Pixiq

“What difference does it make what the police think?”

What difference, indeed.
Michaelk42 recently posted..Unsurprisingly- Pogan gets no real punishment

If the trial goes ahead, it will be an amazing test case to follow.

Interesting…a judge who seems to want to protect the rights of people instead of kiss the asses of prosecutors and police.

I agree with S.B., the judge might let the case proceed, simply to be a test case, and to set precedent.
Douglas recently posted..Photo

This case is really simple. Since anything you say to a cop the cop can use in court against you, any conversation you have with a cop is not private. Because the law says the conversation has to be private there is no case.

That judge is smart, he knows basic constitutional law.

@Hazy: You need to be smart to understand the constitution?

Even someone that just broke their coke bottle glasses can see the the massive hole in the prosecutors logic. You could fit a double bogey semi trailer truck sideways through the bloody thing.

People shouldn’t be upset that this judge is concidering allowing the case to go to trial. It appears as though he realizes that the charges are assenine, he just wants there to be some legal precident set officially indicating that it is assenine

@Hazza: “Even someone that just broke their coke bottle glasses can see the the massive hole in the prosecutors logic. You could fit a double bogey semi trailer truck sideways through the bloody thing.”
Which means absolutely nothing in front of many (probably most) criminal court judges except when a case is so viral. Nobody has ever gone broke betting on the cowardice of criminal court judges (at least not recently). Luckily for Graber this case is viral.
As to S.B.’s comment, the unfortunate thing for Graber is that the judge can create the same test case either way – but one way puts Graber through the grinder (trial) whereas the other (whatever they call a pre-trial dismissal in MD (I don’t know what procedural stage their at)) cuts to the quick. Either way the idiot persecutors can appeal (though waiting until the “prosecution” has rested and then a sua sponte JoA may at least forever indemnify Graber against any conviction pursuant to the double-jeopardy clause).
Even if it’s just this case you’ve gotta love the judge barking at little prosecution boy: “What difference does it make what the police think?” It’s tempting to order a certified copy of that portion of the transcript and frame and hang it on the wall because it’s likely the only time in a lifetime I’ll ever see such words come out of a criminal court judge’s mouth.

@IceTrey: that only applies when there are charges. If a police officer starts talking to you, and then wants to charge you with whatever bullshit because you are filming him, that doesn’t apply at all (or if it does, it’d be equivalent to entrapment, which is illegal.)

@David
Please don’t provide any type of legal advice unless you’ve at least graduated from law school. You are absolutely incorrect regarding police entrapment. I know that you mean well and I’m sure you’re a good guy, but on this issue you simply are wrong. Other than exceptionally rare circumstances, anything you say to the police at any time can be used against you during a trial.

Judges also tend to give information to the sides with statements like these. This is like telling the prosecutor to not bring the case because he is going to be extremely disappointed with the outcome. Judges like to give people a chance to save face and settle things quietly of the record before they officially make asses out of themselves.

Seems to me that Assistant State’s Attorney David W. Ryden and Maryland State Trooper Uhler have already officially made asses out of themselves. If they are smart this will quietly go away before the judge proves just how stupid they are.
duane kerzic recently posted..2010-08-31 Bike Shipping Day

@Duane

I’m thinking there’s still coin flip probability Ryden and Uhler are still dumb enough to press forward with this.
Michaelk42 recently posted..Unsurprisingly- Pogan gets no real punishment

How about this as a solution? If I tell you I’m recording the conversation, you have a choice: consent to being recorded, or walk away from me. Oh, you lose the arrest if you walk away? Too bad!

Hope it goes to trial so that the DA loses his case. However, it’s sad that we need a trial to reset the 1st amendment as a precedent.

We need an official judgment in this case, if the prosecutor drops and walks away it can return at an other time and place. An official finding and judgment will put an end to it and it becomes a fact of law.

I agree with Roger. The only way this law (and it’s a bad one IMHO) is going to go away is if there is a court ruling against it with a strong condemnation from the presiding judge.

@JL
I think we have had the strong condemnation already. At least that’s what I sense. If I was the DA and the judge said something like he has said on the record already I’d be making a motion to have the case dismissed with prejudice and get out of that court room as fast as possible and never bring one of these again.

