Home / *** NOT GUILTY ***

*** NOT GUILTY ***

Judge Ed Newman and bailiff Tony Nathan are former well-known Miami Dolphin players who understand that Photography is Not a Crime (Photo by Carlos Miller).

 

The most telling part of my trial yesterday, besides the continuous lies under oath by Miami-Dade Police Major Nancy Perez, was when a frattish looking prosecutor fresh out of law school named Ari Pregen tried to explain to jurors how a “real journalist” was supposed to act.

A real journalist, he explained, was supposed to follow police orders without a second thought. A real journalist would never back talk to police. A real journalist would never question a direct police order as to why he was not allowed to stand on a public sidewalk.

Miami-Dade Assistant State Attorney Ari Pregen (Photo by Bruce Wayne Stanley)

 

That left the door open for one of my attorneys, Santiago Lavandera, to remind jurors that a real journalist was supposed to do the complete opposite.

“In this country, when you’re a journalist, your job is to investigate.

Not to be led by your hand where the police want you to see, so they can hide what they don’t want you to see.

No, when you’re a journalist, a real journalist, it’s your job to go find the truth. As long as you are acting within the law as Mr. Miller was, you have the right to demand and say, ‘no, I’m not moving, I have the right to be here. This is a public sidewalk, I have the right to be here.’

He did his job. He has the right to do his job the way he sees fit. It’s not up to these prosecutors to tell anybody, much less an independent journalist, how to do their job. It’s not up to the police officers, it’s not up to a judge or the president.

In this country, journalists do their job the way they see fit.

What’s he describing is Cuba. What he’s describing is a communist country. The government says you can’t be here because I say you can’t be here.

And it’s infuriating to me that a prosecutor would try to get up here and try to convince you that just because a police officer says something, that he has to bow his head and walk away.

That is a disgrace to the Constitution of this country.”

By that time, both prosecutors had their heads hung low, knowing they had been beat, reminding me of the old Charlie Daniel’s song about the devil going back to Georgia where the devil hung his head after losing a fiddling contest.

But as I had predicted before the trial, the real ace in my hole was my surprise witness, Miami Herald reporter Glenn Garvin, who was also covering the Occupy Miami eviction that night, but wasn’t arrested, even though he had been standing on the same sidewalk as I had been.

Garvin told the jury that there was no doubt I was a journalist and not a protester, the opposite of what prosecutors had been trying to convince the jury all day long.

He also said that when he was saw me getting arrested, he immediately thought he was going to get arrested, so he asked Nancy Perez if it was all-right for him to be standing there and she said, yes, he was under no threat of getting arrested.

That proved that police had not established a clear perimeter, contrary to what they had been arguing, claiming that I had deliberately walked into that perimeter after being told I was not supposed to be there.

Attorney Arnold Trevilla cross-examining Nancy Perez (Photo by Bruce Wayne Stanley).

 

PINAC videographer Bruce Wayne Stanley recorded the entire trial and I will be adding clips to this piece as I convert and edit them, which might take a few days.

The trial lasted about nine hours but it took the jury just over 30 minutes to deliberate, coming back with a not guilty verdict for the single charge of resisting police without violence.

The prosecuting team led by Thomas D. Graham kept harping on the argument that I had refused to leave the area after police gave several dispersal orders.

But they didn’t have much explanation as to why they didn’t arrest the countless other journalists that were also there.

Nancy Perez claimed to Graham that I had called her names but when my attorney, Arnold Trevilla, asked her what kind of names, she backtracked and said it was only me telling her to get the fuck out of my shot, which is not the same as calling her names.

But I wasn’t even directing my comments to her at that moment but at the officers with the shields who were trying to prevent me from recording an activist getting arrested by City of Miami police.

But even though there was video evidence of that incident introduced in the trial, she still tried to say that I said “fuck you” to her, which I never did. And even if I had, it still wouldn’t have been illegal.

At this point, I have no choice but to conclude she is a compulsive liar, which is probably why she heads the department’s media relations department where she has proven to be a master spin doctor to local reporters.

There is so much more I want to write, but I know my readers are getting impatient, so I will be adding to this post throughout the day.

I’ll just finish it off with a statement from my attorney, Arnold Trevilla, who’s been in my corner from my very first arrest when no other attorneys would take my case, except that one loser who dropped me as a client on Christmas Eve Day when I refused to accept a plea deal.

Trevilla is the real deal. He brought in Lavandera to assist with the case, who also proved to be the real deal.

The prosecutor called this a simple case and he was right because you didn’t need a lawyer or a judge to persuade anybody what happened that night.

It was all captured on video from beginning to end and the jury made up their minds on what they saw.

Glenn Garvin’s testimony was incredibly instrumental in getting the jury to understand the amount of confusion and disorder that was taking place that night.

The police perimeter was unclear and undefined and the jury saw that for themselves.

