Reporter Arrested, Thrown To The Ground For Cursing

from the someone's-about-to-get-a-lesson-in-the-1st-amendment dept

Do the police in Fairfax County, Virginia really not know about the 1st Amendment? It certainly appears that way after watching the video of them violently arresting a reporter named Mike Stark, who was trying to cover the gubernatorial campaign of Ed Gillespie. Now, because some people will want to mention this, I'll note that the following is (a) true and (b) makes no difference at all to this story: Stark works for a highly partisan website that is strongly opposed to Gillespie. But the points here would be identical if it were a reporter at the other end of the partisan divide following the opposing candidate. The positions of the reporter (or the candidate) are meaningless to the basic question of why the fuck was Mike Stark thrown to the ground, piled on by cops and arrested.

And "fuck" seems to be the key word here. The background is that Stark appeared to be filming Gillespie's bus, and a police office told him to "get out of the road" (from the video it's a little unclear, but it really looks like Stark was standing in what appears to be a driveway, not a road). Either way, he backs up a bit and argues a bit with the cop, most of which is impossible to hear. But you can make out him saying "I'm a fucking reporter doing my job." At that point, another cop says "If you curse again, you're going to go to jail." To which, Stark responds in the most responsible manner possible: "Fuck this." At that point, the one officer points to him and says "Go to jail" and the other moves him up against a fence. The officers appear to have some trouble getting Stark's hands behind his back, though it does not appear due to Stark resisting, just police officers who don't appear to be very good at their job. So they just swipe his legs out from under him, throw him to the ground (hitting his head on the pavement) and then a bunch of other officers run over and they all just pile on Stark, who repeatedly says he'll give them his hands if they just get off him so he can move the arm out.

Eventually, the cop cites Fairfax County Ordinance 511 which does (amazingly) say that "If any person profanely curse or swear or be drunk in public he shall be deemed guilty of a Class 4 misdemeanor." So that law is on the books -- but it's bullshit. There is no way that such a law is even remotely compatible with the First Amendment. And, of course, when actually charged, Section 511 was nowhere to be found. Instead, the cops charged him with the favorite of police who have arrested someone for no cause: "disorderly conduct" and "resisting arrest."

This is... bad. It's a clear First Amendment violation and an attack on a reporter. Others who have been arrested (sometimes on similar charges) for filming in public, have sometimes been successful filing civil rights lawsuits against the cops.

On a separate, but related note, it appears the cops did not realize they were being filmed until towards the end of the video where one of the cops walks over and angrily says to the person holding the camera:

"I'd appreciate it if you didn't film us. Really would. Ok? This job's hard enough. Honestly? It's hard enough."

Yeah, must be real hard when you get to body slam a reporter for daring to say the word "fuck" and then have to answer to public scrutiny for your thuggish violation of his rights. Real tough job.


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    Bergman (profile), 1 Nov 2017 @ 10:53am

    Hard Jobs

    Just about any criminal act is hard enough without someone standing nearby generating court-admissible evidence of the perpetrator's guilt.

    That doesn't mean that person should stop generating that evidence.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2017 @ 11:13am

      Re: Hard Jobs

      Exactly - one would think leos everywhere would like cameras and videos running to show they are doing their jobs properly.

      OTOH - bad cops would not like this at all and they might even rough you up a bit in retaliation for not "doing as yer told".

      That reporter will think twice next time - lol

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • icon
        Bergman (profile), 1 Nov 2017 @ 10:51pm

        Re: Re: Hard Jobs

        For those inclined towards high-risk activism, it might be interesting to have people standing nearby such journalists in the future (or even an agent provocateur working for the activist group) to make a citizen's arrest of the officers for the felony they commit when they violate constitutional rights.

        Granted, it wouldn't be safe, but if you had enough people in staggered layers, you could in theory take an entire police department into custody this way, 100% legally, as backup keeps showing up to find the previous backup in handcuffs, and attempting to stage an escape from custody in turn.