There might be a case where the facts support this charge. Like if someone is having a whispered conversation on a park bench and someone has a hidden microphone on it. That might actually fit what was intended in the statue. But I’d have to have the fact pattern to know.
duane kerzic recently posted..2010-08-31 Bike Shipping Day

The police may be concerned…..

Hrmm. What about their employers? The people may be concerned with what their employees are allowed to do to them with impunity.

The judge hit it on the nail, what difference does it make what the police think? Exactly What difference is there between what we think and what the police think, the police want their to be a difference. But they need a reality check and they need one quick. They are nobody over we the people. People tend to forget that we are not a democracy, we are a republic, and in such, we control the government and police are a part of that government that we control. The day our employees control us in every way they see fit, is the day we are all in danger.

If you got a job at walmart and you told your boss they’re going to do what you the employee wants them to do or your going to commit violence against your boss and lock your boss in a small room, what do you think your boss at walmart is going to do to you? Why should it be any different with the police, our employees, are you going to let your employees threaten you to do what they want or else? Time to show our employees their place.

To be clear, allowing it to go to court does not set much of a precedent. It only sets precedent in that court. It is not a binding precedent for the rest of the circuit until it is affirmed or overturned at the appellate level. Other courts may refer to it, but rarely do. The best outcome for Graber is for it to be denied on summary judgement.

It’s not true that the ONLY way this law will go away is with a court ruling. Judges are not the final word in a democracy.

The legislature can repeal the law. Don’t be tricked into hoping that a court may be easier to persuade than a politician. Judges are often a prosecutor’s best friend. Solve the problem by destroying it at the source: repeal it from the books.

This man Plitt is my kinda guy!

So is this a “prima facie” decision by the judge?
ie, On the face of it, the case is with or without merit. If so, why did it not happen a long time ago??? Seems like a waste of money to carry it this far.

As a MD citizen, I watch this case with great interest. I hold our Sate Police in high regard, but lately the organization is taking disturbing turns. First, there was admission they were actively spying on people and a huge uproar. Now, this blatant abuse and misuse of the wiretap law over what amounts to nothing. Pains me to say it but government is starting to resemble the governments of other countries my grandfather proudly fought against. Thankfully it seems we still have judges who call them on the BS.

. “I hold our State Police in high regard”

This made me think… In light of the eventual charges Officer Uhler should have shouted “Police State!” not “State Police !” as he got out of the car and waved that gun around.

About fucking time someone uses their brain.
mepsipax recently posted..The

Why is it they they are allowed to film everyone at their whim (including dashcams) and we have no right to document their activities?

Let me get this straight. If they force themselves unexpectedly into our video, they can then charge us with wiretapping!?! What happens if a 2 year old’s birthday party is interupted by an “officer” sticking guns in peoples faces and mom was taping as the intruder bursts in? Is she to go to prison for taping an offense?

“…police officers should be able to talk to witnesses, even on a public street, without fear that the conversation will be recorded by a bystander.”

Don’t the police always say you shouldn’t have anything to fear if you aren’t doing something wrong?

Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
Erik recently posted..Murray Kyle – A Conscious Roots Groove

“Other than exceptionally rare circumstances, anything you say to the police at any time can be used against you during a trial.”

That seems to be the mistake so many people make, they think the cops are a regular joe and that a conversation with an officer is “just” a conversation.

It never is, the officer can use their discretion in regards to what is said in the conversation and many professional cops do use that discretion. Because in reality, people say stupid shit.

But anything and everything you say can be used by the officer. It can be used to charge you, to charge someone else or to proceed further with a situation. One that starts out normal and proceeds into kafka territory before you can say wtf? Like that old dude that was tazered for being “suicidal” and not wanting to follow the cops request to be taken to the hospital.

Finally a judge who stands up for the people and our Constitutional rights instead of bowing to the whims of these ridiculous police and prosecutors. This is just a complete abuse of power, plain and simple. These police need to realize that they can be video AND AUDIO recorded in PUBLIC without threatening to arrest someone.