Photography is Not a Crime

29 responses so far ↓

• 1 Chaz McCabe // Mar 5, 2009 at 12:21 AM

  I love the way COP2 drags COP1 back so he can pummel the guy himself.

  Thanks,
  Chaz

• 2 Andrew DeFilippis // Mar 5, 2009 at 1:22 AM

  The guy is lucky there was a camera there to prove the officers were aggressive and out-of-line. The police officer that pushed him back into the elevator was on a power trip and lost his control.

  All three of the officers involved should be disciplined heavily.

• 3 Kilroy238 // Mar 5, 2009 at 2:30 AM

  Ok the guy did bump his chest into the cop so maybe he deserves to go to jail but not to be beaten. Punishment is supposed to be for the courts not cops.

• 4 jones // Mar 5, 2009 at 10:21 AM

  What is the problem with this video. The guy tried to interfere with something he had no business sticking his nose into, then he assaults a cop, then he resist arrest.

• 5 Chaz McCabe // Mar 5, 2009 at 10:34 AM

  @jones, With what was the guy interfering? How do you figure he assaulted a cop? Didn’t look to me like he was resisting arrest; looked like he was saying, “Help! Help! The cops are beating the shit out of me for no reason!” Did you see the reactions of the other people in the elevator? Did you notice that the cops’ reaction was a danger to those in the elevator?

  Thanks,
  Chaz

• 6 jones // Mar 5, 2009 at 10:48 AM

  Did you read the police report, they were handling a disturbance not involving this guy and he decided to get involved. You didn’t see him bump into the officer? The reaction I saw from the video was the girl trying to pull him away when she saw him assault the cop.

• 7 Carlos Miller // Mar 5, 2009 at 10:50 AM

  So why did the prosecutors, who will always side with the cops, believe they had no evidence to pursue this?

  And take it from me, lack of evidence has not stopped them from pursuing a conviction.

• 8 jones // Mar 5, 2009 at 11:04 AM

  The prosecutor charged him with misdemeanor battery AFTER reviewing the tape but dropped it because they didn’t think they could get a conviction. If the prosecutor doesn’t think they can convict then they are not going to pursue it. Just because the charges are dropped doesn’t mean the arrest wasn’t warranted. The guy is yelling at and bumps into the officer who is there because of a fight. I think a cop should look the other way when a 15 year old girl kicks a shoe at him from a jail cell but a guy on an elevator when they are trying to restore peace bumps him like that needs to be arrested. Did you see the other video from the lobby. A bunch of wannabe’s taking their shirts off pushing each other around. Maybe the police shouldn’t respond to those types of runs. If this went to trial I think the jury would be split, you would have some who would say he barely bumped the cop and the cop overreacted and you would have some that would say if you hit a cop your going to get arrested and find him guilty.

• 9 torgeaux // Mar 5, 2009 at 5:18 PM

  jones:

  First, the police report you rely on has misstatements of fact in it, as shown by the video, so I can’t take anything it says at face value. Second, he has a right to observe the arrest, and they tried to stop that. He has no right to interfere, but the two videos (watch the one from the lobby camera too) show he never interfered.

  Assume the first cop had the right to shove him (maybe, there was a “nose to nose”). The next cop punched him in the face, no intervening action shown on the tape to justify that.

  The reason the prosecutor dropped it is the cops lied, on paper, and got caught by the video. Those would be the same cops who would have to testify, under oath, subject to cross-exam. Easy win for the defense.

• 10 g8rman // Mar 5, 2009 at 7:07 PM

  If you read the police report you can’t deny the cops beefed up the report to help make their case. However the man did bump the cop and deserved to go to jail for that. Both Officers and the man involved were wrong but the biggest wrong was made by the cops. Please note they are trained repeatly to deal with these situtations. They are trained professionals. They are not a bunch of drunk teenagers and should not have responded as such.

• 11 Karl Mansoor // Mar 5, 2009 at 11:36 PM

  The issue illustrated in the video is a bigger problem than just individual officers.

  Police training and culture does not emphasize true diffusing techniques.

  Rather, it often embraces an aggressive authoritarian response towards interaction with the public under the moniker of “Officer Safety.”

  “Officer Safety” is vital but for a number of reasons too many officers don’t stop to think that it is safer to do everything possible to avoid fights rather than instigating them.

  Throw some inappropriate over-inflated ego from some officers into the mix along with a willingness to completely distort the truth and you have what is evident these days in so many videos.

• 12 Digger // Mar 6, 2009 at 12:10 AM

  The real crime here is the cops lying in their reports. That is much more serious even than the assault. Any officer who knowingly lies about an arrest resulting in false charges being pressed against the victim, should face jail time. All police officers should be thoroughly impressed with how serious an offense we, the people, consider the crime of a police officer bearing false witness to be, so that they will be very hesitant to ever make false statement.

