offduty cop pulls gun on biker - aftermath WTF?!?

**wheeliE-maxx** · 07-24-2010, 11:17 PM

Originally Posted by 02blkws6

The only thing I saw wrong in the op video was that the officer didn't identify himself. I'll admit to being stupid on a bike (130 in a 55). I didn't know I was being chased. The officer was a decent distance behind me and didn't catch up until I was slowing down to enter town. I didn't take exception to having a gun drawn on me, told to get on the ground, cuffed and put in the back of the squad car. I was cooperative, polite, and agreed that my actions were dumb. I caught a break from the LEO and was written a ticket for 94 in a 55. In IL more than 39 over gets a free ride to jail.

I always pay a lawyer to take care of my tickets to keep a clean driving record.

the problem (well, most of it) wasn't in the video. Cops raided his house after he put the vid on youtube, took all of his shit, and went to jail for wiretapping

**Schmalgar** · 07-25-2010, 09:03 AM

Originally Posted by wheeliE-maxx

the problem (well, most of it) wasn't in the video. Cops raided his house after he put the vid on youtube, took all of his shit, and went to jail for wiretapping

Definitely. Not to mention, he uploaded the video to youtube. It was already out there, taking his computer solved nothing. What, did they have a warrant allowing them to search for other instances of him recording police activity? That was completely perposterous. I mean, it's not like he had an ipod or something.

**Mieux97** · 07-26-2010, 07:09 AM

I don't know about the laws in other states regarding wiretapping, but here in Illinois ALL parties must be aware that they are being recorded. During a traffic stop, the police are allowed to record the incident for IVC (Illinois Vehicle Code) violations only. So if I were on a stop and discovered that I was being recorded (audio or video) before releasing the vehicle, I would be well within my rights to lawfully arrest anyone.

As far as the camera guy, I would have asked "can I help you?" It would not have mattered his reply, but I would have told him to move along to avoid the distraction and warned him that failure to do so would warrant an arrest for obtruction. If he decided to stay....he was warned. As far as him snapping pics....that's legit as it is on a public way.

***SMWS6TA*** · 07-26-2010, 07:22 AM

Originally Posted by Mieux97

I don't know about the laws in other states regarding wiretapping, but here in Illinois ALL parties must be aware that they are being recorded. During a traffic stop, the police are allowed to record the incident for IVC (Illinois Vehicle Code) violations only. So if I were on a stop and discovered that I was being recorded (audio or video) before releasing the vehicle, I would be well within my rights to lawfully arrest anyone.

As far as the camera guy, I would have asked "can I help you?" It would not have mattered his reply, but I would have told him to move along to avoid the distraction and warned him that failure to do so would warrant an arrest for obtruction. If he decided to stay....he was warned. As far as him snapping pics....that's legit as it is on a public way.

Ok, now to play devils advocate - if in these states all parties must consent to being recorded, If I ask an officer to turn off the recording device due to me not given my consent to being recorded then how is it legal for them and not for us? That sets a double standard and could be grounds for a lawsuit. If enough cases were brought up and the state had to spend $$ to defend it it would soon become a burden on them.

**pecha** · 07-26-2010, 08:40 AM

Originally Posted by SMWS6TA

Ok, now to play devils advocate - if in these states all parties must consent to being recorded, If I ask an officer to turn off the recording device due to me not given my consent to being recorded then how is it legal for them and not for us? That sets a double standard and could be grounds for a lawsuit. If enough cases were brought up and the state had to spend $$ to defend it it would soon become a burden on them.

they don't care IMO
they don't spend their own money, just ours
that's why few states have problems with their budgets

**clovenhooves** · 07-26-2010, 08:52 AM

I assume there are statutes that make it legal for cops to record without consent the people they stop. I doubt a police officer could legally record the woman eating at the next table in the donut shop.

**GTP231** · 07-26-2010, 10:05 AM

Originally Posted by Nhra Firebird

The cop kinda looks like Cam02ss.

Too tall

**Mieux97** · 07-26-2010, 11:44 PM

Originally Posted by SMWS6TA

Ok, now to play devils advocate - if in these states all parties must consent to being recorded, If I ask an officer to turn off the recording device due to me not given my consent to being recorded then how is it legal for them and not for us? That sets a double standard and could be grounds for a lawsuit. If enough cases were brought up and the state had to spend $$ to defend it it would soon become a burden on them.

I believe the answer would be a resounding no! If the vehicle is equipped with a camera, then it is expected to be in use every time the emergency lights are activated. Since police are allowed to record traffic stops it is mandated for police to do so as allowed by law.

Think about it...police are exempt from many things that would seem to be a double standard to the average citz and this would be one of many...they have to be.

Example: In the state of Illinois, motorists are required to use a hands free device while using a mobile phone in a vehicle...unless it is parked and out of traffic.

I heard a citz ask: "Why are cops always on the phone when it's against the law? Shouldn't they have to abide by the same rules as well?"

Answer given....NO! Why? Because within that same law it states that emergency personnel are exempt.

That lawsuit may never make it off the ground. The cameras are there to protect the officer from B.S. lawsuits and the citz from improper conduct by the police.