Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

'Officer Bubbles' Sues YouTube Commenters Over Mockery

samzenpus posted more than 3 years ago | from the Ricky-and-Julian-disapprove dept.

Canada 594

An anonymous reader writes "'Officer Bubbles' — the Toronto Police Constable who was videotaped threatening a G20 protester with arrest for assault over the crime of blowing bubbles at a police officer has had enough of mocking videos and comments on YouTube. He has decided to sue everyone involved (commenters included) for more than a million dollars each. The complaint is detailed in his statement of claim — most of the comments seem fairly tame by internet standards; if this goes anywhere, everyone is going to have to watch what they say pretty carefully. The lawsuit appears to have been successful in intimidating the author of the mocking cartoons into taking them down."

cancel ×

594 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Morpheus (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33949474)

Is that you?

Re:Morpheus (1)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949512)

Nabu-kudurri-usur

You Know What They Say? (1)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949478)

Mad Dogs and Policemen.

Re:You Know What They Say? (5, Insightful)

NFN_NLN (633283) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949762)

Mad Dogs and Policemen.

So this is why police don't like to be filmed?! It makes them accountable for their douchery after the fact.

Looks like the court of public opinion made its ruling on Officer Bubbles, I sure hope the official court sees things the same way.

Countersuit (3, Insightful)

Conspiracy_Of_Doves (236787) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949492)

They need to collectively countersue him for legal fees.

Re:Countersuit (3, Insightful)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949640)

"Men will never be free until the last policeman is strangled with the entrails of the last banker"
-- Diderot, or so.

Re:Countersuit (1)

tunapez (1161697) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949796)

"Men will never be free until the last policeman is strangled with the entrails of the last banker"
-- Diderot, or so.

Where do the lawyers fit into that scenario?

Re:Countersuit (1)

Rip Dick (1207150) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949954)

They were the first against the wall, duh...

Re:Countersuit (2, Insightful)

NFN_NLN (633283) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949726)

They need to collectively countersue him for legal fees.

Seriously, how is this sue worthy:

  Pussymcfats wrote in response, “officer bubbles probably looks at himself in the mirror a lot.”

Officer Bubbles was abusing his power then and he's trying to do it again.

Why? (1)

Dyinobal (1427207) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949496)

Why is it anyone with even the smallest position of power in government seem to think they can just sue everyone over the stupidest things.

Re:Why? (1)

RapmasterT (787426) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949542)

You might be new here (on planet earth), but positions of authority have little to nothing to do with the propensity of people to sue each other.

Re:Why? (4, Insightful)

Penguinisto (415985) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949838)

Because they're used to exercising petty authority, and cannot stand having their miniscule power challenged. This has been the case since humans first built cities.

Just be glad this retard doesn't have the power of life and death like his contemporaries had in ancient times. Just goes to show - the best measure of civilization is the ease with which a citizen can point and laugh at a stupid official.

Re:Why? (1)

magarity (164372) | more than 3 years ago | (#33950020)

Just be glad this retard doesn't have the power of life and death like his contemporaries had in ancient times
 
Ancient times? You need to travel more - most cops do have that power in any developing country you could list.

ugh (1, Funny)

pak9rabid (1011935) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949510)

Well..it's good to see that it's not only cops in the US that are douches...

Re:ugh (0)

jdgeorge (18767) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949574)

Well..it's good to see that it's not only cops in the US that are douches...

And I was thinking "it's good to see that it's not only people in the US that are douches..."

Re:ugh (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33949612)

Well..it's good to see that it's not only cops in the US that are douches...

And I was thinking "it's good to see that it's not only people in the US that are douches..."

Cops aren't people, silly!

Re:ugh (1)

grub (11606) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949582)

Careful, Officer Bubbles will sue you for $1M as well.

Re:ugh (4, Insightful)

shadowfaxcrx (1736978) | more than 3 years ago | (#33950124)

The amusing bit is that somehow I missed hearing about the whole Officer Bubbles thing until he decided to sue, which brought him up in the news again. Had the little jackass just kept his mouth shut and taken his well-deserved lumps for arresting a girl for assault-with-a-deadly-bubble, I'd never have known about him. I'm sure there are many others out there in the same boat. So he's brought quite a bit more shame and embarrassment on himself with this latest stunt.