The truth is the truth and it is hard to manipulate it when you capture it on video.

e

About Carlos Miller

Carlos Miller is founder and publisher of Photography is Not a Crime, which began as a one-man blog in 2007 to document his trial after he was arrested for photographing police during a journalistic assignment. He is also the author of The Citizen Journalist's Photography Handbook, which can be purchased through Amazon.
  • steveo

    Thank the Lord, for people like Tony Nathan and Ed Newman. These are two of the greatest Dolphin players that ever graced the field. They know what it’s like to be self-reliant and believers in the 1st Amendment. Maybe alot of followers don’t believe in divine intervention, which I’m in tune with but Carlos ran in to two believers before he even got started, how do we explain that?

  • WVUGuy2004

    Let me be the first to say congratulations!

  • rick

    thank you Carlos!

    • mahalo2011

      You and your brilliant lawyer are American heroes. Congratulations!

  • Avi S. Adelman

    Absolutely frigging amazing presentations by the attorneys!

  • steveo

    What did Arnold say: ” Why did Carlos, get arrested? He got arrested for being an American.” That is probably the best quote I’ve ever heard ever.
    Is there any reason why you think the jury was only out 30 min? Most times it takes 30 min to go to the bathroom and wash hands and get a snack.

    • Tannim

      They probably had to wait on the delivery of the court’s paperwork to fill out on the verdict.

  • Peaceful Streets

    Kick ass!!!! Way to go, Carlos!!!

  • Iroc

    Congrats, i never had any doubt.

  • Peaceful Streets

    It’s been a great day for those who watch the cops. It has been a crappy day for thug cops.

  • MarkKalan

    Happy for you but still sad that this has to go on in the first place.

  • Manuel Ducret 3rd.

    Ans as an American he does have unalienable rights,life,liberty and the pursuit of happiness.The cops need to learn that as public servants the PUBLIC doesn’t have to blindly obey them.They have to respect the public that pays taxes so they get a salary.

    • elvez

      Yes! Thanks for doing what 99.4% of journalist in the rest of the country wont.

      • http://www.facebook.com/adguillen Alexis D. Guillen

        Congratulations Carlos. Keep their feet to the fire!

    • John Redman

      I have done a lot (for me, the happy guy) of thinking about why cops (thugs) act as they do. Conclusion 1: they are public school educated. 2: they have drunk fluoridated water all their lives. 3: they have drunk chlorinated water (and maybe bathed and swum in it) all their lives. 4: their baby cribs were made in China. 5: LOTS of doughnuts. 6: they feel inferior because, despite all the foregoing, they dimly sense their (tax-feeder) subordinate status with regard to the robbed general population. As a FC myself, that’s as far as I can take it.

      • Rob

        And I thought that Nancy Perez was an ugly bitch IN uniform! Woof!

        • steveo

          Tampa Police call it “Don’t be that Guy!” and in this case that lady, so to speak.

          http://www.myfoxtampabay.com/story/19390490/2012/08/27/can-you-take-video-of-the-police

          Boy, Arnold tied her up in knots, she should stick with the school crossing guards. That SA really wanted to get the Pinac stuff in, but Arnold tied him up. If the SA couldn’t demonize Carlos as a cop hater, that was his only case.

          • Jon Quimbly

            Rock on, Carlos! Way to go. Due diligence gets justice, and you went above and beyond.

          • steveo

            Perez must have been close to you when you were telling the leos on the line, to not block your shot. I watched the tape again, but I never saw her. The name calling testimony was BS and hearsay if she wasn’t close enough to Carlos to actually hear the “Stop blocking my fing shot.”

            Also, in this context “fing” would be an adjective describing a noun (shot). The adjective describing the shot would have no connotation to a person or a derogatory remark towards any person. I know why the SA wanted to bring that out because he had to make his case by portraying Carlos as a “cop hater.” Arnold never let him even get started with that.

          • Ross

            Congratulations! This was an important case for the City of Miami to lose!

          • James Smith

            congrats Carlos, now sue the hell out of them,, name Nancy first..

          • HenryGomez

            This chick’s testimony is laughable. “We have a facebook page now and have quite a few likes.” Arnie nailed her.

          • Ex-Cop

            That was some excellent trial lawyer tactics by Trevilla on cross. He got Perez to testify outside the bounds of the question asked on several occasions (expounding beyond a simple yes, no, east, west; I don’t know). Any rookie cop will only make that mistake once before their superior takes corrective action. That a MAJOR with 15+ years experience and especially with media experience is beyond the pale. Thank you, I will take care of my own safety and you can disband the police force.

          • steveo

            Actually 27 years, I think she’s ready for retirement. Maybe Obama can hire her for DHS in a command position.

        • Prezombie

          Now that’s not very nice. Carlos Miller isn’t much of a looker either, but he’s awesome because of what he does, not because of what he looks like, and similarly, Nancy is a horrible human being because she misuses power and compulsively commits perjury on a regular basis purely because she can get away with it even when it’s discovered.

