Pittsburgh Cop Arrests Man Video Recording him Making Arrest


A Pittsburgh police officer was already making an arrest when he turned to a man video recording him and decided to arrest him as well.

Nicholas Gerhold said he was attending the Kenny Chesney county music concert Saturday night when a fight broke out in the parking lot.

Police started ordering people to disperse but people apparently didn’t leave quick enough, which is when cops started making arrests.

Gerhold said he and his friend handcuffed and detained in the paddy wagon for 30 minutes before they were freed and informed they would receive citations in the mail.

Here are comments he left on his Facebook wall describing the incident:

There was a fight that broke out down the concert but it wasn’t even us it was some other people so a hour later the cops showed up and told us to disburse But we couldn’t because our car was great there and there was still too many people Partying So my friend Jake put his hands up saying we can leave that’s when they arrested him And that’s when I started video taping them arrest my friend and that’s when the cop seen me videotape my friend Jake getting arrested so he arrested me also

I got arrested for videotaping my friend getting arrested they They put us in the paddy wagon for half an hour let us go after I believe we are getting a citation in the mail


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.

Check Also

The man has put his phone down and is showing his hands but the cop is still fearing for his life.

Maryland Cop Orders Pizza Delivery Man Out at Gunpoint for Not Pulling Over Quick Enough (Updated)

A video surfaced Monday showing a high-strung, agitated and paranoid police officer threatening a pizza …

  • Fotaugrafee

    Let’s see how many collective balls the PBG cops have to actually send a ticket.

  • Prisoner416

    Department contact info and officer name needed, conduct at 0:31 is totally unacceptable.

    • Herbert Napp

      Every single video and story, should have the phone number and address of the responsible department for complaints.

  • ed baier

    Who ever wrote the facebook posting needs to go back to school to retake english, grammer, and writing.

    • Merc

      Says the person who misspelled “grammar”…

      • Guest

        I think he just took the opportunity to give us a fine demonstration of Muphry’s law.

        • Rob

          Who is this “Muphry” you speak of? :)

          • Proud GrandPa

            May I play too? Here is my offering:

            Who is this “Murphy” of whom you speak?
            (This question avoids the terminal preposition and correctly uses both objective and nominative case pronouns in one sentence.)
            Just having fun…

          • Guest


            Not to be confused with Murphy’s law.

            Muphry’s law is an adage that states that “If you write anything criticizing editing or proofreading, there will be a fault of some kind in what you have written.” The name is a deliberate misspelling of Murphy’s law.

  • joe

    The Police should have written citations for littering.

  • Pádraig Pearse

    roid rage.

  • Guest

    I don’t believe it was an arrest. If you’re not transported to another location and booked, it’s not an arrest. It’s a detention. It’s an important distinction in that there are many forms one may have to fill out with the question, “have you ever been arrested?” In this case, I think the person could honestly write, “no.”

    • Carlos_Miller

      Anytime you are held against your will, it is an arrest


      • Guest

        According to that definition, every routine traffic stop is an arrest.

        • REALConservative

          That might be accurate. In Pennsylvania, where this occurred, every traffic violation is recorded in a clerks court of record, and the document always identifies the officer as “the arresting officer” even if it’s a simple “five miles over the posted speed limit.”

          • steveo

            In FL, the traffic statutes specially state that a leo can take you to jail for a traffic infraction.

        • steveo

          ACLU says that there are three stages to the police encounter. Consensual, Detention, Arrest. ACLU says when they put you in handcuffs, you are under arrest, doesn’t matter what the leo says, they also say that if the leo tells you to get out of the car, you are under arrest. You are under arrest, basically, whenever they tell you to do something that you don’t consent to. Like, “step out of the car”, If I don’t will I be under arrest? Yeah, probably. If I don’t do the field sobriety tests, am I under arrest? Yeah, probably. If I don’t give you my DL, am I under arrest, no not necessarily as long as you give me your name and DOB and I can verify that on the computer. Take off your sunglasses, if I don’t am I under arrest? Good question? Turn off your camera. If I don’t am I under arrest? Good, let’s go. Put down your window. If I don’t am I under arrest? Turn off the car. If I don’t am I under arrest? Open your glove compartment. If I don’t am I under arrest? See. You are already under arrest.

          Also, if any form asks you if you’ve been arrested, you don’t have to answer it. And most background cks, except for security clearances, won’t report arrests, only convictions.

