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!

Man Ordered At Gunpoint To Hand Over Phone For Recording Cops

Soulskill posted more than 3 years ago | from the don't-shoot-or-we'll-shoot dept.

Crime 983

HungryHobo writes with this excerpt from a story at Pixiq: "Miami Beach police did their best to destroy a citizen video that shows them shooting a man to death in a hail of bullets on Memorial Day. First, police pointed their guns at the man who shot the video, according to a Miami Herald interview with the videographer. Then they ordered the man and his girlfriend out of the car and threw them down to the ground, yelling, 'you want to be f****** paparazzi?' Then they snatched the cell phone from his hand and slammed it to the ground before stomping on it. Then they placed the smashed phone in the videographer's back pocket as he was laying down on the ground."

cancel ×

983 comments

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

See with that Apple patent (5, Interesting)

Scareduck (177470) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338374)

the cops could have avoided all that trouble [patentlyapple.com] , and then it would just be a he-said/she-said scenario. Neat. Clean.

WAR ON DRUGS? (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36338420)

Shoot cops, not dope!

Re:See with that Apple patent (1)

CSFFlame (761318) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338460)

Whoops, someone forgot about a 5 cent piece of IR filter film. On the other hand apple could just be cock blocking someone else from using this tech, which would be good.

Re:See with that Apple patent (3, Interesting)

brillow (917507) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338530)

Don't think this couldn't be done optically, or with RFID, or wifi, or NFC.

The idea itself is powerful, an obvious weakness in a pathetic implementation does not weaken it.

Of course, this will never happen as long as consumers refuse to buy technology which disobeys them. Oh wait, damn...

Re:See with that Apple patent (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36338670)

Not cockblocking. My guess is that the **IA will demand in the near future that you disable your cellphone before you can enter a movie theater or before you enter an arena to watch Black Eyed Peas live.

This technology will allow Apple users to have their phones turned on and **IA will just send the "don't record" signal, while the owners of other cellphones will have to leave their phones in their car or something.

Ahhh crime. (5, Insightful)

Qatz (1209584) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338376)

Theft, destruction of private property, destruction of evidence, assault, and I'm probably missing a few.

Re:Ahhh crime. (4, Insightful)

Soilworker (795251) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338406)

Is the US trying a new way of social reinsertion by giving policemen jobs to prisoners with clear psychopath behavior ?

Re:Ahhh crime. (3, Insightful)

NatasRevol (731260) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338666)

New?

Re:Ahhh crime. (5, Informative)

jra (5600) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338436)

I'm fairly certain this gent has a 42USC1983 claim against all of the individual officers involved, and I *certainly* hope he's taking advice on that point.

No. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36338656)

Wrong. The guy was violating privacy laws. He got what was coming to him.

Re:Ahhh crime. (2)

hduff (570443) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338438)

Theft, destruction of private property, destruction of evidence, assault, and I'm probably missing a few.

It's OK because it's the police, so you have nothing to fear, citizen, unless . . . you have something to hide.

Re:Ahhh crime. (-1, Troll)

blair1q (305137) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338582)

What do you have to hide that you fear that statement?

It's against the law for the police to do what they did. You can't make it more against the law such that they won't do it. You would have to take away their physical ability to do it, and if you do that, then they're not police, they're girl scouts.

Seriously, think before you go castrating the public's protective services just because you want to be a dick to a cop and not get punched. Because if you actually make it impossible for him to punch you, you also make it really easy for the crook he's unable to chase to punch you.

Re:Ahhh crime. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36338654)

Seriously, think before you go castrating the public's protective services just because you want to be a dick to a cop and not get punched.

Videotaping cops or anyone else in a public place is not "being a dick." It's not even illegal in a two-party state like Florida unless there's a reasonable expectation of privacy.

The cops should not be disempowered from performing their duties, but they should always be mindful that there are serious consequences for breaking the laws they're supposed to be enforcing.