        Any constitutional, civil or statutory rights violation you can win a civil lawsuit over (42 USC 1983) is also a criminal act under 18 USC 242. Every state except North Carolina recognizes citizen's arrest as valid, and federal law states that anyone who can make arrests for state crimes can also make arrests for federal crimes, though they are not required to. Since federal court doctrine considers possessing a firearm while committing a crime -- even if the victim never sees the weapon -- to be an armed crime, police almost never commit a misdemeanor 242 violation, it's nearly always a felony.

        Is it likely to result in the police opening fire on the activists? Quite likely. But attempting to murder people for making a lawful arrest in order to free the criminal suspects they have arrested is something it is lawful to shoot the attacker over in 49 out of 50 states.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      PaulT (profile), 2 Nov 2017 @ 7:24am

      Re: Hard Jobs

      Indeed. If being aware that someone's recording your job performance makes it harder to do, you're either not comfortable doing it, or aware that you're doing something wrong.

      Call centre staff have their performance recorded all the time, as do most retail staff to some degree. I would hope that it wouldn't be a problem for armed public servants to be treated in a similar fashion, since they're entrusted with a lot more power & responsibility.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2017 @ 10:58am

    Tough job?

    Looks to me like the reporter got the tougher end of the job.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Hans, 1 Nov 2017 @ 2:51pm

      Re: Tough job?

      These reporters are true heroes, with families. They have a right to get home safely at the end of the day. No one wants to have to tell the family of a reporter that their loved one was hurt, or worse, killed, in the line of duty.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        JEDIDIAH, 2 Nov 2017 @ 12:02pm

        Re: Re: Tough job?

        It's much easier to do that if you don't commit crimes in front of a cop or otherwise antagonize the idiot with the gun.

        If you mouth off to a cop, you're talking your life into your own hands. It doesn't matter what color your are.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    crade (profile), 1 Nov 2017 @ 11:05am

    "I'd appreciate it if you didn't film us. Really would. Ok? This job's hard enough. Honestly? It's hard enough."

    Sorry to hear it is too tough a job for you. Don't let the door hit you on the way out

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2017 @ 11:08am

    Every cop knows the job is tough and those who remain as cops implicitly accept that. Having a tough day at work provides exactly zero license to trample someone's rights. LEOs need to remember they're public employees, employed to serve and protect... not harass and assault.

    Exactly where does our nation's law enforcement see this current path of aggression ending up? Are they truly surprised the law-abiding public is losing faith in them and starting to see them as the enemy instead of an ally?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2017 @ 11:16am

      Re:

      That's the problem -

      "they're public employees, employed to serve and protect... not harass and assault."

      .... the rich people


      Poor folk not so much, in fact quite the opposite.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Machin Shin, 1 Nov 2017 @ 11:42am

        Re: Re:

        Still holds true though, being a LEO is a hard job. Suck it up or get a different job.

        As for this idea that they are there to protect the rich... well any idiot who spends even a short time looking at some history books should find out that is a VERY bad job to take.

        There tend to be a lot more of us "poor people" and you can push this group around only so long before they collectively as a group say "fuck this". What follows is normally not pretty for anyone on the side of the "rich".

        Looking at the headlines and general feeling in this nation.... we are fast headed for the "fuck this" stage of things. Maybe now would be a good time for them to stop pushing around the "poor people"?

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2017 @ 11:08am

    This job's hard enough. Honestly? It's hard enough."

    I bet it just got a whole shitload harder, dickhead.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2017 @ 11:27am

    Confusion...

    "Do the police in Fairfax County, Virginia really not know about the 1st Amendment?"

    I think you meant to ask... "do they not care" which would be NO!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      crade (profile), 1 Nov 2017 @ 11:32am

      Re: Confusion...

      They know enough to know they won't be held accountable for violating it!

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2017 @ 12:23pm

      Re: Confusion...

      Don't forget, some courts have ruled that LEOs don't have to know the laws they enforce.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2017 @ 12:30pm

        Re: Re: Confusion...

        Yep, I do remember that one, it's sad that the Judge in question is not being impeached for Judicial Misconduct.

        Any judge that says a cop can arrest you for the cop not knowing the law deserves some frontier justice.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2017 @ 2:26pm

        Re: Re: Confusion...

