Here Is The Video Showing Miami Beach Cops Pointing Gun At Man For Recording Them

June 6, 2011 @ 8:30PM

Here Is The Video Showing Miami Beach Cops Pointing Gun At Man For Recording Them

Topics
News

The highly anticipated video that shows Miami Beach police pointing a gun at a man who had just recorded them shooting another man has been posted on Youtube.

And it confirms what we've already reported.That police were ready to kill a man for recording them on Memorial Day.

Here is the back story.

Here is a story I just posted on Miami Beach 411.

UPDATE: A local TV news station is now reporting that police also confiscated one of their cameras on the morning of the shooting.

This little detail was revealed in the last sentence of this morning's Local 10 story on the above video.

Miami Beach police would not comment on Benoit's video.

Police also have not said why officers confiscated a Local 10 camera on the same morning.

The real question is not why police would confiscate the camera. We already know why. They are trying their best to control the flow of information. That much is obvious.

The real question is why did a Local 10 videographer allow his or her camera to be confiscated?

The real question is why isn't Local 10 making more of an issue over this?

Doesn't Local 10 know that police need a subpoena before they can confiscate a camera if it was not used in the commission of a crime?

Comments

Elliott

11 months ago

Sorry, but officer safety is completely off the table. Watching the video the man stayed away and never got close, he NEVER was a threat. Completely unjustified.

Again, any wonder why the regard we USED to have for the cops has been soooooo damaged?

fluid ambient

11 months ago

I was hoping it would show more, it's a chaotic video.

Duane Kerzic

11 months ago

It showed enough. Nothing like getting a gun pointed at you by the gang for making a video.

Mike Ross

11 months ago

I'm in two minds about this one.

First, I'll have to respectfully disagree with Elliot. He wasn't too close for a minor accident or a routine traffic stop. He was initially FAR too close for an active shooting incident. I had no idea who was shooting at who, from that video, and if I'd been there when that gunfire broke out I'd have got low, taken cover, and got at least a block away as fast as my belly could carry me.

In the second part of the video, he was further away and in his car, although still too close for comfort in my view; I wouldn't have wanted to be in that entire neighbourhood. I have no idea if the officer who drew their weapon knew he had been closer, earlier.

My take on it it is, he was recording out the window - his hand and camera/phone were outside the car next to the rear view mirror. There had just been a shooting incident. The officer approaching the car, seeing the gentleman pointing an object, a small, perhaps dark, perhaps metallic-coloured object towards the scene of the shooting might well have felt it prudent to draw their weapon. I can't condemn that out of hand, I'm sorry.

On the evidence I see in that video, I don't see anything too unambiguously egregiously wrong. There's not enough information to make a negative call on the officers actions; to paint it that officer knew he was shooting video, and the weapon was leveled purely *because* he was shooting video... I don't see evidence to support that hypothesis. I've seen a lot worse on this site. To say the officer was 'ready to kill a man for recording them' is somewhat hysterical - it's just spin really, the evidence doesn't support it.

I'm not saying anything as to what else happened that night - to cops, to the person who was shot, or to the shooter of the video; I don't know. I'm just calling it as I see it.

Mike

Rich

11 months ago

Very good points, however that does not excuse their behavior after finding out that it was not a gun. Destruction of private property, attempted destruction of evidence, false arrest and using the color of authority to deny this man his civil rights in my opinion.

Mike Ross

11 months ago

Rich, I purposely and clearly didn't address those allegations; right or wrong, the video doesn't have any evidence to support or refute them. I just called it as I saw it, and to say that it shows cops 'ready to kill a man for recording them' does this blog and its credibility no service.

I've seen plenty of stuff here that does deserve to be condemned out of hand, and is irrefutably bad, wrong, and evil on the evidence of the video itself; this is NOT one of them.

Mike

Kyle

11 months ago

Mike,
A gun should never be pointed at something you're not willing to destroy. The man was not armed, did not make any aggressive moves, and pointing a gun at him was dangerous and wrong.

Mike Ross

11 months ago

Kyle,

I'm a gun owner. I know that rule.

The officer, approaching the driver side of the car, saw a man on the passenger side with his hand out the window. I think it's fair to conclude his hand was not empty; he was filming. He had his hand out the window, *pointing something* towards where there had been a lot of *shooting* just a *few moments earlier*.

I will NOT be too hard on the officer for leveling their weapon as they approached the car in those circumstances. They had at least some reasonable suspicion that he might have been armed, and preparing to shoot. I don't know enough about police training to decide if it was truly appropriate or not, but to me it's prima facie justifiable.

Do you see my point? I do see yours, and in most circumstances I would agree with you. This was NOT 'most circumstances'.

Mike

Duane Kerzic

11 months ago

Mike,

We can't tell who is shooting from the video but if you listen to the narrative the person taking it certainly seems to be very aware of who is shooting at who and who isn't shooting.

I'm sure the officer thought he had a "Cell Phone Gun" so they needed to smash the phone to be sure he wasn't hiding a gun in it. One can't be too safe.

They smashed the phone becaue they knew it had a video of the shooting.

It's also obvious from the video they didn't have a problem opening the trunk and other doors of the car right after the shooting. I'm sure they didn't want to search it till they got a search warrant however just a quick look in the car.

Mike Ross

11 months ago

Re. the shooting, maybe so, maybe no... the video itself doesn't clarify who was shooting who, that's my point and all of my point.

As for the rest of your comments, I didn't see any cops smashing anything. It's not on the video, so I'm not commenting on it. Doesn't mean it didn't happen, doesn't mean I don't believe it happened. See my response to Rich for why I'm commenting at all. I've explained why the cop *may* have approached the car with weapon drawn and leveled, that's all I intended to do.

Mike

Elliott

11 months ago

Mike,
I disagree with your points, you personally might not have wanted to be that close, but the only possible rational argument was officer safety and he wasn't close enough for that to be even an argument. Now I don't know what caused the officers to open fire, and quite frankly all we have is THEIR word which doesn't go very far. The had no *LEGAL* reason to hassle this guy to begin with, the fact that they just killed a guy doesn't somehow magically create a reason. What reason was he even appoached?

Then we go onto theft, destruction of property, which we can reasonably use to paint the pointing weapons at them as just another example of out-of-control behavior. And why destroy the camera?

I'm curious why we give the cops the benefit of the doubt? Had this been the first or second video like this that I have seen maybe, but its not, it is common. Cops don't like me on juries, if a cop says it it carries no additional weight, his story balanced against the alleged perp along with other evidence. Cop vs. perp, no evidence other than he said/he said = not guilty. I've seen too many cops lie to give them the benefit..

Oh, and it took 2 days to find the alleged gun.. Might not be proof of anything, but it certainly tastes sketchy. And it would come up if anybody ever went to trial. Oops, forgot, cops don't break the law..

Mike Ross

11 months ago

Elliot,

Briefly, I'm not saying he was too close for officer safety, I'm saying he was FAR too close for his OWN safety; he displayed commendable courage (or perhaps just a lack of understanding of what danger he was in, being so close to gunfire) but a total lack of common sense. Personally I wouldn't have waited for the shooting to start, I would have run as soon as I saw the first officer draw their weapon, forthrightly and without embarrassment. He also showed a lack of regard for the officers; the last thing they needed was a civilian running around with a camera during and immediately after a shooting; a tense and dangerous situation (although to be fair, I don't think any of them even noticed him, they were all looking at the car and had their backs to him).

I've said why I think he was approached; an officer saw him with his hand out the window and an object in his hand, pointing towards the scene of the shooting. At that time it's quite likely they had no clear idea exactly who had been shooting who, so I don't blame him even slightly for taking an interest. Is that so hard to believe and understand?

