59 votes

Police Officer Tobler Blows His Top Because Citizen Knows His Rights

Credit Steve Bell. Know your rights when talking to a police officer: http://policecrimes.com/police.html There's no law that requires you to talk to a police officer.

Sidney Nebraska Police officer Tobler badge #612 flips out on a citizen.


http://youtu.be/8g7WYwYi3UM

http://www.cityofsidney.org/index.aspx?nid=84

Joseph Aikens
Interim Chief of Police

1715 Illinois Street
PO Box 275
Sidney, NE 69162

Ph: (308) 254-5515
Fx: (308) 254-2299

For Law Enforcement Services
Inside the City Limits, Call:
Non-Emergency:
(308) 254-5515

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

That is amazing!

I love how he keeps his cool, and states the laws which the police are clearly violating by harassing him.

Now, I have a question to all those legal minded DPers out there. This deals with FOC or Friend of the Court proceedings. If you have the right to remain silent, and the right to have an attorney present even when being charged with the most terrible crimes you could imagine, why and how is it that the FOC is allowed to conduct their "interviews" in a locked back room closet without allowing any legal counsel, any recording devices, or any witnesses? How does a non elected official have more power (I.E. being able to fabricate anything they want in their records knowing that there is no proof that can ever discredit that report) than a federal judge? Even a federal judge has a court stenographer in the room, and has to abide by the law, however these DB's are free to create works of fiction which then get sent to the court which 99% of the time makes judgement based only on those reports.

This has happened to me in the past, and I'd be interested to know how you would fight this using your knowledge of law and civil rights. I've gone so far as to leave an interview when they told me I could not record in the room. This has to be illegal, as it offers no legal discourse and is an end run around civil rights to a fair trial.

What are your thoughts?

In fact, I don't want to step on this post, so I will start another I'll call it "Right to fair Trial?" Please answer there, as to respect this post.

What a psycho

Officer Hof Brau doesn't like it when you disrespect his authori-tah.

When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign: that the dunces are all in confederacy against him. ~J. Swift

wow, thats was crazy

wow, thats was crazy

Police officers are now so

Police officers are now so used to barking orders at people in a patronizing script that they truly do NOT believe they are there to serve and protect the citizens who employ them....NOT to accuse... threaten....assault either verbal or physical, or detain them at their whim. Their uncivil manner is reprehensible...speaking to any one with such intolerant bullying.

it is not the job of police officers to protect and serve the

citizens...
It is their job to impose the will of the legislature upon the citizens.
The legislature employs the cops. Not the citizens.

Learn civics and know your adversary.

...so who is training the

...so who is training the police force?

what do you mean?

The police force has training academies mostly. Is that what you mean?

They all seem to be applying

They all seem to be applying the same script from any of the footage I've seen all across the country. Their mandate and training practices seem to be indoctrinating the domestic police force with alternative police practices which we all find abhorrent. Who is making these decisions?

That is a great insight and question

I had always assumed it was the normal relationship between an individual who wants to be in control and dominate another coming up against an individual who does not want to be controlled or dominated.

One continues to escalate the intensity until control and dominance has been established.

It just so happens that cops are armed with toys and the power to harm with legal immunity.

At least that was my perception.

However-I do know that upper echelons of the police community attend training conferences all over the united states and I suppose it is possible that they are being taught to be this way.

But I find it more likely that it is a human response. I see it with parents and children, husbands and wives, bosses and employees. "Submit now or I will raise my intensity until you do."

Zero Tolerance for anyone who

Zero Tolerance for anyone who questions their actions, authority or power sounds like a policy decision. Also who determines the hiring practices in all these communities?

?

another good question...

Another question to consider that has broad ramifications is
"how did people get the idea that the police work for them?"

Where did they get that idea?
Probably from the same people who created the hiring and training policies.
The police work for the lawmakers and impose the lawmakers will upon the people. they are our adversaries, not our employees. they don't work for us, they govern us. Legally speaking, from a basic civics stand point.

You might want to look up

You might want to look up Bobby Peel...thus "bobby" the introduction of a domestic police force rather than use army originating in Britain. It all started with the premise that a man's home was his castle. A night stick was their weapon and personality to walk among the people. You on the other hand only see them as law enforcers... The motto that used to be visible on our police cars was "To serve and Protect". That has morphed into more sinister looking vehicles with big flashing lights, the right to pull you over at their discretion and call it the "ride' Program (looking for drunks). Now the police vehicles look like a game toy with swishing colours all over their cars...A study of their uniforms is also an interesting research. I'll leave that to you.

I am familiar

And I don't look at them that way...the law looks at them that way.

The police are employed by the legislature to impose the legislature's will upon society. Motto or not. They are your legal adversary...always have been.

They have no duty to protect you, and no duty to serve you. They don't work for you. They govern you.

They have the power to harm you with legal immunity so long as they are obeying the legislature.

This is basic civics. The unfortunate reality of our current state of affairs.

What do cops really do?

