|
|
| Re: I Called The NYCLU (Re: Cop Incident) (422846) | |
 |
|
| Home > SubChat | |
[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]
|
Page 7 of 26 |
||
|
| (424116) | |
Re: I Called The NYCLU (Re: Cop Incident) |
|
|
Posted by Broadway Lion on Tue May 1 22:00:26 2007, in response to Re: I Called The NYCLU (Re: Cop Incident), posted by BIE on Tue May 1 20:01:06 2007. ROFLMAO!What a joke! |
|
|
| (424120) | |
Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED! |
|
|
Posted by David of Broadway on Tue May 1 22:16:38 2007, in response to Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!, posted by BIE on Tue May 1 21:13:25 2007. Isn't that the dentist's job? |
|
|
| (424124) | |
Re: (SEAN BELL) ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED! |
|
|
Posted by Transit Guy on Tue May 1 22:29:30 2007, in response to Re: (SEAN BELL) ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!, posted by Newkirk Plaza David on Tue May 1 21:11:43 2007. I agree with that as well. I mean I know this was obviously all one quick event but honestly there was no need to fire 50 shots (especially when one officer is reloading clips), at least fire warning shots to the car (tires) and announce that you are NYPD then go from there. |
|
|
(Sponsored) |
iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It |
|
| (424131) | |
Re: (SEAN BELL) ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED! |
|
|
Posted by LA Blue Line on Tue May 1 23:08:22 2007, in response to Re: (SEAN BELL) ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!, posted by Transit Guy on Tue May 1 22:29:30 2007. ...at least fire warning shots to the car (tires)...Cops are supposed to shoot to protect their own safety or to protect the safety of others. Guns shouldn't be used just to get peoples attention. |
|
|
| (424148) | |
Re: (SEAN BELL) ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED! |
|
|
Posted by Edwards! on Tue May 1 23:57:45 2007, in response to Re: (SEAN BELL) ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!, posted by BrooklynBus on Tue May 1 21:52:03 2007. Former cop,dude.Wasting your time here. |
|
|
| (424158) | |
Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED! |
|
|
Posted by JPC on Wed May 2 01:22:35 2007, in response to Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!, posted by jimmymc25 on Mon Apr 30 23:51:54 2007. Cuffing a person is an appropriate measure if the officer deems the person a threat to himself or others.The question is, did Nilet pose a reasonable risk to himself, to the officers or to others at the scene? Did he engage in abusive language, make aggressive gestures or threats, brandish a weapon or claim to have one, etc? If not, the use of handcuffs could be deemed an inappropriate use of excessive force. |
|
|
| (424159) | |
Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED! |
|
|
Posted by JPC on Wed May 2 01:30:29 2007, in response to Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!, posted by Nilet on Mon Apr 30 23:43:32 2007. On second thought, asking "Am I under arrest" should be the follow-up to "Am I free to go."If you ask an officer if you're being arrested, the officer may conclude that you're doing something illegal (which is why such a concern would come to your mind). On the other hand, asking whether you're free to go is essentially asking the officer for permission to be dismissed, you having done nothing wrong. If he says you're free to go - Go. Just get away from them before they change their minds. If that request is denied, then ask if you are under arrest. If the answer to that is no, then ask why you are not free to go - they better have a pretty good answer (temporary detainment to ask you a few questions is acceptable, although once you answer their round of questions you should ask if you're free to go once again). As far as seizure of property, there are only two cases in which that occurs: (1) when the officer possesses a warrant describing the items to be seized, or (2) incident to an arrest. No arrest, no forfeiture of property. (By forfeiture, I mean involuntary - it's taken away from you against your will. Of course if a cop finds some weed on you and offers to take it away and let you off with a warning, in general you'd be a fool not to take him up on his offer, although strictly speaking you could refuse, in which case you'd be promptly arrested and the narcotics legally seized.) |
|
|
| (424160) | |
Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED! |
|
|
