8 ms·

New Jersey police are pressing felony charges for retweeting an officer’s photo

58 points by chermanowicz 6y ago

RandomBacon 6y ago
That person needs to learn not to speak without a lawyer: “The purpose of this tweet was to find out the officer’s information, to hold him accountable.” That can be construed as vigilantism.
- Animats 6y ago
  Holding police accountable is not vigilantism. The right to photograph cops at work in the US is well established. Cops don't like that, but they lose in court on that.[1] [1] https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/protesters-rights/#i-want-to-take-pictures-or-shoot-video-at-a-protest https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/protesters-rights/#i-w...
  - RandomBacon 6y ago
    I 100% agree with you. I wrote that because that's not what the prosecutor is going to say in court which is why she needs a lawyer since she is in legal trouble.
  - dkdk8283 6y ago
    Proving your right in court can cost you everything.
    - thephyber 6y ago
      Ah yes, the "guilty until proven innocent" framework. I don't know about New Jersey, but the rest of the USA doesn't do it that way for criminal law. That said, I completely agree that defending yourself against a criminal charge in the USA is far too expensive.
      - rmrfstar 6y ago
        > I don't know about New Jersey, but the rest of the USA doesn't do it that way for criminal law. Do you not read the newspaper? People plea out to drug possession when there is video evidence of police planting it, because they can't afford bail and will lose their job and home if they spend 3 months in jail fighting the charge.
        thephyber 6y ago
        I agree with you that there's a huge gap between the intended legal system and the actual legal system, but even those officers who plant evidence will give at least lip service to the "innocent until proven guilty" framework.
        dkdk8283 6y ago
        Do you have experience in the US court as a defendant? Tort or criminal
- thephyber 6y ago
  You can't file a police report against an officer ("holding them accountable") if all you have is a partially covered face, no badge ID, no car ID, and don't know which department/organization. Asking for help identifying an officer is not, in and of itself, vigilantism. It's possible there were intentions of "cyber harassment" (I've never seen that as a legal statute so who knows what the burden of proof is), but I highly doubt simply a retweet is sufficient to prove according to US legal standards. The original message might, but this is dangerously close to the "hate speech" type of standard they have in Europe which is very different from the speech protections we have in the USA. I would argue this lawsuit is baseless (unless there is other, as yet unknown, evidence) and I interpret it to be financial harassment by the officer of a protester which he very likely politically disagrees (based on the "blue line" flag).
jdhbbbhb 6y ago
Clown world
casefields 6y ago
Officer photo here: http://archive.vn/qySKX http://archive.vn/qySKX
- loceng 6y ago
  So I assume that protestors wanted him identified because 1) he was abusive, and 2) he didn't have any fully visible identifying badge number - which if there was then arguably these citizen journalists could simply make a police report via official route instead of depending on public crowdsourcing?
legostormtroopr 6y ago
Doxxing is bad, and that’s exactly what this person was trying to do. Just because it wasn’t successful, doesn’t mean it wasn’t harassment. Additionally, that article makes it very unclear what, if anything, the officer did to warrant being identified. He performed his duties, while wearing a face mask (which everyone is encouraged to do now) which had a pattern some people don’t like.
- jdhbbbhb 6y ago
  Asking for the name of a public employee is doxxing?
- op00to 6y ago
  Can you explain why asking to identify a police officer performing official duties should be illegal?
  - legostormtroopr 6y ago
    "If anyone knows who this bitch is throw his info under this tweet" - this is not trying to identify an officer. This was a tweet that was designed to inflame people. They could have taken the picture to their local police station and made a complaint. They could have sent it to a newspaper. They could have tweeted "This officer is unidentified at a rally." They didn't.
    - redis_mlc 6y ago
      > They could have taken the picture to their local police station and made a complaint. Have you ever tried to do that? From what I've read, that doesn't go well.
- djaque 6y ago
  Accountability is not a bad thing and anyone who wields the power of the state needs to be easily identified by journalists, etc.
- zimpenfish 6y ago
blntechie 6y ago
The most WTF part for me is the summons and the court case identifies the police officer and he would likely to get more visibility and negative coverage than the original tweet which was retweeted by grand total of 4 people. Streisand effect anyone?
- thephyber 6y ago
  Your statement makes sense, but only if the officer actually feared for his life by being identified. What if the purpose of the charges is retribution, not to protect the officer and his family?
djaque 6y ago
Sometimes it feels like the culture of American policing and criminal justice is so broken that we just need to start over from scratch.
- redis_mlc 6y ago
  Here's an explanation for non-US readers, or US readers who don't understand how police are integrated into the judicial system. The defunding movement hasn't been well-explained in the press, but the actual core reality is that police unions need to be removed, and to remove the police unions, you have to start over with new police forces. There's 4 problems that need to be solved first though: 1) After you start over, how do you prevent a new union forming? 2) In the USA, District Attorneys (DA's), etc. are elected. To get elected, police union support at election time is needed/helpful. 3) How do you move existing court cases ahead after you fire the arresting officers? 4) Even though police officers often have misconduct, the DA needs their testimony to be believable for cases. So the misconduct is generally suppressed from public view. As you can see, the dependency of DA's on police officers alone makes this issue very difficult to solve, and when combined with unlimited legal aid from police unions is insurmountable. Canada, which operates quite differently than the US (DA's are appointed), also has a problem with police unions stonewalling investigations. The officers involved just remain silent and lawyer up, the same as the US.

