Subby -1 for the headline.
Regular Joe taking a picture of a patrol cop... no problem
Known drug dealer taking pictures of undercover police. Kind of defeats the purpose of UC

he's an idiot. of course they would arrest him. next time, he should put a 24/7 CCTV camera in front of his house, in a bullet-proof box.

Welcome to the police-state required by the war on drugs.

How's that going for you Democrats and Republicans?

Cops taking covert pictures of citizens - good!
Citizens taking covert pictures of cops - bad!

Democracy? pfft! it's the drugsterroristforthechildren!

Have a nice day citizen, be seeing you!

RedLeg1525: Subby -1 for the headline.
Regular Joe taking a picture of a patrol cop... no problem
Known drug dealer taking pictures of undercover police. Kind of defeats the purpose of UC

Get farked.

Knucklepopper: RedLeg1525: Known drug dealer taking pictures of undercover police. Kind of defeats the purpose of UC

But legal. What's all this "known" bidness?

English. Do you speak it?

Sievert "finally" gave up a code that allowed deputies to find and destroy a photo that showed two undercover vehicles, according to reports.

It was nice of them to charge him with obstruction, then destroy the evidence.

Sievert refused a lawful command to erase the photographs, Colonneso said. That "reasonable request" was to protect undercover officers.

Perhaps law-talker can help me here, but are the police able to lawfully issue a command for me to destroy what amounts to my legal property - photographs taken in public?

milesdavishatesu: he's an idiot. of course they would arrest him. next time, he should put a 24/7 CCTV camera in front of his house, in a bullet-proof box.

You need a battery/generator power source and a wireless encrypted exit point that can't be located. SWAT turns everything off in a house before they enter.

/just a thought

Speedofdarkness: It was nice of them to charge him with obstruction, then destroy the evidence.

This too.

And this:

If the police do not want undercover vehicles identified, they should not bring the cars and trucks when they execute search warrants, Britt said.

These particular police seem Barney Fife-like.

Bob_Laublaw

this is america. police can do whatever they want to whomever they want, and they will do anything in their power to make a given situation much worse for a whole bunch of people. what do you expect from people who take bullets and get paid $26k a year?? they're complete idiots for doing that.

This raid wasn't just a couple of guys out there smoking a little weed. The war on drugs is a crock of shiat. But when you have entire neighborhoods where the kids can't be outside due to what is going on. something is wrong

You have to follow a cops order, no matter how illegal,, then battle it out in court if you can even get there in some places..Thats why some people ,if possible, pop out the memory card in the camera and Ahem hide it.

/No ticket?
//No crime.
///If a cop commits a crime. They should go to jail for days..

Bob_Laublaw: Perhaps law-talker can help me here, but are the police able to lawfully issue a command for me to destroy what amounts to my legal property - photographs taken in public?

A cop once smashed my flask (I was underage) with the end of his maglite on the ground, so deleting a picture is probably no big deal.

/still miss that flask

GaryPDX knows how to plan!

RedLeg1525: But when you have entire neighborhoods where the kids can't be outside due to what is going on. something is wrong

So where do you draw the line?

milesdavishatesu: Bob_Laublaw

this is america. police can do whatever they want to whomever they want, and they will do anything in their power to make a given situation much worse for a whole bunch of people. what do you expect from people who take bullets and get paid $26k a year?? they're complete idiots for doing that.

You underestimate adrenaline. Some people are junkies for it. I'm one of them. You think alcohol is bad, don't ever get hooked on adrenaline.

RedLeg1525: Subby -1 for the headline.
Regular Joe taking a picture of a patrol cop... no problem
Known drug dealer taking pictures of undercover police. Kind of defeats the purpose of UC

...and got it in one.

milesdavishatesu: Bob_Laublaw

this is america. police can do whatever they want to whomever they want, and they will do anything in their power to make a given situation much worse for a whole bunch of people. what do you expect from people who take bullets and get paid $26k a year?? they're complete idiots for doing that.

26k per year? Mayberry maybe.