Posted by Nilet on Wed May 2 02:01:04 2007, in response to Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!, posted by JPC on Wed May 2 01:22:35 2007.  I certainly didn't have a weapon or claim to have one, I certainly debated my point but the most "abusive" language I used was: "I'm invoking the Fourth Amendment and prohibiting further search of the camera." I didn't make any threats (well, I didn't make any physical threats and I don't think I made legal "I'm gonna sue" threats either), and I didn't make any gestures beyond those which accompany conversation. Furthermore, the circumstances were a bit fishy; they'd ordered me to leave either via the next train out or the street exit; I agreed to go to the shuttle buses on the street, I left in that direction (well, I went up one exit stair, noticed the shuttle bus signs pointed the other way, went down, then went up the stairs the signs pointed to.) As I reached the top of the stairs, the officers returned, and cuffed me without a word. |
|
|
| (424161) | |
Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED! |
|
|
Posted by Nilet on Wed May 2 02:03:34 2007, in response to Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!, posted by JPC on Wed May 2 01:30:29 2007. On second thought, asking "Am I under arrest" should be the follow-up to "Am I free to go."I asked neither question. However, after cuffing me, the officer stated: "You're not under arrest," and the fact that I was cuffed and ordered to sit and stay on a bench indicated that I was not free to go. I did ask them to provide the probable cause that they were required to have after they took the camera, but they said only: "We suspect you're going to do something illegal" and "We're conducting an investigation." |
|
|
| (424162) | |
Re: (SEAN BELL) ROBBED BY A COP-- PROPERTY DESTROYED! |
|
|
Posted by E Line Fan on Wed May 2 02:45:15 2007, in response to Re: (SEAN BELL) ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!, posted by Edwards! on Tue May 1 23:57:45 2007. You're a former police officer, Mr. Edwards!? Cooi. |
|
|
| (424163) | |
Re: (SEAN BELL) ROBBED BY A COP-- PROPERTY DESTROYED! |
|
|
Posted by E Line Fan on Wed May 2 02:48:45 2007, in response to Re: (SEAN BELL) ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!, posted by LA Blue Line on Tue May 1 23:08:22 2007. True. |
|
|
| (424164) | |
Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED! |
|
|
Posted by RonInBayside on Wed May 2 02:49:03 2007, in response to Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!, posted by Nilet on Wed May 2 02:01:04 2007. It sounds like you have plenty of grounds - now follow the channels available to you (all of them) and good luck! |
|
|
| (424165) | |
Re: (SEAN BELL) ROBBED BY A COP-- PROPERTY DESTROYED! |
|
|
Posted by E Line Fan on Wed May 2 02:52:32 2007, in response to Re: (SEAN BELL) ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!, posted by Transit Guy on Tue May 1 22:29:30 2007. Firing Fifty Shots Can Not Be Good. :( |
|
|
| (424168) | |
Re: ROBBED BY A COP-- PROPERTY DESTROYED! |
|
|
Posted by E Line Fan on Wed May 2 02:55:31 2007, in response to Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!, posted by David of Broadway on Tue May 1 22:16:38 2007. I believe so. |
|
|
| (424169) | |
Re: I Called The NYCLU (Re: Cop Incident) |
|
|
Posted by E Line Fan on Wed May 2 02:59:25 2007, in response to Re: I Called The NYCLU (Re: Cop Incident), posted by Broadway Lion on Tue May 1 22:00:26 2007. LOL! |
|
|
| (424170) | |
Re: ROBBED BY A COP-- PROPERTY DESTROYED! |
|
|
Posted by E Line Fan on Wed May 2 03:09:08 2007, in response to Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!, posted by Gotham Bus Co. on Tue May 1 19:50:29 2007. That sounds like good advice, Gotham Bus Company. nilet could've still had his pictures. |
|
|
| (424171) | |
Re: Update of the Update (Re: Cop Incident) |
|
|
Posted by E Line Fan on Wed May 2 03:13:33 2007, in response to Re: Update of the Update (Re: Cop Incident), posted by AMoreira81 on Tue May 1 18:45:17 2007. Very True |
|
|
| (424172) | |
Re: ROBBED BY A COP-- PROPERTY DESTROYED! |
|
|
Posted by E Line Fan on Wed May 2 03:18:45 2007, in response to Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!, posted by Nilet on Wed May 2 02:03:34 2007. nilet, I'm sorry this happened to you. :( |
|
|
| (424173) | |
Re: Update of the Update (Re: Cop Incident) |
|
|
Posted by E Line Fan on Wed May 2 03:30:01 2007, in response to Re: Update of the Update (Re: Cop Incident), posted by Nilet on Tue May 1 11:15:31 2007. I would think there would be a report, Nilet. |
|
|
| (424175) | |
Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED! |
|
|
