Last week the U.S. Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the trial court’s ruling and confirmed that we indeed have a First Amendment right to livestream police officers, including as an occupant of a vehicle during a traffic stop.
Details: https://thecivilrightslawyer.com/2023/02/16/cops-afraid-of-livestream-update-court-says-first-amendment-right/
Original Video: https://youtu.be/dGJSGvogZ5A
Video to submit? https://forms.gle/HmwnDQKvwvYPxe967
For business inquiries: civilrightslawyer@ellify.com
Twitter: https://twitter.com/johnbryanesq
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/JohnBryanLaw
Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/@thecivilrightslawyer
FAIR USE NOTICE This video may contain copyrighted material; the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available for the purposes of criticism, comment, review and news reporting which constitute the fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work for purposes such as criticism, comment, review and news reporting is not an infringement of copyright.
NOTE: We don’t condone threats or violence of any kind. If you are upset or outraged by acts of government misconduct featured in this video, we encourage you to utilize lawful means of expression, including becoming involved in the political process, as well as seeking accountability through the judicial system.
NOTE ALSO: The information you obtain here is not, nor is it intended to be, legal advice. You should consult an attorney for advice regarding your individual situation. We invite you to contact us and welcome your letters and electronic mail, or other submissions or messages. However, contacting us does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not send any confidential information to us until such time as an attorney-client relationship is established and documented in a written agreement.
source
Details and Full Opinion: https://thecivilrightslawyer.com/2023/02/16/cops-afraid-of-livestream-update-court-says-first-amendment-right/
It is convenient how the court stopped short of repealing Terry v. Ohio.
You know as well as I do that. Officer safety is just another word for officer. Cowardice in qualified immunity is just another word for stupidity. You cannot keep covering up stupidity
i mean really should have been obvious. qualified immunity ugh.
Listen to a coward at its best. Live stream is dangerous for any corrupt coward like these too scared mutts.
I sympathize with the poor enforcers who are so overwhelmed by officer safety concerns above and beyond all other considerations. On the other hand, if you don't like or can't tolerate your working conditions, you can always look for a different job. In other words, maybe it's time to switch careers. Just, you know, for officer safety. Which, coincidentally, makes life so much safer for all the rest of us.
Mr. Bryan, thank you for posting this decision on the blog. I sometimes have trouble seeing how the judges twist things into whatever result they choose. But it's necessary for us to see how far from Constitutionality they have strayed.
I read someplace, "They love the darkness because their deeds are evil!".
Where’s officer Peppers?!!!!! I’m sure he was there somewhere!!!
Thanks for the update.
IJ is a important component in our community! Please donate! I donate when I can. I know how it feels to be like this in a fixed position. It’s not easy and it’s not worth it because these people have Immunity and they don’t pay! They Citizens of This Country Do! In my case I didn’t receive any help? Help the IJ staff so they can help more people in This Country So That The “ Government Officials Are Held Accountable! “ They need to stop having Immunity so that the Citizens of America stop paying for their Paychecks and Their Criminal Actions over their feelings and their their negligence!
COPS ARE CORRUPT FROM THE TOP DOWN, START WITH THE CHEF AND THE POLICE UNIONS.
Awesome!
It's basically a felony to touch a cop but they do it to citizens with impunity. Who else is way, way beyond fed up with this tyrannical B.S.? Also, let's not forget that law enforcement doesn't even crack the top 25 of the world's most dangerous jobs. Let that sink in. "Officer Safety" is a fairy tale. They chose to do the job and get reimbursed handsomely for it too. There are a couple of qualifications to become a cop. One: You have to be psychotic. Two: You have to be a big crybaby. Three: A big fat liar.
These tyrants demanding the ID of passengers isn't lawful either. You don't have to provide ID even if the driver has warrants or whatever. Can someone please clarify if I'm correct? That's how it is in Minnesota.
News stations live stream shit all the time… so what gives? Money?
I personally am as much afraid of police as I am of criminals. I see little difference. Both will hurt or kill you for not bending to their will. The difference is one is State sponsored violence and protected by the State and powerful unions.
What I don’t understand is how is a livestream more of a threat than talking to someone on the phone during the stop. The officer had no problem with that but under his logic the phone call is just as much of a threat. This doesn’t make sense.
Talk like crack head act like a crack head get treated like a crack head
Why has nobody mentioned live news? Should live news reporting be banned for "officer safety"?
The "officer safety" argument sickens me. It creates victims at the hands of violent, and government-entitled law enforcement agents.
"Officer safety" brings these quotes to mind:
"Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves."
~William Pitt The Younger
“Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” ~Voltaire
There is no expectation of safety for anyone, and law enforcement agents are no exceptions. Without recording police encounters, CIVILIAN BODY COUNTS RISE EXPONENTIALLY, and live streaming actually actually minimizes danger to officers, AND ESPECIALLY to innocent civilians.
To my colleagues: If you can't take the heat, get out of my kitchen.
Hard to believe that police wouldn't want their ordinary practices recorded and broadcast live to the public
I really liked the part about why the cop was granted QI. I, generally, don't agree with QI and would like for it to not exist. But there are RARE circumstances where things aren't very clearly set out in law and if something isn't perfectly clear as to whether or not someone is allowed to do something, I don't think the officer should be able to be sued.
Of course, the opposite side to that is, "in this day and age", officers should know that filming them is legal. So, now that we have clear precedent, there should never be QI granted for trying to take someone's phone.
And, hopefully, anyone who has that scenario happen will do the right thing and call an attorney at their earliest convenience.
But, anyway, the point is, I really enjoyed the explanation of why he got immunity. Again, the times where I agree with QI are few and far between. This just happens to be one of the .000007% of the scenarios where I feel like it was used as intended when the idea was first created. Usually, police try to claim QI to get away with battering handcuffed people.
I suppose calling or texting a friend or family member and telling them you're in a traffic stop on x street should be probibited too. The person who is called can organize a gang of friends, arm themselves, and go to the location to attack the police.
☆ Fact is the First Amendment's speech clause should be suspended entirely during the pendency of the traffic stop because of officer safety.
Looks like the police have made another law — no need for legislation anymore.