Speedofdarkness: Sievert "finally" gave up a code that allowed deputies to find and destroy a photo that showed two undercover vehicles, according to reports.

It was nice of them to charge him with obstruction, then destroy the evidence.

Whut?

The deleted photos werent evidence of anything. His actions in refusing to cooperate is what constitutes obstruction.

/stop watching CSI.

If the cops have nothing to hide, then they don't have anything to be worried about.

Litterbox: The deleted photos werent evidence of anything. His actions in refusing to cooperate is what constitutes obstruction.

/stop watching CSI.

And you know this how? Because the cops (who destroyed evidence) told you this?

I'll bet a good lawyer would have fun with this case.

From the comments below article:

I am all for busting the scum of the earth drug dealers who are worse than pedophiles

So, drugs are worse than raping children? I bet lots of people would disagree with that, including myself.

It would be funny if someone had a video of all this taking place.

Sir Cumference the Flatulent: If the cops have nothing to hide, then they don't have anything to be worried about.

Um, what they are hiding are the identities of the undercover officers and likely, the confidential informant. Some people here need to get an education in basic law, civil rights and what the police can and cannot do. How many of you know your states penal codes?

RedLeg1525: Subby -1 for the headline.
Regular Joe taking a picture of a patrol cop... no problem
Known drug dealer taking pictures of undercover police. Kind of defeats the purpose of UC


That's why you need to have a good wig guy.

If the police do not want undercover vehicles identified, they should not bring the cars and trucks when they execute search warrants, Britt said.

OMG, where did unemployed drug dealer guy get this lawyer's number? Off a billboard?

There's a big difference between snapping a cell pic as you're walking by because you're curious.... and taking license plate pics and UC officers photos to sell to the local drug morons. Common sense is so rare these days.

If the public defender wants this sleeze bag released on his own recognizance, she should have to put him up in her own house.

Weaver95: I'll bet a good lawyer would have fun with this case.

Sure they'll have fun. I wonder where an unemployed drug dealer will get the cash for a good lawyer? It's not like this asshat is head of the Medelin cartel - he's a street corner punk.

Cell phone trifecta in play

Sir Cumference the Flatulent: If the cops have nothing to hide, then they don't have anything to be worried about.

The endless variations of that one are classic and timeless. A true folly of the human condition..lol

Weaver95: I'll bet a good lawyer would have fun with this case.

Hmm. I'd actually bet 5 US dollars that the charges won't proceed.

Sir Cumference the Flatulent: If the cops have nothing to hide, then they don't have anything to be worried about.

Ummm, they want to hide their faces and unmarked cars in hopes of not being killed? Geez.

Weaver95: Litterbox: The deleted photos werent evidence of anything. His actions in refusing to cooperate is what constitutes obstruction.

/stop watching CSI.

And you know this how? Because the cops (who destroyed evidence) told you this?

I'll bet a good lawyer would have fun with this case.

I know this because Im a cop. You keep using the word 'evidence', but in this case, its not evidence of anything. Its not illegal to take the pictures, but in the context of the circumstances, peoples lives are at risk because of those pictures. The crook, refusing to delete the pictures, is obstructing the investigation/criminal case and putting the lives of the officers at risk. What part of that dont you get?

RedLeg1525: This raid wasn't just a couple of guys out there smoking a little weed. The war on drugs is a crock of shiat. But when you have entire neighborhoods where the kids can't be outside due to what is going on. something is wrong

Wanna know what's wrong? Exactly what you pointed out, the war on drugs.

Attack the source of income for these criminals.

The source of income is the drugs, but you can't fight that. It is impossible to stop something that has a x1000 markup from the cost of production. It just isn't going to happen. So you can't fight something with a x1000 markup... What about something with just an x10 markup? A bit easier, it makes the risk not equal the potential reward.

How do you make it a x10 markup or less? Treat drug addiction like a mental illness and not a criminal offense.

tukatz: Sir Cumference the Flatulent: If the cops have nothing to hide, then they don't have anything to be worried about.

