Photography Is Not A Crime (PINAC) reporter Charlie Grapski has been held under the Baker Act after having obtained permission to travel out of Florida to cover the situation in Ferguson, Missouri. Grapski, who is under probation after a campaign of exposing corruption in Alachua County, Florida, was asked to come back to the probation office and accused of making threats on Twitter.
"They told me I needed to fill out more paperwork, which should have been a red flag for me," he said in a telephone conversation from the Park Place Behavioral Healthcare facility in Kissimmee.
But as soon as he arrived, he was informed that his permission to travel out of the state was being revoked because he had been tweeting that he was flying to Ferguson to commit acts of violence, which is a complete lie. I see all his tweets on Facebook and that surely would have drawn my attention as well as the attention of his followers.
"When I asked her to show me the threats, she wouldn't," he said.
He said he left the office angry and sat in a car with his father outside the building to call his lawyer when a SWAT team arrived and arrested him, transporting him to the mental health facility under the Baker Act, which is a state law that allows up to 72 hours detainment of citizens if they show signs of mental illness along with signs they are a threat to themselves or others.
Grapski has recently made methodical public records requests in Albuquerque, NM, Ferguson, and St. Louis County, in order to expose violations of public records laws and other police wrongdoing, relating to the killing of James Boyd by Albuquerque Police and failures to produce an Incident Report for the shooting of Michael Brown.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 09 2014, @01:22PM
This dude is pretty fearless. That's the kind of crazy we need more of.
I hope this ends up with him getting a multi-million dollar settlement that he spends on more police accountability work.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Arik on Thursday October 09 2014, @02:52PM
The corruption this guy uncovers is the disease destroying our country, and if there is any hope for us to pull back from the abyss, it's from people like this, and others following their example.
Time after time he asks public officials questions and they respond with 'turn the camera off.' When he wont do that, they wont talk. Now think a moment. Why on earth would any public official take that stance?
There is absolutely no reason an honest official would do that. Only a crook. We have a LOT of crooks in positions of authority.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Silentknyght on Thursday October 09 2014, @06:37PM
While I agree with the bigger picture, this statement of yours here at best shows a complete lack of understanding, and at worst, is a double-standard.
Regularly, the common cry that I hear on this site and others like it is one against the filming of private citizens. Again, many intelligent individuals on this site and others are smart enough to know that the common refrain, "you don't have to worry if you have nothing to hide," is a non-sequitur: it doesn't mean that constant observation---especially on camera, and permanent for evermore---is welcome.
In today's hyper-partisan world, I'm unsurprised that even the most honest officials are unwilling to discuss any topic on camera in front of an aggressive audience, no matter the worthiness of the cause.
Again, I agree that corruption should be removed from all aspects of life. I just wanted to point out the likely double-standard you're making, there.
(Score: 4, Informative) by tangomargarine on Thursday October 09 2014, @06:59PM
against the filming of private citizens.
The key difference being that government officials, while discharging their duties, can in no way be considered "private citizens."
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by urza9814 on Thursday October 09 2014, @07:01PM
There's a huge difference between private citizens and public officials on the job though. I would certainly think it illegal, possibly even criminal harassment, to follow and film an officer of the law or politician while they are off-duty. But while they're on the job, they're our employees. While I'm in the office, there are security cameras watching me all the time. That's perfectly fine. And filming police officers or other public officials while they are performing official duties is absolutely no different.
There's also the question of scale. One person filming a police officer during a specific interaction is VERY different from a government agency monitoring your every movement throughout the day. Again, if you follow the same cop around all day, I expect you'd be arrested for harassment. And I wouldn't consider such an arrest to be *entirely* inappropriate, though that depends a bit on the details.
(Score: 2) by TK on Thursday October 09 2014, @07:02PM
"Regularly, the common cry that I hear on this site and others like it is one against the filming of private citizens."
I agree with this sentiment, but I don't think this is the case here. If he is filming public officials doing their jobs, I have no problem with that.
If someone is acting as a representative of government, with all the authority of that position, they should be held under more scrutiny than a private citizen, including the scrutiny of the public by whatever non-interfering means are available to them.
That being said, I don't think people should be peeking through their windows, or stalking their families, or anything else to spy into their private lives. As long as you are off the job and aren't wearing the uniform, you can be treated like the rest of us schmucks.
