Skip to comments.Landmark Settlement Reached In Preakness Arrest Case
Posted on 03/13/2014 6:33:37 PM PDT by mtrott
BALTIMORE (WJZ) A Baltimore City lawsuit settlement sparks major police policy and training reforms that affect everyone with a cell phone camera.
Derek Valcourt has details on the change and what it means to you.
The police department is putting it into writing so their officers fully understand. You can record them and they cant do anything about it. First Amendment advocates call it a major victory.
When police made an arrest at Pimlico four years ago, Christopher Sharp was one of several recording. Officers didnt like it.
(Excerpt) Read more at baltimore.cbslocal.com ...
‘bout time the good guys won one.
The courts have decided this time after time and yet the arrests continue.
Because you can’t beat the ride. They would rather get in trouble for taking your phone then having video of their illegal actions posted on youtube.
But if they are not going to fire these officers, what needs to happen is when these police departments are forced to pay settlements, the offending officers’ paychecks should be docked. That will get their attention.
I used to think so and perhaps it would reduce the number of occurrences.
Cops beating someone or shooting the wrong person wont care.
Put cameras on all of them an run them all the time.
And failing that, multimillion dollar lawsuit judgments need to continue to be awarded.
Why? Because idiot voters (absolutely including a large number of Freepers) are too damned stupid to understand that they have a duty to install an administration that will not abuse law enforcement authority...until they are properly reminded through their pocketbooks.
There is software that automatically and simultaneously posts your video to the Cloud.
Good luck confiscating that.
What app is good for that? iOS or Android, or both?
Lock up the corrupt bastards I say.
You miss the point.
Should cops be allowed to confiscate video they find inconvenient? Nope.
Should cops who do so anyway be punished by loss of job, fines, and possible jail time for tampering with evidence> Yup.
If they do so anyway, assuming (generally accurately) that they will simply be able to lie their way out of the mess they’re in since the evidence has “accidentally disappeared,” would it be handy to have the evidence backed up where they can’t get at it? Seems logical to me.
Thats my thought as well. Put cameras in their cars and on their person. They can’t work without them functioning properly. They have no access or control over them. Not them or their supervisor or their chief.