Taping public officials doing their job

[One-Eyed Ross]

While the police are not necessarily responsible for your PERSONAL safety, they create and environment in which you can REASONABLY provide for your own personal safety. Providing for your personal safety in a community where there is NO policing would be a very different matter. That's the issue with stating someone has "no use" for the police. Its unreasonable to say that when you live in a policed society. (I know you didn't state that, just addressing that piece of your argument)

I was trying, though, to get the argument back to the original topic, which was taping police officers while performing their duties....and the benefits of getting bad cops off the street...

It really is an image problem for police departments, and until they really do police themselves and stop encouraging and tolerating bad behavior, the public won't trust them and will tape them.

 

[Caleqs]

I was trying, though, to get the argument back to the original topic, which was taping police officers while performing their duties....and the benefits of getting bad cops off the street...

It really is an image problem for police departments, and until they really do police themselves and stop encouraging and tolerating bad behavior, the public won't trust them and will tape them.

Yup, I'm with ya. I still think we need to solve the issue of how taping could put good cops in bad situations too. There is video evidence to show that angle, etc. can show only one piece of a situation and completely miss what's really happening...to the point of making the person's actions look wrong or inappropriate. Not a big deal if there are multiple camera angles and multiple witnesses, but problematic when there's not.

 

[Redcap]

So, your neighbor steals you tools.... Are you going to arrest him and take him to jail by yourself?

I've been down this very road before. Since the police wouldn't do a dang thing, I fixed the problem myself. Got my property back and different neighbors as well.

 

[locobob]

Yup, I'm with ya. I still think we need to solve the issue of how taping could put good cops in bad situations too. There is video evidence to show that angle, etc. can show only one piece of a situation and completely miss what's really happening...to the point of making the person's actions look wrong or inappropriate. Not a big deal if there are multiple camera angles and multiple witnesses, but problematic when there's not.

We already have a way to solve that... it's called the court system. It is currently relied upon to weigh evidence (including video) and make judgements regarding situations where two or more parties disagree on facts.
I see absolutely no reason why a Police Officer should be held to a different standard.

 

[Caleqs]

We already have a way to solve that... it's called the court system. It is currently relied upon to weigh evidence (including video) and make judgements regarding situations where two or more parties disagree on facts.
I see absolutely no reason why a Police Officer should be held to a different standard.

To some extent that's true. I'm not suggesting they should be held to a different standard. Same standard should apply to anyone. And you may be right, the current system might be sufficient.

 

[One-Eyed Ross]

The point though, is that it doesn't matter if it puts good cops into bad situations. Good cops probably won't be seen in that light, anyway, since I believe they won't do stupid stuff, on or off camera.

I've witnessed cops taking down a person having a psychotic break. They didn't need to taz him, shoot him or smack him with clubs. A female cop tackled him, the rest grabbed him, he was handcuffed and taken to get care.

A video tape of that incident wouldn't have shown anything bad and had it been shown on the news, would not have caused concern or alarm at all.

Cops that are on the fringe, that flaunt their power and abuse the people, are cops that flaunt and abuse. The camera isn't going to change what they are at all.

 

[Caleqs]

The point though, is that it doesn't matter if it puts good cops into bad situations. Good cops probably won't be seen in that light, anyway, since I believe they won't do stupid stuff, on or off camera.

I've witnessed cops taking down a person having a psychotic break. They didn't need to taz him, shoot him or smack him with clubs. A female cop tackled him, the rest grabbed him, he was handcuffed and taken to get care.

A video tape of that incident wouldn't have shown anything bad and had it been shown on the news, would not have caused concern or alarm at all.

Cops that are on the fringe, that flaunt their power and abuse the people, are cops that flaunt and abuse. The camera isn't going to change what they are at all.