Re:Ahhh crime. (5, Insightful)

Man On Pink Corner (1089867) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338688)

If you're a US citizen, one estimate I've seen is that you're subject to 40,000+ pages of Federal, state, and local laws. You may absolutely rest assured that you have broken more than one of them today, probably before you even got out of bed this morning. As have I.

Now, who has "something to hide," and who doesn't?

Re:Ahhh crime. (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36338450)

It's going to continue until people start shooting assholes, regardless if they're cops or not.

I mean really, how long are thugs allowed to continue their... thuggery, until they get shot?

Re:Ahhh crime. (2)

danbuter (2019760) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338520)

None of which will be used against the cops. Unfortunately.

Re:Ahhh crime. (1)

Alex Belits (437) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338564)

Umm... murder? Or at very least manslaughter? The video was of shooting a bystander.

Re:Ahhh crime. (1)

Alex Belits (437) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338610)

(to be precisely, likely a bystander -- but their evidence of it being anything else, doesn't seem too convincing).

Any laywers here? (2)

Threni (635302) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338378)

I mean, I'm not from the USA, but surely even that is illegal there?

Re:Any laywers here? (4, Insightful)

hedwards (940851) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338410)

It definitely is and assuming that this is a somewhat accurate description of what happened, the police officers involved could easily find themselves behind bars for witness tampering, destruction of evidence amongst other things. And police officers do get sent to prison from time to time for this sort of behavior.

Re:Any laywers here? (5, Insightful)

skywire (469351) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338554)

When pigs fly.

Re:Any laywers here? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36338592)

They don't need to, just don't need to walk.

Re:Any laywers here? (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36338600)

You're forgetting the police have helicopters.

Re:Any laywers here? (1)

MechaShiva (872964) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338602)

Quick! Destroy the police helicopter!! We can cram it in their back pocket afterwards and claim they fell on it.

Re:Any laywers here? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36338412)

It's illegal with a wink. The thin blue line is what separates those pigs from any repercussions. After all, we can't have another Rodney King situation.

Re:Any laywers here? (1)

oldhack (1037484) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338446)

This is another case of theory-vs.-practice.

Re:Any laywers here? (1)

Idbar (1034346) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338498)

Nah, in the USA recently, it all boils down to who has enough money

Re:Any laywers here? (2)

skywire (469351) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338550)

Of course it is illegal. What difference does that make? Oh, you must be from a place that still has the rule of law.

Re:Any laywers here? (1)

NatasRevol (731260) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338684)

Here, the law rules?

Bad cop, no donut (4, Interesting)

russotto (537200) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338380)

By the time our porcine "protectors" figure out that smashing up the instrument rarely destroys the recording, we'll all have real-time internet-connected video cameras.

Re:Bad cop, no donut (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36338516)

No, we need realtime upload to Youtube for permanent storage. Streaming is non-persistent.

Re:Bad cop, no donut (1)

Arancaytar (966377) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338560)

to Youtube

If you can't trust the police, how can you trust the cloud? Back it up to your own computer, which should ideally create a torrent automatically...

Re:Bad cop, no donut (2)

russotto (537200) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338660)

If you can't trust the police, how can you trust the cloud? Back it up to your own computer, which should ideally create a torrent automatically...

I think the cloud is safer, actually. In a case like this it doesn't matter, but if you're recording police misconduct occurring at your own home, they're likely to destroy and/or confiscate all your electronic equipment. They can't take extrajudicial action to get at information held by large multinational companies; this is the police we're talking about, not the NSA.

The bright side... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36338382)

..after a lengthy court battle it'll probably become completely legal to video record police officers. Thanks you bastards

Re:The bright side... (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36338468)

It IS completely legal to video record police officers.

Re:The bright side... (2)

MaskedSlacker (911878) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338616)

Yeah, but pointing that out to them is the fast track to testicular tazerdom.

Re:The bright side... (2)

ATMAvatar (648864) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338624)

Not in all states, it isn't. In fact, in several states, it's a felony to record police (or anyone) without prior consent.

