Home / Crazed Woman Attacks Man for Flying Camera Drone over Public Beach in Connecticut (Updated)

Crazed Woman Attacks Man for Flying Camera Drone over Public Beach in Connecticut (Updated)


First, Andrea Mears called police on a man for flying his remote control quadcopter over a public beach in Connecticut.

Then, when police didn’t respond in seconds, she attacked the man

“He’s taking pictures of people on the beach … with a helicopter plane,” she told the cops by phone.

“Can you guys hurry? I already talked to him, just come.”

Seconds later, she attacked him.

The man, who goes by Hogwit on Youtube, began recording the encounter on his iPhone as his quadcopter was flying overhead, capturing her clawing at his face and pulling at his shirt.

“You want to take pictures?” she asks him as she jams her fingers into his mouth. “Yeah, you’re going to see how it feels when police come.”

Then she has the audacity to tell him “let go of me” as she is all over him.

“If you wouldn’t be assaulting me, I wouldn’t be touching you,” he responds, remaining exceptionally calm considering the circumstances.

“He’s taking pictures of people on the beach!” she yells as she continues to rip his shirt. “I’m going to kick your ass, you little motherfucker.”

“Can someone call the cops!” the man yells. “I’m being assaulted! Help!”

Police arrived and arrested her for assault in the third degree and breach of peace. The incident took place May 12 at Hammonassett State Park in Madison.

Screenshot 2014-06-07 17.43.58

 UPDATE: Here are more details from the man who was flying the drone that he posted on a forum shortly after the incident:

I went to a nearby beach that is a whopping 2 miles long, set up, talked to some people that were curious what my “thing” was, demonstrated the loiter feature (pulling the quad to one direction or another), demonstrated rtl (flying it away then having it return), and make a lot of people think the quad was just awesome. I never went below 50 feet save for take off/landing, then after the end of my last flight, some crazy lady came over and started taking pictures of me…and dialed 911 for the 3rd time in 15 minutes…she said something to the effect of, “There’s a guy here taking pictures at the beach with a helicopter plane.” (I distinctly remember her saying, “with a helicopter plane,” because that just sounds hilarious.) They basically said that they’d send someone when one gets free during each of the 3 calls she made, she decided they didn’t care enough about someone obeying the law so when no one was around she assaulted me and she decided to stop when she got a phone call. I called the police to report the assault, and boy was the response big…10 or more vehicles arrived (cops, DEEP, and an ambulance)…They first listened to her story of lies (she claimed I was taking close ups of people in bikinis, and that she had asked me to stop flying before calling the police, and that I was the one that assaulted her, and and and). The police approached me very aggressively, believing her full story, and before anything else was said I brought up something that she missed… The fact that the cell phone in my hand has a camera…that was recording. I had video evidence that she went nuts completely unprovoked, and was the one that assaulted me. She was then charged with assault, and breach of peace and I gave the cops a copy of the video for their prosecution. I then also showed them my last flight where you can make out her colorful shirt getting up from the beach then following it until it lands which proved that she lied when claiming that she asked me to stop flying before calling the police.
At the end of it all, one of the officers said to me basically, “Flying that thing the way you were is fine, you’re not in any trouble. You can come back and fly, but just be aware that some people can be alarmed.”

Just a funny thing to add, last time I was there, a British guy had come up to me and said he thought it was a giant mosquito near him. He said that he first saw snake on a hike here in the States as they don’t have them in the UK, and thought giant mosquitoes were another animal they didn’t have.

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.
  • MadLibertarian

    This doesn’t surprise me, I live in CT and basically everyone here is brainwashed. They think government control is good and having fun/expressing first amendment rights is bad. This woman is a prime example of this. Glad the cops arrested her though, and hope he files a lawsuit against her.

    • Mr.Winchester

      Heres her facebook if you want to say hello

      https://www.facebook.com/ndrmears

      • yesitsme

        not anymore it’s down she must have gotten a lot of hellos for being an @zzhole .

        • Mr.Winchester

          Still works for me. But she has a name and a face so, its gonna be hard to hide. In addition, the boy who was assaulted by this horrible person, why does he not sue her? She should face charges for false statements aswell, and she should be sued by the boy who was attacked.

          • ibanix

            Because lawyers are money. The state will get her a few months probation or a week or two for the assault, if it’s her first offense.

          • inquisitor

            Somehow I am doubtful this is her first offense.

          • OldNavyPatriot

            Battery (the civil claim he has against her) is an intentional tort, which means he can get punitive damages. I know lawyers who are also RC pilots that would probably take the case pro bono (free) or a contingency based on aforementioned punitive damages, if they were in CT. He can probably find somebody. Assuming the dingbat has anything to pay the damage award with.

          • Stephanie Hoshi Schaffner

            thumbs up just cause you called her a dingbat :) (b^.^)b

          • Daniel Pryce

            You should probably get in contact with the guy.

          • OldNavyPatriot

            About all I can do is tell him what I’ve said here, which I’m happy to do. I’m not licensed in CT, so I can’t advise him. I noticed on his youtube account he’s trying to crowdfund to cover the costs of representation.

          • TheDranx

            Especially with that gear he has. Don’t those ‘helicopter planes’ cost a lot? She could have damaged some of the stuff that goes with it in the scuffle.

            If this kid is with his parents, they could sue if they want to pursue it if he can’t.

          • Chang 场河

            Her profile picture is hilarious. Clearly the internet horde with virtual pitchforks have overstepped the bounds of decency in the usual fashion.

          • dougmctx

            Personally, I’m kind of surprised that she attacked him rather than his multicopter. She could have “hit him where it hurt” a lot more effectively by stomping on it, or grabbing it and throwing it.

            Not that anything she did was particularly rational …

          • BlackbeardsWyfe

            She assaulted a minor as well…….

          • Rainman

            “its gonna be hard to hide”, it’s a crime to stalk someone on the internet you little creep.

          • Blanche Starbong

            Tough shiz. It’s a crime to attack people in real life, you little creep.

          • dave hug

            No it’s not, it is a public space as was the place she did this. If this was a full grown man who assaulted a little girl your reaction would be far different So lets not be sexist here. She is clearly misinformed about public cameras and only thinks big brother should have that right but that is not the case. She deserves to be ridiculed and shamed for her actions. She should be glad she lives in a republic most places would have done harsh things for her beating a teen boy like that. Call him a creep if you want but I would make this woman register with the state for what she did.

          • CaptPicard1701E

            He’s not injured, he got her ugly face on the internet and besides the money, the time needed to live through a suit is wasted time. If I were him, I’d just move on. Maybe sue her in small claims for the shirt but good luck with that.

          • Scott Allen

            get a life. Respect Privacy

          • tdpl769

            Respect privacy. I totally agree.. umm except they were in public. If you want “privacy”, you Need to go somewhere private.

        • Sid Walker

          no

      • centralnjbill

        In my opinion, she looks like someone who really shouldn’t be approached without body armor and pepper spray…maybe a net?

        • THG

          Harpoons perhaps.

      • Joel

        LOL thanks. I might have to go say hello.

      • Andrew

        This makes me sick. She is studying Graphic Design according to her Facebook. She of all people should know the rights about cameras. As a fellow graphic major I honestly hope she changes majors, and learns not to violate other peoples rights.

        • THG

          But he is a male – so therefore and thensuch whatever he was doing was automatically perverted.

      • MongoLikesCandy

        Ugh. She’s a graphic design student. Isn’t she be required to take a photography class?

    • The Truth

      Have you been living under a cyber rock your entire life? Step outside the internet and you will see regular everyday people are not brainwashed , they are only simply making a living and trying to survive in a shitty world. Give it up Libertarian retard.

      • eric

        Okay, okay, they’re not brainwashed, its just that the perpetual shittyness of this world has made it impossible for most people to think for themselves. Totally different and your criticism has nothing to do with the fact you have animosity towards libertarians.

        So what’s your bone buddy? Why do you have to be such a dick over such a light comment. Especially considering he’s probably not under a “cyber rock” if he’s talking about his local area.

        Are you politically affiliated yourself and that’s why you’re mad, or do you just lash out at anyone who stands for an ideology?

        • http://milfcommander.com Ruchi

          Hey, eric. Nice response! I agree that mostly everyone can easily be described as unoriginal. They are fed the same corporate lies and mainstream media drolls as everyone else, and they eat them right up! That’s why I have a lot of respect for the hipster movement.

          • Jenkins

            And that’s why you are stupid. The “hipster movement” is a joke. Why not have respect for pedophiles or other degenerates? (Which I imagine you probably do.)

          • http://milfcommander.com Ruchi

            Why is it a joke? Name-calling is a little immature. I know we can both come to an understanding on this if you possess the patience of a grown up and are as willing to talk it out as I am!

          • Blue Gum

            Nice way to throw away any chance of a meaningful conversation by equating hipsters with paedophiles.

            SMH.

          • theaton

            Which is worse, that we are “fed the same corporate lies and mainstream media drolls” or that “they eat them right up?” We know that Lucy is going to pull the ball away every time. If we continue to try and kick it, we are the dumb ones.

      • kraz

        No, many are kind of brainwashed, especially in the US. I’m guessing you’re another one who probably has no clue of what a Libertarian actually is, only what you’ve been told to believe. I bet that’s why you’re so hostile.

      • Adam Wiederholt

        Butthurt Obama supporter…. bet you would vote for another term huh? or even your next vote would be Hillary, and let me guess, you were for all the wars?

        • Steve

          Nice assumptions. I bet you’re completely right.

        • joel

          Adam what you just said is correct, but your facts are a bit off. Not one US president since JFK has had control over whether or not we go to war. Please google search the MIC and you will see whats going on. No president says that we “go” to war. It is a few of the elite rich who pull the strings. I will leave it at that to find out what is going on with our military, banking, politics, etc. The president is purely a puppet and a spokesperson for the elite.

          • Adam Wiederholt

            I say that not one president since JFK has been real, all the time, where have you been? Really? You’re telling ME, to google MIC? LOLOLOL I know who controls the strings at the top, nice roll over saying “I will leave it at that to find out” .

            Boy i’m 32, I’ve been WIDE awake since 2001, partially awake since birth, I knew about the deadly vaccines, deadly fluoride taking our IQs down a notch, or halfing our intelligence/epigenetics, so that the Eugenics kings/queens would be able to out think us. I’m the LAST person you need to use your time to reply to me like that. I don’t see where my facts were a bit off? I never said the president decides on which wars are waged. Besides, votes don’t count, cause they count the votes. Electronic fraud machines to vote on.

          • Stephanie Hoshi Schaffner

            LOL i like how the “ME” is all caps.

        • jutholmes

          Haha retard republican. Facts are your enemy, right. So just ignore them. Let’s vote another Republican to start 2 more wars and put us even deeper in debt. How are your tea party brethren? Give my best to all of your idiot friends that shoot up schools, courthouses, and politicians. You must know at least one of those nutjobs since they’re all tea party or republican.

          • Chang 场河

            Actually, most mass shooters are left-wing in ideology. In addition to being crazy. Not that their politics causes the crazy, or the shooting, but you should know the actual facts before casting aspersions.

          • Christian

            Timothy McVeigh, a registered Republican, and NRA member killed more people than the next 8 mass shootings/murders in the history of the US combined. Facts are facts, right?

          • Jerry St John Wyatt

            Wow, that was a pretty stupid statement Christian. care to fact check yourself before the internet molests you?

          • francesmacomber

            Actually, what he said was completely factually correct. Not to mention the two mass shootings by teapartiers in the last three days.

          • Adam Wiederholt

            “Actually, what he said was completely factually correct. Not to mention
            the two mass shootings by teapartiers in the last three days.”

            That’s a load of crap you’ve heard from teLIEvision, that the Rothschilds/Rockefellers/Warburg/Dupont and others own.

            You’re a brainwashed tool to them and you don’t even know it. Guns are your best friend against criminals and criminal government, especially the latter. Look at what they’re doing over in the Middle East with our taxpayer dollars and money they just print out of thin air, making our labor, worth less, get it? They’ll do the same to us in a heartbeat, just this last week, Obama Administration is pushing for legal usage of US drones, over US soil.. meaning, they’ll bomb whomever they want to, using our own military, against US citizens, regardless of who/what party affiliation they have or views, anyone with common sense would know they wouldn’t stop at what he controlled media claims as “right-wing” they’ll target others, they’ll target water supplies (already have with fukushima they ignore, the fracking, the BP oil spil “Corexit” chemical despersant, I could go on and on, not to mention Monsanto run-off, Hexafluorosilicic Acid, not to mention all the other drugs found in the water supply that they claim you can drink and it’s safe for you, when the water companies SHOULD be purifying the water of EVERY one of their customer’s homes for the price of the water bills we pay) You think they won’t continue the rise in Police State that makes even your most basic human right, outlawed? Think again.

            You want nobody to own guns, besides police and military? That’s your worse nightmare that you will soon realize.

            I like all the labeling and de-humanizing that the people that are seemingly to be “light-wing” or “liberal” but they want to take away freedoms why? That’s against the personal liberty. Taking away liberty is against true liberalism. Hence the name, you get it yet?

            Tea Partiers are people of all parties, former democrats, libertarians, and republicans. Who in my opinion, if it’s a REAL Tea Partier, not the Michelle Bachmann type (former IRS agent, is not a Tea Partier, plus she supports democide in Palestine) is more closer to American values than the current choices of your old party democrats/republicans that have been in office way too long… like Chuck Shumer(D), he can go, like Lee Terry(R), he can go, too. They both vote for war and endless spending of our tax money, endless devaluing of our labor (via printing more paper fiat money), they also both violate our constitutional liberties.

          • Stephanie Hoshi Schaffner

            I have a question. How is television so bad that you say teLIEvision but the internet is OK?

          • Adam Wiederholt

            do you know who owns the teLIEvision networks? Did you know that U.S. and New Zealand are the only 2 countries left on the planet that haven’t banned pharmaceutical advertisements? You can control what website you go to a lot more than you can control what you see on teLIEvision, and the KNOWN liars use the tv, as a tool to control the masses, so you tell me, which media can you get more truth from? TV or Internet?

          • Adam Wiederholt

            How are you even asking me that question to begin with? known mass murdering lying thieves control the TV networks

          • PINAC Troll

            You need to get your ass kicked.

          • Adam Wiederholt

            Says the scum that probably needs it. Sound real tough keyboard warrior, so scared, come and violate my rights lol

          • Adam Wiederholt

            Can’t dispute with facts, so you throw threats and insults, how typical of you.

          • Adam Wiederholt

            And you sir, need to deport yourself from this nation, bunch of coward fluoridated water drinking GMO eating pentagon-bots.

          • PINAC Troll

            You want to get your ass kicked by a 15 year old? You make me want to become a cop so much! I am proud to be an American since we are the freest Country in the world. You even might be a terrorist from the way you think and talk..

          • Adam Wiederholt

            @ francesmacomber’s “Actually, what he said was completely factually correct. Not to mention the two mass shootings by teapartiers in the last three days.”

            Nope, all were registered democrats or FBI informants.

          • PINAC Troll

            You scares of a 15 year old!

          • Adam Wiederholt

            Christian, you should check the eye-witness testimony of the police officers that were there that saw FBI agents stage the whole thing, some of those Police men were “terminated” (they knew too much and would blab, but you could still research it for yourself) Timothy McVeigh was set up. The Fed agents actually staged the whole bombing, the FBI intentionally blew up that child daycare to increase the police state here in the U.S. The FBI has a history of doing the same thing, look at the FBI’s involvement in staging the 1993 WTC bombing… the defendant recorded the conversation of the FBI telling him to go along with making the bomb out of real materials that was supposedly for a ” terror bombing drill”. It didn’t go correctly, so they had to double back and create 9/11/01 WTC false-flag attack, to take the middle-east war to the extreme, to help the State of Israel, democide all the nations, on guess who’s Tax-dollars?

          • PINAC Troll

            Ya right Adam.

          • Adam Wiederholt

            Timothy McVeigh was an FBI informant and was deliberately setup by the FBI. Ask yourself why not one FBI agent was in the building that day, but all across the street, and ask yourself why they didn’t warn the 100+ children in the daycare and the staff that they were going to blow up the building? Police at the scene found bombs that went off inside the building, so the truck bomb myth is destroyed. There was even an bomb that was set to explode but didn’t, explain that Christian. Every one of your “shooters” that you say were NRA/tea-party/repub/conservative, were leftists taking prescription drugs, which the doctors can READ the side-effects on the drug insert “may cause suicidal thoughts and homicidal behavior” FBI blew up Oklahoma Building.. or at the very least, stood down for CIA to blow it up.

          • Blanche Starbong

            Hate to hit you with the truth, liar, but about 80% of mass murderers are wingnuts like yourself. Please don’t shoot me.

          • Chang 场河

            Clearly you’re just going with the “99% of all statistics are made up” meme, because you clearly didn’t do any reading on the issue before responding. Here’s a partial list it took less than a minute to find.

            Elliot Roger – California shooter just a few weeks ago – Democrat
            Nidal Hasan – Ft Hood Shooter: Reg­istered Democrat
            Aaron Alexis, Navy Yard shooter – registered Democrat, Obama voter
            Seung-Hui Cho – Virginia Tech shooter: Wrote hate mail to President Bush and to his staff, his manifesto (though clearly crazy) gives support to Kim Jong-il, who last time I checked, was a Communist.
            James Holmes – the “Dark Knight”/Colorado shooter: Registered Democrat
            Amy Bishop – killed her colleagues in Alabama, Obama supporter.
            Jared Loughner, the Tucson shooter – registered independent, but Marxist in written and spoken commentary, regular poster to the Daily Kos
            Harris and Klebold, the Columbine Shooters – families registered Democrats

            Like I said, it isn’t the politics that cause mass shootings, but the apparent majority of shooters are left-wing in ideology. As to the off-topic comment about McVeigh, it wasn’t a shooting, which is what we were talking about.

          • francesmacomber

            Hahaha. These have all been thoroughly debunked. Seriously, Klebold and Harris’ parents were Democrats? They expressed support for fucking HITLER you nitwit. My dad is a teapartier, but I couldn’t be further to the left. See how that works? Imbecile.

            Please, elucidate to us on how the Millers, the patriot out in Georgia, the cat up in New Brunswick and all of the other right wingers, teapartiers and Republicans that have shot people *in the name of their ‘patriot’ beliefs* were somehow not right wing terrorists.

            Jesus, you wingers are stupid.

          • Chang 场河

            As far as “debunked” goes, I’ll grant the evidence on Klebold and Harris is thin, but the remainder have not been debunked. But as is sadly typical of the internet, you feel compelled to weaken a potentially constructive discussion with insults to support your “argument”. It is a shame.

            Perhaps when you’ve reconciled your anger with your father, and have more coherent and calm phrasing to use in support of actual reasoning, we can have a better discussion. Until then, all the best. I’m done.

          • Adam Wiederholt

            “Democrats? They expressed support for fucking HITLER you nitwit. My
            dad is a teapartier, but I couldn’t be further to the left. See how that
            works? Imbecile.