• 13 jones // Mar 6, 2009 at 1:40 AM

  What false charges digger, the guy assaulted the officer. Why is it everybody thinks it’s ok to assault a police officer as long as it is a minor assault. I would have done the same thing that officer did if somebody did that to me. They fight with this guy for 20 seconds then the tape stops and he is still resisting.

• 14 OneByTheCee // Mar 6, 2009 at 3:10 AM

  jones

  That first cop walked in that elevator and got in that guy’s face for only one reason – to provoke.

  Take your badge-licking to Officer.com, etc., I’m sure they’d love to have you.

  I completely agree with Karl Mansoor – “beat the crap out of everyone” is the current policing mantra.

• 15 jones // Mar 6, 2009 at 8:27 AM

  I’d rather spend my time with you cop haters. I understand you defending your fellow photographers but now your sinking to defending the common criminal.

• 16 Karl Mansoor // Mar 6, 2009 at 11:14 AM

  Hi Jones,

  I don’t get the sense that “everybody” here “hates” the police.

  From what I saw in the video, and from reading the police reports, it is apparent to me that at the point of police involvement with Ortiz in the elevator, the officer provoked the incident.

  That is not the duty of police.

  That does not mean that Ortiz was not obnoxious. He probably was very much so. It also appears that Ortiz’s body language was uncooperative. And it was also unwise for Ortiz to slightly advance his body towards the officer. Please note however that when Ortiz was close to the officer he still had his hands in his pockets. He was just talking.

  But it was the officer that made the primary and first advance and pushed the chest to chest and nose to nose issue. Not only was the officer trying to provoke a fight (it was a “don’t you dare cross me or I’ll kick your butt attitude”), the officer failed to follow multiple appropriate officer safety tactics if he intended to make a lawful arrest. That tells me he was interested in aggression only – he was out of control.

  The purpose of law enforcement is not to fulfill aggressive desires of individual officers. The primary purpose of law enforcement is to keep the peace, restore order, make lawful unprovoked arrests, and bring suspects and evidence before the court for adjudication.

  If law enforcement action can be taken without using force then that is the path which LEO’s should pursue. The officers had an opportunity to try to resolve the incident without force and they did not attempt it. That would have been the safer and more practical course of action.

  The fact that the officers, in their reports, mis-represented facts is strong evidence the officers knew they were out of line.

  None of this means that I am defending Ortiz’s behavior or that I hate the police.
  I strongly support appropriate law enforcement procedures and legitimate officer safety concerns.

  KM

• 17 jones // Mar 6, 2009 at 11:40 AM

  I don’t think they mis-represented facts. He assaulted the officer and he was being disorderly while they were trying to break up a fight that Ortiz was involved in. I guess we just have to agree to disagree. I think an officer has every right to push a guy who is being disorderly, interfering and assaultive. After he is pushed he goes out of camera view so you don’t know what he is doing. Yes his hands were in his pockets, you don’t think anybody ever carried a gun or knife in their pocket.

• 18 Karl Mansoor // Mar 6, 2009 at 1:22 PM

  Actually I know from personal experience that people carry guns and knives in their pockets and elsewhere on their person.

  That is one of many reasons why, from an officer safety point of view, that walking directly up to Ortiz in a crowded elevator, provoking a confrontation, and engaging in the actions which the officer displayed on camera where all poor tactical choices.

  You did not see the officer advance on Ortiz? If the officer really wanted to communicate and diffuse the problem, which should have been his primary goal, he could have done so quite effectively from outside the elevator. He did not have to enter.

  Try watching the video in full screen. Hit pause and play to watch frame by frame. You don’t see the officer initiating aggression? His job is to diffuse the problem, not make it worse and more dangerous for himself, other officers, and bystanders.

  Ortiz was already in the elevator, exactly where the police had previously told him to go. The main disturbance had already been stopped. In fact, from the video it looked like no arrests were made of people who previously were involved in a scuffle. So why start a confrontation, when the original problem has been addressed, just because someone is a little mouthy? Just push the elevator button and let Ortiz be on his way. Who cares if he wants to cuss? I’m sure the police were doing their share as well – if not there then elsewhere.

• 19 jones // Mar 6, 2009 at 1:52 PM

  How do you diffuse the situation. You lock up the loud mouth inciting everybody. Usually that makes the rest of them go on their way.

• 20 Karl Mansoor // Mar 6, 2009 at 3:18 PM

  Are you speaking from experience, or, how you think the issue should be resolved?