The fleas have smaller fleas, upon their backs to bite them, and those fleas have lesser fleas, and so ad infinitum
(Score: 3, Interesting) by takyon on Thursday October 09 2014, @07:04PM
There's no double standard. If you are out in public, you shouldn't act surprised when you are recorded by other citizens. There are also laws in most states affirming the right of citizens to record public officials in the course of their duties, unless doing so would count as "interference". Some states have two-party consent laws, which could restrict the ability to record people, but these don't necessarily apply to public conversations, and government officials are usually fair game.
http://www.dmlp.org/legal-guide/recording-phone-calls-and-conversations [dmlp.org]
That's not to say that you can't take this position and then turn around and oppose state or locality-run CCTV cameras... taxpayers have a right to express their opinions about the merits and opposition to such an expenditure.
The "nothing to hide" argument doesn't work outside of private property. It can apply to Internet traffic, your mail, and other data that governments love to snoop on, but if you're out in public, you can't exactly hide. There will be grey areas, such as drones hovering over public streets, peering into homes, perhaps using infrared cameras. In the case of the state, evidence obtained against you without a warrant by droning your home would likely be found inadmissible. As for your privacy from citizen drones, I'm sure celebs or the FAA will put a stop to that.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Arik on Thursday October 09 2014, @07:39PM
I respectfully disagree.
"Regularly, the common cry that I hear on this site and others like it is one against the filming of private citizens."
As several others already pointed out, that's not apples to apples, because a public servant in the performance (or neglect) of their duties is the exact opposite of a private citizen.
Beyond that, private citizens do not, however much some of us may wish it were otherwise, have any recourse to prevent numerous entities, government and private, recording us every day. We are expected to put up with that, the police and other government agencies will shrug and say there is nothing they can do, but when we turn the cameras around and point the cameras at them suddenly they have a problem with it?
There is a double standard at play here, but it's not coming from me.
"In today's hyper-partisan world, I'm unsurprised that even the most honest officials are unwilling to discuss any topic on camera in front of an aggressive audience, no matter the worthiness of the cause."
The law is clear about their obligations. If they are not willing to discharge them, they should resign from their office and let someone willing to comply with the law assume it instead.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 1) by art guerrilla on Thursday October 09 2014, @08:54PM
reply to silentknyght-
1. thanks for outing yourself as an abject authoritarian, silent
2. do tell what an 'aggressive audience' is, and how many dogs they've shot, how many babies they've flashbanged, and how many INNOCENT civilians these scary 'aggressive audiences' have blown away with no provocation ? ? ?
3. THE problem with this country, is we DON'T have ENOUGH 'aggressive audiences' to put the fear of dog in the kriminal klass who GET AWAY WITH EVERYTHING...
let's string a few banksters up and see if their rapacious ways change...
why not ? WE 99% get shot for NOTHING, but they can't get their just desserts NO MATTER HOW EGREGIOUS and provable their krimes WHICH WRECK THE PLANET...
(please, do go on about my 'juvenile' use of 'k's' instead of the actual points raised... i expect that from authoritarians...)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 09 2014, @01:37PM
The free country where your opinions and insistence will land you in jail. Welcome all, please stand in line for your mandatory indoctrination session to obey your master.
Sarcasm may be part of this post. Unfortunately, it is more reality than fiction.
(Score: 1) by RedGreen on Thursday October 09 2014, @02:10PM
Indeed Orwell was just a few years off in his assessment of the situation, the truth is stranger than fiction.
"I modded down, down, down, and the flames went higher." -- Sven Olsen
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 09 2014, @05:31PM
No, it is not, or you have a very isolated view of reality, much like how the threat of child abductions is in reality much lower than a middle-class suburban housewife thinks. Breathlessly spouting this kind of shit just makes you sound like the talking heads on Fox News calling everyone who doesn't agree with their stance a socialist.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Thursday October 09 2014, @05:50PM
It may be true that expressing an opinion doesn't usually lead to government retaliation.
But lawful public records requests? The people in charge don't like those, or citizens with a deep understanding of their rights and the law. If sunshine laws are on the books and citizens don't bother obtaining public records, wrongdoing can go unnoticed. For the lawyers like Grapski that stir things up, retaliation is the preferred response.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by SlimmPickens on Thursday October 09 2014, @07:14PM
Yay!
It's finally time for US citizens to exercise those amendments!
(Score: 2) by SpockLogic on Thursday October 09 2014, @10:06PM
But only if the jackbooted thugs in uniform let you ...
Kissimmee is still run by a bunch of Good 'Ole Boys with the deepest of deep south mentalities.