            Please, elucidate to us on how the Millers, the
            patriot out in Georgia, the cat up in New Brunswick and all of the other
            right wingers, teapartiers and Republicans that have shot people *in
            the name of their ‘patriot’ beliefs* were somehow not right wing
            terrorists.

            Jesus, you wingers are stupid.”

            You’re the winger here, I’m not with any party brah.

            Nazi’s were the democrats in Germany.

            Cite every single one of the “right-wingers” that you claim shot up anyone, k? Let’s see some citation, cause I’m calling it bull that you’re just repeating the lies you’ve seen on TV.

          • Adam Wiederholt

            Not to mention the Democrat party was the one that started the Klan, oh and by the way the NRA trained and armed african americans to free themselves :)

            Take that teLIEvision viewer!

          • Adam Wiederholt

            You’re the fucking liar Blanche.

          • francesmacomber

            Actually, nope. 75 fatalities in shootings by right wingers since Obama got elected, no fatalities in any shootings by any supposed left-wingers.

            It’s funny, because stupid teapartiers claim that psychos like Loughner or the kid from the Sandy Hook shooting were left wing, which obviously they weren’t, then they make a meme about it, and no amount of facts will ever clear that up for nitwits like you that believe chain emails.

          • dave hug

            Yea its all right wing who kill people with guns, you do know every single government that committed genocide and mass killings where leftist? Yet another idiot who thinks all wars where waged by religion and all murders where commited by guns with no uniforms and the state can protect everyone….. somehow. Sir you are one of the reasons society is going to hell you know what else was a commonality in all the shootings, xanax and prozac now go take yours and think about it.

          • Adam Wiederholt

            Citation?

          • Adam Wiederholt

            How’d Sandy Hook even happen? Wasn’t the shooting in Newtown? hmm.. fishy false flag there cowboys and ladies. Why would they let anyone into a locked front door looking like rambo? Why was Adam Lanza’s mom’s car parked in the drive-way, not at the school, who’s car was it that was used ? (the 2008 Honda Civic car that belonged to a soon to be pardoned male, giving help to the Feds looking to stage a shooting)

          • Adam Wiederholt

            “Haha retard republican.” – um I’m an American, that’s all, no party. If I was ever in or voted for a Party member, it would have been for their voting record and personal values, not like how my parents vote just “democrat” only because there’s a “d” there, they don’t even research the candidate, just vote “d” all the way down, are you telling me that’s more productive? progressive?

            “Facts are your enemy, right.” Facts are our friends. You ignored my statements, that Obama, Hillary, are War presidents, just like Bush, just like Carter, just like Johnson, just like Clinton, just like Nixon, the few that were opposed to these illegal wars were Andrew Jackson, Thomas Jefferson, Washington, John F. Kennedy (oh but he got shot by world powers for wanting to end their monopoly of the money system and that JFK would end the fraud Vietnam war that killed tens of thousands on each side for nothing, just to sell weapons!)

            You support that? Democide: Mass murdering of populace by government force.

            Tea Party is just fine, call it what you will, Americans should come first.

            Like I said before I don’t have a party choice, but if I were to call one my own I would say Tea Party looks like the most American to me, and anyone that wants something different than their government robbing/regulating them out of surviving or starting a small business, meanwhile giving loop-holes to foreign, sometimes just off-shore Mega Corps that don’t pay taxes, and also controlling the main currency by a private centralized bank, is someone that would align themselves with a Tea Partier (if it’s not a Michelle Bachmann fake tea-partier, she was what I call a “sit-in” someone that sits in the spotlight, saying “oh i’m that, ya, Tea Party” when they’re just trying to rob the spotlight from average Joe that needs to get elected that would not cave into the lobbyists, like you or me that work for a living)

            not one single penny should ever go to illegal wars/invasions/black-ops, or funding of the illegal State of Israel on Palestinian land.

      • G0m3r

        A shitty world of THEIR creating. I hate when people like you try to absolve people of their part in the mess we live in. We have the world we made. It my not be the one we wanted but WE did this no one dd this to us. We did this to ourselves with our apathy and willfull ignorance.

      • kyle

        People are brainwashed to a certain extent, in certain cases. How do you explain the fact that the kardashians have ratings?

    • Blue Gum

      “This woman is a prime example of this.”
      So everyone is like this crazy chick?
      Go outside more keyboard warrior.

      • Adam Wiederholt

        He didn’t say everyone. Just those that are government loving control freaks like you who change words around to fit your agenda, just like this girl in the video, changed the story to the police, about HER assaulting the boy

        • Blue Gum

          He literally said “basically everyone here is brainwashed”, so almost everyone then, my mistake.

          As for the rest of your turd of a sentence, what agenda? just like this girl how? I think she is a crazy b1tch, end of story.

          You sound like a nutcase who surrounds themselves with other nutcases who enable you, reinforcing your conspiracy bullsh1t and ignoring all logic.

          PS – I do not even live in America, I’m looking from the outside in and people like you are what make your country look crazy.

          • theaton

            “turd of a sentence, “you sound like a nutcase,”conspiracy bullsh1t.” Do you have anything besides ad hominem attacks?

          • Blue Gum

            I see you ignored my points and resort to attacking my choice of words, You may as well have said nothing.

          • theaton

            I understood your point exactly, that is why I pointed it out.

          • Adam Wiederholt

            “He literally said “basically everyone here is brainwashed”, so almost everyone then, my mistake.””

            That’s okay, but you made another mistake.

            “As for the rest of your turd of a sentence, what agenda? just like this girl how? I think she is a crazy b1tch, end of story.”

            Her agenda, the agenda of most government, take your liberties away, she hated that kid so bad, she wanted to hurt him, she believed that in a public place, she could have privacy and then take away someone’s liberty, then not only that, but threaten and harm that person, then even trying to falsely accuse the kid of attacking her, when it was the other way around, AGENDA.. yeah.. that one? Why is she a crazy woman, what made her flip out like that?

            “You sound like a nutcase who surrounds themselves with other nutcases
            who enable you, reinforcing your conspiracy bullsh1t and ignoring all
            logic.”

            More like the facts are in my court and you aren’t even in the game, as far as debating goes, you’re in the stands trying to get attention from players that are WAY more important to look your way, I’m only correcting you so that others don’t think they could say the same BS again and not think for a second someone won’t call them on their BS. Sure in your head you might be able to flip words around to your own fitting, but this is the internet, you will be wrong and wrong again, good luck with that. Good luck with twisting people’s words around, I’m sure you must surround yourself with moral and valued members of society and we should all take cues from you on how to treat others, cause you know, you’re mister popular that likes to twist people’s words, I’m sure that makes you tons of friends. Oh and calling people names for having more to say than just “she’s a crazy &&&&&” is cool too, right?

            “PS – I do not even live in America, I’m looking from the outside in and people like you are what make your country look crazy.”

            I’m glad, we don’t need people like you twisting words around, claiming people are saying one thing when they’re not, to fit their agendas, and to fit their obedience to corrupt government to praise violating personal liberties of others. (yours? I am not sure what your agenda is yet, just paid to be a troll or what?)

          • Adam Wiederholt

            “I see you ignored my points”

            —What points? All you did was name call.

            “and resort to attacking my choice of words, You may as well have said nothing.”

            —Says the person that insults and name calls, and then ignores all the points I’ve stated lol Making fun of me cause I used the word agenda hehe

          • mtms42000

            It’s a culture of control. Instead of minding her own business and letting another person do as they please, within the law, she decided she didn’t like it and needed to make him stop.

            People should mind their own business. Everyone doesn’t have to like or approve of what others are doing if they are within the law and if unsure of what the law is she should have called the police and asked them. not taken things into her own hands or called 911 as if it were an emergency situation.

          • Blue Gum

            “Within the law”
            That’s the point, this chick thought he was doing something illegal, then she went nuts.

            Basically even if you are within the law, have evidence to stop crazy people screwing you over, especially if you’re male.

          • mtms42000

            What she thinks is illegal and what really is are two different things. If she thought it was illegal she should have called the police, end of story. Not try to detain him then assault him. People think lots of things are illegal that aren’t and then harass the law abiding. Again, people should mind their own business or learn the law if they want to play brown shirt.

          • Adam Wiederholt

            No, again, you’re reading but not reading and comprehending the entire sentence. You can’t just say someone’s saying “Why don’t you go jump” When they’re saying “Why don’t you go jump in the pool”.

            He said, “I live in CT and basically everyone here is brainwashed. They think
            government control is good and having fun/expressing first amendment
            rights is bad. This woman is a prime example of this.”

            He’s saying that this girl, is a prime example of government worshiping brainwashing. He’s SAID that basically everyone in CT is brainwashed, he’s not attacking women or every woman.

            You’re taking what he said into a different realm of what you THOUGHT or want to think he said, or just a troll with nothing better to do with your own life that you need to jump on men that even dare say anything criticizing a woman.

      • RS

        Please, take that dick out of your mouth. Thank you.

    • centralnjbill

      Looks like a #YesAllWomen gestapo agent.

    • FeRD

      Here are the two things that did surprise me, from reading the info on her Facebook page (which @mrwinchester:disqus kindly linked to):
      1. She’s only 23 years old.
      2. She’s actually from Georgia, at least originally.

      I suppose maybe the two cancel each other out. I’d have expected the younger generation to be less technophobic, however the clawing-screaming-ball-of-incoherent-rage special attack in response to anything modern and high-tech does seem very Southern.

  • BeefnBean

    Photography is not a crime, but assault is. That’s why they arrested her. She could have just shot the drone out of the sky and not called the cops. No bag limit on drones, open season on drones be they government owned or by voyeuristic photographers.

    • Keffululator

      If you shoot a gun in a populated area, you better be damn sure you know where the bullet lands. Or you are pathologically reckless about the safety of others.

      • dickgosinya48

        Exactly. Only cops can shoot indiscriminately without fear of reprisal.

        • kraz

          Or concern for others.

      • Heyitswheeler

        I understand what you’re trying to say, but don’t forget about shotguns. Hunters shoot their 12, 20, and 410 gauge shotguns up in the air all the time! Those BB’s in birdshot only have enough force past a certain distance then they plop to the ground harmlessly. However, shooting something with some girth like a .45 in the air isn’t a wise idea. Random story but our local police department requires the cops that are not on a call to go under some sort of structure for 10 minutes before and after New Years night for this exact reason. My dad is a retired Lt. from the department and my brother in-law is currently employed with the same PD, he said they usually just go to the mall parking structure in the middle of our city. Crazy stuff

        • Ryan French

          I’m a freelance news photographer and I do exactly the same when I’m working on New Years. You can hear the rounds hitting the ground…

    • Ryan French

      I’m pretty sure discharging a firearm in public and vandalism is a crime in most jurisdictions. Apparently that never crossed your mind.

    • Brian Wirth

      You’re just as stupid as she is.

    • Mike

      The 1st amendment and the 2nd amendment go hand in hand. Instead of shooting RC Choppers outta the sky. I am going to enjoy both of my rights, safely, and within the law.

    • Mike Ross

      I’m a pro. A pro drone with a pro camera rig can easily cost north of $80,000:

      – $35k for my Red Dragon camera
      – $30k for a Master Prime lens
      – $25k for a drone capable of lifting them

      Start taking potshots, you better have a very good lawyer and very deep pockets because I’m going to own your sorry ass, when you get out of jail. Stupid stupid stupid.

      • steveo

        she forgot her pms medicine. Those anger management classes really suck, she’ll be sorry.

        • Steve

          Although I agree she’s an idiot, making the old pms joke is kind of watered down by now and is far from adding to the conversation. Nice try at being a comedian, though. Don’t quit middle school.

          • simon and garfunkel

            No, it’s still a very funny joke and still very true.

      • DERP

        I agree. Most people that buy these are hobbyists and/or professionals that do arial photography and video.

      • SmokeyBehr

        But you don’t fly your drone over private property without permission, do you?

        • Clark

          Private property ends at the dirt, above that is federal airspace.

          • Serious Photog

            That’s moronic! Photographic aircraft always are in the air above, and it’s perfectly legal and covered by the constitution. Get a brain.

          • Clark

            HUH? If it’s legal and covered by the Consitution, why do I need to get a brain???

          • Adam Wiederholt

            Federal Agencies are NULL & VOID they have no jurisdiction, no rights over our air, they’ll say they have power/rights, but not according to We the People and the U.S. Constitution.

        • Forsythe Jones

          Public property, however…

        • Mike Ross

          Clark is correct.

          However, depending on the situation, it would usually be courteous and professional to inform them what’s going on, and to discuss it with them. Altitude would also play a role here… if I’m shooting from above 500ft I wouldn’t bother the property owner, any more than a small plane pilot would call every house on their flightpath!

          • Steve

            He did say that he set up his drone and showed it to several people who were curious as they walked by. I feel that is fair enough.

          • idratherpostasguest

            Thank you for this response. I find the snarky attitude of droners really offputting in regards to people’s privacy, it seems it’s all just “I’M WITHIN THE LAW I’M WITHIN MY RIGHTS DON’T YOU TEST ME”. You probably wouldn’t like feeling watched by some dude with a camera without knowing what he was up to. Have some friggin’ concern for other people as human beings.

          • Mike Ross

            Yes and no.

            As I said, it’s courteous and professional to reach out to people who may be immediately impacted by a filming project.

            But when it come to privacy… well I’m hardline there. You have NO expectation of privacy in a public place. If I can see you, I can shoot you. Don’t be too precious about this; with CCTV cameras so common, you’re being watched or recorded by multiple “dudes with cameras” every time you go about town. They’re just not quite so obvious as a UAV, or a movie crew, or a street or news photographer.

            We hear a LOT about people who claim they have some kind of ‘right’ not to be photographed. They don’t, and don’t get all upset because we sometimes use UAVs instead of tripods, ok? :-)

        • TheDranx

          Depending on where it’s at. Fly it over a privately owned farmer’s field? Unless the Farm owns the air space, that’s not really illegal. Do it at Disney World? Can’t do that because Disney owns the airspace.

          • Kirkus1964

            They do??????

          • SmokeyBehr

            Technically, the land owner owns the airspace up to the minimum altitude for aircraft, generally 500 feet.

          • DronePilot

            WRONG! Nobody owns anything above the ground up to 400 feet, then FAA kicks in. There are also no LAWS stating where you can and can’t fly (even above 400ft). These are all voluntary advisories – not laws. I can fly my drone next to my neighbor’s window and film, as long as I don’t touch his property I’m legal…I’m not a jerk so I wouldn’t do that, but legally I have every right.

          • badbadnotgood

            Yeah, see, this is exactly the kind of stuff I’m talking about. I know you said you wouldn’t do that, but the fact that people even think that way.. same people would probably try to file a suit if you disabled said drone too. Titchy stuff, this.

          • Punk

            Actually, the FAA doesn’t kick in at 400 feet. It’s a common misconception. We have an FAA advisory. It isn’t based on any legal grounds.

          • http://www.miseryXchord.com Misery

            IDK about elsewhere but if you parked a drone outside someone’s window in California (land of intrusive paparazzi and laws made to address their behavior) in order to photo/film them, it’d probably be considered invasion of privacy and/or intrusion into private matters (unreasonable intrusion upon seclusion; trespassing via surreptitious surveillance). Just like if you had to scale a tree or set up a ladder on the sidewalk and use a 600mm zoom lens, in order to peep through their window. (See especially Cal. Civ. Code § 1708.8 aka the “Paparazzi Law”)

            As far as flying over… In 1946 the Supreme Court ruled in United States v. Causby

            http://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/328/256/case.html

            “[The] doctrine [of cujus est solum ejus est usque ad coelum] has no place in the modern world. The air is a public highway, as Congress has declared. Were that not true, every transcontinental flight would subject the operator to countless trespass suits. Common sense revolts at the idea. To recognize such private claims to the airspace would clog these highways, seriously interfere with their control and development in the public interest, and transfer into private ownership that to which only the public has a just claim.”

            “The navigable airspace which Congress has placed in the public domain is “airspace above the minimum safe altitudes of flight prescribed by the Civil Aeronautics Authority.”

            “We have said that the airspace is a public highway. Yet it is obvious that, if the landowner is to have full enjoyment of the land, he must have exclusive control of the immediate reaches of the enveloping atmosphere. Otherwise buildings could not be erected, trees could not be planted, and even fences could not be run. […] The landowner owns at least as much of the space above the ground as the can occupy or use in connection with the land. […] and that invasions of it are in the same category as invasions of the surface.”

            [According to 49 USCS § 40102 (32), ‘navigable airspace’ means “airspace above the minimum altitudes of flight prescribed by regulations under this subpart and subpart III of this part [49 USCS §§ 40101 et seq., 44101 et seq.], including airspace needed to ensure safety in the takeoff and landing of aircraft.” http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/49/40102

            “CFR §91.119 Minimum safe altitudes: General.
            http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/retrieveECFR?gp=1&SID=8ee4341583daa2e3136aba3bfdc9dc3f&ty=HTML&h=L&r=SECTION&n=14y2.0.1.3.10.2.4.10

            Except when necessary for takeoff or landing, no person may operate an aircraft below the following altitudes:

            (a) Anywhere. An altitude allowing, if a power unit fails, an emergency landing without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface.

            (b) Over congested areas. Over any congested area of a city, town, or settlement, or over any open air assembly of persons, an altitude of 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal radius of 2,000 feet of the aircraft.

            (c) Over other than congested areas. An altitude of 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure.

            (d) Helicopters, powered parachutes, and weight-shift-control aircraft. If the operation is conducted without hazard to persons or property on the surface—

            (1) A helicopter may be operated at less than the minimums prescribed in paragraph (b) or (c) of this section, provided each person operating the helicopter complies with any routes or altitudes specifically prescribed for helicopters by the FAA; and

            (2) A powered parachute or weight-shift-control aircraft may be operated at less than the minimums prescribed in paragraph (c) of this section.”

          • http://www.miseryXchord.com Misery

            While drone regulations are up in the air, US statutes do delineate that property owners have the right to their immediate space above ground, and intrusion into such is treated the same as intrusion on the surface itself.

        • Kirkus1964

          Does Google Earth ask permission?

          • SmokeyBehr

            Google and Microsoft use a combination of satellite- and airplane-based imaging. For the airplane-based imaging, they fly well above the limits prescribed by the FAA. Their “street view” vehicles never leave public roads, and for the most part never leave paved roads.

          • Kirkus1964

            So, what statute prevents a person from flying their model airplane over private property? I can fly my Cessna over private property any time I’d like. There’s no difference.

          • Chang 场河

            If you’re flying a Cessna under 500 feet over private property, I bet you get in legal trouble from the owners.

          • Kirkus1964

            Only if I caused some kind of damage by flying that close. Maybe you have some links to cases where landowners have successfully sued people who flew too close to their property?