I wonder if he'll sue.

Re:ugh (4, Informative)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949584)

Yes. In Canada they're Royal douches!

Streisand effect coming (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33949544)

in 3...2...1...

Re:Streisand effect coming (4, Insightful)

EasyTarget (43516) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949588)

Yeah.. I love the way 'Officer Bubbles (*)' laywer is saying 'the videos are now removed and that is the end of it'.

Someone is about to have a very bad morning.

(*) I'd make a joke about Michael Jackson and chimps in uniform here, but mocking the dead... now that -is- sick.

Re:Streisand effect coming (1)

bluefoxlucid (723572) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949626)

Yeah my first thought was "What the hell is this bullshit?"

Drinking session (1, Troll)

Darkman, Walkin Dude (707389) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949554)

Crazy stuff. Police officers are trained to create a zone of control around themselves, which would include things like threatening random passers-by and generally acting like thugs, its standard crowd control tactics, and while very far from acceptable civilised behaviour, it does work. The commenters didn't understand this, and the police officer didn't understand the commenters, and its all going to make bunch of lawyers wealthy. They should all sit down together and get drunk and forget about the whole thing.

Re:Drinking session (3, Insightful)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949632)

It seems having them behave more like public servants and less like gangbangers might be helpful in more cases than just this one.
The gang in blue somedays seems far more dangerous to public safety than many others.

Re:Drinking session (2, Insightful)

Darkman, Walkin Dude (707389) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949682)

Standard crowd control tactics. If you're facing an ugly mob that hugely outnumbers you, the only way to keep things under control is often to convince the crowd that you're uglier. I agree that a lot of LEOs everywhere take the concept to places it shouldn't be though.

Re:Drinking session (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949742)

Normally the crowd is far less an ugly mob than the cops. The police often go looking for a fight. Even if we say he was totally blameless there, these tactics are wholly unsuited for normal interactions with people.

Re:Drinking session (0)

Darkman, Walkin Dude (707389) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949830)

He's not entirely blameless, he should grow up and not bother suing people. However, they are trained to create a zone of control, which means they need to make crowds think they are tougher and meaner. Standard police tactics.

Re:Drinking session (1)

PhilHibbs (4537) | more than 3 years ago | (#33950102)

Er, that's exactly what the parent poster said. It's the cops' intention to out-intimmidate the mob. And, when you're interacting with a mob, you have to treat them differently from how you would treat individual people, because they will not behave the way individual people behave. I do feel sorry for him - she was provoking him, and he faced her down. I notice that we didn't see why she was being put up against the wall and put in a van, that is left to our imaginations.

Re:Drinking session (1)

moogied (1175879) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949748)

Wow. He was using crowd control tactics? To do what exactly? Piss them off? Let me give you some advice.. when you yell? People try to ignore you. When you whisper? People try to listen.

Re:Drinking session (2, Informative)

Darkman, Walkin Dude (707389) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949788)

A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it.

Re:Drinking session (1)

Archangel Michael (180766) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949832)

Now why didn't I think of that?

Re:Drinking session (4, Insightful)

jandrese (485) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949782)

I know we didn't get to see the crowd very well, but the part of we we did see in that video was anything but ugly. Mostly just people milling about, taking pictures, and one lady blowing bubbles. It wasn't exactly a mob situation. It didn't even sound very angry in the background.

Re:Drinking session (4, Funny)

trentblase (717954) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949858)

Are you for real? Don't you know bubbles are a detergent? A DETERGENT for God's sake! The situation was on the precipice of doom. DOOOM!

Re:Drinking session (0)

Darkman, Walkin Dude (707389) | more than 3 years ago | (#33950076)

Yup, I'm not saying he was justified, but in all likelihood he was just doing exactly as his training dictated. That he's decided to try and make bank at this stage does cast him in a more douche-y light though, he'd have gotten a lot more respect among people who know what's really going on if he'd just let it slide.

Re:Drinking session (3, Funny)

Scrameustache (459504) | more than 3 years ago | (#33950032)

Standard crowd control tactics. If you're facing an ugly mob

Cute girl blowing bubbles scares the ever living shit out of a 6+ feet tall, heavily armed and well backed-up man, see it on youTube!

