Woman Filming US Marshals Executing a Search Warrant Has Phone Destroyed

 

Beatriz Paez says she wasn’t doing anything wrong taking video of a U.S. Marshal executing warrants on San Juan Avenue Sunday. She saw people in handcuffs. “Around 8 people including women were held at gunpoint on their stomachs with their hands held behind their back,” says Paez. But, when one marshal saw her recording, “He told me that I had to go. And, I told him I had the right to film and he said I was interfering with their investigation and I told them that I was on a public sidewalk and I had the right to film them.”

 

Sounds like she is planning on suing...

Give some people some power and it goes to their head.

I think there is a line that people cross with phones. Perhaps she was interfering. It would have been more effective to simply confiscate it if he felt it was interfering.

Perhaps they were undercover and didn't want their identity shown to every tom, dick, and harry drug dealer or fugitive.

Looks like he needed to run some more to catch the filming of the filming. Smile, you're on candid camera.

Perhaps they were undercover and didn't want their identity shown to every tom, dick, and harry drug dealer or fugitive.

 

Then wear a mask. They have no reasonable expectation of privacy while performing their duties in public. If she was indeed interfering with the investigation then she should have been arrested. If she was not, he had no business doing what he did. We've seen over and over police using the "interfering with an investigation" because they don't want to be filmed. I don't know if that was the case here or if she got too close and was a distraction.

Perhaps they were undercover and didn't want their identity shown to every tom, dick, and harry drug dealer or fugitive.

That doesn't matter, undercover officers and feds have gotten into trouble over doing this in the past. If they are undercover they would have masks on.

 

During Occupy about 3 1/2 years ago in Cincy, there was a car at the end of the block where they had there protest, two photographers with the group went to the car and started snapping several photos of the two men inside. They were undercover CPD officers, they arrested the two with the cams and confiscated the cams. Very quickly, just an hour or so later they were told they could go and they got their cameras back, and an apology. Officers were reprimanded and the two with the cameras did get a good chunk of change to keep it out of court.

 

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on these types of actions by officers and feds, I don't know why some hardheaded officers and feds don't start realizing that they cannot continue to do such things.

Edited April 23, 201511 yr by SportsGuy41017

This is a pretty serious charge. The US Supreme Court has said time and again that you can film. There's also the little problem that it appears that the officer has tampered with/destroyed evidence. That and that you need a warrant to search someone's cell phone.

Poor Poor person, have them go get another Obama phone, they are free.

Poor Poor person, have them go get another Obama phone, they are free.

 

You totally missed the point.

 

Either there are rules or the government can do whatever they want whenever they want and if the latter was the case you would be screaming bloody murder mountain ref.

You totally missed the point.

 

Either there are rules or the government can do whatever they want whenever they want and if the latter was the case you would be screaming bloody murder mountain ref.

 

I'm in a great mood today, just playing a little devils advocate and being a little sarcastic. Yeah they shouldn't have destroyed the phone, but not everything has to be filmed either.

I'm in a great mood today, just playing a little devils advocate and being a little sarcastic. Yeah they shouldn't have destroyed the phone, but not everything has to be filmed either.

 

If the police are not doing anything wrong they don't have anything to fear by being filmed.

If the police are not doing anything wrong they don't have anything to fear by being filmed.

 

Maybe they did it for the privacy of the witness or convict. Whatever reason I'm sure the police acted in the best interest of everyone, except her of course.

Maybe they did it for the privacy of the witness or convict. Whatever reason I'm sure the police acted in the best interest of everyone, except her of course.

 

Hard to say without a complete and independent investigation.

Maybe they did it for the privacy of the witness or convict. Whatever reason I'm sure the police acted in the best interest of everyone, except her of course.

 

Again, there is no reasonable expectation of privacy when you are in public. If they don't want to be filmed/photographed don't do stuff to get arrested and drug out in public.