- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 12/31/18 at 1:26 pm to PearlJam
It can’t be the sole reason to continue detainment. But that is not what we are talking about. Again, the police asking your name doesn’t violate your rights. They can ask just as I could. If you refuse and they can ratiionally articulate to the court as to why they continued to detain, then you’re shite out of luck. I don’t think the bar is as high as you believe.
This post was edited on 12/31/18 at 1:59 pm
Posted on 12/31/18 at 1:26 pm to PearlJam
quote:
Curiosity, news reporting, video blogging, real estate appraisal, fun, hobby, etc. Recording a building from public property isn't a crime.
And upon questioning, what was his stated motivation?
Posted on 12/31/18 at 1:28 pm to TSLG
quote:
Meaux...I'm assuming you're in le?
Tangent to le.
Posted on 12/31/18 at 1:29 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:The federal government settled a case on this where it specifically directed it's le to train it's offices that filming a federal from public space wasnt against regulations.
The cops see a guy videoing a federal building. Are there non-criminal motivations for the action? Sure. But there are also severe criminal motivations for that action as well. And, upon questioning, the suspect 1) failed to identify himself or 2) or state a reasonable motivation for videotaping the building
Moreover, simply because one can identify a potential criminal motive to an activity, doesn't mean the activity rises to the level of reasonable suspicion as set out in Terry.
This post was edited on 12/31/18 at 1:30 pm
Posted on 12/31/18 at 1:29 pm to PearlJam
quote:
reasonable suspicion
Is vague for a reason
Posted on 12/31/18 at 1:29 pm to novabill
quote:
However, you are giving them more information than you are required to give them
What does it matter if you have nothing to hide?
I'd like to see this guy go somewhere that has a lot of criminal activity where some of it might take place in a "public" area like a park.. or a parking lot or something.. And video the activity where he can be seen... And see how much they care about his civil liberties.
Posted on 12/31/18 at 1:29 pm to PearlJam
quote:
Stop and ID required reasonable suspicion. See Terry.
Which, I believe, is easily established here.
Posted on 12/31/18 at 1:30 pm to PearlJam
You keep referring to a case settled in district court. That was a case of the defendant being arrested.
Posted on 12/31/18 at 1:31 pm to PearlJam
quote:
Terry
For someone who keeps referencing Terry, you have large misunderstandings of Terry.
Just sayin.
Posted on 12/31/18 at 1:31 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:It isn't. See Musumeci (you'll like his first name), which is on point, but was settled without an opinion. Still pretty persuasive.
Which, I believe, is easily established here.
This post was edited on 12/31/18 at 1:32 pm
Posted on 12/31/18 at 1:33 pm to Meauxjeaux
quote:The only understanding I've asserted is that a Terry stop required reasonable suspicion. Feel free to be more than vague about my misunderstanding.
For someone who keeps referencing Terry, you have large misunderstandings of Terry.
Posted on 12/31/18 at 1:33 pm to PearlJam
quote:
The federal government settled a case on this where it specifically directed it's le to train it's offices that filming a federal from public space wasnt against regulations.
Correct, the act itself isn’t illegal but that has no bearing as to whether to rises to the level of reasonable suspicion in terms of likelihood of a crime being committed in the imminent future.
It isn’t illegal to film kids in a park but you can bet that every mom in that park would be calling the cops on you and they would be well within their power to stop and question you.
Posted on 12/31/18 at 1:34 pm to Antonio Moss
You have to be able to articulate what crime the reasonable suspicion is related to. You can’t just say I think you are generally suspicious.
Posted on 12/31/18 at 1:38 pm to PearlJam
So you are against this?
If someone reports suspicious activity and the police show up and ask for ID and the suspicious person refuses all questions. What do you want to occur?
If someone reports suspicious activity and the police show up and ask for ID and the suspicious person refuses all questions. What do you want to occur?
Posted on 12/31/18 at 1:38 pm to Antonio Moss
quote:Right (it has some bearing, but your point is right), but given the totally of circumstances, someone standing in a high traffic area, conspicuously filming a building doesn't really provide specific, articulable facts supporting reasonable suspicion of a crime.
the act itself isn’t illegal but that has no bearing as to whether to rises to the level of reasonable suspicion in terms of likelihood of a crime being committed in the imminent future
This post was edited on 12/31/18 at 1:41 pm
Posted on 12/31/18 at 1:40 pm to Catman88
quote:Well since you've been so specific about what is the suspicious activity and the totality of the circumstances surrounding it, let me rush to answer this question.
If someone reports suspicious activity and the police show up and ask for ID and the suspicious person refuses all questions. What do you want to occur?
Posted on 12/31/18 at 1:41 pm to OweO
quote:It's an ego trip. It's a "I don't want to show you and you can't make me" type deal. That's all it is. It's a grown up version of a little brat being intentionally obstinate. They try to dress it up as though it's a grown up discussion about our rights vs law enforcement, police state, George Orwell's "1984", rabble rabble...
What does it matter if you have nothing to hide?
I don't give a frick if a cop asks me for my ID. Sure, here you go officer.
There are clear cut cases where some jughead fresh out the academy cop wants to bow up and cross boundaries, but in my opinion this is not a good example of that. Now if somebody had the nuts to intentionally speed in front of a cop who they knew was like that and they exposed him on camera, I would tell them good job. But again, this is a poor example of exposing that.
Posted on 12/31/18 at 1:41 pm to PearlJam
I know Musumeci and it’s completely irrelevant to this case. You are still confusing an acts legality and whether that act can rise to reasonable suspicion when taken with the totality of the circumstances.
Let’s take it to the extreme. We would agree that it’s legal for me to carry a gun? And it’s legal for me to drive a car on public roads? And it’s legal for me to drive behind whichever vehicle a choose? And it’s legal for me to have friends drive in cars behind me with guns, right?
All of that is absolutely legal.
But what if me and three friends in three separate vehicles, all carry weapons, following a vaulted bank vehicle for an hour until it reaches a remote stretch of highway?
Would that not rise to the level of reasonable suspicion?
Let’s take it to the extreme. We would agree that it’s legal for me to carry a gun? And it’s legal for me to drive a car on public roads? And it’s legal for me to drive behind whichever vehicle a choose? And it’s legal for me to have friends drive in cars behind me with guns, right?
All of that is absolutely legal.
But what if me and three friends in three separate vehicles, all carry weapons, following a vaulted bank vehicle for an hour until it reaches a remote stretch of highway?
Would that not rise to the level of reasonable suspicion?
Posted on 12/31/18 at 1:43 pm to PearlJam
Does the sign define to citizens what is considered suspicious? The person filming in this video is purposely filming to arise suspicion by his own record. Now you are telling us thats not reasonable suspicion. Nobody is saying the crime here is filming. However they are asking questions to confirm he isnt planning something that is.
Page 8 of 16
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News