          • Chang 场河

            This is probably the relevant statute:
            1 Torts 460, § 194 (1934). “TRAVEL THROUGH AIR SPACE. “An entry above the surface of the earth, in the air space in the possession of another, by a person who is traveling in an aircraft, is privileged if the flight is conducted “(a) for the purpose of travel through the air space or for any other legitimate purpose, “(b) in a reasonable manner, “(c) at such a height as not to interfere unreasonably with the possessor’s enjoyment of the surface of the earth and the air space above it, and “(d) in conformity with such regulations of the State and federal aeronautical authorities as are in force in the particular State.”

            It would probably be arguable that if you were flying at less than 500 feet, you would be “unreasonably interfering” with the owner’s enjoyment of the surface of the earth. It would also be tough to argue a flight that low was being conducted in a reasonable manner, and it certainly wouldn’t be in conformity with FAA regulations.

          • DesertRattt

            You might want to check the FARs as well

          • Mike Ross

            Less than 500 feet over *structures* (not ‘property’) except on landing and takeoff, you’re going to get in trouble with the FAA, if it’s in a plane.

            There are no FAA regs controlling drones or model aircraft.

          • Chang 场河

            I wasn’t talking about drones, which are clearly the subject of considerable debate in both government and press lately. There actually are FAA regs concerning model aircraft however, in that they are not allowed to interfere with flight patterns of manned aircraft.

          • Mike Ross

            They aren’t ‘regs’, they’re non-binding advice and best practice. There is nothing with the force of law that regulates the operations of model aircraft. Read the ONLY document the FAA have ever produced on the subject here: http://rgl.faa.gov/Regulatory_and_Guidance_Library/rgAdvisoryCircular.nsf/0/1acfc3f689769a56862569e70077c9cc/$FILE/ATTBJMAC/ac91-57.pdf

          • DesertRattt

            Depends on the classification of the airspace and if there are people or buildings nearby.

          • theaton

            Yes, in some parts of the country.

          • Kirkus1964

            Like where? Got a link? The people who take satellite photos of the ground are not asking permission of every landowner.

          • theaton

            Where I work, Los Alamos National Laboratory, for one. The Lab gets the really high res photos so they give permisssion for satellite photos. They don’t give permission for the google vehicles on some of the roads on the property, even the publically accessible roads.

        • Serious photog

          What do you call a news helicopter?

      • jonquimbly

        That’s, what, 12+ pounds? You’ll need a custom-built quad copter…

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8F0Q0v7H_9Q

        • Mike Ross

          We generally use octos, not quads.

          • jonquimbly

            Yeah… that IS an eight rotor copter.

            Are you the volcano guy?

          • Mike Ross

            I’m *a* volcano guy, yes :-)

            A few tests here:

            https://vimeo.com/user10770943

      • DesertRattt

        Fly it below 400 ft over property you don’t own or near an electronic hobbyist and you will need that lawyer to protect your own ass

      • theaton

        You don’t have much to worry about. Shooting an multi-rotor out of the sky with an single projectile would be very difficult for most people, unless at a really stable hover for a number of seconds. Doing so with shot would be easier but the shooter would need to be at close range and thus in line of sight of the pilot or at least line of sight of the POV camera and thuse the piolot could evade.

    • Weelious_225

      It’s a fucking hobby… it’s not like he was taking close-up pictures of people in their bathing suits, and if yo want to see naked people who you don’t know that’s what the Internet is for. You are almost as stupid as she is.

    • Christian

      LOL Are you an idiot? You must be from some redneck state, in civilized states you can’t fire a gun on a public beach.

      • eric

        There’s not a mythical red neck land where people get to shoot off guns in public all day or do otherwise clearly illegal and dangerous activities.

        I wish though, because I would move there tomorrow.

        • Stolenmeat

          Sure there is, it’s called Alabama.

        • sdk

          There is such a place. Just head down to Texas, turn off the main highway, and when you start to notice that all the signs by the side of the road look like Swiss cheese, you’re there.

          • Chang 场河

            I saw that in California some places too. Just there it’s the bad guys who have all the guns, and the honest people who live in fear. In Texas it’s the opposite.

    • guest2

      I remember when drones were called remote controlled helicopters. people don’t get so fucking self righteous and feel justified shooting remote controlled planes.

    • Ben Hamaker

      Destruction of private property is still a crime, and the police reviewed and okayed his use of the drone. If you don’t think what you’re wearing is appropriate to be filmed in. . . maybe you shouldn’t wear it in public.

      • Steve

        Damn fucking straight. Well put!

    • DERP

      Actually, that’s a crime too, dipshit.

    • YourWorstEnemyPC

      Oh shut up, you goddamn conspiracy theorist who doesn’t understand the concept of a sixteen-year-old kid playing with an awesome piece of tech in an outdoor, public area.

      • Steve

        Is he really 16? I doubt that.

    • Steve

      Hopefully you’re just being facetious because shooting a drone out of the sky near a public beach like that would make you a complete moron…or rather just reaffirm your idiocy.

    • whoisjohngalt58

      I am with ya Beef.. Little Perv needed to get his ass kicked.

  • SamSpade

    Wow, this is incredible. Damn good thing he caught this on video.

  • Tom Butler

    Sounds like the police did exactly what they should have.

    • Steve

      A rarity when police doing the right thing makes the news. They do it everyday and we just have a bad taste in our mouth because who the hell is going to report on police doing their job unless it involves something viral? heh

  • beachcam

    The attack aside, why the slow mo? It doesn’t help tell the story and it mutes the audio which is compelling. Everyone, normal play back on all confrontations because audio is just as, if not more important than the image.
    Rule: Audio without video = Radio
    Video with out Audio = Surveillance

  • https://www.facebook.com/karl.hungus.984 Karl Hungus

    This bitch clearly has some mental issues. Flying a remote-controlled helicopter isn’t a crime, and it isn’t necessarily voyeuristic; people do that shit just for fun. Still, if I’d been in his shoes, I’m not sure I’d have posted a video of myself getting an ass-whipping from a woman.

    • LastManOutTheDoor

      He, like most men, could have whipped her. He, like most men, understands that society does not allow men to defend themselves from a woman. Even if they are mentally unstable like this one.

      • Trey21

        The only mental issue she has is the idea that she can do as she please because she has a hole between her legs, that issue affects pretty much our whole society.

        • tickyul

          So true…..Girly privilege!

          • Steve

            S’okay. Men get the money and respect. Women get to be sluts and never have to be struck by a man. Seems like a fine trade off.

            I’m only being slightly facetious. =3

          • tickyul

            Many times women provoke a guy….then they act all butthurt when it backfires.

          • theaton

            And guys don’t do that to women?

          • tickyul

            If a guy starts a fight with a GIRLY, HE will most likely go to jail.
            If a GIRLY starts a fight with a guy, HE will most likely go to jail.

      • Rhaspun

        It would look bad for any guy to go all out against a woman. I’ve too many women take advantage of the fact that many men won’t hit a woman. It doesn’t prove anything.

        • inquisitor

          I would have simply slapped on the sleeper hold and made her pass out.

      • Forsythe Jones

        Bitch even tried to fishhook him and he STILL would have had the book thrown at him if he tried to defend himself in any way other than how he did in this video.

        • Steve

          You know, with that on film- i really think I would’ve bit her fingers. That chick deserves a fucked up nerve in her finger for the rest of her life.

          • TheDranx

            That’s what I was thinking!

            But then you have to worry about if she has anything nasty running through her veins, besides crazy of course.

        • dougmctx

          Without the video, he’d probably have been arrested for assaulting her even with the way that he didn’t really defend himself at all.

          Perhaps a witness could have spoken up and saved him some trouble … but even eye-witnesses often get things wrong too.

          He handled it about as well as he could have, I’d say. He’d have been justified in decking her after she assaulted him, but even if justified … it’s best avoided for several reasons.

  • John H Johnson III

    Just trying to figure out why did the recording stop when the police got there. I would loved to see her lie to them or how they would of accused him of anything they could find purely because he is a man

    • Weelious_225

      He had to stop recording so he could show the video to the officer.

    • Steve

      When police take statements they often do not let the two dissenting folks tell their stories near each other due to interruption and shit. People won’t let you finish your story if you’re standing right next to them and you don’t want them to tell truth/lies whatever it may be.

  • beachcam

    Saw the youtube short 17 sec. version of attack. Good stuff. However please post the uncut real time attack with audio. Just let the video/audio tell the story. Subtitles are great for the parts that are hard to hear. Its all about story telling.

  • ibanix

    That section of CT is full of crazy. I know.

    • Christian

      Hammonasset is where all the out of towners go. Nobody from Madison, or the shore goes there.

      • Forsythe Jones

        Kent seems pretty cool. They filmed I Spit On Your Grave/Day Of The Woman (the original) there and other parts of CT are where Last House On The Left and a few of the Friday The 13th films were made.

  • dickgosinya48

    She must be an off duty police officer . You can tell by the following: claiming your doing something unlawful that clearly isn’t, physically attacking you when you fail to comply with their unlawful orders, lying about it afterwards.

    • o0THX11380o

      Yeah thats bad cop 101. Everything you do wrong, claim the other person did that to you. Makes me so sick.

      • http://www.salescopywriter.net/ Alan

        What do you mean “bad” cop?

    • Rhaspun

      I had checked around and apparently she use too or may currently works in the military. She would be use to seeing that type of BS behavior. It’s easy to emulate.

  • Jim Holmes

    When will the cops offer her a job?

  • BeefnBean

    You all jumped to the conclusion that I would shoot it down with a gun. Brilliant. This voyeur geek got his @ss beat up by a girl. He can turn in his man card if he even has one. His name is Hogwit, he should change it to Dimwit.

    • rust

      Voyeur? At a public beach? What the FUCK are you talking about. What an ASSHOLE you are.

      • BeefnBean

        Careful now. This is a family channel. You don’t want anyone else to find out you’re as geeky as the bloke Dimwit…oops I mean Hogwit do you? You must hang out together looking at girls who won’t give either of you the time of day.

        • Rob

          You must be new here. Fuck off bootlicker.

          • BeefnBean

            Rob and rust must be buddies. SIN tactics. Can’t argue your point with substance so you both call me names. Do you both fly quad copters over the nude beach too?

          • stfu

            And you argued your point better than what? The ass end of a buffalo? Shut the F up you moron. The guy consciously chose NOT to fight back. He could have kicked her flabby, old ass in a heartbeat. That he didn’t is why he isn’t in jail. Too bad you’re too stupid to understand that.

          • Rob

            What the fuck are you talking about, dipshit? Could you make out the gender, or for that matter what ANYONE was wearing on the beach he was flying over? No? Then shut the fuck up with that nonsense. GoPro cameras like the one he was using, have wide angle lenses and aren’t the first choice for voyeurs. You want to go out in public? Expect to get captured on video by someone. It’s illogical dumb fucks like yourself, however, that choose to call attention to themselves by flapping their useless gums whenever they see someone with a camera, and become the focus of an embarrassing viral video. Research The Streisand Effect. Now kindly quit trolling, and go fuck yourself with a chainsaw.

          • gdogshankmasta

            He’s not trolling, he’s just retarded. You can browse his comment history and it becomes clear as day.

          • TrollStomper9000

            There’s trolling and then there’s going full-retard. BeefnBean has retard on-lock.

          • js

            Random passer-by here, letting you know that you are a fucking dumbfuck.

          • pyrepenol

            Go fuck a railroad spike, whore.

        • rust

          CAREFUL NOW? A family channel? Start reading some of my other comments you cocksucker.

          Here’s what I think you must look like:

          • Ron

            OK. I think we need to start deleting some of these trolls.

        • DERP

          hey little kid, kick rocks.

    • JWE

      Oh! So you would have beat the hell out of her, if she had attacked you. Sorry but I was raised, my Mom taught me “REAL” men, don’t hit girls., of course not having any sisters, it was easier for her to do so.

      • Rob

        To be perfectly honest, I’d probably have beaten the hell out of her if she attacked me as well. I would never hit a woman unprovoked, but as someone that believes in equal rights, if anyone (including a crazy woman) feels the urge to attack me, I’ll give them an equal opportunity ass whoopin’. Women aren’t delicate little flowers at all…. Just look at Ronda Rousey. Just because she’s soft and pretty looking, doesn’t mean she can’t take a punch or dole them out.

        This guy would have been fully justified in defending himself by knocking her out, but he remained surprisingly calm. I don’t think I would have been able to maintain that level of cool. I don’t know exactly what I would have done to her, but it probably would have involved a putting a dent in her forehead shaped like a li-po battery pack.

        • DERP

          FIrst off, there’s no need to punch her. It is quite easy to simply restrain someone. Second, this guy did the smart thing by recording it. Her dumb ass is in jail, and more importantly, will have her mental issues revealed with anger management (mandatory for these crimes) and hopefully get some help/meds.

      • volkerball85

        So… what? Women should just have free reign to assault whoever they please? Fuck that. Equality means no one is sheltered from the consequences of their stupid actions. If a woman attacks someone like this, she should get her ass kicked all over the beach like any man would.

    • inquisitor

      The footage from the copter that is so high you can even barely make out there are people even on the beach.
      It is obvious he wasn’t there to get up close to people to see people.
      Idiot.

    • Guest

      Wow! You really got things all twisted up. It’s the brave, decent, and if you must use the word, manly, thing to not hurt another person if you can avoid it. It’s all those cops that escalate situations and use unnecessary force that can turn in their “man card.”

    • John Smith

      Well, in all fairness, nothing in your posts suggests that you’d bring the drone down by means of sharp wit. Your name is BeefnBean, you should change it to microFrank-n-Beans.

    • Eliah Ryan

      a grown women beat up a 16 year old boy and then claimed that she was assaulted by him, why isn’t she handing in her adult card?

    • DERP

      holy fuck, you are a moron. He’s a hobbyist and does arial photography and video. You can easily look him up and what he does. Making the assumption that he’s a voyeur is idiotic. Please sterilize yourself before you procreate.

  • Rob

    I’d have beaten that pasty fat bitch into the ground.

    • jcfrommnj

      I don’t think that legally speaking you would have been in the wrong to cold cock the bitch, after all it WAS an assalt…

      • dougmctx

        Legally he would have been justified.

        Practically, it still could turn out poorly. Bystanders will often intervene when they see a woman getting beaten up, and they may not have seen that she clearly started it. And the police will generally start with the assumptions that 1) whomever called them is the good guy, and 2) the woman didn’t assault the guy first.

        He didn’t know what his video would show, and without that video he could have very well gone to jail even without really fighting back at all — and if the police actually saw him hitting her things could be that much worse, especially with witnesses who heard the screaming and looked and saw him hitting her.

        He handled this in the best way possible.

        • G&PT

          Also, people go on about how a man can restrain a violent woman. Does anyone really think that a man restraining a probably protesting, woman is going to look good to bystanders or police? This woman already shouted “get off me” just based on the minimum action he was taking to defend himself. Also, look at how women squeal and complain when police use legitimate restraining tactics against them. She was also going a pretty good job of restraining him, and they were both on the ground. That makes any serious defense very difficult without risking injury to the aggressor or coming across as the aggressor. Now it’s easy to say “don’t let it get to that situation in the first place”, but women are good at surprise attacks, particularly as men will tend to avoid aggressive stances towards a threatening woman.

  • Difster

    It’s a common problem that women think they can attack a man with impunity.

    • http://www.miseryXchord.com Misery

      If more men didn’t automatically whip out the misogynistic posturing and shame a guy for being assaulted by a mere woman, those assaults would probably get reported more often, and taken more seriously when they are.

      • Difster

        Wait… so shaming a guy for getting beat up by a woman means I hate women?

        You bitchez be crazy!

        • Ralph

          Yes, you denigrate women when you assert that they deserve gentle treatment because of their gender. You are also a simpleton for believing that the measure of a man is how he fights.

          • http://www.miseryXchord.com Misery

            I’d phrase it more like, you denigrate women when the first or worst insults you think of to throw at a guy is to compare him to a woman, a woman’s body parts, or of being weaker than a woman (as if being a woman or like a woman is a bad/negative/inferior thing). Same goes with calling a guy “gay” etc as an insult.

        • http://www.salescopywriter.net/ Alan

          Shaming a guy for being beaten while ALSO demanding he not hit back is indeed moronic.

          • Difster

            Oh, he most definitely should have slugged her.

          • RatBastard

            I think there was a miscommunication here somewhere… Misery wasn’t calling you a misogynist, she was saying that it’s unfortunate that we live in a society where Hogwit is going to be inevitably looked down upon just because he was “beat up by a girl”. Although judging by the full story, the authorities handled the situation perfectly in this case. The woman was prosecuted and he was let off.
            Personally, I think the fact that he restrained himself from hitting her says a lot about his character.

          • http://www.miseryXchord.com Misery

            I just responded to a comment about women thinking they can attack a man with impunity… some of the comments here (and a ton of them on his YouTube channel) demonstrate one reason that situation would exist. A guy posts a video about being assaulted over photography, and instead of rallying behind him like people do when it’s a cop or another man doing the attacking, he gets attacked and called a “pussy” and told stuff like, “I’d be ashamed to post a video where I get my ass kicked by a GIRL”.

            Perhaps it doesn’t look as clearly misogynistic as all the “equal rights, lol, I’d drop the bitch!” comments, but it is.

            For the 17 seconds she was assaulting him, I’m glad he chose to keep the phone in his hand, fending her off but still recording everything. It made all the difference in the world when the police showed up and could see exactly which one of them they needed to arrest.

          • http://www.salescopywriter.net/ Alan

            What exactly is misogynistic about “”equal rights, lol, I’d drop the bitch!”? By definition they are supporting equal rights. According to the definition, that would make them feminists. Are you saying feminists are misogynists? Bitch please.

    • o0THX11380o

      Also that the cops instantly believe her. Same thing happened to me a while back when this stupid bitch stepped into the street as I was turning the corner in my car. I slowed and went around her. Next I know I park and there she is taking my license, then telling security I tried to run her over. Luckily she became more and more obviously crazy and I calmly told the security what really happened.

    • Eliah Ryan

      this is why we need stand your ground laws, if that was me I would have zim zammed her

  • rob

    someone grab me like that,they would never have use of there arm again

  • Michael Mayo

    It would be one thing if you could fly a drone to take voyeuristic pictures. But with a Go Pro wide angle you can barely make out the people on the beach much less their sex. What the hell. I think I might have broke that bitch’s nose. That would have really pissed me off.

    • inquisitor

      A voyer is someone who likes to watch someone without that person knowing they are being watched. The subject not knowing they are being watched is crucial to that definition.
      Do you now how loud quad copters and RC vehicles are?
      It is not possible to fly a drone to take voyeuristic pictures at all…just…pictures.

    • Kirkus1964

      Actually, there is no law against taking voyeuristic pictures of people on the beach.

  • Jeffrey Marcus Gray

    What a truly psychotic woman! I’m glad nobody attacked me at St.Augustine Beach when my son shot this video from his DJI Phantom quad copter.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3ATgnOyj6Q&list=UUIKYGgjBmZ6V_Xu2WboBzzQ

    • JWE

      Looks like you all had a lot of fun, Cherish these videos, I wish there were cameras like this when my kids were little.

