Home / San Diego Police Attack and Arrest Man Video Recording Them, Claiming Phone Could be a Weapon (Updated)

San Diego Police Attack and Arrest Man Video Recording Them, Claiming Phone Could be a Weapon (Updated)

 

San Diego police slapped a cell phone camera out of a man’s hands Saturday, claiming it could be a weapon, before pouncing on him and handcuffing him, lacerating his chin in the process.

Adam Pringle ended up jailed overnight on charges of obstruction because he refused to hand the phone over when the cop ordered him to do so.

But it’s already been established by numerous court cases as well as the U.S. Department of Justice that police do not have the right to take your camera unless it is being used in a commission of a crime.

In this case, Pringle’s only crime was smoking a cigarette on a Mission Beach boardwalk, a violation for which he was already getting cited.

“It is against the law to smoke cigarettes on the boardwalk, so I admit I was breaking the law,” Pringle said in a telephone interview with Photography is Not a Crime Tuesday.

The incident took place at 7 p.m. Saturday evening as Pringle and two buddies were walking on the boardwalk and came across two cops on bicycles who stopped them and started writing Pringle a citation.

Pringle pulled out his Samsung Galaxy smartphone and began recording, which as you can see below, can easily be confused for a weapon – if you find yourself starring in a futuristic science fiction drama.

It all seemed pretty civil until the cop writing the citation told him to stop recording, which Pringle refused to do.

“Phones can be converted into weapons …. look it up online,” the cop told him.

Last month, a South Florida cop confiscated a man’s phone citing the same reason, so maybe this is a new trend.

When Pringle tried to talk sense into the cop, the cop slapped the phone out of his hand where it fell onto the boardwalk and broke apart.

The other cop then pounced on him, slamming him down on the boardwalk where he ended up with a laceration on his chin.

“Blood was everywhere,” Pringle said. “I was laying on my stomach and he had one knee on my back and the other knee on the side of my face.

“They kept telling me ‘to calm down,’ that ‘you’re making this worse for yourself,’ that ‘you have no right to record us.’”

They hauled him up and marched him to the patrol car, telling his two friends that they would be arrested if they chose to follow.

His friends picked up his phone, which was damaged but not to the point where it was unsable, which is why the video survived.

Once out of sight, the officer who tackled him elbowed him to the face.

Because he had several wounds on his body, including his knees, hands and face, an ambulance was called.

An internal affairs officer, Lt. Misty Cedrun, was also called, who spoke to him in the back of the ambulance, but who didn’t seem to think the officers did anything wrong because she allowed the two officers to transport him to jail, even though he told her he fear them.

Unfortunately, Pringle was not provided with their names and it’s difficult to make out the cop’s nametag in the video.

He wasn’t released from jail until 4 a.m. His first hearing will be on May 23 where he hopes to have obtained an attorney. He said he has reached out to the ACLU but hasn’t heard back.

However, this incident is still very fresh and this is a case that is ripe for them.

Pringle said he is an Eagle Scout who is actively involved in his community. He doesn’t mean to be a troublemaker but he is just not afraid to stand up for his rights.

And that obviously makes him a criminal in the eyes of the law.

But because the video survived the assault, we are able to see whom the real criminals are in this matter.

UPDATE: Pringle’s friend continued video recording after he was led away and the cop, whose name is M. Reinhold, didn’t have a problem with that.

In the video below, Reinhold tells his friend that they are trained by the police department to suspect that cell phones can be converted into guns.

He also said that “officer safety” trumps the Constitution, meaning they can claim they are fear for their lives while they throw you in jail for any lame excuse.

Such bullshit but that’s the arrogance of these police officers.

Send San Diego Mayor Bob Filner an email by clicking here to let him know how much respect his officers have for the Constitution.

 

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.
  • Scott Parker

    So if the phone could be used as a weapon, why didn’t the cops pick it up? If they feared it so much, they should have confiscated it.

    • Difdi

      Some guns will discharge if dropped on a hard surface. If the officer truly feared it was a disguised gun, then he would not have thrown it to the ground.

      • Bob

        Good thing that Samsung didn’t have a hair trigger!

      • Craig Allen

        Name a modern firearm that will discharge if dropped? On any surface.

        • Rick Robinson

          Any ginned up conversion POS could discharge. Half assed designs wont include any kind of safety as modern firearms have.

        • Difdi

          No modern, professionally manufactured, well-maintained firearm has that flaw, but some older guns can have it whether by poor design or, as can happen with even the most modern firearm, internal wear or damage.

          But a cellphone gun isn’t necessarily more than a zip gun, which often CAN go off if dropped on a hard surface.

        • Chris Bandrosky

          Remington 700 youtube it buddy

        • Jessica Williams

          A man recently shot himself in the a$$ at a movie theater when is Bersa .380 felt out of his waist band and hit the floor. He was actually charged with being irresponsible with his concealed weapon…even after getting shot in the butt.

        • V.

          Name a modern firearm that fits inside a smartphone.

    • http://www.facebook.com/adam.pringle.3 Adam Pringle

      yet they never did, my friends picked it up

      • Mike Bacon

        Did you find an attorney, Adam? Good luck with you case. My dad was a cop may years ago, but he did not consider himself above the law.

      • GERGreg427

        You, my not so friend, are an idiot! Respect the police, and they will respect you. Shit on them, and you will be put in the shitter.

        • Chris Bandrosky

          We don’t owe the Police anything! They choose the job, it wasn’t forced on them. The Police are hired by the people for the people. The police are the ones that need to show respect ! We the people are the boss. I could understand if the guy was trying to assault the officer, but he wasn’t. We the people do have the right to film them. Except in in Illinois and any smart person out there can probably figure out why! Put “protect and serve ” back on your patrol cars know your place this isn’t Iraq.

          • TitletownX5

            Well Said.

          • LeeCMH

            I took a friend on a trip to Washington DC a couple years ago. If taking photos is “shit[ing] on them” then shitted on the capitol, Lincoln Memorial, Tomb of the Unknowns and several Smithsonian museums.

          • jamber

            on time !!!

        • http://twitter.com/JackVoss1 Jack Voss

          I respect the police, not officers like this, who fail to uphold the laws they swore to follow. Police officers are not above the law.

        • gordon_wagner

          Fuck off, Greg. You’re clueless.

        • YouAreStupiddd

          You’re an idiot if you think that’s how things should be.

        • greenthumb07

          By respect, do you mean obey their every word? I think you misunderstand the authority granted to police by the people.

          • Flashing Scotsman

            I don’t believe for a minute that police departments are training officers that phones can be converted into weapons. I DO believe that departments are training officers to use that as an excuse to stop people from taping.

          • scooby2.5

            If he thought it was a weapon and he was fearful, why didnt he take the phone at the beginning instead of standing in front of so called weapon, pointed at him while he finished writing a citation.
            If the gentleman were pointing a gun at him would he stand there and continue writing a citation?

            What a stupid argument from a power tripping Cop

          • Chop Stick

            Was that an assault phone?

        • https://www.facebook.com/realgjohnson5 Tony Johnson

          This guy is not a police officer. He is a criminal and should be charged like one

        • Tyson Stone

          There have been cases where cops have raped under claims of upholding state laws. For example there was a case (not sure of the state) where someone was pulled over for a speeding ticket. She complied with the officer all the way to getting into his car and driving to holding. There she was stripped, beaten and sodomized by several male cops ‘enforcing the law’, making sure she didn’t have weapons stuffed in her body. All of this for a speeding ticket with a clean record. She respected police orders right up until the point they were sticking their hands and objects into her body. She even politely requested a female officer to do the search when they began stripping her and they laughed in her face. They showed absolutely no respect for her. Police are there to uphold the law and protect citizens, not to be dicks who believe they are above the law.

          Mr. Pringle was courteous and took the ticket knowing he broke the law. He has admitted he broke the law and has no problem being cited for it. Even when the officer was being a complete idiot and violating his rights Pringle was patient and tried to explain his thinking. He was respectful. He was not respected.

          • waynec

            Tyson, sounds like what happens in Hawaii. I lived there for 10 years and heard of more than one incident of cops raping women in the sugar cane fields.

          • Dave Laws

            That cop needs to be fired and throw in jail for destruction of private property, and put on the TSA no fly list. Obviously someone who has low self esteem and was picked on in school. He probably hates his wife and kids too.

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Steve-Pallister/1389811844 Muhammad Abbass

          Go eat a bag of dicks you grovelling prawn.

          • flapjacks

            Ohh somebody doesn’t like the 1st amendment do they! Cameras are great weapons, which is exactly why the police use them. Cop needs a psych evaluation if he actually thinks they’re dangerous though….

          • TheSilverRanger

            A message to cops

            The point of what I am saying isn’t to judge whether cops are justified in doing what they do. This has nothing to do with police training. And this isn’t just about
            American cops. This is about the perception that we, the public, have of you
            when you perform the following actions. It doesn’t matter if you disagree with
            these perceptions, because right or wrong, they exist. The point of this is to simply let you know that we’re watching, and this is how we see things.

            1. When ten of you show up to make one arrest, it makes you look
            like cowards.

            A couple of years ago a man was on his way home a bike ride, and he saw three arrests being made in under an hour in a relatively safe part of the city. At one of the incidents, eight police cruisers responded to make one arrest. The guy who was arrested was ejected for being too drunk in a bar. Just one guy, and he was drunk. He had a stupid moustache, hadn’t hurt anyone and was drunkenly walking home when he was tased and tackled by 3 cops before 6 police cruisers showed up in addition to the two that were there, for a total of 8 cruisers and 10 cops. The man was NOT ARMED. How much backup do you need for one man? It’s ONE MAN. If you can’t handle one drunk guy by yourself, you shouldn’t be a cop. Training tells you otherwise? Well stop being trained by sissies!

            2. When you tase somebody who isn’t trying to escape, it makes you look like lazy cowards.

            A taser isn’t a remote-control for people. Want to talk to someone? Then walk over to them and talk. Don’t tase them and expect them to cooperate. Also, when someone is being tased and is writhing in cardiac arrest on the ground, they aren’t “resisting arrest” by not getting on their knees and neatly kowtowing to your demands. They’re INCAPACITATED. You look like idiots barking orders at them when they can’t move. Being a cop has certain risks associated with it. If you aren’t comfortable with those risks, don’t take the job. Always trying to minimize your risk of injury at the expense of others by being a taser-happy retard makes you look like lazy sissies. Tasing everyone you see because they might pose a risk to you is like spraying everything with a fire extinguisher so it doesn’t catch fire. Part of the problem might be that many cops are overweight and out of shape. If you fatties can’t chase someone down, then you shouldn’t be cops. Studies have shown that not being a fatty is just as effective as using a taser.

            3. When you set up speed traps, it makes you look like you don’t have anything better to do.

            I get happy every time I see a speed trap, because I assume it means all
            criminals have been locked up, you’ve caught the guys who broke into my car on
            three separate occasions and my stolen property will be returned shortly, right
            morons? Good job guys, take a break and make some scratch for the city.
            Because why the hell else would you be sitting on your butt in a ditch if that
            wasn’t the case?

            People who speed are awesome. The last thing this world needs is more slow
            drivers. Traffic jams occur because of idiots braking prematurely.

            And when you pull people over, how about doing it in a place that doesn’t
            obstruct traffic? You know what’s just as “unsafe” as speeding? Having to swerve
            into another lane because your stupid car is blocking traffic. Every time I pass
            another cruiser parked in two lanes, backing up traffic for miles, it makes me
            punch myself in the jaw until I pass out.

            4. When you give out chicken-shit tickets for rolling through stop-signs at 3 AM, or closing down lemonade stands, it makes us think you’re morons.

            We know that “the law is the law.” We also know that you’re not instruction-executing robotic morons. When you harass us with BS fees and fines, it makes us question your judgement. We know that this kind of garbage is all about money; it’s all about nickle-and-dimes. Remember THIS video?

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YsV4y905Xdo

            The legal age for entering into contract in the United States is 18. So that effort to charge them fees by making them apply for a permit? Illegal. Law is the law, right? ARREST YOURSELVES! And speaking of nepotism…

            5. We know you guys use the buddy system to get out of speeding tickets. And it ticks us off.

            Cops have a code that basically amounts to always letting fellow cops go.
            When a cop pulls over an off-duty officer, the officer who was pulled over
            discreetly flashes his badge to let him know that he’s on the force, and he’s
            simply let go. You think we don’t know what’s going on, jerk-faces? It’s a
            courtesy not extended to anyone else, lest the officer is having a particularly
            good day and isn’t PMSing all over the highway.

