Surveillance cameras help police track suspects. They help collect traffic fines. They increase the power of the police.
They also serve as a warning to police. The cameras can catch police in infractions.
Such was te case in Rochester, New York. Two policemen pulled over a motorist who they said hd not come to a complete stop. They found drugs and a gun. He spent four months in jail.
He was released when a judge viewed the driver’s car on a video. In came to a complete stop. The police report was in error.
The man is now suing the city for false arrest and imprisonment.
Surveillance by the police can be surveillance of the police. The cameras are a two-edged sword.
Police departments will find that they have people looking over their officers’ shoulders. They will have to adjust.
That can not be all of the story!
How bad was the rep on this fellow and how much of the drug was found etc.
Yes there must be. I have cancer. I have drugs with me all the time and I carry.
Even if he had illegal drugs and an illegal gun, that evidence, too bad, the stop was and arrest were illegal.
re: "He spent four months in jail."
Get on the jury. Ask the Prosecutor to present the crime victim. "Not Guilty"
Maybe we need more cameras out there. Maybe the police should be wearing cameras and recording their activities. It's unfortunate but in many areas the people need even more protection from the police than by the police. If you don't fit their idea of a model citizen you will be harassed. It doesn't matter what color your skin is. Young white men get beat up by cops also you just don't hear about it when the victim is white.
I love you!
Who was the police officers? Hopkins and Smith of Sanford and Son fame?
Does it matter?
Who did he hurt with the drugs or guns? Nobody? Who did he hurt by rolling thru a stop sign? Nobody?
No victim, no crime.
You are more likely to be killed by a cop at a traffic stop than to be robbed by an un-sanctioned, non-government thief.
And what IF the guy had a bad rap? That does not condone the cops breaking the very code they are paid to uphold. In the first place the scum that calls itself "government" made a rule they have no authority to make, i.e., they claim the authority to say that "drugs" are illegal and the authority to literally kill people for possession and use. The problem is that "government" has stuck itself into the people's lives and is working hard to maintain the high price of drugs and was the initiator of "drug" related violence. If the cartels are brutal, "government" was brutal first and set the pattern for successful drug dealing.
I personally do not even take aspirin, I have no use for any of that s__t, but I am increasingly concerned with unethical bureaucrats including cops, with their assumed life and death power over the people and the notion that conferring a badge and a gun on a psychopath somehow changes the psychopath into an honorable government agent. It ain't so. That is particularly why decent people do not aspire to positions of power and, in my opinion, only the stupid, the reprobate, and those who cannot find an honest job become cops..
So, back to the question, what IF the guy had a bad reputation? Says who? Did he injure any of the people in their person or property? If not, then who fabricated the "bad rap" and based on what standard? Legislative statute? The efflatus of a bunch of bought off bureaucrats who through their unconstitutional armies work day and night to control and oppress the people? Gee, I wonder how a thoroughly corrupt legislature might arrive at a formula for defining a standard of behavior and then instruct their armies to enforce it on we the people? No, there is no defense of police in a free society. All the constitutions, original and phony, absolutely prohibit standing armies and we the people have the responsibility for our defense and our conduct under GOD, not scum that calls itself "government".
Please take me off your e-mail list
Take me off your e-mail list