Riots in California..

[jumpy]

Interesting development of this topic... Some of the earlier comments were thoughtful and proper (or so I thought).

However, as things moved on a pace, I'm drawn to the ignore button and the desire to make a parting cheap shot about how there's a third possibility when you consider yourself damned if you do and damned if you don't - it's because you're just damned, not by virtue of what you do or don't do, but because you are.
Does that make sense? Well it seemed so to me.

[Moeceefus]

Originally Posted by thorn69

It's not just California. People everywhere do this when the Police get involved. They try to instigate matters and make them worse. They're drama whores! They like to provoke us and the suspects we attempt to take in. It's always the same old thing. That poor bad guy - You evil cop!

These are the same people that spill their drinks on the floor in front of a janitor who just mopped it. It's childish behavior. I like to think that many of them get a karma check sometime in their life.

This isn't a case of people spouting off about matters they know nothing of. In this case we have a very clear video of the events and as they say, the camera never lies. Regardless of race involved, I can link hundreds of videos with cops engaging in any number of illegal activities they should be fired or prosecuted for. Cops are public servants and therefore it is the publics right to scrutinize them when they screw up and to keep them in check. Thier duty is to protect and serve. They have a lot of responsibility and should stand to the highest of standards and proffesionalism. Everyone has a camera these days. I hope certain cops realize this and use it as an oppurtunity to better themselves and act in occordance with how they were trained and the oath they took. Nobody is above the law.

[Ducimus]

Everyone has a camera these days. I hope certain cops realize this and

Yeah, and using that camera can land you in jail if your caught.

edit: and camera's can lie, or rather, the resulting film after its been edited.

Originally Posted by Ducimus

Yeah, and using that camera can land you in jail if your caught.

edit: and camera's can lie, or rather, the resulting film after its been edited.

Most of the time the judges won't even allow public film to be used. Our dash-cams in our patrol cars are locked in a black box mounted on the dashboard with seals on them. The seals can only be unlocked by a select few and can never be opened by just one person at any time. The video inside the box is also transmitted instantly to the station and is recorded to their servers. Both the video on the dash-cam and the server have to match exactly and have to be authenticated to be admitted into court. Even then, I've seen judges not even allow our own video to be admitted. Usually it takes a really good lawyer for the defense to get the judge to invalidate our video. It's ALWAYS allowed however when the Officer needs it for his/her own personal defense no matter what.

Judges know that video can easily be tampered with and NO, it's not a "tell all" deal like you seem to think. There's a lot of factors that you can't see in videos. You'd know this if you had ever taken a photography class or went through a basic Police course or academy.

When I went through the Police Academy they showed us a video of a typical traffic stop by a State Police Officer. The Police Officer dismounted from his patrol car and approached the car he had pulled over and made his approach from the back driver side of the car. The next thing we saw was the Police Officer go for his duty weapon and start shooting into the car like a wild maniac. We all thought he had just gone nuts for some reason! Then the car just zoomed away in a straight beeline for about 50 feet and slammed into a telephone poll with the Police Officer still aiming down his weapons sights on the car the whole time like he was Dirty Hairy.

What the video didn't show us, was what was going on inside the car. (Blind Spots)

You see, inside that car was 2 black males that had just robbed a convenience store earlier in the evening and had killed the clerk in cold blood. The driver and passenger in the car waited for the Officer to get to the window so they could kill him as well. As soon as the Officer got to the window he noticed that the man in the passenger seat had a sawed-off shotgun aimed at him, but due to the way the Officer had "sliced the pie" when he approached the car, the passenger couldn't get a clear shot at him with his weapon. He would have ended up blowing his own friend's head off at that angle. The Officer went for his own weapon and commanded for the man to drop the shotgun. We couldn't really see this in the video because the Officer had his back to the dash camera and we couldn't hear this because the Instructors had the sound to the video turned off - on purpose.

When the man didn't comply the Officer started firing away into the car attempting to just kill the man with the shotgun. But the driver attempted to flee and was shot through his head by a round the Officer had intended to put into the chest of the man with the shotgun. The car continued to accelerate down the road because the "now dead" driver's foot was still on the gas pedal. The car crashed into a telephone poll at 20mph and that was the end of it. The man in the passenger seat with the shotgun had been shot once by the Officer and the round severed his spine leaving him a cripple for the rest of his life. He's also serving a life sentence for his criminal actions that night.

Then they played the video with the sound on and we heard EVERYTHING that was being said. The Officer had done his job and done his job well.

Of course the family of the driver tried to sue because they felt that the Officer had shot and killed an unarmed man in the head. But the lawsuit was eventually dropped once the family was shown the videos. First they watched the convenience store robbery where their precious "do-no-wrong" angle was the one that had blown the head off the store clerk - a defenseless 19 year old school boy who was just trying to pay his way through community college. The family tried to decline watching the video of their "do-no-wrong" angel getting his head blown off by the Police Officer but were forced to watch it by the Defense attorney representing the Officer involved.

