My guess is they feared the evidence would be tampered with. I'd trust the evidence in the hands of law enforcement in a secure evidence room more than sitting in the back of a run down corner market.

 

I feel that is a very slippery slope. Allowing police to seize footage from security cameras or cell phones because they "fear it will be tampered with" can lead to inappropriate conduct by officers. The courts seem torn as to when this is and isn't appropriate.

I feel that is a very slippery slope. Allowing police to seize footage from security cameras or cell phones because they "fear it will be tampered with" can lead to inappropriate conduct by officers. The courts seem torn as to when this is and isn't appropriate.

 

That's up to the Supreme Court to decide.

If the shopkeeper thinks that it was an unjustified shooting want he trying to be part of the solution by making the footage public?

 

Ideally, they secure the scene and go for the search warrant. That means the store owner can't go back in the store to potentially manipulate video or evidence then so be it. Hopefully the officers take that into consideration and tell him he can leave and come back later or sit in an air conditioned cruiser or something.

They had a search warrant for the convenience store video based on an article I read today.

 

They immediately confiscated the video which to my knowledge is legal because it is evidence. They can seize something they know contains evidence, like a cell phone recording an incident. They then applied and got the search warrant to view it. Once they view it and recover what they need, they can return it to the owner.

 

They "can" or they "must"? Two different things. Do you know which it is?

They "can" or they "must"? Two different things. Do you know which it is?

 

I believe they are legally allowed to.

I believe they are legally allowed to.

 

Allowed to keep the phone, system or whatever?

 

If they keep it, is the owner compensated for the property?

We don't know what went on. Don't think he was charged but I'm guessing if an eye witness is not cooperating with the police they may want to extend the investigation a little longer to help jar his memory? Same guy who possibly let the criminal, who was shot, sell illegal CD's in front of his store while holding an illegal weapon and pistol whipping another fellow (if those things did happen) . He also wouldn't turn over his evidence of the shooting to the cops. He also had the cell phone video that he gave to FBI. I'm guessing he is a great guy and I'm sure either he was distraught with the police force or he soon will be with the lack of help he gets on his next shoplifting call.

I'm sure the 4 + hours of his time that he sues for will be equal to the 20 Mountain Dew and packs of cigarettes he would have sold while detained.

 

This attitude needs to be adjusted. Be a part of the the solution, not a part of the problem.

 

I know this is a message board response, but if LEOs use the passive aggressive practice of not doing their job when law abiding people standing up for their rights then that would also be an attitude that is part of the problem.

Edited July 13, 201610 yr by Hellcats

I know this is a message board response, but if LEOs use the passive aggressive practice of not doing their job when law abiding people standing up for their rights then that would also be an attitude is part of the problem.

 

The LEO's were doing their job. If that dude performs his civic duty There is no passive aggressive method needed. Be are part of the solution and earn his rights. This guy is seeking money. Purely a money grab at this point.

Mrs. TAC is going to court for the 3rd time today as a witness to a case. She is not going to sue anyone for her 10 hours of time she has spent working with the judicial system. She could have walked away, but she is taking time off of work to do the right thing.

The LEO's were doing their job. If that dude performs his civic duty There is no passive aggressive method needed. Be are part of the solution and earn his rights. This guy is seeking money. Purely a money grab at this point.

Mrs. TAC is going to court for the 3rd time today as a witness to a case. She is not going to sue anyone for her 10 hours of time she has spent working with the judicial system. She could have walked away, but she is taking time off of work to do the right thing.

 

There should be no "if" on passive aggressive actions. LEOS are professionals. Passive aggressive actions don't fit in that realm.

 

Shopowner's experience sounds a bit more extreme.

The LEO's were doing their job. If that dude performs his civic duty There is no passive aggressive method needed. Be are part of the solution and earn his rights. This guy is seeking money. Purely a money grab at this point.

Mrs. TAC is going to court for the 3rd time today as a witness to a case. She is not going to sue anyone for her 10 hours of time she has spent working with the judicial system. She could have walked away, but she is taking time off of work to do the right thing.

Rights must be earned?

Allowed to keep the phone, system or whatever?

 

If they keep it, is the owner compensated for the property?

 

I explained that in a previous post.

ACLU taking BRPD to court over their response to public protests.

 

 

ACLU sues Baton Rouge police over force used on protesters

Edited July 13, 201610 yr by Clyde

ACLU taking BRPD to court over their response to public protests.

 

 

ACLU sues Baton Rouge police over force used on protesters

 

FYI Clyde, not aimed at you. I read the article, it mentions him using a gun against someone else. Aside from seeing the gun pointed at the officer in a clear frame photo....... What is the proper reaction by police? I don't know(because clearly that's the problem??), I'm asking how could they have handled it better?

Article talks about bad decisions by the officers but says they are unlikely to be charged.

 

 

 

'Bad police work' in Alton Sterling's death, but don't expect a conviction, experts say | Alton Sterling | theadvocate.com

BRPD spent $70k on gear last month anticipating the determination made by the US Attorney's office.