Man arrested for shooting photo of police activity in Philly

Finder said:
Should have used a film camera. Digital is dangerous.
Click to expand...

Should have remained in his home and shot from there if he wanted to.

Really, I mean, sure it's "exciting" to see cops take a drug dealer down and all that but unless they're giving him the "Rodney King" treatment, why would you want to, as a private citizen, photograph the incident?

Was there a "defining moment" going on?

Sad part about stories like this is we, the general public who were never present at the original incident when it took place, can only rely on what may or may not be hearsay from news agencies, friends of the accused/arrested, and talking heads from the police departments/government.

Dave
 
The police were wrong here/

The police were wrong here/

He was on his families property.

He was doing NOTHING that was against the law.

The police had NO RIGHT to come on his property. PERIOD.

Now, were he pointing a gun at the police, I would have a different opinion. Just because you give a person a badge and a gun doesn't mean that they can violate the constitution and property laws because they think they can...
 
uh

uh

possibly because it is his right to, maybe a r.k. "moment" would have happened if he didn't have his camera out.

dcsang said:
...why would you want to, as a private citizen, photograph the incident?

Was there a "defining moment" going on?

Sad part about stories like this is we, the general public who were never present at the original incident when it took place, can only rely on what may or may not be hearsay from news agencies, friends of the accused/arrested, and talking heads from the police departments/government.

Dave
Click to expand...
 
ampguy said:
possibly because it is his right to, maybe a r.k. "moment" would have happened if he didn't have his camera out.
Click to expand...

I'm not arguing that he does not have the right to do it.

He's got all the rights in the world (or at least in the U.S.) to photograph from his private property as long as he's not invading other people's privacy; which in this case he was not.

I'm stating that it's foolish to do something like that when there's a chance that you're going to get yourself hurt. It's just plain dumb.

And yes.. I don't think the cops were "right" in what they did - but as I said..all we're reading is a portion of the incident after the fact.

Dave
 
come on, the guy wasnt even really "at the scene" it was happening in front of his house and he took an innocent snapshot. Ironically, if there was a real reporter there with 500mm lens, flash and 12m pixels it would have been absolutely okay.
 
I wonder if anyone got his arrest on video, or perhaps Cruz himself did. It will be interesting to witness the ongoing clash of increased cop strongarming coupled with advances in nano technology. The lawyers will win this one.
 
He's got all the rights in the world (or at least in the U.S.) to photograph from his private property as long as he's not invading other people's privacy; which in this case he was not.
Click to expand...

Not to try to start a Red v. Blue war here, but here in the States, officials in the Executive branch, from the officer in the street to the man at the top, for some reason, think that they can enforce some laws and ignore others. Read today's curent news for some at-the-top intention to ignore certain laws.

If He can get away with it, it sets a very poor example for Officer Friendly out on the beat. :(
 
I agree that we aren't getting the full story. Even a total @sshole cop isn't just going to grab someone standing there taking a pic with a phone. Not saying the guy deserved it, but invariably with something like this the victim isn't as pure as they seem. I have to think it takes two to tangle here, too bad he didn't have the video going, that would be definative.

The guy is going to get his Penn State education paid for, and probably rightly so.

Where's Bill Mattock when you need him?

Mark
 
anselwannab said:
<snip>Where's Bill Mattock when you need him?

Mark</snip>
Click to expand...

Probably over at his site discussing this same thing ;)

Yep.... like I always say.. there are three sides to every story; the two opposing views and then there's the truth.

Dave
 
dmr said:
Not to try to start a Red v. Blue war here, but here in the States, officials in the Executive branch, from the officer in the street to the man at the top, for some reason, think that they can enforce some laws and ignore others. Read today's curent news for some at-the-top intention to ignore certain laws.

If He can get away with it, it sets a very poor example for Officer Friendly out on the beat. :(
Click to expand...

I don't have a big problem with enforcing some and ingoring others. Unless it is one I wanted ignored or didn't want ignored. It happens all the time. Nobody complains when the cops give them ten miles an hour over the speed limit before writing a ticket.

