Police Abuse Woman for Filming – Follow-up

Published On March 27, 2013 | By CopBlock | Articles

I reached out to the young lady in question in police abuse woman for filming (above) - here’s our discussion:

When were you first approached by the HPD Officer?

I was approached by the HPD Officer as I was turning on my camera. It was after the street theater performance had ended. He had pulled up in a cruiser a minute or so earlier, as we were walking down the sidewalk to regroup at our meeting point before going home. One of my friends (not in costume) had been filming during our street theater performance; I asked her to film, but she was too nervous, so I took the camera instead.

How many activists were with you at the time of your interaction/arrest with the HPD?

There were 6 or 7 activists around me at the time of the interaction. Several more were about a block behind, distributing flyers. But we were in Downtown Hartford on Main Street near one of the central bus stations, so there were probably a couple hundred people who witnessed the whole thing.

Do you believe you were singled out because you were recording? Was anyone else detained by the HPD Officer?

I was definitely singled out because I was recording. Possibly also because I was dressed as a French Maid, holding a feather duster, and taller than the arresting officer, telling him that I had a right to film public servants on public property. Nobody else was arrested or detained. My lawyer later told me that the only way the police officer could justify my arrest would be to say I was “threatening.” I thought that was kind of funny.

Do you know who the individual with the flashlight in the recording was?

The individual with the flashlight was a security guard from the bank. He followed us down the street after we left to go home. I don’t know if he wanted to play cop, or had an authority complex, or what. He said he was an ex-marine, so maybe something terrible happened to him to make him do/say what he did/said. As we were walking down Main Street, he kept yelling that he could see my vagina. Then, when the police came, he pointed his flashlight at me. Total sicko.

It appears in the video that the individuals with the flashlight singled you out. Why do you think this was?

At first thought, it’s probably because I was the tallest and most provocatively dressed – the most attention-grabbing of the group. Other than that, I’m not quite sure. There were at least a dozen participants.

You were charged with disorderly conduct and trespassing?

Those were my charges. The disorderly conduct was for filming, and the trespassing was retroactive and arbitrary (as we left when asked, as possible… we couldn’t all exit through one door at the same time). I wasn’t even the last one out of the bank. I don’t have a copy of the police report, but my lawyer told me that the officer wrote that I resisted arrest, which is totally false; a ton of witnesses can back me up on that.

How many court appearances did you have?

I had 5 court appearances total (two in community, three in criminal) between the months of April and September of 2012. I submitted the video as evidence. The case never went to trial by jury. I also didn’t have to stand up and make a plea. Most of what went on at court took place in the rooms behind the courtroom between my lawyer and the judge. I was just sitting around waiting. It seemed kind of fishy. I think they just wanted to sweep my case under the rug after they saw the video.

What is the current disposition of your criminal case?

There are no more court dates. My record has been wiped. The bruises from the handcuffs/ankle shackles have healed.

Lindsey did her own write-up of her experience here.

Experiences like Lindsey’s are the reason sites like Copblock, PINAC, etc. exist, and are quite important for accountability with Law Enforcement. Without accountability, experiences like Lindsey’s will continue.

Lindsey was part of a group of activists and was singled out because she was taller, dressed in a French Maid costume, and openly chose to record her interaction with Hartford Police. This officer had no probable cause that Lindsey had committed a crime, nor reasonable suspicion that she was about to.

The charges – disorderly conduct, trespassing, and resisting arrest – were all dismissed. What this shows is an overreach by law enforcement officers in upholding and enforcing the law – this was personal. Law enforcement officers must be held to account for their actions, good, bad, or indifferent, or situations like these will continue to proliferate.

This conclusion is warranted by the fact Ms. Wainwright had to endure five court appearances (two Community Court, three Criminal Court) over a period of five months, in order to have all charges dismissed. This was a waste of the public’s taxes and the time of all individuals involved. Why did this occur? The Hartford Police officer in question did not want to be recorded.

Had the LEO in question acknowledged Lindsey’s right to record her interactions with public officials, had an open conversation upon arrival, diffused the situation and listened, this experience would not have occurred.

Reach out to Hartford Mayor Pedro E. Segarra (860) 757-9311, Constituent Services (860-757-9500), and Police Chief James C. Rovella, Chief (860) 757-4000, [email protected], to ascertain accountability in this matter.

BigPoppaAZ

 

Like this Article? Share it!

About The Author

When you see "CopBlock" as the author it means it was submitted via our contact tab - see top of page. Anyone can share their police related story with CopBlock.org via this tab, we thank you in advance.
  • d0nj3nko

    @common… Let me guess you read the first sentence and stopped reading? Badge licking moron! Corruption knows no bounds. God bless us all.

  • slappy

    What a bunch of BS. Why didn’t she show what happened before the PD showed up? Obviously she was doing something for someone on that platform to call the PD. I didn’t hear or see anyone come to her aid except a couple of her friends. My guess is her and her idiot activist friends were harassing people, someone called the PD, the officer tried to talk to her and refused to follow a lawful order, she turned on the camera and that is when she was arrested. I don’t even believe the author of this video interviewed anyone. I saw this same so called information posted when the video came out. Again, it’s lying activists who are criminals making shit up again.

  • Breaker

    @Slappy… You seem to be the one making shit up. Nice story bro.

  • t.

    What kind of “activating” we’re you doing? Where are the videos from the rest of your “activators”? Where are the videos you took while you were “activating”?

    Sounds like the officer had a legitimate reason to stop and speak with you. He may not of handled it correctly, but it sounds like you are admitting g that your earlier activities, the ones your were engaged in while activating, were wrong. If you are knowingly going to commit crimes while activating, don’t be surprised at police contact.

  • Common Sense

    “most provocatively dressed”

    Of course you were sweetheart….of course you were. Cause nothing offends bankers more than a woman dressed provocatively.

    …skeet skeet skeet

  • pedro

    it really doesnt matter what she was doing befor when it comes to him telling her to put the camera away,,,i wouldnt have put it away either,,,the way he keeps saying to put it away makes me think he was going to do something illegal or he wouldnt care if she recorded,,,she should sue him and the department for civil right violation, false arrest and whatever else a good attorney can think of,,,fuck that pig,,, i hope i read he gets shot in the eye and dies a slow miserable death

  • ishkabibble

    Sloppy, um I mean slappy, you’re an idiot. Video prior to the ‘interaction’ is not relevant. You and “t.”, El policia had no reason to refrain Ms. Wainwright from recording, she was neither obstructing nor committing disorderly conduct. She was lawfully walking down the street, and happened to stand out, which as far as the law is concerned is not illegal. Tall chick dressed as a maid, eek, I’m gonna need backup.

    Once again an overly zealous, ‘you will submit to my authority’ LEO overplayed his hand, violating the civil liberties of another citizen, without due diligence. Seems to be a recurring theme.

    As for Common Sense, hells to da yeah! Nothing like a little skeet, skeet, skeet, for the ‘sweetheart’, I mean hell she obviously wanted it, and deserved it, right? From the Windows to the walls, till the sweat drips off them balls…

    As the self ascribed Protect and servers of citizens rights, thanks for doubting the authenticity of young Ms. W. here, after the charges were dropped, I’m sure the judge was an idiot, dropping the charges after the well laid out case provided by the Officer for the DA.

  • t.

    Babble: She even admits to trespassing while “activating”. Her wrong doesn’t then translate into allowing her wrong again at a later point. If you willing commit the crime, don’t get mad when the police show. Civil disobideance tends to have illegal activity built in to it after all.

  • ishkabibble

    “t.”,

    She admits to being at the bank, and then being asked to leave. As the LEO you claim to be, I’ve no doubt you’re aware one must be informed, in some fashion, private party posting, informed to leave, etc… and refuse to depart in order to be charged with criminal trespass. Officer UConn had no reason to determine that Ms. W. had trespassed as she was not on said property, and was on transit, then filming. If, as you allude Officer UConn had reason to speak with Ms. W., she had reason to record, for public dissemination, and their mutual protection, the conversation. Officer UConn got testy that she didn’t submit to his command.

