Ever since Rodney King was seen nearly beaten to death by police officers - police and governments have sought to prevent you or I from video taping the corporate bodyguards...your local police departments.
How is it a crime to film police? Well, because any rich person can have a law created, that's why!
You've heard police say "if you've got nothing to hide you've nothing to fear?"
BACK AT YOU!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=pl … bxSZ_FB8#!
Fortunately, the judge rejected the charges against Michael Allison. Common sense and justice prevailed in the end.
Michael Allison, an Illinois man who faced a potential sentence of 75 years in prison for recording police officers and attempting to tape his own trial, caught a break last week when a state judge declared the charges unconstitutional. "A statute intended to prevent unwarranted intrusions into a citizen’s privacy cannot be used as a shield for public officials who cannot assert a comparable right of privacy in their public duties," wrote Circuit Court Judge David Frankland. "Such action impedes the free flow of information concerning public officials and violates the First Amendment right to gather such information."
http://reason.com/blog/2011/09/20/illin … ts-eavesdr
I had a similar experience with the police when I was photographing a severe car accident near my home, standing 50 feet away using a long lens. A policeman told me to stop. I asked why?, and he replied "Because I said so." I replied that's not good enough; what law am I violating?" Fortunately for me the cop gave up and went back to dealing with the accident.
Ah! Thanks for letting me know that. Glad to hear it....But...are they going to do away with that pathetic law?
They should. At least the judge's decision may discourage politically ambitious prosecutors from bringing charges. The courts aren't infallible, but if an appeal is pursued far enough commonsense often has a way of coming into play.
Jury Nullification is on the books!! Juries can overturn corrupt laws, and this is why they aren't ever even informed about their rights as Jurors any more...
Don't bring up the idea of Nullification, it makes Ralph Deeds angry.
Them thar lib'rals don't think that a jury is allowed to overturn precedent.
Then when you point out "that's the entire point of having a jury", they say you're ignorant.
I need to add a lot more research and text to my hub about Jury Nullification. Thanks for sort of reminding me about that.
lol! No jury has the testicular fortitude to do such a thing, and the mere mention of jury nullification cuases a mistrial, and the whole process starts over again. The people with the guts to will never see jury duty.
That doesn't mean that we should give up our rights.
You already gave them up, you just dont know it yet.
You are quite wrong. Someone else might pretend to have the authority to speak for me, but they will always be rather decidedly wrong from the outset of that endeavor.
Go ahead an excercise a right infront of a cop, weather your a witness or a crimminal and see what happens. You know all I need to know about you is where you live and what you drive to have a search warrant for police to come into your home. And then excercise your right to remain silent in front of them. Watch how fast handcuffs come out. And then hopefully you have the jury with the knowledge, and the guts for jury nullification. Unless you have the money to fight for rights, you dont have any. In average a person needs at the very least $10,000 in expendable income to throw away on an attorney to fight for rights, and most people arrest don't. And there doesn't have to be a crime for it to happen, only the potential for one, and thats easy enough to prove.
Your comment made me chuckle. I fully agree with your observation about one possible effect of jury nullification although I view the matter through a different lens. Jurors take an oath to decide a case using ONLY their judgment and wisdom accumulated from life experiences, the testimony presented, and the law as explained to them by the presiding judge. It is a blatant violation of that oath for jurors to judge the law itself or to reach a decision based upon preconceived personal opinions that the law is unjust. Potential jurors who admit they are opposed to the particular statute being applied to their case are not unlikly to sit on that jury. Potential jurors who intentionally conceal such opposition are guilty of a serious infraction. The role of jurors is not to determine if a law is unjust, rather, if the law should be applied to this particular defendant. While it is inappropriate for jurors to violate their oaths, the law considers it more important they decide according to their consciences and they are shielded from external repercussions arising from their decisions. Therefore, jury nullification is unreliable and dangerous, albeit effective, as a strategy against injustices.
On the other hand, a clear and prolonged pattern of jury nullification could lead to an inablility to find a fair and impartial jury, a request to change venue, alteration of the affected law, or to a government reaction to not prosecute.
I’m elated there is something on which we agree.
It's scary to be videotaped. Especially, I think, the Police might be fearful that someone will try to present an edited or altered video against them.
Case in point would actually BE the Rodney King incident. Those few minutes of the tape that were shown wasn't the whole story.
Lying there being beaten doesn't really need context on my planet called earth.
I can't see how any MORE of that story would matter. Police are not paid to beat people, and that's it.
It wasn't a fight, it was a slaughter. I don't think anyone is clever enough to edit video without it being also obvious to persons that analyze video.
As a photographer kind of makes me think what they would do when I take their photographs at events such as the Occupy Miami recent protest. But at least as a former law enforcement officer for the state I would know how to handle myself and what to say to them. Nevertheless it is very disturbing to see police officers acting this way...
Amazing as ususal. US teaches (forces) all other coutries to keep media freedom at the top (even the top of food security). But internally the opposite is practiced. We think US has all the human rights for its citizens, but personal frieds give another picture.
You sure about that?
There's no truth or freedom in the media here. What the US pushes is media fascism, in which Jews control the media.