Re:Drinking session (1)

srussia (884021) | more than 3 years ago | (#33950062)

I agree that a lot of LEOs everywhere take the concept to places it shouldn't be though.

Ya, like Iridium Communications.

Re:Drinking session (4, Insightful)

geekoid (135745) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949698)

No. Officer bubble should sit down with a psychiatrist. Other people didn't do anything wrong.

Re:Drinking session (0, Troll)

Darkman, Walkin Dude (707389) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949760)

That's correct, they didn't. The point of the operation isn't to take out the troublemakers and to give everyone else a big hug, that's impossible, its to ensure that the mob mentality doesn't scent weakness. This is why, I'm not saying it's right, but it is an explanation. Another example was the guy wandering past a police line in the UK a while back, an officer rapped him on the leg for getting too close, and he got a heart attack around the corner. All he was doing was taking a shortcut home, but the officers were just doing what they were trained to do.

Re:Drinking session (0, Flamebait)

ObsessiveMathsFreak (773371) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949990)

That can't be true!!! I have the right to swing my fists about wildly within millimeters of anyones face as long as I don't hit them!! If that right is taken away, especially when used in the midst of a truculent crowd, then whither liberty!?!

Help, Help! We're being repressed!

Re:Drinking session (2, Interesting)

elrous0 (869638) | more than 3 years ago | (#33950090)

That's true. But it still doesn't justify him suing everyone that pointed and laughed at him afterward (if it did, I would have a bunch of big settlements from the day I went to school wearing Spock ears).

Re:Drinking session (1)

Darkman, Walkin Dude (707389) | more than 3 years ago | (#33950112)

Absolutely.

Great idea (3, Interesting)

Drakkenmensch (1255800) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949572)

And suing people making sarcastic comments on the internet is going to make everyone respect him... sure, let's go with that.

South Park? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33949642)

He is the black Canadian Eric Cartman. "RESPECT MAH AUTHORITAH!"

Re:Great idea (2, Interesting)

cgenman (325138) | more than 3 years ago | (#33950066)

It's certainly going to erase the bad impression of him from the internet. Especially now that he's on legal record as "officer bubbles."

Why so many cops are pricks (3, Insightful)

JustNiz (692889) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949618)

Anyone who actively seeks becoming a cop (or a politician) has already proven they are fundamentally the wrong person for the job.

Re:Why so many cops are pricks (4, Insightful)

kevinNCSU (1531307) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949750)

For elected leaders I can maybe understand that logic, but that doesn't make the least bit of sense for police officers. Would you prefer there to be some sort of draft for police officers? So the cop responding to your 911 intruder call is some scared housewife or accountant who got drafted last month and is liable to shoot the first thing that moves when they come through the door?

Re:Why so many cops are pricks (1)

zach_the_lizard (1317619) | more than 3 years ago | (#33950004)

That might be preferrable to the, shall we say, gentlemen who show up at the wrong house and manage to shoot up your dog and charge you with assault and battery. At least your housewife/accountant managed to show up before bodybags were needed...

Re:Why so many cops are pricks (0, Troll)

Scrameustache (459504) | more than 3 years ago | (#33950084)

For elected leaders I can maybe understand that logic, but that doesn't make the least bit of sense for police officers. Would you prefer there to be some sort of draft for police officers? So the cop responding to your 911 intruder call is some scared housewife or accountant who got drafted last month and is liable to shoot the first thing that moves when they come through the door?

Nah, I'd much prefer to have a thug who got into the job because it comes with a gun, a stick, and the right to use those without consequences.
Do you want me to fetch a bunch of "trained officers shoots up innocent people" links to prove the inanity of your point, or can you manage that yourself?

Re:Why so many cops are pricks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33950140)

You joke about it, but that's how the draft in Germany for the military works: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Staatsb%C3%BCrger_in_Uniform (sorry, German)

The idea was that the only way to "control the military" was to force civilian participation. And I believe your criticism could be fixed with training. Of course something like that isn't cheap. But then again: When are things cheap when we want to have them done correctly?