          • Rob

            I’d agree she’s a horrible human being, but she’s also dog ugly. I don’t care if it’s a nice thing to say, or not.

          • Difdi

            With her personality and outlook on the value of oaths, she’s be dog ugly even with supermodel looks. The fact she doesn’t have supermodel looks, or even average looks, just makes it worse.

          • J. kaufman

            @21:16:

            Trevilla: He called you names?
            Perez: (nodding her head to the jury) Yes.
            Trevilla: Tell us what those names were
            Perez: (deer in headlights)

            Damn that be some funny shit.

          • Carlos_Miller

            I agree. Did she really believe we weren’t going to ask her exactly what names I called her?

            In all honesty, I had no interaction with her until I was arrested. She pushed me off the sidewalk at one point, but I just saw her as a uniform.

            And the part about the cops blocking my shot was directed at the cops with the riot shields. And I guess she was there but I don’t remember seeing her.

          • J. kaufman

            I don’t think she was anywhere near you when you made that comment to the officer blocking your shot. I think she saw that on video and just claimed that it was made toward her.

            ***edit***
            okay I just watched the short clip you put together regarding her testimony and this scene from that night….I think I spotted her behind the police line…..so maybe she was there….but I don’t think anyone could interpret that mini-episode to include you calling her names.

          • Happy_Tinfoil_Cat

            That’s my guess, too. If you are on video saying a naughty word at anytime during the day… then that becomes the issue long after the fact. Otherwise, there would be no plausible reason at all since cops simply blow off any DHS alerts.

            I’m sure your arrest had absolutely nothing to do with the DHS alert w/your photo which she claims to have gleefully ignored. uhhuh yep… nothing to do with that. /Sarcasm

          • Ron

            Deer in headlights.

            Looks pointedly at the prosecutor (well ain’t you going to say something),
            glances at jury (damn),
            back at the defence attorney.

            Prosecutor finally objects

          • Ron

            Watch that bit and you will see she does just that

      • George

        I aways thought it was caused by early toilet training….

  • Rob

    Congrats Carlos!

  • http://twitter.com/kylejack Name

    Carlos’ history in the court system: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGXzlRoNtHU

    • steveo

      Miami tradition. Winners like the U, Ed Newman, Tony Nathan and now Carlos Miller.

  • $5860117

    Congratulations!

  • steveo

    Attorney Santiago, Absolutely Fantastic. I would have been crying before going into the jury room. No wonder it was only 30 min.

    • nrgins

      AWE. SOME!! That’s fantastic, Carlos! Congratulations!

  • http://www.livecollarfree.com/ James Schipper

    I can’t even imagine what the prosecutor’s close was, “Ummm…I really got nothing. We didn’t think he’d take it all the way to trial.”

  • MSMediacritic

    Congratulations. Now it’s time to switch from defense to offense.

  • Robin

    So very pleased for you dude! All the best from London UK.

  • Tijuana Joe

    Way to go! Today Freedom triumphed over Tyranny.
    Shame on those in the gov’t who wasted all that time and money over this twaddle, when real crimes are going on.
    And by the way, Nancy, if Carlos didn’t say it , I will:
    Fuck you.

    • tnayew

      Joe, let me second that motion: Hey Nancy, FUCK YOU!

  • Happy_Tinfoil_Cat

    I had to drive home for lunch because your website is blocked for ‘porn’ at my work. Few people have the spine to stand up to false arrests, having their exonerating evidence tampered with, and having cops perjure themselves repeatedly. Thank God for people like you and your lawyer! We need more citizens like you.

  • Hamlet

    Congrats for the positive outcome here and with your lawsuit against them. Slam dunk for sure.

    • Gordon Freeman

      SUXS that this had to go to trail. What a completely useless use of your time, your attorney’s time, the courts time, the judges time.
      But at least the dumb cops were off the street for a few hours (although paid) and the Proc’s weren’t ginning up charges on other people.
      I hope this gets a lot of media coverage.

  • Рон Джамин

    Those closing arguments are firing me up ! !! !

    • steveo

      For Everyone: Carlos was charged with 843.02 of the Florida Statutes which says that a human being is guilty of obstructing or resisting a Leo without violence if the State can prove beyond a reasonable doubt 1) that the victim is a Leo acting under the color of State Law 2) that the Leo is lawfully executing a legal duty at the time of the arrest and 3) that the human being charged is obstructing or resisting the lawful execution of the legal duty of the Leo.

      The State has to prove all elements of the above law in order to prove the human being guilty of 843.02. Obviously, that was a pretty hard road to hoe in this case.

      I’m not sure what Arnold’s strategy was, but I might have been tempted to opt for Judge Newman’s verdict rather than the jury, but the situation is always more tense,exciting, and unpredictable when you pick a jury.