I'm not speaking as to why the officers opened fire, and I'm saying nothing about what happened after the video ended, as there's no evidence concerning that on the video (doh!) beyond the fact that, obviously, some interaction with the police took place.

Mike

Jesse

11 months ago

Not worrying about one's own safety, nor a lack of common sense, nor a lack of regard for police officers is equivalent to probable cause or reasonable suspicion of a crime. That said, the officers had no legal reason to point a gun at them. Simply holding an object in one's hand out the window of a car is not reasonable suspicion of anything. The actions of the officers following their determination that it was a camera belie their real intentions, which was obviously an attempt to eliminate any video record of the shooting.

The fact that there is no video evidence of what happened after the video is prima facie evidence of the illegality of police conduct. Of course there's going to be no record from a camera that was smashed and rendered inoperable. That's the point of smashing it.

Mike Ross

11 months ago

I agree, not worrying about one's own safety isn't any form of probable cause. I never said it was; I just said it was stupid. You're attacking a straw man.

Holding an object out the window of your car is not reasonable suspicion of anything, I would agree - in normal circumstances. But these circumstances were anything but normal; I would disagree when it's night, and you're doing it *right next to* a place there has just been *a large amount of gunfire*; then it's not surprising the officer took an interest.

Look at it from the point of view of the officer, or try to. As far as I could see, it was a bike officer. They had quite possibly just arrived on the scene, they had heard a lot of gunfire, they see someone sitting in a car pointing something out the window. Can you really blame them for drawing their weapon and approaching with extreme caution, until they determine whether or not the gentleman was one of the shooters? I would have looked askance at it if they had actually shot, but drawing their weapon is not unreasonable.

I didn't see any evidence the camera was smashed. It looked as though it was simply turned off. I'm NOT saying it wasn't smashed later. I'm NOT saying ANYTHING about what did or didn't happen after the recording ended, and I'm certainly not defending any of the alleged police conduct during that period. I'm just commenting on what I see in the recording; it's being offered up as evidence, and I'm analysing it with as open a mind as I can. My conclusion is it's a long way short of proving anything either way.

Mike

Johnny Law

11 months ago

@ Jesse

"Not worrying about one's own safety, nor a lack of common sense, nor a lack of regard for police officers is equivalent to probable cause or reasonable suspicion of a crime. That said, the officers had no legal reason to point a gun at them. Simply holding an object in one's hand out the window of a car is not reasonable suspicion of anything."

Are you flipping serious? They had just been involved in a shooting. Of course they were going to be cautious when they see a person behind them pointing an object at them. It's perfectly reasonable that they pointed their weapons until they felt the scene was safe.

As for the "smashed" phone, there was no such thing. The video posted in the next post by Carlos shows the phone only has a small crack on the screen and is perfectly operational. A boot to a smart phone would do a lot more damage. The allegation of smashing the phone appears to be a bunch of crap.

It's amazing how many of the people here simply refuse to allow the police the right to protect themselves. I seriously doubt you would feel the same way if you were in their position that night.

Jesse

11 months ago

Officer safety is unimportant to me. It should also be unimportant to them. Their job is to protect citizens, not themselves. If they don't like that, they can quit and get a job in the productive, non-coercive economy.

It's worthwhile to note that the only people who's safety was either violated or jeapardized in this whole melee was taxpaying citizens. Multiple citizens shot by rampaging police unloading dozens of rounds on a crowded street, followed by multiple police pointing their guns at incredulous citizen bystanders. Not a single officer hurt.

Guess that is the mark of a police job well done.

Johnny Law

11 months ago

"Officer safety is unimportant to me."

Obviously.

"It should also be unimportant to them. Their job is to protect citizens, not themselves. If they don't like that, they can quit and get a job in the productive, non-coercive economy."

