Arrested for filming from the front yard?

[Guest 6.8 AR]

A camera on private property must be a deadly weapon? Really?

I think she won the lottery.

[Paladin132]

I agree we must on this one DaveTN. I just honestly do not like the idea of police having that much latitude in their discretionary powers as opposed to defusing a situation with what is being called verbal judo techniques.

As for your situation, that is a little different and does not involve private property, but rather a public road and someone approaching an officer, involving themselves more than walking out into their yard. As an officer, you have to work among the public all the time, and I will say that during take downs overseas we did not order people into their homes and that was in a situation that amounted to military law - of course we had more firepower sitting around Lol

As a last thought, what if you were filming from inside your home and was ordered to cease and desist, or even doing something innocuous like eating on your front lawn as a picnic and ordered inside. Seems like to me that she was nearly hysterical for being arrested - sort of like I imagine I would be should LEOs hit my door after misidentifying my residence as one in a warrant. I would be angry, and scared since I know I haven't done anything to cross the law.

I say it not to anger you, just trying to point out there might be another point of view sir.

Disagreeing is one thing that makes our country wonderful!

Edited June 23, 2011 by Paladin132

[Major Kong]

Yeah but she's one of these "am I detained?" people. I'm having a hard time mustering up any give a.. err poop. Crying about what was an obvious outcome from her actions. The only psychoses she's suffering from is stupidity.

Stupidity? Obvious outcome? Interesting, thanks for the insight.

[vontar]

Not everyone that crys while being arrested is mental.

There is no way the DA will take this to trial, he will probably try to get her to pea to something but if she don't accept it will be dropped before trial.

They might scare her into accepting a pea deal, but I hope she is smart enough to not accept it.

If it does to trial she will be entitled to a free lawyer and a jury trial if she wants it.

To put one more twist on this, if you don't feel safe with a person standing there were you can see them, how safe do you feel when they are behind closed doors were they can really watch you You don't know what she might have in that house.

[redfsr]

Not everyone that crys while being arrested is mental.

There is no way the DA will take this to trial, he will probably try to get her to pea to something but if she don't accept it will be dropped before trial.

They might scare her into accepting a pea deal, but I hope she is smart enough to not accept it.

If it does to trial she will be entitled to a free lawyer and a jury trial if she wants it.

To put one more twist on this, if you don't feel safe with a person standing there were you can see them, how safe do you feel when they are behind closed doors were they can really watch you You don't know what she might have in that house.

You aren't entitled to a "free" lawyer if you have the resources to pay. Most courts make you fill out financial forms under the penalty of perjury to determine if the court should appoint someone.

At first I thought she was wronged but the more I think about it, the camera doesn't show everything that was going on. That is the problem with cameras. They can be deceiving. They don't show everything that was going on. By the presence of the officers, this appeared to be more than a traffic stop for speeding, etc.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Just one idea--

Inconspicuous head-mounted sportscam.

[Guest TackleberryTom]

I think that I read somewhere that this lady knew the guy who was pulled over. I may be wrong. That one bit of info may have made the situation different. Otherwise, with the info from the video alone, the officer was way out of line. That would not have ended the same had it been in front of my house.

[Guest TackleberryTom]

Let me add, I don't mean violence. I would have called some higher ranking friends.

[bajabuc]

When you get right down to it...rules and regulations have made it impossible for a person to stand up for his/her rights.

The cops says...don't video me...and you have to stop...the cop says I fear for my safety, I need to enter your home...you can't refuse because HE said it. Your recourse is the courts...you fight it and suddenly you can't drive around the block before being arrested for suspicion...suspicion of what...doesn't matter...you made one of us look bad. The only thing I know for sure...a LEO can not pull you out of your car because he needs it.

[DaveTN]

A camera on private property must be a deadly weapon? Really?

I think she won the lottery.

The lottery on community service maybe.

Once again the media titles are simply grandstanding. This has nothing to do with filming and everything to do with obstructing Police.

I'd like to see the entire video, not just the portion the media decided to show. I' also like to hear from the Officers at the scene. Because thats what the DA or the judge will make their decisions based on.

[peejman]

Easy solution.... Leave the camera running. Sit it on a porch rail, chair, stair, etc. Go inside and watch through the window. That's no different than remote security cameras.

Big brother won't let me see the video, but someone commented that she was standing behind the police filming. I can see that making a cop a little nervous. LEO or not, some people just get anxious when they're being filmed, regardless of the situation.

[Mike.357]

I am not sure how she was obstrucitng anything.

I figure the cop was nervous that maybe he would get caught on video doing something wrong. Thats why he wanted her out of there.

