News Shooting by San Jose police: Man alleges cops tried to seize his phone

[brassmonkey]

SAN JOSE -- A San Jose resident who was one of several people recording the aftermath of an officer-involved shooting in South San Jose last month is alleging he was intimidated and threatened with detainment for refusing to surrender his cellphone or delete the images he took.

The allegations are contained in an Aug. 21 internal-affairs complaint filed by Andrew Payne and comes as the issue of recording police performing their duties in public has gained national attention in light of the civil unrest in Ferguson, Missouri.

Earlier this summer, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in Riley v. California that warrantless searches and seizures of cellphones and their contents during an arrest were unconstitutional.

Because Payne was not under arrest at the time he said police demanded his phone, there's little ambiguity in this case, said Margaret Russell, a constitutional law professor at Santa Clara University.

"They can't seize and search cellphones of criminal suspects, so they definitely can't do that to someone in the street," she said.

Police declined to comment on the complaint, citing the ongoing internal-affairs investigation, which can take up to one year to complete. An internal police bulletin was sent out in July on the heels of the Riley decision to inform all sworn staff about the new search-and-seizure rules.

Payne said he was out for a jog the morning of Aug. 14 when he came upon the scene where San Jose police, responding to a 911 call involving a weapons threat, shot and killed a 19-year-old San Jose woman near Blossom Hill Road and Playa del Rey. He said he was one of several people taking pictures and recording video with their cellphones who were approached by officers at the scene asking if anyone had witnessed the police encounter.

But unlike some of the other people, Payne said he refused to hand over his phone for officers to search or give them his personal information. He said he was approached a few minutes later by Sgt. Teresa Jeglum, who is the sole officer named in his complaint. Payne said Jeglum asked him if he was taking pictures, and when he answered affirmatively, told him to clear them from his phone.

"She told me, 'You either need to delete those photos or I'm confiscating your cellphone,' " Payne said. "I told her she couldn't do that, and then she reached to grab my phone."

He said he later relented to officers' requests for his personal information after they asked him if he wanted to go to police headquarters.

"They threatened to detain me if I didn't give them my info," Payne said.

Payne said he spoke with a lieutenant after the encounter and said he just wanted an apology. He said he got a call from Jeglum, but instead of an apology, he got an assertion that she was trying to protect her officers. That didn't hold water with Payne, who said he was singled out.

"There were 20 people there with cellphones, and they harassed me when I didn't cooperate," he said.

Payne filed his police complaint with the city's Independent Police Auditor, which then forwarded it to SJPD's internal-affairs division.

LaDoris Cordell, the IPA and a retired judge, said the SJPD duty manual makes clear that as long as they are not interfering with police duties, citizens are free to record officers working in public view.

"Police officers everywhere are subject to increasing scrutiny by the public in light of recent officer-involved shootings around the country. The result is that policing and cellphone recordings by the public are the new norm," Cordell said. "They are here to stay."

Russell noted that anecdotes about clashes between citizens and police over cellphone recordings have been on the rise nationally. She said what might need some judicial clarity is what constitutes police interference when it comes to recording.

"People may record even if it embarrasses or angers or upsets the police officer," she said. "But what does it mean to interfere with performance of a police officer?"

Ultimately, the issue could be control of the recordings, since some police departments across the country have long had dashboard cameras in patrol cars and more agencies are implementing body-worn cameras, including SJPD. Cordell said the added cameras from the public only work toward increased police transparency.

"It is my hope that police officers will not simply accept, but welcome these recordings by the public," she said. "If they do, it will be a major step toward building trust between the community and the police."

Payne said he hails from a family of law-enforcement officers -- his father is a lieutenant with the Santa Cruz County Sheriff's Office -- and says they're all firmly behind him.

"I'm totally for police officers," Payne said. "But I'm also for civil rights."

full article...

[Juicy D. Links]

2 much o read , give me clifnotes

[L-Pink]

Originally Posted by Juicy D. Links

2 much o read , give me clifnotes

Brassmonkey is posting more cop news.

[bagfull]

Free OJ
This is so sad, cops are out of control

[Grapesoda]

Originally Posted by L-Pink

Brassmonkey is posting more cop news.

from now on.....stories like this should be called 'monkey news' seems somehow appropriate doesn't it?

[adultchatpay]

I stopped by to read the comments.

[bronco67]

Originally Posted by Grapesoda

from now on.....stories like this should be called 'monkey news' seems somehow appropriate doesn't it?

"Good evening...I'm Ape Blitzer with tonight's Monkey News".

or does Chimp Russert work better?

[WDF]

Another Breaking BM report from the Regurgitated News Network.

[brassmonkey]

Originally Posted by WDF

Another Breaking BM report from the Regurgitated News Network.

thanx man!

[Tom_PM]

Self serving behavior that is against the law. Someone call the police. Oh wait... Someone call Jesus' dad, he's always super full of spite.

[Legendary Samir - BANNED FOR LIFE]

Another clear case of racial profiling in America

[clickity click]

Dem Bastards!

[TheSquealer]

[Horatio Caine]