'I'm gonna lock your ass up': Footage emerges of Ferguson cop who killed Michael Brown . . .

Daily Mail (U.K.) ^ | November 16. 2014 | Kieran Corcoran

[Scoutmaster]

• Darren Wilson was filmed last year threatening to arrest Mike Arman
• Told resident of Ferguson, Missouri, he was not allowed to film him

Footage has emerged of Darren Wilson - the police officer who killed Michael Brown - threatening to arrest a man for filming him.

The video shows Wilson approaching a resident in Ferguson, Missouri, and demanding that he put away his camera. [snip]

The arrest was filmed in 2013, but was only posted online this week. It shows Wilson telling Mike Arman, a 30-year-old Ferguson resident, to put away his phone or be arrested.

Wilson, thinking he is being photographed rather than filmed, said: 'If you wanna take a picture of me one more time, I’m gonna lock your ass up.'

In response, Arman, identified by the Guardian, said: 'Sir, I’m not taking a picture, I’m recording this incident, sir.'

The clip cuts out after Wilson approaches, but an incident report which Wilson filled out after the event revealed that Arman was cuffed and taken to Ferguson police station.

There he was charged with failure to comply with Wilson, and also for breaching regulations on pit bull dogs. The charges were later dropped, Arman claims, when he showed police the video footage and proved his pet was not a pit bull.

The incident offers another insight into Wilson, whose behavior during the fatal confrontation with Brown is under intense scrutiny.

[dragnet2]

Amity: He doesn’t say “in his face,” he says “remove the camera from my face” — Arman was filming Wilson’s face

Is it not true anyone reading Wilson’s report would assume the resident had his camera right in Wilson’s face?

I noted you evaded the question. Is this not true?

[Amity]

I have issues with the “failure to comply” laws myself, but that’s an issue with the law, and not with the cops who follow it.

[Amity]

I didn’t evade the question; I hadn’t read it yet.

And, no, since that was not my assumption when I read it, I’d have to say it is not true that “anyone” reading the report would assume the resident had the camera right in Wilson’s face. The fact that you read it that way proves that you read it that way, not that everyone does.

[Texas Eagle]

That would be the question if you want to be arrested.

Isn't that a normal question? What am I being charged with?

[dragnet2]

A lot of cops believe that videotaping cops is illegal due to wiretapping laws, and Wilson may be one of them

Your spin is speeding up the rotation of the planet...Please stop before we all fly off.

Everyone the streets everywhere has cell cameras. Been this way for many years. Are you suggesting cops do not know what the law is regarding something so common?

Wiretapping laws?

Come on...

[Half Vast Conspiracy]

They don’t get to make up the law though.

[dragnet2]

Amity: He doesn’t say “in his face,” he says “remove the camera from my face” — Arman was filming Wilson’s face

Is it not true anyone reading Wilson’s report would assume the resident had his camera right in Wilson’s face?

I noted you evaded the question. Is this not true?

I didn’t evade the question; I hadn’t read it yet. And, no, since that was not my assumption when I read it

Then that makes you an extremely disingenuous individual.

[Future Snake Eater]

Ridiculous attempt at character assassination that has no bearing on the shooting in question.

This is up there with Zimmerman being suspicious of St. Trayvon (PBUH) b/c he was black. Completely irrelevant to the shooting and the immediate events that led to it.

[dragnet2]

He doesn’t say “in his face,” he says “remove the camera from my face”

You suggesting this does not infer or suggest the camera was right in Wilson's face is laughable at best.

Come on now.

[ASA Vet]

What are you going to charge me with?

I know, I know! Ending a sentence with a preposition.

[Springman]

Bump for later.

[Amity]

Personally, I think cops wearing cameras is a great idea, but I know a lot of cops are opposed to it, and some of them further believe that people don’t have the right to videotape them. Only place I ever ran across an explanation for that belief was here:

http://research.lawyers.com/ignorance-of-the-law-may-be-an-excuse.html

If you know a better explanation, pass it on!

[dragnet2]

Don’t know what you’re talking about. I never mentioned anything about that issue.

[Half Vast Conspiracy]

That makes them human, not liars.

Yet cops get extra credibility when testifying in court.

[dragnet2]

some 'cops' of them further believe that people don’t have the right to videotape them

I see, so they are able to claim ignorance of the law, but that don't fly for anyone else.

Got it.

[Leaning Right]

Cops can legally lie in order to advance an investigation. That's not always a bad thing.

I suppose my beef here is that's the cop's “lie” (if that's what it was) violated Arman's 1st Amendment rights. The Bill of Rights...that's a big deal.

By the way, back in 2012 the US Supreme Court determined that it is not illegal to videotape cops when they are performing their official duties. Any cop that still does not know that is, for the lack of a better word, incompetent.

[Amity]

Then that makes you an extremely disingenuous individual. I would say it merely makes me someone who does not jump to the same assumptions you do. But if you assume anyone who disagrees with you is "extremely disingenuous," then I'm beginning to see why you're so convinced Wilson must be lying.

[Scoutmaster]

I apologize that you couldn't view it. You may need to update your Flash Player from adobe.com.

However, I Googled and found that the video has now been posted several times on YouTube.

Askywhy5times provided one link. Here's another YouTube link to the video.

Frequently, if a video on a website doesn't work for you, you may find the same video on YouTube with an internet search engine.

[dragnet2]

Amity: He doesn’t say “in his face,” he says “remove the camera from my face” — Arman was filming Wilson’s face

Is it not true anyone reading Wilson’s report would assume the resident had his camera right in Wilson’s face?

And, no, since that was not my assumption when I read it

Then that makes you an extremely disingenuous individual.

I would say it merely makes me someone who does not jump to the same assumptions you do.

No one buys that. It's BS...No sale.

[Protect the Bill of Rights]

Call me crazy, but I have watch & listened to the snippet over & over. I am not sure he said “lock your ass up.”

Not sure exactly what it is he said. Something along the lines of “If you keep taking pictures (and then something about the grass).” When he says what I hear as grass, his head turns and he looks at the grass.

Might be my brain filling in for what I see, rather than what I cannot make out. Who knows? I’d like to see the entire video.

Wilson, with his hands in his pockets, does not look very threatening to me. He does not look angry either. More like “what a pain in the ass.”

Regardless, he does not look like the monster who shot a gentle giant of a teen in the back while said gentle giant’s hands are raised as the race whores have falsely claimed.