        Sadly, the cops here DID know the law. It's just a bad law (or at least badly applied).

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2017 @ 11:31am

    Fuck the police? Go Fuck yourself. Lock him up. When he starts carrying a firearm to do his job, instead of a camera, I will cut him some slack too.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      crade (profile), 1 Nov 2017 @ 11:41am

      Re:

      Right. Just let the cops beat up people they know are innocent of any crimes.. Normally it would be a crime, but they have guns right? That makes it ok.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2017 @ 11:44am

      Re:

      Yeah, because a firearm is a true measure of how much a man someone is.

      You have a really small dick, don't you?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        David, 1 Nov 2017 @ 1:43pm

        Re: Re:

        You got that mixed up. Compensation for lack of dick is a big car. A firearm is compensation for lack of authority and courage.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      crade (profile), 1 Nov 2017 @ 11:48am

      Re:

      Not "Fuck the police", "Fuck the criminals".. whether they happen to also be police or not

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Machin Shin, 1 Nov 2017 @ 11:52am

      Re:

      Wait.... What the fuck? You will cut me more slack if I walk around with a gun? I am really confused. I think you broke my logic meter.

      Wouldn't the guy without the gun get greater respect? He was the one brave enough to go out without needing a gun to make him feel safe.

      Also on another side note. What the fuck? "When he starts carrying a firearm to do his job, instead of a camera" The guy is a reporter. Please, try and explain to me how a gun is a replacement for a camera. They both "shoot" things, but with really different end results. I really don't think we want our reporters out shooting guns every time they do a story.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2017 @ 12:26pm

        Re: Re:

        "I think you broke my logic meter."

        Don't worry, it was already broken a long time ago. But at least it is a good sign yours is not as broken as the tard you are responding too.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2017 @ 1:07pm

      Re:

      Yawn.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Mike Masnick (profile), 1 Nov 2017 @ 1:49pm

      Re:

      Fuck the police? Go Fuck yourself. Lock him up. When he starts carrying a firearm to do his job, instead of a camera, I will cut him some slack too.

      So, just to confirm: your argument is that if you're not a cop, you have no civil rights? Fascinating.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2017 @ 2:37pm

        Re: Re:

        Sounds like a Trump voter.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2017 @ 5:13pm

        Re: Re:

        >>> So, just to confirm: your argument is that if you're not a cop, you have no civil rights? Fascinating.

        Sheesh. What the first commenter meant was that just being civil to police isn't a burden compared to the likelihood of police actually getting shot at while protecting the rights of idiots who despise them.

        And, given your description of it, I'd say charges would stick if weren't a reporter: they'll use this for a crusade.

        Since some seem confused about "arrest": once told you're under arrest -- even if not deserved -- the only lawful option is to do as told, NOT struggle at all. You'll get your day in court later. Don't be a hothead.

        I recognize that some persons have legitimate problems with "arrest", but this isn't one of those case. This reporter made himself the story, period.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2017 @ 5:39pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          Yeah, blue boy. Deep throat that authoritarian cock. Mmmm!

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          That One Guy (profile), 1 Nov 2017 @ 5:45pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          Sheesh. What the first commenter meant was that just being civil to police isn't a burden compared to the likelihood of police actually getting shot at while protecting the rights of idiots who despise them.

          If police can't take someone saying 'fuck this' and hurting their feelings then they are more than welcome to get the hell out of such a stressful job and look for one where they don't have to deal with the public so much, and is perhaps safer. Might I suggest construction? Cattle farming? Perhaps garbageman?

          Protecting their rights? Like arresting someone doing his gorram job for talking back to police? Yeah, they seem super concerned about the rights of those around them.

          And, given your description of it, I'd say charges would stick if weren't a reporter: they'll use this for a crusade.

          No need to take his word for it, follow the first link in the article and you can watch the video yourself. I just did and I can attest that he isn't in the road, they did sweep his legs out from under him causing him to slam into the ground, and they dogpiled on him like a freakin' football team while at the same time demanding that he put his hands back.