UNacceptable (4, Insightful)

markdavis (642305) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338386)

Yet another example of a government agent stomping on the Constitution. What type of country has this become? One where the government can track, monitor, record, and harass citizens, yet citizens can't even record a public event without being treated as terrorists. Just disgusting.

Now they should sue and we can all pay for it with an ever increasing tax burden.

herp (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36338538)

derp This wasn't the government at all. Oops- you can keep that tinfoil hat, hadn't noticed it before.

Re:herp (1)

rhook (943951) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338646)

Police are officers of the state, i.e. they are government agents.

This is not a police state. (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36338388)

The U.S. is much better than China. We are free. [uchicago.edu]

Re:This is not a police state. (1)

jhoegl (638955) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338470)

Right, and letting things like this go allow Police states to occur.

Crooks chasing crooks... (4, Insightful)

MaskedSlacker (911878) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338390)

...and cops wonder why we hate them?

Re:Crooks chasing crooks... (4, Insightful)

hduff (570443) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338452)

...and cops wonder why we hate them?

They know.

They just don't care.

Re:Crooks chasing crooks... (0, Troll)

gbjbaanb (229885) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338492)

I guess it used to be ok when they only did this kind of thing to black people....

But now they've started doing it to people like you, its a whole different matter isn't it.

I think everyone needs to take this as a reminder about supporting the fundamental liberties (not necessarily all the bleeding-heart ones) of everyone, including those groups that you don't belong to.

Re:Crooks chasing crooks... (4, Insightful)

MaskedSlacker (911878) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338528)

You sure seem to have assumed a whole lot of shit about me based on nothing.

For all you know I'm an african-american lesbian. So fuck off.

Of course, I agree with you about supporting fundamental liberties for everyone. I'm just rather irked at your bullshit assumption that I somehow ever supported doing anything like this to anyone you prejudicial fuck. The only one in this thread ever talking about this having ever been ok is you. Don't go accusing me of what bigger assholes than you (surprising that such could exist) have said.

Re:Crooks chasing crooks... (1)

chinakow (83588) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338574)

Don't speak for me. I can make up my own mind about who to like or dislike or even hate.

Re:Crooks chasing crooks... (1)

MaskedSlacker (911878) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338598)

You misunderstood. He has multiple personalities.

Re:Crooks chasing crooks... (1)

chinakow (83588) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338644)

OOOoooh, gotcha. Carry on then. Though, I'm afraid our friend is in need of some other uniformed men that s/he will likely also dislike.

Re:Crooks chasing crooks... (3, Insightful)

DesScorp (410532) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338606)

...and cops wonder why we hate them?

The criticism and complaints against these officers is completely justified... they should face charges at a formal hearing for this... but a blanket statement about "we hate cops" makes you look silly and juvenile. Government... federal, state, and local... has become far too powerful. But they're not yet the Nazis you and other perpetually outraged Slashdotters make them out to be.

Re:Crooks chasing crooks... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36338680)

If they stick together and cover for the really bad ones, they are all bad. Unfortunately that's exactly what they ALL do.

Re:Crooks chasing crooks... (5, Insightful)

The Dawn Of Time (2115350) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338690)

I guess we should wait until they are the Nazis, huh?

police brutality.... (2)

wired57 (1901846) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338398)

sounds like those police need to be taught a lesson.

Re:police brutality.... (1)

mysterios_asian (2035572) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338650)

sounds like those police need to be taught a lesson.

i agree. they even do shit to innocent people for no fucking reason

he says he kept the SIM card in his mouth? (2)

YesIAmAScript (886271) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338400)

The HTC EVO is a Sprint phone, it doesn't use SIM cards.

Also, video isn't stored on the SIM card.

Maybe he means the memory card?

Removing the memory card requires removing the battery first on an HTC EVO. It's somewhat unlikely he did that discreetly.

Re:he says he kept the SIM card in his mouth? (3, Insightful)

Briareos (21163) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338422)

Depends on how smashed up the phone was - after a good police trampling I wouldn't be surprised if the battery was already missing and the sd card slot was bent...

