Posted on 09/07/2011 4:44:15 AM PDT by marktwain
TAMERA MEDLEY begged the police officer to stop slamming her head - over and over - into the hood of a police cruiser.
Thinking they were helping, passers-by Shakir Riley and Melissa Hurling both turned their cellphone video cameras toward the melee that had erupted on Jefferson Street in Wynnefield, they said.
But then the cops turned on them.
Riley had started to walk away when at least five baton-wielding cops followed him, he said, and they beat him, poured a soda on his face and stomped on his phone, destroying the video he had just taken.
Meanwhile, two officers approached Hurling, urged her to leave and, after exchanging a few words, slammed her against a police cruiser, Hurling said. They pulled her by her hair before tossing her into the back of a cop car, she said.
Although it's legal to record Philadelphia police performing official duties in public, all three were charged with disorderly conduct and related offenses, and officers destroyed Hurling and Riley's cellphones, erasing any record of Medley's violent arrest, the pair said.
Charges against Hurling and Riley were dismissed, but Medley was found guilty last month of disorderly conduct, resisting arrest, harassment and related offenses. She was fined $500 but has filed an appeal.
Echoes of the incident, which was corroborated by a half-dozen witnesses, have been reverberating nationwide in recent years as the combination of cellphone video and police officers has simmered into what is an increasingly explosive formula. A growing number of bystanders have been misled, arrested or worse for using their cellphones to record what they perceive as excessive force by cops making arrests, watchdogs say.
"I grew up in the neighborhood and I saw stuff go down but it never happened to me," Riley said recently, adding that he did nothing wrong. "They stomped my phone and said it was a federal offense."
'Relevant for integrity'
The issue is gaining national attention. The American Civil Liberties Union has civil lawsuits pending in Washington, D.C., Florida, Illinois and Maryland. Last week, a federal appeals court in Boston ruled that police had violated the First Amendment rights of a lawyer who was arrested after filming cops arrest a teenager.
Suits have been settled in Pennsylvania, and this year, the ACLU plans to file a lawsuit on behalf of several Philadelphians.
True, but until the cop themselves actually pay instead of the city (aka tax payers) this will not stop.
98% of the thug cops making the 2% good cops look bad.
Yep. A “public servant” has NO reasonable expectation of privacy while performing their duties.
Indeed. Openly OR clandestinely. And any cop/department/other government entity who prevents it should be fined/fired/eliminated.
I'm coming around to the notion that all cops should have a minividcam that they are REQUIRED to wear and have running at all times, and that cannot be turned off (by them).
Why can cops use a dashcam, and film suspects without any legal challenge, even in states that require 2 party consent? Police officers also carry microphones in which they can record an arrest - and this is perfectly legal.
I fail to see where any state Constitution grants Police rights to record the common citizen, but are immune from recordings taken by the common citizen (ie. victims). I must have missed the section where it says that a passive observer, who records police activity is in any way interfering with the police in performing their duty.
That is the cops figure.
If cops, or more critically the police unions, were smart about it, they would want every minute they were on duty filmed for their own protection to provide credible evidence of their behavior. That they instead act like thugs smashing cell phone cameras speaks volumes about their behavior.
1. Selective filming
2. Editing and timing.
It is quite possible that the filming witness comes upon the arrest scene after the arrestee's violence has been damped down, but resistance continues. E.G., Rodney King. In effect, this edits out the cops' side of the story. Had Rodney's impromptu cinematographer filmed the first few minutes of the encounter, or had the MSM published Rodney's rap sheet, perhaps he would not have become a black folk hero.
At the same time, citizens have the right to record whatever the hell they want to record of public officials performing public duties. The coppers running the street filmers down, and destroying their property just ain't right ... or legal.
Solution: the cops are just going to have to do a better job of recording their work. Perfect assignment for one of the female Affirmative Action nincompoops now infesting every department in the land.
Perspective. Also remember, that given the present court system and political correctness, that beating that a perp however wrongly receives is very apt to be the ONLY punishment the SOB is ever going to get. Feel sorry for them, just not THAT sorry.
Tough situation all around. Perhaps after a particularly rough bust, the cops ought to call for civilian volunteers to give nasty perps the flogging they so richly deserve. Film that.
Why is a passive observer, who uses his cell phone to film 5+ cops subduing a perp - a SOB? How can any rational person justify that the observer be attacked by a gang (if the gang happens to work for a police department - is that somehow ok?).
If the cops want to act like a unruly gang - treat them like an unruly gang. Felony assault for everyone involved, and let them serve time like anyone else.
The 'what-if' scenerio holds no water at all. "What if" you get a gun? "What if" you go on a shooting rampage? Why, let's prevent you from ever getting close to owning a gun. What if you record a cop raping a woman, what if you edit that film? What if you decide to sell dope? What if ....
Bottom line - the Police work for US, they answer to US - we don't answer to them. If they are operating within the realms of the law, within the professional realm in which they are trained - any filming of them will only go to re-inforce their actions.
Only the successful clarification of this right to film the police — perhaps by the Supreme Court — will bring an end to the excessive police violence we see more of every day in this country.
O my, i didn't want to give you the impression that I think the cops should get away with this. However, the power to film is the power to distort, as a look at tonight's newscast will demonstrate. I merely think that the cops ought to do a better job of filming themselves, so that reasonable people can compare and contrast the many versions any street encounter is sure to engender.
any filming of them: Disagree.
The right of the people to film THEIR cops at work is paramount, if they stay out of the way ... however, I would prefer the whole story . Give me civilian film AND cop film.
Couldn't agree with you more!
__________________________________________________
What?
There are courts to punish lawbreakers, that is not the cops job. The cops are trained to handle violent arrest resistance without hurting the suspect. They know how to do it. Did Rodney King deserve what he got? Yeah he probably did but that is not the job of the cops. What the cops did to him was wrong. There is never a time when it is right for you hit someone who is held down. If the cops filmed every minute of what they did then there would be no worry about selective editing. I would hope that all states pass laws that dismiss a case if there are minutes of an encounter missing. I have seen too much of harassment by our men in blue, I'm tired of it. Those guys have a job that is occasionally hard to do, occasionally. They don't need to fly off the handle and get revenge, a court can do that.
Come on. You exaggerate. Probably five out of a hundred deserve to wear a badge. But I’m an optimist.
“The right of the people to film THEIR cops at work is paramount, if they stay out of the way ... however, I would prefer the whole story . Give me civilian film AND cop film.”
But then there would be evidence, evidence the police cannot control to document police behavior.
That’s the only reason police are going after someone with a camera. To hide the criminal actions of corrupt police.
Could the cops handled that a bit better? You bet. Neither am I suggesting that arresting officers act as judge, jury, and executioner. OTOH, they are entitled to vigorous self-defense, even as you and I.
Do the cops use excessive force? Are they bullies. Yup. And they are punished for it (from time to time. All I ask is that we don't misplace our sympathies too readily. Take the news with a grain of salt.
There are three classes of people on the street: citizens, criminals and super criminals with blue uniforms/badges.
I'd rather be assaulted by ordinary criminals, cause if you shoot one of them and other ordinary criminals hear about it, they make a point to stay away from you.
If you shoot a super criminal in Blue, the other criminals in Blue, gang up and come for you with a vengeance!
Indeed. Good point there.
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.