          The only way they'd be able to 'use this for a crusade' is to try to scare people into submission. 'Talk back to us, prepare to eat the sidewalk'.

          I recognize that some persons have legitimate problems with "arrest", but this isn't one of those case. This reporter made himself the story, period.

          Yes, how dare he say 'fuck', that clearly justified a dogpile by incompetents followed by an arrest and the usual bogus charges which might as well be shorthand for 'contempt of cop'. /s

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • icon
          JMT (profile), 1 Nov 2017 @ 5:51pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          " What the first commenter meant was that just being civil to police isn't a burden compared to the likelihood of police actually getting shot at while protecting the rights of idiots who despise them."

          No, that's not what the first commenter meant. What he meant, because he stated it quite clearly, is that he thinks the reporter should be throw in jail (after being physically assaulted) for not talking nicely enough.

          There is no basis in law or common sense for the officers' ridiculous over-reaction. If the burden of the (statistically very low) likelihood of being shot at is so great then they should find another damn job.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2017 @ 8:26pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          The only lawful option? How politically correct. The second comes after the first for a reason. Wilful enforcement of obviously unconstitutional laws makes you a domestic threat to the constitution.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 2 Nov 2017 @ 12:49am

          Re: Re: Re:

          >What the first commenter meant was that just being civil to police isn't a burden

          People might be civil to the cops if they were approached in a civil fashion, rather in the aggressive fashion used by the cops.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 2 Nov 2017 @ 6:30am

          Re: Re: Re:

          What the first commenter meant was that just being civil to police isn't a burden compared to the likelihood of police actually getting shot at while protecting the rights of idiots who despise them.

          It is perfectly legal to give the police the middle finger. Ask the police in Saratoga NY about that, but be sure to do it nicely - they don't like being reminded of it.

          If they can't handle that, or it hurts their feelings, I personally don't give a shit. If they can't shake it off, why would I expect them to do anything other than run the other way when faced with a REAL threat?

          This reporter made himself the story, period.

          Actually, the fuck up of a cop made the reporter the story. The other fuck up who whined about being recorded certainly deserves some credit too.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 2 Nov 2017 @ 10:58pm

        Re: Re:

        there is no recourse for police who are walking human rights violators

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      DOoG, 1 Nov 2017 @ 3:11pm

      Re:

      So you're going to respect bank-robbers, gang-bangers and murderers more than upstanding citizens that are doing nothing wrong?

      Glad to know which side of the law you're on there Bubba Nobrains!

      It's probably a good thing that Dahmer was killed by a fellow-inmate back in '94, or your fetish over criminals, though he wasn't a gun-toting type, could have gotten yourself killed.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    I.T. Guy (I'm back.), 1 Nov 2017 @ 11:34am

    So tired of the bullshit... whaaa, my job's so tough whaaa. When in actuality the garbage man has a more dangerous job than doughnut dunker's. I hope he sues the pants off them.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2017 @ 11:39am

      Re:

      I hope he sues the pants off them.

      I, for one, would prefer that the cops not be pantsless. They're visually unappealing enough as it is. (Besides which, if cursing in public is an offense, what are the odds that being pantsless isn't?)

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    PlagueSD (profile), 1 Nov 2017 @ 11:42am

    Resisting arrest...I love that one. If I'm "resisting" arrest, then what charges am I being "arrested" for? If there are no "charges" then you are not "arresting" me. Therefore it is impossible for me to "resist" being arrested...

    I know this logic will fly WAY over some people's heads.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Mattheus (profile), 1 Nov 2017 @ 12:21pm

      Re:

      It's like a legal Mobius strip. You think there are two sides to the situation, but there's really only one: theirs.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      tom (profile), 1 Nov 2017 @ 12:46pm

      Re:

      I think "Resisting Arrest" is often a CYA charge in case the subject/victim requires medical attention either then or later. If he/she was 'resisting', then the injuries obviously occurred during the arrest attempt and are wholly the responsibility of the person being arrested. Otherwise, why is the person the LEO's were interfacing with covered in injuries? The Resisting charge is often coupled with "Attempting to Flee". Have seen this done on enough "Cops" shows when all the person did was take a step or two the wrong way or didn't immediately comply with the cop's request. And these are arrests they don't mind being televised.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      orbitalinsertion (profile), 2 Nov 2017 @ 12:35am

      Re:

      This has already been an established mode of action, yup. My favorite is the lawyer in the courthouse.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Jigsy, 1 Nov 2017 @ 11:53am

    Upon being thrown to the ground, the police kept repeating "Kenneth, what is the frequency?"