Regardless who owns it, it is true i feel that us in the US are being fed a steady diet of useless crap.Trivial matters,sports,useless celebrities and some putz anchors opinion. I really don't pay attention to the news anymore because I tend to get it from other sources on the internet. I wanted to sit with my wife for a while so we put on the news A week or two ago the lead story on 5 PM NY channel; 2 news was a story about stem cells in discarded,pulled or fallen out teeth,then the usual useless crap.I got sick of this after about 1 minute and began looking through the cable guide.I found a German broadcast in english and I saw reporting on the following: The pullout from Iraq,The uprising in Egypt,The debt crisis in Greece and Italy,the problems in Syria and something from Turkey (sorry I forgot what). All in 30 minutes, the reports had footage and great coverage no less. The next 30 minutes with the BBC report wasn't bad either. This proves to me that main stream media is crap. My wife asked me ,Why don't they tell us this stuff on our news? I told her because they don't want us to know,,,,,,,,, Knowledge is power.
On the subject of important things NOT being discussed. I'd really like to understand more about just WTF is going on here:
http://stevequayle.com/dead_scientists/ … tists.html
I took an interest in # 102 Jack Wheeler the day after they found him. He had a lot going on,he knew a lot also.
Reading here explains more.
http://www.veteranstoday.com/ in general
http://www.veteranstoday.com/2011/02/22 … k-wheeler/
There's strength in numbers.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEaCx5Xy … e=youtu.be
very brave, fortunately for you. I'm just making a point. It doesnt take much, for you to be convicted of anything. YOu say you have rights which you dont. You even stated it yourself someone will speak for you even if they're wrong. So if they are speaking for you, does your say hold any weight? No someone else is deciding your fate even if you do speak out. You are at the mercey of your government, And they will tell you its for your own good.
Big Brother is watching your electricity meter. Anybody heard of "Smart Meters?" Listen to "Minivan Jack" here:
Sorry, Ralph, Minivan Jack is full of crap.
No one can tell when you turn your toothbrush on as he claims. They may be able to detect current draw in that minute amount (although I would question that); they cannot put a use to it.
Jack also tells us to refuse the power company the right to change our meter. It is not "our" meter; it belongs to the power company and they can do whatever they want to with it.
While it is true that the power company can monitor current usage minute by minute there are far too many thousands of possible uses for that power for them or anyone else to even attempt to assign a usage to the data.
For instance, several years ago I found my power bill slowly rising over the span of several months. I'm talking nearly 50% of my spring and fall usage amounts (no heat, no AC). It took months, but the problem was eventually traced to a main breaker slowly going bad and leaking current through itself internally. Large amounts of current. That was not being used at all.
I've also had a well pump controller fail in the "on" position, running the pump 24-7 for 2 months until I realized from the bill that I had a problem. Another good sized current draw out of the blue.
These things happen all the time and all the analyzing in the world of meter data won't find a cause without a physical visit. Yes, minute by minute data is available, but is also worthless.
You may well be right wrt electricity meters. However, plenty of questionable government spying has been going on in the name of national security. Vigilance is important on the activities of local and state police, homeland security, the FBI and the NSA.
I got smart meters. The question is who is going to control this kind of technology.
Google/Amazon? (To offer you a watering system and green grow light for the marijuana growing in your basement!)
All the above?
Who said those systems were just used for drugs? Or are we jumping to conclussions. If thats the cas then every single public building should be charged with attempting to manufacture, since they you metal halide lighting in large ares, which is a full spectrum high output light perfect for indoor growing.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QeMg7hJZqqI The reason cops need to be monitored.
What you get what they get.
http://anongallery.org/5753/time-magazi … d-editions
...just don't get caught, send your film to the internet via Internet Cafe', and make copies and send to all television stations across the country.
If they find you, you'll be arrested in many cities. There are stupid laws that are unconstitutional yet are allowed to stand. We have the right to defend ourselves against tyrants, both from abroad and across the street.
Laws that protect police from wrong-doing are not legal laws. However you will find yourself in prison in many parts of this "free" country for standing on your front porch, or sitting in your own car, and recording a police officer "not" doing his duty.
Police Deny Press Access to Protest site--
http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2 … amp;st=cse
London police are untrustworthy, too.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/28/busin … f=business
They are harassing this reporter for breaking the Murdoch phone hacking scandal.
Of coarse nothing happens even when they are cuaght in the act
by Ralph Deeds3 years ago
Is police brutality increasing? 12 recent shocking examples from AlterNet:http://www.alternet.org/police-brutalit … 98&t=7
by Jennifer Kessner8 months ago
If you haven't kept up to date on the issues in Ferguson, here is a drastically simplified version of events:1. On August 9th, a St. Louis County police officer shot an unarmed 18-year-old young black man. 2. The...
by Mike Russo2 years ago
I know this is going to be controversial, but I'm deeply concerned about racism in this country. There seems to be many more shootings of unarmed black men by white police in the last few months. This latest...
by ahorseback16 months ago
Most of Americans support you , trust the job that you do and support the process in which you do it ! Up to about eighty percent of us, [ 80%,] depending on race , economics , ...
by Don W23 months ago
Article: http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2015/0 … ard-video/Video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGIS1Knpvs0Why could three police officers inside a police station, not subdue a 17 year old girl without use of...
by Mike Russo3 months ago
It's because of the "Use of Force Model" that has been adopted by law enforcement from the military Many cops across the country have been trained in this use of force model. It works like...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.