Posted on 06/28/2011 1:39:35 PM PDT by Do Not Make Fun Of His Ears
The Rochester woman whose run in with the law with her iPhone and made national headlines, plans to file a lawsuit claiming Rochester police violated her civil rights.
Donald Thompson, attorney for Emily Good, told News 10NBC's Ray Levato Tuesday they may sue the individual police officer involved in her arrest, the Rochester Police Department, "any or all of the above and that's something to be discussed and considered."
Good was arrested in her bare feet and pajamas while standing in her own yard one night in May while taping a traffic stop that happened in front of her 19th Ward home. Good kept recording even after an officer asked her to stop and go inside. She was charged with obstructing government administration.
Monday, the District Attorney's office asked City Court Judge Jack Elliott to dismiss the charges because a review of the evidence showed there was no legal basis to prosecute.
Thompson says, "Her stated reason for video taping in the first place was that three white officers were stopping a young black male. And she's obviously attuned to social issues and concerns. There's nothing wrong with monitoring the course of those proceedings to make sure the correct procedures are being followed."
Thompson says says the lawsuit will claim a violation of Good's civil rights under the guarantees of the First Amendment. He said they will either file it in state or federal court.
"There was no crime that she committed here," says Thompson. "There was no basis to arrest her. There was no reason to forcibly take her from her property. It's a violation of her civil rights."
"It was pretty far over the line," says Thompson. "That's why it went national. "
(Excerpt) Read more at whec.com ...
Hey, all I wanna know out of you, is do you agree to the terms finalized in #81?
Within a few feet? I hate to tell you this, but all anybody has to do is watch the original video to see how full of crap you are.
Have a nice day!
I think you’re jumping the gun a bit, SD hasn’t really agreed to anything.
Read his posts, he looks scared to come right out and agree, so he’s just sort-of, maybe, perhaps, onboard. Unless things go the way they’re going to go and even he can’t deny that he looses, then, no deal.
If city officials can have surveillance (and they are planning on it) on the people, then the reverse holds true as well...
You are right on the money. If they do nothing wrong
what do they have to be afraid of. Still, standing too
close to police action can be hazardous.
True dat. Heck, he tried to throw something in there about "Well, if I lose, then we wait until an Appeal".... LOL... doesn't sound too confident after all......
>>With each point/counterpoint, this lady destroyed this thig cops arguments...
Cop: go inside...
Lady: This is my yard, I have a right to stand in my yard...
Cop: I dont feel safe...
Lady: Look at me, how do I threaten you?<<
Yes, the officer had to act like Johnny Badass, and no way was this barefoot woman in her pajamas going to defy his “ORDERS.”
He couldn’t face the truth, and was humiliated in public. So to save face, instead of admitting the woman was right, he lashed out.
He reminds me a lot of SoldierDad.
Oh, yes. Please accept the postion of those who support this liberal POS who went looking for trouble so she could file this suit. You have no evidence the woman DIDN’T make any comments or statements to the officer, but you’ll run with that lack of evidence anyway. Incredible.
Finally some common sense. Too bad more cops aren’t like you. Perhaps many wouldn’t have lost such respect for the profession if they were.
Thank you for that, sir.
Nice job of taking the incident completely out of context and ignoring the totality of the incident. Amazing.
Again. she was on her property.
All else is irrelevant.
“Fraidy-Cop” LOL
Hmmmm... guilty until proven innocent. A peek inside the mind of a statist. Incredible.
No, if there is an appeal, we wait for the outcome. Sorry, that’s the offer.
Hey Sparky...she was standing in her yard, too.
A point you so conveniently fail to address and completely ignore.
That cuts both ways, you know.
>>You have no evidence the woman DIDNT make any comments or statements to the officer, but youll run with that lack of evidence anyway.<<
That one is so out there, I thought I’d repost it to make sure I’m not “imagining” you just said that.
Horse pukey. No one is alleging the cop did anything that is not on tape.
>>Hey Sparky...she was standing in her yard, too.<<
I pointed that out to SD on another thread, and he called me a liar. Seriously.
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.