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2017 @ 12:07pm

    Wonder when the last arrest was... Could be an argument that its legalised by prescription? (I think that is the right term)

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    JoeCool (profile), 1 Nov 2017 @ 12:40pm

    Inevitable

    Well, the poor taxpayers of Fairfax county VA are going to be poorer still after the inevitable lawsuit that the police are clearly going to have to settle out of court for tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      That Anonymous Coward (profile), 1 Nov 2017 @ 1:56pm

      Re: Inevitable

      And I am very sure that the Chief coming out and saying they would do it again because fuck is a bad word won't add to many 0's to the settlement amount... oh wait.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2017 @ 12:42pm

    Stop being someone I don't like

    There problem solved, when you live in a fascist state, people of the state can harm and murder you because they don't like you an never have to take responsibility for their actions.

    THAT THAT THHHAATT IS ALLL FOLKS!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2017 @ 2:25pm

    Get the fuck out of the road and maybe you don't get your ass kicked while getting arrested.

    What makes this douchbag think he can block the bus? Fuck him, and fuck you if you think this guy should be able to do that. Reporter or not, fuck him.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Rapnel (profile), 1 Nov 2017 @ 3:00pm

      Re:

      fuck. you. apologist cunt.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2017 @ 3:52pm

      Re:

      Did you watch the video?

      He was on the sidewalk. Yes, there was a driveway there that crossed the sidewalk, but the bus was half a block away and not moving. Helps if you look at the source material.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2017 @ 3:53pm

      Re:

      As you are clearly the arresting officer I'm shocked you would use such language.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2017 @ 5:03pm

      Re:

      So do you suck off anyone in a badge for free or just at a really reduced rate?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      That One Guy (profile), 1 Nov 2017 @ 6:07pm

      Re:

      For one, watch the video, he wasn't in the road, at most he(and the cop telling him to 'stay out of the road') was in a driveway/cross street that the currently stationary bus might possibly have turned into at some point in the future.

      Two, even if he was in the street the fact that you apparently think that would justify getting his ass kicked while getting arrested is disgusting, and a perfect example of the kind of mindset that causes people to distrust and be disgusted by police. Thugs don't deserve respect, if they can't do their job in a professional manner and deal with the occasional 'fuck this' then they are quite welcome to quit and let someone more competent and capable replace them. If you're going to set the bar that low that shouldn't be very difficult at all.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      DB (profile), 2 Nov 2017 @ 3:41am

      Re: He wasn't charged with obstructing traffic

      If being in the street was the problem, the police would have added on a citation for that.

      It seems pretty clear what happened. The police officer was part of the security detail. He was told by someone working for the campaign to harass the reporter. He did. The officer thought that the profanity was a justification to roughly arrest the reporter. Before they filled out the arrest report the officer was told the law was unconstitutional, so they had to substitute 'disorderly conduct'.

      Without the video, the officer's narrative would stand. Before the age of ubiquitous video cameras I certainly would have believed it. But with the video it's clear that the police officer was arresting the reporter for a violation of section 511. They needed to substitute a different charge later to justify the arrest. Without a plausible charge -- one that wasn't obviously unconstitutional, the police couldn't justify the force used during the arrest.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 2 Nov 2017 @ 6:32am

      Re:

      Get the fuck out of the road and maybe you don't get your ass kicked while getting arrested.

      Now, now...we wouldn't want to offend any snowflake police officers reading this would we?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    DOoG, 1 Nov 2017 @ 2:43pm

    Law enforcement should be held to a higher standard.