            Sometimes you write tickets for going 1 over the speed limit, sometimes it’s
            10. Then when you get called on doing something stupid like writing a ticket to
            someone for a law that shouldn’t be enforced and rarely is (like jay-walking in
            New York), you hide behind your tired mantra that it’s the law and that you have
            to be consistent. Except when you aren’t.

            6. When you flash your lights just to get through intersections, you look like a-holes.

            I’ve followed cops who’ve done this, only to see them park their cruisers for
            coffee or lunch. And speaking of lunch…

            7. When you park in a red zone to eat, it makes you look like lazy a-holes.

            The argument can be made that police officers need to be near their cruisers
            at all times in case of an emergency. Fine, but that doesn’t entitle you to eat
            at the most popular restaurants. If you want to eat at some trendy restaurant,
            park at a meter and pay, like everyone else. Can’t find a meter? Tough luck, go
            someplace else. Doctors, surgeons, rescue workers and security all have
            important jobs where people’s lives are at stake, and you don’t see their cars
            popped up on the curb, obstructing traffic and parked illegally so they can fill
            their fat faces with lunch. We know you’ll never get written a ticket (see #5),
            it ticks us off, and it makes us trust you less, and cooperate less.

            Now this is the part of the article where I say “I know that police officers
            have a tough job,” but they don’t. Being a cop isn’t hard, it’s dangerous.
            There’s a difference. Being an engineer, teacher or airline pilot is hard. Being
            a logger, deep sea crab fisher, coal miner or firefighter is hard and dangerous.
            Being a cop is dangerous, but usually not hard. Driving around, issuing
            BS tickets and filling out paperwork isn’t hard, it’s annoying.

            This is also the part where I say “now I know that most cops are good,” but I
            don’t. I only know two cops in real life, and they’re both awesome, but so is
            anyone I choose to call my friend. Most cops I see abuse their power every day
            by parking illegally, talking on their cellphones while driving, drifting in and out of lanes without turn signals, flashing their lights to get out of intersections and power tripping like crazy. If you’re a cop who’s reading this, rather than being butt-hurt by people’s perceptions of you, do something to change it. Write a fellow officer a ticket. Stick your neck out for us, rather than your colleague for a change. Do the right thing. We notice.

            And as for us: record cops. Record them all the time. Record them even if
            they’re not doing anything. Cops are cracking down on this and they’re trying to
            change the laws to make it illegal so they can’t be held accountable for
            breaking the law. They look up your plates every time they’re behind you at a
            stop, even if you haven’t done anything, just to check up on you. It’s time we
            started checking up on them.

          • http://twitter.com/TrustNoOne2017 J

            This is the response I received from the San Diego Police Chief:

            “Thank you for contacting me regarding the recent incident involving Adam Pringle and the San Diego Police Department. It is the policy of the San Diego Police Department that citizens
            are allowed to video tape officers in the performance of their duties. I am in touch with the Police Chief, and the San Diego Police Department’s Internal Affairs Unit is investigating the situation.
            I appreciate your advocacy on this important issue.

        • Randy Wallace

          You Sir, are an ASS. Come to KY, I will show you what respect is. This so called “POLICE OFFICER” was out of line. I hate trolls

        • T TYlis

          Yes, he was wrong to exercise his rights guaranteed by the constitution. The police will define, weapons, rights and anything else they see fit. He did have a lapse in judgement thinking that his rights matter.

          • Bob

            Reply from Mayor Filner

            “Thank you for contacting me regarding the recent incident involving Adam Pringle and the San Diego Police Department.

            It is the policy of the San Diego Police Department that citizens are allowed to video tape officers in the performance of their duties. I am in touch with the Police Chief, and the San Diego Police Department’s Internal Affairs Unit is investigating the situation.

            I appreciate your advocacy on this important issue.

            Sincerely,

            BOB FILNER

            Mayor”

        • http://twitter.com/MartianEmpress Rezeya Montecore

          Tell that to my friend who was jailed and beated for being transgender. Go to hell.

        • V.

          Idiot. The officer assaulted him and destroyed his property, for doing something completely legal and completely harmless!

        • Dave Laws

          Cops need to earn respect before they are given any. And be damn sure I don’t respect ANY OF THEM. 99% of them are uneducated dirt bags.

        • nomercy55

          you greg are a freakin idiot cop azz kisser

      • Bob

        How come your friends phone wasn’t a weapon?

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=511955073 Tarver Hall

        find the asshole cop’s addresses. we’ll pay them a visit

        • http://twitter.com/FilthyPazuzu FilthyPazuzu

          Sinking to a level lower than theirs is definitely the answer. No doubt about it. Why don’t you take some kids as hostages while you’re at it, you fucking moron?

          • http://twitter.com/MartianEmpress Rezeya Montecore

            There’s really no moral equivalence in the example you gave. You don’t think it’s perfectly fair to show up and let them know we’ve got them surveilled as well as they have us? Well, you just roll over and wag your little tail, then.

          • The Reverend Dak

            Make sure you sue the police association, the groups that defend Police and their police brutality, as opposed of the SDPD and/or the city.

            He’s making bullshit excuses, Reinhold said, at first, that he “couldn’t film”… all bullshit.

            Abuse of power. He wouldn’t be as abusive if he didn’t have a gun.

          • http://excoplawstudent.wordpress.com/ ExCop-LawStudent

            Just out of morbid curiosity, what is the basis for including the police association and the groups that defend police?

            How exactly are they liable?

          • Ƒɩƪţħƴ Ƿɑɀųɀų is f@$kin stupid

            Or he could not go and not take some kids as hostages. Then Instead go remove a piece of shit from society. The only way peaceful protest work is if you have people on the inside that agree with you. Occupy wall street didn’t take action and nothing got done. Hippies peacefully protest the war while althoughs people where dieing. Sooner or later people will realize the the only way to stop this kind of shit is to jump in while it was happening. I dream of the day when that cop slapped the phone out of his hand everyone one in that cafe and on the street would of jumped in and reminded Mr. Reinhold that he polices by consent of the people around him. Mr Ƒɩƪţħƴ Ƿɑɀųɀų your a sheep.

    • http://www.facebook.com/grammaton76 Sean Newton

      Moreover, if it WAS a concealed firearm, possession of a loaded firearm would be a 12031 charge (felony I think), plus zip gun charges (separate felony). If there really HAD been a gun in the phone, they’d have been tripping over themselves to confiscate it and get a “big bust”. This was clearly just about getting the camera turned off.

      • Bailout_more_Banks

        Good point! And Another excellent reason to dismiss these Einsteins! They are NOT doing their job properly by issuing a health&safety code citation while ignoring several felonies in the form of weapons charges. Perhaps they’d be better off managing a Pizza Hut?

        • JdL

          Perhaps they’d be better off managing a Pizza Hut?

          Would YOU visit a Pizza Hut run by these bozos? ;-)

          • Lynchenstein

            You have the right not to order extra cheese, but not doing so could constitute assault on my bottom line so I’m gonna kick your ass!

      • Bull

        What is even more perplexing, according to office reinhold, any phone can be converted to a weapon. If someone is within two feet of me, I have to check that weapon, is that unreasonable?, says reinhold. So why didn’t officer rienhold check EVERYONE that he passes, as according to his logic, all cell phones can be weapons? Does he have proof that he checks every person that comes within 2 feet of him for a weapon if they are on a cellphone? Surely this cop, while working on the boardwalk, passses by folks talking on phones that are closer than two feet. And does this dolt seriously think that a .22 is only dangerous out to two feet, even when fired from a one to two inch barrel? As a former, thank God, police officer, it is increasingly embarrassing to see what is being churned out as police.

        • Bull

          Also, if the officer was so concerned, why did it take him so long to decide that the phone could be a weapon? Hell, if it was, the non tactical thinking of this cop would have already gotten him killed.

        • GERGreg427

          He isn’t stating that it is a “gun”. Not all weapons kill. It might come across better if he said “tool to do harm”. Words are considered a weapon.

          • Quincy Bones

            He probably perceived it as a “tool to do harm” to his reputation.

            Looks like it worked and his attempt to shield himself backfired much more than if he’d just ignored it.

          • Tyson Stone

            Called freedom of speech. If words harm the officer he has the right to sue, not violate Mr. Pringle’s rights as a free citizen of the United States of America.

        • Chris Bandrosky

          Thank you for your honesty Sir . But in your days you were probably peace officers. ” To protect and serve ” Was the motto. Now po-lice are just mostly parasites , revenue generators. Not all but I would be fair to say most.

      • MustBeSaid

        It’s not even physically possible to put a gun into a phone in a way that it would fire being held in the way this phone was being held. Even a .22 round is considerably longer than that phone is wide.

        It’s a complete BS excuse and the cop knew it. He’s a pathetic little man with tiny penis who messed up in life and had to become a worthless beat cop who writes tickets for smoking on the boardwalk. Garbage men make more money and get more respect than cops like him.

        • Justice2013

          how long does it take to change the orientation of a phone to be pointing it in a way that the phone could conceal a 22 round?

    • Ian Battles

      I’m amazed they didn’t “confiscate the phone as evidence”.

  • http://www.facebook.com/brianjosephconnelly Brian Connelly

    Please find out and give us the names of those police officers.

    • http://www.facebook.com/adam.pringle.3 Adam Pringle

      All i know so far is M. Reinhold badge number 6223. unfortunately i dont have the others yet

      • Carlos_Miller

        His first name is possibly Martin, which I gathered from a quick Google search.

      • Jenny Reiswig

        Yay, this means we can finally ban cell phones in public!

  • steveo

    Also, if the leo believed that the detained individual was pointing a gun at him, the leo should have charged him with aggravated battery on a police officer, not obstruction. And if the leo believed that the act of recording was obstruction, why didn’t he take the camera as evidence to prove to the judge that the arrestee was filming. Over and over and over, we’ve said here and the courts back this up, that recording is speech. If I stood there and said ” I hate cops, cops suck, why don’t you guys get a real job, F… you” Most cops wouldn’t like it, but they know that it’s just words. Speech is protected as long as speech doesn’t get into “fighting words”.

    Judge: Officer, why did you arrest this gentleman?
    Leo: Because he said that he hates cops. So, I arrested him for obstruction.
    Judge: Now I hate cops, too.

  • Nancy Robinson-Jackson

    with the kind of logic anything could be a weapon even a ice cream cone

  • Difdi

    If officer safety trumps oath and law, then so would citizen safety. And yet, I suspect that if a citizen met a cop at gun-point, proned him out on the pavement with a gun to the back of his head and called in the dispatch to verify whether the armed, uniformed man was a real cop or an impersonator, the cops would not feel that safety trumps law.

  • discarted

    This second video just proved the obvious…this cop is arrogant joke and is now just trying to justify his illegal behavior.

    And “Officer safety trumps the Constitution”?

    Sure, pal. Keep on believing that until the day you’re sued out of your job.

  • Rob

    Sorry Officer Reinhold, but officer safety does NOT trump the 4th Amendment. If that were true, any asshole with a badge could claim your cellphone was a gun and take it…. oh wait

    Seriously though, you’re wrong M. Reinhold 6223

  • Erica

    Wow never knew a cell phone can be a weapon. I think this cop is off is rocker and needs to look up what weapons look like. Sorry to say this but cell phones is not a weapon. It does help people record cops behaving badly like this one just did for this man.

    • http://excoplawstudent.wordpress.com/ ExCop-LawStudent

      There have been .22 cal. cellphone guns found. Just none in the U.S., they’ve all been in Europe.

      • Difdi

        They also all look like a cellphone from the early 1990s. Monochrome LCD screen, big & clunky, protruding antenna (the barrel is hidden inside the antenna).

        Even if you could hide a gun inside a modern smartphone, the smallest and weakest cartridge around is more than twice as long as the phone is thick. If you’re aiming the camera lens of such a hypothetical phone gun at someone, then the barrel is by necessity pointing straight up or straight down.

  • http://www.facebook.com/adam.pringle.3 Adam Pringle

    My bail was $5000
    meaning i had to pay $500. that money had to betaken out of my saving to move into my own place

  • Whoady Foshoady

    His 2 friends should have stood their ground and helped defend their friend knowing full well he was in the right. We need to stand together and fight for what we know is just. This is exactly why our government is shitting all over us. They know we wont stand together.

    • Bob

      Email sent to Mayor Filner. The other officer needs to go down just as hard for not stepping in and protecting your rights. The Blue Line needs to be severed. Good luck!