Off topic: I believe in Germany soldiers also have the right to question their superiors if they feel it violates ethics while in most other countries that's a court martial. Urm, I don't know what the correct reference is for that -- maybe this: http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Innere_F%C3%BChrung

I hope my quotes are correct, I actually got that info via small talk with a German career soldier.

Also worthwhile to mention: Germany is currently considering to abolish the draft for financial reasons.

Re:Why so many cops are pricks (1)

mdm-adph (1030332) | more than 3 years ago | (#33950146)

I don't understand your argument -- scared housewife or accountant, they would still get the same training. Yes, I would rather have a draft.

Re:Why so many cops are pricks (1)

DigiShaman (671371) | more than 3 years ago | (#33950082)

Depends on who's choosing to be a Cop. Personally, I love it when a Cop is ex-military. Case in point: I've had to call 911 at 4am on a thug threatening everyone that walks through my Appartment gate for not giving him money. He stands there like a bouncer.

Cop came and hunted him down in the complex. A second Cop came on-site from dispatch. They cuffed him and placed in the back of the patrol car. As I was watching from my window, I could see him reach for the officer (attempted choke-hold with arm while cuffed??? Not sure, couldn't see well from my angle). The Cop jumped out of the drivers side and tased the guy. After 10 minutes, he was threatening to kill the Cop and his family. NOT GOOD! He got his ass tased again.

So ya, I love it when Cops take out the trash. If you ask me, that thug could have gotten a bullet to the head and I would have looked the other way.

He's wearing glasses. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33949620)

Perhaps he's afraid the bubbles would cause hair loss.

Re:He's wearing glasses. (1)

PawNtheSandman (1238854) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949670)

Get arrested for blowing bubbles?
Well he just got of prison and wants your number!

Some people insist on being arrested (2, Insightful)

RapmasterT (787426) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949652)

I don't think it's all that hard for an adult to understand that blowing soap bubbles into a police officers face is going to get you arrested, and he did give her the courtesy of a warning first. I don't really see the controversy there. Well, not unless people are unable to disentagle the word "bubble" from the "soap" part. Blowing a rather effective eye irritant in a cops direction isn't likely to end well, no matter if it's in bubble or other form.

it does seem like he could have a thicker skin about random internet jackhole comments though. you don't HAVE to read them.

Re:Some people insist on being arrested (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949708)

Have you ever seen soap bubbles?
They cannot exactly be aimed at the eyes.

Re:Some people insist on being arrested (3, Insightful)

Scrameustache (459504) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949806)

I don't think it's all that hard for an adult to understand that blowing soap bubbles into a police officers face is going to get you arrested, and he did give her the courtesy of a warning first. I don't really see the controversy there. Well, not unless people are unable to disentagle the word "bubble" from the "soap" part. Blowing a rather effective eye irritant in a cops direction isn't likely to end well, no matter if it's in bubble or other form.

By that logic, allowing children to play with soap bubble is child endangerment.

Re:Some people insist on being arrested (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33949864)

  He didn't give her a warning. He gave her a threat.

  She got the freedom to blow bubbles, it is not her fault that an act of God (wind) might send it towards his or another persons eyes. She could had blown the bubbles away from the cops and it could still had hit him in the eye. The wind could even had blown a bubble into her own eyes. I guess she took that risk to "harass" the poor manly cop.

  He was acting like a total power jackass and took the action too to be so by getting the girl arrested. And him suing over some Youtube comments shows more of how big of a crybaby he really is. I don't feel sorry for him at all.

Re:Some people insist on being arrested (2, Insightful)

RapmasterT (787426) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949968)

He didn't give her a warning. He gave her a threat.

I guess. He did give her a "threat" of arrest if she continued her behavior. Some might call that a "warning". It seems a pointless exercise in semantics.

But hey, don't listen to me, I'm just some guy on the internet. If anyone wants to act like a jackass to cops, and ignore warning/threats of arrest, go for it. Just don't expect me to cry any tears over the injustice of it all. Apparently there's no shortage of people who WILL, but it won't be me.

Re:Some people insist on being arrested (1)

TheStatsMan (1763322) | more than 3 years ago | (#33950042)

So any threat/ by the police is justifiable. That's an interesting view of the law you have there.