  • inquisitor

    She apparently is out of her mind and lied to the police.

    But why at 1:03 does the audio recording stop and why does the filming go into this irritating skipping slow frame mode?

    It would seem his device would continue to record just the same as it had been up to this point.

    Why later alter the audio and video of this incident prior to posting on youtube?

    And why does this video stop just before the contact with the police and does not continue with the rest of the incident leading to her arrest?

    • codemonkey138

      Slow motion is the reason. If you want to see that part with audio and at normal speed he posted that video as well: http://youtu.be/DeVaXak7Xnw

      • inquisitor

        …and perhaps the contact with police and her arrest is forthcoming?

        • codemonkey138

          I would hope so as i would like to see that part as well.

          • inquisitor

            Yes.
            Imagine her surprise.

  • jcfrommnj

    OK, I stopped laughing. Do you think that EVERYONE is as sane as the posters to PINAC ?

  • Guest

    “Police arrived and arrested her for assault in the third degree and breach of peace.”

    Yay! I was fully expecting to read that he was arrested.

    • inquisitor

      Had he not recorded this, and she had lied saying he was punching her in the face, he probably would have been arrested.

      She would have upped her lying to his attempting to rip off her clothes and raping her.

      She did lie to the officer, that is an additional crime.

      • Jim Morriss

        Notice how that is missing from the report. Until he mentioned the camera they had already made up their minds he was guilty.

  • Do_You_Compute

    Who cares about an assault… We should be worrying about these GIANT mosquitoes!

    • Oprah

      GIANT blood-sucking creatures who float around looking for a juicy victim? Why worry? The police are clearly arresting them.

      • Bruce Choate

        How about this little guy…

  • nrgins

    That bit about the giant mosquito is absolutely hilarious! :-)

    • G&PT

      Being British, I also found it funny (and also somewhat sad) that the British person had said there were no snakes in Britain. We actually have two species of snake here, the Adder and the Grass Snake, the former being venomous. They are both rare and few people ever see them, although Adders are responsible for a small number of dog deaths.

  • nrgins

    I’m guessing this woman was sexually assaulted in her life, and has a high degree of sensitivity to what she perceives as perverse activity. Sad. Plus, when she assaulted him, he wasn’t even flying his drone. So it was all about expressing her personal rage.

    • Ralph

      I’m guessing she’s just an anti-social loon.

      • nrgins

        Well, she’s definitely a loon, that’s for sure.

    • Jim Morriss

      It’s not MY responsibility to deal with HER problems. If she has a problem with Cameras in general she needs to stay at home where she has control. I don’t care if she was sexually assaulted, assaulted and battered, or battered and deep fried. She can’t do that and then lie bout what happened. She obviously will make up shit. That is the kind of person that will say “Daddy Touched me on my Woo Hoo” Or make up shit about you for pissing her off. There seems to be one blatant charge missing, filing a false charge. She told the cops the he assaulted her.

      This crazy bitch has issues all her own. So tell me your just trying to explain why she flipped out and you are not trying to excuse it. If she would have attack me like that I would have left her in a heap.

      • nrgins

        Wow! Now we need to discuss why YOU’RE flipping out like this! LOL Did someone attack you as a child? Was your father a prick to you? LOL Dude, it was just a comment, nothing more. Seriously, calm down, OK? I was talking about why she might be freaking out like that, and felt sorry for her. You see anything in what I wrote where I was excusing her behavior? I sure don’t. So why don’t you take a Xanax and find a good, competent psychiatrist, OK? Thanks.

      • matter0ni

        uh… calm down dude. he never tried to excuse the pathetic girl. he clearly said its sad that shes such a cunt. i think you should hook up with the psycho bitch personally and make a reality tv show out of it

      • Ryan French

        Why are you getting so worked up on someone who agrees with you? Holy cow either read the post again if you don’t understand or get some medication.

  • RPM

    I have had a few dealings with road rage incidents over the last 2 years and every-time it was a woman driving. This just video just shows that there are some crazy ass bitches out there. Thank God he was recording her because he would of ended up in jail and she would have walked scott free.

  • Alexandra Ellis

    He posted the unedited attack video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elnENHrliKc

    • dougmctx

      “This video has been removed as a violation of YouTube’s policy prohibiting content designed to harass, bully or threaten.”

      I haven’t seen the whole, unedited video, but I guess showing her attacking somebody else harasses, bullies or threatens her?

  • Kenneth Brooks

    She obviously needs to be evaluate for some psuchological trauma that caused the abhorrent behaviour In response to this innocuous stimuli. In short I thick she is wacked.

  • Brian
    • Carlos_Miller

      Friend her and get your clothes ripped off as she straddles your body.

      • Lee Carter

        kinky

    • Bruce Choate

      wonder how long her account will stay active after her friends catch wind of this posting, nice find.

      • Ralph

        You can see her anti-social posting from a few minutes ago, it says “F___ Off”

        Since it was just posted 12 minutes ago I assume she bonded out of jail a couple hours ago, made it home, downed a few drinks and fired up Facebook after a friend or two texted her about becoming infamous on PINAC for being a rip roaring loon.

        Now’s she’s gone and proven that indeed she is. An angry loon at that

  • http://www.salescopywriter.net/ Alan

    We don’t have snakes in the UK? Wut? Not in Ireland but the rest have plenty of adders and grass snakes

  • eapint

    Imagine how people get alarmed when other drones bomb and kill them.
    100.000 civilians killed (and counting) in Afghanistan. :-)

  • DontTreadOnUsBlog

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AetJWKjVqOI Just makes me think of this

    • Ryan French

      This is gold, thanks for sharing! LOL

  • http://www.eyesonauthority.com/ Eyes On Authority

    i hope there is an extended version of this somewhere

  • Hupuable .

    Wow and if you had not recorded the assault, you’d be the one in trouble. Fucked up anti-male society, seriously.

  • Guy Fawkes

    People need to stop and THINK. I am all for free speech (hence the Guy Fawkes moniker) but we have enough surveillance in our lives without citizen voyeurs now jumping on the bandwagon in the name of ‘free speech.’ Admittedly I have not seen this particular man’s videos and he deserves the benefit of the doubt, but all who are advocates of privacy should NEVER condone ANYONE filming you or your families without express permission. This includes both police and citizens. This woman went off the deep end, yes. But do not film your fellow citizens unless you either are ignorant of their Constitutional rights or you just don’t care, at which point you’re simply a Nazi. You have no Constitutional right to invade others’ privacy. Period.

    • coradon1

      Bullsh*t. You have ZERO expectation of privacy in a public place and a beach is about as public as it gets.

      • Guy Fawkes

        Bullsh*t, Clarence Darrow. Read the 4th Amendment. I will repeat this for your benefit: There exists a subjective yet reasonable expectation of privacy as it pertains to this particular situation under the 4th Amendment, understanding that privacy expectation cannot be made EXCEPT to what is observed pursuant to aerial surveillance that is conducted in public navigable airspace not using equipment that unreasonably enhances the surveying government official’s vision or that of the public. An argument can be made (and has been made) that drones and the accompanying recording equipment unreasonably enhance the surveyor’s (or voyeur’s) vision. ERGO, there exists a subjective but very real reasonable expectation of privacy.

        • SamC

          And, how do zoom lens on an SLR fit into this? Are they not an enhancement to a recording device? If I go to the beach, should I take along release forms as I shoot up along the coast?

          • Guy Fawkes

            Obviously one does not need to take release forms provided one ‘shoots up along the coast.’ In the event you zoom and purposefully video any given person (so long as they are not an agent of the State in the performance of their duties as the Supreme Court has already ruled on this) and that individual wishes to remain private and pursue the issue, then I would advise you to seek legal counsel, yes.

          • Chris McKenna

            Bullshit, plain and simple. You are incorrect, and magnificently so.

          • Ryan French

            Agreed. The guy is so far off base and doesn’t even use his real name so why bother? He’s probably a teenager who enjoys irritating people from behind the keyboard. People interpret things differently but he’s so far off, it has to be a joke.

          • Chris McKenna

            I agree. I have to learn to ignore the invincibly ignorant!

          • Guy Fawkes

            Lol. A teenager? I’m educated and in my 50’s, Sherlock Holmes. If you bothered to look at the avatar you would have discovered this and a link to previous comments/vote ups. It’s called research. I’m not so foolish or narcissistic as to use my real name on the net. Let me guess: you’re another ‘constitutional lawyer’ like your pal, right? Sure. A couple of real Constitutional scholar chick magnets.

          • Chris McKenna

            Really? When I asked you to provide SCOTUS cites backing up your assertions, you couldn’t. The cases you cited were nowhere near on point. You are not educated, nor do you do research, at least not in the law. The fact that some morons somewhere applauded your lunacy is not proof of either accuracy or reality.

          • Ryan French

            I never claimed to be to be any kind of constitutional lawyer. I base my interpretation of the law based on case law. It’s pretty simple. You have zero expectation of privacy in public.The gray area you speak of doesn’t exist and videotaping in public is not viewed as an invasion of privacy in the eyes of the law. If you can cite any relevant and legitimate source that challenges that statement, I am very open to discussion.

            Quite honestly, I don’t care about you enough to look at your avatar, previous comments, nor am I impressed with how many vote ups you have. You seem to be the only person who thinks you’re right. Sounds very indicative of narcissistic behavior to me.

            FYI, I choose to use my real name and picture on the internet because I stand behind my statements. I take others who don’t with a grain a salt because well, it’s the internet and not everything you read is the truth and people are notoriously full of it.

          • Guy Fawkes

            I don’t use my face or name on the internet because I actually have employees and wish to retain a level of privacy. I would counsel other people of substance to do likewise. You are a freelance news photographer- probably not much substance to protect there. Show your face, name, address, phone number. Nobody cares.
            Perhaps you are fine with a stranger filming your young daughter on the beach or at the mall. I am not fine with that, nor are most people. Video and photograph the police or government all you wish and I will support you. They must be held accountable to the citizenry. But there is something fundamentally wrong with a man who supports the idea that the vulnerable should be exposed to the prying eyes of every vulture in public.
            You said you don’t care enough to view who you are addressing, yet you made stupid assumptions about that person. People who are smart and aware identify who they address- those who don’t are either lazy or don’t care about their argument.

          • http://twitter.com/jcunwired Jody Carbone

            He’s a wannabe. I’d guess a truck driver with ready access to Wikipedia. Stop feeding the troll.

        • Chris McKenna

          Can you cite a SCOTUS case that says this? The 4th Amendment applies against the government, not a private citizen. You appear to be mistaken on a number of counts; a few SC cites would allow us to judge your assertions better.

          • Guy Fawkes

            The origination of the 4th Amendment, much like others, was applicable to government only but has morphed into broader interpretation.
            One can argue those interpretations, which are many, with the primary origination challenged due to Katz v. United States; Wolf v. Colorado; The Soap Co v. Ecolab (non government agency intrusion); Camp, Dresser & McKee, Inc. v. Steimle & Assoc., Inc. among others.
            Again, I am not here to present written argument, I am merely illustrating a legal point that the 4th (and 6th) Amendments may not be sacrosanct any more than the 2nd as we move into the future.
            (I am a Constitutional constructionist and strongly believe in personal freedoms and privacy, btw).

          • Chris McKenna

            You are absolutely wrong. The cases you cite don’t stand for any of the assertions you make. You use a lot of big words, mostly incorrectly, to make it seem like you know what you’re talking about, but you don’t. Take it from me, a constitutional lawyer. Stop making a fool of yourself.

          • Guy Fawkes

            Lol. I use ‘big words?’ Let me guess…I also conjugate my verbs. I have an excellent grasp of the English language and do not ‘use words incorrectly,’ chuckles. You’re a Constitutional lawyer? Doubtful. If you had a JD and practiced in the area of Constitutional Law, you would quickly discern my comments were (as I clearly indicated) merely illustrating the flexibility in the Constitution, a ‘living’ and dynamic document, a position shared by most Constitutional scholars. I reiterate for your benefit- ‘I am not here to present written argument, I am merely illustrating a legal point that the 4th (and 6th) Amendments may not be sacrosanct any more than the 2nd as we move into the future’. A fairly clear declaration.

          • Chris McKenna

            You cite cases that have no application to your argument, you talk about a “living and dynamic” constitution, use words like “sacrosanct” and “discern” in am attempt to sound intelligent, yet you misunderstand the law so basically. Your arguments are wrong, your conclusions are wrong, the cases you cite are off-point, and you don’t know how to punctuate. You claim to be an “originalist,” yet you also claim that the Constitution is “flexible” and “dynamic.” You are terribly confused, and are either poorly educated or just plain stupid.

          • Guy Fawkes

            Ar you daft? Do you know the definition of ‘sacrosanct’? It is apparent you misunderstand the meaning of ‘discern’ as well. These two terms are used in relation to Constitutional argument quite often. They are not unique. The Constitution IS a living document- another phrase often heard, the meaning of which is quite clear to any first year law student, yet you act as though this is the first you have heard of it. You must believe the Constitution is a static document- thankfully others do not agree. We have amended the Constitution several times…in case you hadn’t noticed.
            I claim to be an ‘originalist’? Where did I claim this? I didn’t. You either have great difficulty with reading or with retention. I used the word ‘constructionist’ which is a different term and has different meaning. Any Constitutional lawyer would know this (aren’t you an attorney, Clarence Darrow?). No doubt you will claim that constructionist and originalist have the same meaning, so here’s a gift. btw, I am a loose constructionist, and a follower of Justice Scalia. Go troll elsewhere.
            http://parablemania.ektopos.com/archives/2005/10/why_originalism.html

          • Chris McKenna

            With all of that, how can you still be so wrong on the law? You maintain things that the SCOTUS has consistently repudiated. You come here and spout BS about your “constructionist” credentials, and how you’re an advocate for privacy, yet you manage to get the law and the principles upon which the law rests so spectacularly wrong. Keep spewing, your constant failure is amusing. But, on a serious note, you’re wrong. Wrong about the law, wrong about the Constitution, wrong about public policy, wrong about the cases you cite, wrong about everything. Check with a lawyer, check with a judge, check with a law professor. Learn the law before you keep embarrassing yourself.

          • Guy Fawkes

            ‘Credentials?’ I cited my credentials? Can you read? You either are a piss poor attorney or you have zero judicial temperament. You claim to be a constitutional lawyer (hardy-har). I am not a lawyer nor have I claimed to be- I would have attended law school but I desired friends and wanted to make a nice living lol. I am in business and we do employ corporate legal counsel. You bitch about someone being multi-syllabic, whine about them being legally wrong (incorrect would be a better word but I understand you aren’t familiar with the intricacies of our lexicon).
            Allow me to elucidate something for you- although I’m not an attorney I am quite successful and have mentored more than one young graduate in finance and/or business. When they say something factually incorrect or make errors, I point those errors out with example…much like your prof did if you actually graduated law school. It is too late in this conversation, but you showed remarkably little presence and bearing, and taught nothing, especially if you are who you claim to be. Nobody asked you for a lesson; however, you had ample opportunity for correction and you failed each opportunity. To the original point of privacy, perhaps you care not when a stranger videos your daughter or wife on the beach, but most others do care. Film and photograph the police and state agents as you choose, I am for that. But I enjoy my privacy as a citizen and don’t want to live in an Orwellian world. Enjoy your filming.

          • Chris McKenna

            In other words, you can’t prove any of your assertions, instead you resort to ad hominem attacks. When you make an assertion, the burden of proving falls on you. Resorting to insults merely indicates that you can’t prove them, thereby rendering all your commentary nugatory.
            If my family is in public, they are fair game to be photographed. That is, and has been, the law for quite some time.

          • Guy Fawkes

            I supplied you with a link just two comments ago. You need to stop drinking whiskey for breakfast, it seriously affects your reading and retention.
            It is you who have supplied nothing thus far. Zero. Zilch. Nada..although you did use ‘nugatory’ in a sentence and are now multi-syllabic. Good for you!
            You don’t mind your young daughter being filmed in public by some vulture? Father of the year material, I see. How protective of you. Most fathers I know do have a problem with that…but they are men.

          • Chris McKenna

            See, more insults, no substance. You made assertions, the burden of proof is on you.
            And the link you supplied has nothing to do with photography, privacy, or the sixth amendment.
            As far as me supplying evidence, the SCOTUS has continually held that people have the right to photograph that which they can see, that is in public, and that generally speaking, people have no expectation of privacy when they are in public. Have you never heard of street photography? Or documentary film-making? How about the continued activity of paparazzi? The evidence that people in public can be photographer surrounds you on a daily basis. If you ever turned on the nightly news you would see it. Would you like a case law primer on the subject?

          • Guy Fawkes

            You raise silly to an art form. I’m not certain why you are having such difficulty here- I have been quite clear in my comments. I used terms such as ‘may’ and stated that I was not, in fact, making a written argument but only offering illustration. I said this more than once and reiterated it previously for your benefit. You went to law school? In the US? There were no forceful and factual declarations made by me- that is the definition of ‘assertion’, Sunshine. You continually refer to comments I haven’t made and misinterpret what is transparent…that is, when you aren’t incorrectly criticizing my use of ‘big words’.
            Obviously I understand the expectation of privacy issue as it relates to being in public- I commented on the subjective expectation of privacy and used aerial surveillance as an example. Perhaps you weren’t paying attention.
            Based on your inability to follow simple conversation, I do not think you qualified to offer case law primer on this or any other subject.

          • Guy Fawkes

            You raise silly to an art form. I am not certain why you are having such a difficult time, but allow me to once again define my comments for you- although they are clear and were defined for your benefit previously. I used the term ‘may’ and said I was not, in fact, making a written and definitive argument but was merely illustrating a point. I made no forceful and factual declaration- which is the definition of ‘assertion’, Sunshine. You continually refer to comments I have not made and misinterpret what is readily transparent…when you aren’t criticizing my use of ‘big words’.
            You actually went to law school? In the US?
            Obviously I understand the concept of one’s reasonable expectation of privacy as it relates to being in public- I commented on the subjective expectation of privacy and used aerial surveillance as an example.
            Based on your inability to follow simple conversation, I do not think you qualified to offer a case law primer on this or any other subject.

          • Chris McKenna

            You have made five factual assertions. Five separate times you have claimed that the law says something. You have claimed that there are constitutional rights and /or prohibitions either for or against certain actions. You are incorrect in every single assertion, without exception. Here are the assertions you have made. I challenge you to prove each of these assertions by using primary source materials. If you can’t prove your assertions, then you need to avoid making unproveable assertions in the future. Like they say in gambling, put up or shut up.

            “all who are advocates of privacy should NEVER condone ANYONE filming you or your families without express permission. This includes both police and citizens. … But do not film your fellow citizens unless you either are ignorant of their Constitutional rights …You have no Constitutional right to invade others’ privacy.”

            Prove it.

            “There exists a subjective yet reasonable expectation of privacy as it pertains to this particular situation under the 4th Amendment, understanding that privacy expectation cannot be made EXCEPT to what is observed pursuant to aerial surveillance that is conducted in public navigable airspace not using equipment that unreasonably enhances the surveying government official’s vision or that of the public.”

            Prove it.

            “The origination of the 4th Amendment, much like others, was applicable to government only but has morphed into broader interpretation.
            One can argue those interpretations, which are many, with the primary
            origination challenged due to Katz v. United States; Wolf v. Colorado; The Soap Co v. Ecolab (non government agency intrusion); Camp, Dresser & McKee, Inc. v. Steimle & Assoc., Inc. among others.”

            Prove it.

            “In the event you zoom and purposefully video any given person …and that individual wishes to remain private and pursue the issue, then I would advise you to seek legal counsel, yes.”

            Prove it.

            “I’m educated”

            Prove it.

          • V

            so the constitution can mean anything we want it to?

          • Guy Fawkes

            You are clearly a troll; however, the ‘V’ moniker is humorous although rather transparent. I have not seen the movie.
            I invite you to read the thread and the answer to your (rhetorical) question will be self-evident.
            Interesting use of punctuation, btw.

          • http://twitter.com/jcunwired Jody Carbone

            The cases you cite all come to the same conclusion – that we have no reasonable expectation of privacy in information “knowingly exposed” to anyone. Kind if like walking along a public beach, sidewalk, street. You may wish to give up, you’re not doing well for the rest of the world’s Constitutional constructionists.

          • Guy Fawkes

            Read the thread. You are quick on the trigger, Wyatt Earp.

        • http://twitter.com/jcunwired Jody Carbone

          Oy. The 4th amendment only protects your reasonable perception of privacy as it pertains to government search and seizure. It has nothing to do with taking photographs in a public place. In fact, the wording is curiously and completely void of any language to indicate that the same privacy is or should be granted in public.

          You claim to be a Constitutionalist, the question then becomes which constitution? It’s not the one from the US.

          • Guy Fawkes

            It might be of some help if you actually read the thread Lol.

        • coradon1

          You are absolutely incorrect pal. “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated,” There is your 4th Amendment. Please explain how in what other universe would there exist a belief that being on a beach, in the midst of thousands of other beach goers, almost all of whom carry cell phones and cameras in plain sight, could you ever think you were safe from filming? How does a GoPro, hanging from a drone 50 feet over your head “enhance” your vision more than someone standing 5 feet from you with an iPhone 5 recording video? You need to get out of that box you’re hiding in and use your brain. I understand by your screen name and your ranting that you are anti-big brother and all that crap, but there is no way you can argue a case that you have a reasonable expectation of privacy on a busy public beach.

          • Guy Fawkes

            Hey slowpoke- read the thread? This issue has been resolved LONG ago. You’re late to the party.
            btw, you’re wrong on a few points which have also been discussed WEEKS AGO. No doubt your legislature, like most others, has scheduled to take up the debate of drone use and the associated privacy issues. Based on comments from lawmakers, one suspects drones will be heavily restricted in the near future, so enjoy your voyeurism while you can. btw, privacy issues are addressed by the 4th Amendment. Perhaps you weren’t aware of that- too busy being arrogant. Research it before you act like a fool. Now go find a current thread.

          • coradon1

            I’ve come to realize you’re one those people convinced you are right no matter what and too stupid to argue intelligently.

          • Guy Fawkes
          • coradon1

            Again, you’ve done absolutely nothing to show that ANYONE (other than you) would have an reasonable expectation to privacy on a public beach. This has been my whole point all along. The 4th Amendment does not apply in any way to this case because the 4th Amendment deals strictly with government vs citizen. So you can quit trying to dragging that into the issue. This is a civilian using a flying camera to record other civilians in an extremely public location. This is not a home in which you WOULD have a reasonable expectation of privacy. Here let me quote something from the same Self Defense website YOU linked.

            ” It may sound obvious, but you have little to no privacy when you are in public. When you are in a public place — whether walking down the sidewalk, shopping in a store, sitting in a restaurant or in the park — your actions, movements, and conversations are knowingly exposed to the public. That means the police can follow you around in public and observe your activities, see what you are carrying or to whom you are talking, sit next to you or behind you and listen to your conversations — all without a warrant. You cannot necessarily expect Fourth Amendment protection when you’re in a public place, even if you think you are alone. ”

            Are you able to grasp the simple concept yet that this guy did nothing wrong?

          • Guy Fawkes

            Nice try at changing your debate. Your original post said: ‘You are absolutely incorrect pal. “The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated,” There is your 4th Amendment.’
            You posted that in reply to my asserting that privacy issues were detailed in the 4th Amendment as if it were another amendment and you were some Constitutional expert (which you clearly are not.) You then scoffed at the idea of legislatures addressing and restricting civilian drone use…so I posted several links indicating that it is, in fact, the 4th Amendment which addresses privacy issues, and posts related to legislatures which are, in fact, concerned about drone use and likely to heavily restrict the same.
            I’m not the person you need to convince, pal. You should be concerned about your elected representatives, because as of now the vast majority of citizens have a negative opinion of drones, civilian or otherwise. I don’t care if you believe it or not- you can face East looking for a sunset but it isn’t going to happen for you. You act as though your ‘rights’ are secure; they are not. Restrictive legislation happens daily, and privacy concerns are paramount in the public mind. If you don’t see this you have been living on Mars. Now run along- I’m certain there is a CL thread from 1998 with your name on it. You can go troll elsewhere.

          • coradon1

            You are literally the stupidest person on the internet or deliberately ignoring what was said just so you can continue to rant. Either way it’s absolutely f*cking useless to continue this debate any longer so unless someone else wants join the conversation I’m done with this topic and you.

          • Guy Fawkes

            *laughs* You are ridiculously pathetic. Weak. I looked over your little profile and all you do is troll. Troll, troll, troll. Whine and complain, call everyone names, change your debate and troll on. You whine about Bush, whine about Obama, the GOP, snivel and act a fool. How old are you? Do your parents know you’re on their computer? If you’re married are you a cuckold at home? Feeling insignificant? You clearly have issues. People laugh at vapid and transparent numbskulls like you. Troll on, little girl…I’m done wasting my valuable time reading your silly little trolling gibberish. Lol

          • coradon1

            No the 4th Amendment does NOT apply when it’s not an issue between government and civilians. Read your own damn links you provided. “Private individuals who are not acting in either capacity are exempt from the Fourth Amendment prohibitions.” The 4th Amendment was never meant to protect people from each other. That’s why we have privacy laws. This is basic stuff they teach in high school, you should know it already. The Constitution was designed to set limits on the GOVERNMENT. The guy playing with this drone is not the government, and as long as he’s not violating any laws, he untouchable. Your third link even reinforces the fact it’s not a 4th Amendment issue: “On a five-to- four vote, the Court held that wiretapping was not within the confines of the Fourth Amendment.”

            As for the claim that there is an expectation of privacy on a public beach, refer to the 2nd link you provided: “It may sound obvious, but you have little to no privacy when you are in public. When you are in a public place — whether walking down the sidewalk, shopping in a store, sitting in a restaurant or in the park — your actions, movements, and conversations are knowingly exposed to the public.” There can be no place more public than a beach, surrounded by hundreds of other people, many of which are carrying camera phones and wearing very little clothing.

            As for the legislature, that’s their job, to write laws that set restrictions on when and where these drones can be used. I’m not arguing that at all.
            In summery, It’s not me who didn’t do his research, it’s you. I don’t know if you even bothered to read the information you provided because it pretty much blew every one of your claims out of the water.

    • inquisitor

      Interesting opinion…even though it is the wrong one.

      • Guy Fawkes

        You apparently aren’t a Constitutionalist or an advocate for privacy. I am both.

        • http://twitter.com/jcunwired Jody Carbone

          No, you most definitely are not the former. You may wish you were but your Constitutional knowledge is the equivalent of short facts from Readers Digest.

          • Guy Fawkes

            An adolescent reply but it did contain a smattering of wit. You must be the life of the party. Congratulations!

    • Bruce Choate

      Are you kidding? you are wrong is so many ways I just don’t know where to start.

      • Guy Fawkes

        Do enlighten us. There exists a subjective yet reasonable expectation of privacy as it pertains to this particular situation under the 4th Amendment, understanding that privacy expectation cannot be made EXCEPT to what is observed pursuant to aerial surveillance that is conducted in public navigable airspace not using equipment that unreasonably enhances the surveying government official’s vision or that of the public. An argument can be made (and has been made) that drones and the accompanying recording equipment unreasonably enhance the surveyor’s (or voyeur’s) vision. You should perhaps refresh yourself in Supreme Court rulings and Constitutional Law.

        • Bruce Choate

          So tell me how a GoPro camera enhances one’s vision with such a wide angle lens.

          • Guy Fawkes

            Are you saying GoPro cameras don’t zoom? Are you telling us that you aren’t aware of any issues the American public are currently having with possible drone use in domestic airspace? News much?
            I’m not here to present you with Supreme Court written arguments over the presumptive 4th Amendment issues surrounding the videotaping and/or viewing of citizens via unmanned aircraft. I will leave that to legal counsel who are more than adequately qualified. This is not a surface issue, be assured.

          • Bruce Choate

            That’s right there is no zoom feature on a GoPro camera, it’s a fixed lens. Oh I’m fully aware of what is happening and how you and others like yourself are misinformed.

          • dougmctx

            It does have a Wide, Normal and Narrow mode, however.

            These are just digital zooms used by the video mode, and even the narrow mode is pretty damn wide, but it’s not completely accurate to say that a GoPro doesn’t have a zoom feature.

            But yeah, it’s pretty much the opposite of a telephoto lens.

          • http://twitter.com/jcunwired Jody Carbone

            It’s a change of resolution, not a digital zoom. Makes it even worse for “voyeurs”.

          • Bruce Choate

            However it’s not a zoom feature since in narrow mode objects still appear further away than they actually are and has to be set beforehand and can’t be changed in-flight.

            here’s the actual footage taken the day of the attack

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6R5HrpGB2s

          • http://twitter.com/jcunwired Jody Carbone

            I am saying it – GoPro cameras don’t zoom.

            No, I am not aware of those issues, not from private individuals. Please share. And while you’re at it, please do share the written arguments you rely so heavily on. Just be sure they pertain to private citizens, not local or fedaral government efforts at policing the population – there’s a big difference.

          • Guy Fawkes

            Hmmm…my friends and I must have the only GoPro cameras on Earth that zoom.
            This might be of help to you. Try to be factual prior to framing your argument.
            http://gopro.com/support/articles/how-to-pan-and-zoom-in-gopro-studio

          • http://twitter.com/jcunwired Jody Carbone

            Oh, so now you own a GoPro?

            Read up on how GoPro ‘zoom’ works. It’s not zoom, it crops the image.
            http://gopro.com/faq-sd-hero-cameras/#no-zoom

          • Guy Fawkes

            Apparently you know nothing of the varifocal lenses used on GoPro. You’re probably too busy being a smartass.

          • Bruce Choate

            Yet another troll comment, false again GoPro doesn’t use varifocal lenses
            Heck what do I know??? I’ve been using GoPro cameras for years, just to prove it here is one of several cases with some in it. Just took the picture with my IPhone a few minutes ago.

          • Guy Fawkes

            Hmmm…so RageCams, Sony and others don’t make varifocus lenses used on GoPro? I should notify them at once so they realize your disbelief and stop production.
            You mentioned lack of credibility…
            Here’s a tip: When you challenge the veracity of a statement, know what you’re talking about- it makes the conversation so much more interesting. Lol

          • Bruce Choate

            Sorry but your just an internet troll with no credibility, so you trying to justify your misinformation with products that have never been used on RCMA’s is astounding. Next time you post make sure you understand which camera that varifocus lens fits, then see that it is only able to be manually adjusted. Oh did I mention that the camera needs to be modified to make it work and that voids the warranty. Can you link me to a Sony site that has lenses that fit GoPro’s?
            Oh wait nevermind might as well forget what I wrote…..YOUR JUST A TROLL

          • Guy Fawkes

            You jumped to conclusions, looked like an idiot and now you’re simply being ridiculous. Products that have never been used on RCMA’s? The demonstration videos must have been produced at Skywalker Ranch. Perhaps they’re magic! It must be sorcery! Yes, there are remote versions of lenses. You fail the detective class, unfortunately…and you should focus on your spelling.
            The troll is you. I didn’t troll your comments, you trolled mine- yes?
            It’s the mask, isn’t it? I know it has an allure but get a hold of yourself, man. Egads. Now move on and go video some innocent civilians who are minding their own business.

          • Bruce Choate

            link me to a GoPro camera with a varifocus lens being manipulated remotely on a model aircraft

          • Guy Fawkes

            Oh my…LucasFilms said you’re correct. So did Sony, JVC, LE, the multitude of mil spec lens manufacturers et al…the videos taken by remote aircraft where zoom is clearly used are all a figment of our collective imaginations. A hoax perpetrated by the Illuminati just to astound and amaze the brilliant Bruce Choate.
            Thank Gawd- I thought I was seeing things.
            Do your homework.
            I’m off to greener pastures.
            Troll on.

          • Bruce Choate

            Brilliant answer! because you simply can’t, BTW some things I won’t reveal, one being is why the lens that RageCam sells isn’t used, but since you think all those companies you listed make lenses for a GoPro camera, I’ll let you live in your fantasy land.

            BTW When did I say zoom lenses aren’t being used on remote aircraft?

            link me to a GoPro camera with a varifocus lens being manipulated remotely on a model aircraft

          • Guy Fawkes

            You are pathological.
            You admit that remotely operated zoom lenses are being used on remote aircraft, yet you still wish it proven?
            Do you argue with yourself in private? You may wish to see a mental health professional at your earliest convenience.
            I got a laugh at your ‘some things I won’t reveal’ comment- I was only joking about the Illuminati but now you have me in stitches.
            You’re facing East looking for a Sunset, Socrates. Wow.

          • Bruce Choate

            Hmm lets see the military Predator drone has a zoom lens, but wait they don’t use GoPro cameras either. keep trying to twist what I said around, it won’t work, I’m way too smart for you.

            link me to a GoPro camera with a varifocus lens being manipulated remotely on a model aircraft

          • http://twitter.com/jcunwired Jody Carbone

            Still not a zoom, this is a mod, not available for anything but Hero 1/2 and most importantly, still only goes to 12mm – hardly enough to support your claims that the young photographer is nothing more than a voyeur.

          • Guy Fawkes

            Not so. There are more varifocal lense accessories for Hero3 than are available for 1 or 2. Not that I care.
            Why are you still commenting on this thread? Don’t you have some innocent citizens to video? Perhaps an unsuspecting teen on the beach?

          • Bruce Choate

            Boy your still at it? You are so wrong, there’s a reason they list that lens for the hero 1,2 but not the 3….and you’ll have to do a lot of research to understand why, because your the EXPERT INTERNET TROLL that has no clue what your saying.

            link me to a GoPro camera with a varifocus lens being manipulated remotely on a model aircraft

          • Guy Fawkes

            You lack business experience. As technology progresses, OEM catering to that technology proliferate and progress. This is fundamental to business.
            An example- there are more OEM related accessory for iPhone 5S than were for iPhone 4.
            It is relative and not specific to any technology- that is to say, something as popular as GoPro has a multitude of lenses and OEM accessories. Whether or not they are licensed by GoPro is irrelevant. I suggest you search them out as others have.
            I am not interested in trolling the internet. I made the error of commenting loosely in this forum and wasn’t aware I needed to have my legal counsel screen my comments prior to posting. There are an enormous amount of amateur sleuths and ‘Constitutional lawyers’ on this site with the majority having very little real substance, save for their toy gyrocopters. I am one who does not answer to others or spend my valuable time linking them to nonsense- besides, there is much to be gained from doing your own homework, so do it. It is your hobby, after all. I have different hobbies.
            I have moved on from this rather unimportant forum and I counsel you to do the same. Good evening.

          • Bruce Choate

            Now I know your just another internet troll, the article you linked is a feature in GoPro Studio software used in post production. Oh and your claims to own a GoPro camera….. BS. ENJOY YOUR TROLL STATUS you just lost all your credibility, well the very little you had.

          • Guy Fawkes

            Read the thread, QuickDraw McGraw. Read the thread (why must I repeat myself on this site?)
            btw genius, troll comments are not generally found in the middle of a long thread started by the troll or found in multiple answers by that troll responding to questions posed by others. smh

          • Bruce Choate

            Definition of troll = Guy Fawkes

            1) trolls always defend their false statements with continuous half truths

            2) trolls are self righteous know-it-alls

            3) trolls use the internet to find answers to best suit their claims

            4) when cornered troll always steer the subject another direction avoiding answering the actual questions put to them

            The motto of a Troll
            If you can’t dazzle ‘em with brilliance, baffle ‘em with bullshit

            everything above you have done

            I don’t need to read the link you posted, I use the software all the time and fully understand the zoom feature in GoPro Studio, however you failed big time searching the internet to try and prove Jody Carbone wrong.
            Now prove me wrong and post a picture of your GoPro with a zoom lens.

          • Guy Fawkes

            Lol ok sheriff.
            My counsel to you would be to read the thread (I have already discussed this with you) which might help alleviate your obvious suffering.
            Your definition of troll is interesting, but incomplete. A troll is also a figure in Norse mythology.
            The four ‘definitions’ you provided suit you perfectly. I never trolled a single comment you made in this forum or elsewhere, yet you have trolled mine. My comments and the subsequent debate were on the Constitution, and I never steered the subject to another topic. You on the other hand have somehow managed to maneuver the conversation to GoPro lenses and made it about you personally, even going so far as to post pictures of your supposed possessions…a nice touch of familiarity but I don’t really want to form a relationship, thanks.
            Regarding the original Constitutional conversation, I readily admitted I was not an attorney and was merely illustrating a point. Hardly the definition of a ‘know-it-all.’ You, on the other hand ‘don’t need to read the link’ I posted. Way to learn! Clearly an expert.
            So by your own definition YOU are a troll.
            Me? Just a guy.
            You asked me for photos- I do not post photos online for random strangers- an unwise practice.
            I am busy with more pressing things so you are free to continue trolling either here or elsewhere. Troll on.

          • Bruce Choate

            OK then why did you steer the topic to the constitution, in which you clearly have no grasp of, this has already been proven by others with far more knowledge about the subject than myself. Why haven’t you given them an honest answer yet? Oh wait you just used #4 on me….lol

            BTW I love trolling trolls about subject they clearly know nothing about that I have extensive knowledge of, so fire away.

            Now prove me wrong and post a picture of your GoPro with a zoom lens

          • Guy Fawkes

            Not a big fan of reading, are you?
            I find it rather telling that of the 16 total comments you have made, 14 have been made while trolling me.
            If you have further nonsensical questions I’m certain they have all been answered in the corresponding thread.
            Read the thread.
            While you are somewhat of an amusement, I am busy with more pressing issues. I believe I stated this earlier.
            You are free to continue asking questions which have already been answered, video the unsuspecting or whatever else you do. Lol
            Troll on, and I thank you for admitting you ‘love trolling’.
            I personally do not have time for it.

          • Bruce Choate

            so typical of a troll, once cornered they avoid answering questions posed to them. Afraid to post a picture? more like you can’t because you’ve been caught in a lie and now trying to steer the subject another direction to hide the fact.
            The difference with me trolling you is I use facts, not fiction and don’t have to make-up stuff to prove my point. Just like others have done to you already.

            Now prove me wrong and post a picture of your GoPro with a zoom lens

    • Itsatarp

      Constitutional rights. You keep using that term but I don’t think it means what you think it means.

      • Guy Fawkes

        I am aware you don’t think it means what I believe it means. Read the Constitution, primarily the 4th Amendment and the 4th in conjunction with the 6th Amendment. Incredible document.

        • Itsatarp

          Those only address actions the government can take and do not apply to private citizens. There is nothing in the constitution that prevents a private citizen from taking your picture while you are in a public space.

    • Kirkus1964

      LOL, you are being filmed in public all the time without your permission by surveillance cameras.

      • Guy Fawkes

        I realize that lol. There are issues with such filming, however. You needed to read my comments.

        • Kirkus1964

          No, there are no issues. You are in la la land.

    • JWE

      A believer in free speech, loose constructionist, and a follower of Justice Scalia. But apparently no student of history. If you were, you would know that: Guy Fawkes was a Roman Catholic terrorist, who fought for span in their wars against and persecution of Protestants. Upon his return to England, he was part of a plot to blow up Parliament, to kill the Protestant King, and Members of Parliament; in order to reinstate a Catholic monarchy, and government. and kill or expel all Protestants to Scotland.

      • Guy Fawkes

        So what is your point? I know a great deal about Guy Fawkes, but thank you for your cursory history lesson.
        I have been associated with Guy Fawkes (as have many other individuals) for some time now.

        • JWE

          Oh so sorry I thought you were some romantic V for Vendetta fan, who did know the truth.

          So you knowingly associated yourself, with a Catholic supremacist, Who was not for freedom of religion; and only believed in free speech, as long as it agrees with him.

          • Guy Fawkes

            I have not seen ‘V’ for Vendetta.
            You may wish to, explore; less, avenues, of; punctuation (it makes your comment difficult to read).
            To your point, one would do well to reflect on the revolutionary ideas held by the founders of the Unites States in considering Guy Fawkes. Consider also Locke, Montesquieu and others regarding the French revolution.
            Fawkes was much more than a simple Catholic supremacist as you describe him.
            Guy Fawkes- ‘the last man to enter Parliament with honest intentions’.

      • Guy Fawkes

        What is your point? I know a great deal about Guy Fawkes, but thank you for your cursory history lesson.
        I have been associated with Guy Fawkes (as have many individuals) for some time now.
        It is you who need to study Guy Fawkes and more importantly, what he represents.

    • http://twitter.com/jcunwired Jody Carbone

      Before you continue with the nonsense that is in direct contrast with the photographer’s rights you might want to see the actual “voyeur” footage. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6R5HrpGB2s

      Nobody’s constitutional rights have been violated, nobody’s privacy was violated. There are laws, this is well-understood. If you are in a public place there is no reason to expect privacy. It’s that simple. The kid did nothing wrong.

  • Keal G Seo

    I want to see her reaction to the cops seeing the video an arresting her.

  • Gunner Miller

    There is a lot of win in this situation. The cops acted properly it seemed, and backed the photographer/RC flyer. :)

    • inquisitor

      The photog had the incident on video as evidence.
      Had he not, who knows how it would have went down.

  • hammer

    Well…. his Zipper is down ~2:15 mark.

    • inquisitor

      And that means or equates to what, exactly, for you?

  • Randy Morris
    • inquisitor

      She and I are friends now…thanks.

  • Janet Wilkinson

    Typical irrational feminist woman why the hell do we believe they are always the victim when we have nut jobs like this wondering around attacking kids !!

  • CTPhotog
    • inquisitor

      A link to an error page.

    • Ralph

      nformation is accurate as of June 07, 2014 06:31 AM Defendant InformationLast, First:MEARS ANDREA LRepresented By:434944 DENNISTON L O LLBirth Year:1991Times on the Docket:2Docket InformationDocket No:N23N-CR14-0148108-SArresting Agency:ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION POLICE (DEP)Companion:Program:Arrest Date:5/12/2014Court:New Haven GA 23Bond Amount:$0 (This case only)Bond Type:Promise to AppearMiscellaneous:(Released From Custody)Activity:Awaiting PleaNext Court Date:6/19/2014 10:00 AMCurrent ChargesStatuteDescriptionClassTypeOccOffense DatePleaVerdict Finding53a-61ASSAULT 3RD DEGAMisdemeanor15/12/201453a-181BREACH OF PEACE 2ND DEGBMisdemeanor15/12/2014

      • capt. America

        I think that all PINAC supporters should be at her court appearance on June 19,2014 at 10;00AM in New Haven,Ct.to insure she is properly punished for her crimes. I know I will be there with my camera and video equipment to record this piece of filth on society and the legal out come.

        • C YA

          I’ll fly the DRONE for some nice aerial shots when she goes BAT SHIT again and then post it.

        • Ryan French

          I would love to go if it wasn’t so far. Hopefully someone can attend and posts the video!

  • strap on

    She is one mean tough lesbian.

    • whoremoan

      Lying c*nt.

      • pms

        BITCH!

  • action

    She’s still pissed about that sex tape her last boyfriend posted of her.

    • Ralph

      Her boyfriend sounds as sick as she is, Likes posting N-word jokes.

      They both sound like trailer park trash

  • JSintheStates

    Contrary to the opinion of other comments on this site, this rejection of public photography is going to get much worse! Paparazzi have no respect for anyone’s privacy or property! And using a remote controlled aircraft to take pictures of people is still in-your-face public rudeness and belligerence! Individuals have privacy rights, even in public, even if jerk photographers and fascist oligarchies don’t think so!

    • suckmeoff

      But, It’s not illegal. Go PINAC!

    • Bruce Choate

      The only problem with your argument is people weren’t the primary reason for the camera, but the overall beauty of the area. Here’s a link to his actual camera footage, now tell us what is wrong with it? Until you’ve flown FPV you’ll never understand why we do it.
      BTW can you link me to a law that says you have a right to privacy in public?
      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6R5HrpGB2s

    • Yobama

      I agree with you in principle, but the law is what counts here. And the law says you have no expectation of privacy in public.

  • Billythrowtheballatmyhead

    DID NOBODY GOOGLE?

  • jakeF20

    There’s a reason I haven’t flown my quadcopter and GoPro very much after my wife gave me for my birthday. (the guys at the hobby shop recommended this over an RC plane to learn)

    I’m still trying to find places where people won’t think I’m a voyeur or trying to do nefarious things with the thing. People like her are exactly why I’m hesitant. All it takes is one crazy to ruin my day.

    • dougmctx

      And if somebody accosts you while you’re flying … it’s likely to crash.

      You’re extremely vulnerable while flying it.

      (And I’m not even talking about FPV flying, just normal R/C flying. Though if you have a model that will just stop and hover or return to base if you stop flying it that would be helpful if you do encounter a problem.)

      I’ve done a lot of aerial photography with R/C planes and have not had any problems with crazies, just people asking questions and kids asking if they can fly it. (And neither is really a problem.) Though I’ve always done it with planes rather than quadcopters, and I think people are less freaked out by them.

  • Dozer

    White Knight cops will be duped by anyone with breasts and a vagina. If he hadn’t taken video he’d probably be in jail for assault.

  • Alper

    Maybe she wants to be famous, check her acting/modeling profile: http://www.exploretalent.com/andreamears

    • Ralph

      The conclusion at Explore Talent is that she doesn’t have any.

      • Guest

        Whaddya mean she has no talent? She’s a total drama queen!

  • Eliah Ryan

    If this man was not filmed he would have been arrested for assault because of VAWA and other feminist policies, the only reason this woman dared to hit him was because feminism teaches girls they will always get away with it.

    It is also the only reason he didn’t dare to hit her back, not all men are as clever and a lot of male domestic violence victims are now in prison or have committed suicide.

    • yousaidwhat

      You don’t know what feminism means…

      • Eliah Ryan

        I know what it does…

  • Mr.Winchester

    She has a facebook tho !

    https://www.facebook.com/ndrmears

  • Rogue cops cost us money

    I bet she is on some kind on anxiety medications. She clearly has mental issues.

    • Yobama

      The World Health Organization estimates 30% of women in America are on anxiety drugs now. None of those women seem to realize that no one was on anxiety drugs years ago, and the human race did just fine.

      • ElixirThief

        That’s an idiotic claim.

        • Yobama

          Google it.

      • ENTWAFFNUNGDERGESTAPO!

        good point, but i disagree that the human race has ever been doing just fine, depending upon what exactly you mean by the word “fine.”

    • rust

      About your name… I don’t think you know what ROUGE is.

      • ENTWAFFNUNGDERGESTAPO!

        it continues to amuse me, though. It’s possible someone else may have already reserved the name with correct “rogue” spelling.

        Not that anyone asked or anything.

        • rust

          Hah. Yeah… for me the name calls up images of Enforcers in drag

  • Amy Amrap

    This is what every protected group wants to do.. Kill white men. Any doubt?

  • jimmy

    If he never recorded it – they would have arrested him for assault with nothing happening to that ugly cunt that attacked him

    • Yobama

      Yup. Therein lies the irony. He needed a backup video source to prove that the woman was lying about her assault over the first video.

  • thegreenamigo

    We have snakes in Britain. I think you’ll find he was taking the piss.

  • tickyul

    Of course the cops initially believed the GIRLY. And she got cited with 3rd degree assault…………LOL, tables turned and they would have written the Dude a page long list of violations.

  • Alexander Vucelic

    Sent her Note with link here – Maybe ahe’ll Show up

    • sdk

      Fat, frumpy hausfrau sees a 16 year old kid flying a RC copter and
      instantly assumes he’s her own personal papparazzi there to perv on her, and her
      alone… If she actually comes here and sees hundreds of photogs talking about her, some talking about coming to film her day in court, her head will explode.

  • DERP

    lol, what a dumb cunt. https://www.facebook.com/ndrmears

  • Jason Christie

    #yesallwomen

  • Cornelius Van Huff

    #yesallwomen

  • Josh Mickan

    The scary thing is: What if he hadn’t filmed the crazy woman on his phone? Would he be locked up now?? American Police are lunatics, as evidenced all over the place. Whatever the hell happened to “Innocent until proven guilty”? Or the right to proceed, free from harassment?

    • Alexi Peck

      He still had the video from the quad copter, he would have been fine

      • dougmctx

        Only if it was still recording during the assault.

        He was never in trouble for “voyeuristically” taking pictures — it’s the accusations of assault (and maybe worse) that he really had to worry about.

  • lock down

    I think she should start watching “ORANGE IS THE NEW BLACK” TV show for pointers.

  • ibanix

    Wait a second, this took place on May 12th and we’re only hearing about it now?

    • Forsythe Jones

      CURSE YOU PATRIARCHY!!! (shakes fist in the air)

  • volkerball85

    I bet she probably ran home after this to whine on her blog about how sexist the system is and how oppressed she was in this incident.

  • ElixirThief

    This can’t be true, because Internet Feminist say there are no advantages to being a woman in society, such as lying about being assaulted to get what they want.

  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7VOg-s4xVPM QueensGambit

    If it wasn’t for the recording, he would end up being in jail for an alleged sexual assault. Sad but that’s how it goes. In the Western society, women are the victim and are the spoken truth.

    You’re white? Male? Oh, then you’re too privileged to even live.

  • kraz

    She was released RoR? What a nutcase.

  • Dom

    You can tell that the internet is full of middle school children and high school douche bags when all you see are comments like “when does she join the police force”. Such an idiotic world we live in.

  • Ryan French

    I guess I’m not the only one who thinks that without the video… he would have been arrested solely on basis of being the male party of a male/female scuffle. No one’s doubting the overwhelming number of men abusing women… but you have to wonder how often men are punished because the police already have their minds made. The lesson to learn from this is always have a recording device handy. You never know when you’re going to encounter a crazy.

    • Brust

      I didn’t really think of this until you and a few others have brought it up. That is a frightening thought. I also find it odd that her charges are so minor (3rd degree assault and 2nd degree breach of the peace). Is there no charge for the lies she told officers at the scene? As you mentioned; those lies could have sent this kid to jail or worse.

      I don’t know if it’s the male/female aspect of it in this instance as much as it is the adult/teen issue. Meaning, cops would probably believe the story of a housewife over a teenager any day of the week.

      • http://twitter.com/jcunwired Jody Carbone

        This amazes me. Third degree assault? If the photographer was female, the attacker male would it have been the same charge? God forbid the attacker be anything but white…

        She lied to 911 and police, she attacked a minor and this is the charge she walks away with. It’s as sickening a part of the story as the attack itself.

      • Mark Neil

        The age gap may play a part, but the gender variable is most certainly a significant aspect.

  • Boomhauser

    He should have open carried also. That twit woman is the reason we are doomed as country.

    • Betheny Sanders

      we are doomed because men are growing more weak and pathetic. its ok for you to photograph another mans daughter but if he kicks your ass for it then you cry. that is weak and pathetic. should the fbi just be able to take your photo? i hope not

  • thetruthhurts

    Yep….she was told that “If you see something, say something” She probably saw the video while shopping at Walmart…..and being a good citizen, called the police and then decided to kick some perverted male terrorist pro-bra motherfucking homosexual hating beer drinking no good for nothing piece of shit male…… “take that you alla arkbar mofo muslim camel fucking sand man!” “I’m going to tear that shirt right off your mofo……oh woo…..nice pecks……what to mate later?”

  • OfficialPro

    How much do you want to bet this crazy woman who attacked the guy is a womens’ studies major?

    • Mark Neil

      That’s a suckers bet

  • John Mollyhorn

    IS everything flying in the air is a drone now?? I saw an eagle flying this morning, or wait maybe it was a drone….. Hello!! McFly! McFly! It’s not a DRONE, Just a RC Toy. Reporters simply use the word drone because they enjoy the popularity of the word as it has become associated with a lethal device. A recreational RC quadcopter with GPS is hardly a Drone.

    • dougmctx

      PINAC ought to know the difference, and they used the word drone.

      That said, from his updates —

      “demonstrated the loiter feature (pulling the quad to one direction or another), demonstrated rtl (flying it away then having it return)”

      … those are autonomous flying features, and if it can do things autonomously, it actually does fit the definition of a drone. Most R/C aircraft don’t … but it sounds like his does, even if he flies it manuallly most of the time.

  • gfrewd

    the kid is too busy with his toy and the thought of getting juicy video for his brain dead Youtube subscribers to just stop and try and communicate with the girl. it’s not hard to see how she probably saw that drone the same way she would see some creepy asshole sitting on the beach with a telephoto lens. right or wrong, legal or not, she had concerns, and the kid, who has only ever interacted with the internet, didn’t know how to actually talk to a stranger. gg, fail all around. who the fuck takes a drone out to a beach? Do something with your life you dumb fuck.

    • jasonallen19

      whoa… don’t troll too hard.

    • heterodox

      No matter what, that was not worthy of a 911 call (911 is for EMERGENCIES), and you do not magically take on the right to attack someone.

      • dougmctx

        If he was actually breaking the law, a 911 call would have been appropriate on her part.

        That said, she got the law wrong and he was not breaking it. And of course she doesn’t get to attack him even if he was.

        She should have just called 911 and waited for the police and explained her part and he’d explain his and the police would tell her that the law was not broken and she wouldn’t be a famous whackjob now.

        • rust

          She should NOT have called 911 in the first place. That number is for EMERGENCIES.

          • dougmctx

            If a police officer needs to be dispatched, 911 is the correct number to call.
            If somebody is breaking the law and it needs to be dealt with, 911 is the correct number to call.

            She was wrong in that he was not breaking the law, therefore no officer needed to be dispatched — but given that she didn’t know the law (well, she thought she did), 911 was indeed the right number to call.

            911 is not *strictly* for emergencies — if you have an automobile collision and your cars are off to the side of the road and nobody is injured, it’s not an emergency any more, but 911 is still the right place to call if the damage is serious, for example.

          • Ryan French

            That’s not entirely true, at least for most areas.

            Most police departments often have a specific local number non-emergency dispatches. I was a dispatcher for a large police department.

            If someone called 911 for an accident and there were no injuries or road obstruction, they would be handed off to the non-emergency line to keep 911 free.

            There are plenty of situations where calling 911 is inappropriate such as reporting graffiti, noise complaints or suspicious people. When in doubt, call 911 but everyone should memorize or save the non-emergency number to the agency at least where you live or work.

            Calling 911 for non-emergency police matters can be a problem. We often have a dozen people trying to call in at the same time and if dispatchers are tied up on non-emergency calls, people with actual emergencies are holding.

            This woman calling 911 was inappropriate because it was a non-emergency (until she committed battery) and he was not committing a crime. Not to mention she lied to the dispatchers and the police.

          • dougmctx

            You can quibble over if this was worthy of calling 911 or not, but it’s quite clear based on the video that I saw (you can hear her calling 911) that she thought it was an emergency, and I seriously doubt anybody was going to change her mind …

            … probably not even the cop who put her into cuffs and hauled her to jail for assault.

          • Ryan French

            I think you missed my point… you said 911 is the appropriate number to call for a police response. I was simply adding that may not be true in certain situations. Would you call 911 for a noise complaint? Of course not if your area has a non-emergency number. I’m not sure how familiar you are with the 911 system but I am and I know how often it’s abused. Just trying to educate.

          • rust

            Tell you what Dougie boy. The next time you need an ambulance, I’ll call 911 to complain that McD’s put salt on my fries, howzat?

          • dougmctx

            Well, aren’t you a ray of sunshine!

            I certainly never said anybody should call 911 for McDonald’s not getting your order right (and yes, I remember that being in the news for actually happening), but nice strawman.

            Maybe they’re different in Madison, CT (where they don’t seem to have a 311 type number, being a small town), but here in Austin the police have basically said what I said. They don’t really state it online, but the City of Chicago has said the same thing and done so online —

            http://www.cityofchicago.org/city/en/depts/311/supp_info/faq.html

            When should I call 311 vs. 911?

            You can call 311 to find out what Police District and beat you live in, as well as the date, time and location of your next beat meeting. Also calling 311 allows you easy access to non-emergency police services, from filing police reports to talking to police personnel in your district. You should call 311 if the incident that you are reporting has occurred and the offender is gone from the scene. You should call 911 if the incident you are reporting is in progress and the on-site presence of a police.

            In her case, she (erroneously, I know) thought there was a crime in progress, and so if Chicago’s or Austin’s rules applied … she should call 911. And she *obviously* thought this was an emergency, so you’re nuts if you think she was going to call any other number.

            In general, the police would prefer that you err on the side of calling 911 rather than calling whatever non-emergency number they offer if there’s any question if it’s enough of an emergency or not, just so something important doesn’t get delayed. This wasn’t an emergency of any sort, at least not until she started assaulting him, but she certainly thought it was.

          • rust

            Geez, you really do chomp the turd in this. Tell you what, go to her trial and beg the court that she THOUGHT there was a crime going on, and you sympathize with her because she THOUGHT it was permitted to commit an assault on someone when they don’t get their way, and she THOUGHT she would get sympathy from the Enforcers. Tell it to the judge! Maybe he’ll give you your very own emergency number! 1-800-EAT-SHIT

          • dougmctx

            Reading comprehension isn’t your strong suit, eh?

            That’s OK, many people have similar problems, and help *is* available to those who seek it!

          • rust

            To quote you: ” And she *obviously* thought this was an emergency,”

            Fucking LIE much you assmuncher? Shit Eater?

          • dougmctx

            Yes, she thought it was an emergency. She thought it was such an emergency that she called 911 and begged them to send somebody as fast as possible. No sarcasm there … she clearly thought it (it being his flying or photography or whatever) was an emergency that required an immediate police response.

            I’m glad that you have enough reading comprehension to get that from what I said, but beyond that … where are you trying to go with it? What do you think I lied about? Or are you just trying to troll me?

            She was expecting the police to rush in and arrest the pervert and praise her for being the hero that saved the day … but reality intruded, as the threat and the crime existed only in her mind. At least until she created a real threat/crime.

            Certainly, she was wrong — no crime was committed by him and the 911 dispatcher seemed to realize that she was blowing whatever was happening way out of proportion, but she *clearly* did believe it was an emergency.

            Just so there’s no confusion … when she goes to court, it’ll be for her assault. Not for “misuse of 911″ or anything along those lines. You can argue that she should have never called 911 — and she shouldn’t have, based on the fact that the crime she was trying to report wasn’t a crime at all — but that’s not why she’s in trouble.

          • rust

            OK, Mr Turd Munching pedophile. I guess you need to be schooled: your dig at me writing that I have “reading comprehension” issues begs the implicit lie that you didn’t write that she “THOUGHT” it was an emergency, but in fact you had. So, you are just another libtard jackoff. Man, I love insulting you.

            So now we have your admissions: that she was the guilty party, that she believed she had the moral high ground because “the police [would] rush in and arrest the pervert” (YOUR WORDS, Mr. SHIT FOR BRAINS).

            “She thought it was an emergency” — NO FUCKING EXCUSE. Explain the “emergency”: was someone dying? Was there property destruction? Were aliens landing on her brain? Was she worried that her boyfriend Dough-boy in Texas might stop telling her she was precious?

            Look, Texas-boy, get your ass out of a MAN’s state and go back to Faggotlandia.

            Don’t forget to flush.

          • dougmctx

            heh.

          • dougmctx

            If somebody is applying graffiti right now, I’d say that 911 is the correct number to call — you want the cops to catch them in the act. Noise complaints, suspicious people it’s less certain.

            http://www.911.gov/whencall.html may be of some assistance here —

            In an emergency, call 911 or your local emergency number immediately from any wired or wireless phone.

            An emergency is any situation that requires immediate assistance
            from the police, fire department or ambulance. Examples include:

            A crime, especially if in progress
            A car crash, especially if someone is injured

            In this case, the whackjob woman thought a crime was in progress, so …

            And then when the police didn’t arrive fast enough, she provided a real crime!

            Now, different areas will have different standards, but this certainly isn’t an unusual position.

    • Mark Neil

      Why is it that, even when a girl is clearly in the wrong, some people will make up excuses to justify her actions and blame them on whatever man happens to be handy. Think “kid” had no obligation to speak with her. It was HER sense of entitlement (we’ve been hearing that word a lot with Elliot Rodger, but seem to ignore all the women with a sense of entitlement that leads to violence. odd that) that spurred her to violence. But when people like you are willing and able to make excuses and blame men, rather than condemn these women, you only encourage further behaviour like this

  • No one wants your fat pics…

    She calls him a pervert due to claims of flying the “drone” and taking pics, yet don’t we see women taking selfies in mirrors with their cleavage and breasts and asses hanging out?

    Funny how that works out.

    • heterodox

      Taking a selfie is not the same as being photographed by someone else without your knowledge. However, you have no reasonable expectation of privacy on a public beach.

    • Betheny Sanders

      so if a girl wears a bikini she wants you to film her? you caveman. you sound like a stalker.

  • BRUCE

    AH, we’re back . . . nice profile pic.

    • Rezist2Exist

      Youtube is censoring the original video saying it has content “designed to threaten, harass or bully”

      the fuck? Videoing someone assaulting you is harassment?

      Edit: as of 6/10/14 it’s back up

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIGRRRcuvQw

      • heterodox

        I’m hoping they mean that HE was being threatened, harassed, and/or bullied.

        • dougmctx

          But he posted it, so I’m guessing not.

      • ENTWAFFNUNGDERGESTAPO!

        use of the word “nazi” is considered offensive in many/most comment forums. Why anyone would be offended by use of this term is baffling to me. or perhaps it speaks volumes?

    • Brust

      I see she’s associated with Gateway Community College (very prestigious as far as strip mall, for-profit, non-accredited colleges go). I’m guessing she’s the criminal justice professor. She doles out justice one unprovoked assault at a time.

  • UncleGroOve

    I’m in the market for a ‘copter to film our club’s mountain bike rides. basically some simple gopro setup with a “follow me” mode, and maybe some aerial shots of some of the less practicable parts of the trails. Having said this – I’d never film when there’s other people around as it really bugs me when others are flying POV (i.e. goggled in to their onboard cameras) like when I’m having a picnic, etc. As much as I *love* photography I don’t take pictures where I would be infringing on some other person’s privacy (like, a crowded beach)… last thing I need is to be physically assaulted by some crazy creep!!!!

    • http://twitter.com/jcunwired Jody Carbone

      Umm, just pointing out the silliness of your comment:

      “I don’t take pictures where I would be infringing on some other person’s privacy (like, a crowded beach)”

      Privacy on a crowded beach?? Good luck selling that one.

      • UncleGroOve

        Yes, sorry if it wasn’t clear. I’m in Italy and the beach I’m talking about is one of those paying ones, where everybody is in relatively close contact. I pulled out my camera plus noticeable telephoto lens to take a shot at some seagulls and I immediately noticed people staring at me, and it wasn’t a “curious” stare, more like some sort of pre-alarm. The fact that we’re humans and sociable (up to a certain limit) doesn’t mean that we can, for example, intrude in somebody’s conversation or chat up anybody “just because”. And just to make it clear – I think the woman’s behavior is way way beyond acceptable (to me it’s actually scary that someone can lose it like that).

  • Angela Briel

    Wait, they don’t have snakes in the UK?

    • James Morgan

      Snakes were by legend.. driven from Ireland (by St Patrick).. There are a few.. but none are poisious.

  • Chris P. Bacon

    I’d like to know how she knew whether this man was photographing anything or just flying the thing.

    • Mark Neil

      Assumption. That men are always doing something nefarious. It’s what feminists teach women, don’t you know?

  • http://scallywagandvagabond.com/ scallywag

    A woman viciously assaults a man and only comes to receive misdemeanor charges and women dare to cry sexism??- wtf …

    http://scallywagandvagabond.com/2014/06/andrea-mears-assaults-man-beach-receives-misdemeanor-charges-instead/

  • Vincentsparda

    Man, could you have imagine what would have happened to this innocent kid if he wasnt recording this ? The ignorant ass cops would of believed this crazy/spoiled ass bitch and this kid would have gone to jail and have a criminal record which probably would have made the rest of his life hella harder. Hate to thinks how many times shit like this happen where the innocent get in trouble cause they cant prove their story.

  • JWE

    I know I am going to catch hell for this: But she looks to be pregnant it me. As any men who has ever been married to a one: Prego are craaaazzzy!

  • heterodox

    I would have fought back a lot more than he did. I’m not saying I would have gone overboard or purposely injured her, but I would not give her a chance to gouge my eye or give someone else time to come join in and help her assault me.

  • NeverTrustCrazy

    Youtube has done what it does best and deleted the video:

    This video has been removed as a violation of YouTube’s policy prohibiting content designed to harass, bully or threaten

    • inquisitor

      This is why Carlos is using liveleak…and the video is still preserved under his headline.

      • NeverTrustCrazy

        Yeah that’s great, I love LiveLeak. Just wanted to point out Youtube doing it’s typical pandering to the handful of feminists that tagged the video.

  • Guest

    It is to bad men and boys need to prove they’re innocence, whereas the woman are always given the benefit of the doubt…

  • WEHAVESNAKESDAMMIT

    We have snakes in the UK lol

  • andrew

    i wonder if she runs after the google cars when they’re taking pictures for google maps lol

  • Mike

    I’m surprised by the number of people who are ok with the constant surveillance. I wouldn’t like it if a person walked up to me and started taping, and I wouldn’t be cool with a surveillance copter flying over my head either. Let’s be honest….he wanted to see hot girls in bikinis, not show off his “cool” gadget. Apparently I’m crazy, like her!?

    • Brust

      Don’t like RC quadcopters overhead? Then go attack the pilots! Laws and rights be darned! Just beat people up until society behaves the way you want us to. It’s your world and we’re all just passing through.

    • http://twitter.com/jcunwired Jody Carbone

      Do you assault people with cameras in public places just because you “wouldn’t like it”?

      Did you even see the video his drone recorded? If he wanted to see hot girls in bikinis he would probably have stayed on the ground with a telephoto lens, and certainly it wouldn’t have been pointed at Andrea Mears.

    • Ryan French

      I don’t particularly enjoy people who smoke around me… would it be appropriate for me to assault them?

    • http://rubberpunch.dk/punchone/ RubberPunch

      We don’t know why he chose the beach. My guess is that it has no trees, poles, buildings, and other tall structures that the drone can be caught in.

      If he wanted video of girls in bikinis, the internet is a lot easier to navigate I imagine.

    • Betheny Sanders

      you are not crazy. you probably have a girlfriend and the rest of these pervs don’t.

  • socialismisevil

    if not for that video , the sexist misandrist would have lied and won

  • VoodooEconomics

    its interesting what stories police believe without any truth to them. Luckily the kid had his video on and running.

  • $102188809

    This strikes a nerve with me because after all the hoopla with the #YesAllWomen stories over the past few weeks if he hadn’t had the presence of mind to record it he would have been cleared of snooping once they saw the copter’s video but he could have been charged with assault since it would be he said/she said, and another story about women every day being victimized by men when it’s clear she was the antagonist.

  • jutholmes

    Ahh the town I grew up in. I wonder who this nutjob girl is …

  • Barnack

    I took a look at her Facebook page – Jeezuz!! In every photo of her se has this wild, deranged look in her eyes…

    • Ben Dover

      She looks familiar. Is she a porn actress?

      • Candy Kane

        Maybe a stripper.

      • Rhinos are just Obese Unicorns

        Yea, from “Chuncky White Bubble Buttocks: Part 6″ and “Fat Cows Need Love 2″

  • itson

    She could be Jodi Arias #2

  • BlackbeardsWyfe

    Age of the Nerd!!!

    Hipster – 0

    Geek- Lots of props!!! Handled himself very well during this nasty encounter!!!

    Why was the youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIGRRRcuvQw video considered harassment? You can’t be accused of harassment if you don’t attack or “harass” people on the beach minding their own business…….

    Looking forward to following the outcome of the whole thing.

  • Luc

    Crazy in the head, crazy in bed. Many women think they can be the aggressor, then claim to be the victim when the cops show up.

    I hope she does time like a guy.

  • Josh w

    I bet if he hit her he would have gotten in trouble

    • rs1123

      If he had hit her he likely would have been the only one arrested. His letting her beat on him without fighting back did not make him a wuss as one person suggested, it was very smart. And I think he was man enough to survive her attack.

      • Josh w

        Yeah i agree with that but i just hate it when people think they can get away with stuff like that. I mean i know she didn’t but still just going up and beating someone is never okay all though in this situation it would be self defense if he just hit her once.

  • Cwhite

    Shes lucky it wasnt me

  • Mark Neil

    Men are always assumed to be the ones in the wrong unless they can prove their innocence. Based solely on their gender. This has to stop. Women are increasingly using this assumption to get away with awful behaviour, including murder, and in this case, unprovoked assault. And why did she assault him? because she thought he was doing something nefarious… IE, the very same attitude of presuming men are in the wrong.

  • Adrien Wild

    I’d sue the f*** out of her. Make her lose her house and vehicle for doing that.

    • rs1123

      Most important is to make sure she ends up with a criminal record for assault. Happy job hunting, sweetie.

  • http://twitter.com/jcunwired Jody Carbone

    Andrea Mears looks just crazy enough to be well on the way to becoming the NRA’s next spokesperson. Will we see a new “Stand your Skies” initiative for mouth breathers? ;-)

  • Ammy Pearson

    Crazy bitch

  • FAKIA

    I’m not sure I would have been been as calm. Got to admit the slow mo with no sound could cover a heck of a lot of stuff though. Looks like he’s hiding something.

    • rs1123

      Fee-lings… nothing more than fee-lings…

    • Bruce Choate

      look on his youtube channel he posted an unedited version of the attack as well, the police also got a copy off his cell phone that day.

  • Rhinos are just Obese Unicorns

    I hope he sues the crazy woman for punitive damages and wins a boatload of cash….

    • Kalsu

      wins a quadcopter of cash… hehe

  • Kalsu

    From her facebook pics, she has the crazy eyes.

    • Rhinos are just Obese Unicorns

      And she is morbidly obese…

      • Betheny Sanders

        you are an ugly person but she can lose weight

  • Rhinos are just Obese Unicorns

    She is a fat disgusting pig in a fat person’s shirt….

    • Rollo Tomasi

      In a fat mans shirt!

  • Rhinos are just Obese Unicorns

    If this is the way she treats a guy she just met on the street, I would hate to see how she treats her boyfriend….

  • Rhinos are just Obese Unicorns

    Something tells me Andrea Mears is a feminist….. Just a hunch…..

  • whoisjohngalt58

    truthfully if the little pissant was flying his friggin’ drone around my daughter on a beach he’d wind up in worse shape and his drone would have been used as a trap target. AND his phone would have been tossed against rock then into the water.
    All you little phucks who think you have the right to invade a persons space need to get the hint. I don’t like it from the Gooberment OR anyone.

    • Rhinos are just Obese Unicorns

      Calm down tuffy; the kid was taking landscape video… And if you are worried about your daughter, maybe you should teach her some values and have her dress in an appropriate fashion and not like a slut….

      • whoisjohngalt58

        Little phuck would need surgery to get the phone and drone out of his ass. I call Bull crap in the landscape stuff.
        ya’ll in the Peoples Republik of Connecticunt would get busted for carrying a shotgunb on a beach.

        • Rhinos are just Obese Unicorns

          Watch the full video of the teenagers drone’s flight… afterwards, I will gladly accept your apology….

          • Ryan French

            He’s not interested in the truth nor apologizing. That would hurt his ego.

        • Distortion_Kills

          You can call it BullCrap on the landscape but the fact exists that his GoPro camera is incapable of a zoom feature, so landscape is about all you get. Unless you’re interested in ants wearing bikini’s or plan on flying down some gal’s cleavage, you’re not going to get much “skin” in the shot. But Hey, why cloud all the emotion with technical facts.

          • rs1123

            You can’t convince someone who has made up his mind. He would rather defend his wrong position than to correct it and be right himself.

    • UNKN

      That’s because you’re about as ignorant as the woman in the video. If you were in any way smart you’d chat the guy up and show an interest in what he’s doing. Pretend you thought they were cool and can you see how good to images are that it can take. I think most people would share because it’s a hobby or just something they think is cool. If they act all weird when you ask maybe they’re pervs, but being a perv isn’t illegal it’s just not normal.

      I’m saying perv, not a pedophile before you get all holier than thou on me.

    • Ryan French

      You’re no use to your family in the hospital and/or jail. Quite a price to pay, all to prove how much of a man you are. However, I doubt you’d do such a thing. I have little faith for keyboard warriors.

    • Fleendar the magnificent

      You must be one of those sovereign citizens? Right?

    • ENTWAFFNUNGDERGESTAPO!

      sounds like you really know how to enjoy the beach

      ever think maybe you’d want to have your own camera monitoring your daughter? I’m sure she’d welcome your watchful eye looking over her, no? Wait, that might also require you to spend some time actually being a father. never mind.

      • Betheny Sanders

        i like this comment. good on you dad!

    • Guest

      And you’d be put away for good.

    • rust

      Really, you have the name “John Galt” and you spout such shit from your oral cavity?

      • Betheny Sanders

        internet superman has a small wee-wee so he talks big

        • westside_resident

          No doubt you’ve sampled enough to be an expert on sizing them.

    • rs1123

      50 feet up is ‘invading a person’s space’? You realize that’s five stories up in the air, right? Hardly ‘flying his … drone around’ (her).

  • Terry Bodinet

    I am the king of passive aggressive, just sent this to her on facebook, enjoy.
    Hey how are you? I just saw an article about your arrest in Connecticut, I am soo sorry for you! Hopefully now you will realize it’s not okay to go around assaulting people who are breaking zero laws simply because you disagree with them! Isn’t the Constitution Great? It protects everyone equally! Hopefully now you have learned something from this and will never go super saiyan on some innocent guy on the beach or anywhere else again! I really liked the quote on your About section here on facebook- Everyone is like a butterfly, they start out ugly and awkward and then morph into beautiful graceful butterflies that everyone loves

    -Drew Barrymore

    Sadly you will probably stay ugly forever. Tisk tisk, well no need to fret my dear I’m sure you will make some good friends in jail!

    Seriously though, you aren’t even that good looking so I’m certain the guy with the “helicopter plane” wasn’t even looking at your ugly ass! So no worries! Well, I have to run, can’t sit around pointing out your shortcomings all day, I just hope you’ve learned that some people deserve an ass whooping, and in this situation, it was you. Too bad this guy didn’t defend himself. Toodaloo!

    • Betheny Sanders

      you must be proud. what a man.

  • Rollo Tomasi

    Also lying to a Police officer. Making false accusations,etc…etc..etc.. Throw the book at her and sue her into the poor house,or nut house…

    • Jim Morriss

      That should read “…sue her into the poor house [AND] the nut house.”

  • Rollo Tomasi

    How come hot chicks don’t go crazy over this shit? it’s always some fat skank.

    • Betheny Sanders

      hot chicks do go crazy they just don’t pay you any attention

      • rs1123

        “They”… what a nice Freudian slip.

        • Betheny Sanders

          they means girls. they don’t pay you attention either. a girl knows.

  • Betheny Sanders

    I have been reading these posts and they are so revealing. The majority are men calling a woman they have never met the ‘c’ word and using vile language toward her. Your mothers must be so proud. No wonder none of you have dates or wives who love you. Oh i know you are all married to supermodels huh? People like their privacy whether or not you allow them to enjoy it. It won’t be long and the public will be sick of your invasions, laws change due to circumstance and public opinion (gay marriage). My husband who is a REAL man aptly pointed out that flying your little drones is a solitary hobby. You are usually alone. instead of throwing a football with your kids on the beach or taking a run with your wife, you will just spy…and then excuse it with “it’s legal.” It may be legal for now but that doesn’t make it right and doesn’t make any of you less creepy. I wonder how you would feel if some creepo was filming your daughters? You probably wouldn’t care and your daughters are worse for your weakness. Put down your dumb little toys. go exercise. You are sick perverted voyeurs. Are most of you just looking at scenery? Sure looking at trees and the roofs of buildings. I don’t buy it. No. you are spying on others, and passing it off as something else. Do you really want cameras everywhere? If so then you are fascists. You will all spout off your mouths at me and be disrespectful to a female because that is who you are, but thank God there are men still in the world who will stuff your little copters where the sun does;t shine and then take their legal lumps for what is right. So spout off little boys- I will pay you the same attention that other females pay you which is none.

    • ENTWAFFNUNGDERGESTAPO!

      thanks for all the attention

      • Betheny Sanders

        not used to it are you

        • ENTWAFFNUNGDERGESTAPO!

          does your husband know you’re flirting with me on-line, honey?

          • Betheny Sanders

            my hubby knows everything :)

          • ENTWAFFNUNGDERGESTAPO!

            is he cute and bi?

          • rust

            He probably swallows

          • Betheny Sanders

            what is funny is you wouldn’t say that if you were standing in front of him. i promise, internet superman.

          • westside_resident

            I’d bet you have a cavern between your thighs, angry woman.

          • rust

            That’s right! Hide behind the big brave man.

          • Betheny Sanders

            :) I like you! He is very cute and in great shape but nope he’s straight. and taken.

          • Strap On

            He doesn’t know that you and Andrea Mears are lesbian lovers.

          • Betheny Sanders

            pfffft. silly rabbit. girls don’t take you seriously, do they sugar? lulz

    • Cimejes

      You have more to be worried about from cell phone cameras than these sort of things. These are loud and fitted with cameras for wide shots, it’s not like they can sneak up on people or take close ups from 50+ feet up.

      Kid’s video from that place, from the same day he was assaulted:

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6R5HrpGB2s

    • rust

      the “c” word? CUNT?

      • Betheny Sanders

        thats the one. now go wash your mouth out with penis

        • rust

          Chastised!
          Stop being such a prude. Use real words.

    • rs1123

      You and your husband should get jobs as psychics and mind readers since you have 100% confidence that you are omniscient. I have a hunch your husband wouldn’t dare disagree with or contradict you.

      I don’t go for people taking photos when they’ve been asked nicely to stop but this kid with his drone was not taking photos of anyone identifiable, there was no invasion of privacy except in his ASSAILANT’S mind. And yours.

      • Betheny Sanders

        “i don’t go for people taking photos when they’ve been asked nicely to stop”
        oh so you don’t like it when people take your photo? hypocrite.
        what if they don’t stop? whatcha gonna do

        • Guest

          Hey, were you one of those saying that George Zimmerman should’ve stayed in his car and waited for police to arrive?

    • Guest

      “flying your little drones is a solitary hobby.”
      So is flying a kite. Speaking of which, go fly a kite.

      • Betheny Sanders

        you are a guest? who invited you?

        • Bruce Choate

          Just as bad as yours, posting under an alias

        • Guest

          So are you. Who invited you? Or do you think this site and the public beach are your private property?

    • Jim Morriss

      I am indeed married and have dates. While she is not a supermodel, she is the most beautiful person know. How did “gay” (I think you meant “homosexual”) marriage come into this? Are you incorrectly using this as some sort of example of “public opinion”. Well so is “anti-homsexual-marriage” a public opinion. Public opinion is rarely clear and often wrong. [see “McCarthyism”]

      Your “real man” seems narrow minded and just plane wrong. You probably never let something like facts enter into your opinions but if either of you had bothered to view the videos you would see he was not people watching or spying, he was getting some great sweeping shots of the beach and the areas behind the dunes. Also flying tends to be a very social thing; while some may practice alone, almost all RC flyer I know belong to social groups that meet and fly together. This hobby also attracts many spectators A real man would not waste his time “defending” his woman from a camera that is a hundred feet away. A man married to a self aggrandizing supercilious drama princess might, however, out of embarrassment. He might just tell her to shut-up and grow up though; if he as in an adult relationship and a “real man” not just a macho asshat.
      You seem have a low threshold for the justification for violence you see as morally right but not for self-defense.

      You claim it is creepy? Why? Is it different that YOU can’t see who’s watching you? I guess you feel creeped out a lot. At the bank, in the store, driving, at ATMs, etc. Many of the most famous photographers in the world people watched and took pictures. A few even used a right angle lens. How much privacy do you think you have on a public beach? While your pondering that and scratching your head, look up and wave at the myriad of satellites that are looking down on you. Say cheese “Google Earth”. Then go to your local county GIS maps and look at your backyard in the airial shots they have open to the WORLD. Not a satellite picture, a picture taken from an low flying airplane.I love this gem “… It may be legal for now…” IT has
      always been and always will be. You want to know how I know that? It has
      nothing to do with the constitution that it started with. It has to do
      with the government not giving up their ability to SPY on YOU.

      BTW: Wanting cameras all around is, if anything, paranoid, not Fascist. Fascism is when they government nationalizes most of the businesses and lets certain monopolies exist, and a few other nice things like that. It is a totalitarian regime. While the all want cameras that is not what makes it Fascist. It is what makes them a paranoid regime.

      Also BTW: Looks have nothing to do with being a cunt. While bitches are snide, superficial and feel superior, a cunt is all that AND self rightious. Some of the finest looking women are bitches and cunts. I don’t use the word myself as I put it in the same class as nigger, faggot, gay and such. They are all prior meanings poor choices of derogatory vocabulary.

    • Bruce Choate

      solitary hobby, most of the time we have a spotter with us. I have plenty of friends that get together to fly. We have meet-ups every week. You and your husband have no idea about what FPV flying is all about. yes the camera is there to record the event, but it’s the feeling that your the one flying.

      BTW I love your double standards bitching about men calling her a CUNT yet here you are calling anyone who flies a drone “sick perverted voyeurs” Go live in your fantasy land you have no clue what your talking about. News flash cameras are already everywhere…..
      Oh and your attitude shows just how ignorant you truly are.

      • Betheny Sanders

        oh and your attitude shows just how single and sad you are. sad little man. yeah if you take pictures of other people you are a sick perverted voyeur. yep.

        • Bruce Choate

          LMAO, now your calling all men sick perverted voyeurs, good one. You should really seek therapy, you’ve got a very twisted thought process going on in that little brain of yours. Sounding more and more like this could really be Andrea Mears herself speaking, if not you both attend the same hate men group, how sad.

    • Bruce Choate

      So as a woman you believe what she did was OK? Attacking a minor, then lying to police claiming she was attacked and even told a news reporter on camera that he attacked her first? Yet the video footage clearly shows otherwise, not to mention an eyewitness came forward that saw her attacking him.

      Almost sounds like this is an Andrea Mears alias speaking

      • Betheny Sanders

        that must be the girl in the video. i didn’t watch it. oops. you know too much about her, ya think?

        • Bruce Choate

          You didn’t watch the video, yet come in here spouting your self-righteous indignations, yup your sounding more and more like Andrea Mears every minute.

    • BO_stinks

      you’re a hypocrite, you do the same thing.

  • Guest

    THIS is why you can’t take assault claims at face value. Real assault victims should be outraged by lying pieces of shit who lie about being assaulted.

    • rs1123

      Whether its people like this woman, or teenage girls who have men sent to prison over a story they made up because they are ‘mad at’ the guy, people need to stop playing with others’ lives just because they think they can tell some lies and fix someone they don’t like.

  • Guest

    When George Zimmerman’s interrogator bluffed that Trayvon Martin may have recorded the confrontation on his cell phone, Zimmerman replied that he prays to God that it was recorded.
    Later, when Shellie Zimmerman allegedly recorded an argument with him on an iPad, home security footage captured him breaking the iPad.

    • BO_stinks

      what has that to do with anything?

  • Dan Gelston

    The little punk got his bottom paddled by a girl. Deservedly so.

    • rs1123

      Had he fought back you can bet he would have been arrested also, if not the only one arrested. By keeping his cool it was the woman who got busted, not him.

      Deservedly so.

      • Betheny Sanders

        woman hater. its ok we hate you back.

        • Guest

          rs1123 is an assaulter hater and a liar hater like me. God forbid you’re ever assaulted and people won’t believe you thanks to liars like that woman.

        • CrackerJacker

          What a clueless response.

    • Guest

      Refusing to hit a girl even when she attacked him. What a little punk. He needed to give a big pimp slap, right?

    • Betheny Sanders

      yep! you got it!! girls rock. these weaklings cant actually talk to females so they just take our pictures. creeps.

      • http://www.luxferousproductions.com clepto

        have you watched his vids…he hardly cares about people….hes shooting the scenery you numbtard…

    • http://www.luxferousproductions.com clepto

      he should have beat her ass…

    • BO_stinks

      so you’re all for violence solving problems? sick.

  • biggyfries

    The little creep is lucky I wasn’t there, he would have been bleeding heavily and his equipment would nave been crushed. Seems he wasn’t a MAN, he had better boobs than the woman attacking him. He was a punk trying to bet close-up shots of women’s genitalia. He is no “man”

    • Cimejes

      Not even close. The copter was 50+ feet in the air and the cameras on those things are suited for wide shots of the scenery, not close ups. You can watch videos that the kid takes. People in the vids are the size of insects.

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6R5HrpGB2s

    • rust

      Troll

      • Betheny Sanders

        you are an ugly troll, internet superman

        • rust

          I don’t think you found all my posts yet, Manwich.

          • ENTWAFFNUNGDERGESTAPO!

            heheheh

            manwich

            heheheh!

          • rust

            anyone notice that “Bethany” — err, “BETHENY” seems to be a made-up alias, given that Betheny isn’t a REAL name?

            Or maybe… https://www.facebook.com/bethany.sanders.712

    • Betheny Sanders

      yay!!! you get big hugs and a high five for being a real man!!!

      • http://rubberpunch.dk/punchone/ RubberPunch

        I don’t think hugs and high fives are the reason some men play the ‘real man’ game. Though hugs is a step of the way I guess.

    • Josey Wales

      You must have missed the part where “He showed the police the VIDEO of his flights”. He is just a kid having fun with an awesome toy.
      Your armchair deductive self-reasoning is priceless. It’s folks like you that are the koolaid drinkers and make women hate men.
      I would bet $20 that you never even kissed a girl because your blown out of proportion comment does not reveal any “Knight in shining armor, I’m a real man” qualities.
      I’m sure you brag to all of your internet friends how much sexual experience you have, but you must know, playing tummy sticks at 12 while at a sleepover doesn’t count.

    • John Gary Whalen Jr

      You should probably seek help for your nonsensical, violent tendencies brother.

  • TJ

    He was taking pictures of a solo sow on the beach. It appears javelinas take exception to and young blonde guys.
    A low cal diet awaits her!

  • Guest

    But nobody complains about flying a kite, which can have a camera on it as well.

  • Jim Morriss

    The local CBS link to this vid is gone because the “user deleted his account” Smart move Mr Miller not depending on links to OPV (Other Peoples Videos) but have a copy on LL.

  • Jim Morriss

    Did anyone else notice how calm the Atlantic Lake was in the videos. That was a gorgeous bit of film.

  • MRAAlternate

    A feminist discovered that public spaces are public and not her personal dictatorship… It must have been quite the paradigm shattering event for her.

  • Perv hater

    Interesting you all have the balls to publish her facebook page, but will not even give his name? Where is the post to his facebook?

    • ENTWAFFNUNGDERGESTAPO!

      he’s a minor, genius.

    • dan3333333333

      He’s the victim deee[u]che!

  • Scott Allen

    I hope the little PERV is given a “STIFF” warning and the lady is found not guilty of anything. Perhaps she should have refrained from pounding him. I hope the little PERV is a little more reluctant to ply his voyerism on public beaches. Why do we think the stupid drone is OK …. No one would tolerate someone walking up to beach bathers with a digital camera and snapping off a series of photos ? She should have just taken his remote control device and tossed it into the water along with his helicopter. I support the lady – even after watching the video. I say – go get his computer browsing history and see if he is innocent and his motives were pure at heart.

    • Guest

      I hope you’re assaulted by a crazy lady who breaks your expensive camera or other equipment and accuses you of assaulting her, and the police believe her and lock you up.

    • dan3333333333

      Thats funny she deserved a trip to the hospital and he had every right to put her there to prevent her from not only doing what she was already doing, but prevent her from what she might do deliberately or accidentally, it does not matter, with her belligerent behavior in control of her movements she could have easily poked his eye out and over what? Im thinking she was so angry because he was flying over the good looking women and not her.
      I think the only perv here is you for siding with a female that thinks she is exempt from the law of domestic violence/assault yet protected by it when she decides to lie. Both of you should removed form public, your nothing but an ongoing drama session of lies!
      When I was a teenager there were people at the beach with cameras all the time taking pictures of gorgeous bodies and no one had a problem, the girls/women were complimented. Grow up morons theirs nothing illegal about it, its a public place!

    • Guest

      He was given a warning “that some people can be alarmed.” I hope he’ll carry pepper spray next time, in case a crazy guy assaults him.

    • Scott Allen

      “I know, if I put PERV in ALL CAPS and repeat it a couple of times, it’ll become true.”

    • John Gary Whalen Jr

      Two miles of beach with no camera mounted on a drone….really “perverted” stuff. LOL

    • Lukas Prochazka

      If it would be a girl flying a dron and boy assualting him you would be like: that lady just try to make her afternoon nice to flying her drone and doing what she loves…and the stupid boy should go to jail to 500 years….double standars

    • Noneya Biness

      You’re just as ignorant as that psycho bitch. Both of you are making assumptions about what the guy is doing with absolutely no evidence. For one thing, quad cameras point forwards and not straight down at the ground, assuming he even had a camera on his quad at all, which I doubt due to how small it was. Even with a high-end rig, people on the ground just look like ants from 100 ft up. Hardly anything a “perv” would get off on.

  • David
    • CrackerJacker

      That smells of scam.

  • Abigaill Tomsen

    That’s not a commercial drone but a RC 4 blade helicopter available at most hobby shops and on eBay. They are relatively inexpensive ($200-$1000) and can be controlled from a smartphone, tablet or joystick RC controller.
    That girl is lucky she didn’t grab me like that, I wouldn’t have been as forgiving as the boy.

    • Guest

      She wouldn’t have assaulted a woman or a big guy. She thought she could take him. Little did she know he had an iPhone up his sleeve.

  • dan3333333333

    Had the attacker been honest and laid her case out unembarrassed like a humanbeing to her victim, maybe he would have apologized for flying around her, not wanting her in his video?

  • Flip

    Man, you got bigger problems if a chick can beat your a/z/z

    • BO_stinks

      being a real man doesn’t mean you have to hurt women, as you believe they do.

    • Mike TheVet

      The kid knew the woman couldn’t hurt her. That’s why he didn’t fight back.

      Do you have experience with confrontational women?

    • Mike TheVet

      No response huh? Typical…

  • wtf0804hydroponics

    What a witch calls the cops and than attacks him and runs to the cops when they
    show up, good for him having video proof other wise he would be screwed.

    • Noneya Biness

      The cops should get her for lying to them and false accusations against that kid. Also frivolous use of 911.

  • Mike TheVet

    I really would have liked for another observing woman to confront the lady attacking that CHILD.

    Double standard rears it’s ugly head again.

  • 0JRB19690

    That’s one crazy cunt!

  • Sid Walker

    what a crazy fag man…

  • Giordano Bruno

    Hilarious! Voyeurism is rude and this “photographer” got his ass kicked by a girl!

    • Noneya Biness

      Except it wasn’t voyeurism dumb a$$. You are taking the word of psycho-woman over this kid filming landscapes with his quad? People would look like ants on the ground from that height.

  • JZ

    well she did assault him, but I kind of see where this comes from. As a woman, I don’t appreciate people taking pictures without consent, especially on a beach. I found those discussions of big brothers below really annoying. Just because you can’t stop government doing that doesn’t mean you are happy to let everybody take pictures of you on the beach! or metros! or any other public spaces… what happens if the pictures have your children inside? Do you want that? When you take your children in the public, does it give right to any strangers just to take pictures of them? When you enjoy the sun topless, does it give right to any passes-by to take pictures of you? Beach is not private, but to ensure most people can actually enjoy it, such behavior should be put under scrutiny. Of course if he’s only taking picture from high above without any particular people as target, I’m sure it won’t be a big problem. But I don’t understand why everybody is criticizing the woman here, but totally ignoring that what the guy did could be an offensive act to some people.

    • Bruce Choate

      If your in a public place anyone has the right to take your picture, there is no expectation of privacy. With that said did you bother to even watch the video from his quadcopter?

      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6R5HrpGB2s
      he wasn’t taking pictures, just filming scenery like many other videos on his youtube channel.

    • Lukas Prochazka

      you kidding me? enjoying sun and somebody trying to take pictures? what if somebody is enjoying his new drone and it’s his hobby and passion and some lady come to him and beat him…it’s that disturbing?? …it’s 21 century, and what if you face have somebody on the picture what he will do with it…anyways anybody can find your picture on fb and download it if you have one…

    • s dubbya

      If you go to a public area, you should have no expectation of privacy. period.

  • John Calvosa

    This kid is my hero even when he was getting hit he kept his composure and knew exactly how to handle the situation. He knew they blame him and he countered that with some smart thinking. He is go going to be lawyer.

  • Dal

    Just an FYI, the UK does have snakes; Grass Snakes, Smooth Snakes and Adders (or Common Vipers). Only the Adder is venomous but with modern knowledge of snake venoms nobody has died from an Adder bite for 20 years.

  • ronny

    facebook of this stupid cunt
    https://www.facebook.com/ndrmears?fref=ts

  • obamamamma

    I am just so happy that this clearly insane woman was arrested!!

  • Pixie
  • blah

    The British guy you spoke to is an idiot. Of course we have fucking snakes in the UK!

  • sir lionel manqueef

    1. she is fat
    2. she is assaulting this boy
    3. she is assaulting a minor
    4. she is ugly
    5. she lied to the cops
    6. i hope she goes to prison
    7. this boy broke NO LAWS
    8. i wish i had a helicopter plane like that…looks pretty cool

  • I hate feminists

    If it weren’t for all the feminists in this world complaining about myths, this guy would’ve been free to defend himself against this bitch. Instead, he couldn’t even poke her if he wanted to press charges against her afterwards.

  • johnee

    She assaulted him, plan and simple. Whether I agree with the use of his drone, he was within his rights.

  • Anton Berlin

    Why didn’t they charge her with trying to file false charges and all that goes with that ?

PINAC

PINAC Logo cutout copy
Be the Media