    Any law enforcement personnel, local, township, county, state, federal, any whatsoever should be held to a higher standard, with higher penalties.

    Basically, what I am saying, because of the powers they wield, literally life and death over non-leos, then they need to be accountable at much higher level.

    What would be a 1 year prison term for a non-leo, would be a 10 year term for a leo, because less face it folks, they are the leos, and they damned well know better.

    It should also be a one strike you're out, for life kind of position. Because again, let's face it, they damned well know better.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    McGyver (profile), 1 Nov 2017 @ 3:51pm

    It's a very tough job, but you make it tougher for you and your colleagues by eroding the public's trust.
    Respect goes both ways, and the burden of that effort is in law enforcement's court since they are the ones entrusted to uphold the law and not violate it because they feel pissed off or disrespected.
    Yes, they are only human, but law enforcement is held to a higher standard and behavior like this just makes life harder for good cops.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      That One Guy (profile), 1 Nov 2017 @ 6:09pm

      Re:

      Yes, they are only human, but law enforcement should be held to a higher standard and behavior like this just makes life harder for good cops.

      Minor but important correction. They should be held to a higher standard, but pretty much everything I've seen demonstrates that they are instead held to a lower standard, given leeway far more and more often than a member of the public with regards to their actions.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2017 @ 4:16pm

    TIRE HAD BEEN PUNCTURED
    "On the ride home, he discovered his front passenger tire had been punctured."

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Stephen T. Stone (profile), 1 Nov 2017 @ 4:28pm

    Dear police officers: We understand that what you do is difficult. We just want to make sure that what you do is legal.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    That One Guy (profile), 1 Nov 2017 @ 5:55pm

    Don't want to be watched by the public? Don't take a job involving them in public settings

    "I'd appreciate it if you didn't film us. Really would. Ok? This job's hard enough. Honestly? It's hard enough."

    The only way I can see the job of a public servant, working in public being 'harder' if they are recorded is if they're doing something they don't want a third-party record of.

    They're big boys and girls, if they can handle people watching them then they can damn well handling people recording them, and if they really are following the laws they are tasked with enforcing then any recording will simply back them up on that.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      DOoG, 1 Nov 2017 @ 6:13pm

      Re: Don't want to be watched by the public? Don't take a job involving them in public settings

      Throw their own words back in their lycanthropic faces!!


      If'nz you ain't got nuttin' to 'ide, den you woun't care if'n we's records yuz everah move you make and every word you udder!!

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    TruthHurts (profile), 1 Nov 2017 @ 9:16pm

    Looking forward to the civil rights violations case..

    Wonder how many of those cops will end up in prison? I'm hoping every last one of them. In my own personal opinion, those "bozos" (sorry bozos for the insult) deserve a minimum of 10 to 15 years, and preferably served @ Gitmo for their constitutional terrorism!!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 1 Nov 2017 @ 9:34pm

    As a Fairfax county tax payer i would appreciate if the county police force would not make the county liable for Damages in losing civil suits. Officer act like you are always on camera because you probably are.

    I want every force to put to put a picture of Alan Funt saying smile you are on Candid Camera on the door out of every locker room.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Jeffrey Nonken (profile), 2 Nov 2017 @ 8:01am

    "I'd appreciate it if you didn't film us. Really would. Ok? This job's hard enough. Honestly? It's hard enough."

    My scalp wounds bleed for him.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 2 Nov 2017 @ 8:29am

    Typical PIGS!!!! I watched the Video, and I hope the Reporter gets a huge pile of money. As the the police, generally nothing happens to them. They're protected by the union. They should be thrown in jail for a few years.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 2 Nov 2017 @ 9:54am

    Sounds like he got a well deserved beating.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Ed (profile), 2 Nov 2017 @ 10:14am

    Cops just making cops look like SS troops, nothing out of the ordinary here.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 3 Nov 2017 @ 6:55pm

    "The land of the free" lol

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Thanks To Our Sponsors

The Techdirt Free Speech Edition
is a partnership with

with sponsorship from:

Essential Reading
Techdirt Insider Chat
Recent Stories

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.