      This jury, (which we are going to have to get more info from Carlos) was obviously not a “Leos always tell the truth” jury which is usually, especially in S. Florida, the norm. But in this case not the norm.

      • IceTrey

        Well they had plenty of video evidence so they didn’t really have to take the word of the cops.

        • steveo

          This is another issue that blows my mind. Even when the video, audio, and mapping, gps, public records, radio communications recordings confirm that the leo is lying, they still lie. They’ll lie through the depositions, they’ll lie through the trial as though they actually believe that “Listen, I’m a LEO, do you believe me or your lying eyes and ears.

  • Grant Stern

    You earned it!

    • Michael Corbin

      Congratulations, Carlos; well fought.

  • discarted

    Carlos,

    What about the deletion of the evidence? What was found out? Who testified for them regarding that issue?

    • Rail Car Fan

      I thought and was asking myself the same question.

      Rail Car Fan

      • MAFIAAFire

        Where can we see the full trial? This stuff is fantastic! Congrats!

    • http://www.facebook.com/matthew.butch Matthew Butch

      That’s a great point- but remember this was only a trial on whether Carlos was guilty of breaking the law.

      The destruction of evidence will be a separate, civil case.

    • Ron

      It would have been pointless to ask, she would have just said she knew nothing about that, and the persecution would have objected anyway

  • Virtualfrog

    Carlos has done it again. I am 65 years old and have traveled the world. I have followed PINAC from the beginning. Having just about seen it all I no longer have much hero worship in me. But I will shout from a mountain top that the respect I have for this man is as close to hero worship one can
    get. He is a humble man that does his job well and does not let anyone keep him from the truth. No one can ask any more than that of anyone. The civil suit will be interesting as they try to settle as cheap as they can. I look forward to the rest of the story. FANTASTIC CARLOS!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • steveo

    I could probably spin this from the SAO’s point of view. Let’s see…. It was 10 pm at night! This jury had listened to testimony on a low level, idiotic misdemeanor case for 9 hours. What the heck do you think they’re going to do, ask the judge to take a recess until tomorrow? No they’re going into the jury and getting out of there asap without examining our argument which was superior to the defendant’s argument. Heck the jury didn’t care about the law, they just wanted to go home.

    Second, the jury was mostly made up of Hispanic people who may or may not be citizens, kind of like the defendant. If you have a jury of brown, deciding the fate of a brown, what do you think the verdict is going to be? After Attorney Santiago made a blatantly racist argument without substance that appealed to the racial characteristics of the jury, the law took a back seat.”

    Hey, Mr. Prosecutor, you want me to continue?

    • steveo

      Thank God for criminal defense attorneys. The most thankless job on the planet, but the most satisfying, I think.

      • rubem

        Dude u Rock

        • Luc

          Carlos, you’re the man… Congrats on your win.

          • Jeff

            What totally and utterly sucks is in a way they still won. You had to go through all of this work, had to pay all of this money. You had to worry what could happen if found guilty. For them, it’s just another day at the office. I’ll bet they didn’t give it much of a though prior to or after the trial. They just somehow get to go right back out today and do the exact same thing again in the exact same way. You can’t get back being arrested, you can’t get back sitting in jail, having to bond out. You can’t get back any of it. To be certain you did the right thing all the way around in fighting it. What totally sucks is they did not lose nearly as large as you could have lost and they have no repercussions – YET. I so hope you are able to suit them – although, once again, it won’t be their money you are paid with it will be the people’s money and even a few pennies of your own tax dollars coming back to you. This is just all so blasted wrong. Just so wrong. Thank God you won though and are willing to do it all when most people would not.

          • HawaiiCorruption

            So in a nutshell, Carlos commits no crime, however is arrested and charged. Then incurs legal fees and the stress of jail hanging over his head.

            LEO (and I use that term loosely) Perez commits the crimes of false reporting, unlawful detainment, false imprisonment, malicious prosecution, destruction of evidence, and numerous counts of perjury. Charges filed = 0.

            In act 2, we know the city will try to drag the civil suit out for years “defending” the actions of Perez..

            Just gotta love “The Land of The Free”.

          • Michael Stahlschmidt

            Fantastic. People need to stand up for their rights or they will be continually infringed upon. Thank you for standing up for your rights and those of others. I am sorry you had to go through this.

          • John Smith

            I notice Nancy wasn’t exactly dressed to impress. Also, I didn’t realize how homely she is. Christ, that woman is hard to look at.

          • Steve

            Congrats Carlos. I’m curious to see the your attorney’s cross examinations of the prosecution witnesses. I hope that you post them unedited, or with as little editing as possible.

          • Carlos_Miller

            It will all be posted. It just may take a few days because it requires converting and compressing and uploading and all that takes a while with large files.

          • Me

            Hey Carlos, from a photo-porn standpoint, some of us would be interested in what you used to record (HW), the format, what you’re using to convert, etc.

          • Carlos_Miller

            I record in AVCHD with a Canon XA 10, so I have to convert it in Final Cut in Mov files.