What is wrong here, if the victim, friendly witness and ACLU lawyer are to be believed, is that there was no law against what was being done, so no law to enforce or ignore.

But as dcsang said, often there are at least three sides to a story. Saying a man is being released because there is no supervisor on duty does sound a little suspicious though.

BTW, on the wep page where this story was, did anybody notice the http://www.nbc10.com/sports/9584410/detail.html which was a reference to the winner of the Tour De Lance... no that was last year, I mean Tour De France? Now did he do something wrong or is this a manifistation of the apparent French fixation about doping at the Tour by Americans? (or maybe other nationalities too, and we just don't get the reports here in the USA) Mind you I have no sympathy for athletes who use performance enhancers to try and claim they are better athletes than they really are.
 
I've watched quite a bit of cop TV in my day. Here's what may have went down:

Possibly some of the cops didn't do some procedure 100% right or slipped some dope in their pockets or planted some somewhere.

Back at the Donut Den, another cop remembers a kid near the scene with a camera phone...
 
This is sad!! I really feel for the guy. The neighborhood should have risen up, arrested the cop, and held him until the DA got there. This would put the power back into the hands of the people. I hope to never tangle like this, as I would be the story on the news.
 
AMPGUY- why frame innocent poeple when there are plenty of guilty ones out there? I can see planting something on someone during a traffic stop b/c theyare being an pain, but to go in and mount a raid to plant stuff? I hope you are on my jury if I ever get arrested.

By the way, the best way I've heard to stay off juries is to slip in to an answer, "Why would the cops arrest an innocent man?"

Mark
 
Mark

Mark

perhaps it is a matter of degrees.

Maybe the "innocent" drug dealers flushed a lot down, and the cops wanted to ensure the bust yielded enough booty for the prosecutors to get something to stick.


anselwannab said:
AMPGUY- why frame innocent poeple when there are plenty of guilty ones out there? I can see planting something on someone during a traffic stop b/c theyare being an pain, but to go in and mount a raid to plant stuff? I hope you are on my jury if I ever get arrested.

By the way, the best way I've heard to stay off juries is to slip in to an answer, "Why would the cops arrest an innocent man?"

Mark
Click to expand...
 
anselwannab said:
I agree that we aren't getting the full story. Even a total @sshole cop isn't just going to grab someone standing there taking a pic with a phone. Not saying the guy deserved it, but invariably with something like this the victim isn't as pure as they seem. I have to think it takes two to tangle here, too bad he didn't have the video going, that would be definative.

The guy is going to get his Penn State education paid for, and probably rightly so.

Where's Bill Mattock when you need him?

Mark
Click to expand...

I'll play Bill for a bit. I don't think you can assume anything like "Even a total @sshole cop isn't just going to grab someone standing there taking a pic with a phone," and "but invariably with something like this the victim isn't as pure as they seem." There are plenty of bent coppers in the US. Three of Boston's Finest were just arrested in Miami for transporting drugs to distribute. Every major metropolitan police force has bad cops; that's what Internal Affairs divisions are for. It sounds like these police were acting like Redcoats before the American Revolution.

You certainly should not assume Neftaly Cruz was doing something wrong. If the story is correct, he was standing on his family property, just taking photos then the cops had no probable cause to violate his 1st and 4th amendment rights. The burden of proof was on the police to show he was causing a real obstruction of their duty. Obviously, they could not and so they released him.

"They said if the supervisor was there I wouldn't be a free man and that he is letting me go because he felt that I was a good person," Cruz said.
Click to expand...

This just sounds fishy to me. It's too odd a statement to be something Mr. Cruz made up, so it sounds like the cops lied to them to try to discourage him from filing complaints. I certainly hope the cops are fully investigated and if proven wrong, dismissed from Philly P.D. and forced to pay Mr. Curz compensatory and punitive damages.
 
sounds fishy, indeed...

sounds fishy, indeed...

...but it will be interesting to see what, if any, precedent this will set in the USofA... given the freedoms of this and that, and the other thing... often touted.


:) SC
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom