Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Seattle Sues Attorney For Requesting Police Dash-Cam Footage
Reason.com ^ | 1-5-12 | Lucy Stiegerwald

Posted on 01/07/2012 4:45:29 PM PST by apoliticalone

Seattle has a brilliant solution to their many police problems — refuse to release police dash-cam footage, then sue the person requesting said footage.

(Excerpt) Read more at reason.com ...


TOPICS: Politics
KEYWORDS: abuse; constitution; corrutpion; democrats; donutwatch; dountwatch; foia; fraud; govtabuse; leo; liberalfascism; libertarian; lping
We need law enforcement to understand that they work without question to protect and defend taxpayers and citizens. Nothing else counts. That is their Constitutional authority.
1 posted on 01/07/2012 4:45:37 PM PST by apoliticalone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: apoliticalone

They don’t care. So long as there’s no way to hold them accountable to the people they exist to “serve and protect”—they will continue to go around as jackboot thugs.

Police forces should be privatized to destroy their monopoly powers and make them directly accountable to citizens.


2 posted on 01/07/2012 4:48:19 PM PST by Utmost Certainty (Our Enemy, the State | Gingrich 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: apoliticalone

Hidden camera, post to YouTube as an anonymous log in. Done.


3 posted on 01/07/2012 4:50:26 PM PST by SkyDancer ("If You Want To Learn To Love Better, You Should Start With A Friend Who You Hate")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: apoliticalone

They created evidence and as such it is an obligation on discovery.

Eff em and counter sue.


4 posted on 01/07/2012 4:51:36 PM PST by Vendome (Don't take life so seriously, you won't live through it anyway)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: apoliticalone
" But Seattle City Attorney Pete Holmes, who filed the lawsuit, says the city is caught between two conflicting laws. "There's a plain conflict in the laws between the Public Records Act (and) the Privacy Act. The city will pay dearly if it makes the wrong choice," said Holmes."

We have no expectation of privacy when we're in public and the cops shouldn't either.

5 posted on 01/07/2012 4:58:06 PM PST by rockrr (Everything is different now...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vendome

Any competent Judge will rip the cops a new one at the first hearing.


6 posted on 01/07/2012 5:04:14 PM PST by Farmer Dean (stop worrying about what they want to do to you,start thinking about what you want to do to them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Farmer Dean

Competent judge.....that’s funny.


7 posted on 01/07/2012 5:05:54 PM PST by Lurker (The avalanche has begun. The pebbles no longer have a vote.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: apoliticalone

THE MURDEROUS COPS HAVE TO PROVIDE THE VIDEO. tHERE ARE EVEN STANDARD FORMS TO FAX OVER TO THE POLICE STATION TO REQUEST IT.

Maybe this attorney doesn’t represent anybody?


8 posted on 01/07/2012 5:07:24 PM PST by yldstrk ( My heroes have always been cowboys)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lurker

Up there in liberal land finding a decent Judge could be a challenge.


9 posted on 01/07/2012 5:08:28 PM PST by Farmer Dean (stop worrying about what they want to do to you,start thinking about what you want to do to them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Utmost Certainty
Police forces should be privatized to destroy their monopoly powers and make them directly accountable to citizens.

Do you think a Seattle police force that works for a private global corporation beholden like GE, to Commie Chinese shareholders with accountability only for more profits for shareholders will protect and serve us USA citizens better?

Sorry but I don't agree, just as I object strongly to a mercenary military. We as USA citizens (not the global capitalist bankers) need to define what functions should be accountable to we the people, and those functions we define are about what consider as government.

The rest are profit centers for owners, not about the country.

10 posted on 01/07/2012 5:09:26 PM PST by apoliticalone (Honest govt. that operates in the interest of US sovereignty and the people, not global $$$)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: apoliticalone

The last few days, near Tacoma, the police have been out in force trying to catch people with speed traps, etc..... Their budget must have been dipping because it seems they were only interested in giving out tickets than to arrest real criminals, like the ton of illegals that flood our streets.