          • Rob

            My granddad would have said that she was uglier than a mud fence, or that she was so ugly she could stop an 8 day clock. :D

          • Bawk Bawkbagawk

            she has a face like a smack in the nuts.

          • tnayew

            Hawaii, you are so right. “Some people” can not control their position of power. I’m 65 years old and back in 1964 when I was a minor I was sexually molested by a cop. I’m not a criminal and never have been but ever sense that episode I have “hated” those types of police officers and will expose them when ever I can. Way to go Carlos, Santiago, Arnold, & Glenn and all the others that helped bring these people into the light!

      • ccbarrpics

        Congratulations Carlos from a long time follower of PINAC.

  • Steve

    Carlos,

    Have you filed a complaint against Perez w/ MDP? If only to help document her actions inside her personnel file to help the next guy she goes after.

  • Pak

    Does this mean we finally get to stop seeing that damn picture of Perez every third blog post? ;)

    • Carlos_Miller

      Now I have a new photo

  • steveo

    Watch #22 take it to the house at the Orange Bowl. At about :56 sec you’ll see Ed Newman #64 breaking from the huddle. A special bond between an O lineman and his running back.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EH-dSc0K8sw

    • Ron Grounds

      Congrats Carlos ,lawful citizens win again.

      • joh

        Good for you sticking up for yourself. What a bunch of hired goons. Check out this vid–I learned a lot about dealing with antagonistic cops from this! http://youtu.be/2TP63QEpzV0

        • Dutch

          I would suggest that what Carlos is doing with PINAC is far bigger than just sticking up for himself. He is the Rosa Parks of the 21st century and those rights he’s fighting for will benefit citizens far into the future.

          • Fascist Nation

            Wow, this saves on getting a magazine subscription delivered to you in jail.

          • steveo

            Veteran’s Day: what is that for? something about dying and fighting for freedom?

    • Carlos_Miller

      I remember watching that play as it happened at my friend’s house.

  • Joel Chandler

    Carlos, if you have not already done so, would you mind sharing with your readers the total economic cost to you in mounting your defense? I think it’s important to remember that defending your liberties (and ours) isn’t free. Keep up the good work.

  • http://www.facebook.com/matthew.butch Matthew Butch

    This is great news, GREAT news. So glad you didn’t just just win, you had a jury declare you won!

    I was pumping my fists in the air at your victory!

  • steveo

    A Prosecuting team? for the State? This is a misdemeanor!!Usually these are done in groups with the standard sentence of 6 mos. probation and 50 hr community service. Plus misdemeanors are heard in county court, not even Circuit court. Not a whole lot different from a traffic ticket and usually the judge won’t even give you a jury or allow you to take depositions.

    • Difdi

      If you demand a jury trial, the judge HAS to give it to you, or you cannot be convicted of a crime in that court. Basic constitutional law.

      Of course, if nobody ever broke an oath or violated the law, we probably wouldn’t have courts or police. We certainly would not have criminal appeals courts.

      • steveo

        Crimes carrying a possible penalty of more than six months in jail are
        serious crimes and require a jury trial if the defendant so desires;
        crimes carrying a penalty of six months or less in jail are considered
        petty crimes and a defendant is not entitled to a jury trial in such
        cases in FL. Also, if the prosecution and the judge agree that even in the case of conviction that no jail time will be sentenced, the defendant does not have the right to a public defender or a jury.

        • http://twitter.com/ActLocaleeFTL Act Locally

          @FreeTalkLive show topics: Photography is not a Crime’s Carlos Miller Wins Trial,GovtDefinesRealJournalist ow.ly/fbeRO @FederalJack

          • Virtualfrog

            It seems that this woman should give dancing lessons. She has more side steps than the tallest building in Miami! She would do very well on Dancing with the Stars.

        • Difdi

          The U.S. constitution does not make that distinction, and the 14th amendment extends that to the states. If you are to be deprived of your liberty, property or good name by a court, and have the conviction on your record, then you are not merely entitled to a jury trial, but any judge who refuses you one has committed a federal crime (18USC241, 18USC242).

          The Florida statute that denies the right to a trial by one’s peers is unconstitutional. It’s as simple as that.

          • steveo

            See Lewis Vs. US http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/95-6465.ZO.html, opinion rendered by Justice O’Connor: “We conclude that no jury trial right exists where a defendant
            is prosecuted for multiple petty offenses.” A shock to me too.

            What really sux in Fl, if you are on trial for say molesting a child under 12 yrs old that is a mandatory life sentence and you have to serve 25 yrs. You only get 6 jurors (you only get 12 in a death penalty case) and the defense attorney is not allowed to inform the jury of the mandatory sentence. If he does, it’s a mistrial.

            What makes anyone think here that we really follow the Constitution? There’s no 4th Amendment anymore. State vs. Miller is proof of that.

          • Jan R.

