General (OIG). Each OIG office is supposedly charged with not only auditing their particular agency?s actions but also uncovering possible misconduct, waste, fraud, theft, or certain types of criminal activity by individuals or groups related to the agency?s operation. At present, there are 73 such OIG offices in the federal government that, at times, perpetuate a police state aura about them.

For example, it was heavily armed agents from one such OIG office, working under the auspices of the Department of Education, who forced their way into the home of a California man, handcuffed him, and placed his three children (ages 3, 7, and 11) in a squad car while they conducted a search of his home. This federal SWAT team raid, which is essentially what it was, on the home of Anthony Wright on Tuesday, June 7, 2011, was allegedly intended to ferret out information on Wright?s estranged wife, Michelle, who no longer lives with him and who was suspected of financial aid fraud (early news reports characterized the purpose of the raid as being over Michelle?s delinquent student loans). According to Wright, he was awakened at 6 am by the sound of agents battering down his door and, upon descending the stairs, was immediately subdued by police. One neighbor actually witnessed the team of armed agents surround the house and, after forcing entry, they "dragged [Wright] out in his boxer shorts, threw him to the ground and handcuffed him."

This is not the first time a SWAT team has been employed in non-violent scenarios. Nationwide, SWAT teams have been employed to address an astonishingly trivial array of criminal activity or mere community nuisances: angry dogs, domestic disputes, improper paperwork filed by an orchid farmer, and misdemeanor marijuana possession, to give a brief sampling. In some instances, SWAT teams are even employed, in full armament, to perform routine patrols.

How did we allow ourselves to travel so far down the road to a police state? While we are now grappling with a power-hungry police state at the federal level, the militarization of domestic American law enforcement is largely the result of the militarization of local police forces, which are increasingly militaristic in their uniforms, weaponry, language, training, and tactics and have come to rely on SWAT teams in matters that once could have been satisfactorily performed by traditional civilian officers. Even so, this transformation of law enforcement at the local level could not have been possible without substantial assistance from on high.

Frequently justified as vital tools necessary to combat terrorism and deal with rare but extremely dangerous criminal situations, such as those involving hostages, SWAT teams ? which first appeared on the scene in California in the 1960s ? have now become intrinsic parts of local law enforcement operations, thanks in large part to substantial federal assistance. For example, in 1994, the U.S. Department of Justice and the Department of Defense agreed to a memorandum of understanding that enabled the transfer of federal military technology to local police forces. Following the passage of the Defense Authorization Security Act of 1997, which was intended to accelerate the transfer of military equipment to domestic law enforcement departments, local police acquired military weaponry ? gratuitously or at sharp discounts ? at astonishing rates. Between 1997 and 1999, the agency created by the Defense Authorization Security Act conveyed 3.4 million orders of military equipment to over 11,000 local police agencies in all 50 states. Not only did this vast abundance of military weaponry contribute to a more militarized police force, but it also helped spur the creation of SWAT teams in jurisdictions across the country.

In one of the few quantitative studies on the subject, criminologist Peter Kraska found in 1997 that close to 90 percent of cities with populations exceeding 50,000 and at least 100 sworn officers had at least one paramilitary unit. In a separate study, Kraska determined that, as of 1996, 65 percent of towns with populations between 25,000 and 50,000 had a paramilitary unit, with an additional 8 percent intending to establish one.

While the frequency of SWAT operations has increased dramatically in recent years, jumping from 1,000 to 40,000 raids per year by 2001, it appears to have less to do with increases in violent crime and more to do with law enforcement bureaucracy and a police state mentality. Indeed, according to Kraska?s estimates, 75-80 percent of SWAT callouts are now for mere warrant service. In some jurisdictions, SWAT teams are responsible for servicing 100 percent of all drug warrants issued. A Maryland study, conducted in the wake of a botched raid in 2008 that resulted in the mistaken detainment of Berwyn Heights mayor Cheye Calvo and the shooting deaths of his two dogs, corroborates Kraska?s findings. According to the study, SWAT teams are deployed 4.5 times per day in Maryland with 94 percent of those deployments being for something as minor as serving search or arrest warrants. In the county in which the Calvo raid occurred, more than 50 percent of SWAT operations carried out were for misdemeanors or non-serious felonies.

This overuse of paramilitary forces and increased reliance on military weaponry has inevitably resulted in a pervasive culture of militarism in domestic law enforcement. Police mimicry of the military is enhanced by the war-heavy imagery and metaphors associated with law enforcement activity: the war on drugs, the war on crime, etc. Moreover, it is estimated that 46 percent of paramilitary units were trained by "active-duty military experts in special operations." In turn, the military mindset adopted by many SWAT members encourages a tendency to employ lethal force. After all, soldiers are authorized to terminate enemy combatants. As Lawrence Korb, a former official in the Reagan Administration, put it, soldiers are "trained to vaporize, not Mirandize."

Ironically, despite the fact that SWAT team members are subject to greater legal restraints than their counterparts in the military, they are often less well-trained in the use of force than are the special ops soldiers on which they model themselves. Indeed, SWAT teams frequently fail to conform to the basic precautions required in military raids. For instance, after reading about a drug raid in Missouri, an army officer currently serving in Afghanistan commented:

My first thought on reading this story is this: Most American police SWAT teams probably have fewer restrictions on conducting forced entry raids than do US forces in Afghanistan. For our troops over here to conduct any kind of forced entry, day or night, they have to meet one of two conditions: have a bad guy (or guys) inside actively shooting at them; or obtain permission from a 2-star general, who must be convinced by available intelligence (evidence) that the person or persons they?re after is present at the location, and that it?s too dangerous to try less coercive methods.
Remember, SWAT teams originated as specialized units dedicated to defusing extremely sensitive, dangerous situations. As the role of paramilitary forces has expanded, however, to include involvement in nondescript police work targeting nonviolent suspects, the mere presence of SWAT units has actually injected a level of danger and violence into police-citizen interactions that was not present as long as these interactions were handled by traditional civilian officers. In one drug raid, for instance, an unarmed pregnant woman was shot as she attempted to flee the police by climbing out a window. In another case, the girlfriend of a drug suspect and her young child crouched on the floor in obedience to police instructions during the execution of a search warrant. One officer proceeded to shoot the family dogs. His fellow officer, in another room, mistook the shots for hostile gunfire and fired blindly into the room where the defendant crouched, killing her and wounding her child.