Anyway the place to make your point is not on the sidewalk or your front yard. You will not win that battle right then and there. I guess you gotta decide if taking a ride is worth making that point.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

Dave, you assume too much. You go off and call someone insane. That was a

nice touch. An innocent bystander with a camera is made into being a criminal.

I guess the police are the only ones able to use technology against a civilian

populace. Someone wanted something covered up. I don't know the rules a

police officer has to live by, but I can't think of a camera as a deadly weapon.

I'm certain probable cause will end up being used. For what, I don't know.

[Guest GunTroll]

Dave, take off your cop hat and think of this in another way for a change. Why should we not challenge our authority respectfully? If we don't we lose. We are losing everyday from both fronts all for the name of safety." Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" BF . Isn't it somewhere in the Miranda rights that "anything you say or do can be used against you in a court of law" (para phasing here). Why can't that also go for the LEO's ? So if I must get consent to film a LEO (in NY and other states evidently) why do LEO's not ask for consent to film me when I'm pulled over? Seems like double standards to me. LEO's work for us and protect and serve us. I hate double standards. And if LEO's power continues to increase without balance, bad things will happen and you know it. America has a history of rebellion. Abusive authority more or less started this country.

And to get away from the filming, and more towards the order to go inside, Its ludicrous to think she should do so because this LEO told her to. She in no way was disrupting/obstructing his arrest from her yard. Please feel free to try to explain how she was. I didn't hear any verbal disruptions/obstructions. Didn't see any physical disruptions/obstructions. Maybe her camera had a light on and it impaired his vision? Please inform us?

ACLU as despicable as they are will sue for her probably. She will get paid. Probably get a better camera too.

Edited June 23, 2011 by GunTroll
I can't speel goodd

[Guest UberDuper]

A police officer is allowed to clear the area during an investigation and tell people to leave. This isn't a big deal. Playing the officer safety card is kind of a bitch move to get someone with a camera out of the area but he's well within his rights (for the lack of a better word) to do so.

From the video and article it doesn't look like she got beat or tazed or sprayed. She just got arrested. She chose her battle and she'll have to suffer the consequences. If anything, she now has legal standing to pursue a civil case that might get police policy changed.

I'm prone to holler about police stupidity/brutality/corruption/executions from the comfort and safety of my desk chair but this case is a non-issue. This woman refused a lawful order (albeit lame and without merit) from a police officer conducting an investigation. It's that simple.

[Guest GunTroll]

Yep. Its that simple to give up rights, alright.

[Guest iScream]

Confirmed:

(a) No person shall willfully fail or refuse to comply with any lawful order or direction of any police officer invested by law with authority to direct, control or regulate traffic.

I read this as applying only during some type of motor vehicle related command from a cop. Am I just crazy, or thinking too wishfully?

[Guest bnoland]

She was not arrested for filming in itself. She was arrested for what ammounts to obstruction/disorderly conduct in the state of TN. I never once heard the officer say anything about the camera, only about her being where she was. He said I "I dont feel safe with you standing behind me after what you said earlier before you started filming". That is an officer safety issue any day of the week. Not so much her being there alone but the chance that she may call other people to the scene and have others get riled up. Same reason why most officers don't allow people to make phone calls while you are detained. She was asked multiple times on the video to go inside of her home and she blatantly refused to do so. It didn't even look like they took her camera since you can see her being filmed while she was being arrested. It didn't seem like the officers carried about the filming, they just wanted her to go back inside. That is a very reasonable request.

[Guest bnoland]

I read this as applying only during some type of motor vehicle related command from a cop. Am I just crazy, or thinking too wishfully?

Traffic refers to vehicle and pedestrian traffic.

[Guest GunTroll]

I hate when "traffic" is used when pertaining to my private property or yard and me standing in it. Now when I'm cutting my grass I will think of myself as a pedestrian and follow all traffic laws while operating my John Deere lawn tractor.

Still waiting for an example of how she obstructed the duties of the LEO as far as to safely arresting the suspect. He cuffed, searched, and put the perp in the squad car, and If I might add, he did it rather well even with this woman obstructing him the whole time. Dave?

[DaveTN]

Dave, take off your cop hat and think of this in another way for a change.

I’ve walked in both the shoes of those cops and of an average citizen. Why would I want to disregard knowledge and experience I have? We don’t know what was going on with that traffic stop. He may have initially told her to get out of there because he was concerned about her safety because of who he was stopping. After that she just became a diversion that he had to deal with. We just don’t know.

As I said before cops don’t care if you film them; this wasn’t about filming; this was about obstructing Police. Why did the cop not feel safe? I don’t know, and if the press knew they aren’t saying.

