|
|
| Re: Today I got a summons from the LA Sheriff and added to the LA terrorism list (Long) (231765) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: Today I got a summons from the LA Sheriff and added to the LA terrorism list (Long) |
|
|
Posted by ldemery on Thu Mar 23 18:26:57 2006, in response to Today I got a summons from the LA Sheriff and added to the LA terrorism list (Long), posted by Easy on Sat Mar 18 20:02:12 2006. The story posted by "Easy" has attracted considerable attention. This is a "textbook case" of abuse of authority by law-enforcement personnel. The "Light Rail Now" website has expressed interest in writing this story up.http://www.lightrailnow.org/ If you are willing to identify yourself, "Easy," please contact them directly: lightrailnow@lightrailnow.org If you do not wish to give your name, "Light Rail Now" might be willing to work with you to come up with an acceptable "description." For example, you might describe yourself by city (or area) of residence, age and (general) occupation. I am not associated with "Light Rail Now," but I am associated with "www.publictransit.us." http://www.publictransit.us/ We have run a number of stories on harassment of photographers by police. Our general policy re. sources is that anything found "online" is "fair game" for commentary. However, I want to offer "Easy" the courtesy of asking his OK to describe his encounter and provide a link on www.poublictransit.us. FYI: an extremely interesting court case is currently under way in Torrance: (DailyBreeze.com, December 16, 2005) http://www.railpage.com.au/f-p408522.htm "One of the officers asked if McKinniss had heard about September 11th," the lawsuit states. The officer told McKinniss that since the 2001 terrorist attacks, it was illegal to photograph bridges, airports and refineries, although no such law exists." http://www.mercedsearch.com/news/743.html "It is distributing how they acted," [U.S. District Judge George] King said, noting that the officers may have thought they were being vigilant considering how refineries are considered potential terrorist targets. "But vigilance is not an excuse for not being aware of where the constitutional line is," King said. The judge indicated he was particularly concerned about the pat-down search when there was no evidence presented that McKinniss was a threat to the officers' safety. "Maybe you folks need to better educate your officers," King told Robert Acciani, Torrance's chief deputy city attorney. The reason this case is so interesting is because the photographer alleged (in his lawsuit) that a civil rights violation occurs if police tell someone that something is "against the law," when in fact no such law exists. If the court went along, that could make life very interesting for miscreant cops such as the ones who hassled "Easy." |
|
(There are no responses to this message.)
|
|