  • FTP

    ADAM,……YOU MUST SUE ! TRUST ME,…they will settle out of court, but make sure you don’t accept a few grand. You also want your lawyer fees to be paid separately. Once you sue the town and the police (settlement), you then sue that ASSHOLE COP, and the other dick for going along with it personally with a Title 42 1983 claim. THEY will have to fund their own lawyer, and when the judgement is reached, THEY will owe YOU money from THEIR pocket.

    • http://excoplawstudent.wordpress.com/ ExCop-LawStudent

      Adam, talk to a lawyer instead of listening to people here. If you settle with the city, legally you are precluded from filing a suit against the officer. See Robi v. Five Platters, Inc., 838 F.2d 318 (9th Cir. 1988); Mycogen Corp. v. Monsanto Co., 51 P.3d 297 (Cal. 2002).

      It is a principle known as res judicata. The officers have privity with the city, and a settlement against one is a settlement against all.

      • steveo

        I agree with this advice. Mickey O. should be able to steer the proper counsel your way.

        Anyway to keep your spirits up, here is clip from a copwatcher in our area who was arrested pretty much the same as you for obstruction. He got $25K from the city without much paperwork going back and forth. He had a good attorney who got a 1/3 of the settlement.
        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F_8Bv0wNgCY

    • http://excoplawstudent.wordpress.com/ ExCop-LawStudent

      Adam, as I mentioned before, talk to a lawyer and don’t follow this advice about how to file the suit. You can’t do two separate lawsuits. Once the first case is concluded, the second case is precluded by res judicata. If you don’t include all of the parties in the first case, you cannot go after them in a second case.

      Second, assuming for the sake of argument that you could bring a second lawsuit, under California law, the city is required to indemnify the officers. That means the city pays for the officers’s lawyers and damages, if any. They won’t have to pay out of their own pocket.

      Finally, don’t accept any legal advice over the internet. It’s normally not worth what you paid for it. Talk to a lawyer.

    • Rusty Gunn

      FTP, you’re my kinda guy! (In a platonic way, you understand!).

  • steveo

    This Reinhold guys a liar. In the first video, he said “Put that away.” In the second video, he says that all he wanted to do was to inspect the phone to see if it was a gun or taser. He never said, “let me inspect your phone, I’ll give it right back.” If someone was pointing a gun or a taser at him would he say, put it away?

  • Dustin Hedberg

    ive seen fake cellphone guns before actually… that fire .22 rounds…. but in this day and age they should know about the movement of filming cops

  • H MAN

    Here is the letter I sent the Mayor…

    After seeing the video how your police treat citizens, my wife and I are cancelling
    our planned trip to your city. It is simply too dangerous to be near your thugs.
    Perhaps if you fired them for giving unlawful orders about filming and for
    assaulting Mr. Pringle we would reconsider, but we all know that won’t
    happen.

  • chipster

    if one cop can get away with it as an excuse then they all jump on the band wagon– I bet if they were no longer paid overtime for court you would see a clear docket on the court records..

  • http://www.facebook.com/ndteegarden Nathan David Teegarden

    Make sure to plead not guilty to the BS obstruction charge.

  • Matt Nastasi

    Cops lie all the time. They violate citizens’ rights with impunity. Many are little more than paid thugs. This “phone as a weapon” bullshit is ridiculous.

  • rick

    In that area are there any external security cameras you could see? It might be worthwhile to revisit the scene of the crime and take a look around. You might also want to post some fliers just in case someone has a camera pointing out a window.
    Don’t settle and Good luck!

  • Staci

    How many of you live in San Diego? Law enforcement is fairly reasonable here. I will be happy to hear all sides before making some knee-jerk reactionary statement. Both parties need to be responsible for their actions. Period.

    • Carlos_Miller

      The video pretty much speaks for itself.

    • Craig Allen

      What the hell else do you have to see? The cop didn’t want to be filmed and LIED so he could take action. Very simple. How was the citizen not being responsible Staci?

      • Staci

        Action was already being taken, as this person admitted. There was a citation in progress, yes?

        I really don’t want to be on the side of the police, but come on! Have a friend (that’s not being cited for anything) filming and you may have an argument.

        • JdL

          I really don’t want to be on the side of the police,

          I haven’t seen anything BUT unqualified support for the police from you so far. Or have I missed something?

          • Staci

            See above.

          • Phillip D Breske

            Just sent this to the mayor’s email:

            “Dear Mayor Bob Filner,

            In regards to the police activity that occurred on a Mission Beach boardwalk involving Adam Pringle and San Diego Police Officer M. Reinhold (http://www.photographyisnotacrime.com/2013/04/09/san-diego-police-attack-and-arrest-man-video-recording-them-claiming-phone-could-be-a-weapon), I would like to know why your police department is training its officers that cell phones used for video recording police activity can be converted for use as tasers or firearms, as described by Officer Reinhold in a video recorded by Mr. Pringle’s friend after the aforementioned incident.

            If, as the officer states, officer safety trumps the Constitution, and if all officers are indeed being trained that any cell phone can be used as a weapon against them, does this not lead to a complete abandonment of everyone’s First Amendment rights to record public police activity? After all, if every police officer in this country is trained to assume that the cell phones pointing at them are liable to be weapons, what prevents them from summarily “disarming” every citizen, and in doing so, then subjecting those same citizens to arrest and possibly brutal beatings for resisting said disarmament?

            Where does it end? I ask you what devices are also similarly sized that cannot also be converted to tasers and firearms? Why is a cell phone suspect, but not a portable radio? Surely a radio of suitable dimensions could be made into a much more lethal and effective weapon than a cell phone no larger than the palm of a hand? What about a lady’s purse or a man’s attaché? I frequently carry a large digital camera that is bigger and heavier than a large-frame semi-automatic pistol. Is this camera also going to be assessed for weaponized function if I visit San Diego?

            Your city’s police force is truly in dire need of some revised training if this is how they are now being taught to interact with the citizens of and visitors to the area. Happily, I can now say that I will never be one of them as I plan to avoid your city if and when I travel to California.”

        • d

          Not only that, but he is no threat to them. He is disabled by stell pins still in his hips since childhood and a very bad backfrom a car accident a few ago.
          What we have here is police beating up a disabled man for smoking a cigarette.

        • Difdi

          Being cited for a civil infraction does not strip you of your constitutional rights.

  • MLady

    Like the woman in the insurance commercial says, they can’t put anything on the internet that is untrue; so telephones CAN be made into a weapon…NOT!!!

  • Doug Bethea

    Sounds like Carlos Miller has a bone to pick with law enforcement!

    • Carlos_Miller

      Because I insist they abide by the law?

      • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003526419876 KC Ted

        Just out of curiosity, I tried to google a cell phone converted into a weapon. I found only 1 instance, a phone was converted into a “stun gun”. Other warnings that a razor blade can be hidden in a battery compartment (hmm, dubious info). The only references I could find, even remotely bringing this to light, is police training documents and warnings.
        It seems that any reality of this, that can be “looked up online” is from the police themselves. I think it’s just contrived data to give LEO’s an out, when taking someone’s cell phone to avoid being video recorded.

        • phil

          im sure his galaxy s3 looks like the 1994 cell phone they use to make the cell phone guns, like im sure it could be confused for that. i hope the hall monitor, errrr.. police officer, gets fired and fined for abusing his power.

      • Gene Turlington

        “You’ve lost your way, Sergeant. You’ve lost sight of the purpose of the law: to protect its citizens, not persecute them. Whatever we are, whatever’s left of us – we’re better than that. Now these proceedings are closed. You’ll be transported back to your ships and we appreciate your help.” -William Adama, Battlestar Galactica

    • Craig Allen

      Sounds like you will defend bad cops no matter what.

    • JdL

      Sounds like Carlos Miller has a bone to pick with law enforcement!

      He sure does! Don’t you? Will you try to justify the behavior of these two “officers”, for example?

    • Difdi

      No, Carlos has a bone to pick with violent criminals.

    • Wrex Allen

      If officer dickface, er, Reinhold is so scared of an innocuous cell phone, he should quit. As a matter of fact, he shouldn’t leave his house. What a pussy to hide behind a badge.

  • Craig Allen

    One must remember, cops can claim obstruction or interference with official acts ANYTIME you fail to follow their orders… they know this and abuse the fuck out of it….. knowing nothing will usually come of their actions. Given our legal system, it is cost prohibitive for most people to follow thru with legal action to bring cops like this to a jury trial.

    • Difdi

      True only in that they can CLAIM anything. You could jaywalk in front of an officer and be charged with treason, but that doesn’t mean you committed treason.

      Not all orders an officer gives are lawful orders and only lawful orders must be obeyed. Examples of unlawful orders include ordering someone to not exercise their rights (federal crime) and ordering someone to violate the law.

  • Dennis B

    Both Officers need to be bought up on charges and prosecuted! The problem at hand is the officers just didn’t want to be recorded! With the cell phone weapons their talking about, the cell phone has to be pointed at the target(antenna) the gun barrel would be the antenna! Enough is enough!

  • http://www.facebook.com/mike.moulder.5 Mike Moulder

    I found instructions on how to make a stun gun from an old phone, but nothing on making a firearm. Good luck on your proceedings Adam.

  • http://www.facebook.com/bob.nau.3 Breanda Mc Cabe

    libertard douche bag

    • Staci

      Poetic.

  • Staci

    Law enforcement in this city is quite reasonable. As much as I want to be on the side of this ‘Pringle’ dude, if you’re being cited for anything…you need to try to be cooperative. If you’ve ever worked with the general public, you know they’re capable of anything. And yeah, maybe even a cell phone COULD be a weapon. Most likely it isn’t, but, people want to go home at night so there are boundaries. We can’t bring more than a few ounces of hair gel on a plane (for the past SEVERAL years) because it can explode. Quit your whining.

    • http://twitter.com/kenpoboot Ellen Moberly

      Um if he is referring to this…
      http://www.iacsp.com/deadly-decoys.html
      then he’s stupid. I’m very sure this mans ‘modern’ phone looks nothing like what has been converted. Give me a break.

    • JdL

      if you’re being cited for anything…you need to try to be cooperative.

      And, in your book, being “cooperative” means, giving up your right to record the encounter? Keep in mind, this is a very public exchange, and very relevant to any future defense, or to bringing charges against rogue officers.

      And yeah, maybe even a cell phone COULD be a weapon.

      And maybe a suitcase COULD contain a nuclear weapon.

      but, people want to go home at night so there are boundaries.

      There are boundaries for Mundanes, but not for cops, according to your apparent view of the world. Cops can use any excuse they please, no matter how implausible, to launch an attack on any citizen they please. Will that citizen go home at night? That’s an open question, after an interaction with a cop.

      We can’t bring more than a few ounces of hair gel on a plane (for the past SEVERAL years) because it can explode.

      Actually, hair gel can’t explode. And if you’re going to defend the predations of the TSA, you won’t find a sympathetic audience here. They’ve caught exactly how many terrorists? And done how well when testers successfully smuggle in obvious bomb parts? What a pathetic, expensive joke!

      • Staci

        1. NO.

        2. No. Again.

        3. You are correct. It can’t. It was sarcasm. Good job!

        • LBrothers

          Next time, stick the phone down your pants before they can grab it. They could all sit around on their bikes and figure out what to do.

        • JdL

          1. NO.

          2. No. Again.

          Are monosyllabic responses pointing at who knows where supposed to have some comprehensible meaning?

          • IHateFatChicks

            Most Law Enforcement is composed of narcissistic sociopaths, pathological liars and violent, unintelligent troglodytes. They lie and abuse people.

          • grumpa

            The whole problem was not the filming, but the idiot’s refusal to allow the officer to inspect the cel phone. This officer said he would have given the cel back once he verified it was just a phone. The law is pretty straightforward about obeying a law enforcement officer. Arrogance and being argumentative are what got this stupid photographer in trouble. Once the phone was checked, it was allowed to continue filming – just like the officer first said…. cooperation with the police is the smartest way to avoid trouble. seems simple enough.

          • rick

            Of course! Since police never lie and there are zero videos out there proving otherwise I would totally agree to let him examine my cell phone. I would even expect him to return it to me immediately. Cue PT Barnum

            Next, they will be asking to examine mainstream media cameras, officer safety of course, with their solemn promise to return it right away.