            See Duncan v. Louisiana, 391 U.S. 145 (1968)

            http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0391_0145_ZS.html

            “It is doubtless true that there is a category of petty crimes or offenses which is not subject to the Sixth Amendment jury trial provision [n31] and should not be subject to the Fourteenth Amendment jury trial requirement here applied to the States.

            In determining whether the length of the authorized prison term or the seriousness of other punishment is enough, in itself, to require a jury trial, we are counseled by District of Columbia v. Clawans, supra, to refer to objective criteria, chiefly the existing laws and practices in the Nation. In the federal system, petty offenses are defined as those punishable by no more than six months in prison and a $500 fine.”

  • rick

    What is MDPD’s best course of action now?

    Wishful thinking–admit wrong doing in deletion of video, administrative punishment for those involved up to termination, and financial penalty.

    Truly, those involved should be charged with a felony for destruction of evidence. But who has that power and is willing to pursue a “one time incidence?” The communities trust in police to protect our civil rights is of paramount importance!

    I’m curious what outcome Carlos would find satisfactory.

    • Dave

      What makes you think this was a “one-time” incident?

      • rick

        I don’t. My point is that the FBI won’t swoop in and do anything unless a pattern of violations occur and evidence exists to make it worth their while. Instead of felonious actions being white washed by inhouse investigations, the powers that be (FBI, etc.) need to bring the hammer down on every incident.

        • Carlos_Miller

          Just added two more videos, Nancy Perez’s direct examination by the prosecutor and Nancy Perez’s cross examination by my attorney.

          More are on their way.

          • steveo

            Haven’t seen the whole thing yet, but so far it looks like you could get some traction on false arrest, violation of 1st Amendment rights, and for sure malicious prosecution. I think a jury in a federal civil rights case would agree that this is malicious on the part of the SAO. Plus in a civil rights case, the burden of proof is preponderance of evidence which I think you can easily reach.

  • Curtis Nixon

    Fuckin A! Pigs who think they are above the law need to get shut the fuck down! Awesome fucking work!

  • Tom Legrady

    I’d like to see police and other officials sentenced to wearing a vest—like the safety vests construction workers use—with the LETTERS “CONVICTED LIAR” showing front and back, for a year or two, whenever on duty or appearing in an official capacity, including in court.

    Police and officials are believed when their report disagrees with the defendant, because they are supposed to adher to higher standards. Showing in public that they are known to decieve would put their testimony in a different light.

    • Tom legrady

      oops, left out some essential words; I’m referring, of course, to police and officials who have testified falsely.

  • samala5793

    CONGRATULATIONS!!! Thank you so much for all you do.

  • steveo

    obviously you didn’t need it, but looking at the scene from Google Earth makes a huge impression. The operator can go 360 degree, go left, right, north south, Perez kept saying she didn’t know or was confused, but with the video and the mapping program, she wouldn’t have been able to deny her way out of it. The jury could actually see where you were and where she was at the time of the arrest and how far away from the Govt Center you were. Arnold tried to nail her down as to why do you as a leo believe that you can restrict the movement of an American Citizen walking back to his car on a public sidewalk, 3 or 4 blocks away from the park. But I couldn’t really tell from the video exactly how far away you were. The location was about .1/4 miles away (about 4 football fields) from the center of the park. Perez is maintaining that you wouldn’t leave the park, but obviously that wasn’t true. Where did she want you to go, Nassau?

    In order to use Google earth, though, you need an I-3 or above Intel and it would have helped if the court had a 60 in but you have to go with what you have.

  • RickHorowitz

    Congratulations! Good to see the right result comes out of our legal system sometimes. :)

  • IO_IO

    I have a few comments here. I was surprised that Perez was not more professional in both her attire and attitude. For a person in her position – commanding a division of over 100 employees, and also instructing classes on the topic. That coupled with being the department’s primary public information officer, spokesperson and thus their main expert in media affairs, I would have though that she would have had much more of a command and professional presence, rather than being somewhat dowry and uninspiring.

    This was the department’s best opportunity to kill off the obvious and announced lawsuit from
    Carlos. So, essentially Carlos was arrested for doing nothing (other than exercising his Constitutional Rights) – walking along a public sidewalk. Assault & Battery? False arrest? Malicious prosecution? How about kidnapping off a public street – against his will. False Imprisonment? Destruction of property – but how did they know to delete the video, illegal search? Warrant to view the video? You can start piling up these items like cord-wood here. I would really like to hear the State’s Attorney General defend both the prosecution and the arrest as being anything near lawful, and why the AG is not taking steps to stop actions like these.

    So, why is the prosecution allowed to continue to practice law? Would not the State Bar Association be interested in these actions? The prosecution is suppose to be an officer of the court? You start to address their ability to practice law from being a lawyer (affect their livelihood) – a lot of this will instantly stop. Why does not the AG also address the police problem.

    I’ll stop here…..