I may be wrong, you may be right, but I believe its naive to say that good cops can't be put in bad situations even when they do everything right based on video evidence that only shows a portion of the incident or only a certain angle. Of course, this should all be worked out in the courts, as others have said, but the toll it takes on the office involved is tremendous. I wish I could find the couple of videos where this was indeed the case, but I came across them somewhere in the internet ether and I can't find my way back to them.

Heh, doesn't matter though, video or not, these things can happen. Saying you can't video public servants is not going to make a difference any more than banning guns has a positive impact on crime rates. You should be able to video them, but that video should only be one part of the evidence. Unfortunately, in our culture, video is truth...even when its not!

 

[Misterbill]

Yup, I'm with ya. I still think we need to solve the issue of how taping could put good cops in bad situations too. There is video evidence to show that angle, etc. can show only one piece of a situation and completely miss what's really happening...to the point of making the person's actions look wrong or inappropriate. Not a big deal if there are multiple camera angles and multiple witnesses, but problematic when there's not.

Explain why having a badge gives cops some special right to escape public scrutiny?

Guess what? If I'm working in a public place doing my job I can be taped by anyone who cares to do so. It's a public place and I have no expectation of privacy.

There are NOT, and I defy you to post them if you think there are, lots of cases where cops doing exactly the right thing were victimized by video taping.

I have worked with LE for well over 20 years now and not a single cop I know who isn't a dirt bag, cares if you videotape them. Are you referring to the Rodney King incident? Because if you are, those guys were breaking the law. they beat the ever-loving sugar out of someone offering little to no resistance. They should have been charged and they should have been fired.

Police in this country are steadily becoming more violent, less interested in people's basic rights and more prone to handing out beatings than at any time I remember. -Personally I think it's incredibly bad training that has become de rigueur.

the more video taping the better. If that makes some cop uncomfortable, too darned bad. He can hang it up and get another job. Meanwhile, public servants are subject to public scrutiny. As they should be.

 

[Caleqs]

Explain why having a badge gives cops some special right to escape public scrutiny?

Guess what? If I'm working in a public place doing my job I can be taped by anyone who cares to do so. It's a public place and I have no expectation of privacy.

There are NOT, and I defy you to post them if you think there are, lots of cases where cops doing exactly the right thing were victimized by video taping.

I have worked with LE for well over 20 years now and not a single cop I know who isn't a dirt bag, cares if you videotape them. Are you referring to the Rodney King incident? Because if you are, those guys were breaking the law. they beat the ever-loving sugar out of someone offering little to no resistance. They should have been charged and they should have been fired.

Police in this country are steadily becoming more violent, less interested in people's basic rights and more prone to handing out beatings than at any time I remember. -Personally I think it's incredibly bad training that has become de rigueur.

the more video taping the better. If that makes some cop uncomfortable, too darned bad. He can hang it up and get another job. Meanwhile, public servants are subject to public scrutiny. As they should be.

Hey brother, I'm not saying that. Never have. Re-read my posts. I'm only suggesting that we make sure video is given its proper place as evidence of the whole. I'm sorry if anything I said lead you to believe I don't think they should be open to taping. Let me be clear so there's no mistakes: I believe the issue is a difficult one because of the possible negative impact in some circumstances where video can be misconstrued. That's it.

I did not say cops are free from public scrutiny. I never said there were lots of cases where cops were victimized by video taping. I only said we should be careful because it has happened.

Not sure why I'm the target of your anger when I never said anything you're accusing me of. Heck, in my last post I came right out and said that videoing public servants is the right thing to do...unless you believe gun control works...then my statement can be taken to mean we should ban video taping.

 

[One-Eyed Ross]

As a further note, it is a fundamental right under the 1st Amendment, so what you, I or the police departments think about it is a moot point. It is a right to video tape them, and catch audio of them as well. And all for the public good...

 

[Caleqs]

As a further note, it is a fundamental right under the 1st Amendment, so what you, I or the police departments think about it is a moot point. It is a right to video tape them, and catch audio of them as well. And all for the public good...

Heh, true for most of the discussions on the internet!

