Juan Santana approached an individual who wore a “Hialeah Police” badge to question the treatment of his friend. Rather than be receptive to a “customer complaint” that individual - Antonio Sentmanat – took Santana’s videocamera and its footage was deleted.
From the write-up below, by Carlos Miller:
But when one of Santana’s friends walked up to the tug-of-war to get a closer look, Sentmanat reached for his gun.
“He told Keith to step back and that was when I released my grip,” Santana said. “I didn’t want my friend to get shot over a camera.”
Sentmanat handed the camera to the other cop who deleted the footage, before handing Santana a card saying he could pick up the camera later at the station.
This incident came to my attention per a comment left by Santana on a recent video published about my experiences in Bridgeport, CT with Angel Martinez of Connecticut Cop Block – website / Facebook / [email protected]
Cameras coupled with the Internet are really bringing-about transparency. It’s not surprising those who claim a “legitimate” right to initiate force don’t want their actions documented.
Give our friends a call to share your thoughts:
Hialeah Police Department
- 305.883.5800
- 501 Palm Avenue, Hialeah, Florida 33010
- http://www.hialeahfl.gov/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=128&Itemid=382&lang=en
If you do call, why not leverage your efforts? You’re already making the call, why not record and share it. Perhaps someone would gain from hearing how you frame things. And having been helped by call floods in the past, it does make a difference when it’s made clear that others are paying attention.
_____________________
South Florida Cops Confiscate Camera and Delete Footage, Claiming They Feared it was a Gun
by Carlos Miller
2013.07.14
A South Florida cop said he was in fear for his life when he snatched a man’s camera from his hand on Tuesday, handing it over to a second cop who deleted the video that had just been recorded.
The cops then kept the camera, handing Juan Santana a receipt where he was told he could pick it up later.
The Hialeah cop, later identified as Antonio Sentmanat, told Santana that he thought the Sony Bloggie camera was a gun.
“He told me that they have cameras with guns inside them,” Santana said in a telephone interview with Photography is Not a Crime.
“He told me, ‘I don’t know if there is a gun inside that camera.’”
Santana, who weighs more than 500 pounds and is recovering from a car accident, had pulled up to Sentmanat in a three-wheel medical scooter on the street in front of his house in broad daylight and asked for his name and badge number.
“I wanted to report him to internal affairs because he pointed a gun at my friend and frisked him illegally,” Santana said. “I wanted to get his name on camera.”
Santana, a longtime PINAC reader who lives in Hialeah, a municipality in Miami-Dade County, said it all started when cops pulled in front of his house in two unmarked cars after spotting his friend, Manny Garcia, sitting on his front porch.
A cop wearing a SWAT t-shirt then hopped out of his car, pointed his gun at Garcia and ordered him to step onto the street.
Garcia, 18, had no idea what was going on, so he obliged. Once on the street, the cop began frisking him before releasing him, realizing he had nothing to do with the auto theft he was investigating.
Meanwhile, another friend who had witnessed the incident, ran inside the house to tell Santana what was going on.
Santana stepped out of the house and learned that police were actually looking for his tenant, who rents the efficiency behind his house.
Santana walked back to the efficiency and knocked on the door, asking his tenant to step outside and talk to the cops.
The tenant stepped outside and began talking to the cops without getting frisked or threatened with a weapon. They didn’t even bother asking for his identification at this point.
It turned out, the cops were investigating a report of a stolen car, which had been parked across the street from Santana’s house. The main suspect in the auto theft – who was already in custody – was a female friend of the tenant’s, who sometimes visited him.
But after a few questions, the cops determined the tenant had nothing to do with the stolen car, so they let him go.
Meanwhile, Santana was still upset that police had pulled a gun on his friend, especially when it became evident they had no need to pull a gun on anybody in that investigation.
So he rode up to the officer on his scooter and demanded his name and badge number.
“He said, ‘this is how we’re going to do this,’ and steps out of the car and grabs my wrist to take my Bloggie,” Santana said. “I tightened my grip and held on to it and he kept pulling at it.”
But when one of Santana’s friends walked up to the tug-of-war to get a closer look, Sentmanat reached for his gun.
“He told Keith to step back and that was when I released my grip,” Santana said. “I didn’t want my friend to get shot over a camera.”
Sentmanat handed the camera to the other cop who deleted the footage, before handing Santana a card saying he could pick up the camera later at the station.
Santana was so enraged he had his friend retrieve a second camera from inside his house, a Gumball 3000, which he placed around his neck and began recording as he argued with police over the camera confiscation.
Antonio Sentmanat, Hialeah police employee
The video is hard to follow visually because Santana was recording discretely but the audio confirms that cops confiscated the camera because one cop tells Santana that “he doesn’t know what you’re intentions are” in defense of Sentmanat, who is pictured above.
Later that night, Santana went to the police station with some friends to retrieve his camera, but was told he would have to wait at least five days for the report to be completed.
He plans on returning tomorrow.
“He told me that they have cameras with guns inside them,” Santana said in a telephone interview with Photography is Not a Crime.
“He told me, ‘I don’t know if there is a gun inside that camera.’”
This is the integrity of cop’s. Any excuse to violate the law. Show me just one cop who has even been threatened by a “camera gun”
And what does that have to with deleting video?
Well, the piglets are increasingly in for a new treat, thanks to cloud technology.
@t
Cops don’t oppose filming, my ads.