  • http://www.facebook.com/eloy.saenz.10 Eloy Saenz

    awesome.

  • Steven

    For a police officer, especially a Public Information Officer, she’s terrible at testifying. Her body language, demeanor, and hostile attitude are terrible. If your civil suit ever goes to trial, that will be helpful to you.

    • Fascist Nation

      I see ARS Technicapicked up this story:

      http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2012/11/jury-says-journalist-arrested-while-videotaping-police-is-not-guilty/

      I wonder why Perez did not appear in uniform? Think they feel a uniform makes her look less sympathetic to a jury?

    • Fred S.

      I agree. One of the first things they taught us at LAPD Academy was that when you answer a question, you answer it to, and look at, the jury. You’re answering it for them. She did this when the Prosecutor was examining her. But during cross, she ignored the jury and answered everything to the defense attorney. I know this sounds like a nit, but it shows a serious lapse in demeanor. For such an experienced officer, this is a major fail.

      • yatopepeg

        Carlos, I’d like to urge you and your excellent commenters to go easy on Nancy Perez. Yes, she inappropriately had you arrested, most likely from animus, and yes, she was snide and insulting while she did so, and yes, there is reason to believe that she was less than truthful, and that she personally and impermissibly hindered your defense.

        But that doesn’t make her ugly. It doesn’t even make her a bad person. If we direct personal animus toward her, we fall into the same trap she fell into. Further, even those who seem to be our worst enemies can someday become allies.

  • bobholderman

    Carlos, Could you comment a bit More about them deleting the footage and how, if at all, it was addressed in your case?

  • IceTrey

    Carlos, is it possible for you to find out how much your arrest and trial cost? I’d love to see the prosecutor get skewered for wasting money on such a frivolous case.

  • Boomer

    What really jumped out at me in the video’s was how awful Major Perez is in her testimony. One of the first things taught to police officers is how to testify in a court proceding and it’s clear to me she must not have been in attendance in those classes, or had never had to testify before. I’m not sure which one is worse.

    The rule in the courtroom, as it is with a police investigation, is to get the witness/suspect to keep talking until they say something that undermines their testimony. And experienced officers know this, and know how and when to answer a question, and shut up. The concept is exactly the same as it is in Las Vegas, where the idea is to keep you playing long enough for the inevitable math to catch up with you.

    Bravo to you, Carlos for your victory. And to your attorney for slamming the door on Major Perez claim that you had called her names. It’s a perfect example of someone like her never being able to shut up, and she eventually said something that couldn’t be supported under cross examination.

    Your victory is a victory for us all.

  • zapeee

    as i read this i think about all of the people that get abused by the police this way. even when the police are wrong, innocent people dont know it, or cant afford to fight, and take the plea.
    I have come to expect this kind of behavior from police (FUCK YOU NANCY, think before you BLINDLY FOLLOW ORDERS like a NAZI STOOGE), but for the DA, Ari Pregen, to drop trou and piss on our rights this way is intolerable.
    hey ari, why dont you convict some 90 year old lady for using pot for medicine, seems right up your alley!

    • leslie moore

      Congratulations! Congratulations!! CONGRATULATIONS!!!

      And thank you.

      I sooooo much needed to see a sucess in this case and the delivery of that success was spectacular – far beyond my wildest dreams (which dreams ‘they’ have labeled ‘delusions’ and you proved their label wrong, so your victory is a personal victory for me too).

      Leslie Moore, Chico, California

  • leslie moore

    I want to thank every one of those 12 jurors.

  • Fred Mertz

    When are these police officers going to be arrested for kidnapping – false detainment, selective prosecution, official oppression, etc?

    • watching from overseas

      Congratulations, Carlos.

  • cansado

    zzzzzzzzz..is it over yet? what will you do for fame now?

  • Glenn Festog

    Well its always good to see a “win” for the little guy. As to LEO’s in general I can assure you that, when those blue & reds go off in my rearview mirror or the “boys in blue” approach me on foot, I suffer no more anxiety than I do when approached by Crips, Bloods, or any other armed criminal gang member.

  • Bawk Bawkbagawk

    when she asked to see the deposition, i half expected her to reach in her purse for some White Out.

  • sfmc98

    Just wanted to add my congratulations and can’t wait to see more of the trial (hopefully the whole thing). How foolish of that prosecutor to go forward with the case. Hmm, wonder how much collusion and/or influence there was from the police department in this case?

    Also, I find it somewhat dismaying that the whole case seemed to hinge on whether or not you were a “real” photojournalist or a demonstrator. It doesn’t seem to make much difference to me. Either a person has a lawful right to be there or they don’t. Whether or not the police deem you a real photojournalist shouldn’t have a bearing on that.

    Now on with the 42 U.S.C. 1943 suit!

