Pixiq

A Russian that is more patriotic than a significant number of police. Let that sink in.

How is it appropriate that a cop to claim ignorance on the law that is the same for the whole country when the average citizen can not to a law specific only to sub 1,000 resident town.

If the police do not know the law ... ummmm ... THEY SHOULD NOT BE ENFORCING THE LAW ! (facepalm)

Off topic, but this may be of interest:

"Less than Picture Perfect: The Legal Relationship between Photographers' Rights and Law Enforcement" - Morgan Leigh Manning, University of Tennessee, Knoxville - College of Law, Tennessee Law Review, Vol. 78, p. 105, 2010

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1857623

Authority can shove their sovereign immunity up their ass, if ignorance is no excuse then it should be enforced equally to cops as it is to citizens

Why are government officials allowed to use "qualified immunity" as an excuse? If anything,they should know the law better than the average citizen. If I were to go to court and state, "Sorry your honor, I didn't know; I'd like qualified immunity," I would be told that ignorance is not an excuse.

Sadly, as a kid, I remember "Career Day" in school, and the auditorium filled with kids during the police presentation, and everyone looked up to and respected "Officer Friendly," the local role model.

Then you grow up and learn the truth.

"But Glik is a Massachusetts-licensed lawyer who emigrated from Soviet Russia"

Talk about messing with the wrong guy.

(shakes head)

Stupid, stupid cops.

My prediction is that no "Precedent" will
ever end this mindless persecution of photographers
in the USSA.
As long as the Police can fall back on "Qualified Immunity"--due to ignorance of the law--then the
law won't matter. It's that simple.

If ignorance of the law is no excuse for us mere civilians, how can it be an excuse for those charged with enforcing the law?

Asshatachusetts needs to update it's antiquated wiretapping laws to get in line with the 21st century.

Hmm, Freedom and Bravery in the face of tyranny and oppression knows, no Race, creed or color. The CORPORATE FOREIGN STATE POLICY ENFORCEMENT REGULATORY SERVANTS should not be acting like the secret police. Nor should they be afforded the ability to hide behind false doctrine.

So,what you're saying is: it's OK for government to probe our privates with electronic contraptions, or gloved fingers; analyze the contents of our pee pee and poo poo; and snoop through our every possession on any pretext whatsoever; but we the people are not allowed to videotape the government's excesses where it's possible to witness them?

There no such thing as "qualified immunity". I hope this guy moves this into a federal court and not the corporate joker state courts we have. And if they deny it in federal court, we need to have a revolution for real, cause these criminals are tramping on our god given, constitutional unalienable rights. Far as Im concerned it would be treason and they should pay the ultimate price, Death.

There no such thing as "qualified immunity". I hope this guy moves this into a federal court and not the corporate joker state courts we have. And if they deny it in federal court, we need to have a revolution for real, cause these criminals are tramping on our god given, constitutional, unalienable rights. Far as Im concerned it would be treason and they should pay the ultimate price, Death.

There no such thing as "qualified immunity". I hope this guy moves this into a federal court and not the corporate joker state courts we have. And if they deny it in federal court, we need to have a revolution for real, cause these criminals are tramping on our god given, constitutional, unalienable rights. Far as Im concerned it would be treason and they should pay the ultimate price, Death.

Title 18, U.S.C., Section 242
Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law
Sec. 241. Conspiracy against rights
If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or
District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same; or
If two or more persons go in disguise on the highway, or on the premises of another, with intent to prevent or hinder his free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege so secured--
They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined
under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

Title 18, U.S.C., Section 243
Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law
This statute makes it a crime for any person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom to willfully deprive or cause to be deprived from any person those rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution and laws of the U.S.

This law further prohibits a person acting under color of law, statute, ordinance, regulation or custom to willfully subject or cause to be subjected any person to different punishments, pains, or penalties, than those prescribed for punishment of citizens on account of such person being an alien or by reason of his/her color or race.

Acts under "color of any law" include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within the bounds or limits of their lawful authority, but also acts done without and beyond the bounds of their lawful authority; provided that, in order for unlawful acts of any official to be done under "color of any law," the unlawful acts must be done while such official is purporting or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties. This definition includes, in addition to law enforcement officials, individuals such as Mayors, Council persons, Judges, Nursing Home Proprietors, Security Guards, etc., persons who are bound by laws, statutes ordinances, or customs.

Punishment varies from a fine or imprisonment of up to one year, or both, and if bodily injury results or if such acts include the use, attempted use, or threatened use of a dangerous weapon, explosives, or fire shall be fined or imprisoned up to ten years or both, and if death results, or if such acts include kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, shall be fined under this title, or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both, or may be sentenced to death.

So again,, there is no such thing as immunity, Dont give up to them shit!!

Considering the horrendous court decisions of late. . Particularly the Indiana Supreme Court saying a policeman can enter your home for any reason, even for something illegal. . The Arizona SWAT team found "guiltless" for killing the 2 tour Marine Veteran, And the SCOTUS eviscerating the 4th Amendment yet again. .I'd say this case will go the same way.

You all need to understand, THEY consider US, as nothing more than criminals. It's mindset that's growing, and I don't see any change in sight. I fear this case will go the same way. . "We The People" mean nothing to the politicians who "govern" us. They only care about remaining in power. .

At least 90% of the time CAMERAS do Law Enforcement's Job for them. The same as the citizens do. We all should think about that......JACK

But, ossifer, I didn't know it was a crime to talk while you were beating me!

Shaddup, you're goin' tuh jail for contempt of a "police" officer. Besides, I see you're wearin' a belt! Thass agin the LAW here... an' ignorance of the LAW aint no excuse!

ON point, I think: Ignorance of the law does not excuse misconduct of anyone least of all in a sworn officer of the law, In Re McCowen (1917) 177 C 93.