Overreacting is one thing, sticking your head up your ass hoping the problem goes away is another - edIII
(Score: 2) by SlimmPickens on Friday October 10 2014, @12:10AM
But only if the jackbooted thugs in uniform let you
That was kind of the point. Maybe my Australian sense of humor is out of place here ;)
(Score: 5, Informative) by takyon on Thursday October 09 2014, @01:48PM
A lot of these links are very, very long, so here are some excerpts from the Charlie Grapski story of the events in Alachua County:
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 5, Informative) by takyon on Thursday October 09 2014, @01:51PM
Continued:
(Score: 2) by Nerdfest on Thursday October 09 2014, @04:23PM
How the hell can this happen? This is wide-spread corruption that seems to quite clearly have been exposed. Is there some sort of state or federal investigation into it going on?
(Score: 2) by takyon on Thursday October 09 2014, @04:56PM
datapharmer below had this to say:
Most recently, Clovis Watson [wikipedia.org] won his second term in the House of Representatives unopposed (yes, he has won in the upcoming Nov. 2014 election by default).
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 4, Informative) by Arik on Thursday October 09 2014, @05:24PM
Criminals get promoted to high office. Whistleblowers get beaten up by SWAT and imprisoned.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Thexalon on Thursday October 09 2014, @02:09PM
The sad fact is that stories like these no longer surprise me. In words attributed to Josef Stalin: "Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide everything."
Politics is a very very dirty business right now in the US. I live in a place where we've not infrequently had exit polls and election results disagree significantly, where election officials were caught organizing ballots to ensure that the legally required partial hand recounts (to ensure the counting machines weren't busted) came up with the right answers, and where organized efforts to disenfranchise black voters are an annual event. There are people getting paid over $150K a year from city and county funds to do nothing in particular. There are very lucrative contracts awarded to companies that just happen to have done some free work recently on officials' homes. There are all sorts of quid pro quo going on in my state house, occasionally overshadowed by religious nutjobs. And of course there's a reason why Congress has an approval rating of about 15% across people who identify with both parties or no party at all.
The actual running of government or carrying out the will of the people very much takes a back seat to all the shananigans. And this kind of corruption is not limited to any particular political party.
One common criticism of the government of Iran is that there's an unelected body who controls who's allowed to run for president. But that's just as true in the US, except that instead of an unelected council of ayatollahs, there's an unelected group of incredibly rich people.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 3) by takyon on Thursday October 09 2014, @02:19PM
The worst bit is the tyranny of the local government, the local police department. On the federal level, you have partisan gridlock, currently historically so depending on who you ask, and you have high scrutiny of every move that a politician makes. On the local level, the media are skittish (they are partners rather than adversaries of the police) and the only thing getting out the story is the ubiquitous smartphone camera (and soon, perhaps the smartphone with automatic cloud upload).
Events like Ferguson are rare. Call it a random event blown up by media hype, but the organized reaction certainly helped and has helped keep the story alive. Perhaps the only counter to systemic corruption is a continuous and unrelenting response by citizens. PINAC (Carlos Miller, Jeff Gray, and others) and Grapski represent the videography and public records slices of an emerging nationwide response to local corruption. The PINAC site itself is set to expand to do a lot more of this kind of reporting (and hopefully get rid some of those annoying ads, god damn).
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by Immerman on Friday October 10 2014, @04:07AM
>Perhaps the only counter to systemic corruption is a continuous and unrelenting response by citizens.
I'm inclined to agree, in fact it sounds like a rephrasing of that rather famous and insightful quote from the earliest days of our nation: "The price of freedom is eternal vigilance".
Those who hunger for power shall forever pursue it, and so those of us who wish to live in a free society we must forever pursue that freedom with every bit as much dedication, or watch it crumble in the face of unrelenting erosion.
(Score: 5, Informative) by datapharmer on Thursday October 09 2014, @02:46PM
As someone who lives in Alachua county, I can tell you that Grapski is a curious fellow. He is definitely a bit on the wild side, but has done a number of interesting things. To defend the "he might just be crazy" crowd I give you his previous arrest record [alligator.org], which in itself was controversial (some residents and politicians believe they kept him longer in jail because he was a political activist, but there is no doubt he was breaking and entering). From the exposing corruption side he has a long history going back to his time as a student when he was awarded $6 million dollars [alligator.org] for some secret-society-controls-the-UF-student-government shenanigans. The now defunct High Springs Herald had regular coverage of him and Watson duking it out. Ultimately, Clovis Watson resigned and it appeared from various news accounts that there was some serious misappropriation of funds/nepotism going on with the Police department and city commission up in those parts.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Thursday October 09 2014, @03:13PM
Domestic abusers have an easier time dodging charges than Grapski, heh.
Thanks for the links.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by strattitarius on Thursday October 09 2014, @03:51PM
All of that is very strange. On top of the strange events, he was held in jail for 90 days!!!! For what seems, at the most, to be some Class C Misdemeanor?
