Man Facing Up To 75 Years In Prison For Videotaping Police

  • metta

    Posts: 39133

    Nov 26, 2011 5:14 PM GMT
    Man Facing Up To 75 Years In Prison For Videotaping Police

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 26, 2011 5:43 PM GMT
    I applaud Mr. Allison for standing up for his civil liberties.

    Only a fascist police state would not want their actions to be recorded for public scrutiny.

    This is a "freedom of the press" issue, in my view.
  • roadbikeRob

    Posts: 14354

    Nov 26, 2011 5:53 PM GMT
    This is horribly wrong and also sign that our government is getting too powerful at both the state and federal levels. Police officers are public servants who are 100% accountable for all their actions. Videotaping police committing wrongdoings against citizens should never be made a crime. How could the second and final Rodney King verdict been determined if it were not for someone with a video camera showing corrupt, dirty cops from the LAPD beating up on Rodney King who was pulled over for a moving violation.
  • tazzari

    Posts: 2937

    Nov 26, 2011 6:01 PM GMT
    Another hint of the America we seem to be moving into; it is very frightening indeed, and something that should alarm both liberals and conservatives.

    For another facet, see from which I except the follwoing:

    "US citizens of all political persuasions are still reeling from images of unparallelled police brutality in a coordinated crackdown against peaceful OWS protesters in cities across the nation this past week. An elderly woman was pepper-sprayed in the face; the scene of unresisting, supine students at UC Davis being pepper-sprayed by phalanxes of riot police went viral online; images proliferated of young women – targeted seemingly for their gender – screaming, dragged by the hair by police in riot gear; and the pictures of a young man, stunned and bleeding profusely from the head, emerged in the record of the middle-of-the-night clearing of Zuccotti Park.

    "But just when Americans thought we had the picture – was this crazy police and mayoral overkill, on a municipal level, in many different cities? – the picture darkened. The National Union of Journalists and the Committee to Protect Journalists issued a Freedom of Information Act request to investigate possible federal involvement with law enforcement practices that appeared to target journalists. ..

    "… So, when you connect the dots, properly understood, what happened this week is the first battle in a civil war; a civil war in which, for now, only one side is choosing violence. It is a battle in which members of Congress, with the collusion of the American president, sent violent, organised suppression against the people they are supposed to represent. Occupy has touched the third rail: personal congressional profits streams. Even though they are, as yet, unaware of what the implications of their movement are, those threatened by the stirrings of their dreams of reform are not. "

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 26, 2011 6:06 PM GMT
    Yea I dont think anyone is going to say that this is "right" in any sense.

    Public officials are just that, public. To say that their privacy is violated from these actions is just, well, foolish.
  • tazzari

    Posts: 2937

    Nov 26, 2011 6:45 PM GMT
    It's not foolish - it's destructive.
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3284

    Nov 26, 2011 9:15 PM GMT
    tazzari saidIt's not foolish - it's destructive.

    In the next election year, one of the most important questions should be if a politician supports this sort of interpretation of the law. Its crazy.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 27, 2011 4:35 PM GMT
    This is extraordinary dangerous and I can't even put it into words how wrong this is. And even if he is eventually cleared of these charges, he’ll still be out $100k in legal fees.
  • GQjock

    Posts: 11649

    Nov 27, 2011 4:54 PM GMT
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Nov 27, 2011 5:09 PM GMT
    How can police acting in public, in full view, have their "privacy" violated due to "eavesdropping"? Are ordinary bystanders supposed to close their eyes and turn away? Haven't they also "eavesdropped" by witnessing it, whether they record it or not?

    eavesdrop: to secretly listen to a conversation

    Where's the "secretly" when this happens in plain view in public? Furthermore, I note the irony that the police themselves video-record these incidents, and even provide them to US reality TV shows. No privacy for the subjects of these police stops. I guess in the US privacy protections now only apply to the police and our other Fascist masters.