          • Guest

            “You are under arrest, basically, whenever they tell you to do something that you don’t consent to.”

            If that were really so, then there would be no more than 2 stages to any police encounter. Consensual and arrest, because the detention is absent your consent. No one “consents” to not being allowed to leave.

          • steveo

            Most people consent during police encounters, the figure I’ve seen is about 95% (even when they have 300 lbs of pot in the trunk), that’s the main problem. Can I take a look in your car? Sure. Pull everything out of your pockets. OK. Do these field sobriety tests. Ok. Do you know why I stopped you? Was I speeding? Somebody called about the noise, can we come in? Sure.

            I would guess that near 100% of detained citizens never ask “Am I free to leave?” ask our law school student how many people asked if they were free to leave in 20 years.

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

            Only a handful, more in the last five years than the first fifteen.

          • steveo

            percentage out of how many encounters? probably less than 1%.

            Until we have more citizens, and especially the citizens in the people of color community, asserting their rights, most of this discussion is worthless because most American citizens allow the leos to walk all over them. Do you think Bloomberg and the skinhead Chief of Police in NYC would get away with stop and frisking white people? They’d be voted out of office and fried by every court available. Do you think white people smoke marijuana, yeah, some I know do and that’s been for 40 years.

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

            Sure, less than 1/2 of a percent out of thousands of encounters. I did have one that was an ass about it. We had a call about a guy, no further description, looking into cars where we were having a bunch of BMVs. He asked if he was free to go, I said sure, he told me to “F” myself, and then crossed the street against a “Do not walk” signal.

            Oops. Now I had PC to stop (it’s a misdemeanor – traffic level violation). He had warrants and a criminal history for BMV, plus a burglar tool (slimjim), so he went to jail.

            The others just walked off when I answered that they were not being detained.

          • steveo

            yeah, and on the subject of searching cars,why not try to get consent every time. It’s stupid to “pat down” a car when you can get consent. If 95% of the drivers give consent, that leaves 5% that say no. Then you call the K9, if the k9 can’t get there within 30 min or so,then let them go, but if the K9 get’s there, the K9 officer can get consent 1/2 the time even if the dog doesn’t alert. If the dog alerts, you can still get consent, by telling the driver you’re going to tow the car, until you can obtain a warrant and he has to pay for it unless he consents in writing. Then if he won’t consent to that, you arrest the driver for the traffic violation and do an “inventory” search of the car, tow it and apply for a warrant. If leos want to search your car, it’s going to get searched. And all of the above methods will hold up in court, too.

          • Guest

            A well trained and careful officer will usually try to obtain consent before resorting to a detention or a non-consensual search. The main reason for this is it eliminates the possibility of the arrest being deemed unlawful due to a lack of reasonable suspicion for the detention. And it eliminates the possibility of having evidence found in a search thrown out for lack of probable cause. With consent, everything is fair game.

          • steveo

            that’s right, consent eliminates disputes over RAS, pat downs, probable cause all those cans of worms. If the driver or citizen consents the leos have nothing to worry about.

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

            I disagree on the searches, but that is based on my experiences and is not intended to say your position is wrong.

            Part of my aversion to consent searches is the paperwork my department required by policy. It was easier to narrate the PC to the camera and handle it that way, but I’ve done it both ways.

          • Guest

            Who is that a picture of in your icon?

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

            Don’t know, but I liked the look of it.

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

            If you have PC to search, it tends to weaken the argument if you ask for consent, it’s refused, and then you search anyway based on the PC.

            Also, if you have PC and it’s a vehicle, you normally don’t have to get a warrant. Carroll
            v. United States, 267 US. 132 (1925). It’s called the automobile exception, or Carroll exception. You still have to have PC.

            I rarely asked for consent, but based my searches on PC. When you “tell” the camera what you see and smell at the time of the stop, it documents it. I never lost a motion to suppress based on a warrantless search of a car.

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

            The ACLU is wrong. I could pull cases from each circuit, but they all say the same thing (which is probably why it appears that SCOTUS has not ruled directly on this issue). The same thing applies at the state level.

            “[U]sing some force on a suspect, pointing a weapon at a suspect, ordering a suspect to lie on the ground, and handcuffing a suspect—whether singly or in combination—do not automatically convert an investigatory detention into an arrest requiring probable cause.” United States v. Sanders, 994 F.2d 200, 206 (5th Cir. 1993).

            “Nor does the use of handcuffs exceed the bounds of a Terry stop, so long as the circumstances warrant that precaution.” Houston v. Clark County Sheriff Deputy John Does 1-5, 174 F.3d 809, 815 (6th Cir. 1999).

            “[T]he handcuffing of the defendants did not necessarily turn a legal investigative stop into an arrest.” United States v. Smith, 3 F.3d 1088, 1095 (7th Cir. 1993).

            “Our cases have made clear that an investigative detention does not automatically become an arrest when officers draw their guns, use handcuffs, or place a suspect in the back of a patrol car.” Gallegos v. City of Los Angeles, 308 F.3d 987, 991 (9th Cir. 2002) (internal citations omitted).

            “[T]he use of firearms, handcuffs, and other forceful techniques does not necessarily transform a Terry detention into a full custodial arrest….” United States v. Shareef, 100 F.3d 1491, 1502 (10th Cir. 1996).

          • Photog at Large

            ECLS/Stevio?other posters — I generally don’t like off topic posting, but this one seems to be getting read and responded to more than when I asked a question elsewhere on the forum. Hopefully members won’t mind checking this link and offering feedback/opinion. TIA


          • steveo

            Ok, I believe you.I need a lawyer now, before I answer any questions. All this even solidifies my belief that when you are confronted by a leo, you are already under arrest. Put your hands behind your head, and lay down on the ground and beg them not to hurt you and mumble I need to talk to my lawyer. I’m not moving until all of you leave.

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

          A traffic stop and citation can technically be an arrest, dependent on state law. In some states, there are not “infractions” or “violations”, there are misdemeanors punished by fine only. The citation is basically an ROR, or the officer can transport and book the individual.

        • stk33

          One definition of the arrest is moving the subject to another place against his will. That is, if the cop says “stay here and don’t leave”, it’s detention (the courts also specified “for a short time”, but it’s anyone’s guess what is “short”); but if he moves you elsewhere, such as to his car, that is arrest.

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

            The courts have allowed officers to move a detained subject at the scene without it transitioning into an arrest, and have specifically allowed them to move detained subjects into their car. Moving the subject to a different place is normally held to mean a substantial distance, such as to the station or a jail.

          • Photog at Large

            Just for clarification though, do restraints (ie handcuffs, zip cuffs, etc) move the encounter from mere detention to arrest in this specific scenario/story ?

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


          • steveo

            ACLU says yes. Cops say no, cops have the guns.

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

            I’m at school, so I don’t have time to look it up, but there is case law on it. Remember that the ACLU isn’t always right.

          • steveo

            A retired American General met with a retired Viet Cong General in an economic summit. The American general said, “You know, you never defeated us in a field battle.” The Vietnamese general said, ” And that’s immaterial.” ACLU might be right, might be wrong, but usually it’s immaterial.

          • Currently-a-Lawyer-never-a-Cop

            Time is the biggest factor. Even a routine traffic stop can be considered an arrest if the detention time exceeds reasonable needs. For instance, people being made to wait unreasonable amounts of time for drug dogs to arrive has been ruled an arrest even without handcuffs or transport from the scene.

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

            It is one of the many factors, yes. We would go over and over the factors during in-service training, and some of the guys would still never get it. They would focus on time, and then transport the guy to the PD, or block them in with their car, or tell them they were free to go, ask for consent, and when denied consent, detain them for a dog.

            It was one of the things I tried to keep a handle on as a supervisor, but hard to do, in part due to the officer’s failed war on drugs mentality.

          • steveo

            So, officer, if I don’t go into your car willingly, would I be under arrest, would you put handcuffs on me, and charge me with obstruction? Probably yes. So then I’m already under arrest.

            Why did the Soviet soldiers defeat the Germans at Stalingrad? Because they all believed that they were already dead. They knew the Germans would just shoot them, all the members of their families and all the children if they didn’t stand up for themselves. So, they were already dead. So, if I’m already under arrest, why should I do what you say? Take me to the judge.

            But so what, you going to sue the guy for false arrest, if he puts you in the back of the car without telling you you are under arrest and then letting you go? Maybe the judge will give you a dollar.

          • Guest

            No. You are under “investigative detention.”

          • steveo

            This assumes that I consent to being “investigated”. Leo: at this time I’m detaining you for investigation. Me: No you’re not. I want to leave and I’m going to leave unless I’m under arrest. Am I under arrest?” Well, I’m going to place you under arrest for obstructing a police officer if you don’t comply. So, then, I’m under arrest, right?