So actively trying to arrest criminals and going towards the sound of gunfire isn't good enough for you? They have to have a total disregard for their safety as well? Sorry buddy but that's not how it works. Luckily, the majority of the public and the courts would rather we take reasonable steps to stay alive even if it inconveniences people who think of cops as expendable.

"Not a single officer hurt."

Good. Sorry if that bothers you.

Jesse

11 months ago

The majority of the public would rather not be shot by rampaging, trigger happy cops.

If the public took the same "reasonable" steps to stay alive that these officers took, our society would be a bloodbath. Actually, the public is going to need to start taking some "reasonable" steps toward safety from the police.

nevernot

11 months ago

I'm not sure if you've ever seen the phone in question but it's a large touchscreen device. Saying the officer could not recognize a 4.3" illuminated screen as a phone is ridiculous. There is no way someone could confuse a 4 inch tablet with a bright light source with a gun, especially at night. In fact I doubt the officer would have even noticed the people if he hadnt seen the light from the screen, these phones are particularly bright. That being said why did he intentionally and willfully destroy evidence?

hal

11 months ago

@nevernot:

exactly, the last part of what you just said is what i mean.
in the attempt to destroy the phone the, a perhaps legal act, becomes then an illegal act on the part of the police! and showing i think that GLENNA was wrong in her "on air" report, and her statements within! and indicating what the true intent of the police were, no matter what they are claiming now! the video never lies, the police sometimes do, and are doing so in this case.
i rest my case!

Johnny Law

11 months ago

@nevernot

Isn't the camera on the back end of the phone? There is no bright screen on the back of a smart phone and a video that shows the phone shows that the back is black. So the officer (who was just involved in a shooting and dealing with all the effects of adrenaline) sees a guy behind the officers. This guy is pointing a black object out the window.

How can you not understand why he was concerned about it?

And there is no proof he tried to destroy anything. A video of the phone shows it only has a very small crack on one corner of the screen.

fluid ambient

11 months ago

Is this the entire video? I don't get it. I thought the video should show up to where the camera was smashed by a cop.

It's very difficult to say what happened. You just see a car being fired upon by a lot of cops. I dunno if that is enough evidence to prove that the person inside was some innocent guy who was at the wrong place at the wrong time.

I'm torn on this one. I was hoping it would show active knowledge by the cop of destroying evidence. I can't jump on the bandwagon till I have that.

Michael.Robinson82

11 months ago

From CNN. I posted link in my comment further down.

"Benoit says the only reason he still has the footage is because it was saved on a tiny memory card, which he removed and hid from the officers, despite being told to hand over his video.

"I took the chip out and put it in my mouth," he said, and kept it there the whole time he was interviewed by police at a nearby mobile command post."

Carlos Miller -...

Pixiq Expert

11 months ago

This is what they released, but I wouldn't be surprised if he turned off the video by instinct after having the gun pulled on him.

The guy is not a professional videographer. He is just some guy with a camera phone.

I can imagine in a stressful situation, you might just turn off the camera thinking it will make the cops go away.

hal

11 months ago

this video is more then enough, the piggie needs to go to prison for life, and any others that helped or knew what he had done, and didnt come forward!

Randi Scott

11 months ago

Cops aren't always the good guys. Sometimes they're just the other bad guys.

Remember when they used to earn our respect instead of our contempt?

Phred

11 months ago

That concept died in the late 60s and early 70s. I taught my own kids (now adults) that the cops are NOT their friends, which is the exact opposite of what I was taught. That applies to my nephew who's a state trooper (when he's on duty).

