SWAT Team Shows Up In Ferguson, Detains Reporters Live Tweeting Their Actions
from the incredible dept
We've been debating internally whether or not to cover the mess that is currently going on in Ferguson, Missouri. There has been plenty of attention paid to the protests and the failures by police there -- and we frequently cover problems with police, as well as the militarization of police, which was absolutely on display in Ferguson (if you've been under a rock, police killed an unarmed teenager there last week, leading to protests over the past few days -- and the police have been handling the situation... poorly, to say the least). However, the situation was changing so rapidly, it wasn't entirely clear what to cover. The pictures from Ferguson of a very militarized police force were disturbing, and we've been thinking about writing something on that (and we may still). However, this evening, things got even more ridiculous, as not only did the SWAT team show up, but it then arrested two of the reporters who had been covering the events: Wesley Lowery of the Washington Post and Ryan Reilly of the Huffington Post. Both had been vital in getting out the story of what was happening on the street.Here are a few of their tweets (prior to being arrested):
I counted 70+ SWAT officers. Guns trained on crowds. Insanity. pic.twitter.com/stev2G6v4b
— Ryan J. Reilly (@ryanjreilly) August 13, 2014
Overkill in #Ferguson. Officer won't answer my question about why this is needed. pic.twitter.com/iSPsP1Rxa1
— Ryan J. Reilly (@ryanjreilly) August 13, 2014
This exchange-> RT @AntonioFrench: State Senator asks the #Ferguson police chief if she's going to be gassed again. https://t.co/bXTjTbc7kM
— Wesley Lowery (@WesleyLowery) August 13, 2014
Two reporters just cuffed and put in cop can outside Ferguson McDonald's where @WesleyLowery said he and @ryanjreilly were working
— Jon Swaine (@jonswaine) August 13, 2014
Police come into McD where me and @ryanjreilly working. Try to kick everyone out.
— Wesley Lowery (@WesleyLowery) August 13, 2014
SWAT just invade McDonald's where I'm working/recharging. Asked for ID when I took photo. pic.twitter.com/FOIsMnBwHy
— Ryan J. Reilly (@ryanjreilly) August 13, 2014
I just called Ferguson police chief to ask about @WesleyLowery and @ryanjreilly, told him what I knew. His response: "Oh, God."
— Matt Pearce (@mattdpearce) August 14, 2014
I just talked to the Ferguson chief again about Wes and Ryan. "I told them to release them," he said of the riot command.
— Matt Pearce (@mattdpearce) August 14, 2014
Ferguson chief tells me @WesleyLowery and @ryanjreilly's arresters were "probably somebody who didn't know better."
— Matt Pearce (@mattdpearce) August 14, 2014
Officers slammed me into a fountain soda machine because I was confused about which door they were asking me to walk out of
— Wesley Lowery (@WesleyLowery) August 14, 2014
Detained, booked, given answers to no questions. Then just let out
— Wesley Lowery (@WesleyLowery) August 14, 2014
Also Ryan Reilly of Huff Po. Assaulted and arrested
— Wesley Lowery (@WesleyLowery) August 14, 2014
@ryanjreilly and @wesleyLowery have been arrested for "not packing their bags quick enough" at McD's #Ferguson
— Ryan J. Reilly (@ryanjreilly) August 14, 2014
Unfortunately my last Vine featuring the officer who assaulted me was deleted when other my phone died.
— Ryan J. Reilly (@ryanjreilly) August 14, 2014
There are all sorts of very questionable activities going on in Ferguson, including intimidation and threats against the protestors exercising their right to assembly and free speech. Detaining reporters in the middle of that is just the latest in a long string of "fuck your constitutional rights" by the (very heavily militarized) police down there.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: arrests, assembly, detention, ferguson, free speech, freedom of the press, journalism, michael brown, police, protests, ryan reilly, swat teams, wesley lowery
Companies: huffington post, washington post
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Not gonna be good.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous involved, too?
I have not done any other research as to the validity.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Anonymous involved, too?
