Pixiq

Woooohoooo!

Hopefully he gets his computers (and other electronics that were seized) back now. Anybody know if the full judgement has been posted anywhere?

Finally, a bit of sanity!

I’d like to see two other things happen with this case.

1. The thug who assaulted him should at least be disciplined. Probably not a firing offense, but there should be some action taken against him.

2. Graber should be able to recover damages against the police and the D.A. for malicious prosecution. They were way over the line on this one.
Difster recently posted..Lessons From Mexico

They have to give him his equipment and video back, both unaltered.

I hope he sues them for unlawful arrest/prosecution, as well as sues them civilly.

He now should immediately file a formal complaint against the officer, as well, though the “blue code” will undoubtedly prevail.

Thank God we have an honest and intelligent judge in Maryland. Bravo.

Mike

Not sure, but it looks like my last two comments were lost with the move...or they might who up later....

Anyhow, yes Johnny there are gray areas when it comes to privacy and what constitutes a private conversation. However, I still insist that the facts in this case indicate that the officer who brought the charges against Graber had no such expectation:

1. He was on a public road.
2. He was yelling/talking loudly.
3. He was waving a gun.
4. He was working in his official capacity as a public servant.
5. Graber's camera was in plain sight visible to all within a reasonable distance.

There is no way anyone can expect privacy with those sets of circumstances. If this is the case then every single Maryland police officer who has pulled over a civilian for a traffic violation and used a dashboard camera that records audio is also in violation of the law and should be arrested and charged with the same crime and face the $10,000 fine (for each count) and up to 5 years in prison (for each count).

Somehow I doubt that is the road you want to go down Johnny, but feel free to piss away whatever credibility you might have here by coming up some convoluted logic to justify a glaring double standard.

Apparently my original comment didn't make it..

There is no gray area here.

Your question about the park is not valid in this case.

Given the base facts, he's a cop operating in his official capacity the remaining facts don't even matter, but here they are: side of the road, yelling, waving his gun.

So, how can there be ANY real discussion about this being private? Tell me? I really want to understand your perspective, because the plain facts tell a very simple tale. Saying it was private doesn't make it so. This abuses common sense.

I'm going to answer your park question now.
1. As a cop in his official capacity, no conversation con be considered private because of the nature of yur job either have to report on the content or potentially testify, you don't have the freedom to not do this. So private?
2. In the park yelling, again no, no privacy can be expected.
3. In the park talking so that others can't hear or only hear a word periodically, yes, private, but only if #1 doesn't apply.

Now, they had plenty of time to look at the law and facts, charging him this way gives pretty clear indications of retaliation. It is NEVER in a prosecutors best interest to act in such a way. It only serves to generate mistrust of the system and the people.

So Johnny, you can spin and twist all you wan't on a lot of these stories and have some wiggle room. But not here, that cop screwed the pooch when he didn't immediately identify himself, and where I am from that would likely have gotten him shot, and justifiably so, it looked like he was going to jack the bike and there was no indication he was a cop. He was acting crazy and when the video was posted he probably didn't like it, boo-hoo, maybe he should have acted like a professional.

If the Judge is so honest and intelligent, why did it take so long to act? Yes he should sue, but an effort should be made to remove the DA and see that the cops involved are severely punished.

Wow that is fantastic. Someone should send that ruling to that idiot in NC, Judge Dixon!

This is some great news!

I would really like to know how the Maryland State police are going to react to the ruling, now that a judge has told them they can, will (and should) be video recorded in public.

I suppose they’ll have to find a new way to impose a “contempt of cop” charge on people now, but it’s nice to know that BS charges like that won’t be started because of holding up a camera… At least, in theory. This may turn out to be a very powerful precedent.
Rob recently posted..Where Is Mainstream Media In The Bradley Manning Case

Excellent opinion, we should make billboards of it.

Excellent.

EXCELLENT news. I was very much hoping to see this result, but was only cautiously optimistic, as common sense doesn’t always win out in the end.

But it did in this case.

I hope the officer feels like a douche.

It took long enough, but yay!

I’d like to see a civil suit come out of this, but my hopes aren’t high, considering how difficult it is to win against the cops on their “home turf”.

Great news. I hope the word is getting out to other LEOs. To bad Anthony had to go through this.

Oi. Leave it to the sun to spell the Judges name wrong.

Thank goodness this judge understood what was going on. Sure, take away his license, fine his ass for speeding and reckless driving. But do not destroy accountability. Go Judge Plitt!

Great news, but the problem isn’t really that law in particular, it is the police’s use of any-old-law they want to use to arrest a person. Tomorrow it will be resisting or causing a disturbance or disorderly conduct or assault for lifting a finger and threatening an cop. Something has to be done to prevent these harassment arrests.

Graber screwed up. He should be charged for reckless driving and speeding. If that leads to him losing his license, and even jail time if the law so declares, then so be it.