Posted by American Pig on Wed May 2 04:05:15 2007, in response to Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!, posted by Gotham Bus Co. on Tue May 1 19:50:29 2007. And if it's an SD Card, flip the switch to LOCKED. |
|
|
| (424176) | |
Re: (SEAN BELL) ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED! |
|
|
Posted by SUBWAYSURF on Wed May 2 04:10:32 2007, in response to Re: (SEAN BELL) ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!, posted by salaamallah@hotmail.com on Tue May 1 20:39:02 2007. too bad |
|
|
| (424185) | |
Re: I Called The NYCLU (Re: Cop Incident) |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Wed May 2 06:18:58 2007, in response to Re: I Called The NYCLU (Re: Cop Incident), posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Tue May 1 17:38:02 2007. If Rush Limbaugh used them for his Oxy defense (err..I mean medical privacy defense), then surely anyone can. |
|
|
| (424186) | |
Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED! |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Wed May 2 06:32:41 2007, in response to Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!, posted by Gotham Bus Co. on Tue May 1 19:50:29 2007. He shouldn't hide anything when what he was doing is legal. |
|
|
| (424187) | |
Re: (SEAN BELL) ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED! |
|
|
Posted by SMAZ on Wed May 2 06:33:54 2007, in response to Re: (SEAN BELL) ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!, posted by Edwards! on Tue May 1 23:57:45 2007. NYPD? |
|
|
| (424189) | |
Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED! |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Wed May 2 06:47:09 2007, in response to Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!, posted by Nilet on Wed May 2 02:01:04 2007. You know what to do. Don't listen to Ron. |
|
|
| (424220) | |
Re: (SEAN BELL) ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED! |
|
|
Posted by BrooklynBus on Wed May 2 10:34:09 2007, in response to Re: (SEAN BELL) ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!, posted by SMAZ on Wed May 2 06:33:54 2007. I think he's talking about Jeff Rosen. |
|
|
| (424261) | |
Re: I Called The NYCLU (Re: Cop Incident) |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed May 2 12:43:21 2007, in response to Re: I Called The NYCLU (Re: Cop Incident), posted by Jeff Rosen on Tue May 1 20:42:30 2007. Shirer is not exactly light reading. I'd reccomend Ian Kershaw's "Hitler: 1936-45". It downplays the details, but really lays on the atmosphere. |
|
|
| (424305) | |
Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED! |
|
|
Posted by Mark S. Feinman on Wed May 2 14:15:56 2007, in response to Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!, posted by Fred G on Tue May 1 21:16:49 2007. LOL!!--Mark |
|
|
| (424329) | |
Re: (SEAN BELL) ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED! |
|
|
Posted by salaamallah@hotmail.com on Wed May 2 16:06:10 2007, in response to Re: (SEAN BELL) ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!, posted by SUBWAYSURF on Wed May 2 04:10:32 2007. too bad .....what ?what ? |
|
|
| (424332) | |
Re: I Called The NYCLU (Re: Cop Incident) |
|
|
Posted by BIE on Wed May 2 16:35:33 2007, in response to Re: I Called The NYCLU (Re: Cop Incident), posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed May 2 12:43:21 2007. The fact that you eschew scholarly works says a lot about the frames of reference which cause you to arrive at your opinions. Nazism as a political movement was a coalition of the military industrial complex, populist/conservative elements of the working classes, and so-called pro law and order groups. Does this sound familiar????? It Should!!! |
|
|
| (424334) | |
Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED! |
|
|
Posted by BIE on Wed May 2 16:39:31 2007, in response to Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!, posted by BrooklynBus on Tue May 1 17:14:02 2007. The one class of employee who should NEVER, UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES, be allowed to unionize. |
|
|
| (424380) | |
Re: (SEAN BELL) ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED! |
|
|
Posted by FarRock on Wed May 2 18:09:58 2007, in response to Re: (SEAN BELL) ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!, posted by South Brooklyn Railway on Tue May 1 21:09:40 2007. YEAH!BLACK POWER!!!! |
|
|
| (424415) | |
Re: I Called The NYCLU (Re: Cop Incident) |
|
|
Posted by Chris R16/R2730 on Wed May 2 19:13:07 2007, in response to Re: I Called The NYCLU (Re: Cop Incident), posted by BIE on Wed May 2 16:35:33 2007. What the fuck are you talking about? |
|
|
| (424625) | |