Re:he says he kept the SIM card in his mouth? (1)

Delarth799 (1839672) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338430)

Well when a phone is smashed up Im sure it makes it a lot easier to do things like that.

Re:he says he kept the SIM card in his mouth? (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36338524)

Yeah, they definitely meant the SD card. It's not commonplace enough yet for people to have the lingo down.

Re:he says he kept the SIM card in his mouth? (3, Insightful)

camg188 (932324) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338542)

He probably took out the memory card after they put the smashed phone back in his pocket.
But who knows? If the reporter screwed up facts like 'SIM cards don't store video', who knows what other facts they got wrong in this story.

Once again, news reporting appears to the be the most technically clueless profession. (and if this video actually exists, I guess the police would be the second).

Re:he says he kept the SIM card in his mouth? (1)

blair1q (305137) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338594)

and it's unnecessary. you have to get to the card and mangle it. stomping the phone probably didn't even scratch it.

Re:he says he kept the SIM card in his mouth? (1)

camg188 (932324) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338596)

Oh, and the article also says this:

Benoit has not posted it on Youtube because he is asking to be compensated. But it sounds as if he won’t have much trouble getting compensated through a settlement with the police department.
However, he first must post the video for the world to see.

So, he can't post the video because he asking to be compensated, however he must post the video first to do that???
Contradict much? FN reporter should have been a writer for Monty Python.

Fucking pigs. (3, Insightful)

Hatta (162192) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338404)

Fucking pigs.

Re:Fucking pigs. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36338444)

Fucking pigs.

Hey, the cops did a bad thing, but leave their wives out of it. They're just complying with lawful orders too.

Phone's gone, followed by cops' innocence. (4, Interesting)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338426)

If there's enough of the phone to recover images, then the cops have made their situation worse. It looks like that's the case, but it's from an SD card, not a SIM card - given how Sprint's phones work.

Another point - how about apps that instantly stream to an offsite location? The cops would still be thwarted, and still have to pay.

Hopefully the cops end up paying tons of cash to replace the phones, along with whatever criminal penalties come from their actions.

Re:Phone's gone, followed by cops' innocence. (5, Interesting)

hduff (570443) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338458)

Another point - how about apps that instantly stream to an offsite location? The cops would still be thwarted, and still have to pay.

That's how the Camden police thugs got caught.

Note to those cops: (2)

orkysoft (93727) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338604)

Yes, stomping the phone will easily destroy the recording, which is stored on a very fragile medium. The act of giving the broken phone back, accompanied by some choice threats, really complements the boot-stomping nicely! There is absolutely no need to do difficult technical stuff in order to erase the recording, or to "confiscate" the phone. Breaking the screen of the phone is all it takes. Giving it back adds insult to injury so nicely! You deserve a sprinkle-encrusted donut for this brave and ironic act! Don't listen to those trolls talking about memory cards and other stuff, they're just trying to make you waste your precious time.

And this is why you livestream (4, Interesting)

Zerth (26112) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338428)

Record it online, not on your phone. Although I suppose it won't be long before cops carry cell jammers as a regular thing.

Re:And this is why you livestream (1)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338462)

And if you happen to have access to a wi-fi link, it won't matter.

Re:how how? (3, Interesting)

jago25_98 (566531) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338480)

I thought this too. Looking into it though, how do we actually do it? The only way I can think of that's convenient on a Symbian phone is stickam, then viewing it on a computer already running somewhere... which isn't great. You want the whole thing to be as quick as pressing one button

Re:how how? (3, Informative)

rhook (943951) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338552)

Qik does this quite well.

http://qik.com/ [qik.com]

Re:how how? (2)

Soft Cosmic Rusk (1211950) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338572)

Dropbox?

Re:And this is why you livestream (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36338676)

not so fast it's illegal to use cell jammers. i used to work in a prison as a cook and would hear the warden bitching all the time about the fact his job would be so much easier if he could use a cell jammer.

I wish there were a law (5, Insightful)

dachshund (300733) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338454)

What we need is a Federal law with two components:

1. Establish that it's perfectly legal to film the police doing their job in a public place.
2. Make it a crime, punishable with serious jail time, for a police officer to intimidate a photographer, confiscate their camera, or return the camera without the images.