          • Ryan French

            He didn’t have to hand over the phone. Just because the officer makes a demand doesn’t mean it’s a lawful order. You give the police too much power, such as nations where the police are known to demand money from citizens. But hey… if you cooperate you won’t get in trouble…

      • Staci

        Had to re-read one last time before I made a final comment. I hope people get the hair gel comment as an indication of how complacent we have become. NOW we worry about our rights? Use some damn common sense in the first place, and a lot of things might go away. I’m going to do something productive, besides sitting behind a keyboard. Cheers!

    • steveo

      Actually this is a monumental event because this leo is saying that the SDPD is training leos to believe that cell phones could be guns or tasers. That would mean that a leo could create their own exigent circumstances to seize anyones smartphone and search it without a warrant. That shouldn’t be acceptable to anyone.

      For instance, a leo could stop you for a traffic stop, tell you to get out of the car, pat you down, take your cellphone out of your pocket and start going through it because he wants to maintain that he has exigent circumstance to seize and search the phone because it might be a weapon. So could a ham sandwich.

      That being said,make sure you password protect your phone and load all your recordings to Bambuser, Dropbox or some other service.

    • http://excoplawstudent.wordpress.com/ ExCop-LawStudent

      Staci, I was a cop for over 20 years. The officer’s reason is BS. More concerning is the statement he made in the second video, that officer safety trumps the Constitution.

    • Ryan French

      (1) Law enforcement being reasonable in your city has nothing to do with this particular incident. That’s like me saying “officer I’m a pretty good person in general therefore I feel like I should get a free pass on this one.”

      (2) I will agree with you that the citizen was being uncooperative when refusing to put the camera away. If an officer told me to do a hand stand, I’d probably refuse and that would also make me “uncooperative.” Both of those are related because you don’t have to do them just because “the officer said so.” The camera did not inhibit the officer from writing the ticket, which he was already doing while his partner stood there for over a minute while his unsuspecting comrade was held at “phone point.”

      (3) The phone being a weapon is a really pathetic excuse. What next? Checking a tube of chap stick? That could fit a larger caliber. Bottom line, the officer didn’t really think it was a gun. If he did, he wouldn’t have casually asked him to put it away. He only pulled the weapon bullshit when he realized the citizen was aware of his right to record in public. If this were a fantasy world and the phone was indeed a weapon: Why wasn’t the other citizen recording after the arrest asked to surrender their phone as well?

      (4) Just because the police want “go home at night” doesn’t mean they have power to make up the law as they go along. I hold two dangerous jobs; a freelance news videographer and a real estate investor. Both sends me to the ghetto on a regular basis, sometimes by myself. I feel fairly safe because I carry a weapon and I train on it. There are times I feel uncomfortable but I don’t violate the rights of others because of my paranoia. The police have the same right to life as average citizens. Therefore, if an average citizen feels uncomfortable with you holding your phone, do you think they should be able to confiscate it from you? Or are you saying the police can decide the 4th Amendment does not apply to them?

      (5) Your comparison to hair gel on a plane is really comical. Flying on a commercial airliner is not a right and when you pay the ticket you agree to follow the established guidelines. If you don’t like it you can find another mode of transportation. Walking down the public sidewalk is a really, really different situation. It’s pretty sad I have to point that out to an adult. Let hope walking in public doesn’t require the same security procedures as a TSA checkpoint. Sounds like you’d be all for that. Not sure why.

      For the record.. I was police dispatcher, my grandfather is a cop and I am currently taking care of a deputy’s cat after he suffered a coma in a traffic accident. I am pro-police, but I am also pro-Constitution. It was written for a reason…

    • Difdi

      Cooperation yes. But cooperation does not include waiving constitutional rights or obeying unlawful orders.

  • steveo

    This leo also took the man’s property without a warrant and searched it. The Supreme Court has held that Fourth Amendment limitations on law enforcement officers’ authority to seize individuals’ property must be “scrupulously observed” when the item seized contains information protected by the First Amendment and “the basis for the seizure is disapproval of the message contained therein.” Walter v. United States, 447 U.S. 649, 655 (1980).

    • Gary Muich

      Where do they get these pieces of shit cops? Bunch of cocky renegades! And nothing will be done to them!

      • Phillip D Breske

        If I pulled an actual gun out of my pocket and pointed it at the officers in the video, do you think either of them would wait 61 seconds before telling me to “put that away, please,” or do you think it’s more likely the officer not writing would have immediately noticed the gun and thrown himself bodily onto me and forced me to the ground to save his partner’s life, all while shouting, “DROP THE GUN, NOW!” So why would they then state that they thought the cell phone could have been a gun if they assumed from the start that no one’s life was in danger?

    • Josh B Guptill

      I guess his phone is one of those new transformers no one knows about, that is, except the police.
      I guess it could be a weapon if the perp was an MLB pitcher or an NFL quarterback.

    • jgio143

      The officer was doing his job. The man getting the citation was being a smart ass. What ever happened for respect for the law?

      • http://excoplawstudent.wordpress.com/ ExCop-LawStudent

        The officer apparently didn’t have any respect for the law, or his oath. That’s why we need to keep them accountable.

      • TucsonRoo

        Dont be such a dick next time! Doing it just to be so is screwed up! Yep, its your right to be a dick

      • Difdi

        Being a smart ass is not illegal. Exercising a constitutional right is neither illegal nor being a smart ass. The law is quite clear that the officer was in the wrong and the photographer was in the right. What ever happened to not breaking sworn oaths?

    • JDS

      Hey Carlos, don’t forget to update the title of this post from “Update” to “Update II”. (Just watchin’ out for you buddy.)

  • Kathleen Pfeifle

    Great use of public funds, come on!

  • steveo

    This is really a pretty important case because the leo is maintaining that the SDPD is training it’s officers that cell phones might be guns. Therefore, I guess, they are taking it upon themselves to create an exigent circumstance to seize anyones cell phone for that reason. More from the DOJ:

    “It is well established that individuals have a property interest in their cell phones that is protected by the Fourth Amendment. A government official’s intrusion into a private citizen’s personal effects constitutes a Fourth Amendment seizure if the individual has a “possessory interest” in the property and the official engages in “some meaningful interference” with that interest. United States v. Jacobsen, 466 U.S. 109, 113 (1984).”

  • Ron Allen

    I sincerely hope you take this to trial, and then make them pay in a civil suit as well.

  • yhw

    for what it’s worth– here is an email I just sent to the Mayor of SD. Thanks to Carlos and all the folks standing up for our rights and for a civil, decent, non-paranoid society…

    To: BobFilner@sandiego.gov

    Cc: sdpdpolicechief@pd.sandiego.gov

    dear Mayor Filner

    I have read news coverage of the recent brutal arrest by officer M. Reinhold of a citizen who was using his cellphone as a video recorder while being cited for illegal smoking.

    The recorded statements by Officer Reinhold that the cell phone was a weapon are outrageous. Are visitors to the beautiful city of San Diego to understand that anything (e.g. a camera, a pen, a candy bar, a can of soda for goodness’ sake) can be deemed a ‘weapon’ by the San Diego police, and expect random arrests and physical violence under the cover of “officer safety”?

    The citizen in question was quite obviously not using the cell phone as a weapon. The officer’s excuse that it was a weapon is a twisted and slippery-slope approach, and flies in the face of strong legal protections for citizens who elect to record police actions.

    I’ve visited San Diego before and would like to do so again, but I certainly won’t as long as the brutality and the excessively authoritarian, paranoid logic displayed by Officer Reinhold is supported by the San Diego government and police. Surely you can stand up and publicly identify this as a disastrous incidence of anti-community policing? And work with the police to make sure it doesn’t happen again?

    Photography is not a crime. Thank you for your consideration of my views.

    Yours respectfully,

    • yhw

      also for what it’s worth– a few days later I received the below reply from Mayor Filner to my email (above):

      Dear :

      Thank you for contacting me regarding the recent incident involving Adam Pringle and the San Diego Police Department.

      It is the policy of the San Diego Police Department that citizens are allowed to video tape officers in the performance of their duties. I am in touch with the Police Chief, and the San Diego Police Department’s Internal Affairs Unit is investigating the situation.

      I appreciate your advocacy on this important issue.

      Sincerely,

      Bob

      • steveo

        Well, if these are the true feelings of the Mayor, then the charges against Mr. Pringle should already have been dropped by the chief of police. But we rarely see, the police department in question stepping up to the plate, admitting their mistake, and filing a motion to withdraw the charges. Maybe mayor Bob, it’s different in this case.

  • http://twitter.com/SteppingShadows Stepping On Shadows

    Disgusting.

    • http://batman-news.com arvizu9618

      The person who invents the “Phone Necklace” is going to be a millionaire….they can’t think its filming if its just around your neck instead holding it in their face like a douche…

  • Scott Michael Brandt

    Clearly these cops are insecure about themselves and their ability to confidently do their jobs correctly and effectively, and felt the need to mask this with egotistical force. Maybe they felt a little ashamed/embarrassed of the citation (valid or not) they were giving (smoking OUTDOORS on the beach boardwalk), as there were many others witnessing the encounter/stop? Maybe they felt they needed to project their manhood from behind the badge to all watching? To prove themselves worthy of the badge to others? It was only an encounter/stop for violation of a city ordinance. Did they need to prove they were bigger than the measly stop for a citation? Those are the ONLY conclusions I can come up with in watching this video. Why did it take so long for the officer to ask/tell him about the phone? He sat writing the citation for a lengthy period. In addition, his partner standing in concert with him said, did nothing. If he had/they had reasonable suspicion to believe that the phone could be a weapon and used against them, jeopardizing their safety, wouldn’t he have asked to see it during initial contact? When it became a “stop”? Before writing the citation? Why didn’t his partner? Why didn’t he ask his partner to check it out? His partner was looking away at times out over the beach! Clearly he was not worried about his safety. Neither was the officer writing the citation, as he sat relaxed on a wall. No defensive posturing by either of them! They could have explained themselves and why they wanted to see it (for their safety) and that they would return it promptly. Nothing wrong with it, then give it back so they may continue recording. Which by the way was totally legal and within their rights. TOO BAD THEY DIDN’T LIKE IT! IT”S THEIR RIGHT! When he finished the citation for the violation he looked up and ONLY THEN did the phone become an issue. And then told the young man to PUT IT AWAY?!! He does not have to! Again, if there was a reasonable suspicion to believe that it could have been a weapon and used as such why would he say that? Put it away?!! If it had been, that’s a crime in itself! The officer stated later it could’ve been a weapon! So put it away?!!! Why did he/they not suspect the other phone being used later to record the now “stop” further as a weapon also? The one recording while the other officer escorted the young man away. Were there reported “Phone stick-ups” in the area by similar men fitting their description? Were their reports of people/
    young men of similar description discharging their phones in public? I doubt it. There are so many things wrong with what these officers said and did during this encounter/stop it’s pathetic. They should not be on the streets with a badge. I wish I had been there.

  • D Westburg

    I hope he sues, and wins, and they loose their jobs

  • fghdhdfh

    The officers name(s) will have to appear on the arrest report. Or on the court complaint/charges. I would think by now every police department in the US would have gotten the memo, and forwarded it to their officers, that if they interfere with the public’s right to record their public activities, all they are going to do is give themselves a blackeye, especially if they physically abuse people.

  • Curt Piper

    I’ve watched both videos, and fail to see anything that the cop may have done wrong. However, since this website is dedicated to persecuting the police for the perceived abuses against the 1st amendment “suffered” by those who wish to record the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, then I fully understand the attitudes of the commenters here (basically, Down with the Cops). The fact is that there are companies that weaponize cell phones, or create weapons that appear to be cell phones; the cops were briefed on it, and, do not want you to get close enough to them and activate the hidden knife or tazer. And, sometimes the very police that protect the public has to break the law to do so. Ever notice them speeding or running red lights in an attempt to catch an alleged criminal? My concern is that there’s a law in the first place that prohibits smoking in public.
    http://motorcitytimes.com/mct/2012/07/weaponize-your-iphone-the-yellow-jacket-stun-gun-iphone-case/

    I have also seen an adequate number of videos where the cops were doing something questionable, and the cameras were being used as evidence against them. This isn’t one of those cases.

    • FTP

      So you saw nothing wrong with the cop attacking this man because he was filming ? You are ridiculous. I guess if it had happened to you, THEN you would see something wrong right. Get over it Curt, American Citizens are allowed to record cops period. This man was recording for a while and the camera was never an issue, nor was it an issue for the other cop. Even after this man was attacked by this lunatic, the other guys were filming and THAT phone wasn’t an issue. WHY ? I hate throwing out the Karma JU JU, but I now hope and pray that some lunatic cop goes after either you, or a loved one ie; Son, Daughter Wife, for something ridiculous like this so your eyes will open up.

