Amy Goodman violently manhandled during unlawful arrest

[Mr Bean]

2. Police figuring these asshat protestors are more likely to cause trouble and skirt the edge to irritate a cop into doing something just because there are cameras there to record it all.

Right or wrong they are just being pragmatic not political.

Yes because that's a great idea, the Police are allowed to break the law to protect a fellow cop, that's just what we want is to encourage the police to adopt a "no rats" policy.

No serious you missed the point Timotheus, these folks(Cop-Watch, and other such groups) take Camera's and they film protests, and they follow cops around to watch them.

And when you know something happens like a cop assaulting a reporter, or a on beat cop body checks a cyclesit claiming the man "assaulted him" then you need to catch that.


I have this idea Timotheus, and maybe it's just me, but if you a cop and your being filmed then you should have no issues with it since your... you know upholding the law? We do have all sorts of special laws saying what cops can and can not do and they have many more freedom's than your average American when on duty. If your not you know... breaking the law? Then why have any issue with people filimg(At a distance) as you go about your job.

Let me reinforce that, Cop-watch and other such groups film from the sidelines(Often from inside buildings) specifiably so they don't get in the polices way. But in the last few days in St Paul the cops have sought out such groups and arrested their members without charges and taken their equipment.

That does NOT look good.

[Kamakazie Sith]

The problem is that the article is addressing two issues at once. The initial two detentions, which were clearly out of line, and Goodman's White Knight delusions, which were foolish. Yes, one caused the other, but you can't tar all three with 'But Amy Goodman's an idiot for trying to bust the other two out.'

To KS, a question that's come to mind over the course of this and several other threads. At what point should the populace cease trusting the police, and how do you measure that? I'm not at all saying that point has been reached, at least not nationally (individual 'bad apple' districts are another story, but not what I'm focusing on), but I'm curious as to where you think that point would be, and what actions would be reasonable after reaching that point.

Like you said how do you measure that? It seems like it would be a personal choice. The question you should ask yourself is are you arriving at your conclusion rationally?

Take the other thread where the police raided those activist homes. It is probably rational to distrust the police when it comes to incidents where there is a political factor especially with the republicans giving them a free get out of being sued card. (Very disappointed by the way it pisses me off that they have no integrity)

[Kamakazie Sith]

Do the cops actually bring their own cameras?
Last mayday i was in Berlin to watch the anual riots and the cops themselves had huge amounts of cameras. The masses throw rocks and bottles at them and as soon as the cops have an individual clearly on camera they move in and arrest him.

Yes, during large activities we bring our own cameras due to the fact that people edit their films so it will be taken out of context.

[White Haven]

<snip>

Like you said how do you measure that? It seems like it would be a personal choice. The question you should ask yourself is are you arriving at your conclusion rationally?

Take the other thread where the police raided those activist homes. It is probably rational to distrust the police when it comes to incidents where there is a political factor especially with the republicans giving them a free get out of being sued card. (Very disappointed by the way it pisses me off that they have no integrity)

As much as the whole 'Lulz we pay for lawsuits' arrangement is a problem, it's only ABLE to be a problem because there's apparently no way to pursue criminal charges against law enforcement officers for these blatantly criminal actions. When civil suits are your only recourse, they become meaningless if you happen to be squaring off against the rich.

[White Haven]

Edit: The rich or the rich-backed.

[Thanas]

In Germany it is exactly like this. If you resist arrest by a cop who tries to unlawfully arrest you, you can not be charged.
If the arrest is lawful and you can prove that at the time of resistance you thought that it was unlawful and it is determined by the court that it is within reasonable circumstance that you thought that the arrest was unlawful you can not be charged either.

Same with escaping from prison. It is not a crime and you can not be charged for it. Even if you were imprisoned for a real crime.

While this appeal strongly to the personal nature of my freedom and right to avoid being detained or punished unfairly I agree with Mike. It's a legal nightmare waiting to happen. It's taking the law into your own hands and it's a horribly bad precedent.

That law has existed for over 50 years and has yet to turn into a legal nightmare. All it takes is sane courts.

[Justforfun000]

That law has existed for over 50 years and has yet to turn into a legal nightmare. All it takes is sane courts.

And lets be honest...mature citizens.

[Singular Intellect]

That law has existed for over 50 years and has yet to turn into a legal nightmare. All it takes is sane courts.

And lets be honest...mature citizens.

Two criteria, particularily the mature citizen one, that I personally have little trust in.

[Timotheus]

2. Police figuring these asshat protestors are more likely to cause trouble and skirt the edge to irritate a cop into doing something just because there are cameras there to record it all.

Right or wrong they are just being pragmatic not political.

Yes because that's a great idea, the Police are allowed to break the law to protect a fellow cop, that's just what we want is to encourage the police to adopt a "no rats" policy.

No serious you missed the point Timotheus, these folks(Cop-Watch, and other such groups) take Camera's and they film protests, and they follow cops around to watch them.

And when you know something happens like a cop assaulting a reporter, or a on beat cop body checks a cyclesit claiming the man "assaulted him" then you need to catch that.


I have this idea Timotheus, and maybe it's just me, but if you a cop and your being filmed then you should have no issues with it since your... you know upholding the law? We do have all sorts of special laws saying what cops can and can not do and they have many more freedom's than your average American when on duty. If your not you know... breaking the law? Then why have any issue with people filimg(At a distance) as you go about your job.