This law should have no exception for "accidents" like phones being smashed or evidence being lost --- any more than we tolerate "accidents" involving children being lost or killed. Police should know that the minute they confiscate a private individual's camera they are putting their careers and their freedom in the balance should anything go wrong.

Of course none of this would be workable; if Congress actually passed any kind of law it would almost certainly protect the police and not the citizenry; and half of Slashdot would probably object to this being a Federal law rather than a state law or would propose that we adopt a technological/market solution instead.

What we need are cops who aren't thugs (5, Insightful)

msobkow (48369) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338512)

It's not illegal to film them, so you don't need a law explicitly making it legal. What you need is for these thugs to be charged with assault and more.

Re:What we need are cops who aren't thugs (1)

brillow (917507) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338622)

The problem is most prosecutors won't risk losing good will with a police dept by prosecuting cops in these matters.

How can the police be held to the law if the prosecutors have conflicts of interest? Shouldn't there be a standing special prosecutor to handle such claims?

Re:What we need are cops who aren't thugs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36338626)

Illegal in MA supposedly. They will charge you wiht breaking wiretapping laws with potentislly very serious consequences if the video has audio. Obviously i do not agree, but dont try it in this shit hole state.

Re:What we need are cops who aren't thugs (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36338678)

It's not illegal to film them, so you don't need a law explicitly making it legal. What you need is for these thugs to be charged with assault and more.

Actually FL has a ruling that it IS illegal to video or sound record police officers in and on active duty. They apply an old wire tapping law and have convicted several people now serving jail sentences.

Re:I wish there were a law (1)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338532)

I don't think this kind of accountability law can be readily abused. The Slashdot poster archetype that hates regulation, the libertarian, does so primarily because it hates big/corrupt/Orwellian government. I think everyone here will agree that such a law is what should be.

The real problem is the SIGs that can lobby their way into blocking it. And when you're talking about agents of the law, they already have friends amongst the legal profession who've ascended to Congress. They don't even need to spend millions of dollars to buy off politicians.

Re:I wish there were a law (5, Insightful)

White Flame (1074973) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338540)

There's nothing that should be specific to police officers. Any public servant is accountable to the public for their actions, and has no claim of privacy from the public eye. This needs to be cast in stone, no matter which role the servant is in.

Re:I wish there were a law (3, Insightful)

brillow (917507) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338580)

It should be a crime, punishable with jail time, for an officer to intimidate anyone who is not committing a crime.

Law enforcement should defer to the citizen, not the other way around. An officer should not use their power to impede a citizen without damn good reason, and they should beg the pardon of the citizen if they are mistaken.

I've never understood why law enforcement officials are given special deferment when they say accidentally kill someone. I would expect the opposite. I would expect that its ESPECIALLY bad when a trained person who holds and guards the public trust fails at their job and considered criminally egregious when this is the result of gross negligence or incompetence.

It seems that violent crime goes down every year, yet police budgets go up and up.

Or to write it a neater way (1)

RobertLTux (260313) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338640)

It is in all cases of Police Misconduct a matter of proving that the Officer is in fact Innocent Of All Charges (and furthermore any cameras under control of the state are EXCLUDED from use as evidence). So if you get accused as an officer your DashCam(TM) can not be used to settle things with IA and if nobody else can be found with video (or is otherwise a Witness) then you go down.

(this will also cut down on the need for everybody to have to risk filming an Officer)

get Dexter to take care of thees bad cops (1, Funny)

Joe_Dragon (2206452) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338472)

get Dexter to take care of thees bad cops

I miss friendly NZ (1)

lu-darp (469705) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338482)

Our cops don't carry guns.

Re:I miss friendly NZ (2)

Stormthirst (66538) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338614)

They don't (for the most part) carry them in the UK either where I grew up. I still feel a little nervous about the RCMP carrying. Would I feel any less nervous if I was allowed to carry? Not really. More guns just means more opportunity to get shot - accidentally or otherwise.