Re: (SEAN BELL) ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED! |
|
|
Posted by SUBWAYSURF on Thu May 3 06:53:37 2007, in response to Re: (SEAN BELL) ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!, posted by salaamallah@hotmail.com on Wed May 2 16:06:10 2007. You know. |
|
|
| (424644) | |
Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED! |
|
|
Posted by JPC on Thu May 3 08:11:55 2007, in response to Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!, posted by Nilet on Wed May 2 02:03:34 2007. In any event, the point is that cuffing is a legitimate tool if the officer believes you are a threat, as they can't just cuff anybody they're "investigating" or that they "think" "might" "do something illegal." |
|
|
| (424646) | |
Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED! |
|
|
Posted by JPC on Thu May 3 08:16:19 2007, in response to Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!, posted by Nilet on Wed May 2 02:01:04 2007. Ahh, the old 2004 RNC trick... tell the geese to go someplace and when they do you herd them into an area and begin arresting them for being there.THe officer is going to claim that you returned to do more photography after being ordered to leave. I assume you attempted to explain why you turned around, but the cop would hear none of it (typical cop behavior). So you should explain in detail how you attempted to exit the station, and after seeing that you were going the wrong way, reversed direction. And when you tried to explain why you came back the cop wouldn't pay any attention. |
|
|
| (424649) | |
Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED! |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Thu May 3 08:25:09 2007, in response to Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!, posted by JPC on Thu May 3 08:16:19 2007. THe officer is going to claim that you returned to do more photography after being ordered to leave. I assume you attempted to explain why you turned around, but the cop would hear none of it (typical cop behavior).I've seen that so many times that it's as if that's what they are trained to do. your pal, Fred |
|
|
| (424654) | |
Re: (SEAN BELL) ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED! |
|
|
Posted by JPC on Thu May 3 08:36:00 2007, in response to Re: (SEAN BELL) ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!, posted by Jeff Rosen on Tue May 1 20:26:04 2007. Hey Sarge,Actually I think he makes a valid point. (I'm speaking as an EMT here, to you as a LEO.) Forget about Fat Albert (Sharpton), who just muddies the water wherever he goes. If somebody jumps in front of your car, points a gun at it and begins screaming orders, my suspicion is that most citizens will pay more attention to the gun and the screaming than the fact that the word "police" might be among the many they use, or the shiny piece of metal hanging around their neck. If that officer were in uniform it's much more likely they'd notice that hey, this person's a police officer! You know as well as I do, the geese don't respond predictably to being confronted by emergency services. On go the lights and sirens, and cars will swerve *in front* of you because they don't know where to go to let you through. On calls, people act in all kinds of strange behavior when uniforms and badges start showing up at their door. Besides, shiny pieces of metal aren't too hard to come by (there are tons of "police" stores that will sell badges for almost anything), and anybody can say that they're the police (not legally, of course, but that doesn't stop them from trying). But walking around in a PD uniform is not likely to go unnoticed for long, so if you see someone in uniform they're far more likely to be the real thing than if they just flip out a shield or say they're a cop. So in addition to the issue of confusion regarding identity, the use of UC's in mainline law enforcement work dramatically increases risk of impersonation (i.e. it's a lot easier to walk around with a shield under your shirt and whip it out when you want to play cop than it is to walk around all day in uniform). I think it's a problem (in general) that PD's are relying more heavily on UC's for jobs that really should be handled by uniforms. My understanding is that the old way was, UC observes something illegal (e.g. narcotics sale), calls in the plates and description, uniforms make a "traffic stop" of the vehicle, and collar the perp. (Of course, in an exigent circumstance, a UC would make the collar is something really bad is going down (e.g. assault or rape in progress.) Other than that, UC's generally don't make collars and generally don't interact with the