I do need to be clear as it seems folks are taking my comments as a vote one way or another.....I have no problem taping public officials. Frankly, I don't actually care one way or another. I DO support the constitution and the rights it provides to your point One-Eyed. I do have a big problem when people, who don't understand the job police do, use video for their own ends to make a good cop look bad or to paint all cops with the same brushed based on some video (biased or not). To Misterbill's point, it doesn't happen a lot, but it happens.

 

[Misterbill]

Hey brother, I'm not saying that. Never have. Re-read my posts. I'm only suggesting that we make sure video is given its proper place as evidence of the whole. I'm sorry if anything I said lead you to believe I don't think they should be open to taping. Let me be clear so there's no mistakes: I believe the issue is a difficult one because of the possible negative impact in some circumstances where video can be misconstrued. That's it.

I did not say cops are free from public scrutiny. I never said there were lots of cases where cops were victimized by video taping. I only said we should be careful because it has happened.

Not sure why I'm the target of your anger when I never said anything you're accusing me of. Heck, in my last post I came right out and said that videoing public servants is the right thing to do...unless you believe gun control works...then my statement can be taken to mean we should ban video taping.

Sorry if I was crawling up the wrong butt. But no, I don't see how videotaping poses any more problem for police officers than eye-witness testimony. And it has the advantage of destroying bad cops' ability to depend on the thin blue line for defense.

Good cops get coerced into backing up BS police reports because they figure they will be in danger if they don't go along. A video-tape of an incident gives those guys a good "out" to refuse to go along. That may be the best reason taping.

 

[Caleqs]

Sorry if I was crawling up the wrong butt.

LMAO. That's the funniest thing I've read today. I'm going to use that if you don't mind. No worries.

But no, I don't see how videotaping poses any more problem for police officers than eye-witness testimony. And it has the advantage of destroying bad cops' ability to depend on the thin blue line for defense.

Good cops get coerced into backing up BS police reports because they figure they will be in danger if they don't go along. A video-tape of an incident gives those guys a good "out" to refuse to go along. That may be the best reason taping.

Man, that's a side of LE I don't see. Talk about a conundrum. No wonder most of the questions asked in police interviews of new candidates center around stuff like that.

 

[wyattburp]

As an LEO if I know someone is recording me I will put it my report. If you refuse to give me your contact information I will charge you with R&O. The second that recorder comes on it is now evidence of the incident and must be made available to the court. I have no problem being recorded, that IS your right. But, if it hits the fan are you going to be in the way causing me more stress and danger: I now have to worry about your butt as well? As I said I have no issue being recorded, just do it responsibly and respectfully. Stay out of my way and keep your mouth shut (if close enough to be a distraction). Also, some people who would generally be compliant and not cause problems get a little mouthier with the camera's on, and will make comments that are unnecessary. Here is a cop doing a good job handling an open carry citizen. Guy open carry stopped by ex Marine Policeman - YouTube

I'm glad I don't live in your neck of the woods...

IMO, an honest and respectful cop doesn't need to worry about being recorded. My dad (former cop) has ranted about the superior attitudes cops have "now-a-days" and how a little oversight might be good for the overall public perception.

 

[apd193]

I'm glad I don't live in your neck of the woods...

IMO, an honest and respectful cop doesn't need to worry about being recorded. My dad (former cop) has ranted about the superior attitudes cops have "now-a-days" and how a little oversight might be good for the overall public perception.

Had you read the whole comment that I made, I stated that I don't mind being video taped and that it IS your right. However, if an incident is to the degree that video taping is necessary than I would ask you to give me a copy of the recording. I am not going to keep your recording device, what good does that do me? I have asked several people who have recorded me to meet me at the police department so that I can make a copy of the incident. Not only have these people been willing to do so, they usually end up spending close to an hour or so talking with me in a more personal way and are able to get questions answered. I have not ever been denied a request to get a copy of someones recording. If an officer is honest in his request and can show the need to have said copy, why would you refuse to give him/her a copy.