I would take it with a grain of salt because you have to remember that the FBI and other LEOs are known for trying to go after mass group gatherings and undermine them in a number of ways.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Anonymous involved, too?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
First Amendment Fear
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."
and that everyone might be the press. A formerly small but annoying class (that had some special privilege if they jumped through the correct hoops), that is now potentially huge; and possibly annoying in very different ways.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: First Amendment Fear
made this point a while back: 'the press' are PROXIES for US ALL, exercising their free speech/reporting rights on behalf of ALL OF US...
the press doesn't have 'special rights' we mere citizens don't have, they have the SAME RIGHTS we ALL HAVE, they are simply exercising them on our behalf...
WE ALL have those rights, just that some individuals are exercising them on our behalf in their news gathering actions to inform us all...
not as if reporters are supposed to dig up all this info, interview public officials, etc ONLY to keep that information personal and private to themselves, and thus are allowed those rights as a privileged classp; no, that research and reporting is done on behalf of all of us...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: First Amendment Fear
Freedom of the press means a freedom to print or have printed and disseminate what one wants to say. That is it is protecting what the founding fathers did, print and circulate political pamphlets that opposed the existing government.
Note for the regular trolls, that means at ones own expense, and does not meant other people have to disseminate your speech for you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: First Amendment Fear
/s - jic
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: First Amendment Fear
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: First Amendment Fear
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
(Parody)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: (Parody)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: (Parody)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: (Parody)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: (Parody)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: (Parody)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: (Parody)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
"Glad you are here to stand witness, please give your ID in case we need to call on you, and please make sure that you don't get in the way when doing your civic duty in order to minimize the danger for yourself, us, and others."
Nothing wrong with that as far as I can see. Except that is not exactly what seems to have transpired...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Also, if a cop is going to ask someone for their ID, I'd say it's only fair that they return the favor, listing name and badge number for the record.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
I think in most jurisdictions you're required to identify yourself (not necessarily by presenting photo ID) if asked by police. Otherwise they can detain you while they determine your identity.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I think this is a technicality (my inner pedant is the one that cried out), but my understanding is that you are not required to identify yourself. However, if you don't identify yourself, the police do, as you say, have the power to detain you until they can determine your identity -- so it's in your best interest to do so anyway.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Otherwise referred to as "identifying yourself".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
/s
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Disturbing
Am I the only one that finds the above statement (from the chief of police, no less) deeply disturbing?
Members of a SWAT team are supposed to be very seasoned officers which receive extra training in weapons and tactics.
The fact that the police chief thinks they are "probably somebody that didn't know better" speaks volumes about the type of officers and their qualifications that have been put on a SWAT team.
No wonder the situation is getting so out of control. Based on these recent revelations, I would not be surprised if at some point the police completely lost their composure and started firing into the crowd at random (Kent State ring a bell for anyone (although that was the National Guard in that incident)).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Disturbing
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Disturbing
But not, apparently, in the law and what is, and is not, legal.
Or, even worse, perhaps they do know the law, and in particular are aware of the difference between the law on the books, and the law in practice.
Arresting or 'detaining' someone for taking pictures/video of the police? On the books, not legal. However, since no judge has the spine to actually punish cops who do so, in practice such arrests/detentions are effectively legal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Disturbing
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So cool!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: So cool!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: So cool!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: So cool!
Be glad they look like an army rather than a Transformers movie casting show refuge camp.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: So cool!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: So cool!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: So cool!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Reporters and reporting
1) a bunch of accidental citizen-reporters and a few big and small media outlet reporters (bravo to the ones who stayed).. On Twitter.
2) A collected live feed... On Reddit.
and... god help us...
3) A live video feed from Alex Jones. $%#$$ INFOWARS has more live coverage than the biggest TV news organizations in the U.S. (But I can't bring myself to click on their feed. I just can't. There were a couple other live feeds up earlier, but they seem to have stopped.)
And as to the response of the police chief when told that his SWAT team had assaulted and arrested two reporters
I believe the "didn't know better" had nothing to do with the chief's concerns about freedom of the press, and everything to do with: "oh shit this time we attacked people who might have some influence with people in power".
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Reporters and reporting
Proof? Try and call Alex Jones to discuss Bill Cooper. lolz will ensue.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Missouri cops need to be jailed, all of them.
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metro/for-busch-family-woman-s-death-is-latest-in-tragic/a rticle_2efd8b6d-b179-53dc-a6b9-dc9ae1c4e929.html
Every township needs to be cleaned and and re-zoned into something sensible with federal oversight until such time as the kindergarten cop mentality that is so prevalent in that state disappears.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Missouri cops need to be jailed, all of them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Missouri cops need to be jailed, all of them.
And that's saying something.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Missouri cops need to be jailed, all of them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Missouri cops need to be jailed, all of them.
Since then that guy's life is ruined, cops all mess with him in a 1000km radius, he carries around a police snooper just to protect himself (not kidding), it helps him get away from where he is in time before they arrive in case he happened to walk the streets while looking "different".
sorry bout the long story, but that's in Canada, where I imagine most of you imagine things are massively different.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Missouri cops need to be jailed, all of them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Missouri cops need to be jailed, all of them.
You live in two major metropolitan areas?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Missouri cops need to be jailed, all of them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Missouri cops need to be jailed, all of them.
That sounds really obnoxious.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Missouri cops need to be jailed, all of them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Missouri cops need to be jailed, all of them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Missouri cops need to be jailed, all of them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
As someone who lives in the St. Louis Metro area...
There was another police shooting today in Ferguson--apparently a guy in a mask with a gun took a pot shot at a cop who then shot back. The guy is in critical condition at a local hospital right now. At least he's not dead which probably would inflame the situation. A state rep. was tear gassed, and she's black.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: As someone who lives in the St. Louis Metro area...
As a white middle-aged male, I don't fit the pigs' profile of A Bad Guy, so I largely escape the harassment and bullying, the assaults and arrests, the fabricated charges and the rest. But not everyone is so lucky, and this time, the incident ended with Michael Brown dead. (Because of course a kid a few days away from going to college decided to attack an armed police officer, well, just because. Right.)
The pigs there routinely beat, intimidate, insult, and arrest citizens for the crime of being black -- and then they lie, lie, lie about it. Everyone knows this. And their reaction is a mix of fear and rage -- as should be obvious by now. The Ferguson police aren't there to "protect and serve": they're an organized, armed gang with a very long history of threats and violence.
The only difference between today and last week, last month, last year, is that NOW there are outside reporters getting a taste of it. Nothing else has changed.
Michael Brown was murdered by a racist thug with a badge, and in all likelihood, he'll get away it because the cops have spent the last several days destroying incriminating evidence and fabricating exculpatory evidence. Of course they have: it's what they do. It's how Ferguson works.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: As someone who lives in the St. Louis Metro area...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: As someone who lives in the St. Louis Metro area...
He wasn't arrested but was majorly questioned about how come he had 800 dollars in cash.
And I never want a cashless society, it would be such bullshit, some people hacked your paypal account and your bank kicks you out ? Well I guess you'll have to do without any money now bro.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: As someone who lives in the St. Louis Metro area...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: As someone who lives in the St. Louis Metro area...
It raised a bunch of eyebrows. I wouldn't recommend doing it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: As someone who lives in the St. Louis Metro area...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: As someone who lives in the St. Louis Metro area...
It should spread! Not the vandalism and looting, but the protests.
Cops in the US have far too much impunity to beat or kill people and then explain it away as they were afraid for their safety, or they were just following procedure. See a kid with what seems to be a gun? Shoot him to death first and ask questions later! Guy won't comply with your demands? Beat him to death! Old woman won't sign a ticket? Taze her!
Not all cops are bad, but a large number of them have become thugs who think that questioning their authority should be a capital crime.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ask the folks in Detroit and LA how well that worked out...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Ask the folks in Detroit and LA how well that worked out...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Like sheep? I think not.
Leaders should lead by example. Some people may follow.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Small Town SWAT is Different From Big City SWAT.
I think you can assume that the Ferguson police chief called the SWAT out, put a gun in the hands of someone like George Zimmerman, because the situation had worsened beyond what his comparatively small number of _paid_ officers could handle. Ferguson may be legally a city, but economically and sociologically, it is part of St. Louis, and potential rioters and/or protesters will have been driving in from all over the larger city. The Ferguson police chief must have not wanted to admit he was out of his depth and hand over to either the county sheriff or the state governor (the commander in chief of the Missouri National Guard).