They do 1 of 2 things.
1. They come to a scene to investigate a crime that occurred. Pretty much all they do there is document a crime was committed.
2. They create crime scenes. They stop people and accuse the people of a crime.
This is all for revenue, for the police, the court system (notice I did not call it the "justice" system), the lawyers and the prisons. D.A.s, judges etc all benefit from guilty verdicts. The D. A.s all trump up big bogus charges to scare people into pleading out even though they committed no crime. Most people can't afford a top dollar attorney and have a huge fear of bogus felony charges thrown at them and cave to a plea. So very warped in a country where we are supposedly innocent until proven guilty. But the way the system now works you plea out or risk a guilty verdict for a charge dreamed up by cops and D. A.s.
What is the cost to be innocent until proven guilty? Minimally 5 grand. Go to trial add another 10 grand or more and risk a jury that is in the court's pocket.
Good luck with justice in this effed up legal system.

Formerly rprevolutionist

You have failed to address

the fact that many "top dollar" lawyers are in it solely for the money and aren't about to bite the hand that feeds them. They work intimately with the prosecutors and Judges on a daily basis and seem to think it's a game with no consequences. It's become a readily apparent "Quid pro quo" system with the citizens at the mercy of their extortionate scheme. Their fraternity system puts the Mason's to shame.

There are no politicians or bankers in foxholes.

You are right

They all work hand in hand and when you hire an attorney you are just playing into the game. What choice do you have?

Formerly rprevolutionist

I don't like being followed

I don't like being followed around, stalked, or searched. It is an interesting reaction when the officer gets followed. Apparently, they get upset about it too. Its a little hypocritical, that's all.

"truth is treason in an empire of lies."
Worldofpropaganda.wordpress.com

A Cop Is A Powerful

Public servant that should be watched closely by the public.

buddy

You as a private citizen shouldn't be followed.

Some one in the public sector has no guarantee to not be followed and held accountable. Taxpayers are this man's boss and have every right to hold him accountable.
When he starts threatening and name calling, it is time for him to become unemployed!

Formerly rprevolutionist

This is not a good way to go about it.

I thought the officer held his cool pretty well. The kid was being a dick. If you want to go around filming police, fine, but when an officer reasonably questions someone about being followed, either politely establish your rights-informing them that you mean no harm or interference, or explain that you are just collecting footage, give a reason if you so choose.

The officer shouldn't have threatened obstruction, because that doesn't fit, but if you following him around for no reason at all, that is stalking and is against the law. He would have arrested you for stalking if he'd thought about it. The officer's only reaction should have been to politely ask you to stop following him. But it takes two to create a tense situation.

Treat an officer no different than you would treat any stranger, their subconscious will force them to reciprocate. They consciously have to be a dick, you acting scared or overreacting allows them to continue the act. Not buying their act and treating them normal forces them to give up the act (unless their a Hollywood actor). Then you can reason with them just as you would anyone else. If they treat you terribly off the bat, treat them just as you would anyone else that treats you terribly.

"Tu ne cede malis, sed contra audentior ito."

Cop?

Are you or were you a cop? They violate our rights everyday, every cop!

No, I've never been a cop.

My friends and parents will never believe me when I tell them someone thought I was a cop because I was sympathetic to the cop's view.

I mean, if someone was following me like that, and then got mouthy when I asked them about it, I'd probably get upset too. It's not like a ticket was given out, or an arrest made. Then the officer would unquestionably have committed a criminal act. But he didn't. I don't see the big deal with this video. The videographer is a jerk. That is no way to conduct yourself in society, and any person, cop or not, would be expected to have a negative reaction to that type of behavior.

"Tu ne cede malis, sed contra audentior ito."

"The kid was being a dick"???

Did the kid initiate any non-consensual harm?
Did the kid pull over the cop?
Did the kid threaten the cop with non-consensual harm?
Did the kid scream at the top of his lungs and call the cop names?

The kid has no legal obligation to speak to his adversary (beyond identifying himself) and every legal right to travel and record the cops...on top of that the the kid properly invoked the law.

This kid put his life and property on the line to protect what's left of our civil liberties...and you call him a dick? No wonder TPTB kick out butts so easily. We can't even support our own.

Learn civics.

Disagree...

Facts:

1. This kid broke no laws.

2. He was unlawfully detained by the police officer and then, by definition, assaulted by that officer.

Just like the first amendment protects the most abhorrent speech, police officers need to be able to deal with the worst of society in a professional way.

We have the right to be dicks, as a public servant in the line of duty he does not. The officer should have been arrested on the spot and fired.

NOTE: I am not advocating violence in any way. The content of the post is for intellectual, theoretical, and philosophical discussion. FEDS, please don't come to my house.

i agree

if this turkey was following me around I would want to know the deal, too.

I don't really give praise to this, nor do i think this is front page material.

could have done without the phone # urging people to call the chief of police.

Sleeping?

Are you asleep?

you think its acceptable to arrest and threaten violence

because someone is following you around?

Do you think you could to that personally...without repercussions?
I don't think so.

Its okay to go ask, but the boy is not obligated to answer. The cop was frustrated that he could not dominate the boy and then lost his mind.

Try THAT With A Cop in Bloomberg's NYC

...just so we can compare outcomes.

That 2nd Officer...

...shows that there are good people too. That first officer clearly has anger issues though and he basically admitted that he was going to invent a reason to arrest the driver. Plenty of things require an officer's attention that he can say he has to focus on. If a person asks for directions the officer can say "you're obstructing justice because I'm focusing on you rather than on something else".

No

Sorry, there are no good cops.