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

            If they have reasonable suspicion, the officer can detain you without your consent. Arrest has nothing to do with it at that time. That is based on Terry v. Ohio.

            Most states have a provision for enforcing that. In Texas, if you start to leave, you get charged with Evading Detention.

          • Guest

            No consent is needed for an officer to detain you. Hence, the word “detention.” Not, “voluntary staying.”

        • DaleC

          A traffic stop is a detention. If you get a ticket, technically, it is an arrest.

      • Photog at Large

        A bit of a side discussion – when I read further down at the link Carlos posted defining ‘arrest’, it shows the following regarding search after a qualified traffic stop :

        Similarly, police may not stop motorists without first having a
        reasonable and articulable suspicion that the driver has violated a
        traffic law. If a police officer has satisfied this standard in stopping
        a motorist, the officer may conduct a search of the vehicle’s interior,
        including the glove compartment, but not the trunk, unless the officer
        has probable cause to believe that it contains contraband or the
        instruments for criminal activity.

        I just wondered if this is completely accurate — referencing Arizona v Gant 556 U.S. 332 (2009) ?

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

          More facts are needed to determine that. In Gant, the subject was arrested for driving on a suspended license, handcuffed and placed in a police car. He had no way of accessing the vehicle to gain access to weapons or to destroy evidence, and the search was suppressed.

          In other situations, such as New York v. Belton, 453 U.S. 454 (1981), the search was upheld as proper. See also Chimel v. California, 395 U.S. 752 (1969). Belton was similar, but there were four suspects and only one officer, the suspects were not secured, and he had probable cause that there were drugs in the car from the odor of marijuana and other indicators.

          In Belton, the officer was looking for evidence for which he had probable cause, while in Gant the officer was just generally searching. What kind of evidence would you find for DWLS?

        • steveo

          Here’s a good rule of thumb. Don’t carry any drugs in your car. Keep it clean. Don’t leave any beer cans or vodka bottles lying around, and leave the drug tools at home. If you have a gun in the car, even though it’s legal it’s a good idea to tell the leo, and even though state law says you don’t have to tell him. You’ll probably never be searched as long as you are white.

          Also, don’t drive your car with an expired tag. Ck your taillights, turn signals, tag light and headlamps regularly. If you have a suspended license. The leos are going to know this by cking the tag or because they know you. Try to get your license, unsuspended.

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

            Good advice. Also don’t consent, only answer the questions you need to, and be polite (even if they’re an ass). Video it if possible.

          • steveo

            if it weren’t for alcohol, drugs and bad drivers, we wouldn’t need any cops in our county. 95% or more of the arrests involve alcohol, drugs, suspended licenses.

          • Guest

            “only answer the questions you need to”

            That would be, name, address, and date of birth. There are no other questions you NEED to answer.

            Now that the Supreme Court has made it clear that your pre-arrest silence can be used against you if you don’t first cast the proper magical incantation, you now also need to say, “I invoke my right to silence,” at the beginning of every police encounter.

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

            Those are the only questions you are required to answer. There may be a need to answer others, for example if your pregnant wife is in the back seat in labor and the officer asks what’s the hurry.

          • Photog at Large

            Well darn, guess i should go clean the vehicle out :) j/k

            The above would seem to be pretty obvious (don’t have illegal items on or about your possession) – but people aren’t always the sharpest tool in the shed. Hence warnings about not placing a hot iron on your face, and other label warnings 😉

          • steveo

            Sometimes I drive around at night in my community so that I can do some copwatching. Try counting the number of vehicles that have a light out in the back, you’ll lose count. There are more vehicles to stop, legally, than leo time to stop them. My theory is people generally arrest themselves.

  • Joel Turner

    When are these mental deficient persons wearing badges going to learn, I feel it will only happen when they get sued for payroll fraud.

  • srandallthomas

    Damn it’s a job, they are supposed to be professionals. Why is that cop so emotional, like his feminine side has overtaken him?

    • TheTruth

      Most cops are insecure geared gorillas that couldn’t do anything after high school and were too scared to join the military. :)

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

        Gee, why didn’t someone tell me that before I did 5 years of active duty and 15 in the reserves?


        • MCIDoOrDie

          Were you a POG who stayed inside the fancy wire or were you a bullet catcher? And what branch were you tough police man and what MOS?

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

            I was 11B3P when I was Army. My reserve time was USAFR and I was a J31P3.

