Pixiq

That was pretty funny.. Idiots.. I will give the officer 1 props, he did give his badge number when asked.. Other than that, epic fail..

Apparently they aren't used to people not just bowing to their wishes, he was clueless when he was told no..

If the officer actually thought he could arrest him he would have.. His inability to articulate any reason, let alone a rational or reasonable suspicion doomed him right from the start.

This raises another question, jurisdiction, he doesn't allege that Jerome entered the site, under what theory does Jerome have to even comply with ANYTHING he says? I guess that would have a lot to do with how these transit officers are considered under the law. If they are equivalent to private security, I don't see even having to acknowledge them from the sidewalk, they are non-entities and holding you against your will could be considered kidnapping.

I really like Jerome calling the cops, I would like to see the whole hour plus, especially the interaction with the Sargent. He was respectful, never raised his voice, and never allowed the officer to bully him. He did get a little flustered a couple times but no problem.

Altogether very instructional, well done Jerome.

Oh, and I don't think that letter is quite strongly worded enough. Their officers violated Jerome's rights, CLEARLY. The transit authority needs to explain WHAT they are going to do to rectify the situation and HOW they are going to keep it from happening again.

I also think he should have called out each violation separately and any recent supreme court precedent or state/local law to clarify, make it so they have no wiggle room..

Since ignorance is no excuse works both ways, so when will the suit be filed?

Carlos,
Interesting story. Do you or Jerome have more of the video posted somewhere on the internet? It would be interesting to see what happens next.

Thanks,
Frank

As always, Jerome did a great job of politely but firmly asserting his rights. A few months ago I had the opportunity to spend a couple of days turing DC with Jerome. His demeanor and grace under pressure are impressive. We could all learn a lot from him.

I do, however, worry about his safety. Jerome, keep up the good work. I look forward to our next outing.

Jerome, edumacating one clueless cop at a time.

Good work. It's hard to believe this kind of thing still happens.

To be fair, I blame the people educating and training (and then failing to punish) the cops.

BTW "....that he is no match for some...."

should be

"...that he is more than a match for some..."

Or is one of those American things where you have turned "I couldn't care less" into "I could care less"

"Why is that personal information?"

"Because it's MY NAME."

"Oh."

Brilliant.

Great work Jerome!

This, is and your other videos, are a great example of knowing and standing up for our rights as citizens and photographers. As with so many of these videos, it is interesting how the officers make up the laws as they go along to get what they want at the time, i.e. yes you are obligated to give ID, that you can be detained for taking photos, etc.

You brilliantly asserted your rights as always Jerome! Thank you for this!

A friendly word of advice for officers with an IQ under 120... Don't mess with Jerome, because he'll take you to school every time.

do Polski niech cwaniak przyjedzie, dostanie raz drugi pałą przez łeb to się gnojek nauczy kurwa... troskliwi amerykanccy policjanci kurwa jego mać...

As much as we want to praise the photographer's actions, I agree with the police officer. If someone is at a transit facility at night taking photos with no one around (even on public property) that is suspicious even to me. And remember, the FBI and Metro police foiled a plot to blow up the DC Metrorail system a month ago. So I can understand the officer being extra sensitive.

Just for the sake of reference, I'm a seasoned transit photographer who has taken many photos of WMATA without a problem because I don't put myself in situations deemed suspicious.

"Whether any crime is committed, or whether the cop is mistaken or poorly trained is irrelevant to whether you end up on the watch list. The cop is supposed to file your name and identifying data into the database simply because he felt suspicious."

The problem here is that "suspicious" doesn't really
mean anything. It is based on a gut feeling
of someone who stands to benefit financially
(court $$)by calling you that.
Peter Watts had a verbal spat with a cop (no arrest, no conviction) in Canada 12 years ago, so he was branded last year a "repeat offender" in his case in the US where he got convicted of a felony for not getting back into his car fast enough for border guards. The "badge guys" want you on their
stupid list; it gives them better leverage over people.

It appears that Mr. Jerome is looking for confrontation and that's a dangerous game. Be careful my friend. We are living in very dangerous times.