(corrected-video) Milwaukee cops Threaten Videographer with Loitering

Published On February 1, 2013 | By John Freeman | Articles

 

Milwaukee police tell a man that he is loitering if he films them, while they film him.

Like this Article? Share it!

About The Author

  • Dan Sayers

    I’m not familiar with the laws of that jurisdiction, but I’m pretty sure that loitering is an infraction that can only be valid on private property. I would venture to wager that it also requires the passage of a certain amount of time. Finally, the act of filming a stationary location is PURPOSE that, so long as you’re not trespassing, is cause for you to remain stationary.

    To further empower you, the moment he brings up “lawful order” for something you’ve expressed that you do not believe is in fact lawful, ask him to show you the statute for your own knowledge. Also, I have a sneaking suspicion that his name is not actually officer.

  • YankeeFan

    Loitering is a charge that some courts will not accept as it is or has the potential to be used in a manner in which it was not intended.

  • Common Sense

    The police do not ‘have to show you the statute’ or any other document prior to an arrest. The loitering allegation is probably a city ordinance. It appears the ordinace 106-31 has withstood several challenges.

    106-31. Loitering or Prowling. The activities of
    loitering or prowling set forth in subs. 1 to 9 are
    unlawful within the limits of the city.
    1. LOITERING. Loiters or prowls in
    a place, at a time, or in a manner not usual for
    law-abiding individuals under circumstances that
    warrant alarm for the safety of persons or
    property in the vicinity. Among the circumstances
    which may be considered in determining whether
    such alarm is warranted is the fact that the actor
    takes flight upon appearance of a peace officer,
    refuses to identify himself or manifestly
    endeavors to conceal himself or any object.
    Unless flight by the actor or other circumstances
    makes it impracticable, a peace officer shall prior
    to any arrest for an offense under this section,
    afford the actor an opportunity to dispel any
    alarm which would otherwise be warranted, by
    requesting him to identify himself and explain his
    presence and conduct. No person shall be
    convicted of an offense under this section if the
    peace officer did not comply with the preceding
    sentence, or if it appears at trial that the
    explanation given by the actor was true and, if
    believed by the peace officer at the time, would
    have dispelled the alarm.

  • http://www.policemisconduct.net Glenn

    We need more documentation of police acting in this manner. Making such recordings, then showing them to the people is the best way to prove the police view the public as their sworn enemy.

  • BluEyeDevil

    Common your at it again, the copy and paste legend. It is not unlawful to film the police and it is not unlawful to stand on a public sidewalk. Let me ask you a question would you deem unlawful to stand across the street and film the cops. Maybe, a little ways down the block. How many feet is lawful distance to film cops, LOL hypocrites. Was this man interfering in a police investigation. The law is not up for interpretation, especially by some pig. LOL, who can barely speak proper English. Let me help you with the LAW:

    Loitering is defined as “remaining in any one place under circumstances that would warrant a reasonable person to believe that the purpose or effect of that behavior is to enable a criminal to establish control over identifiable areas, to intimidate others from entering those areas, or to conceal illegal activities.”

    It is clear that this man should have stood his ground and asserted his rights. There was no reasonable suspicion that he was engaging in illegal activity, unless of course this pig thinks that filming the police is illegal. Again pigs are not that smart. I would let him arrest me and then made his life hell with litigation, civil suit and embarrassment.
    Sometimes we have nothing better to do than hold the public servants accountable for violation of civil rights. ..!.(‘_’).!..

  • BluEyeDevil

    HEY EVERYONE CHECK THIS ONE OUT,

    Armed guard disarmed teen in Atlanta school shooting, says police chief
    The Associated Press
    First Published Jan 31 2013 12:58 pm • Last Updated Jan 31 2013 06:53 pm
    Atlanta • A student opened fire at his middle school Thursday afternoon, wounding a 14-year-old in the neck before an armed officer working at the school was able to get the gun away, police said.
    Multiple shots were fired in the courtyard of Price Middle School just south of downtown around 1:50 p.m. and the one boy was hit, Atlanta Police Chief George Turner said. In the aftermath, a teacher received minor cuts, he said.
    Authorities investigate the scene of a school shooting, Thursday, Jan 31, 2013 in Atlanta. Authorities say a 14-year-old has been wounded in a shooting at an Atlanta middle school and a suspect has been taken into custody. Atlanta police spokesman Carlos Campos says the wounded student has been taken
    (John Bazemore | The Associated Press) A woman comforts a child after after a shooting at an Price Middle school in Atlanta Thursday, Jan. 31, 2013. A 14-year-old boy was wounded outside the school Thursday afternoon and a fellow student was in custody as a suspect, authorities said. No other students were hurt.
    A student and parent react to seeing each other when buses arrive to unite parents and children at Emmanuel Baptist Church following a shooting at Price Middle school in Atlanta on Thursday, Jan. 31, 2013. A 14-year-old boy was wounded outside the school Thursday afternoon and a fellow student was in custody as a suspect, authorities said. No other students were hurt. (AP Photo/Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Curtis Compton) MARIETTA DAILY OUT; GWINNETT DAILY POST OUT; LOCAL TV OUT; WXIA-TV OUT; WGCL-TV OUT
    A distraught woman is turned back by police at the scene of a school shooting at Price Middle school in Atlanta on Thursday, Jan. 31, 2013. A 14-year-old boy was wounded outside the school Thursday afternoon and a fellow student was in custody as a suspect, authorities said. No other students were hurt. (AP Photo/Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Curtis Compton) MARIETTA DAILY OUT; GWINNETT DAILY POST OUT; LOCAL TV OUT; WXIA-TV OUT; WGCL-TV OUT
    Children look out from a school bus as they are transported to their parents after a shooting at an Price Middle school in Atlanta Thursday, Jan. 31, 2013. A 14-year-old boy was wounded outside the school Thursday afternoon and a fellow student was in custody as a suspect, authorities said. No other students were hurt.
    A man and a woman are reunited with a child a child after after a shooting at an Price Middle school in Atlanta Thursday, Jan. 31, 2013. A 14-year-old boy was wounded outside the school Thursday afternoon and a fellow student was in custody as a suspect, authorities said. No other students were hurt. (AP Photo/John Bazemore) Mother and daughter embrace as Tiffany Myricle, 37, leads her daughter Xavia Denise Myricle away from her school bus when parents and children are reunited at Emmanuel Baptist Church after a shooting at an Price Middle school in Atlanta on Thursday, Jan. 31, 2013. A 14-year-old boy was wounded outside the school Thursday afternoon and a fellow student was in custody as a suspect, authorities said. No other students were hurt. (AP Photo/Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Curtis Compton) MARIETTA DAILY OUT; GWINNETT DAILY POST OUT; LOCAL TV OUT; WXIA-TV OUT; WGCL-TV OUT
    The wounded boy was taken “alert, conscious and breathing” to Grady Memorial Hospital, said police spokesman Carlos Campos. He was expected to be released Thursday night.
    Police swarmed the school of about 400 students after reports of the shooting while a crowd of anxious parents gathered in the streets, awaiting word on their children. Students were kept at the locked-down school for more than two hours before being dismissed.
    Investigators believe the shooting was not random and that something occurred between the two students that may have led to it.
    Schools Superintendent Erroll Davis said the school does have metal detectors.
    “The obvious question is how did this get past a metal detector?” Davis asked about the gun. “That’s something we do not know yet.”
    The armed resource officer who took the gun away was off-duty and at the school, but police didn’t release details on him or whether he is regularly at Price. Since 20 children and six adults were shot to death at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Connecticut in December, calls for armed officers in every school have resonated across the country.
    Hours after the Atlanta shooting, several school buses loaded with children pulled away from the school and stopped in front of a church about a half-block away. Parents tried boarding the buses. Police who initially tried to stop the parents, relented and screamed, “Let them off!” about the students.
    James Bolton was at work when his sister called saying a teen had been shot at his son’s school and was in the crowd as parents began swarming the fleet of buses.
    LOL,
    US GUN NUTS ARE SO STUPID, HMMMMMMM……what was the difference between sandy hook and atlanta………..Oh an armed individual in the school ………. lets do the ratio 26 dead Sandy Hook: 1 injured Atlanta, LOL, I so right

  • BluEyeDevil

    OH YA HOW ABOUT THIS ONE……..
    I AM ON ROLE TODAY

    The Newtown Board of Education wants more armed police officers in the towns four elementary schools after the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary last month.

    Last night, they decided to ask the town to approve the request to include one additional full-time Newtown police at each of the elementary schools in next year’s budget.

    Today, members of the board will be meeting with state and federal officials about obtaining additional funding for security.

    “Our parents are demanding of us that things are made safe and secure and certain measures are put in place,” Chairwoman Debbie Leidlein said. “So we’re being very thoughtful.”

    Several police officers have been stationed at all Newtown schools since the Dec. 14 shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary, where 20 children and six staff members were killed.

    Those officers will remain at the school through the remainder of the school year, but the budget for the next fiscal year funds only resource officers at the middle and high schools.

    Parents said security means more than a police presence.

    “My main concern is with accessibility to these school, said Neil Johnson, a parent of two Newtown students. “On December 14th, that was the main bare-boned reason that occurred.”

    “After what happened in our community, I just think we should go over and above and provide a shining example for the rest of the world and protect our kids,” said resident Donna Lorenz.

    NOW AS LONG AS THESE COPS STAY OUT OF SCHOOL BUSINESS SUCH AS HANDLING DIFFICULT STUDENTS, DISCIPLINARY ISSUES, USED FOR ENFORCEMENT, CORPORAL PUNISHMENT OR ANY SCHOOL ACTIVITIES AND STICK TO GUARDING THE GROUNDS AND KEEPING THE STUDENTS SAFE THINGS WILL BE ALL WELL BUT ILL BET YOU A BUFFALO NICKEL THAT THE COPS WILL BE USED FOR NON COP DUTIES THAT WILL END UP WITH CIVIL SUITS AND A BLACK EYE FOR THE POLICE ONCE AGAIN…………

  • t.

    Devil: Yes, the police officer did a great job.

  • rick

    Submit story to copblock or post link only!

  • Common Sense

    I posted the ordinace to people, maybe even you, could understand it and make an infomred opinion.

    Always remember, what you think of a law/statute/ordinace and what the police, prosecutors, judges think are usually worlds apart.

    It won’t be your decision on whether your behavior is legal or not.

    Just ask Adam, he actually wrote it in his appeal, to sum, “I didn’t think what I was doing was illegal.” But guess who though otherwise? The judge and the DA, and the police.

  • http://www.badgeabuse.com badgeabuse

    Just go on private property and tell Officer Coleman to suck a cock…

    let them know thats now a “lawful order” though.

    Most cops problems are they have NO RESPECT for the general public they serve..

  • http://www.policemisconduct.net Glenn

    POLICE OFFICER RAPES A THREE MONTH OLD INFANT AND A ONE YEAR OLD CHILD!

    When you see common sense, t., underoath, psosgt and all the other shills spew their boot-licking propaganda here on Cop Block, remember, THIS IS WHAT THEY STAND FOR, AND THIS IS WHAT THEY DEFEND!

    Wichita KS police officer Officer Joseph T. McGill, 28, was convicted today of committing a sexual act on a 3-month-old child and a 1-year-old child. Officer McGill pleaded guilty in January 2012 in an unrelated case to sexual battery while on duty as a police officer and was sentenced to three years probation. Those charges stemmed from separate incidents in November 2010 and February 2011. The judge set sentencing for March 1:
    http://www.kansas.com/2013/01/24/2649372/former-police-officer-convicted.html

  • YankeeFan

    I am willing to bet you most courts will not let a cop use loitering to stop them from filming. Thats as weak as saying someone is being disorderly for cussing out a cop. It is protected speech. Laws were not enacted to stifle the constitutional rights of citizens and we have a bonafide court ruling in a qualified immunity hearing, that filming the police is a right. Someone who walks out of a house or walks down a sidewalk and starts to film is hardly loitering and any attempt to say so will only result in another lawsuit against a clueless cop.

  • YankeeFan

    Lets remember In Adam’s case, he made a recording without disclosing to the other party he was doing so. Fimling and taking pics of police has been ruled time and time again to not only be legal but a right under the 1st amendment. Big difference in cases really!!

  • Common Sense

    @YF

    I agree, but it proves my point, that what Adam thought was legal/illegal wasn’t decided by him, but by the court.

    Simply because the person filming believes they are correct, they may, be in fact incorrect.

    Remember the one in Texas, who was found guilty of interferring, while he was filming? Again, if you want to film, have at it, but don’t get involved. However, its nearly impossible for the cameraman, atleast in the video’s posted, not get involved, and there in lies the rub.

  • steve

    you dont have to do much in court to prove your not loitering or proweling. he already told the officer what he was doing and what he was doing was legal. the cops use this loitering and proweling when they cant find a real reason to arrest someone. they use it as much as they use the risisting of arrest . maybe 20% of the resisting is true the rest is a fabrication to cause more problems. the loitering and proweling laws came about after the vagrancy laws were abolished due to
    constitutionality. you can plain as day see that THE ASSHOLE COMMON SENSE USES THIS TO HARANG PEOPLE ON FALSE CHARGES, HES SUCH A KNOW IT ALL. I YA READ IT GOOD ITS EASY TO BEAT THIS CHARGE.

  • steve

    BLUE EYED DEVIL BROUGHT THIS THOUGHT OUT OF ME.I THINK IF THEY HAVE SECURITY AT THE SCOOLS ANY WHERE THEY SHOULD BE UNDERCOVER AND PLACED STRATEGICALLY LOOKING LIKE JANITORS OR MAINTENANCE OR A COACH. WITH PROPER COMMUNICATION.

  • Otto Maddox

    The planets must have aligned in just the right order tonight. I’m finding myself in agreement with the cop fanboy.

    It’s hard to hear all the people who like to argue with the police. That’s probably one of the most futile activities you could ever take part in.

    My favorite is “Am I legally obligated to answer that question?” First, why would ask a police officer for legal advice? They aren’t lawyers. Second, the cop is most likely going to just say “Yes.” What does he have to lose. He’s ALLOWED to lie to you after all.

    So just practice SILENCE. Remember you don’t have to answer any questions.. so don’t.

    Just record. Let the video speak for itself.