What we are witnessing is an inversion of the police-civilian relationship. Rather than compelling police officers to remain within constitutional bounds as servants of the people, ordinary Americans are being placed at the mercy of law enforcement. This is what happens when paramilitary forces are used to conduct ordinary policing operations, such as executing warrants on nonviolent defendants. Yet studies indicate that paramilitary raids frequently result in misdemeanor convictions. An investigation by Denver?s Rocky Mountain News revealed that of the 146 no-knock raids conducted in Denver in 2000, only 49 resulted in charges. And only two resulted in prison sentences for suspects targeted in the raids.

General incompetence, collateral damage (fatalities, property damage, etc.) and botched raids tend to go hand in hand with an overuse of paramilitary forces. In some cases, officers misread the address on the warrant. In others, they simply barge into the wrong house or even the wrong building. In another subset of cases (such as the Department of Education raid on Anthony Wright?s home), police conduct a search of a building where the suspect no longer resides. SWAT teams have even on occasion conducted multiple, sequential raids on wrong addresses or executed search warrants despite the fact that the suspect is already in police custody. Police have also raided homes on the basis of mistaking the presence or scent of legal substances for drugs. Incredibly, these substances have included tomatoes, sunflowers, fish, elderberry bushes, kenaf plants, hibiscus, and ragweed.

All too often, botched SWAT team raids have resulted in one tragedy after another for the residents with little consequences for law enforcement. Judges tend to afford extreme levels of deference to police officers who have mistakenly killed innocent civilians but do not afford similar leniency to civilians who have injured police officers in acts of self-defense. Even homeowners who mistake officers for robbers can be sentenced for assault or murder if they take defensive actions resulting in harm to police.

And as journalist Radley Balko shows in his in-depth study of police militarization, the shock-and-awe tactics utilized by many SWAT teams only increases the likelihood that someone will get hurt. Drug warrants, for instance, are typically served by paramilitary units late at night or shortly before dawn. Unfortunately, to the unsuspecting homeowner ? especially in cases involving mistaken identities or wrong addresses ? a raid can appear to be nothing less than a violent home invasion, with armed intruders crashing through their door. The natural reaction would be to engage in self-defense. Yet such a defensive reaction on the part of a homeowner, particularly a gun owner, will spur officers to employ lethal force.

That?s exactly what happened to Jose Guerena, the young ex-Marine who was killed after a SWAT team kicked open the door of his Arizona home during a drug raid and opened fire. According to news reports, Guerena, 26 years old and the father of two young children, grabbed a gun in response to the forced invasion but never fired. In fact, the safety was still on his gun when he was killed. Police officers were not as restrained. The young Iraqi war veteran was allegedly fired upon 71 times. Guerena had no prior criminal record, and the police found nothing illegal in his home.

The problems inherent in these situations are further compounded by the fact that SWAT teams are granted "no-knock" warrants at high rates such that the warrants themselves are rendered practically meaningless. This sorry state of affairs is made even worse by recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings that have essentially done away with the need for a "no-knock" warrant altogether, giving the police authority to disregard the protections afforded American citizens by the Fourth Amendment.

In the process, Americans are rendered altogether helpless and terror-stricken as a result of these confrontations with the police. Indeed, "terrorizing" is a mild term to describe the effect on those who survive such vigilante tactics. "It was terrible. It was the most frightening experience of my life. I thought it was a terrorist attack," said 84-year-old Leona Goldberg, a victim of such a raid. Yet this type of "terrorizing" activity is characteristic of the culture that we have created. As author Eugene V. Walker, a former Boston University professor, wrote some years ago, "A society in which people are already isolated and atomized, divided by suspicious and destructive rivalry, would support a system of terror better than a society without much chronic antagonism."
__
Constitutional attorney and author John W. Whitehead [send him mail] is founder and president of The Rutherford Institute. He is the author of The Change Manifesto (Sourcebooks).

Copyright ? 2011 The Rutherford Institute


Latest Tyranny/Police State
- Campus police officers caught using security keys to steal food from cafe
- The New FBI Powers: Cointelpro on Steroids
- Lawsuit: Union tells cops to "lie" about beatings
- Police Demand Video Camera.. Owner says NO
- When cops are the reckless drivers and try to instigate high speed chases for TV
- "No Knock Raid" by Lindy - A song about the drug war's deadliest tactic
- Kids Lemonade Stand At U.S. Open Fined $500 And Shut Down By Montgomery County
- Video shows Julian Assange's life under never-ending house arrest

This site contains copyrighted material the use of which in some cases has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Such material is made available for the purposes of news reporting, education, research, comment, and criticism, which constitutes a 'fair use' of such copyrighted material in accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner. It is our policy to respond to notices of alleged infringement that comply with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (found at the U.S. Copyright Office) and other applicable intellectual property laws. It is our policy to remove material from public view that we believe in good faith to be copyrighted material that has been illegally copied and distributed by any of our members or users.
About Us - Disclaimer - Privacy Policy
"Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened..." - Winston Churchill


View the original article here