Guy Fawkes

11 months ago

The cops didn't smash any cell phones. Santa Clause and the elves did it, with his friends the little grey men who showed up in flying saucers to help him.

hal

11 months ago

@guy:

your oh so right, and ya know what, when the JUDGE needs a seeing eye dog, we all in deep shit. cause justice wont be done, he will never "see the 8x10's with the circle and arrows on the back" and deputy BARNEY with his gun with no bullets only does what he is told!
[WE ARE BEING MISDIRECTED, OUR ATTENTION SHOULD BE ON WHO IS DOING THIS, THE SHERIFF OF THE COUNTY WHERE THIS IS GOING ON ACROSS THE NATION. [dont sheriffs get elected], ALL OF THE POLITICIANS IN D.C. AND ALL THE CAPITALS OF WHICHEVER STATE YOUR IN!]
who the hell do these piggies work for anyway?
who do they take orders from?
where does the fucking buck stop?
i mean hell with getting those piggies fired, shit they should have never been hired in the first place!!!!!
to hell with the damn MAIN STREAM MEDIA......talk is cheap and even if they report it, things wont change a damn bit!!!
action speaks louder then words, and its time for action!!
dont you think??????????????????????????????????????????????????????
??????????????????????????????????????????

fluid ambient

11 months ago

The only thing I can say is that I did not see the car doing anything "aggressive" to warrant all those cops open fire on it.

The car windows were tinted, and I can't even see inside it. Are they claiming he held a gun at them? That seems farfetched as I can't even see what's going on inside the vehicle.

Michael

11 months ago

And if he was waving a gun around, you would think it wouldn't take them 2 days to find (plant) it. They claim he fired shots? Where are the spent bullet casings? Do you need another week to find those to?
lol

Mike

"Be excellent to each other" Bill S. Preston Esquire

Michael.Robinson82

11 months ago

"Where are the spent bullet casings? Do you need another week to find those to?"

Yes - with the way they declared war on that car they have lots of casing to sort through! LOL

Seriously with the way they opened fired you would have thought the person inside was firing on them with an AK-47.

Michael.Robinson82

11 months ago

Source of video is CNN who paid Benoit a licensing fee.

Why no video of camera being smashed?

"Benoit says the only reason he still has the footage is because it was saved on a tiny memory card, which he removed and hid from the officers, despite being told to hand over his video.

"I took the chip out and put it in my mouth," he said, and kept it there the whole time he was interviewed by police at a nearby mobile command post."

Source: http://www.cnn.com/2011/CRIME/06/07/florida.shooting.witness/

Local 10 camera being confiscated? One more sign we are turning into a police state.

Jesse

11 months ago

What I want to know is why the police are immediately given the benefit of the doubt when they pull a gun on someone? If I pull a gun on someone "holding an object in their hand and pointing it at me", I will be accosted by police, ordered to the ground, disarmed, cuffed, and probably get a few choice shots to the body or head by their knees. In other words, treated like a criminal caught red-handed.

Apparently people with government-issued costumes are the only ones entitled to presumptively take actions to protect their safety.

Of course my solution would not be to allow citizens to go around waving guns like the cops do, but instead to crack down on the cops. Preferably disarm them. Government employees at all levels should be prohibited from carrying firearms.

Randi Scott

11 months ago

Protect and serve has become intimidate and control.

Cops are becoming the hands of the beast.

With the proliferation and increasing quality of camera phones and point and shoots the tide is sure to turn on cops behaving inappropriately. They have closed circuit cameras monitoring us and now we have You Tube and our own way of monitoring them.

Jim Morrison wrote in one of his songs…

"They've got the guns but we've got the numbers. Gonna win yeah we're taking over".

Media and exposure is our weapon.

Ben Henschel

11 months ago

Forget the end of the video, I'm more concerned with at least 3 cops unloading on the person in the car in the beginning. I'm sure they had their reasons to use lethal force, and I'm not doubting those reasons, as I don't know what actually happened. But is that normal for like 3 cops to fire 5 to 6 times like that when they do go lethal? It seems like over kill to me.

John Howard

11 months ago

Goofy forum software. Posts even though it seems like nothing happened when you click submit.

John Howard

11 months ago

ABC picked up the story on the evening news 6/9/11 and ran a ~3 minute piece on this event, including the above video.