Corrigan Texas Police unlawfully cite man for Recording Police

 

Comments

Auditor Philip Turner challenges an unlawful prohibition of filming the Police by giving the officers a card containing the legal case that he won which established the right to record the police: Turner vs Driver.

The 2 police officers didn’t seem to realize that the last name he told them corresponded to the name of the legal case written on the card.

Thanx for what you do Patriot.

Hands him case law with his name on it and he literally makes the same stupid mistake. Oh well. Gotta learn somehow. Thanks for your reporting!

How dumb do you have to be to arrest a guy for filming a police station, as he is literally handing you a card and explaining the Federal case law, the case that HE WON, that recognizes an individual’s right to film the police and police departments?
Meet Officer Brown and Officer Foster of the Corrigan Police Department.

Would love to see the looks on their faces when they realize they cited the guy whose name is on the case law that makes it a civil rights violation to have detained him.

It’s terrifying and upside down when a city ordinance can supersede a federal law. That’s like saying murder is legal but only on your own private property.

You cant even be around patrol cars? AND they park them near the entrance… So it’s illegal to enter the PUBLIC BUILDING?!

The whistle out of the cop prior to him citing you is a psycholocial marker of his feeling insecure knowing he is wrong. The swagger of the same officer nails it. Evidently the entire department lives in a hole.

It’s interesting that they made a law to stop him from expressing his constitutional rights 🤷🏻‍♀️🤔 seems like oathbreakers to me

@Let the James Begin well their cops are there as roadside robbers so are not very bright. The mayor is married to the chief so ah, nothing wrong there huh.

Thank you for the good work you are doing following up on this injustice. They are hoping nobody will fight this court and get it overturned. I hope you have the financial means to follow through on this. I hope other auditors do the same.

Should also foia request the body cams of every cop at this pd’s last 5-10 arrests and see just how bad the problem is in small towns and how many illegal acts the cops do,guaranteed you’ll find some footage that will go viral

If you don’t have the law on your side, intimidate, inconvenience, and lie. And cops wonder why they are getting so much hate
I just so pray that the Supreme Court of the United States of America takes up this case. Turner v Drivers is clearly established in the Fifth Circuit but the Republicans in state legislature are beginning to challenge this constitutional rights of freedom of the press for citizen journalist. Ohio, Georgia, and Florida are considering similar laws. We are looking for The Battousia to handle our business for freedom. God bless The Battousia!!! It is amazing how ignorant law enforcement officers are concerning the basic principles of the Constitution which underlies are systems of governing. This is a blatant disrespect for the rule of law.

And since Turner v. Driver has been established, they don’t get qualified immunity, right?

Man this town has a fortune wrapped up in signs….look at all of them.

 

Let’s talk about systemic failures in Uvalde….

“Protect and Serve” is a brand slogan, not a mission statement. You should believe it exactly as much as you believe shopping at Walmart will make you “Live better”, or that chewing mint flavored gum will “Double your pleasure”.
The same type of cop that will stand in a hallway while kids are being shot will stand by and watch another cop strangle a hand cuffed suspect. We’ve got a problem.
The “no duty to protect” really hits home. And it’s scary how some people in this country bow down to these power hungry tyrants. This incident has really laid bare how extensive these issues are within the system.
Without accountability, there’s no change- so much truth there.
The single thing that I can’t get out of my head is the knowledge that as angry, frustrated and disgusted as I was watching the heavily armed, helmeted, body armoured, ballistic shielded law enforcement officials milling around, they could hear something I couldn’t because it was edited out…… The screams of the children 🥺 and still they did nothing 🤬
This is the most ticked I have seen Beau. And I have the feeling this was probably the umpteenth version.
The Uvalde PD is just a symptom of the larger problem: PD considers ANYONE (including children) as less important than themselves. They don’t care about you or I. They care about themselves. No one else. Until that changes then this type of behavior will repeat.
Their paychecks are comprised of our taxes. There is a special relationship. Someone better put that in a law PDQ.
‘In retrospect Sandy Hook marked the end of the US gun control debate. Once America decided killing children was bearable, it was over.’ (Dan Hodges)
I explained the same ruling to my wife and she replied, “I thought they were heroes.” Then I replied, “Heroism is optional.” It broke her heart because it was 19!!! children being murdered.🙏
What makes it worse is those “I’m going home at the end of my shift” cops do their best to get rid of the cops willing to protect their community, so they don’t feel inadequate.
After seeing the Uvalde footage, it’s hard to not want to “defund the police”. Especially when citizens stop active shooters all the time on their own. We actually care about each other.
Problem with that Beau… A state legislature did spell out the legal obligation of the police… and the Supreme Court ruled that the State violated the rights of the police to selectively enforce laws, and thus, the woman wasn’t able to successfully sue the police for the murder of her kids.
She had a restraining order against her estranged (violent) husband. The state laws explicitly said any person who violated such restraining order shall be arrested as soon as possible. The man goes to her place, asks the kids to get into the vehicle, then drives off. He calls the woman about having the kids. She calls the police. The police refused to go and arrest him. He shows up later that night and commits suicide by cop. When the police search his vehicle they find the bodies of the kids in his vehicle.
I doubt the USSC would rule in any other way even when the Federal Government makes such a law… You live in a defacto police state propping up an oligarchy…
As a nurse, if I failed to initiate CPR on anyone without a DNR, I would likely lose my job and be forced to defend my license to practice. Why aren’t cops held to any standards?
Deshaney v Winnebago County is the supreme court case referenced in the video https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/DeShaney_v._Winnebago_County
I think it’s time to start hiring human beings as police officers. Whatever it is they’ve been hiring haven’t been working out that well.
I guess the question is “To serve and protect who?” And the answer is themselves and our corporate masters. They not only should protect children, they should protect all of us my ex was a cop almost 50 years ago in a small town. He would be ashamed to count himself in their ranks. Of course, he once singlehandedly disarmed a man with a machete. And he was 5’10” and weighed all of about 160 soaking wet. It’s a matter of thought and courage. And they wonder why we want to defund them. (And of course, a lot of those children were brown.)
So if that’s what 40% of a cities budget looks like spent on police….maybe let’s try 40% on mental health and welfare…and I bet things would be better
“No duty to protect” while simultaneously being protected “qualified immunity” and spending more time focused on “civil asset forfeiture” than on public safety. It’s dystopian dysfunctionality by design… they are essentially private security for corporations, the politically connected and the government.

The government murdered Fred Hampton. Will it ever be held accountable?

Flint Taylor and Jeff Haas, co-founders of the People’s Law Office in Chicago, were the lead lawyers in the landmark case that exposed the FBI’s involvement in the assassination of Black Panthers Fred Hampton and Mark Clark. While that case was settled nearly 40 years ago, newly revealed documents show that the conspiracy to murder Hampton and cover up evidence of government involvement goes deeper than most ever imagined. In this special episode of “Rattling the Bars,” Eddie Conway talks with Taylor and Haas about their decades-long battle for the truth, the government’s continued surveillance and persecution of dissenters, and the ongoing fight for justice and accountability.

Read the transcript for this video: https://therealnews.com/the-governmen…

 

Comments

These two gentlemen have been heroes of mine since graduating from an Illinois liberal arts college in 1969 They are 2 examples of what propelled me to a career as criminal defense attorney Thank you, gentlemen, for all you have done. And thank you, Eddie, for gracing us with their exceptional perspectives–not to mention the hero status you all have in my eyes. My 60’s cohorts and I were already radicalized by the time Fred Hampton was murdered. We witnessed–sometimes in real time–inspiring leaders with vision, integrity, benevolence, charisma, and promise, including JFK, MLK, RFK, get taken out. Seemed like the same set of unscrupulous government actors, whose unchecked grip on power was being threatened had teamed up with crime figures and others facing the same threat, to eliminate such leaders. That conclusion has been repeatedly bolstered with each similar political “elimination” since, including Fred Hampton. Keep fighting for justice.

 

They hide behind labels and saying government did this is like saying your gun was responsible for the shooting. “Individuals” who were involved need to be held accountable.

 

We should be teaching our kids about hero’s like these gentlemen.

 

Cointel pro never ended. It’s name was changed. Look into phoenix, fusion centers, and parallel construction.

We Arrest Journalists For Free Press, But That’s Not A Violation Of Free Press

 

This is the most dangerous kind. Feigning ignorance in an attempt to pacify, then becoming argumentative when challenged. Anyone who believes this officer is anything but disingenuous is an absolute Blow Pop.
This is the most dangerous kind. Feigning ignorance in an attempt to pacify, then becoming argumentative when challenged. Anyone who believes this officer is anything but disingenuous is an absolute Blow Pop.
The Sheriff’s STILL REFUSE to return Cache valley’s PHONE, sickening!!
LOL! “I’m not going to debate with you.” Instant fail. THAT is the sound of a cop who just got caught being ignorant,arrogant, wrong, and violating the Constitution.
This guy lies like crazy. He knows about releasing records, they just act stupid so they don’t have to release videos until the attorney General makes them. Then they Redact so much of it that it shows nothing. Then you are forced to start all over with the Attorney General. It’s like a dog chasing his tail. You just hardly ever get what you want even if you draw them a detailed picture.

You’re going to put up with what the law allows councilman! The police will not even listen to you.

 

Councilman says everyone’s views will be respected and allowed to speak without interruption, then proceeds to interrupt and disrespect the citizen. A coward and a tyrannical hypocrite.

This needs to be taught and instilled to our children, and repeated over and over by grown adults: “the price of freedom is eternal vigilance…”

 

 

This is absolutely atrocious. His right to address his government is being stomped on. I appreciate that the police did not prevent him from speaking but they should have gone further and had this disruptive councilman removed. He had no right to behave this way. It’s his job to shut up and listen to the people. This country is just completely off the rails. The inmates are running the asylum and the majority of our citizens have no clue or concern. It’s so frightening.

 

 

Unlawful to interrupt a citizen in a public forum once they begin their allotted time. This Councilman should know this, so should the officers. There is no “back and forth” or debating during public forum. What a slimeball., file an injunction against the entire board. That was despicable.

 

He’s NOT ALLOWED to interrupt public comments. The public has a statutory right to comment on public policy UNMOLESTED.
Like this dude is literally asserting himself as a despot and attempting to silence people. When this is seen there should be IMMEDIATE ACTION.
The real story here was the guy sitting in the back of the room, trying to get the guy speaking thrown out, so an officer made him sit down and stood next to him to intimidate him! Lol!
Purpose of meetings is for the public to voice out grievances!!! SO the government MUST LISTEN CAREFULLY AND FULLY SO THE PUBLIC WILL BE SATISFY OF WHERE TAXPAYERS GOES AND FOR WHAT IT IS SPENT!!!!
“Everyone should be protected unless you’re going to criticize me” is what he was trying to say
Blatantly interrupting and not allowing the member of the public to speak openly. Just because he doesn’t like what is being said he doesn’t have the power to be the only person to speak uninterrupted. He is abusing his power.
The COURT actually said he could NOT post on social MEDIA???? WTF? You only need watch this councilman react to earned criticism with an attempt to overstep his authority as well as VIOLATE HIS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS.
i like how the council member talks about respect but have no clue what respect means , also complains about being intrupted but then intrupts him , open mic mean FREE SPEACH. and also WELL DONE cops upholding this guys rights
I’ve called “points of order” in two different commission meetings (one city and one county) and both were actually handled appropriately.
What a crooked city council, nobody says anything about this man’s rights, shame, disgrace, dirty councilman.
If they’re doing this criminal action in plain view what are they doing behind closed doors….???
The councilman doesn’t understand that his feelings mean absolutely nothing and he’s clearly disregarding case law and federal law. This man needs to be voted out of his position and charged for suppressing his 1st amendment right as well as stopping his time to take a break cause they did t like what was being said, these people are spineless and ignorant beyond belief. These officers need to stop approaching the man speaking trying to intimidate him to stop. Please file an injunction against the meeting and members.
When a councilman thinks he’s in charge of everything instead of working FOR the people
Christo needs to do this the next time they pull that shit, state plainly on camera the following verbatim. “By interrupting my time you’ve violated my rights and standing case law, and have committed felonies under 18 USC 241 and 242. At this time every member before me who has acted to prevent me from speaking during the period of public commentary is under citizen’s arrest and hereby remanded into the custody of the officers standing in session and witness to the aforementioned crimes.” The officers will have no other choice but to arrest every council member in the room.
Absolutely runs away on this guy’s of a recess just to shut him up since the cops wouldn’t remove him
I would have demanded my 6 uninterrupted 6 minutes. Why does the council hear personal attacks but the speaker is describing actions done or not done by the council. Calling them names just plays into their hands. You have reams of actions by these people. Use that to your benefit. No matter what you use to describe them honestly still slows your cause. Constructive argument and FACTS. My granny used to say “Kill”em with kindness“. Sounds kind of simple but you cant fight someone who is smiling and speaking in a harmonious tone as your words cuts them with a thousand cuts. I’ve never mastered it. I tend to go straight at it then let my wife tear them a new one.
Isn’t Joshi the guy who had his uncle take the blame for pulling campaign signs from peoples yards; and he still got elected mayor? The “dumbing down is real.
Funny how the cops came over to Christo, instead of going after the Councilman that is breaking the law.
I don’t understand how the court can prohibit a person from posting on YouTube while their case is pending, I imagine that stipulation is part of the bond agreement. That being said, others can post whatever that stipulation keeps him from posting.
The saddest thing about this meeting is that there were no other speakers and only one crazy person in the room in the corner. We are doomed!
Why are the cops not taking the council member to jail for breaking the law.
Public comments do not have to be about the business at hand. These people are truly corrupt. We all need to start going to all city council meetings. The shit they do there is astonishing.
Mayor has a bathroom break directly after a recess…imagine that
Mayor has a bathroom break directly after a recess…imagine that
He need’s to get his minute’s back’ The constant interruptions & threats to have him removed 😡😡
The cops ain’t gonna waste time for a pointless arrest again. He never gets charged in the end so why do it.
Voicing grievances is allowed. But I find if you do it with respect and not contempt, it speeds the success of resolve.

European Law prohibits filming the police in Davos

 

Saagar takes viewers through the agenda of the 2022 World Economic Forum held in Davos that made speech restriction and controls on free speech central to the agenda for the world to see

Original: YouTube

Video Comments

  • During a 2018 trip to Italy, our tour guide in Florence told us to be careful not to take any photos of the police who were patrolling around the historical monuments. He said specifically “this is not America – this is not a free country. if they see you take their picture, they will confiscate your camera or phone and they will not return it. you don’t have rights here” It was pretty eye opening.
    Censorship isn’t designed to combat disinformation, it’s designed to combat dissent.
  • “Recalibration of a whole range of human rights.” No.
  •  Right. The irony is that while you can’t film anyone without their consent, the overlords will be recording your every move using facial recognition software in fully automated cities.
  • If it wasn’t for Sagaar I wouldn’t have found out that the WEF is in fact a privately owned organisation, that peddles (and makes lots of money from) providing corporate access to government officials. I am grateful he’s pointed out what an Australian government official has said at DAVOS because its NOT being covered here at all.

 

More Research:

I wanted to know whether Sagaar was reporting an isolated incident or taking things out of context so I did more research.  Here are some of the top search results for:

 

What the Law Says About Filming the Police in Europe

In some countries, moves are afoot to curtail documenting police actions.