    • iceboxjones

      Touching another person for filming is illegal, called assault right?

      Nothing wrong?

    • IHateFatChicks

      Obviously, you’re late for your medication again. You’re delusional.

    • steveo

      He didn’t say, could you show me the phone so I can inspect it. He said, “Put it away.” You don’t tell a criminal to put away a gun if he has it in his hand standing 4 feet away.

      By your logic any citizen recording a traffic stop with her smartphone plainly visible, could be yanked from the car, put in handcuffs and transported to jail for seeking to record a simple police encounter because the phone might be a gun. A ham sandwich could be a gun, but it’s not.

  • Marc

    Man, I’m all for filming and photographing cops and exposing them for thugs when they pull crap like that, but the global banker conspiracy loonie crap isn’t making anyone look good.

  • Francis Hensel

    it just the new communist regime, get use to it, or vote out your demorats

  • steve

    555 yes officer safety trumps a cell phone…. OMG… glad i am not living in San Diego… besides you can’t smoke in public..a cell phone can be turned into a tazer or gun?

    • http://www.facebook.com/ben.chase.1690 Ben Chase

      I just want to know when the officers involved will be arrested and charged with assault. The city and district attorney will have no credibility if the officers escape prosecution for this. Police are not above the law. They are supposed to be citizens like us, held to a higher standard due to their role. Accountability needs to happen.

  • ac

    well, following police logic then your jean’s belt can be use as a weapon or sunglasses can be use as a weapon or somebody’s scarf can be used as a weapon. this lawlessness of police must be stopped. absurd of confronting and arresting a person for nothing will be continued forever in this country until society will struggle and stop it…

  • Tyson Stone

    If it could be a weapon and the officer was worried it was a weapon why was he fine with the cell phone for an entire minute of recording?

  • eddy

    I’m starting to think a new, exciting career is in order. Buy a camera and just walk around on publicly accessible property and record everything. Have a backup that sends audio right to the cloud. Then a few 25k-50k settlements a year, you’d be doing pretty good!

  • MustBeSaid

    Police like this are traitors of the USA. They should receive a traitors punishment. Execution by cellphone.

  • Frank Palmer

    http://www.nbcnews.com/technology/gadgetbox/man-arrested-filming-police-phone-said-be-weapon-1C9314434

    Mainstream media just picked this up including a link to PINAC. Nice

  • Frank Palmer
  • Vigilant Citizen

    This is such a lie, in the original video he told him to put it away not to let him inspect it. SUE!

  • Barking Dog

    I remember back in the day, maybe 20 years ago when phones were big enough to carry bullets inside.

    With
    the I phone and the driods that aren’t easily opened, it’s impossible
    unless the CIA made it for you. If they are working, there’s no way it
    can be a gun, too much inside.

    That jerk cop is repeating an
    alert from 20 years ago that’s obsolete because no one has that phone.or
    even uses one on those old frequencies. More cop nonsense to justify
    stupidity. “Look it up on the internet”

    And that alert was only for a short time, they weren’t popular those phone guns.

    www.
    hoax-slayer.
    com
    /cell-phone-guns.shtml

  • http://www.www.org/ Woodrow Waxman Wotan

    LIEUTENANT MISTY CEDRUN can be reached at
    858-552-1700
    mcedrun@pd.sandiego.gov

    • http://www.www.org/ Woodrow Waxman Wotan

      Presumably, “Officer” Reinhold would be
      mreinhold@pd.sandiego.gov

      UNLEASH THE DOGS OF DEMOCRACY

      • http://www.www.org/ Woodrow Waxman Wotan

        Neither of these bounced – they should be good addys.

  • Bordeauxm

    A camera is a weapon, when used against tyranny.

  • Anon

    The first thing the officer asked him to do was to put the phone away. If he believed it to possibly be a weapon why would he ask him to put it away from his view ?

    • John D.

      I seriously hope the state of CA doesn’t sweep this under the rug. That cop had no right to do what he did or a reason to do what he did. He was the aggressor because he didn’t like being filmed. Talk about a big baby that throws a fit when they don’t get what they want. Did he “check” the other guy’s phone that was recording him after the ASSAULT to make sure it wasn’t a weapon or did he only think the VICTIM’S phone was a weapon? What a fucking joke. If you’re not doing anything wrong you have no reason to worry about being recorded. I bet the SUSPECT (officer Dudley) has done other shit like this before and gotten away with it because the video evidence was destroyed or there wasn’t a camera rolling. He needs to be arrested and fired from the police department before he brings them more negative attention. What a dickhead. I hope the victim sues the shit out of San Diego PD. I hate cops that act like the suspect in this video. There is no fucking need to act like a badass because you had a gun and a badge. Most cops are nice, but then you have assholes like the one in the video. Good grief.

  • John D.

    I sent the San Diego mayor an email. This cannot be swept under the rug.. I hope the victim has justice served.

  • Anon

    I emailed Mayor Bob Filner and this was his reply.

    >>Thank you for contacting me regarding the recent incident involving Adam Pringle and the San >>Diego Police Department.

    >>It is the policy of the San Diego Police Department that citizens are allowed to video tape officers >>in the performance of their duties. I am in touch with the Police Chief, and the San Diego Police >>Department’s Internal Affairs Unit is investigating the situation.

    >>I appreciate your advocacy on this important issue.

    >.Sincerely,

    >>BOB FILNER

    >>Mayor

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000324664662 Georgy Dilov

    they don’t represent good in our society, NO more never again Nazi Gestapo police there is no good police,they think they’re better than everybody else just saying police it make you sick

  • protectourkidsnow

    LOL! Email Bob Filner to let him know how little respect his officers have for the Constitutuion. That’s rich! Bob Filner hasn’t had respect for the Constitution for years…

    I agree that this is wrong and that they are definitely using a loophole to stop people from recording them but Bob Filner is not your guy to try to garner any respect for the Constitution. I still cannot believe that Filner took a demotion from Congress to Mayor of San Diego and I am amazed that anyone in San Diego elected him but oh well, that’s the sorry state of San Diego government for you.

  • Rajeev Sinha

    Perhaps working in a Pizza Hut, rather than actually running one.
    I wouldn’t trust them to run a bath let alone a small business!

  • Stoney-Browning

    WRONG!! the order was illegal! He had no duty to comply! if a cop hands you a gun, orders you to shoot yourself, and arrests you for not doing so, do you think there’s a case? Not likely!

  • Jon Quimbly

    When is a cellphone not a cellphone? Has there ever been a documemted example??

    Ordering you to let the officer confiscate your phone, and them arresting you for failing to do sp, is so obviously wrong.

    I’m not normally one to carp about corruption as much, but this so obviously is a case of it.

  • Guest

    this is what my cell phone looks like.

  • Ruby Kuby

    Sue the fuck out of that turd. Weapon, my ass. What a total dick head.

  • Tony Loro

    Just another way to stop recording. No person or cop has been shot in the USA with a gun resembling a cel.
    http://www.snopes.com/crime/warnings/cellgun.asp

  • Rusty Gunn

    Ruby, Ruby, Ruby! TSK! TSK! TSK!

  • Rob

    This looks like another open and shut case of blatant prior restraint. I hope this guy gets a really good attorney to slap the city, department, and the officer personally with a hefty lawsuit. I would also file a federal criminal complaint against the officer.

  • Shawn

    “His friends picked up his phone, which was damaged but not to the point where it was usable, which is why the video survived.”

    Carlos, I think that you mean UNusable.

  • Difdi

    Yes, but it doesn’t look anything remotely like a Galaxy.

    http://www.hoax-slayer.com/cell-phone-guns.shtml

  • Kyle

    There was a video on Youtube taken years ago of a then-new cellphone that fired bullets… However, it had an antenna… which was the barrel. It’s pretty much been debunked by modern cellphones that are thinner and have no appearance of an older cell.

  • Chris Parks

    There are such things, but the ones I have seen look like 90’s phones. Also alot of manipulation is needed to cock and fire. The cop knew it wasn’t a firearm. Why would he demand to not be videoed if it was?

  • http://IAmDanMarshall.com/ Dan Marshall

    Those cops deserve to be fired and barred from law enforcement for the rest of their lives.

  • http://www.facebook.com/fcarlson21 Frank Carlson

    no wounder their is no respect for cops they do it to them selves bet his mom is really proud of him what a jewel.the cop is the criminal.

  • http://www.facebook.com/jay.lensch Jay Lensch

    This officer needs to be fired. What a piece of shit.

  • Jim Jesus

    Overzealous assholes. If you are going to enforce the law shouldn’t you be required to know the law? Silly question I’m sure.

  • Carlos_Miller

    Yes, of course. Will fix it now. Thanks.

  • http://www.facebook.com/adam.pringle.3 Adam Pringle

    this is the phone that was called a weapon

  • sunshipballoons

    I don’t understand how this is “prior restraint.” But it is outrageous, illegal and wrong.

  • http://excoplawstudent.wordpress.com/ ExCop-LawStudent

    There has also never been one recovered in the United States. It is a European issue, and has been for over a decade.

  • JdL

    “Phones can be converted into weapons …. look it up online,” the cop told him.

    Yet another cop shits his pants over something that would frighten no one else on earth. Amazing!

  • Tony Loro

    It is interesting an IA person (Lt. Misty Cedrun) was at the scene. But SDPD IA when called 1 hr ago said she was transfered from the IA dept. The other officer had been watching for minutes yet he did not perceive the cel as a weapon. This will end badly for them.

  • JDS

    So, he didn’t mind him filming the whole thing, pointing the camera at him the entire time, despite it’s potential to be a weapon? The other cop didn’t say anything about it either, it wasn’t until the very end they had a problem with it…

    Carlos, please keep us updated on this one. I know you do your best to keep track of all your stories, moreso than any other journalist I’ve seen cover this topic, but there’s been so many lately that I want to see justice served! (I know you get updates as they happen and it’s not your fault that the system moves slowly. But still! :) )

  • Rob

    Even though the video survived and was published, the officer was clearly trying to censor the man by forcibly making him turn off his camera, preventing the lawful recording of any possibly legal or illegal actions taken by the officer. The officer knew he was doing nothing more than filming, despite his claim that he thought the phone might be a weapon. Is my understanding of prior restraint incorrect? Would it only be considered prior restraint if the officer had tried to delete the video?

  • steveo

    Anytime a government agent stops someone from newsgathering who is lawfully present, it is an act of prior restraint. Prior restraint is actually quite simple, 1) Govt doesn’t want a person or group to collect information about govt 2) Govt acts to suppress or restrain the person from collecting the “news” and publishing the news. Here is what the DOJ says about this action by this leo:

    “When material falls “arguably within First Amendment protection,” and officers’ warrantless seizure of that material “br[ings] to an abrupt halt an orderly and presumptively legitimate distribution or exhibition” of that material, the Fourth Amendment is violated. Roaden v. Kentucky, 413 U.S. 496, 503 (1973) (“Such precipitate action by a police officer, without the authority of a constitutionally sufficient warrant, is plainly a form of prior restraint and is, in those circumstances, unreasonable under Fourth Amendment standards.”

    Legal historians will tell us that prior restraint was probably the main reason for the 1st Amendment and over the years, prior restraint has been elevated to a constitutional principle because the SCOTUS has never upheld an act of prior restraint in the history of the US, even in the case when govt said that the publication of the information would be a clear and present danger to the security of the US and even when the “news” was gathered illegally.

    I always use Larry Flynt as an example because he was constantly in court over being told by various govt agents that he couldn’t publish his material. Well, Hustler magazine is still standing and Larry is still alive and earning 200 million a year. Larry won his case before the Scotus 9-0 after calling them “eight assholes and a token cxxt”.

  • Jeffrey Marcus Gray

    I have done Google search after Google search and I can’t find one incident where a cop has been shot with a camera phone! I’m going to tell you LEO’s who think this new lie about “cameras as guns” is going to stop us from filming you….LOL,LOL,LOL,LOL,LOL!

  • Chris

    There is a good article out today on Huffington Post about how modern cops tend to claim “fear for my life” as a defense against using excessive force, even though statistically, cops haven’t been this safe on the job for 50 years:
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/09/police-shootings_n_3038938.html

  • http://excoplawstudent.wordpress.com/ ExCop-LawStudent

    That’s because there are no camera phone guns that have ever (as in never, none, zilch, nada) been discovered in the United States. They have been in Europe for about 10 years (and very rare there), but they have never made it here.