I just had a case where my camera that I wear on my shirt did not work, and car video was not able to pick-up what I witnessed. I was at a convenience store getting a soda when a man I know not to have a DL and is an admitted alcoholic (he told me both things) drove up to the store, onto the sidewalk, and came with-in an inch of hitting the building. I observed the man driving. I could smell the odor of the alcoholic beverage as he walked past me into the store. I took the items I purchased out to my car, and was walking back in when the cashier came out and asked me to get rid of the guy. As I went in I observed him fall over dropping the beer he was trying to purchase.

I went through the investigation and arrested the man for DUI. Well, a young person here in my town was video taping the whole incident. I approached him and was able to get a copy of the video he shot. In this incident being video taped was beneficial to me. His argument in court was that I did not observe him driving (remember I don't have to be in my car to observe you drive). Long story short, the video from this individual in conjunction with the video from the store upheld my charges. On a side note I was not able to charge him with wreck-less driving as I did not observe and was unable to contact the victims of the property he drove over or the person he nearly hit. And he "only" drove three blocks to get his beer. And he blew a .141/.135

I have been backed up in court several times by video shot by the citizenry. Even to the extent of assisting getting two children taken away from an abusive mother. (We had been trying for years to get those kids out of her home. While during a custody exchange at the PD someone video taped the incident where I did not allow her to take the children, because she was abusing them in front of the PD. I obtained a copy of the video and was backed in court and the Health and Wealth-fare Department actually backed me up to.

So go ahead and record: just be willing to assist when needed, and don't make a situation worse by being present. Don't approach me in a traffic stop (open carry) stay a safe distance back {nothing says danger to a cop like a person approaching him with a gun holstered or not}. In the same way that I'm worried about my safety, I'm also worried about your safety (cause cops have "never" been shot during a traffic stop {by one in the vehicle or pedestrians}, they've never been hit by cars, had items thrown at them, or been blind-side attacked by pedestrians. If you are present you are in danger of being injured too. So just be safe and reasonable while you video tape, be smart in your approach. If a cop gets a little heated that you are present and in close proximity to him/her understand it is (most generally) with good reason.

And yes there are moron cops out there (I work with one). They make it difficult for everyone. But also remember we aren't perfect and are subject to mistakes just like you are; so before you go saying that a cop is bad, consider you don't know all the facts, and maybe he made a mistake. I have issued citations in the past, thought about it and have gone and retracted the citation: when the air was a little clearer and I realized that I wasn't fair in my judgment.

But then you get the video tape of the NM Trooper who lost his job while banging a lady in his uniform on the hood of his patrol car. An idiot in an idiot situation. I agree get rid of guys like that.

 

[Adam12]

I've been down this very road before. Since the police wouldn't do a dang thing, I fixed the problem myself. Got my property back and different neighbors as well.

So, take the law into your own hands? anarchy?

 

[Adam12]

Good cops get coerced into backing up BS police reports because they figure they will be in danger if they don't go along. A video-tape of an incident gives those guys a good "out" to refuse to go along. That may be the best reason taping.

Where is that going on? I've been a cop for over ten years and never been coerced into backing up someone's story. With 20 years as a cop, can you give me an example for a bad cop coercing you?

 

[Redcap]

So, take the law into your own hands? anarchy?

Call it as you like. I retrieved my property and made it abundantly clear that thieves are not welcome in these parts.

 

[iusmc2002]

Call it as you like. I retrieved my property and made it abundantly clear that thieves are not welcome in these parts.

Shame on you for doing something on your own! You should have taken him to court or, or or....... You're SUPPOSED to depend on other people to take care of these types of things for you, what if EVERYONE started doing that? You know, personal responsibility..... What would po-po's be for if we could solve our problems on our own? Tsk, tsk, tsk. In this economy, you should have kept calling the cops so they can keep making a buck

 

[Riot]

So, take the law into your own hands? anarchy?

Vigilantism