11 posted on 01/07/2012 5:11:18 PM PST by dragonblustar (Allah Ain't So Akbar!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: apoliticalone

Avoid the Seattle cops at all times - they have had a stink on them for a century, at least. Back in the 70’s one of their detectives murdered an informant/criminal who was wearing a tape recorder as he was shot. In the 60’s the scandal was “tolerance”, also known as bribery from pimps, after hours clubs, dope dealers, etc. - a large portion of SPD was on the pad and may still be.
A recent chief of the department (Gil Kerlikowski) had his loaded 9mm automatic stolen from his parked car - he now works for the obama administration, of course.


12 posted on 01/07/2012 5:16:30 PM PST by dainbramaged (I lost my mantra around 1969.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: apoliticalone

This is some more of that Polosi style “Open Government” isn’t it?


13 posted on 01/07/2012 5:32:23 PM PST by fella ("As it was before Noah, so shall it be again.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: apoliticalone

This is some more of that Polosi style “Open Government” isn’t it?


14 posted on 01/07/2012 5:32:41 PM PST by fella ("As it was before Noah, so shall it be again.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dainbramaged

You have that right. The jackboots in that liberal rat commie loving ‘diverse’ cesspool/sewer known as Seattle are the most corrupt and out of control PD in the good old USA.


15 posted on 01/07/2012 5:33:42 PM PST by bobby.223
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: apoliticalone

No police force in America is legally expected to protect, defend or serve the public. The only legally required role of the police is to preserve order and investigate crime.


16 posted on 01/07/2012 5:34:23 PM PST by muir_redwoods (No wonder this administration favors abortion; everything they have done is an abortion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: apoliticalone

I didn’t think they had any US Constitution authority. I don’t know what Constutional basis they have for existing.

Police departments are hired by municipalities and states. If we don’t like their performance, we should be able to fire them. And in many cases that has occurred. But, some departments have been able to build up such a high barrier against responsibility by obtaining immunity, etc.


17 posted on 01/07/2012 5:38:23 PM PST by AlmaKing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: apoliticalone

“Reason” is lying or badly misinformed. The problem here is with two different Washington State statutes that conflict with each other. One says that the videos need to be released. Another says that they can’t be released. The city’s complaint is for a declaratory judgment. They want the court to sort out the mess and declare that the privacy statute controls.

The court could just as easy rule the other way. Seeking declaratory relief in this manner is quite common.

The spin that “Reason” (Think Paultards, Libertines, Tin Foil Hatters) is putting on the story is nothing short of ridiculous. They are hoping that stupid people will buy the spin.


18 posted on 01/07/2012 5:58:01 PM PST by willamedwardwallace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muir_redwoods

“No police force in America is legally expected to protect, defend or serve the public. The only legally required role of the police is to preserve order and investigate crime.”


Then they need to change their badges and banners and patrol car statements. They are compensated by the public to protect, defend and serve and work for us.

http://www.theiacp.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=frHJv6Z24bU%3D&tabid=178


19 posted on 01/07/2012 5:58:37 PM PST by apoliticalone (Honest govt. that operates in the interest of US sovereignty and the people, not global $$$)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: dragonblustar
The last few days, near Tacoma, the police have been out in force trying to catch people with speed traps, etc..... Their budget must have been dipping because it seems they were only interested in giving out tickets than to arrest real criminals, like the ton of illegals that flood our streets.

I recently went to an exhibit of Norman Rockwell's art. This one caught my eye because it showed how little people actually change. Sure the cops now have radar and speed cameras instead of just a stopwatch, but the speed trap for profit is almost as old as the car.


20 posted on 01/07/2012 6:02:53 PM PST by KarlInOhio (Herman Cain: possibly the escapee most dangerous to the Democrats since Frederick Douglass.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: willamedwardwallace; bamahead

“The spin that “Reason” (Think Paultards, Libertines, Tin Foil Hatters) is putting on the story is nothing short of ridiculous. They are hoping that stupid people will buy the spin.”


Yeah I know some prefer jackboots, more laws, more rules, and more government, but I still prefer freedom and liberty over all of the above.