The greatest fear of the city fathers of such small towns is annexation by the adjoining big city. The city fathers would lose their jobs. One can see how this would preclude asking for help.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Small Town SWAT is Different From Big City SWAT.
Escalating violence and stupendous arrogance by police is as much a problem in big cities as in small towns. (And I say that as a resident of the city who helped make SWAT such a popular thing. Darryl Gates left LAPD 20 years ago, but his legacy lives on. Unfortunately.)
Wherever police power is not checked by strong oversight and accountability, a culture of abuse is inevitable. The militaristic escalation just makes it worse.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Last time it began at Lexington green...
And as before....
"I only regret that I have but one life to give for my country!"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
But when the "protesters" sole intention is to loot every store they can then i find it hard to support them. They use the killing of that guy as an excuse to steal physical stuff.
Very immoral
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
fyi: according to reports, it started out peaceful and police started the shit then it spread. This is classic antagonistic riot mongering, the police seem to enjoy it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The cops are responsible for all of the violence through their own criminal activities, any and all violence, damages, injuries and other crimes need to placed squarely on the officers shoulders, all charges should be filed on the cops involved as they instigated the entire tragedy.
Illegal stops.
Murder
Instigating riots
Police brutality
kidnapping (what they call detaining - it's illegal)
violating the constitutional ammendments equates to treason, and should be treated as such
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
But of course a single word can make all the difference...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Actually, states are forbidden from using the army to enforce law, but...
The government has the power to order the armed forces into action on American soil in order to stop things like a rebellion, insurrection, domestic violence, etc. So basically the second that the government feels there's any serious threat to their power, you'll be seeing real tanks and soldiers on US streets.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Apparently the US army veterans would disagree with you. http://boingboing.net/2014/08/14/us-veterans-ferguson-police-d.html.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
That's the part that the cops forget.
If they pull their weapons first, it's every citizen's right to defend themselves against the criminal-cop that is illegally drawing their firearm.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Really? This sounds wrong to me. Can you support this?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
If someone, I don't care who they are, pull their guns out and aim them at you, while you are just standing there, doing nothing illegal, then hell yes you have a right to defend yourself.
Cops are people, and unfortunately, in Missouri a majority of them are also criminals and deserve anything they get for illegally drawing their weapons, up to and including being killed, which would only improve the situation there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
If a cop pulls a gun on you when performing his duty, I don't think that automatically constitutes a threat to your life that justifies a lethal response. There can be circumstances where it would, of course, but those are the exceptions and not the rule.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Your rights mean nothing when you are dead.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I wasn't addressing the ethics of the situation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I wasn't addressing the ethics of the situation.
You two are talking about different things. He's making a claim about natural rights, and you're asking about legal rights.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
And you'd be shot dead. And probably a whole bunch of people around you would be shot dead. And the police would have legal justification for shooting you. Yeah. Great idea.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Weird
And who thought the solution to the town's problems was to get rid of the reporters? Did these idiots dream it up themselves, or did the officer in command also lack the basic understanding about the difference between a constitutional state and a war zone? What possible rationale to clear people out of a McDonalds -but not the employees? Selective or what?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Turns out the plague was right :p
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The solution to the towns problems are not simple - the police appear to be way over the line, but the public reaction is equally past intelligence. Rioting, looting, and destroying things doesn't solve the issue.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom and yet depreciate agitation, are people who want crops without ploughing the ground; they want rain without thunder and lightning; they want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters. The struggle may be a moral one, or it may be a physical one, or it may be both. But it must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will.
Find out just what any people will quietly submit to and you have found out the exact measure of injustice and wrong which will be imposed upon them, and these will continue till they are resisted with either words or blows, or with both. The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress."
--- Frederick Douglass
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Yeah, I am sure that there will be progress now the 7/eleven has been destroyed and the electronics stores looted.