public (except in sting operations and things of that sort, and even then the UC will act aggressively only if there is an imminent threat to safety, otherwise calling it in to uniforms.) (To draw a parallel case, emergency vehicles have lights and sirens and clear markings on them so that they can be detected from a distance and geese can make evasive maneuvers when the EV is still at a distance (and even then, they don't always do such a good job). Suppose we started responding in unmarked cars, no lights, no sirens. Just a regular car heading down the street, and all of a sudden he goes flying through a red light, the wrong way down a one-way, makes an illegal U-Turn - it would be accidents left and right! Having UC's respond and do the same things uniformed police officers do (but ordinary citizens do not) is no different!) Unfortunately, in the Kathryn Johnston case (the Atlanta shooting case of the 92-year old woman by UC officers serving a warrant based on erroneous information), the DA is looking to hang the officers for following their orders, while the policy of sending UC's to serve warrants and perform other law enforcement tasks best suited to uniforms remains is really the cause of such confusion. That's why I think this is such a real problem. |
|
|
| (424771) | |
How NOT to handle an encounter with police (Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!) |
|
|
Posted by railbus63 on Thu May 3 13:07:29 2007, in response to ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!, posted by Nilet on Sun Apr 29 20:42:32 2007. Sorry, but IMO you could have handled this encounter with the police much better. Were you within your rights to photograph in the station? Yes. Is an officer wrong if they (allegedly) delete your photos? Of course. But, geez, you could've avoided that outcome with a little common sense. You crossed the line when you accused the officers of unreasonable search and seizure when all they were doing was looking at the photos on your camera. Look at the situation from their point of view - why did you have a problem with them looking at all of your pics? Did you have something on that camera that you didn't want them to see?You then compounded this by recording their badge numbers - was that really necessary? Up to that point, they had done nothing wrong that I can see, and now you've basically told them that you're going to report them. So if you did in fact come across cops who are willing to break the rules, you just got on their bad side. The result was an embarrassing episode of being handcuffed in public and having your camera taken away and the photos somehow lost. Wouldn't it have been preferable if you addressed your concerns about being told not to take photos after the fact with the NYPD? You still would have had your pics and video. Regarding your complaint - let's look at it from a neutral point of view. You have two officers who were presumably called to the scene by NYCT employees when a suspicious individual was seen taking photographs and making customers 'jittery'. These officers will no doubt have detailed reports which justify their decision to stop you on the platform and later putting you in cuffs. If they did delete your photos, then they may well say that the photos were still in the camera when they gave it back to you. You have no proof that it was the NYPD that deleted these photos. Absent any concrete proof of wrongdoing, it will come down to the word of two uniformed police officers against your word. Few of us will win that encounter. What's worse, you've also pissed off two police officers and perhaps their friends on the job. We need to get the police to understand our hobby and understand why it is OK, not give them justification to make life miserable for any other rail buffs they come across. We photographers have the law on our side, but we still need to find a way to establish our rights with operating employees and law enforcement officers. This was not the way to do it. My $0.02 worth. Jim |
|
|
| (424783) | |
Re: How NOT to handle an encounter with police (Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!) |
|
|
Posted by Karl M, Ex New Yorker on Thu May 3 13:38:35 2007, in response to How NOT to handle an encounter with police (Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!), posted by railbus63 on Thu May 3 13:07:29 2007. NO, what has to be done is the TA MUST put on all stations and in all trains notices that photography is legal, with the standard procedures along with it, and DRILL it into the heads of the NYPD that photography of the transit system is LEGAL dummit and make the TA personell aware as well with the usual morning meetings as all operations like the transit authority has.Until you go through this humiliating ordeal you just don't understand how traumatic this can be and being hand cuffed has it's own problems along with it, just don't be judge and executioner in this case, he didn't do anything wrong only photographing trains which was LEGAL. Karl M |
