Posted on 08/26/2005 4:37:24 PM PDT by Excuse_My_Bellicosity
Until last year, Tanya Ortega de Chamberlin had a clean record, with no criminal convictions or even an arrest. But her refusal to provide her date of birth or Social Security number to a South Salt Lake police officer changed that.
Although she was not suspected of committing a crime, and eventually provided the requested information, Ortega de Chamberlin was still cited based on her initial resistance.
The obstruction charges against her were later dropped. But Ortega de Chamberlin says that's not good enough - she has filed a lawsuit asking for a declaration that her constitutional right to be free of unreasonable search and seizure was violated. She also wants reimbursement of the money she spent fighting the criminal case.
Capt. Chris Snyder said Thursday that the department cannot comment on pending litigation.
The legal action, filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Salt Lake City, gives this account of the incident:
On Nov. 4 about 12:30 p.m., Ortega de Chamberlin, a photographer who lives in Salt Lake City, was standing on a public sidewalk near 3021 S. Main St. when Officer B. Heddlesten approached her. The officer said she was not suspected of a crime, but demanded the photographer give him her name, date of birth and Social Security number and tell him whether she had a driver license.
Ortega de Chamberlin gave her name but told the officer she was not required by law to provide the other information he requested.
In response to her repeated questions, Heddlesten said he did not think she had committed a crime or was attempting to commit one, according to the suit. However, the officer still insisted that she had to tell him the information; his supervisor, Sgt. Brian Stahle, who arrived at their location, backed him up.
Under threat of arrest, Ortega de Chamberlin finally complied, but was cited for allegedly interfering with or obstructing an officer by giving false information and by refusing to give information. Her suit says she then was put in handcuffs and placed in a police car until the officers changed their minds about taking her to jail and released her.
The charges were dismissed before trial, but Ortega de Chamberlin still has a criminal accusation on her record.
Is "3300 South" the same as "3000 South Main"?
Although she was not suspected of committing a crime, and eventually provided the requested information, Ortega de Chamberlin was still cited based on her initial resistance.
-break-
The officer said she was not suspected of a crime, but demanded the photographer give him her name, date of birth and Social Security number and tell him whether she had a driver license.
You are an idiot. The cops --that protect you-- can't do their job if they can't identify the people they are talking to.
Get a life and quit bashing the folks that keep your sorry a--h--- free!!!!
Where have you been that you would still believe that truth or justice is even recognizable in the courts anymore?
The defining difference between the American concept of freedom and the European concept is summed up in the phrase, "Your papers please."
It's 4 blocks away. The incident took place at 3100 S Main, which would be 3 blocks........this is the general vicinity.
I am NOT saying she was doing anything wrong by being there. I used to work for a photographer in that area. Anytime I would be outside, men would stop and ask me if I wanted a "date." (I'm just an ordinary looking middle age woman too.)
These areas aren't publicized and they do tend to move around a bit, but this is a hot spot.
Well if she was taking pictures of an FBI building across the street (or some other government building) then the officer would have some cause.
Otherwise...
And as far as requiring a social security number, I'd guess that is simply illegal to require.
True, but even the best are on the mark maybe 85% of the time. If an LEO aggressively pursues his job and does what he is paid to do, he will occasionally make a mistake. When he makes this mistake, his career can quickly come to an end.
It is small wonder that many of our public defenders have gone into the survival mode and only do enough to get by and no more.
From the transcript of the case...
D: I just need to see some identification.
H: Why?
D: Because I'm investigating an investigation
H: Investigating what?
D: I'm investigating
Did you read that word " (hopefully) "? Sheesh...
Pinged by your friend I see. I knew this thread was going to take that turn.
I see you are another "I believe everything the media writes crowd" ( especially when it applies to bashing cops ). I have read post #80, so I think I can safely make that conclusion.
I know when to step away fom the curb to keep a reckless driver from trying to run me over, and I am taking that step back.
See ya.
I couldn't have said it better myself, my FRiend!
Too pat! This smells. There has to be more to it than in this report. Something is not Kosher here besides her name. What a moniker!
Bye-bye!
Really crummy reporting, no?
One would think that is the first question a real reporter would ask
As far as I'm concerned, if I am ever asked, my response is "why do you need to know?". He either has probable cause or he doesn't.
Specially as a pedestrian.
...American Association Against All As****e Acronyms...
Been a while hasn't it?
Since 9/11, I thought we were to be alert for suspicious activity. This is a photographer. Was she taking photos of a sensitive area? As a private citizen, we are supposed to report such activity to the local authorities. Did someone report this person? If so, tough luck, lady. I agree with the cop.
"The police aren't always infallible and they do pick on people if they think they can get away with it. "
Isn't it illegal to use SSN for ID?
"The fact that the officers supervisor backed him up leads me to think there was some reason for the request. "
If the cop kicked some little girls dog to death they would still back him up.
"They're "Law Enforcement Officers" now."
Soon they'll all be Homeland Security Officers citizen.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.