Ummm, they want to hide their faces and unmarked cars in hopes of not being killed? Geez.

Thats kind of how it works. If I cant identify you, I cant track you down or otherwise, kill you.

Some searching on google seems to support recording what officials do in public. Granted he's on parole and thus lower than pond scum as far as most cops are concerned, but he still has civil rights.

The ACLU has fought cases like this before and won.

Link(pop)

Well that's one less kid that's going to be dealing drugs.

Because after he wins his lawsuit over the violation of his civil rights he will be rich.

Litterbox: Some people here need to get an education in basic law, civil rights and what the police can and cannot do.

I would say the same thing of the police in this story.

Knucklepopper: tukatz: There's a big difference between snapping a cell pic as you're walking by because you're curious.... and taking license plate pics and UC officers photos to sell to the local drug morons. Common sense is so rare these days.

No, you're wrong. There is no difference; as long as the cops were in a public venue, I can take any photo I please.

Ummm, no.

Assistant public defender Jennifer Joynt-Sanchez called the arrest "beyond belief." Joynt-Sanchez, representing Sievert in court, said Sievert had a right to resist unlawful police detention.

If this pans out I believe we will see a sharp increase in cops planting "evidence" on people and then lying in court. They already do this regularly as it is, this would give them a reason to increase their criminal activity. Perhaps a mandatory 20 year sentence if caught would help deter this.

RedLeg1525: Subby -1 for the headline.
Regular Joe taking a picture of a patrol cop... no problem
Known drug dealer taking pictures of undercover police. Kind of defeats the purpose ofarknown drug dealer? Rumor has it. I'd like to see the convictions.

I know, you read it on the internet so it must be true.

Litterbox: What part of that dont you get?

The part that I don't get is that these particular police officers didn't exercise due diligence while executing warrants in public to hide their identities from potential and past offenders they fear will exact retribution.

RedLeg1525 2008-03-16 01:33:11 PM

Known drug dealer taking pictures of undercover police. Kind of defeats the purpose of UC

The police said he was a "known drug dealer based on a couple of arrests", nothing was mentioned what he was arrested for or if he had any convictions. This is circle the wagons time at the police department. If he was a convicted drug dealer, they would have said he was a convicted drug dealer and not "known drug dealer".


Litterbox 2008-03-16 01:52:10 PM

UC officers should have worn masks. Apparently, they weren't concerned about anyone in the house seeing their identity or their vehicles.

Weaver95: I'll bet a good lawyer would have fun with this case.

They always have fun. Win or lose, they still get paid.

RedLeg1525: Subby -1 for the headline.
Regular Joe taking a picture of a patrol cop... no problem
Known drug dealer taking pictures of undercover police. Kind of defeats the purpose of UC

This thread is started with a load of "fail".

YouPeopleAreCrazy: They always have fun. Win or lose, they still get paid.

Why don't you look at my accounts receivable and then try to tell me that's the case.

GaryPDX: milesdavishatesu: Bob_Laublaw

this is america. police can do whatever they want to whomever they want, and they will do anything in their power to make a given situation much worse for a whole bunch of people. what do you expect from people who take bullets and get paid $26k a year?? they're complete idiots for doing that.

You underestimate adrenaline. Some people are junkies for it. I'm one of them. You think alcohol is bad, don't ever get hooked on adrenaline.

Average LEO salary is 40-50k, not 26k.

Poor guy.

He should have saved his money, everyone knew N'SYNC wouldn't last forever.

Did IQs drop sharply while I was away?

Litterbox: The crook, refusing to delete the pictures, is obstructing the investigation/criminal case and putting the lives of the officers at risk. What part of that dont you get?

Actually it seems like you aren't getting something here.

You said yourself that taking the pictures is not criminal, therefore trying to call this guy a 'crook' is trying to find justification for an illegal action by trying to discredit the reputation of the victim.

SpinStopper: Did IQs drop sharply while I was away?

Cripes - did you die again, Lazarus?