58 points by chermanowicz 6y ago

That person needs to learn not to speak without a lawyer: “The purpose of this tweet was to find out the officer’s information, to hold him accountable.” That can be construed as vigilantism.

Animats 6y ago
Holding police accountable is not vigilantism. The right to photograph cops at work in the US is well established. Cops don't like that, but they lose in court on that.[1] [1] https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/protesters-rights/#i-want-to-take-pictures-or-shoot-video-at-a-protest https://www.aclu.org/know-your-rights/protesters-rights/#i-w...
- RandomBacon 6y ago
  I 100% agree with you. I wrote that because that's not what the prosecutor is going to say in court which is why she needs a lawyer since she is in legal trouble.
- dkdk8283 6y ago
  Proving your right in court can cost you everything.
  - thephyber 6y ago
    Ah yes, the "guilty until proven innocent" framework. I don't know about New Jersey, but the rest of the USA doesn't do it that way for criminal law. That said, I completely agree that defending yourself against a criminal charge in the USA is far too expensive.
    - rmrfstar 6y ago
      > I don't know about New Jersey, but the rest of the USA doesn't do it that way for criminal law. Do you not read the newspaper? People plea out to drug possession when there is video evidence of police planting it, because they can't afford bail and will lose their job and home if they spend 3 months in jail fighting the charge.
      - thephyber 6y ago
        I agree with you that there's a huge gap between the intended legal system and the actual legal system, but even those officers who plant evidence will give at least lip service to the "innocent until proven guilty" framework.
        dkdk8283 6y ago
        Do you have experience in the US court as a defendant? Tort or criminal
thephyber 6y ago
You can't file a police report against an officer ("holding them accountable") if all you have is a partially covered face, no badge ID, no car ID, and don't know which department/organization. Asking for help identifying an officer is not, in and of itself, vigilantism. It's possible there were intentions of "cyber harassment" (I've never seen that as a legal statute so who knows what the burden of proof is), but I highly doubt simply a retweet is sufficient to prove according to US legal standards. The original message might, but this is dangerously close to the "hate speech" type of standard they have in Europe which is very different from the speech protections we have in the USA. I would argue this lawsuit is baseless (unless there is other, as yet unknown, evidence) and I interpret it to be financial harassment by the officer of a protester which he very likely politically disagrees (based on the "blue line" flag).

jdhbbbhb 6y ago

Clown world

casefields 6y ago

Officer photo here: http://archive.vn/qySKX http://archive.vn/qySKX

loceng 6y ago
So I assume that protestors wanted him identified because 1) he was abusive, and 2) he didn't have any fully visible identifying badge number - which if there was then arguably these citizen journalists could simply make a police report via official route instead of depending on public crowdsourcing?

legostormtroopr 6y ago

Doxxing is bad, and that’s exactly what this person was trying to do. Just because it wasn’t successful, doesn’t mean it wasn’t harassment. Additionally, that article makes it very unclear what, if anything, the officer did to warrant being identified. He performed his duties, while wearing a face mask (which everyone is encouraged to do now) which had a pattern some people don’t like.

jdhbbbhb 6y ago
Asking for the name of a public employee is doxxing?
op00to 6y ago
Can you explain why asking to identify a police officer performing official duties should be illegal?
- legostormtroopr 6y ago
  "If anyone knows who this bitch is throw his info under this tweet" - this is not trying to identify an officer. This was a tweet that was designed to inflame people. They could have taken the picture to their local police station and made a complaint. They could have sent it to a newspaper. They could have tweeted "This officer is unidentified at a rally." They didn't.
  - redis_mlc 6y ago
    > They could have taken the picture to their local police station and made a complaint. Have you ever tried to do that? From what I've read, that doesn't go well.
djaque 6y ago
Accountability is not a bad thing and anyone who wields the power of the state needs to be easily identified by journalists, etc.
zimpenfish 6y ago

blntechie 6y ago

The most WTF part for me is the summons and the court case identifies the police officer and he would likely to get more visibility and negative coverage than the original tweet which was retweeted by grand total of 4 people. Streisand effect anyone?

thephyber 6y ago
Your statement makes sense, but only if the officer actually feared for his life by being identified. What if the purpose of the charges is retribution, not to protect the officer and his family?

djaque 6y ago

Sometimes it feels like the culture of American policing and criminal justice is so broken that we just need to start over from scratch.

redis_mlc 6y ago
Here's an explanation for non-US readers, or US readers who don't understand how police are integrated into the judicial system. The defunding movement hasn't been well-explained in the press, but the actual core reality is that police unions need to be removed, and to remove the police unions, you have to start over with new police forces. There's 4 problems that need to be solved first though: 1) After you start over, how do you prevent a new union forming? 2) In the USA, District Attorneys (DA's), etc. are elected. To get elected, police union support at election time is needed/helpful. 3) How do you move existing court cases ahead after you fire the arresting officers? 4) Even though police officers often have misconduct, the DA needs their testimony to be believable for cases. So the misconduct is generally suppressed from public view. As you can see, the dependency of DA's on police officers alone makes this issue very difficult to solve, and when combined with unlimited legal aid from police unions is insurmountable. Canada, which operates quite differently than the US (DA's are appointed), also has a problem with police unions stonewalling investigations. The officers involved just remain silent and lawyer up, the same as the US.