          • Dan Matthews

            11Boozer! Then a cop. Damn, you do like putting your ass on the line.
            I’m even further impressed EC.

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

            The P suffix is airborne. My first unit was an airborne infantry battalion.

          • Proud GrandPa

            I am impressed. You have had quite an interesting career.

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

            It’s not that impressive. I was lucky and was never deployed to a warzone. There are many people out there that did much more, and sacrificed much more than I have.

          • John

            I’m disappointed EC. First you serve in an honorable position defending the constitution, then serve in a position that seems to be hell bent on violating it whenever possible?

            6 years as 11B here and would never dream of serving in law enforcement, nor has anyone I’ve served with (immediately) moved into that field.

            The police these days seem to thrive on oppressing civilians. Of course I don’t believe every LEO is this way, it may soon come to that. After all, how many people that take the oath seriously:

            On my honor,
            I will never betray my badge,
            my integrity, my character,
            or the public trust.
            I will always have
            the courage to hold myself
            and others accountable for our actions.
            I will always uphold the constitution
            my community and the agency I serve.

            will choose to work side by side with those who have a very different mindset? With those who laugh about tasing people, finding it amusing instead of seeing it as a necessity. With those who can’t wait for the day they finally get to shoot a suspect.

            I have never been imprisoned. I do not have a criminal record. I am not impoverished. I do not live in a bad neighborhood. I am a veteran. I am a husband. I am a father. I am a productive member of my community. And I am human. As such I am bound to make a mistake one-day. When that day comes I sincerely hope I do not find myself tased, beaten or shot. I hope that I do not find myself being treated like scum because of a moment of weakness or stupidity, in spite of a lifetime of honorable deeds.

            Considering the way I have been treated during traffic stops, my hope is not strong. I have lost trust in the police, and I know that I’m not alone.

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

            John, I would have hoped that your time in the Army would have taught you not to stereotype people.

            I’ve never worked with another officer who laughed about tasing someone. I have never worked with nor heard of an officer who couldn’t “wait for the day they finally get to shoot a suspect.”

            On the contrary, I can give examples of just the opposite. There were several occasions where I would have been legally justified in shooting a suspect, but I did not do so for a number of reasons. The same with other officers that I worked with. One tackled a suspect who was attempting to draw a gun on the officer. Another officer was fighting with a suspect who was trying to gain control of his gun, and the suspect was winning – the back up officer used a sleeper hold instead of shooting him. Yet another officer drove up on a double murder with the suspect standing there with the literally smoking gun in his hand, yet didn’t fire and took the suspect into custody. There are plenty of other examples.

            I have been shot at, come on suspects with knives, baseball bats, crowbars, etc, and would have been justified in shooting each of them, but thankfully did not have to do so.

            The officers I know that have shot a suspect all wish that it had not been necessary. Every single one of them.

            I’ve seen officers do everything that they could to save someone’s life, sometimes successfully, sometimes not. I’ve seen the victims of evil, shot, stabbed, strangled, raped, and killed. I’ve seen detectives work 16 hour days to try and close a case and bring evil-doers to justice.

            I have seen no officer intentionally violate someone’s constitutional rights. Have I seen officers make mistakes? Sure. But not a single one intentionally violated someone’s rights. Some mistakes officers make got them suspended or fired. Some officers committed criminal offenses (almost all off-duty) and were fired – most were prosecuted.

            This happens in every profession, including the military.

            I served in an honorable profession both in the military and in law enforcement. If you choose not to believe that, it is your problem, not mine.

          • John

            My time in the military taught me exactly the opposite, how to stereotype. When you are in combat, without clear combatants, stereotyping might just save your life.

            I didn’t make it clear that I know there are many who wear the badge with honor, and didn’t intend to insinuate that you did not. I also believe every example you have given of good officers. I know that there are good officers, but probably more in your generation than now and likely more now than the next.

            I have personally heard uniformed officers laughing while talking about the force they had to use on someone. This occurred in public at the gas station getting coffee.
            My wife over-heard a conversation between an off duty officer in plain clothes while he was on a date (my wife recognized him). He was telling his date about he almost GOT to shoot someone in an ‘if only he’ context.

            I have also experienced being insulted and belittled during a traffic stop. Yes I was speeding. Yes I know it is against the law and I deserve the citation. I don’t deserve to be called a “fucking idiot”. If I said that to an officer you can bet the outcome wouldn’t be very good for me. Yet because he is wearing the badge, I am forced to sit there and take it along with muttering a couple “yes sir’s” now and then.