  • Tijuana Joe

    This has the potential to become the perfect pretextual mechanism to suppress photography, like the spurious “odor of marijuana” or “canine alert” have become vis-a-vis the 4th Amendment.
    Except for one thing, it’s too stupid.

  • steveo

    absolutely correct, they restrained him from gathering the “news” prior to it’s publication. (From the DOJ: Indeed, the seizure of material protected by the First Amendment is a form of prior restraint – a long disfavored practice only permitted in limited circumstances)

    As an example, say, the US secret service went up to Abraham Zapruder and told him in 1963 that he couldn’t film the motorcade from the area next to the grassy knoll. Think that would have been outrageous act of censorship? The most famous 27 seconds in film making history. And with the above videographer, what if an alien ship landed on the boardwalk right behind the leo when he was filming, wouldn’t that have been an important piece of news. Filming is alot like that scene in “Training Day”, when Denzel scares the recruit by yelling “BOOM’. “Hey, you never know.” You never know what you’re going to record.

    This videographer here had a lot of courage, more people have to be willing to keep the cameras rolling even in the face of arrest.

    There is also a great piece written by some legal scholars explaining how a detained person has the right to record because of due process and the 5th Amendment. Here’s a link. http://flliberty.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/due-process-right-to-record.pdf

  • timgoes

    Adam Pringle, lawyers will sue for you for false arrest and battery and you’ll get $20K in 2 years. For no fee in till you get the money.

    Entrap the police. Have multiple cameras. One very clean person to get arrested and 3 more with hidden cameras to video it.

  • http://www.facebook.com/adam.pringle.3 Adam Pringle

    hey steveo, carlos said to look out for posts from you, he said you were very knowlegable in the law and this sort of thing i am the victim in the video.

  • Matt

    If that cop still has his job, that is another sign that America is no longer the land of the free AT ALL. That cop is a disgrace to every real American that has fought for our RIGHTS!

  • Difdi

    Yes, phones can. But far more commonly, police are converted into assholes.

  • drksilenc

    the only weapon it is is a weapon against idiot police like him.

  • Mark J

    Pretty much anything can be made into a weapon, but my belief is on this issue, that cops have much more fear of what the information a video on the phone might contain than they are about some device in the phone being used to harm them physically. That DOES NOT mean they have, or should have, the right of arbitrary censorship but rather that we need better ways of getting that information out to the public- hopefully soon it’ll be possible to stream HD video of incidents such as this directly to the Internet in real time so even if the camera’s destroyed the footage is safely in the public domain.

  • JdL

    Yes, phones can.

    Pretty much anything can be made into a weapon,

    Very true. Pretty much anything could be dangerous in some unusual way. A backpack might contain a bomb. A suitcase could hold a nuke. The guy next to you might have a syringe of nerve gas. But as far as I know, only a cop would look at a cell phone and (in preparation for adrenalin-fueled violent behavior under color of law), think, “OMG, a deadly weapon!”.

    Cops really are special in some significant way.

  • Difdi

    Probably because in most places in the U.S., there’s no need to hide your gun.

  • Difdi

    That’s not entrapment. If it were, no police undercover operation would ever be admissible in court.

  • Difdi

    A police officer has no more right to self-defense than any citizen. The main difference when it comes to self-defense between a private citizen and a police officer is that the officer has a duty to advance on the danger. Depending on the state, a citizen might have a duty to retreat from it or might be able to lawfully stand his ground, but that citizen can negate his own self-defense plea by advancing on the source of trouble.

    But once they’re in danger, a citizen has exactly the same right to self-defense that a police officer does. If an officer can claim self-defense and get away with it, then a citizen in the same circumstances could as well. Or at least that’s what the law says.

  • http://excoplawstudent.wordpress.com/ ExCop-LawStudent

    It is just BS on the part of the officer. There have been no cellphone guns ever found in the U.S., but there have been plenty of fountain pen guns, wallet guns, and cane guns. You never see the officers react like that when they ask for a driver’s license and the subject pulls out his wallet, or when a subject pulls out a pen to sign a ticket. I wrote more about it on my new blog, at excoplawstudent.wordpress.com.

  • H MAN

    My letter to the mayor…
    After
    seeing the video how your police treat citizens, my wife and I are cancelling
    our planned trip to your city. It is simply too dangerous to be near your thugs.
    Perhaps if you fired them for giving unlawful orders about filming and for
    assaulting Mr. Pringle we would reconsider, but we all know that won’t
    happen.

  • http://excoplawstudent.wordpress.com/ ExCop-LawStudent

    He is very knowledgeable on the law.

  • steveo

    See if Carlos can give you Mickey O’s email and send him a message about your plight. He has had dealings in San Diego in the past with various agencies and could steer you in the direction of some good legal counsel in the area.

    Read about the case on this blog about Mr Baier: “They impounded his camera, threw him in jail and did not return his camera until the following Monday. And only because Mickey Osterreicher started giving them hell on Saturday (I was with Mickey that day in Fort Lauderdale so I witnessed his telephone conversation with one of the assistant chiefs).”
    Mickey probably still remembers who he talked to. Maybe he can get you in touch with Mr. Baier who is probably an expert with the SDPD by now.

  • Carlos_Miller

    Good luck on the new blog!

  • Difdi

    I can just see the headline “Cops tackle senior citizens citing risk of cane guns, 34 elderly people hospitalized, cops to receive medals for heroism”

    Oh, and I bookmarked your blog.

  • Lefim

    I’ve seen cattleprods disguised as cellphones sold at gunshows. They’re not Tasers. I differentiate between the two, though some Tasers can have cattleprod features in them as well.for CQB.

  • http://excoplawstudent.wordpress.com/ ExCop-LawStudent

    Thanks Carlos.

  • FTP

    This is the kind of cop that makes everybody hate cops. What a little fucking pussy !

  • Tijuana Joe

    “In the video below, Reinhold tells his friend that they are trained by
    the police department to suspect that cell phones can be converted into
    guns.”

    Trained? If this is “by the book,” there’s something wrong with the book.

    Robert Trivers wrote about this, the evolutionary advantage of self-deception.
    If you deceive yourself, and are in a position of authority, you can get away with anything.

  • Carlos_Miller

    Mickey informed me tonight that he has sent an email to his contact at SDPD and is waiting to hear back.

    I’m curious about this particular training where they teaching cops that cell phones could be guns.

  • Carlos_Miller

    Mickey was on this as soon as I posted it. This one is a wild one.

  • steveo

    I know this is the Sheriff which is different from the SDPD, but this is a bit from something Mickey wrote before:

    San Diego Sheriff’s Department Media Guide, specifically:

    Do not prevent the taking of pictures or interviews of person(s) in
    public places.

  • Pacosf

    And in particular, training about converted cell phone weapons being left at the scene, in public areas. How does this mesh with the whole “public safety” gig? We keep hearing how these law enforcement agencies need more equipment & budgets in the name of “public safety”.

  • God

    The law in the State of California is that you need the consent of all parties before filming a conversation. Sorry but this guy has no real cause of action for the cop preventing him from filming. Now maybe he has a police brutality claim, but that is not on the video so I cant really say one way or another.

  • rick

    Ignorance of the law is unacceptable ONLY in citizens. For police to be found in violation of the law you need a victim who is the daughter or the mayor, governor, or president, 3 HD cameras at different angles recording the incident in totality (running since the beginning of time so we know the context), THX quality surround sound, 10 citizen witnesses per cop, and a signed affidavit from God the Almighty.

    Getting a conviction is much tougher.

  • Carlos_Miller

    That law does not apply in public where one does not have an expectation of privacy

  • JLLNYC

    You’re not very bright are you? Every court to examine the issue has held that the First Amendment right to record public officials in public trumps state recording laws. See the DOJ letter to the Baltimore PD for an excellent overview.

  • discarted

    Dear God,

    Apparently you’re not all knowing. I suggest you read up on CA wiretapping law before trying out the internet again. Particularly it’s expectation of privacy clause.

  • BernardKingIII

    Sorry god, but you’re wrong. California statutes only require the consent of all parties when recording if there is a reasonable expectation of privacy. Clearly, there is no reasonable expectation of privacy on a public beach (if there was then Mayor Filner’s seal cam at the Children’s Pool would be unconstitutional).

    More importantly, however, is that the First Amendment right to record public officials in public trumps any statute or local law which would attempt to prohibit it.

    On duty law enforcement just needs to get used to being recorded and should conduct themselves at all times as if they are being recorded.

  • steveo

    Crap, just when I thought everyone has read the voluminous information on wiretapping/eavesdropping on this blog, God writes in and says he missed it.

  • Carlos_Miller

    Are you there, God? it’s me, Carlos.

    To tell you that you’re dead wrong.

  • Bridgett Cash

    Um that only applies to phone conversations and places one would expect to be private. If you are out in public you have no expectation of privacy.

  • hp

    Obviously you’re dyslectic. You spelled your name backwards.

  • feefoe

    Nope. Officers actually have neither a duty to advance upon danger, nor the duty to protect you, This is a common misnomer, and has been ruled upon, so it’s the reality of the relationship between you and police. Some people argue that the ruling was to protect officers from claims that they did not intervene in a situation when the officer may not have had any idea that his assistance was needed, others are less generous, but the bottom line is that police have no duty to come to your aid. That’s not to say that there aren’t many good and brave police officers out there who will indeed come to your aid, as many do every day, simply that they have lo legal responsibility to do so.

  • Bob

    Both of them, I agree. Don’t forget about the douchbag that did nothing but help perpetrate the crime.

  • Carlos_Miller

    The second cop is the one who attacked him. Fuck that guy. He’s a thug in uniform

  • Joe

    I find the comment “they are trained by the police department to suspect that cell phones can be converted into guns” just plane stupid. If that is the case, the officer would have drawn his weapon as soon as the phone became visible. So, was the officer following training by ignoring the potential weapon? Or was he only following training at the end where he knocked the phone out of the hands?

  • LBrothers

    Just listen to this fucking idiot. He doesn’t believe this bullshit any more than anyone else – he just needs an excuse for escalating a nothing situation into a circus. Until these cops lose their qualified immunity and have to actually follow the law, this shit will not only continue but grow exponentially.

  • Bob

    I didn’t realize the other guy was the one that attacked him. Yeah, they both need to go down hard.

  • Billythrowtheballatmyhead

    No…he needs to be fired AND CHARGED WITH A CRIME.

    Dirty cops should have 2X the penalty applied to them when they break the law.

  • rick
  • Ron Allen

    Yep… assault,unlawful detention, false arrest, willful destruction of private property…

  • Billythrowtheballatmyhead

    Why is the truth always so ugly……

  • Mark J

    I don’t like what this says, but am glad it’s posted. Law enforcement should NEVER be above the law.

  • Lynchenstein

    The lower chart could mean that in general, cops and other law enforcement types could be committing crimes that earn less jail time. It could also mean that cops are punished less harshly than everyone else. I’m not a sympathizer, but this chart has no context.

  • VS

    Assault, Battery, abuse of power, impersonating a police officer. Fire him now!

  • http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/ Matt Cutts

    That dumb cop really don’t know what is Samsung Galaxy at all?

  • http://twitter.com/cshotton Chuck Shotton

    Oops.

  • Carlos_Miller

    Cops tend to be Blackberry users from what I’ve seen.

  • P

    what happened to the second video?

  • Proud GrandPa

    Pretty much anything could be a weapon…
    Could this be used to silence Jews with phylacteries and furry hats? Or Christians and Mormons with Bibles? Or party-goers with wrapped presence? Where does this madness end? One can make a strong argument that the claims of the officers were (a) legally without merit, and (b) motivated by personal resentment at the victim.
    If one wishes to video these same cops, one must come with plenty of friends to video you also. We may have a mass arrest or else establish the right to photograph. Let the local cops decide. My guess is they would not attempt this mistake again.

  • mvpel

    Hopefully that quote from the SDSD Media Guide means that they can kiss their sovereign immunity goodbye.

  • http://www.cafepress.com/bulliesforromney Bullies For Romney

    Just fired the follow off to:

    Good Afternoon,

    Mayor Bob Filner – BobFilner@sandiego.gov
    Chief William Lansdowne – sdpdpolicechief@pd.sandiego.gov
    Kevin Mayer – SDPD Media Relations – kmayer@pd.sandiego.gov
    Council President Pro Tem Sherri Lightner – sherrilightner@sandiego.gov
    Council member Kevin Faulconer – kevinfaulconer@sandiego.gov
    Council President Todd Gloria – toddgloria@sandiego.gov
    Council member Mark Kersey – markkersey@sandiego.gov
    Council member Lorie Zapf – loriezapf@sandiego.gov
    Council member Scott Sherman – scottsherman@sandiego.gov
    Council member David Alvarez – davidalvarez@sandiego.gov
    Council member Marti Emerald – martiemerald@sandiego.gov
    Lori Weisberg – Reporter – Tourism & restaurants – UT San Diego – lori.weisberg@utsandiego.com
    Diana McCabe – Topic Editor – UT San Diego – diana.mccabe@utsandiego.com
    Nirmala Bhat – Section Editor – Business – UT San Diego – nirmala.bhat@utsandiego.com

    After reviewing this video and seeing how San Diego police officer M. Reinhold treats San Diego citizens, I have made a recommendation to a collective of California scuba divers to cancel our planned July scuba vacation of 20+ divers to San Diego, at a potential cost of approximately $20K+ to San Diego businesses and city.
    http://www.photographyisnotacrime.com/2013/04/09/san-diego-police-attack-and-arrest-man-video-recording-them-claiming-phone-could-be-a-weapon/

    Officer M. Reinhold is an unprofessional, untrained and unqualified brutish police officer who is a clear and present danger to San Diego citizens and tourists. I assume his actions are not indicative of the San Diego Police Force or the training that goes into producing a fine officer.

    Perhaps if your police force properly trained this officer, or fired him for unlawful orders and brutalizing citizens, all of which violates the civil rights of citizens and tourists when it comes to filming interactions with officers, and for assaulting Mr. Pringle, the victim in this matter, we would reconsider this cancellation. But we all know that won’t happen.

    I am sure you’re aware San Diego is California’s leading shipwreck diving destination and it’s known as ‘Ship Wreck Alley.’ http://www.wreck-alley.com/

    What you are probably unaware of is a single shipwreck, intentionally sunk to attract scuba divers, contributes OVER $4 million of tourism dollars to the local community annually. There are a number of wrecks (large and small) near San Diego, however there are six wrecks that highlight Wreck Alley dives.

    There are between 2.7 to 3.5 million active scuba divers in the US with around 6 million active scuba divers worldwide.

    Recreational scuba diving and snorkeling contributes about $11 billion to the US gross domestic product.

    California is the #1 domestic scuba diving market and destination. Annually some 1.38 million dives are made in California, and annual direct expenditures from SCUBA diving in California range from $161 million to $323 million.

    Please refer to the Dive Equipment Manufacturers Association (DEMA) statistics attached for verification of these figures.

    Scuba diving represents millions of tourism dollars for San Diego. As an active diver for over 13-years, and a well-known publicist serving, in part, the scuba industry, I will be advising my peers in all of the leading scuba travel clubs throughout Northern and Southern California, as well as other parts of the country, to avoid travel to San Diego, recommending they choose safer alternative dive destinations.

    Until San Diego can proves she provides a safe haven for its citizens and tourists from the scourge of police brutality, my efforts will be to advise the scuba tourism industry to avoid San Diego at all costs and/or take great precautions for one’s personal safety when encountering San Diego Police Officers.

    The best place for the city of San Diego to resolve such issues would be that Officer M. Reinhold be removed from active duty, terminating him, immediately.

    The cancer of police brutality that is afflicting this country will cost municipalities and taxpayers billions in the years ahead from lawsuits if something is not done to reel-in inept officers.

    Denying municipalities tourism dollars until they can provide safe streets from police brutality will also prove to be very costly.

    San Diego, as well as other leading cities that are this nations leading tourism destinations must condemn these actions by its police officers and take action immediately to purge these violent offenders in blue from their ranks immediately.

    Please note, this email, in its entirety, with all of the above email addresses, will be posted online and throughout social media advising the scuba diving and travel and tourism community of our concerns about San Diego public safety.

    Thank you.

    Respectfully,
    CB

  • Joel Turner

    After the case is dismissed, someone needs to file charges on behalf of the citizens of the city against the officer for pay roll fraud, because he knowing accepted pay for work that he knew wasn’t legal.

  • Ryan French

    Hm, a thin smart phone can fit a .22 round? If so, Officer Reinhold needs a new partner because the other officer just stood there for over a minute while his brother in blue was at “phone point.” Please show me a documented incident of an officer being shot with a converted smart phone. Just a bunch of assholes grasping straws…

  • Lefim

    You mean that “God” is not omnipotent and omnipresent? Now we’re in trouble!

  • hockeyflow33

    I feel like the letter to the mayor would have greater standing if it didn’t contain several grammatical errors.

  • Difdi

    The infamous and seldom seen cellphone gun looks like something from the early-nineties (nothing like a modern smart phone) and the large protruding antenna is the barrel.

    If you were somehow to hide a gun inside a modern smartphone, then using the camera function would cause the barrel to be pointed straight up in the air. Even the smallest, weakest cartridge is more than twice as long as a smartphone is thick.

  • Chris Olin

    I think I can see the magic button to make the trigger pop out… wait — right there.. err, nope. I don’t see anything.

    This is what is going to happen until we require that officers have more than a high school/GED education.

  • Difdi

    Given where the camera lens is on a smartphone, if it were a camera gun it would be very, very obvious. Mostly because the bullets would be about three to four times longer than the phone is thick…

  • Difdi

    I never said they have the duty to protect anyone but themselves — which is the same duty all citizens share. You seem to have grossly misunderstood what I said, then ran for the endzone with it.

    As for the duty to advance, it’s implicit in how the differences in self-defense law function for police versus how it functions for private citizens. A private citizen who goes looking for trouble usually is not allowed to claim self-defense. Police who go looking for trouble on the other hand are almost always allowed to claim self-defense, even if the officer is the aggressor.

  • http://excoplawstudent.wordpress.com/ ExCop-LawStudent

    Must be a Florida thing – most that I know either use an iPhone or a ‘Droid. I can’t remember any that use a Blackberry.

  • CoastalKid

    Terry Stop? Did the officer reasonably believe that someone who was committing a “smoking on the boardwalk” offense would be in possession of a weapon? To arrest him, they would need probable cause, which I am going to doubt they had. Then again, can’t the police detain anyone who they witnessed committing a crime? I am just spouting off things from the top of my head here, either way, the excessive use of force seemed uncalled for.

  • GERGreg427

    The kid got what he deserved. The police officer did not agree to be filmed, and therefore, the kid should not have recorded. There has to be consent on both sides of the camera, and the fact that it was posted online could get the kid sued because he does not have the consent of the officer. The only reason he was beat down was resisting arrest. That is the fact. The police should not have to put up with douche bag kids running their mouths.

  • GERGreg427

    Mayor Filner’s seal cam at the Children’s Pool has signs posted letting you know they are there. By entering, you are allowing them to record you. Every business that has outdoor cams have signs posted letting you know you are on cam

  • GERGreg427

    How was his action “above the law”? The situation was getting out of hand, and he controlled it. This kid is a piece of shit. Police feel that their life is always in danger. Leave them alone.

  • eSkimoz

    Can you be more stupid than that?
    It’s in a public place. Police are on their duty, and you can film them. And what an awkward moment… police officers don’t identify themselves in the situation where “kid got what he deserved”.

  • Benton Quest

    Greg Lacy is a troll.
    Don’t feed the trolls.

  • GERGreg427

    Wrong. The kid failed to comply with the police officers orders.

  • GERGreg427

    The no respect comes from higher ups covering their own ass in the light of the “mob” coming for heads. Every government official should back their officers 100%. With that being said, they also need to look into something before saying it wasn’t legal. This kid was not attacked for the hell of it, or because they could get away with it. He was attacked because he was not complying with the officer. He did not show respect for the people that do what they can to keep the streets safe for others. You step on their toes, the will step on your face. The cop can never have the lower hand, or his life could come to a very quick end.

  • GERGreg427

    Are you saying that if you were being videoed, and wanted it to stop, you would not force the person to stop? Go to this link: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100506003010AAtdbRJ

  • FFS

    Not to mention He was filming both police officers for awhile before it “became a problem” So there was no reason for the police to do what they did….

  • TitletownX5

    Stupid comment. What planet are you from?

  • arglebargle2

    It was an unlawful order, he had no obligation to comply. Photography of public servants while performing their public duties in public is a protected right.
    The way these things draw out, two years from now, he will get a small settlement paid for by the taxpayers, and the cop will get a mark on his record. It won’t make news and no one will care.

  • http://excoplawstudent.wordpress.com/ ExCop-LawStudent

    That is about the dumbest thing I’ve heard so far, and I was a cop for 20 years. First, the People deserve public officials who are accountable for misconduct. When I screwed up as an officer, I took my punishment, and officials should investigate alleged wrong doing. If the officer is wrong, he should be held to account either administratively, civilly, or, if appropriate, criminally.

    Second, there is no law that requires people to “comply” with an officer. The kid may not have shown respect, but that is not a criminal (or civil) violation. Besides, respect has to be earned.

    Finally, there is no excuse, ever, for an officer to state that officer safety trumps the Constitution.

  • OldUncleDave

    Greg is an example of the “passive authoritarian” personality. At another time and place they were called “good Germans.”

  • MarkTrance

    Wow , you are definitely a member of the “part of the problem” camp. Hopefully you will wake up soon or be rendered powerless, so the rest of us can clean up the incredible mess your kind have left of the world.

  • Chris Bandrosky

    A cell phone put his life in danger. You’re an idiot! I’ve seen the cell phone / gun conversion. Problem is that with todays phones being so thin there would be no way for this mod to be possible. The situation got out of control when the officer assaulted him and broke his phone end of story. Cop should be fired. If he was so scared why let the next person film without looking @ his phone as the pig states
    ?

  • Hamlet

    hahahahahahahahah!

    LEAVE BRITNEY ALONE you big meanies!!!!

    Fucking idiot trolls.

  • http://twitter.com/terryrayc Terry Carter

    really, so where is the phone, if they thought it was a weapon then they would have taken it…guess what without the phone/weapon they have no proof of a crime and they just lost the case…if nothing else they should be fired for being clueless about how to do their job.

  • Benton Quest

    Greg Lacy is a troll.
    Don’t feed the trolls.

  • Benton Quest

    Greg Lacy is a troll.
    Don’t feed the trolls.

  • OldUncleDave

    The law says it is not illegal to film the pigs. You are a piece of shit.

  • Lis Carey

    His action was “above the law” because the law, indeed the Constitution, protects that young man’s right to do exactly what he was doing.

    Police feeling that their lives are always in danger is not a justification for claiming they feel “threatened” by a cell phone as an excuse to confiscate cameras, cell phones, or other legal recording devices.

    The piece of shit here is the cop.

  • http://excoplawstudent.wordpress.com/ ExCop-LawStudent

    If you are in a public place, you have no expectation of privacy and anyone can film you, with or without your permission. Instead of looking at Yahoo for answers, you need to look at the law.

    Here it is very clear. See Mam v. City of Fullerton, No. 8:11–CV–1242–JST, 2013 WL 951401 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 12, 2013); Cuviello v. City of Oakland, No.
    C 06-05517 MHP, 2007 WL 2349325 (N.D. Cal. 2007).

    If you forced him to stop, you could be charged with battery.

  • TitletownX5

    How many megapixels did he shoot him with?

  • Ryan French

    You’re joking right? There is no expectation of privacy in public. Case law supports it. Unless you have a good attorney, a lot of money to throw away and a good health insurance policy I don’t recommend stopping anyone from recording with force. I’ve noticed people such as yourself have a problem understanding the following concept: just because you don’t like it, doesn’t make it illegal. You should really do some more thorough research (NOT YAHOO ANSWERS) or consult an attorney before you end up on CNN… and here.

  • RTM

    THIS. So much THIS. THIS is how you make a difference in the community. The mayor doesn’t give a damn about Mr. Pringle or anyone involved. He cares about revenue, and will apply pressure on his police chief when revenue drops. THIS is how real stuff gets done.

  • Dr. Midas Riff

    When will EVERYONE wake up? It is NOT against the law to smoke a cigarette on the boardwalk, or anywhere else for that matter. There is a difference between actual laws, and “Acts” “by-laws”, etc. If you have done nothing to “break the peace”, have not harmed anyone, or anyone’s property, then everything else is just an invitation to contract with these police corporations. Make no mistake, these guys’ job is to collect revenue. If he had tried to write me a citation for smoking, I would never, ever consent to that. Period.

  • rick

    Follow the link at the top, or this one:

    http://www.policemisconduct.net/statistics/2010-annual-report/

  • gordon_wagner

    His orders were and are illegal. Can you not grasp that?

  • Lis Carey

    No one, not even you, is legally required to follow illegal orders, and this particular order was glaringly illegal and a violation of the young man’s Constitutional rights.

  • David Ivey

    Clearly the officer claiming the phone could be a weapon was just an excuse to get the young man to stop recording. If we went by the officers logic then they could assault anyone by asking for your ID then taking you down as soon as you took out your wallet, because “it could be a weapon… look it up on the internet.” Those officers abused their power of authority and assaulted that young man. They should be the ones getting charged.

  • Chris

    I am more offended that both camera ops don’t know to hold the phone in landscape. Cop should have cuffed you for that alone.

  • mxlu

    the cop is giving the offender a PEN so he can sign the ticket. I think a blunt instrument like a phone should be the least of his worries.

  • Mole1

    No, every business that has outdoor cams does not have such signs posted. Those that do have them because they think it increases their security.

  • Jozie

    No, but he is omnisexual….

  • Michel2001

    Noticed
    the cop told the guy to put the phone away, saying he didn’t have a
    right to film, but later told the second guy his friend should’ve just
    handed it to the cop so he could inspect it. If he had actually tried to
    do that instead, when the cop was claiming he was concerned it was a
    weapon, the guy might’ve been shot instead of just roughed up and
    arrested.

  • AlsoBeyond Higgsboson

    It becomes conducive in a climate of witchhunt.

    That’s judge, jury and executioner.

    There was a fellow down in San Diego (I’m L.A.) who was
    shot in the face, I believe–don’t know–all best of memory
    and otherwise hearsay (I’m a lawyer–) supposedly for
    reaching into his pocket after having been stopped for
    riding his bicycle on the sidewalk.

    That’s sure a helluva a result of biking on the sidewalk.
    A cop shoots you in the face (if true.)

    I can only imagine the bicyclist saw witchhunt on the cop’s
    face and reached for a camera.
    Only an idiot would think a bicyclist would ride with a gun in
    his pocket.

    Surely, as with the general population, some police will as
    a result of witchhunt, which would have also enabled judging/transference
    of a nature that may have been connected with the Dale Akiki case,
    also in that area, have had parent who were bent on transfering witchhunt
    and/or ego defense in its wake. Judging exists to the exclusion of love.
    If by way of arbitrary perversion concomitantly, some police are voluntarily
    obese, then the feelings of inadequacy will have been rooted in the
    emotional AND the physical, as obesity is a prime cause of impotence.
    “Witch” (reportedly applied to Thatcher) as taken from
    Oz, for ounces of gold, obviously was intended for
    connecting Wicked Witch of the West with witchhunt.

    Those who engage in the process all match the description
    of the intended targets, though only they have self-created
    themselves as they corrupted the world, a process seemingly
    analogous to Gray’s Sports Almanac having been transplanted
    back in time (“Back to the Future.”)
    It was earlier burning women at the stake when midwives
    threatened medieval doctors.

    Otherwise earlier still, and lately, it’s saying deny birthright
    to some and then associate with them anyone not going along
    with such fraudulence as the rich demagogue switching out
    monopoly for capitalism and the mouthpiece making afraid of
    being wrongly demonized anyone objecting.

    Witchhunt is a Ponzi scheme that has reached its end, mirroring
    the financial Ponzi schemes and their corresponding environmental
    toll.

    The nominal author, L. Frank Baum, was a dire racist, as was the
    sculptor of Mt. Rushmore (the presidents therein were all anti-
    monopoly.) Obviously, the former had his theatre and play bankrolled
    by his mother-in-law, the wealthy Joslyn Matilda Gage, an abolitionist,
    close confidant of Susan B. Anthony, and quite moralistic and religious
    woman. Also, obviously, she’s the true inspiration of the play. Also,
    obviously, she’s the actual author.

    There’s conceptually a parallel. Mohammed was educated by a woman
    who would become his wife (Kadija,) not to imply there was anything
    between Gage and Baum other than Gage’s love of her daughter, Baum’s
    wife.

    Borglum (Rushmore) simply wanted his own freedom though he didn’t
    worry about the Indians’ or blacks’ or women’s.

    Curiously, both ended up in South Dakota, site of the final elements of
    the genocide of the American Indian.

    That last sentence might have import, if I may say so myself.
    Gage, the moralist, understood witchhunt. She understood hypocrisy
    to the point of genocide in the name of God.
    She thought good was very rare, obviously.

    So do I.

    As many Britons read this (I’m an Angelino (L.A.)) I perhaps should be
    permitted saying this is about Shakespeare as well as Nostradamus-Pascal-
    Gilgamesh-quantum mechanics / judging, transference, scapegoating, mollification,
    ego defense.

    Beware the person judging who may simply need doing so
    and because of whom everything is monopolized, privatized,
    and then requiring war alongside the opportunity to benefit
    from one’s own countrymen. The person doing that, even on
    the radio famously, will likely be followed in syndication by
    the fraudulent control freak.

    http://goo.gl/sPtPb

  • Number Six

    I looked it up. There are no videos on youtube showing a “Cell phone weapon”
    and only one doubtful snopes article on Google. Looking at my own phone,it very doubtful that a .22 shell can even fit in one. Usually cops say they dont believe the internet when its inconvenient for them, but they belive this horseshit?

  • http://www.telescreen.org Vidiot

    ExCopLawStudent points out on his (new, excellent) blog that there’s absolutely no history of a cell phone gun in the US, and one case in Europe. The cops are being disingenuous.

    http://excoplawstudent.wordpress.com/2013/04/10/police-myth-cellphone-guns-in-the-united-states/

  • Branden Silva

    This is why cops will not strap cameras to themselves, because somehow I think it will incriminate their behavior more than the civilians they are harassing.

    I know you often get a one sided view of police officers on the internet being nefarious and above the law. After all, you rarely see good videos of cops doing their job appropriately within the laws statutes. We only remember the drama because fear is a powerful and nobody reads the obituaries where a police officer gave his life in duty. It’s a danger job, I get that and precautions need to be taken.

    And indeed cell phones can be modified as weapons, but these guys did not come off as dangerous individuals. They were simply filming on a cell phone out of the bazillion other cell phones out there that aren’t guns. The cop could simply say, let me inspect it to make sure its not a weapon and let the kid go on his merry way with recording lawful police activity of writing a citation.

  • rick

    I hope one day during broadcast a national news anchor says, “…it is completely legal to record police in public…”

    I’m willing to start with a local news anchor.

  • adam hammer

    can someone from Anonymous go ahead and hack the police
    records and post this cops home address, where his wife and kids work and go to
    school that way some can show up and mace them in the face as payback asap.
    this is why people hate cops and him needed to be taught a lesson soon!!!!

  • Guest

    I want to live in a world where police are held accountable for their actions not a world where the innocent are punished for the actions of another.

  • James Doster

    This is an absolute travesty… Even if the BS excuse “A cell phone can be converted to a weapon” – there’s no law against having a weapon (most states allow open carry in public places that do not charge admission or serve alcohol) The illegal activity is to USE the weapon for anything other than sparring and sport (in the case of target shooting, swordplay or archery) or self defense. clearly a cell phone can cause the office no PHYSICAL damage (though by what survived of the recording I’m sure it will cause them all sorts of POLITICAL damage.)

  • http://excoplawstudent.wordpress.com/ ExCop-LawStudent

    Why don’t we just post your address and job info at the same time?

    Only a sociopath would wish harm on innocent women and children.

  • http://twitter.com/FilthyPazuzu FilthyPazuzu

    Public SERVANTS.

  • Jonathan
  • rick

    2:00 “…they are given to us by our Creator…”
    Stopped listening

  • http://excoplawstudent.wordpress.com/ ExCop-LawStudent

    Ditto.

  • Mick Magill

    DId not watch… BUT… It is a fact that our Constitution does not grant us rights.

    The Constitution ENUMERATES inherent rights that the government is constrained from acting against ( See “Natural Rights of Man”, Hume ).

    If we start from the argument that the government has the power to grant you rights, we tacitly give them the authority to remove those rights.

    And I am NOT a theist… but have no problem with the term “Our Creator” … as long as that is not conflated to “Jehovah” or some other version of an Abrahamic god.

  • Common Sense

    Don’t know if it has been brought up by someone else already, but yes cell phones can be a weapon. Our department recently confiscated what looked like a cell pho e, but was really a taser. So the officers do take items such as this into account as a possible weapon.

    HOWEVER, if the officer was so concerned about that possibility, he should have addressed it as soon as it was produced. Ok, so he was busy writing the revenue ticket, no excuse! A well trained officer should always be aware of their surroundings and movemnts of others in which they are interacting. So we have now established he is not observe t, what about his partner. He appears oblivious as he is looking everywhere. It obviously did NOT concern him.

    Could this simply be a case of POP? I believe this was a clear cut contempt of cop. The photographerhas done NOTHING wrong! This officer simply had somone who knew the law and who was not intimidated by this bully.

    Sadly this will probably play out like to many other simular cases where nothing happens g the cop and the photographer us never vindicated. As a LEO with over twenty years experience this officer is an embarrassment not only to the uniform, but also to the US Constitution.

  • rick

    YouTube clip from previous poster:
    /watch?v=H8XLpVBFv7w
    Notice how effective that taser is.

    If you have any reported cases of a cell phone causing physical injury (Naomi Campbell exception) please provide a link.

    Thanks

  • http://twitter.com/TrustNoOne2017 J

    There are innocent people that are attacked by the Police also, and that’s ok ? Maybe if the Police saw their loved ones being attacked then maybe they just might change their ways. Just saying.

  • http://excoplawstudent.wordpress.com/ ExCop-LawStudent

    No, that is not OK. That’s why I pointed out either here or at excoplawstudent.wordpress.com that the North Carolina PD had a real problem identifying and taking action against problem officers. That’s why it is a good thing that the U.S. Attorney in North Carolina is prosecuting one of the officers under 18 U.S.C. 241.

    I’ll reiterate–only a sociopath would wish harm on innocent women and children.

  • keith

    Well
    he has a very nice civil case against that officer for 2 constitutional
    violations. 1st amendment and 4th amendment. Under title 42 section
    1983 of the US Title code. If he wants to he can sue him PERSONALLY.
    Even make it 2 cases and really cost that officer some legal bills

  • Dan

    That was riDICKulous… I emailed the Mayor. Hope you win a zillion dollars in court from those men who are pretending to be law enforcement officers. “To protect and serve” my ass.

  • Jerry

    Dear Mickey H. Osterreicher….do not go near a cop shop,and if you do,please do not drink anything they may offer you…you may end up like them

  • rick

    I have no problem with the term Creator, God, Allah, or Spaghetti Monster. Just don’t use it as the premise of the argument.

  • http://dreadpiraterobert.blogspot.com dreadpiraterobert

    When you see a cop in San Diego, you should probably assume they are going to assault you too and act accordingly. After all, that’s what this cop is teaching us.

  • Chris Bergstrom

    A pencil, pen, baseball bat, roll of quarters, etc… can be considered a weapon. A black belt’s fists can be considered a deadly weapon too. So what. Obviously the subject was not complying and the officer felt threatened. Good for him for fucking him up!

  • mjh2901

    Problem is the tax payers will have to foot the eventual bill and large judgement instead of the officer. When adam sues he will win.

  • Boomer

    This story finally hit the local news station last night here in San Diego. Of course, they didn’t show enough of the video to fully illustrate the absurdity of Reinhold’s actions in arresting Mr. Pringle. The comments on KUSI were relatively negative to the actions of the police, but, true to form, they didn’t go so far that it would endanger their precious “access”.

  • sunshipballoons

    Point taken. I guess a better point is that, not only is it a prior restraint, but it is also a direct infringement on First Amendment rights, which also include the collection of information (e.g., the “right to hear” speech). Even if there were no prior restraint doctrine, this conduct would still violate the constitution. that’s more what I was getting at. I appreciate the explanation of how prior restraint also applies here.

  • http://www.y8u.org/ Y8

    I had been motivated to see your article two times because of the huge information and fascinating content. Thanks.

  • DemocideH8tr

    Fucking Californian Socialist Pigs! Stupid Liberas in that state are losing all of their rights and paying high taxes for the least amount of freedom.

  • snork

    Where’s the second video?

PINAC

PINAC Logo cutout copy
Be the Media