At the same time, Joseph Uhler deserves (at least) a reprimand and plenty of desk patrol for his attempted retaliation against Graber.
Calladus recently posted..Another Fleur de Pensée atheist tattoo!

IF this ruling is published and thus sets a president its a good thing even if a long time coming. If it does not set a president to other prosecutors then it would have been better for others (but maybe not necessarily for Graber ) if it had gone to trial.

Either way its a good thing for Anthony Graber

This story is full of win.

Carlos, I’d like to think that the work you’ve been doing had something to do with this. Your ongoing dedication in securing our right to photograph is truly a worthy and venerable calling. Keep up the great work!

Congratulation Anthony! Thank you for fighting for our freedoms.

Outstanding results and comments from the judge!
William Beem recently posted..Nice Legs

Excellent news. Now wait for Maryland to pass a new law.

Happy happy joy joy.

JL must be pissed right now. +1 for average citizen -1 for the cops. lol

Has anyone seen a link that has a written decision posted or anything like that? I’d like to see the Judge’s exact thoughts on this matter.

This is a great start, but unfortunately, the ruling isn’t precedential.
The best outcome for everyone except Anthony Graber would be for the DA to
appeal and have the ruling upheld. It’s hard for me to see an appellate
court reversing, but I’ve learned never to guess what a panel of judges
will do.

Even if an appellate court were to affirm, I think an action under 42
U.S.C. 1983 is a long shot because a US District judge would almost
certainly hold that the law was not clearly established at the time of
Graber’s arrest, and bar the suit on grant of qualified immunity. And in
any event, with a warrant, the cops are pretty well covered. A DA has
absolute immunity, so nothing is likely to happen to him. Removing him
from office? Cassilly has run unopposed for years, so he likely to survive
this just fine.

There may be an issue of retaliation in making the charge of reckless
driving; why did it not happen until after the video appeared. Graber’s
attorneys can assess this much better than can I, but I’d guess this is a
long shot as well.

The real hope here is of course that this will never happen again in
Maryland. Unfortunately, this can’t be assured without affirmation by a
higher court. Ditto for legal action against police; absent an appellate
decision, a federal judge might still conclude that the law was not clearly
established.

Anon,

Why would I be pissed? I’ve always thought that was a bad law. The guy beat it so good for him. However I don’t blame the police for enforcing the laws that are on the books. After all, that is their job.

JL:
“However I don’t blame the police for enforcing the laws that are on the books.”

Uh-huh. A law that only became important for them to “enforce” after it went viral via YouTube.

It had not a blessed thing to do with the “law”, Johnny, and everything to do with retribution for publically embarassing Joseph Uhler. The “law” was merely the tool used.

If there hadn’t been such nonsense on the Maryland books, Mr. Graber would instead have been pulled over for a “safety inspection” every time he left his driveway. And/or cited for 31mph in a 30 zone. And not signalling a turn soon enough. Etc.

I agree with you more often than not, John, and it really irritates me sometimes how far up your @ss your head is sometimes.

Judge Plitt’s decision: http://www.aclu-md.org/aPress/Press2010/Court_Opinion_092710.pdf

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/09/27/fbi.cheating/index.html it amazes me who dishonest most LE agencies are now a days.

“However I don’t blame the police for enforcing the laws that are on the books.”

A naive childish opinion from you JL how shocking. Police are expected to rationally apply the law to real life situations. That’s a concept the rest of us refer to as common sense, something you clearly lack given the ridicules excuse’s for felonious assault in the Michael DeHerrera travesty. Automatons blindly following orders is a concept for robots and Disney animatronics not civil servants.

Every possible reading the this ruling points to gross negligence by the Maryland Police. They can only hope Anthony Graber doesn’t file a civil against the officers involved. To say nothing of the under armor clown shown in the video who should be fired by now.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/09/27/fbi.cheating/index.html it amazes me how dishonest most LE agencies are now a days.

(edit)

@ Peter,

I doubt the police knew about the video until it went viral. How could they charge him for a video they weren’t aware of?

Hmmm….so they charged him with a law that is on the books. He took it to court and a judge handed down a ruling that the law shouldn’t apply in this situation. Now there is a case law on this so it is unlikely that people will continue to be charged. Looks like the system worked.

It’s great that you guys can read the minds of the police and determine their motives. I wish I had that power.

Calladus: you don’t seem to be familiar with the case. He was punished for the whole motorcycle part of the incident.

Radley Balko asks the right questions, as usual:

“Had Graber unknowingly violated state law in a manner that caused very little actual harm to anyone else, he at the very least would have had felony record. He could have gone to prison for several years.

“Instead, we have public officials who violated the law, who should have known they were violating the law, and who caused significant harm to someone else in the process.

“So what will be their punishment?”