            You can also go onto liveleak and watch video after video of officers treating people like trash. Watch the cyclist get shot in the back. Watch person after person get tased for not complying, when they clearly didn’t understand they were obligated to.

            With that said I would like to reiterate that I don’t believe that this is the majority. I don’t hate cops. I have had many interactions with very professional officers, a few have been down right pleasant.

            I do however believe that the few tarnish the perception of the many. Trust is a powerful thing. When I’m getting pulled over, which kind of officer am I getting? It could go anywhere from being verbally abused, to exchanging pleasantries, getting my ticket, and heading on my way. I should be able to ‘trust’ that I know exactly what I will get from anyone wearing a badge. I should be able to get the same respect I give.

            When you come into contact with an LEO you never know which type you are going to get. Uncertainty=insecurity. Trust cannot happen with insecurity. So as long as ‘squad integrity’ prevails, things will never change.

            And you are 100% right, this happens in the military as well. The difference is that (from my experience) in the military once you hit ground in combat, individuals with certain ‘traits’ are reassigned to jobs where they won’t endanger someone’s life.

            Well that was very long winded. Essentially what I mean to say is that I wasn’t trying to insult you, or say that you have acted without honor. As summarized as I can make it:
            In the infantry we fix those who act without honor. In the police force it appears that those who act without honor are protected.

          • Dan Matthews

            C130 goin down the strip
            airborne troopers going to take a trip
            Stand up hook up shuffle to the door
            Step right out and count to four

            Needless to say, I’m impressed EC!

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

            LOL, well jumping out of a C130 is better then being sucked out the door of a C141. The best jumps (as far as just the jump) were out of UH1 Hueys, followed by a CH47 Chinook. It’s not that big a deal. Any moron can be trained to jump.

          • Dan Matthews

            Don’t cut yourself short. They would either have to push me or throw out a bottle of a good single malt Scotch that I would go out on my own to save.

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

            Hey, a friend of mine found a bottle of old single malt for only $15K. How about you buy it and we can talk about jumping or whatever.

            Or you could just give me $15K and I’ll tell you how it was. :p

          • Dan Matthews


            I came home from playing golf one day to find my wife and her friends on the patio, totally shit faced from drinking mimosas all day. When I went into the kitchen and found three empty bottles of my $75 champagne and realized it was used to make mimosas, I realized there and then that she would become ex-wife number 2.
            I probably would have killed all of them if they had emptied a $15,000 bottle of anything.

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

            LOL. It’s a good thing that I don’t like champagne.

            Funny thing, I made the same offer on the Scotch to my friend, only he wasn’t as polite as you.

          • Dan Matthews

            You gave me a challenge to remember my own:
            32D2T25 Fixed Station Facilities Controller, trained in HF and VHF radio control, with some microwave. When I got in country, I ran an Officer’s/Enlisted Men’s bar.

        • REALConservative

          Because most cops…well, you can’t tell them anything.

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

            Sure you can.

            We just don’t believe it.


  • Farid Rushdi

    I’ve never believed that police had any type of quotas for arrests and tickets but you see this stuff and it makes you change your mind.

    Just because you can do something doesn’t mean you should. A 10-second conversation with the two guys would have made him realize there car is there and they couldn’t get away right then.

    I think when officers go into “arrest mode,” they become someone else where common sense stops and all they can do is find people to arrest.

    And as long as police departments don’t protect the citizens and let the blue wall take care of the officers, nothing will ever change.

  • Burgers Allday

    Interesting and sensible discussion of “arrest” versus “detention” on this thread. Bottom line: there is a wide margin of cases where it is impossible to say for sure whether it was an arrest or detention, and good lawyers could argue the issue either way. It is a classic first year of law school issue where they teach the young’uns that some legal standards are fuzzy and indeterminate (often on purpose and often for good reasons).

    The arrest versus detention issue now has “higher stakes” than ever, because a recent Supreme Court case (which Ex-Cop has blogged) suggests that a suspect’s silence can be held against the suspect if the suspect is merely being “detained” but not “arrested.”

  • $58984987

    It is not obvious to me that the person was detained-arrested for filming.
    It is obvious the police were attempting and ordering the people there to disperse and leave the property.
    Which is why the person filming was cuffed…as he had not left and was not leaving the property.

  • who watches the watchmen?

    hick cops.