|
|
| (424788) | |
Re: How NOT to handle an encounter with police (Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!) |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Thu May 3 13:52:24 2007, in response to How NOT to handle an encounter with police (Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!), posted by railbus63 on Thu May 3 13:07:29 2007. You crossed the line when you accused the officers of unreasonable search and seizure when all they were doing was looking at the photos on your camera.Um, that IS unreasonable search and seizure. Why are you afraid to say it like it is? If he told the police that in a non-threatening manner, then Nilet did NOTHING wrong. You can't be afraid to talk to the police. They are supposed to be on your side. why did you have a problem with them looking at all of your pics? Because of exactly what happened!!!! There are some bad apples out there who like Jeff Rosen would "accidentally" break someone's camera and the police who handcuffed Nilet who said "you can't prove I deleted your pictures!" By not allowing the police to get a hold of your camera and by not allowing them to see your photos, both of which you have a right to do, up to a point which was not crossed here, you prevent your photos from being deleted. You then compounded this by recording their badge numbers - was that really necessary? Absolutely. What's worse, you've also pissed off two police officers and perhaps their friends on the job. Haha! If Nilet's story is true as he told it, then the officers are about to get a lot more pissed off! |
|
|
| (424797) | |
Re: How NOT to handle an encounter with police (Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!) |
|
|
Posted by BMTLines on Thu May 3 14:06:46 2007, in response to How NOT to handle an encounter with police (Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!), posted by railbus63 on Thu May 3 13:07:29 2007. You crossed the line when you accused the officers of unreasonable search and seizure when all they were doing was looking at the photos on your camera.They crossed the line by demanding to see the pictures. Amateur photographers (not just railfans) are very upset over this - it is all over the photography boards and photo magazines. Photography lawyers are advising photogs that they do not have to show their photos without a warrant. Look at the situation from their point of view - why did you have a problem with them looking at all of your pics? Did you have something on that camera that you didn't want them to see? What if he did - what if the other pictures were x-rated pics of him and his girlfriend? Still legal but none of anyone's business!! If they did delete your photos, then they may well say that the photos were still in the camera when they gave it back to you. You have no proof that it was the NYPD that deleted these photos. Of course they will say that but there are so many similar complaints from photographers throughout the country (again not just railfans) that it will add to the incidents on their record if they have done this before. Eventually the pattern becomes the evidence. These are precisely the types of complaints the NYCLU is looking for to add to its lawsuit. IMO the goal now is to help the NYCLU win its class action - that is what will make life easier for photographers in the end. Only a court order will stop the NYPD from harassing us. |
|
|
| (424806) | |
Re: How NOT to handle an encounter with police (Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!) |
|
|
Posted by Fred G on Thu May 3 14:19:03 2007, in response to How NOT to handle an encounter with police (Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!), posted by railbus63 on Thu May 3 13:07:29 2007. I'm sorry but your bend over and hope for the best approach is wrong. You have every right to tell them that it's unlawful to demand your camera and look at the photos and especially take it out of your sight. You have every right to request their names and badge numbers if you have a problem with them. You DON'T have the right to get aggressive and start calling them names, or in general getting pissed off and abusive. I've been with Nilet when confronted by the police and can vouch for his courtesy, so it's not like he went out of his way to piss anyone off.We need to remain assertive and stand our ground on this. I agree with Chris when he says "I'd rather risk getting blown up than live like this". your pal, Fred |
