Tag Archives: refusal to identify

LVMPD Police Illegally Detain Then Falsely Arrest Las Vegas Man For Not Telling Them His Birthdate

LVMPD Illegal Detention False Arrest Las Vegas Federal Courthouse

Note: This post was shared with Nevada Cop Block via reader submission. If you have videos, stories, or personal interactions with the police (and/or “justice” system) that you would like to share, send them to us and we will do everything we can to bring it to the attention of the world.

Update: I’ve been told that the name of the officer who is wearing the body camera is Officer J. Deel. Also, the officer who orders that Mr. Martinez be (falsely) arrested is named Officer Jenkins. A third officer, who appears on camera at the end while he is being placed in the car, is named Officer Hernandez. (Other officers, who currently have not been identified, were also present.)

In the body camera footage (which was recorded by Officer J. Deel) embedded below, police officers from the LVMPD​ illegally detain then falsely arrest Joshua Martinez outside of the Lloyd D. George Federal Courthouse in Las Vegas​. Initially they approach and ask him for his birthdate, claiming that he is required to identify himself because they “are assisting the federal marshals within the courthouse.” Their only explanation for why he is supposedly required to identify himself to them is because when he tried to enter the courthouse the marshals asked him for ID, which he did not give them.

However, in order for someone to have to identify themselves to the police, they need to be legally detained first. In order to be legally detained, the police must have a reasonable suspicion that that person has committed a crime, is currently committing a crime, or is about to commit a crime. Even if there is a requirement to show ID in order to enter a building (I’ve personally been to the courthouse many times and can’t recall having ever been required to do so), not having that ID or opting against showing it to them is not a crime. It simply means they won’t allow you inside. So that does not satisfy the requirement for reasonable suspicion of a crime.

In the meantime, during the video, they readily admit several times that they are not accusing him of having committed a crime. In addition, they admit that he is on public property and confirm that he has not been trespassed from the property by the federal marshals. Contrary to what they claim while demanding the information that Martinez is under no legal obligation to provide, they are by their own admission not investigating him for having committed a crime.

Since they in fact never legally detained him, he is not under any obligation to identify himself to them. They also never ordered him to leave the courthouse property. So, he’s not disobeying any lawful orders. Therefore their charge of obstruction and the resulting arrest is false and illegal. Cops lie a lot and try to trick you into giving up your rights, but they also often don’t know the laws they are enforcing. This actually looks like the latter case.

See the original (raw) body cam video here at Joshua Martinez’ YouTube channel: https://youtu.be/riA0TcO7QnE

2 Comments

Norfolk Constabulary Kidnap UK CopBlocker Marcus Potter for Publicly Filming Cops Outside a McDonald’s

The following post and accompanying video were shared with the CopBlock Network by Marcus Potter, a UK CopBlocker who has submitted numerous other videos (see “related posts” section below) to the CopBlock Network, as well. It was shared via the CopBlock.org Submissions Page.

In this post, marcus was legally filming several cops inside a McDonald’s. Soon after, a manager takes offense to him filming the inside of the store, even though it is clearly within public view from the outside. Also, in spite of his claim that they “can’t be filmed,”  that manager even states that they have cameras of their own inside.

Whether the fact he was filming the police is related to his complaint isn’t clear, but regardless of that, this complaint is used as an excuse by officers from the Norfolk Constabulary to first harass and demand ID from Marcus and then to illegally arrest him, when he refuses those demands.

If you have a video, personal story involving police misconduct and/or abuse, or commentary about a law enforcement related news story, we would be happy to have you submit it. You can find some advice on how to get your submission published on the CopBlock Network within this post.

Date Of Incident: February 2, 2017
Officers Involved: PCs Christopher Giddens #31 and Katie Swann #1161, Sgt. Daniel Smith #3427, Sgt. Youngs #174, and Sgt Willows #702
Department Involved: Norfolk Constabulary
Department Telephone No.: +441953424242
Department Facebook Page: Norfolk Constabulary on FB
Department Twitter Account: @NorfolkPolice

Click the banner to submit content to CopBlock.org

Click the banner to submit content to CopBlock.org

 

I was doing some CopBlocking in Great Yarmouth, Norfolk, UK and had pointed my camera into the local McDonald’s, at which point a disgruntled member of staff (Steve) approached me and proceeded to whine about my filming. Sgt, Dan Smith 3427 approached Steve and asked if I was upsetting him or his customers. He explained that he wasn’t allowed to be filmed and that I was upsetting him.

At this point, another officer present, PC Christopher Giddens 31, got out a section 35 pad and Smith used Section 50 Police Reform Act 2002 to demand my name and address so that his colleague could issue me with a section 35 notice. I stood my ground and refused to give either officer these details, at which point Giddens arrested and then read the caution to me. Smith then handcuffed me and Smith then conducted a Section 32 PACE search. After this was concluded, I was then placed in the rear of Smith’s van by Giddens and he sat with me in the back whilst Smith drove us to Great Yarmouth Police Investigation Centre.