  • steveo

    2007

    1 Disorderly conduct Misdemeanor Aquitted by Court
    2 Resist Off W/O Viol Misdemeanor Nolle Pros

    3 Ostrt/Disguise Pers Misdemeanor Nolle Pros

    4 Probaton Violation Misdemeanor Abandoned

    2010

    1 Resist Off W/O Viol Misdemeanor Nolle Pros

    2 Disorderly Intox Misdemeanor Nolle Pros

    2012

    1 Rest Off W/o Viol Misdemeanor Acquitted by jury

    Here’s Carlos’ sheet from the clerk’s office: Looks like 7-0 to me. Think they’d learn by now. Doesn’t help the SAO office’s conviction rate any.

  • Bob Bishopric

    Excellent, Carlos. I really admire your point of view and determination. Also, I can’t stand 98% of what Garvin says, but I have to give him props for standing up for you.

  • Michael Barfield

    Awesome!

  • Rusty Shackleford

    Nancy Perez looks like a bridge troll…kinda like Gollum. Hopefully you can recoup your legal expenses in a lawsuit.

  • http://ladythatsmyskull.tumblr.com/ Sleestak

    Very disappointed in more than a few of the comments concerning Perez attractiveness. What does Perez’ looks have to do with anything? It’s her professional conduct not how appealing she is at issue. Very unprofessional and the level of discourse for an issue as important as this needs to be higher than ‘woof’ remarks.

  • Jon Quimbly

    I second that- what a ridiculous charge to prosecute, especially against an obviously well-prepared defendant, one who publicly shares (some of) his trial preps.

    They had to cover their asses, I suppose, but resisting arrest? Without an underlying charge to be arrested for? What a bunch of dolts.

  • steveo

    actually, the SAO case was to demonize Carlos as an out of control cop hater. I’m sure they had stacks of comments from this blog ready to introduce if Carlos testified and Arnold didn’t object to any of the speculation and hearsay comments that Judge Newman didn’t allow. Arnold said it one time “inferential hearsay” which is also known as “bolstering”.

    Since Arnold wasn’t going to allow any of that evidence to be introduced, the only place that the SA could go was with the “real journalist” vs. the “hack, street protester/agitator who says he’s a journalist” which doesn’t play because everyone has the same rights if they are lawfully present. Something that Arnold nailed down with Perez’s testimony. Hindsight is always better than foresight, but I might have tried to pin her down on whether she thought Carlos was lawfully present on the sidewalk and whether the other bystanders were lawfully present or whether she even knew the legal concept of lawfully present.

    You know they coached her on this strategy because at 7:57 she said he was antagonistic towards the leos, at 5:06 she used the word “aggressive” and then said that Carlos was calling her names at 5:30. All of this was either pure BS or manufactured hyperbole.

  • steveo

    In Florida, this is the charge for contempt of cop. usually defendants plead guilty and get a withheld adjudication, 6 mos probation and 50 hrs community service. Carlos being a take no prisoners photojournalist gets charged with this every 18 mos or so because leos don’t feel like communicating with him. Nancy Perez could have stopped him, introduced herself, and even if she really didn’t know who he was anyone with half a brain can see he has more than 1K dollars worth of photo equipment on his neck. He would have told her that he was going back to his car, she could have said Where is the car? and she could have had one of the officers go with him, heck there were about 2K of them not doing anything. But no, she has to pull a power trip, cost the department and the county 1000’s of dollars and be sure she turned in her overtime slip for the trial.

    Joel and Robert here is an opportunity to get the overtime requests from her weekly sheets to see how much she was getting paid.

  • http://www.noneedforastinkingwebsite.com/ dow daytrader

    Freedom and our Constitutional Rights prevail over Tyranny…

  • Jmz

    you are a real Citizen and a great reporter!

  • Sierra Angel

    A victory for liberty, good job for standing up and not taking a plea bargain!

  • Frankly Bored

    A “real” prosecutor would be ashamed…

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_VHVLLX6JUHHKTZ7WLSTOMKZ6FA catmandu

    Congrats. Hee-hee. A real cop wouldn’t show up in court dressed like that.

  • SgtMustache

    WOO-HOO! Any possibility of a counter suit, legals costs, wrongful prosecution?
    Glad you’re here, speaking up, being witness to the world.
    Thanks.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1072806637 Darrell G. Ragland

    Who goes to court dressed in a sleeveless sun dress….only if you have a face as ugly as a bulldogs ass or you are Police Major Nancy Perez…OR….both! Nancy retire and return to your burrow with the rest of your groundhog friends.

  • catherine todd

    Excellent! We need more people like Carlos Miller and the ones who are unafraid and willing to stand up for our legal Constitutional rights which are quickly being IGNORED by police and anyone deemed to be an “authority” (read BULLY) in our country. I really am afraid for the way things are going. When are people going to wake up and realize WE ARE THE TERRORISTS! And finally, the chickens have come home to roost. Good going, Carlos, and your excellent attorney! Kudos to you both!

PINAC

PINAC Logo cutout copy
Be the Media