Then the prosecutor goes ahead with prosecution after the friend wants to drop charges? All of this leads me to believe he was treated much different than some other random guy.
All in all, a great submission and interesting story. Imagine what kind of shit this guy would be in if voice recorders and video wasn't so cheap and easy to use, not to mention the website to spread the word.
Slashdot Beta Sucks. Soylent Alpha Rules. News at 11.
(Score: 2) by Alfred on Thursday October 09 2014, @03:52PM
WTF. Was the swat team just really bored that day?
"OMG! He's sitting in a CAR!! And ANGRY!!! Call the SWAT Team!!!!"
Too bad an officer couldn't have gone up and tapped on the window. They could have saved some taxpayer dollars.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Thursday October 09 2014, @04:03PM
Here is your complementary SWAT red pill:
Illinois judge rules police entitled to Swat raid over parody Twitter account [theguardian.com]
ACLU Report Says 'Militarized' SWAT Teams Treat Neighborhoods Like 'War Zones' [vice.com]
Massachusetts SWAT teams claim they’re private corporations, immune from open records laws [washingtonpost.com]
On Tuesday, September 18, a US appeals court ruled that an August 2010 SWAT raid on a Florida barbershop was out of line [vice.com]
Drug Dealing Cop Sold Steroids to SWAT, While Pimping Out His Wife [thefreethoughtproject.com]
Candid Interview with Former Louisiana Cop on No-Knock Raids [photographyisnotacrime.com]
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday October 09 2014, @04:43PM
Swat is being used as a different tool. It is to make you think twice about committing a crime citizen.
These people have little interest in serving the public. It is a job to them. They want to make their job as easy as possible. Little things like rights get in the way of that.
There are good apples and bad ones. But the good ones have to continue to work with the bad ones once you are gone.
(Score: 3, Informative) by tathra on Thursday October 09 2014, @06:59PM
every officer who participates in the "blue protects blue" crap is involved in a criminal conspiracy in addition to shirking their duty. every good cop who knows about a bad cop and doesn't arrest them is committing a crime.
i'm not sure if there's an oath to defend the constitution at anything below federal level, but anyone who takes that oath and ignores or undermines the constitution or knows their superiors or coworkers do is committing a federal crime (Title 5 USC Section 7311, punishment is listed under Title 18 USC Section 1918) in addition to conspiracy.
(Score: 2) by PinkyGigglebrain on Thursday October 09 2014, @07:10PM
"The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."
Edmund Burke
"Beware those who would deny you Knowledge, For in their hearts they dream themselves your Master."
(Score: 2) by Sir Garlon on Thursday October 09 2014, @05:15PM
Obviously the SWAT team was unnecessary. The choice to call SWAT is simply retaliation for being a thorn in the side of the crooked local police force and city government. I am sure cost was not a consideration.
I'm surprised SWAT didn't tase him, just to be safe.
[Sir Garlon] is the marvellest knight that is now living, for he destroyeth many good knights, for he goeth invisible.
(Score: 3, Informative) by takyon on Thursday October 09 2014, @05:44PM
This has been mentioned on PINAC and DailyKos:
http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2014/10/08/10814-mike-brown-shooting-open-discussion-thread/comment-page-1/ [theconservativetreehouse.com]
It looks like some "conservative" authoritarians may have initiated the action against Grapski after seeing him comment on Livestream. This is speculation, and obviously the whole story is going to develop as these 72 hours roll on.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 2) by strattitarius on Thursday October 09 2014, @06:02PM
Slashdot Beta Sucks. Soylent Alpha Rules. News at 11.
(Score: 1) by takyon on Friday October 10 2014, @06:52AM
rehash and discussion of above [photographyisnotacrime.com]
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 10 2014, @12:01AM
Oh, I know a fellow on federal supervised release who has a evidentiary hearing in a week and a half over several alleged violations of his supervised release conditions. I've read the petition filed with the court and it's a tissue of lies, innuendo, and inaccuracies. Probation officers and their kin, parole agents, have a lot of power over those they supervise but they are required to act lawfully and within the constitution. His PO regularly breaks the law or fails to follow the court's instructions. Too many power-mad people are hired as PO's and it causes problems. This story is a more public example of one of them. Hopefully, Mr. Grapski will file the necessary court paperwork which will hopefully lead to this PO hanging by her public hair, at least professionally. PO cockroaches don't like the light of federal civil rights charges shining upon them.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Thursday October 16 2014, @06:16PM
PINAC's Charlie Grapski Prepares for Legal Battle After Having Been Involuntarily Committed to Hospital [photographyisnotacrime.com]