    If Officer UConn had utilized a logical methodology, acknowledged Ms. w.’s right to record, and had a conversation with both parties, a potentially different outcome would have occurred, without waste of public resources.

    She might have even blogged about Officer uconns recognition of her 1st. Amendment rights.

  • t.

    Babble: Keep in mind she doesn’t even really tell any story. Just a goofy fake question / fake answer thing.

    But she admits to being an “activist” in the company of 7-8 other “activists”. She says the were returning home from a “street performance”. I think we can make some reasonable inferences from that (and some other things). First…they went to the bank for their “street performance” / activating.

    Now SHE says that they left “as they could” through the one door. 9-8 people should be able to exit a bank pretty quick (as most have double front doors). So that shouldn’t have taken very long

    Now the security guard that she believes as “from the bank”. Why would she know that? Maybe that’s who told her told her to stop “activating” and leave. Now I do find it very interesting that he thought it important enough that she be located and pointed out / IDE ticked by the police that he kept her in sight as she walked / fled from the bank.

    I also find it quite interesting that SHE says that she was singled out because she was recording. Now, by her own statement she hasn’t started recording / filming when the officer approached her (if she hadnt started filming yet…she can’t be singled out because she was filming). It’s also quite telling that the security guard pointe her out….not be ause she was filming because he keep her in sight while waiting for the police)

    So, keeping in mind HER one sided story-like narrative, and even the “facts” that she presents…..what can we infer?

    That they were trespassing at the bank and wouldn’t leave until they found that the poli e had been contacted. That the security guard who most likely told them to leave (he is an agent of the bank) thought that her behavior while activating (whatever it was…which we don’t know as she only describes it as a “street performance”…which was done inside a bank) was aggregious enough that he follow the group and pointed her out to the police. From her own statements we learn that her arguement that the officer approached her because she was filming….by her own statement didnt start until after she had been approached…is just silliness.

    As for the case / charges being dismissed. You may have a decent insight into that. A conviction is at the BRD level…far above the PC needed to charge. There may not have been enough evidence to show that they had been sufficiently informed to leave and therefore weren’t trespassing.

    Now as I said, I don’t think this officer handled this very well. There are definitely times and places to be concerned about phone usage when dealing with suspects (especially when dealing with “activators”) but this may not have been one of those times (although with such limited info it’s hard to know for sure). If he was going to arrested her, just arrested her and leave at that.

  • courtofpublicopinion

    best way to deal with them is ignore them untill they point a gun at you or get closer than 20 feet or so it takes 2 to tango, if you just smile wave and finish up what you are doing and leave well there goes their story and viral video seems pretty simple to me

  • Elvison velvet

    All of those people there, and one cop. Why didn’t the crowd detain the cop when he started assaulting the woman? I got beat up and arrested a couple of years ago when I fought a cop off a prostate, handcuffed girl that he was kicking…right on my town’s main street, and no one else jumped in to help her or me (I did not know the girl), and I would do it again any and every day.
    C’mon people, fight back!

  • Common Sense

    ha ha ha, +5 points for ishkabibble

  • n8

    It’s obvious that the Leo had no justification for his actions, all charges dropped and case dismissed.. idk how much more one needs to see that this was nothing more than a power trip.. accountability is what we are looking for, this cop made a bad arrest …apparently the judicial system could not justify the cops actions…
    I know officers have a tough job but one they choose to do. Everyone makes mistakes as well, this we all know. As with any mistake there are consequences and what I’ve seen Leo are not held accountable for their mistakes and poor judgement. This incident cost this woman time and money not to mention the humiliation of being arrested… this man should have lost his job and been required to compensate this women out of his own pocket. Just like anyone else that isn’t shown privilege..
    I also know officers get offended by sites like these and they can’t stand the camera when its pointed at them.what they don’t realize are simple acts like these lead to contempt for Leo’s everywhere… it seems they already operate on a us against them mentality..

  • t.

    One has nothing to do with the other.