Come on. If they want to fight, fight the man. Don't screw up innocent people's lives just because you see a chance for some free stuff.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
This isn't the first time you've posted stupid shit defending asshole policemen while logged out either.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Neither does the threat of attack dogs, tear gas, and fully armed fucktards who apparently, and according to their own supervisor, "don't know better."
Keep backing someone into a corner, and eventually they'll fight. Fact of the matter is that filming them is entirely necessary, and they deserve all the notoriety they're getting - the world is watching, and apparently, the police still don't understand the implications of that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
...
Keep backing someone into a corner, and eventually they'll fight. "
Looting is theft. Rioting puts the lives and livelihoods of NON-INVOLVED parties at risk of harm. Destroying things belonging to innocent third-parties gains what exactly for the perpetrator? Fighting back against the/an oppressor is one thing, harming other people (including members of their own community) is entirely another.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
no, eventually they will bust the windows out of the local electronics store and empty it out, and do the same to the local 7/eleven too.
Point is if you want to fight, fight. Don't use it as an excuse to rip off and destroy other people's business and property.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sanctioned vandalism?
Looting by independent opportunistic criminals is most likely, followed by police purposefully letting vandalism and looting go undisturbed. Less likely is looting initiated by the police, though it happens for various reasons. Least likely by far is looting by those mourning the assassinated kid. An important reason is WHY they showed up to protest in the first place, and whom they consider themselves to be. Nobody loot to prove they are not the criminals.
(Nor is protestors looting for food relevant in Ferguson).
When citizens unmask vandals and looters at protests they frequently turn out to be police. Typical daft excuses is that they need to do it to "blend in" or "build cred". Vandals have also very obviously been smashing things for a long time in front of the MSM, before equally obviously let go, while protesters being prevented from unmasking them, by the police.
Police staging riots, looting and vandalism would not welcome recording devices. Though someone even remotely interested in fighting crime would actively encourage documentation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Response to: Whatever on Aug 14th, 2014 @ 3:11am
They had an interview on NPR this morning at least go find out the details before talking out your ass.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Response to: Whatever on Aug 14th, 2014 @ 3:11am
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Rioting, looting, and vandalism is the natural consequence of lawless behavior from those tasked with enforcing the law. Law abiding citizens defending themselves from police brutality are distracted from protecting their own property, and the police are too busy assaulting innocent civilians to enforce the laws they themselves won't obey.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Police State.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Police State.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Police State.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Welcome!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Welcome!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Technically arrested, not detained
It is also technically false arrest and false imprisonment.
Although, to make it even more confusing, the technical terms "arrest" and "detention" are different for some specific regulatory and procedural situations.
Nevertheless, as far as Constitutional rights are concerned, this was "technically" an arrest, plain and simple.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Technically arrested, not detained
Do you have any reference for that? I'm not finding anyone saying cuffs = arrest.
"An arrest is a seizure of a person in which the subject is 1) required to go elsewhere with police, or 2) deprived of his freedom of movement for more than a brief period of time, or 3) subjected to more force than is reasonably part of an investigative detention. "
Are handcuffs always not reasonably part of an investigative detention? Not sure, but I could see courts ruling that as a detention by that definition.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Technically arrested, not detained
If you're arrested, you'll be processed. If you're detained, you'll just be allowed to leave once the police have finished.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
live tweets
http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2024306188_tweetingcrimexml.html
All you "citizen reporters" are putting the police at risk!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
A government is a shadowy reflection of its people...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I've seen plenty of cops in riot gear, this pales in comparison. Most people are not being violent at all even in Ferg... but the cops are reacting as if they're in the middle of the post Rodney King LA riots.
This goes far beyond racism. That's just the surface issue. People in general are sick of the police acting as tyrants, and if thecops keep going with the heavy handed response the situation could easily explode.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
death threats
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: death threats
Were those threats cited as being a part of the reason for the response? If not, then it's not really very relevant.
"all of those officers are from surrounding communities because the local guys are under protection."
So the officers involved weren't the ones who received the death threats, then? That makes the threats even less important.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: death threats
How could this behavior *not* result in death threats and riots against them?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
BACK IN THE US
BACK IN THE USSR
DON'T KNOW HOW LUCKY YOU ARE
BACK IN THE US
BACK IN THE USSR
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
2A
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]