Let me reinforce that, Cop-watch and other such groups film from the sidelines(Often from inside buildings) specifiably so they don't get in the polices way. But in the last few days in St Paul the cops have sought out such groups and arrested their members without charges and taken their equipment.

That does NOT look good.

I was not supporting their actions at all. I was merely saying that their was nothing at all political about their actions.

[Alyrium Denryle]

2. Police figuring these asshat protestors are more likely to cause trouble and skirt the edge to irritate a cop into doing something just because there are cameras there to record it all.

Right or wrong they are just being pragmatic not political.

Yes because that's a great idea, the Police are allowed to break the law to protect a fellow cop, that's just what we want is to encourage the police to adopt a "no rats" policy.

No serious you missed the point Timotheus, these folks(Cop-Watch, and other such groups) take Camera's and they film protests, and they follow cops around to watch them.

And when you know something happens like a cop assaulting a reporter, or a on beat cop body checks a cyclesit claiming the man "assaulted him" then you need to catch that.


I have this idea Timotheus, and maybe it's just me, but if you a cop and your being filmed then you should have no issues with it since your... you know upholding the law? We do have all sorts of special laws saying what cops can and can not do and they have many more freedom's than your average American when on duty. If your not you know... breaking the law? Then why have any issue with people filimg(At a distance) as you go about your job.

Let me reinforce that, Cop-watch and other such groups film from the sidelines(Often from inside buildings) specifiably so they don't get in the polices way. But in the last few days in St Paul the cops have sought out such groups and arrested their members without charges and taken their equipment.

That does NOT look good.

I was not supporting their actions at all. I was merely saying that their was nothing at all political about their actions.

Yeah, and you are flat wrong, as has been demonstrated in this thread, what with the GOP paying the insurance that covers the inevitable lawsuits...

[Death from the Sea]

One protester came up with his own way of dealing with thuggish policemen:

Crooks and Liars

If policemen are going to be such hoodlums and the authorities are not going to do anything about them, then it's only a matter of time before more people take the law into their own hands, just like the nutter who jumped the cop in the video.

By the way, that asshole in a badge probably won't be charged, even though he deliberately attacked bystanders and reporters.

depending on what the guy the officer was dragging off had been doing determines alot here. But I think that it is pretty easy for the officer to justify his actions there, once he was hit by that coward that ran away. The officer was greatly outnumbered by a crowd that was hostile towards him, once attacked and the officer was down, the crowd began to close in even more on the officer. Had he not sprayed the crowd may have joined in on the attack on the officer. The officer safety issue even played such a large role that the officer ended up letting the guy he was pulling (dragging) down the street go free so he could retreat from the crowd.

Coward? what was he going to do? duke it out mano'a'mano?:lol: the only rule is winning, this cop lost, that's all there is to it.

attack a person from the back and then runaway like a little bitch, yeah, that is a coward. What the guy should have done was not attack to officer.

[Kamakazie Sith]

<snip>

Like you said how do you measure that? It seems like it would be a personal choice. The question you should ask yourself is are you arriving at your conclusion rationally?

Take the other thread where the police raided those activist homes. It is probably rational to distrust the police when it comes to incidents where there is a political factor especially with the republicans giving them a free get out of being sued card. (Very disappointed by the way it pisses me off that they have no integrity)

As much as the whole 'Lulz we pay for lawsuits' arrangement is a problem, it's only ABLE to be a problem because there's apparently no way to pursue criminal charges against law enforcement officers for these blatantly criminal actions. When civil suits are your only recourse, they become meaningless if you happen to be squaring off against the rich.

Actually, there is a way to pursue criminal charges. You file with the city prosecutor.

[Elfdart]

How do you go about identifying the policeman decked out in clonetrooper armor who manhandled you for no reason? Get out a pad & pencil and ask their name and badge number?

[Kamakazie Sith]

How do you go about identifying the policeman decked out in clonetrooper armor who manhandled you for no reason? Get out a pad & pencil and ask their name and badge number?

Well, in this case the officer wasn't wearing "clonetrooper" armor, and was captured on camera. I recommend you stop jerking off, wipe your own cum from your eyes and actually pay attention to what's in the video.

Besides unless I'm mistaken police are required to wear nametags or some type of identification (like a number) with riot gear.

[Nova Andromeda]

How do you go about identifying the policeman decked out in clonetrooper armor who manhandled you for no reason? Get out a pad & pencil and ask their name and badge number?

Well, in this case the officer wasn't wearing "clonetrooper" armor, and was captured on camera. I recommend you stop jerking off, wipe your own cum from your eyes and actually pay attention to what's in the video.

Besides unless I'm mistaken police are required to wear nametags or some type of identification (like a number) with riot gear.

-He obviously was not talking about just this individual case which is clearly the exception to the rule (i.e., only a small percentage of police activity is caught on camera).

[Kamakazie Sith]

-He obviously was not talking about just this individual case which is clearly the exception to the rule (i.e., only a small percentage of police activity is caught on camera).

Whatever. Names/Identification is stll visible on all uniforms.

[CJvR]

We have a law here requiring police in riot gear to be marked with large clearly visible identity marks so that they could be identified when all the "innocent bystanders" who just happened to be in the path of a riot could file proper colmplaints. Unfortunately, but hardly surprising, the identifiers also made it possible to coordinate more serious attacks on those officers which lead to many taping over the ID marks.