Some day an idiot activist is going to walk up on a scene, distract the officers, and something very bad is going to happen. Someone will get hurt or worse all because some idiot activist can’t figure out that what they are doing is just plain stupid.
The video is still there just have someone restore it.
If they’re that easily distracted, it’s going to happen anyway, activists or not.
beware, any movement out of the corner of a cops eye may scare the shit out of him causing him to quickly turn and empty his gun to eliminate the potential threat, is this really the type of policing any of us want? but how do we end it?
and slappy anyone that easily distracted is the very definition of STUPID oops i forgot that IS the first requirement to become a cop
So the average cop is no longer able to see the difference between a pistol and a smartphone? Yeah, sounds about right.
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 WHO THEY ARE, 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
Yep, protecting our rights and opposing crooked and abusive cops is stupid. Slappy the clown strikes again.
@Slappy
Tough. Without those activists, bad things have happened to citizens. Maybe if cops were better at controlling themselves and each other, so many eyes wouldn’t be on cops.
And it is legal, no matter what you want.
0 = The number of police officers killed by guns hidden in phones/cameras in the history of the US.
21 = The number of police officers killed in automobile accidents just last year. This years numbers are up more than 20% already.
If this cop were rational he would be more concerned about wearing his seat belt and driving a little less recklessly then taking cameras.
Tom do you have the stats to back up those numbers? I find it odd that only 21 cops died in vehicle accidents all year and for the whole nation. Thanks.
Sigh…
COINTELPRO Techniques for Dilution, Misdirection and Control of an Internet Forum
Technique #2 – ‘CONSENSUS CRACKING’
A second highly effective technique (which you can see in operation all the time at http://www.abovetopsecret.com) is ‘consensus cracking.’ To develop a consensus crack, the following technique is used. Under the guise of a fake account a posting is made which looks legitimate and is towards the truth is made – but the critical point is that it has a VERY WEAK PREMISE without substantive proof to back the posting. Once this is done then under alternative fake accounts a very strong position in your favour is slowly introduced over the life of the posting. It is IMPERATIVE that both sides are initially presented, so the uninformed reader cannot determine which side is the truth. As postings and replies are made the stronger ‘evidence’ or disinformation in your favour is slowly ‘seeded in.’ Thus the uninformed reader will most like develop the same position as you, and if their position is against you their opposition to your posting will be most likely dropped. However in some cases where the forum members are highly educated and can counter your disinformation with real facts and linked postings, you can then ‘abort’ the consensus cracking by initiating a ‘forum slide.’
Go to your local news first. Consider it insurance.
slappy: define “activist.” I’m guessing you think it means anyone who disagrees with the authorities. If so, would that include the Founding Fathers? They disagreed with the king and his officials. Many of us consider the Founding Fathers heroes.
If a cop tries to grab your camera and you are a gun owners you should take that cops life and keep yours safe. cops are crazy these days and liars so after a few get killed trying to infringe on the rights of citizens, the rest will learn to behave.
What is the business address of the federal judge who says we DO have a right to record police? I would like to start a letter writing campaign to this judge and send him these videos and ask him if he is going to allow these officers to get away with contempt of his ruling or if he will have thim arrested.
don’t you just love organic robots?
He was correct for 2012.
For 2013
Line of Duty Deaths: 20
Automobile accident: 4
Gunfire: 10
Heart attack: 3
Motorcycle accident: 1
Stabbed: 1
Vehicular assault: 1
For 2012
Line of Duty Deaths: 119
9/11 related illness: 1
Aircraft accident: 3
Assault: 1
Automobile accident: 21
Duty related illness: 3
Fall: 2
Gunfire: 46
Gunfire (Accidental): 2
Heart attack: 6
Heat exhaustion: 1
Motorcycle accident: 5
Stabbed: 5
Struck by vehicle: 6
Training accident: 1
Vehicle pursuit: 5
Vehicular assault: 11
Read more: http://www.odmp.org/search/year/2012#ixzz2NzpU9qCl
Its doubtful any federal judge will answer any letter from the public.
The 1st and 7th circuit have ruled on it….not sure who the judge was
The 7th Circuit Court found a specific First Amendment right to record police officers. It’s the second federal appeals court to strike down a conviction for recording police. In August 2011, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit ruled that a man wrongly arrested for recording cops could sue the arresting officers for violating his First Amendment rights. We need to start using this tool
The Supreme Court’s refusal to grant certiorari in the case doesn’t necessarily mean the justices endorse the lower court’s ruling. But it does mean that at least six of the current justices weren’t so opposed to the ruling that they felt the case needed to be heard.
I bet it was all 9
Its doubtful any federal judge will answer any letter from the public.
That all depends on what the cause is. Maybe not a letter per se but if you remember recall election of Gov Grey Davis, he filed suit with the 9th to stop the recall as it violated rights under the equal protection clause. A 3 judge panel agreed and put a stop in order to hear it and the entire court gathered and immediatley overturned the 3 judge panel with no explaining. So sometimes, even the courts, do understand when things are best left alone to the people. I may have some details off as this was a long time ago but i clearly remember him filing suit and the entire court saying in a sense thatw e want no part in this mess!
excellent points altogether, you simply received a new reader.
What could you suggest in regards to your post that you made some
days ago? Any sure?
A judicial opinion is not the same thing as a court order.
A person is only bound by a court order, and only if the court has jurisdiction over that individual, and the order applies to them.