Re:Some people insist on being arrested (1)

Scrameustache (459504) | more than 3 years ago | (#33950100)

So any threat/ by the police is justifiable. That's an interesting view of the law you have there.

To some people, deference to authority is the highest achievement one can strive for.

Re:Some people insist on being arrested (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33949926)

"In a mature society, “civil servant” is semantically equal to “civil master.”" - Lazarus Long

You do understand that due to the many nanny states we suffer today, bubbles (understand this is a CHILDS TOY) must be formulated to be milder than baby shampoo, right?

So, it won't harm a young child's eyes, we feel they're safe enough to allow kids to use them unattended, but big butch there feels it' an *assault*?

I supose if she stuck a flower in his gun barrel that would be grounds for them to open up on the entire crowd?

Sigh.

Rome is indeed burning..

Re:Some people insist on being arrested (1)

zach_the_lizard (1317619) | more than 3 years ago | (#33950056)

With attitudes like this, it's not hard to see why people are wondering if cops truly are adults, because their power hungry temper tantrums and blaming the victims are more in line with the thinking process of a toddler.

Good luck with that (1)

pnuema (523776) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949668)

If you're Canadian, you might have a problem, but Americans can tell this douche to stuff it.

Re:Good luck with that (2, Insightful)

Scrameustache (459504) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949826)

If you're Canadian, you might have a problem, but Americans can tell this douche to stuff it.

From the safety of their free speech cage.

Canadians repress speech on a regular basis (2, Interesting)

megaskins (199874) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949688)

This type of idiocy is common from Canadians. I had a American Professor friend post a not to nice blog about a product made in Canada and the Canadian company sent him a take-down letter. He told the Canadians to fuck off.

Re:Canadians repress speech on a regular basis (1)

h4rr4r (612664) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949758)

So was it hockey equipment or maple syrup?

Re:Canadians repress speech on a regular basis (1)

onkelonkel (560274) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949812)

Back Bacon

Re:Canadians repress speech on a regular basis (1)

MattSaki (1712524) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949868)

I do not think overzealous take-down letters is a strictly Canadian trait. Extrapolating these two (probably completely unrelated) incidents to an entire nation is idiocy.

Let's all go comment (1, Insightful)

ktappe (747125) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949714)

I'm going to go comment on the video purposely to get included in this. I want to see dear officer try to come after me. I will attempt to educate the Canadian with regard to this thing we Americans call the First Amendment.

Re:Let's all go comment (1)

Obfuscant (592200) | more than 3 years ago | (#33950114)

I will attempt to educate the Canadian with regard to this thing we Americans call the First Amendment.

Despite the common misconceptions about it, the First Amendment does not grant people the right to slander or libel. The standard regarding ridicule used to be whether the person was "a public presence", or something to that effect. E.g., a TV performer who puts himself up in the public view deliberately, or a politician.

Have You Tube and ubiquitous camera video devices removed that protection for the normal person? Is everyone now supposed to be considered open to such attacks? Or is it a deliberate decision that police officers in the performance of their duty have lost protection from this, too?

Discredit to the Police Force (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33949718)

Fortunately in Canada you have to "prove damages", and the damages of a cartoon that many of us didn't see, pale in comparison to the damage this officer (yeah that's my opinion, so sue me!) did to himself, and the discredit he brought to his force. Well, unfortunately the whole of Canada's police forces involved in the G20 were pretty discredited by both their lack of action, and their action that was clearly counter to out constitution.

We're still waiting for a full Federal inquiry, by PM Harper is still running and hiding from it.

We all make mistakes, some of us apologize and move on, some of us just move on, and some of us decide to display even more ignorance to the world.

Frivilous Lawsuit (1)

digitaldc (879047) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949724)

This DEFINES it!

Mr Bubbles, you must be new around here (2, Insightful)

feedayeen (1322473) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949728)

Mr Bubbles, you seem to have a fundamentally wrong idea as to how the Internet works and an understanding of the Streisand Effect will be invaluable in the coming months as you are mocked not only by not only YouTube commenters, but also journalists who will undoubtedly pick up the story and your own friends as they read about it.

Toronto Police Const. Adam Josephs is a fascist (4, Informative)

Scrameustache (459504) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949752)

Sue me.