Spain in 2015 enacted the Citizen Security Law (better known as the gag law) that threatens a hefty fine for the unauthorized publication and dissemination of images of the police.

In Belgium, a video blogger is appealing a €300 fine imposed by a court for filming and uploading two police officers’ response to an incident at a café, which in the court’s view violated their privacy. The Belgian interior minister is reportedly considering a formal legal ban.

The lower house of the Dutch parliament recently adopted a motion calling for a change in the law that would result in the prohibition of the publication of recognizable images of police officers.

.. The right to film or photograph the police is a key safeguard of human rights and civil liberties in situations, particularly in situations that present a high risk of violations, such as stop-and-search operations, identity checks, or protests. Activists have argued that filming the police in action is a way to de-escalate tensions and potential violence, as the police officer is forced to behave in accordance with the law. Where abuses do occur, victims often find their version of events will not be believed unless video and photo evidence are available to support their claim against the police.

 

Can I film the police in Germany?

There is no exception for police officers1, 2. The rules described above also apply to them1. You can’t share photos or videos of police officers without getting their permission or blurring their faces.

What happens if I don’t follow the rules?

The punishment is a fine, or up to 2 years in prison1, 2. People rarely go to prison, but fines and lawsuits are common1. In some cases, your camera can be confiscated1.

The subject of the photo can sue for damages1. They have 3 years to do this1. The 3 year period starts from the last time the picture was distributed1. Both the photographer and the publisher (including websites) can be sued1. You might have to pay for the victim’s legal costs1, 2.

Can I just blur people’s faces?

No. You must make sure that the person can’t be recognised1. For example, tattoos, clothes, hair styles and jewellery can be used to recognise a person, even if their face is blurred1.

 

The new French law that restricts photos and videos of police officers

What is the bill?

The proposed law, Loi relative à la sécurité globale (law on global security) is a major piece of security legislation covering issues regarding policing in France, several of which have drawn criticism.

.. Most controversial is the bill’s clause 24, which would criminalise the publishing of any photos or videos where a police officer or gendarme could be recognised, if there is an intent to harm their “physical or psychological integrity”.

It’s similar to a bill that came before the parliament in the spring, which failed to pass, but this time it has been backed by the Interior Minister Gérald Darmanin.

“My job as interior minister is to protect those who protect us,” Darmanin told BFMTV.

“I had made a promise, that it would no longer be possible to broadcast the image of the police and gendarmes on social media. That promise will be kept,” the interior minister said.

more: politico.eu

 

European Union Court finding:

The defendant, Sergejs Buivids, made a video recording inside a Latvian police station whilst he was there giving a statement in connection with administrative proceedings that had been initiated against him. The video showed the police facilities and a number of police officers going about their duties. Mr Buivids then published the video on YouTube.

 

.. Further, there is no express exception in the Directive excluding the processing of personal data of public officials, and case law shows that the fact that information is provided as part of a professional activity does not mean that it cannot be characterised as “personal data”.

According to case law, “journalistic activities” are those that have as their purpose the disclosure to the public of information, opinions or ideas, irrespective of the medium used to transmit them.

The CJEU said that it was for the referring court to determine whether “journalistic activities” applied here, but the CJEU could still provide guidance.

The question for the Latvian court was whether the sole purpose of the recording and publication of the video was the disclosure to the public of information, opinions or ideas. To that end, it should take into account Mr Buivids’s argument that the video was published online to draw attention to alleged police malpractice, which he claimed occurred while he was making his statement. However, establishing malpractice was not a condition for the applicability of Article 9.

In this case, the CJEU said, it was possible that the recording and publication of the video, which took place without the persons concerned being informed, amounted to interference with their right to privacy.

 

 

Filming Police on Duty in the UK

The police have no power to stop you filming or photographing officers on duty. Recording film footage on a police incident, or taking photographs of their actions, is not illegal.

But, you must follow some basic guidelines..

 

Some English photographers have been stopped and searched using the “terrorism” loophole.