Anothe video of the incident... (5, Informative)

pongo000 (97357) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338486)

...can be found here [liveleak.com] . Rather chilling.

Hmmm.. (1)

RottenJ (2060834) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338488)

I wonder if those jerk-off cops know there is a good chance the video is recoverable.

Every phone should have a one-button option for... (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36338494)

Just as every phone should have an easy way to summon emergency services without looking at the screen, every phone should also have an easy way to initiate a "live recording" option: record+immediate streaming upload

Meaningless (1)

heptapod (243146) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338496)

Unless the video's already posted at YouTube or LiveLeak.

Not an iPhone (5, Insightful)

afortaleza (791264) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338508)

When it says he removed the SD card, you know it's not an iPhone.

Been there, done that? (-1, Troll)

farseeker (2134818) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338544)

Have you ever been in a high adrenaline situation that ended in you shooting and killing someone? Have you ever voluntarily ended someones life? Have you had someone film you whilst you do this? Unless the answer to all of the above is "yes", how about you keep your damning judgements to yourself. These police put their lives on the line for your protection every single day, and it's not our place to pass judgement on their behaviour. That's for disciplinary hearings. Also, phrases like "in a hail of bullets" stink of tabloid reporting and have no place on a serious news post. Dissapointing.

Re:Been there, done that? (1)

guybrush3pwood (1579937) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338558)

redneck alert?

Re:Been there, done that? (5, Insightful)

JonJ (907502) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338584)

Have you ever been in a high adrenaline situation that ended in you shooting and killing someone? Have you ever voluntarily ended someones life? Have you had someone film you whilst you do this? Unless the answer to all of the above is "yes", how about you keep your damning judgements to yourself.

If the police officer can't handle these situations, I highly suggest they go for an alternate career. Maybe as a garbageman or something that shouldn't involve weapons. Seriously, it might be an extremely stressfull situation when he's shooting at the alleged drug dealer, who allegedly shot back at them. But when this innocent bystander, only being guilty of having a camera, gets guns shoved up in his face, then you aren't fit to take care of justice. If your job as a public servant can't take the scrutiny of someone video taping you as you perform your job, then you have no business being in the line of duty. Please, let the people be able to weed out the bad cops. We need the good ones. So your arguments are basically not relevant, as criticism isn't dependant of having to be in the persons shoes.

Re:Been there, done that? (1)

blair1q (305137) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338612)

"serious news post"?

is this /. or nytimes.com?

Who Cares (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36338568)

Seriously, who cares if this is leaked. The officer responsible will probably get a suspension (they deserve a prison sentence like any regular civilian in my opinion) and the cops will just say it was an isolated incident. It is not like anyone can loose any more faith in the police anyway.

If you are an on duty police officer you can get away with murder and at most you will be fired. There is a completely different standard of law for these corrupt bastards.

Lawlessness (5, Interesting)

hackus (159037) | more than 3 years ago | (#36338570)

Since I was born in this country I have never seen so much lawlessness by financial institutions, politicians and law enforcement.

If this continues the USA will break up. If the USA becomes politically unstable we could see civil war.

There are already indications of this as state legislatures ignore their constituents and yield to the criminals in Washington.

We have states desperate to save the currency Washington is destroying, by declaring new issues of monetary and economic rules in their own states.

Meanwhile you have Federal powers trying to make it illegal to put anything other than Federal Reserve notes and arresting anyone who dares try.

A confrontation is coming between those who have looted and stole everything in this country and those who have been stolen from.

Be sure you pick the correct side when the crap hits the fan, because it is going to get very very ugly.

-Hack

You live in a police state. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36338590)

Get used to it. Either that or, you know, actually get up off your obese asses and do something, instead of whining on Slashdot.

Dismissed! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#36338638)

Yah it will end up like the case of the guy who used his phone to record a police officers voice who was braking the law just to have the court throw it out and arrest him for illegal wire tapping. Dosnt matter what you say or do.. cops will do what they want and get away with it no matter what.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?