  Locking up “the loud mouth ‘inciting’ everybody” to make the “others go on their way” is a very limited and overly simplistic view on the multiple options to diffuse a problem. It is not even diffusing a problem in the true sense of the word “diffuse.” Use of force and arrests should come after legitimately trying to diffuse a problem has failed.

  The officer made no effort to truly diffuse the incident. He provoked the confrontation.

  While in the elevator, nothing that Ortiz was doing or saying was “inciting” any of the other bystanders. The people that previously were pushing and shoving did not resume their actions. The people in the elevator were not being incited by Ortiz. In fact, one male in the elevator looked like he was trying to achieve further calming at the point the officer was entering the elevator. A good officer would have noticed that and continued along the same path but that does not satisfy an over inflated ego and desire to punish. Actually, a good officer would have tried to achieve calming first without having to have a likely intoxicated person set a better example. Look at the video frame by frame again and watch closely.

  It was the officer entering the elevator who caused further “inciting.”

  People, including innocent bystanders, get injured and killed unnecessarily when officers fail to utilize available non-force diffusing techniques – when officers escalate problems instead of reducing tension. Who wants that?

  Prosecutors don’t like dropping charges as Carlos alluded to in comment #7. Police officers really hate it when that happens and prosecutors don’t like all the grief they get from cops who have had their charges dropped. Believe me on this.

  The prosecutors would not have dropped this case unless they realized the police had nothing and overstepped their bounds.

  I’m sorry I can’t convince you on this but the demeanor and actions displayed by the officers in the elevator are not good for us as society. That misplaced aggressive police attitude is very dangerous.

  I am all for appropriately arresting people when necessary. The elevator incident wasn’t one of those times.

  But you can have the last word if you like. I tried to explain the best I could.

  Thanks for the conversation.

  KM

• 21 jones // Mar 6, 2009 at 3:47 PM

  Thanks for the last word, let’s assume I agreed with you that the officer should have tried to diffuse the situation by other means. They were both yelling at each other and it didn’t escalate into a physical confrontation until Ortiz assaulted the officer. Up until then it was just a shouting match.

• 22 cshsus // Mar 6, 2009 at 7:44 PM

  There seems to be some debate as to whether the citizen provoked the attack. Did anybody else notice that he still has his hands in his pockets at the time the police push him against the elevator? I have never heard of somebody attacking with their hands in their pockets.

  Edit: Whoops, missed Jones’ post, good point about the knife/gun. Jones are you a cop?

• 23 Jack // Mar 7, 2009 at 10:23 AM

  The FT Lauderdale police is corrupt. This case is caught on tape many are not these officers do this day in day out. I know several cases in the past year alone that this happened to other young guys minding their own business. Sometime even trying to help as good Samaritans.
  The all city should be sued heavily, because they allow for this stuff to happen.

• 24 upyourscm // Mar 10, 2009 at 6:31 PM

  I guess you missed the part where the guy head butts or chest bumps the officer. Also, the guy has his hands in his pockets. For all the cops know he had a weapon.

• 25 doug // Mar 10, 2009 at 9:49 PM

  They were just protecting the Boobs. Move along.

• 26 lonnie baker in davie // Mar 30, 2009 at 11:15 AM

  To: whom it concerns,

  After reviewing the video of the incident the Ft. Lauderdale Police Officers overreacted with force and fasified reports alleging an overstatement of resistance of the suspect and an understatement of force used by police. In addition, the police officer engaged at the suspect, where the suspect was not violent towards any policeman or civilian. I am also a victim of police brutality by this agency. In sum, the failure to discipline and cover-up by the agency Superiors leads to misconduct and the prosecution should prosecute for criminal charges as where a criminal offense has been committed by police.
  Respectfully,
  Lonnie

• 27 Mike // Apr 14, 2009 at 3:49 PM

  The officers were clearly out of line and the aggressors in the video. This is why police in general do not like video cameras, the truth is exposed all too well and they cannot lie for each other in their reports. Thank God for this kid it was on video. Im not a cop hater by any means, just an observer. I cannot believe people in these forums are sticking up for the police in this video, are you guys on drugs? open up your eyes! even when truth is right in front of your face, there will be people that still deny the truth, the reality is there is no excuse or justification for any law enforcement officer to act this way. THERE IS NO EXCUSE OR JUSTIFICATION FOR ANY LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER TO ACT THIS WAY!

• 28 ALL BE DAMNED // Apr 17, 2009 at 2:31 AM

  Vids broken here Carlos

• 29 HOTROD954 // Jun 6, 2009 at 6:58 PM

  I agree with Jones, he should have minded his own business to begin with. I would have done the same exact thing if not more to that bastard. That’s what happens when you decide you’re brazen enough to take on the police.

Leave a Comment

Name

Mail

Website