Re:Toronto Police Const. Adam Josephs is a fascist (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33950040)

Please mod parent up. Help getting "Adam Josephs" up in the google cache.

To play devil's advocate (2, Insightful)

Godai (104143) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949794)

The initial incident was pretty silly and I don't have much sympathy for the officer being ridiculed for that, but my understanding is it elevated past that quite quickly. From other articles I've read, there were cartoons & posts about him beating people and what not. You can argue that it was for fun but there was a note in one of the articles that libel laws cover comments & such on websites, so if you do it you'd better be careful its not defamatory.

Its a kind of tricky line. Anonymity is a powerful and -- often -- good force on the Internet, but there are clearly times when it can be a detriment. Its not hard to design a thought exercise: imagine that newspapers were printed anonymously or articles within them were written anonymously. Yes, I know sources remain anonymous, but in those cases the author of the piece takes responsibility for any libel (well, them and their publisher). If a paper could just publish blatant nonsense that was incredibly defamatory, I doubt many of us would stick up for them. So why do we stick up for some assholes getting their kicks on a bulletin board? It probably didn't matter that much ten years ago, but with YouTube and Facebook and all the viral crap, stuff that would have limited to a few people having a chuckle can now range unpredictably large. Hell, just look at the whole cyber-bullying phenomenon.

Make fun of the officer for being an idiot with the bubble lady -- he deserves that. I'm not sure he deserves some of the other crap, or even if you think he does, if its defamatory (let the lawyers argue that) and you say it, you can be held accountable. There have always been limits on speech -- American 1st amendment not withstanding -- so I don't know why people think the Internet is somehow a special magical case.

Re:To play devil's advocate (1)

js3 (319268) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949908)

what does anonymitiy have to do with it?

Re:To play devil's advocate (3, Insightful)

onkelonkel (560274) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949920)

Parody. When you purposely exaggerate certain aspects of a situation in order to show how ridiculous it is. The officer Bubbles video is textbook parody. No more no less.

Re:To play devil's advocate (1)

jonescb (1888008) | more than 3 years ago | (#33950018)

Successfully suing someone for libel and win is extremely difficult to do. You have to prove that the person said whatever it is they said in order to harm you or your reputation. The accused can merely say "I did it for money", or make up any reason other than "I want to ruin your life", and it's perfectly fine and legal. Even if they did want to ruin your life, how are you going to prove that?

Need New Laws - citizen rights (5, Insightful)

RichMan (8097) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949802)

Citizens need the right to record any public police action, and any police action in which the individual citizen is involved.
This needs to be a law now.

The public needs a clear law allowing for the recording of police actions and allowing for the recording to be owned by the citizen and protected from seizure by police officers.
Some police do lie, some police do overstep the bounds, some police protect fellow officers.

Mr. Bubbles. If you don't want to be mocked... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33949804)

Try not being and idiot for a change. Not everyone respects the pathetic little bit of power you've been given to protect the wealthy. Deal with it.

No kidding he should be sued! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33949816)

Swear words (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33949818)

I have had to go and add insulting comments to the videos. Good luck to him not bankrupting himself through this.

"Flowers are better than bullets." ~ A. Krause (2, Informative)

zenwarrior (81710) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949842)

This guy must be really pissed-off about missing Kent State where he could have killed a protester for placing a flower in his gun. So in memory of Kent State student Allison Krause who was killed on 4 May 1970 and said, "Flowers are better than bullets", after placing a flower in the barrel of a national guardsman's rifle, 40 years later I remind Officer Bubbles that, "Bubbles are better than bullets."

Cops are out of hand (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33949862)

We need to have a peace officer bill of responsibilities.

Tenent #1 all offenses committed by a police officer carry minimum sentencing of 3 times the usual maximum sentence for the crime (this should apply for anybody in a position of power).

Cops have a lot of power, and like to abuse it. Put a few cops away for life, and the rest might think twice about committing murder, assault, etc. using their badge both to facilitate the crimes and as a shield against prosecution.