|
|
| (424808) | |
Re: How NOT to handle an encounter with police (Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!) |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Thu May 3 14:27:22 2007, in response to How NOT to handle an encounter with police (Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!), posted by railbus63 on Thu May 3 13:07:29 2007. However, if what Nilet said is true, about pissing off two officers, that is the least thing the officers should be worried about---because I'm not so sure they were following their own department guidelines even, because preventing one from taking down the badge number is a offense (internally) that could result in termination with cause.Nilet might have been offended, but the officers probably have placed their careers in jeopardy, with the minimum being faced is days in the street. |
|
|
| (424809) | |
Re: How NOT to handle an encounter with police (Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!) |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Thu May 3 14:28:53 2007, in response to Re: How NOT to handle an encounter with police (Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!), posted by BMTLines on Thu May 3 14:06:46 2007. A court order won't necessarily stop, because the NYPD will appeal. It might take years for it to work up through the courts. |
|
|
| (424810) | |
Re: How NOT to handle an encounter with police (Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!) |
|
|
Posted by BIE on Thu May 3 14:32:59 2007, in response to How NOT to handle an encounter with police (Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!), posted by railbus63 on Thu May 3 13:07:29 2007. Why should we have to walk on eggshells aroung cops? I think it is time to restore the ban on police collective barganing which existed until the early '70s and beef it up by banning PBA type organizations altogether. A felony racketeering charge should be the result. If we don't crush the bad attitude of police real soon, our Constitution will be toilet paper. |
|
|
| (424811) | |
Re: How NOT to handle an encounter with police (Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!) |
|
|
Posted by AMoreira81 on Thu May 3 14:33:24 2007, in response to How NOT to handle an encounter with police (Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!), posted by railbus63 on Thu May 3 13:07:29 2007. The deleting photographs, that cannot be proven or used against the officers. Being cuffed without being arrested, now THAT can use as the basis for a lawsuit or the officer overstepping his or her authority. |
|
|
| (424813) | |
Re: How NOT to handle an encounter with police (Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!) |
|
|
Posted by BIE on Thu May 3 14:41:04 2007, in response to Re: How NOT to handle an encounter with police (Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!), posted by AMoreira81 on Thu May 3 14:27:22 2007. We need sting operations to get bad cops off the street. The PBA needs to be BANNED and we need a STRONG CIVILIAN Complaint Review Board to weed out the bullies which seem to gravitate to the job.However, those who kill or harm police should be given the severest punishment that can be meted out including the death penalty. |
|
|
| (424826) | |
Re: How NOT to handle an encounter with police (Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!) |
|
|
Posted by TunnelRat on Thu May 3 15:17:16 2007, in response to Re: How NOT to handle an encounter with police (Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!), posted by BIE on Thu May 3 14:41:04 2007. stupid statement"the pba needs to be banned"its a labof org.that fights for the rights of its members,like any other union.Did you know that untill 1969 if a cop worked overtime he could only get STRAIGHT TIME.back.no time&and 1/2 for over time.the civilian pop.of this land got it but we didn`t.The PBA fought for& got it for its members.this is just 1 example of how we benefitted from the pba. |
|
|
| (424854) | |
Re: How NOT to handle an encounter with police (Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!) |
|
|
Posted by LA Blue Line on Thu May 3 16:15:52 2007, in response to Re: How NOT to handle an encounter with police (Re: ROBBED BY A COP— PROPERTY DESTROYED!), posted by Terrapin Station on Thu May 3 13:52:24 2007. They are supposed to be on your side.They have rarely been on my side. |
|
|
|
Page 7 of 26 |
||