I was told that the mother cried her eyes out after watching it but went up and hugged the Officer that had shot her son and thanked him for doing his job and said something like after 21 years, she never really knew who her son was!

[Moeceefus]

Originally Posted by thorn69

Judges know that video can easily be tampered with and NO, it's not a "tell all" deal like you seem to think. There's a lot of factors that you can't see in videos. You'd know this if you had ever taken a photography class or went through a basic Police course or academy.



Then they played the video with the sound on and we heard EVERYTHING that was being said. The Officer had done his job and done his job well.

Of course the family of the driver tried to sue because they felt that the Officer had shot and killed an unarmed man in the head. But the lawsuit was eventually dropped once the family was shown the videos. First they watched the convenience store robbery where their precious "do-no-wrong" angle was the one that had blown the head off the store clerk - a defenseless 19 year old school boy who was just trying to pay his way through community college. The family tried to decline watching the video of their "do-no-wrong" angel getting his head blown off by the Police Officer but were forced to watch it by the Defense attorney representing the Officer involved.

I was told that the mother cried her eyes out after watching it but went up and hugged the Officer that had shot her son and thanked him for doing his job and said something like after 21 years, she never really knew who her son was!

If you'd ever taken a photography class you'd know it is easy to tell when photos/video have been tampered with. Also if you'd ever actually been to a police course or academy, you'd know that cameras are your most powerful weapon for your defense or downfall. Cameras do not lie. Raw footage is not edited and it is easy for the experts to tell. When trying to argue against the power of the camera, why post about an event in which the camera saved the day?

Originally Posted by Moeceefus

If you'd ever taken a photography class you'd know it is easy to tell when photos/video have been tampered with. Also if you'd ever actually been to a police course or academy, you'd know that cameras are your most powerful weapon for your defense or downfall. Cameras do not lie. Raw footage is not edited and it is easy for the experts to tell. When trying to argue against the power of the camera, why post about an event in which the camera saved the day?

Sure, they can be of help but they are not the "end all, be all" of self protection nor are they the "end all, be all" downfall of anybody either. Like I said, there are "blind spots" in film that the viewer can't see. Just like you're not supposed to see the camera crew or the microphones used in making a movie. Those are hidden blind spots that the film crew takes advantage of to make their film. Videos don't catch everything that's going on - EVER! They only catch what the cameraman wants to catch.

And you're wrong again - There are several ways to tamper with film that experts can't identify anything being wrong. For one, a person can simply cut the beginning of a video out so that the video benefits their elaborated "story" or even the ending can be cut out for the same purpose. Therefore there's no way for an expert to know what happened at the beginning or the end of the video. They will only be able to see where the video starts and where it ends. So basically only the middle and still, they can't see what's going on in the blind spots. There's also indirect tampering where a person knowingly only films what they want to film. In other words, they don't videotape everything. They only video what they want their story to say. The film won't look tampered with, but then again, it's indirect tampering so there wouldn't be any physical tampering at all.


And from here on out, I'm just going to stop wasting my time with your insulting claim of what I am and what I am not. I've told you what I do for a living and now you're just beginning to act childish about it. I can not for the life of me understand what your personal problem is with this other than a personal hatred for Police or some form of childish jealousy that perhaps I have a more adventurous and interesting job than you?! Yeah, that's probably it!

[Moeceefus]

Originally Posted by thorn69

Sure, they can be of help but they are not the "end all, be all" of self protection nor are they the "end all, be all" downfall of anybody either. Like I said, there are "blind spots" in film that the viewer can't see. Just like you're not supposed to see the camera crew or the microphones used in making a movie. Those are hidden blind spots that the film crew takes advantage of to make their film. Videos don't catch everything that's going on - EVER! They only catch what the cameraman wants to catch.

And you're wrong again - There are several ways to tamper with film that experts can't identify anything being wrong. For one, a person can simply cut the beginning of a video out so that the video benefits their elaborated "story" or even the ending can be cut out for the same purpose. Therefore there's no way for an expert to know what happened at the beginning or the end of the video. They will only be able to see where the video starts and where it ends. So basically only the middle and still, they can't see what's going on in the blind spots. There's also indirect tampering where a person knowingly only films what they want to film. In other words, they don't videotape everything. They only video what they want their story to say. The film won't look tampered with, but then again, it's indirect tampering so there wouldn't be any physical tampering at all.


And from here on out, I'm just going to stop wasting my time with your insulting claim of what I am and what I am not. I've told you what I do for a living and now you're just beginning to act childish about it. I can not for the life of me understand what your personal problem is with this other than a personal hatred for Police or some form of childish jealousy that perhaps I have a more adventurous and interesting job than you?! Yeah, that's probably it!

Every technique you just mentioned to tamper with film is easily detectable and such tampering, direct or indirect would be taken seriously and thrown out by any court. And thanks for the laugh on that last paragraph.

Originally Posted by Moeceefus

Every technique you just mentioned to tamper with film is easily detectable and such tampering, direct or indirect would be taken seriously and thrown out by any court. And thanks for the laugh on that last paragraph.

Um yeah, whatever you say there buddy!