Heck with the cop... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33949884)

She should be lucky she didn't blow them in MY face. I've no love for control freak cops, but he gave her the option. And yeah - hate to say it, but to stand there and blow bubbles in someones face - that shit can sting. And no, if I wanted some detergent in my face I'd be washing it instead of standing there. Dunno which one pisses me off more - control freak cops or piss-ant little jewelry-hole ridden beatnick bitches with attitude. Blow bubbles in my face you little wet-nap greenie protester and I'll just haul off and slap you. They were both acting like douches - but bubble-bitch started it.

ahh barbara (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33949906)

I summon forth the power of the Streisand!

You miss the point (1)

MyLongNickName (822545) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949912)

Blowing Bubbles is wrong unless he consents.

Silly Slashdotters.

Though I don't agree with the lawsuits... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33949914)

If someone followed you around blowing bubbles in your face you'd probably react much worse. People seem to choose a side (pro- or anti-police, for example) and run with it without giving rationalization to individual situations. What would you have done? He was almost perfectly professional and he took the right course of action.

If you think police are paid to be walked all over by anyone who chooses to do so, well, you're just part of the problem.

I would like to shake the hand... (1)

bornagainpenguin (1209106) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949948)

...of the lawyer who convinced "Officer Bubbles" to file this lawsuit. This is taking being a magnificant bastard to all new heights! What better way to mock "Officer Bubbles" than by ensuring the video clip he wants most to disappear gets spread all over the world? How better to screw over the asshole than by racking up legal fees you know will accomplish the very opposite of what was promised?

This is great!

Consequences of the Internet (1)

sammysheep (537812) | more than 3 years ago | (#33949992)

Many will agree that this lawsuit was a poor response. However, it does prompt in my mind the power of the internet to hold in eternity the funniest, nastiest, and unluckiest moments of our lives. Many will say, "Good, he deserves it." But think about what this means generally: your mistakes can be immortalized in such a way that you may pay for them even after a long time has passed and even if you've apologized or repented of your actions. You can even be threatened and abused via e-mail. (Notwithstanding, it looks doubtful this fellow has done the former and purportedly he has received the latter.)

In brief, the internet + video can make the consequences of our actions much larger than they would otherwise be, and perhaps, disproportionately so.

Lawsuits are dumb (1)

vonlogik (1633647) | more than 3 years ago | (#33950012)

But really.... you expect him to just sit there and take the bubbles to the face? This is just too idiotic to debate any further.

You know the score, pal. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33950046)

You're not cop, you're little people.

Cartoons? (1)

choongiri (840652) | more than 3 years ago | (#33950048)

Well, where are the "mocking" cartoons? Who has a link?

In defense of Officer Bubbles... (0)

chemicaldave (1776600) | more than 3 years ago | (#33950074)

...that bubble lady was asking for it. Perhaps the officer's response was unnecessary, but I'd be pissed off if someone kept blowing bubbles at me after I asked them to stop. Not to mention the fact that her behavior indicates she's just blowing bubble to incite the officers. She said "my name is a mystery." then seconds later, "I have nothing to hide." Maybe she didn't deserve to be arrested, but she was certainly asking for it.

Thanks, Officer bubbles! (1)

russotto (537200) | more than 3 years ago | (#33950078)

I love the fact that the complaint includes transcripts of all the offending cartoons. They're hilarious and it saves me the trouble of tracking them down.

I used to think... (1)

Rene S. Hollan (1943) | more than 3 years ago | (#33950094)

... that no one deserved to be called a fucktardic pig.

I guess there's a first time for everything.

This Canuck proudly wraps himself in the First Amendment, now that he's a lawful permanent resident of the U.S.

Whatcha gonna do, Officer Bubbles, extradite my ass back across the border?

Dear Bubbles, Fuck You. (1)

Pezbian (1641885) | more than 3 years ago | (#33950104)

Sincerely,
Reality

I don't give a shit who you are, you don't bend the principle of the law to get all vindictive on a personal level, especially not like that. This guy is "gonna get raped".

If I acted like that much of a bitch-chump, I'd have to kick my own ass.

It's not defamation of character when it's true.

Is blowing just air at someone assault? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33950144)

What if she just blew at him? Is that assault as well? After all, molecules of air would be hitting him. Seriously, if bubbles are assault then is blowing air at someone assault?

If not, where does cigarette smoke fit in? Assault?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?