21 posted on 01/07/2012 6:05:24 PM PST by apoliticalone (Honest govt. that operates in the interest of US sovereignty and the people, not global $$$)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: apoliticalone; Abathar; Abcdefg; Abram; Abundy; albertp; Alexander Rubin; Allosaurs_r_us; ...
"What the police department is saying is if you make a request for public documents, ultimately you will be sued."



Libertarian ping! Click here to get added or here to be removed or post a message here!

22 posted on 01/07/2012 6:12:46 PM PST by bamahead (Few men desire liberty; most men wish only for a just master. -- Sallust)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: apoliticalone

How would you define “police state”?


23 posted on 01/07/2012 6:18:58 PM PST by TPOOH (I wish I could have been Jerry Reed.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: leapfrog0202

24 posted on 01/07/2012 7:57:25 PM PST by leapfrog0202 ("the American presidency is not supposed to be a journey of personal discovery" Sarah Palin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: TPOOH

How would you define “police state”?


The term “Police state” is a matter of public perception.

If the public at large feels wary of, angry at, or intimidated by the police, then we have a “police state”......as opposed to a public that offers and gets positive support from a police force that defends and works for the citizenry.

The direction of public perception in this matter is not clear. Unlike many countries, we Americans don’t put up with BS or attempts at intimidation from “public servants” for very long.


25 posted on 01/07/2012 8:28:30 PM PST by apoliticalone (Honest govt. that operates in the interest of US sovereignty and the people, not global $$$)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: bobby.223
" The jackboots in that liberal rat commie loving ‘diverse’ cesspool/sewer known as Seattle are the most corrupt and out of control PD in the good old USA."

If that's so, the JSO in Jacksonville Florida are a photo finish second.

26 posted on 01/07/2012 9:33:31 PM PST by AnTiw1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: apoliticalone

Yes they do need to make those changes. The courts have ruled that they cannot be sued for failing to protect citizens since they have no legal obligation to protect individual citizens, merely to preserve civil order.


27 posted on 01/08/2012 2:31:53 AM PST by muir_redwoods (No wonder this administration favors abortion; everything they have done is an abortion)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: apoliticalone
Are you one of those Occupy Wall Street types who believe that all corporations are conspirators?

Utmost Certainty is correct, virtually all governmental functions that do not involve elected office should by contracted from and provided by private businesses.

The Free market system provides far more honesty and integrity than political union cronyism.

28 posted on 01/08/2012 5:55:00 AM PST by Aevery_Freeman (Rights begin where power ends!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Aevery_Freeman; Utmost Certainty; apoliticalone
Utmost Certainty is correct, virtually all governmental functions that do not involve elected office should by contracted from and provided by private businesses.

Personally I don't disagree with in the least when it comes to privatizing public services that have traditionally been provided by local & state gov'ts - like trash collection, water/sewer service, public transit, etc. Private corporations have an incentive to provide those services - for which there is rather static demand -at lower cost to the taxpayer and lower their operational costs to make a profit doing it.

But serious corruption and constitutional concerns can and do occur with Big Business and Big Gov't form alliances that can profit by denying Americans' freedom. The Private Prison lobby is one such example right now, that is just starting to get out of control. Private jail lobbies fill the campaign coffers of state elected officials, who in some limited instances have gone on to build jails that aren't needed, and then pass laws which increase mandatory sentencing minimums for what most people would consider rather petty crimes. The Private prison system, of course, benefits with more taxpayer dollars per inmate, per year. So it's in their financial interest that more people go to jail. Some info in this article from AZ:

http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2011/09/04/20110904arizona-prison-business-politics.html

Also, a story from a couple of years ago, where two judges were indicted in a kickback scandal in PA. They were sending juviniles who really had no prior records and committed very 'young and stupid' like offenses away to privatized juvinile detention centers - run by a company which it turned out later, they had some business ties to:

Pennsylvania rocked by 'jailing kids for cash' scandal

This is why privatizing police is NOT a good idea, IMO. Not that these companies are evil, but there is the massive potential for corruption at the POLITICAL level when there's incentive to deny due process and skirt constitutional protections in our justice system to enhance the bottom line (and increase one's re-election campaign contributions). Slippery, slippery slope.
29 posted on 01/08/2012 9:44:44 AM PST by bamahead (Few men desire liberty; most men wish only for a just master. -- Sallust)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: bamahead
Far be it from public unions to provide kickbacks to their employers.

Oh, wait - those are called political contributions.

To paraphrase a common gun argument; companies are not evil, people are.

Enterprises run by man will always be subject to corruption - the free market system limits the damage.

30 posted on 01/08/2012 10:00:07 AM PST by Aevery_Freeman (Rights begin where power ends!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Aevery_Freeman
Far be it from public unions to provide kickbacks to their employers.

No doubt. If you read that whole AZ Central article - one of the most vocal critics of the entire privatization thing is...you guessed it, public-unions.

Personally I think we stand to limit the damage more by writing more politician, private-contractor and/or union accountability into the laws themselves. Make those in the public trust pay for their foul-ups and come to justice for their shady dealings at every level. THAT is what's really at the core of most of these problems! There is zilcho accountability for any public official or any beneficiary of public trust, anywhere.

Name me one law or policy that's written such as where the entities executing it can stand accountable for their malfeasance? Hard pressed.
31 posted on 01/08/2012 10:21:47 AM PST by bamahead (Few men desire liberty; most men wish only for a just master. -- Sallust)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: bamahead

I agree.

Privatizing government functions and requiring taxpayers to pay for it via taxes is something I do not generally support because it leads to costly corruption. The real goal is to keep government small enough that we can pay for it, and so it doesn’t take our rights, not to give politicians and their partners in crime opportunities to steal.

Any time public private partnerships exist where tax dollars directly feed corporate interests, there is always a strong tendency between the involved parties, politicians and bureaucrats to create collusion and corruption that in the end becomes much more costly to taxpayers than having government do the function itself.

Our politicians are very astute (not necessarily honest) handing out lucrative contracts paid for directly by other people’s money (taxpayers) to well heeled corporations. When it comes to selling or leasing a public asset they will make deals and under-price it for their cronies costing us once again. The bureaucrats that are entrusted to manage the private aspect soon find lucrative revolving door benefits and they will be managing it for their benefit, not ours.

So in the end some functions like trash collection that can be mandated out totally and then directly paid by the users are more amenable to privatizing than those functions where it behooves citizens to have direct control and not have their taxes taken and given to corporations.


32 posted on 01/08/2012 11:07:22 AM PST by apoliticalone (Honest govt. that operates in the interest of US sovereignty and the people, not global $$$)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: bamahead
We could provide the same accountability in the contracts with private companies and require bonding of the employees.

As a public school teacher, I see firsthand how a union monopoly harms everyone involved and how the free market would help. We are so inculcated with the concept that police, fire and education departments must be staffed by public employees that it is sometimes hard to visualize the alternative.

33 posted on 01/08/2012 11:18:03 AM PST by Aevery_Freeman (Rights begin where power ends!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: bamahead

>> “What the police department is saying is if you make a request for public documents, ultimately you will be sued.”

Wow!


34 posted on 01/08/2012 11:22:23 AM PST by Gene Eric (C'mon, Virginia -- are you with us or against us?!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Aevery_Freeman
Are you one of those Occupy Wall Street types who believe that all corporations are conspirators?

I'm one of those Americans who continues to see USA small business and corporations as a strong and important part of our country and economy. I once agreed that when GE was doing well the USA was doing well. That changed when US corporations became global (Chinese, India, Japan, Mexico, USA) corporations. I'm no longer nearly as enamored or trusting. They no longer show or have any loyalty or patriotism towards America unlike many Americans in the military who have died for the USA. The only thing many of these global corporations will die for is another big bonus to send more jobs offshore. Their strategic view sees our USA sovereignty as a problem. I find it even more problematic that they (as globalist non-USA citizens) can use their vast sums of money to control who gets elected in our government. Does that answer your question?

Utmost Certainty is correct, virtually all governmental functions that do not involve elected office should by contracted from and provided by private businesses.

I touched on that below. Some things in government I would support privatization. But I generally don't enthusiastically support my tax dollars going to the private sector via politicians most of which are crooked and experienced at taking shovelfuls of our money in the process, thus costing us even more. Make the actual financial exchange directly between the end user taxpayer and the business. I'd feel much more confident in reducing the corruption potential if only we'd once see a real prosecution and punishment (execution would be best, but 20 yrs at hard labor would suffice) of the political elite and those on the take when they get caught. Until then they will view scamming the system as a low risk high reward venture.

The Free market system provides far more honesty and integrity than political union cronyism.

Your idealism is commendable. Mine is jaded and tainted. Crony capitalism runs rampant in the USA between the politicians and the big "private" players like the TBTF banks and they all use our tax money and they get rich as we get poorer.

35 posted on 01/08/2012 11:37:10 AM PST by apoliticalone (Honest govt. that operates in the interest of US sovereignty and the people, not global $$$)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: apoliticalone
Unlike many countries, we Americans don’t put up with BS or attempts at intimidation from “public servants” for very long.

What century did you write this in? You certainly haven't been to an airport recently.

36 posted on 01/08/2012 12:25:09 PM PST by Forgotten Amendments (Ding! Frog's done!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Forgotten Amendments

Agreed, hopefully not too optimistic for our once freedom loving culture that has been coerced into accepting what they throw at us.


37 posted on 01/08/2012 5:54:32 PM PST by apoliticalone (Honest govt. that operates in the interest of US sovereignty and the people, not global $$$)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: apoliticalone
I'm afraid we've gone to freedom loathing in the past couple of generations.

Years ago, I thought those polls that said Russians were nostalgic for the days of Stalin were a bunch of commie propaganda. But no, people are sheep. They want a dictator and what's left of America is no different. :(

38 posted on 01/09/2012 9:42:26 AM PST by Forgotten Amendments (Ding! Frog's done!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: willamedwardwallace

The problem is that the State is selecting to enforce the law that currently is in the best interest of *the State and its agents*, and *ignore* the other law.

That doesn’t bode well for constitutional liberties.


39 posted on 01/09/2012 10:21:06 AM PST by Altariel (`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Altariel

No, the City is asking the Court to tell it what it should do since there is an ambiguity in the law.


40 posted on 01/09/2012 10:25:38 AM PST by willamedwardwallace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: willamedwardwallace

“Although Seattle City Attorney Pete Holmes says the city will abide by the court’s decision, Egan told King 5 TV that the Washington privacy act prevents the footage from being made public until the final disposition of related litigation. That is, until the officers can no longer be sued for what they did in the video.”

This is not a case of a city asking a court to tell it what to do.


41 posted on 01/09/2012 10:47:44 AM PST by Altariel (`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Altariel

Egan has an agenda, nothing he says should be taken at face value.

Look at it this way, what happens if the City releases the video and then they are sued under the privacy statute?

You seem to say that the City ignoring the public access law is terrible, but it should ignore the privacy law.

Both are the law. The city breaks the law if it unilaterally picks one over the other. Hence, the city went to the court and asked for a declaratory judgment.


42 posted on 01/09/2012 10:55:53 AM PST by willamedwardwallace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: willamedwardwallace

The police have no greater an expectation of privacy than any other member of the public would have in a given setting.

Argumentum ad hominem does not help your case.


43 posted on 01/09/2012 11:02:51 AM PST by Altariel (`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Altariel

Calling a question “argumentum ad hominem” doesn’t make it so.

Should the city break the law? Yes or no?


44 posted on 01/09/2012 11:09:41 AM PST by willamedwardwallace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: willamedwardwallace

Should a city prevent an attorney from having access to dash-cam footage, yes or no?

Bear in mind, without public access to the dash cam footage of the police officer who killed a Seattle woodcarver, we would not know what really happened.


45 posted on 01/09/2012 11:32:39 AM PST by Altariel (`)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Altariel

It depends on the law. You seem to think the city can pick and choose which law to ignore.

Since there are conflicting laws, the court has to sort it out.


46 posted on 01/09/2012 11:34:14 AM PST by willamedwardwallace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Altariel

Under what conditions should institutional special interests have priority and more clout than we the people / the public?


47 posted on 01/09/2012 11:39:01 AM PST by apoliticalone (Honest govt. that operates in the interest of US sovereignty and the people, not global $$$)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson