The New Paradigm: Smile You're On Canid Cop Camera

By: Honest Value Media DesignJoel Drotts

Who is this course is for?

   This course was designed as a refresher course for Law Enforcement Officers who work in a department that has or is instituting a policy "Cop Cams" or "Wearable Camera's." The purpose is of the course is to show video of real life police stops, detainment's, arrests, and other interactions with the public by law enforcement, which was caught on tape; and did go terribly wrong. The hope is that by watching the mistakes of other officers, combined interacting with the content and instruction that does accompany the videos taken from real world incidents, law enforcement professionals will be more aware of the letter of the law, how best to ENFORCE the law without collateral liabilities or fouled evidence, and promote a dialog of law enforcement best practices, shared with and among law enforcement professionals, and with-in law enforcement departments. The ultimate goal is to reduce civil liabilities, preserve properly evidence and arrests, while respecting and protecting the Constitutional civil rights of the public.    

With that in mind, please begin the course with the video below. The video was chosen as a good example of the new paradigm of video taped law enforcement, and the fall

out that can and will come about if you forget that you're on tape or say untrue

statements to the public on tape.

The following set of video's concern the topic and subject of law enforcement interactions with the Courts. Watch the inappropriate and even outright stupid and negligent behavior of the officers in the following video's, some of which resulted in criminal charges being

brought against the offending law enforcement professionals.

Obey the Judge at all times. Do not attempt to tamper with the chain of evidence.

DO NOT DO EITHER OF THE AFOREMENTIONED ACTIONS IN COURT AND ON CAMERA!

Pay attention to the charges brought against the Officers, and you quickly realize that they all stem from tampering with evidence and/or disrupting the honest and truthful chain of evidence. While this tape was damaging and showed the officers brutally beating an innocent man, none of the charges brought against the Officers are related to assaults or batteries. It should go without saying that you should NEVER falsify, hide, or manufacture evidence of any sort. You may think you're doing yourself or your department a favor, but in the long run it doesn't pay off. Moreover, if you're caught hiding, falsifying, or manufacturing evidence of any sort, then defense attorney's can and will call into question every arrest you have ever made (Cut and dry with honest evidence or not.), and more likely than not every perpetrator you've ever arrested will set free. This is especially true for any and all cases where your word and credibility are at the center of a successful conviction.

Therefore, no matter how bad you believe a piece of evidence to look or seem, it is better to submit that evidence faithfully. Then work with the D.A. and your superiors on the best course of action and the best way to secure a lawful conviction on the merits, in light of all the relevant evidence (No matter how bad you may believe certain evidence to look.). Your failure to do so WILL result in not only all your arrests being subject to substantial review and possible reversals, but your immediate and permanent dismissal from the force, a possible inability to work as a law enforcement professional any longer as a career, as well as criminal charges being brought against not only yourself but any other Officers who knowingly fail to prevent your submission or lack there of the submission of all known truthful and relevant evidence. Uphold your oath, collect and submit all relevant and known evidence, and respect and protect the unbroken documented chain of evidence.

Click icon to add picture

Remember that all you do and say is or will be recorded at all times while on duty, and is therefore a part of the relevant evidence admissible in court. That evidence can and will be not only used to free falsely arrested individuals, but used against you n both civil and criminal trials and charges against any officers whom does falsify evidence.

Avoiding Sexual Misconduct by Officers!

Click icon to add picture

This disturbing video should be pretty self explanatory, but do not abuse the power of your badge for

sexual gratification. Do not use excessive pat downs or searches. You may pat down OVER CLOTHING

for weapons only for those not on probation or parole. If the suspect is on probation or parole you may

search more thoroughly, but body cavity searches should be conducted only upon a probable cause

factor of 95% and never in public. Secondly if you must conduct a cavity search, make sure that the

searching officer is of the same sex, and that there is another officer present at all times during the

cavity search. Finally conduct the search quickly and as least violating manner possible. Cavity searches

are not recommended as an investigation tool for arrest, as there is simply too much room for error and

possible civil and criminal charges being brought against the officer. Therefore, body cavity searches

are recommended only subsequent an arrest, for suspects already in custody and under arrest. 

Do not threaten arrest or make arrests, to cover up sexual misconduct by an Officer.

Click icon to add picture

Click icon to add picture

DO NOT break protocols and procedures that are created and mandated by your superiors or your particular law enforcement department for searches and strip searches of in custody prisoners. The set-up, regularly up-dated, and taught protocols are designed to negate the potential risks officers face both in civil and criminal courts. If you are not aware of the protocols and procedures in place and utilized by your particular department, do not hesitate to seek the advice of a superior officer or a fellow officer whom you know to have a significant number of years with the department to explain, teach, and/or demonstrate how the departments protocols and procedures are practiced.

Avoiding Wrongful Arrests

Fire Responder protocols and procedures control any scene where both departments are active and engaged, as they are directly charged with delivering life saving medical treatment to victims, the injured, and even an alleged perpetrator under arrest. Any law enforcement professional that prevents, interferes with, or other wise causes a denial or delay of needed and critical medical treatment can be found liable in civil courts very quickly, and even charged criminally depending on the nature of delays and the severity of medical harm caused by delays or denial of needed medical treatment. Law enforcement should act in a support capacity, ensuring the safety of the medical and fire responder personnel and those they are treating. Law enforcement are not trained nor allowed to make medical diagnoses or opinion about the medical needs of the injured or ill. An arrest, if warranted, is secondary and suspended until such time as medical aid or treatment has been rendered and concluded to such a state that the arrested is in a "stable medical condition."

    Statements taken or the answers to investigative questions asked a suspected perpetrator of a crime before or during first aid is being rendered, are inadmissible in court. Moreover, it is unlawful and a crime to actively deny a suspect first aid, until such time as they answer questions for arresting officers. To deny medical treatment in such a manor will cause any statement or answers to questions inadmissible as being "uttered under duress," and the officer attempting to deny medical treatment liable both in civil and criminal court for possible  "human torture" or "cruel and unusual punishment.“ Therefore, the best practice for law enforcement professionals is to make any needed arrests at the hospital once a suspect is in a "stable condition." If advisable by medical personnel; minor restraints which do not hinder the rendering of medical treatment, are advisable, in order to protect the safety of medical personnel. 

DO NOT make arrests out of anger or ego. DO NOT attempt to enforce "Policies" instead of the law. If you do make unlawful arrests you will be liable in civil court for wrongful arrests, as

was the case with the sheriff in the last teaching video.

All charges against the man in this video were dropped, the Officer fired, and the law enforcement department that employed the officer

made to pay $40,000. DO NOT be over quick to use force, when a more diplomatic and verbal manner to resolve the issue can be utilized.

It is a legal and logical impossibility to have a "resisting arrest," unless and until there is a prior charge or probable cause to make an arrest. You may make an arrest "for interfering with a police

investigation," but you can not make an arrest for resisting arrest by itself or without the prior charge and reason to make a lawful arrest.

It is also a mistake to interfere with the attorney client privilege, and when counsel is present you must speak only to counsel or direct any questions to the attorney. The attorney, when present, does

speak for the client, and the attorney client privilege is one of the most defended privileges or Constitutional rights recognized and regularly upheld by the courts.

Avoiding Constitutional Blunders And Violations Of Civil Rights

Amendment V

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.

You may not imply, state, or legally come to believe that an individual is guilty or hiding anything from you by invoking any of their Constitutionally promised rights. That includes the Fifth Amendment right to remain silent, the Fourth Amendment right not to consent to a search, or any other Constitutional right.

As printed in the Cornell University Law School

https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/fourth_amendment

This is protected educational use material

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.Fourth Amendment

FOURTH AMENDMENT: AN OVERVIEW

I. INTERESTS PROTECTED

The Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution provides, "[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

The ultimate goal of this provision is to protect people’s right to privacy and freedom from arbitrary governmental intrusions. Private intrusions not acting in the color of governmental authority are exempted from the Fourth Amendment.

To have standing to claim protection under the Fourth Amendment, one must first demonstrate an expectation of privacy, which is not merely a subjective expectation in mind but an expectation that society is prepared to recognized as reasonable under the circumstances. For instance, warrantless searches of private premises are mostly prohibited unless there are justifiable exceptions; on the other hand, a warrantless seizure of abandoned property usually does not violate the Fourth Amendment. Moreover, the Fourth Amendment protection does not expand to governmental intrusion and information collection conducted upon open fields. An Expectation of privacy in an open field is not considered reasonable. However, there are some exceptions where state authorities granted protection to open fields.

A bivens action can be filed against federal law enforcement officials for damages resulting from an unlawful search and seizure. States can always establish higher standards for searches and seizures than the Fourth Amendment requires, but states cannot allow conduct that violates the Fourth Amendment.

The protection under the Fourth Amendment can be waived if one voluntarily consents to or does not object to evidence collected during a warrantless search or seizure.

II. SEARCHES AND SEIZURES UNDER FOURTH AMENDMENT

The courts must determine what constitutes a search or seizure under the Fourth Amendment. If the conduct challenged does not fall within the Fourth Amendment, the individual will not enjoy protection under Fourth Amendment.A. Search

A search under Fourth Amendment occurs when a governmental employee or agent of the government violates an individual's reasonable expectation of privacy.Strip searches and visual body cavity searches, including anal or genital inspections, constitute reasonable searches under the Fourth Amendment when supported by probable cause and conducted in a reasonable manner.

A dog-sniff inspection is invalid under the Fourth Amendment if the the inspection violates a reasonable expectation of privacy. Electronic surveillance is also considered a search under the Fourth Amendment.

B. Seizure of a Person

A seizure of a person, within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment, occurs when the police's conduct would communicate to a reasonable person, taking into account the circumstances surrounding the encounter, that the person is not free to ignore the police presence and leave at his will.

Two elements must be present to constitute a seizure of a person. First, there must be a show of authority by the police officer. Presence of handcuffs or weapons, the use of forceful language, and physical contact are each strong indicators of authority. Second, the person being seized must submit to the authority. An individual who ignores the officer’s request and walks away has not been seized for Fourth Amendment purposes.

An arrest warrant is preferred but not required to make a lawful arrest under the Fourth Amendment. A warrantless arrest may be justified where probable cause and urgent need are present prior to the arrest. Probable cause is present when the police officer has a reasonable belief in the guilt of the suspect based on the facts and information prior to the arrest. For instance, a warrantless arrest may be legitimate in situations where a police officer has a probable belief that a suspect has either committed a crime or is a threat to the public security. Also, a police officer might arrest a suspect to prevent the suspect’s escape or to preserve evidence. A warrantless arrest may be invalidated if the police officer fails to demonstrate exigent circumstances.

The ability to make warrantless arrests are commonly limited by statutes subject to the due process guaranty of the U.S. Constitution. A suspect arrested without a warrant is entitled to prompt judicial determination, usually within 48 hours.

There are investigatory stops that fall short of arrests, but nonetheless, they fall within Fourth Amendment protection. For instance, police officers can perform a terry stop or a traffic stop. Usually, these stops provide officers with less dominion and controlling power and impose less of an infringement of personal liberty for individual stopped. Investigatory stops must be temporary questioning for limited purposes and conducted in a manner necessary to fulfill the purpose.An officer’s reasonable suspicion is sufficient to justify brief stops and detentions. To determine if the officer has met the standard to justify the seizure, the court takes into account the totality of the circumstances and examines whether the officer has a particularized and reasonable belief for suspecting the wrongdoing. Probable cause gained during stops or detentions might effectuate a subsequent warrantless arrest. C. Seizure of PropertyA seizure of property, within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment, occurs when there is some meaningful interference with an individual’s possessory interests in the property.In some circumstances, warrantless seizures of objects in plain view do not constitute seizures within the meaning of Fourth Amendment. When executing a search warrant, an officer might be able to seize an item observed in plain view even if it is not specified in the warrant.

III. WARRANT REQUIREMENTA search or seizure is generally unreasonable and illegal without a warrant, subject to only a few exceptions.To obtain a search warrant or arrest warrant, the law enforcement officer must demonstrate probable cause that a search or seizure is justified. An authority, usually a magistrate, will consider the totality of circumstances and determine whether to issue the warrant.

The warrant requirement may be excused in exigent circumstances if an officer has probable cause and obtaining a warrant is impractical. For instance, in State v. Helmbright 990 N.E.2d 154, Ohio court held that a warrantless search of probationer's person or place of residence complies with the Fourth Amendment if the officer who conducts the search possesses “reasonable grounds” to believe that the probationer has failed to comply with the terms of his probation.Other well-established exceptions to the warrant requirement include consensual searches, certain brief investigatory stops, searches incident to a valid arrest, and seizures of items in plain view.There is no general exception to the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement in national security cases. Warrantless searches are generally not permitted in exclusively domestic security cases. In foreign security cases, court opinions might differ on whether to accept the foreign security exception to warrant requirement generally and, if accepted, whether the exception should include both physical searches and electronic surveillance. IV. REASONABLENESS REQUIREMENT

All searches and seizures under Fourth Amendment must be reasonable. No excessive force shall be used. Reasonableness is the ultimate measure of the constitutionality of a search or seizure.

Searches and seizures with a warrant satisfy the reasonableness requirement. Warrantless searches and seizures are presumed to be unreasonable unless they fall within a few exceptions.

In cases of warrantless searches and seizures, the court will try to balance the degree of intrusion on the individual’s right to privacy and the need to promote government interests and special needs. The court will examine the totality of the circumstances to determine if the search or seizure was justified. When analyzing the reasonableness standard, the court uses an objective assessment and considers factors including the degree of intrusion by the search or seizure and the manner in which the search or seizure is conducted.

V. EXCLUSIONARY RULE

Under the exclusionary rule, any evidence obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment will be excluded from criminal proceedings. There are a few exceptions to this rule.

VI. ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE

In recent years, the Fourth Amendment's applicability in electronic searches and seizures has received much attention from the courts. With the advent of the internet and increased popularity of computers, there has been an increasing amount of crime occurring electronically. Consequently, evidence of such crime can often be found on computers, hard drives, or other electronic devices. The Fourth Amendment applies to the search and seizure of electronic devices.Many electronic search cases involve whether law enforcement can search a company-owned computer that an employee uses to conduct business. Although the case law is split, the majority holds that employees do not have a legitimate expectation of privacy with regard to information stored on a company-owned computer. In the 2010 case of City of Ontario v. Quon (08-1332), the Supreme Court extended this lack of an expectation of privacy to text messages sent and received on an employer-owned pager.

Lately, electronic surveillance and wiretapping has also caused a significant amount of Fourth Amendment litigation

Click icon to add picture

Officers MUST HAVE an articulate description of the probable cause, and be able to state or cite the charge or offense. In the prior video the Officer makes the mistake of telling the camera-man he is being detained, but fails to explain the lawful charge and reason for the detainment. The Officer compounds his violations by telling the camera-man he is being detained because he is suspicious. This is a violation twice by this officer. As law enforcement you must be able to cite the nature and name of the law which you are detaining some one on, or allow the to go free.

Click icon to add picture

Without an arrest or search warrant it is illegal for a law enforcement professional to attempt to enter a home, domicile, business, or building without permission. Law enforcement MUST obey the request of the property owner or person in control of the property to leave peacefully.

Examples of Proper Police Conduct

From start to finish this law enforcement professional handled the situation perfectly. He never overstepped his boundaries. He informed the camera-man while he was being spoken to. He then quietly made his presence known. He did not engage the camera-man in debate, he did not get angry, he simply stood there letting the camera-man know he wasn't going any where; until he was. Then his partner came up, and he too acted professional and courteous. It infuriated the camera-man because the police officers are not engaging him, but are simply standing there; "saying a lot without saying it!" The officers were able to cite the city ordinances off the top of his head. These law enforcement professionals set a fine example of how knowledge of the law can help police officers in the field to deal with certain situations.

This law enforcement professional bites his tongue and respectfully leaves the woman's property at her request, as he had no warrant or Constitutional right to be trespassing unwanted upon the land of the woman. Compare this video to the prior video in which the officer attempts to block the door and remains upon the land (being an unwanted unlawful trespasser). Respect the private property of

the general public, and they will learn to respect your.

Click icon to add picture

This law enforcement professional goes above and beyond to protect the First Amendment rights of this young film crew, and in so doing reminds the airport Public Relations agent that he is there o enforce the law and not private party interests or policies of corporations.

Thank you for purchasing and utilizing this on-line training course for law enforcement professionals. It is the hope of the author that by

showing video of real life mistakes and bad decisions of other Officers in the field that this training program will ultimately help you to avoid some of the similar mistakes. We tried to find a good

cross section of possible scenarios, while keeping the program manageable and entertaining as well, as learning only happens in engaged minds. Thank you for you service to the community, and

your continued desire and dedication to become the best law enforcement professionals you can become. Be safe, and have a great

day!

THE END