I was walked up to the holding area by both officers and took a seat whilst the custody sergeant became available. After about five minutes, the buzzer sounded alerting Smith and Giddens that the custody sgt. was available and I was taken to a charge desk where I was booked in by Sgt. Youngs 174 of the Suffolk Constabulary. I cooperated with most questions and provided her with my name (which I hadn’t been asked for prior to this point) but refused to provide my date of birth which she demanded from me using a number of threats.

Eventually, I was subject to a second search, which was conducted by PC Giddens. After this search was concluded, my bag was searched and all possessions were handed to Youngs, including my driving license that stated my date of birth and address. This information was entered onto the computer by Youngs. At this point, I expected to be released from my custody without charge and issued with a section 35 notice. However, I was taken to a cell for no apparent reason and my unlawful detention in custody continued for another six hours.

I was then taken to the charge desk by a police officer, at which point I was charged and released on bail to attend Great Yarmouth Magistrates Court with conditions “Not to enter Great Yarmouth except to attend court or for a prearranged solicitor’s appointment for reason to prevent further offenses on bail” by Sgt Willows 702 of the Suffolk Constabulary. I was then shown out of Great Yarmouth Police Investigation Centre and made my way home. I returned to court and pleaded “no case to answer” and was released on unconditional bail to attend my trial at Great Yarmouth Magistrates Court.

My custody records stated that the circumstances of arrest were: “DP has been at a location filming people outside and inside which has antagonized people & caused issues and was going to be given a sec 35 but refused details.” That my detention was authorized by Sgt Youngs 174 of the Suffolk Constabulary as being necessary for the following purpose: “To ascertain details as DP refuses to provide those details” and that the reasons the arrest was necessary were: “To enable the address of the person in question to be ascertained, per PACE CodeG 2.9 (b). To enable the name of the person in question to be ascertained, per PACE CodeG 2.9 (a).” It also stated that the arresting officer was PC Giddens 31, the same officer giving the account of arrest to Youngs, that the escorting officer was Sgt. Smith 3427 and that “The search was conducted by PC31 Giddens.” In relation to my unlawful handcuffing it stated: “Force/Restraint was used because front stack in roder.”

It later transpired from the video footage that PC Giddens spoke to his colleague, PC Katie Swann 1161 whilst Smith searched me and asked her to get a few lines from Steve stating that “distress” was caused by my actions. He explained that I had been arrested under “section 59” which in fact relates to the seizure of vehicles and is a section of the Police Reform Act 2002.

– Marcus D Potter

Related Posts

Leave a comment

London Metropolitan Police Attempt to Demand ID From Cameraman at Hackney One Carnival

The following post and accompanying videos were shared with the CopBlock Network by Marcus Potter, who has submitted numerous other videos to the CopBlock Network, as well. It was shared via the CopBlock.org Submissions Page. (See “Related Posts” section below for previous videos submitted by Marcus Potter.)

If you have a video, personal story involving police misconduct and/or abuse, or commentary about a law enforcement related news story, we would be happy to have you submit it. You can find some advice on how to get your submission published on the CopBlock Network within this post.

Date of Incident: September 11, 2016
Officers Involved: Metropolitan Special Constables Mohammed Rob 5122GD and Egwuatu 5747GD
Department Involved: Metropolitan Police Service
Department Twitter Account: @MPSHackney
Department Facebook Page: Metropolitan Police Service UK
Department Telephone No.: +44300 123 1212

Click the banner to submit content to CopBlock.org

Click the banner to submit content to CopBlock.org

This video was filmed on the 11th September 2016 and shows you that the Metropolitan Police Service cannot issue you with a section 35 notice without knowing your name and address. You do not have to give your name and address unless the police have lawful grounds to require them, e.g. under Section 50 of the Police Reform Act 2002.

I was recording Metropolitan police officers at the Hackney One Carnival in London, at which point a police officer, namely Metropolitan Special Constable Egwuatu 5747GD, took umbrage to my filming. He told me to “move on” and said “You’ve been warned about being here.”

He was clearly quite annoyed by my filming and wanted me to go away solely because of it. I stood my ground and refused to go. He then tasked another officer, namely Metropolitan Special Constable Mohammed Rob 5122GD, to disperse me from the area using section 35 of the Anti-social Behaviour Policing and Crime Act 2014.

Rob again asked me to leave the area, which I refused to do. He then explained that he would be issuing me with a section 35 notice on the grounds of my filming, at which point he asked for my name and address and asked me to stop filming.

I refused to comply with Rob’s request or provide him with my name and address. Rob then said he would be back to continue talking to me and left. I remained at the location filming for about two hours, during which I again bumped into Rob and Egwuatu. They both ignored me.

– Marcus D Potter

Related Posts

Leave a comment