Yes 6.8AR the woman is a loon. I’ve seen it happen plenty; People that disregard the warnings and get arrested are usually mental cases or drunk. She may have been both.

GunTroll, cops don’t make laws. The have the power their state legislators and the courts give them. There is no double standard.

Why should we not challenge our authority respectfully?

You can. The proper way for the woman to handle this would have been to go make a complaint against the Officers. It could have been explained to her in a better setting why she needed to get her crazy azz off the lawn and back in the house. She still may have not been able to comprehend what was going on, but at least she wouldn’t have been arrested.

Isn't it somewhere in the Miranda rights that "anything you say or do can be used against you in a court of law" (para phasing here). Why can't that also go for the LEO's ?

It does.

So if I must get consent to film a LEO (in NY and other states evidently) why do LEO's not ask for consent to film me when I'm pulled over? Seems like double standards to me.

This isn’t about filming. But you are right. People should be allowed to film what they want as long as they aren’t interfering, obstructing or violating someone expectation of privacy.

I hate double standards.

Then send in your HCP and your FFL; you are the poster child for double standards.

And to get away from the filming, and more towards the order to go inside, Its ludicrous to think she should do so because this LEO told her to. She in no way was disrupting/obstructing his arrest from her yard.

They will determine that in court.

Please feel free to try to explain how she was.

I can’t; I wasn’t there.

ACLU as despicable as they are will sue for her probably. She will get paid. Probably get a better camera too.

She won’t get a dime (or shouldn’t), with her prior conviction she will be lucky if she doesn’t do jail time.

[Guest GunTroll]

"Can We Tape?"

Just so you know. Everyone should know.

[Guest bnoland]

"Can We Tape?"

Just so you know. Everyone should know.

She was NOT arrested for filming. She obstructed officers performing their official duty by causing a safety issue because she was drawing the attention of officers by refusing to return to her home instead of allowing them to give their full attention to the task at hand. If she was arrested for filming they would have taken her recording device and this wouldn't be an issue because no one would have been able to post the video because it would have been tagged in to evidence.

[Guest 6.8 AR]

So by the bundle of ownership rights conveyed when you buy real property, there is an exclusion

for anyone who feels unsafe? That person, whatever her mental state, and I'm not a shrink, like

you must be, who thinks everyone else is a loon, recording with a camera is a criminal.

I think someone's ego should be checked at the door, before going to work.

We've gotten ourselves in a mess, especially with the current rulings. The police state is marching

forward. Videos like this show rank stupidity is taking out yet another of those formerly highly

held institutions. It's a shame. At least it isn't the norm in Clarksville. We still have an above average

group of men and women in blue.

[Guest GunTroll]

I’ve walked in both the shoes of those cops and of an average citizen. Why would I want to disregard knowledge and experience I have? We don’t know what was going on with that traffic stop. He may have initially told her to get out of there because he was concerned about her safety because of who he was stopping. After that she just became a diversion that he had to deal with. We just don’t know.

perhaps

As I said before cops don’t care if you film them; this wasn’t about filming; this was about obstructing Police. Why did the cop not feel safe? I don’t know, and if the press knew they aren’t saying.

sure if you say so

Yes 6.8AR the woman is a loon. I’ve seen it happen plenty; People that disregard the warnings and get arrested are usually mental cases or drunk. She may have been both.

GunTroll, cops don’t make laws. The have the power their state legislators and the courts give them. There is no double standard.

absolutely right there. Most politicians suck at defending our liberties too.

You can. The proper way for the woman to handle this would have been to go make a complaint against the Officers. It could have been explained to her in a better setting why she needed to get her crazy azz off the lawn and back in the house. She still may have not been able to comprehend what was going on, but at least she wouldn’t have been arrested.

takes money, maybe she is broke. Shouldn't matter because she was on her land.

It does.

This isn’t about filming. But you are right. People should be allowed to film what they want as long as they aren’t interfering, obstructing or violating someone expectation of privacy.

Right on!

Then send in your HCP and your FFL; you are the poster child for double standards.

Again I'm directly calling you out to explain yourself, Sir. WTF does that ^ mean? In fact don't bother I'm done with you.

They will determine that in court.

Yes they will.

I can’t; I wasn’t there.

But you have no problem assuming someone you never met is insane or drunk or both. And she was wrong for her actions. The LEO was right, etc. etc. Hypocritical statements on your part?

She won’t get a dime (or shouldn’t), with her prior conviction she will be lucky if she doesn’t do jail time.

LEO, JUDGE, JURY wow what a resume you have.

.