For what it’s worth: Judge Plitt is neither a rookie nor a bleeding heart: here’s his bio (PDF).

“However I don’t blame the police for enforcing the laws that are on the books.”

Except that’s not what they did. They attempted to use a contorted, incorrect interpretation of a law in order to exact retribution for being made fools of.

And then a judge had to smack them down.

And also, as Radley Balko puts it;

“Moreover, if Pitts had ruled the other way, Graber would have violated an ambiguous law, broadly interpreted in a way that most everyone else in the state (and for that matter the country), including the attorney general, believed to be incorrect. That is, he would have had no reason to believe that what he was doing was illegal.”
Michaelk42 recently posted..Unsurprisingly- Pogan gets no real punishment

Also:

“I doubt the police knew about the video until it went viral. How could they charge him for a video they weren’t aware of?”

They must have thought that thing on the top of his helmet was a laser. That he hadn’t had time to charge yet.
Michaelk42 recently posted..Unsurprisingly- Pogan gets no real punishment

(and if only wordpress let me edit comments, ever)

The relevant link: http://www.theagitator.com/2010/09/27/maryland-judges-tosses-the-felony-...

and Balko’s far more eloquent rebuttal to JL and the “just enforcing the laws” crowd (which seems to only consist of JL at the moment):

“Now you could perhaps argue that Casilly and the police department violated Maryland law unknowingly. But given their positions, that their responsibility as public officials is to enforce Maryland law, and that there isn’t a single court case that interpreted the Maryland statute in the way they did to justify their pursuit of Graber, I find it far more persuasive that they either knew they were breaking the law, that they were willfully ignorant of the law, or that they were pretty severely negligent in their duties.”
Michaelk42 recently posted..Unsurprisingly- Pogan gets no real punishment

I have a vision, a vision of marches and rallies equal to the civil rights movements that brought about a marvelous change and ended segregation but against police abuse and for our rights as humans to be free from such abuses. A vision of the people standing up for their rights against the police that conspire to abuse them. A vision of the people, united against police abuse and not just grabbing a camera to record it, but doing what is right and stepping in to stop it without regard to what the police think as it is the police who should be regarding what we think. There will be a marvelous change, yes, I can see it. But just like the civil rights movements, Public Officials will not like being made to answer to the people and will fight against us to prevent it. In my vision, I see people stop talking about standing up to it, and actually stand up.

The key to being free is stop accepting their notion that we must have their permission to be free.

Jeremy Lindsey

The guy beat it so good for him. However I don’t blame the police for enforcing the laws that are on the books. After all, that is their job.

I’d say that this law is not on the books.
Steve Verdon recently posted..Alan Grayson Digs Hole Even Deeper

To me, Judge Plitt’s opinion is thorough and well reasoned. Though much of what he concludes is self-evident, it’s nice to see that it finds strong support in decisional law from widely varied jurisdictions. Sad that the decision isn’t binding, but it should be pretty persuasive if the issue arises again.

This is the first I’d really seen of the details of how the persecution went down. Suffice it to say that everyone involved, from the Maryland State Police to the Harford County DA’s office, is the most pathetic excuse for a public servant I can imagine, with regard to procedural as well as substantive law.

I can’t say much for the grand jury, either. They’d probably indict a ham sandwich without the DA even asking (and perhaps without even knowing what a ham sandwich was).

Anyone who claims this was about the enforcement of a law is either naive, a JL in disguise, or a JL wannabe. This was and is about the JLs trying to shield themselves from the law and from justice as they continue their pursuit of the power and self affirmation that motivated them to become a police officer. Of course they are not police officers as they are merely JL pretenders… arrogant, pompous, very insecure and in the end… very dangerous individuals to you, me and society.

Way more interested in seeing the cop dealt with.

I am a fan of your website and wanted to bring to your attention a NY Times article re: reporting “suspicious” conduct such photography to the Nationwide Suspicious Activity Reporting Initiative.

https://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/28/opinion/28farmer.html?ref=opinion

Thank your for your efforts to protect our civil liberties.

OK so this is very strange:
http://www.myfoxdc.com/dpp/news/maryland/wiretap-charges-tossed-in-video...

Video blurs out the cops face???
WTF?

“Why would I be pissed?”

Because you don’t have a knee-jerk, anti-cop reaction to any and all situations having to do with the police, therefore you are The Enemy. Either march in lockstep with everyone else or continue to be The Evil Outcast. Attempting to see other points of view or to understand both sides is wrong and will not be tolerated.

You have been warned.

Bill,

Pretty much on target there. I actually agree with the judge and think that this decision is a good thing. However because I don’t vilify all the cops who charged the guy based on an existing law, I am a bad bad man. Ah well.

Are there really JL wannabes? I find this intriguing. Perhaps I could start a club and start selling JL bumper stickers.

They could say “THE POLICE CAN DO NO WRONG!!”