Federal Security Guard Assaults Man for Video Recording After Pointing Out Sign Allowing Video Recording (Updated)

Wally Sullivan walked into a federal building in Tampa while video recording this week, hoping to make a public records request, but was informed he would have to turn off his camera.

When he asked what law or policy forbade him from entering the Immigration and Naturalization Services building with his camera, he was directed to a wordy document posted on a wall behind him.

But before he could find the section that addressed photography, a security guard assaulted him, forcing the camera off.

If only that security guard would have taken the time to read the section from the General Services Administration, which states the following:

Photographs for News, Advertising or Commercial Purposes

§102-74.420—What is the policy concerning photographs for news, advertising or commercial purposes?

Except where security regulations, rules, orders, or directives apply or a Federal court order or rule prohibits it, persons entering in or on Federal property may take photographs of—

(a) Space occupied by a tenant agency for non-commercial purposes only with the permission of the occupying agency concerned;

(b) Space occupied by a tenant agency for commercial purposes only with written permission of an authorized official of the occupying agency concerned; and

(c) Building entrances, lobbies, foyers, corridors, or auditoriums for news purposes.

Like anything handed down by the feds, the policy is contradictory because it states that permission is required to shoot non-commercial photos in the “space occupied by the tenant agency,” unless that space happens to include “building entrances, lobbies, foyers, corridors, or auditoriums” and the photography is for news purposes.

Considering he had not yet crossed the metal detector security checkpoint and was trying to document a public records request, it certainly doesn’t look like he was violating the policy because making a public records request is a very journalistic procedure.

But as we’ve seen so many times when dealing with security guards, they seem incapable of comprehending the rules and regulations they are paid to enforce.

We’ve seen it several times with 50 State, the company I am suing over repeated assaults for taking photos on the Miami-Dade Metrorail system (trial is scheduled for May), and we saw it last month with Alutiiq, the company paid to supposedly protect federal courthouses in Miami as well as with the idiots from 50 State again who are paid to protect Miami’s criminal courthouse.

Now we’re seeing it with Paragon Systems, the Virginia-based company contracted to keep cameras out of the INS building in Tampa, despite what the policy clearly states on the wall that anybody can read.

Of course, that assuming the guards can read.

Sullivan returned the following day to find out why he was kicked out despite the policy saying he was allowed to record.

Because he did not want to get assaulted again, he walked in with his camera off.

This is how he explained it in an email:

I asked for the big guy that had told me to leave on Monday (His name is Leroy Lee).  When he responded, I asked him to define the statute as he was applying it, he said, that he made the decision that no videos could be shot in the lobby because the statute said so.

After a few minutes of showing him how the statute actually reads, and how vague it is, he decided to call the Field Security Manager, Robert M. Russell, and I asked him how he defined the statute…He said it said that I could not film in the lobby.

Then I asked what justified him deciding this, he went into the security reasons as they usually do and after I showed him what I had showed Leroy, he then told me that  he didn’t need me to quote statute to him and that it was a regional decision made by the United States Customs and Immigration Offices, so I asked who was the person there that had decided to define the statute this way.

He said, for me to find out more I would have to call PIO Sharon Scheidhauer, in Orlando at 407-237-8837.

Mr. Russell then asked me to step outside to continue our conversation, On the way out I asked if I could get his comments on public record…He said, no!…I asked again and he replied the same, No!  So from there he went back to the safety issue again and gave me the number to the privacy office in Orlando ( 407- 237 8825).  I managed to bring up my concerns with trading any issues of security verses freedoms and this seemed to upset him, he then told me that If I had no business concerning immigration, that I would not be welcome on the property anymore.

So perhaps we all should give PIO Sharon Scheidhauer, in Orlando at 407-237-8837. And maybe even Paragon System headquarters  at (703) 263-7176  to see what are the hiring qualifications for security guards.

And perhaps we should see how our local federally funded security guards interpret the rules they’re suppose to enforce about recording inside federal buildings to see if they’re any different than the idiots in Florida.

Paragon also has a Facebook page where they told all their 121 followers (what it was at the time) that they are “security officers,” not security guards.

Screen shot 2014-01-09 at 1.43.23 AM

Semantics doesn’t mean anything when you come across like thugs on video.

UPDATE: Then there is this comment on their Facebook page, unrelated to the other comments regarding this story.

Screen shot 2014-01-09 at 11.23.00 AM

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

Stephen Matakovich

Pittsburgh District Attorney to Refile Charges Against Acquitted Cop who Attacked Teen on Video

The Pittsburgh police officer who was acquitted this week on assault charges when a surveillance …

  • http://www.policemisconduct.net Film The Police Always

    Amazing how authority goes to these little trolls heads. Our country is so fucked, and I thank all of us that actually make a difference by recording these assholes everyday.

    • kurtsteinbach

      I’ve worked security. it is how they are told to enforce the rules. You ask the person to turn off the camera. If they refuse, you ask them to leave. If they refuse you tell them to leave. You never touch them or the camera. You get the supervisor. You do not touch the person recording or their camera. You repeatedly, firmly ask/tell them to stop recording and ask/tell them to leave. You get your supervisor. You call the police. You never touch the person/people. You work for the Security Company, they are contracted to the government. It is up to the government supervisor to make that determination on recording. If you make physical contact, you leave yourself, the guard company, and the government open to lawsuits. If they call the police, you and your company cannot be sued, especially if it’s legal to record. All of this is part of the standard training. I was in the military, it;s why I could be a security Officer (I had a background check). I graduated college. If they do not as them to stop recording and leave they will be fired. The Guard is not to blame for doing what he was told. he is to blame for assault. Like I said, you never touch the person/people recording, and since it is lawful to record in such places, the government and other private businesses where it is lawful need to stop forcing such situations on contracted guard companies and low level employees. if you don’t want to be recorded, remove them yourself…. Security Officers, are subject to the law and may not break it. It is why they should handle this as if have stated. They are required to follow the law….

      • Difdi

        The thing is, constitution > laws > policies. Especially when there are federal laws that make violating the constitution a crime.

        If a guard is ordered to violate the law, it is (by definition) an illegal order.

        • kurtsteinbach

          But the guard works for the Security company and is the Security Company’s employee. The Security Company is contracted to the government agency. BTW, violating the Constitution is not always a felony with criminal penalties. For example, if your employer discriminates against you because you are a women, no one will be going to prison. They might be fined, forced to hire you back, and have to pay you a lot of money. If the guard refused to ask/tell the person to leave, he will be fired, and most people cannot afford to sue, plus, he will lose anyway. His employment agreement was and is to follow company policy, which says follow all directions given by the client at a post. He is a Security officer, a private citizen, not a military officer or a police officer. Your “illegal order” excuse does not apply to non-military personnel or non-government employees. This type of situation, is once again why the government should not be using private contractors. It puts individuals in compromising positions. Large scale government use of private contractors began in the 90s at the passage of legislation by the GOP Congress, who got Clinton to sign it after they shut down the government….

          • inquisitor

            And this is why when Mr. Security puts his hands on me he will be drawing back a bloody stump looking at his hand now lying on the ground wondering what just happened.

          • Difdi

            And then the SWAT team rolls in and guns you down where you stand.


          • Phred

            Plus your dog. They always go for the dog.

          • Difdi

            And if you don’t have one, they might just buy you one, so they can then shoot it. Have to follow procedure, after all.

          • inquisitor

            How long will that take?
            I will have moved like the wind.

          • $910553

            As far as I am concerned, if I take out enough of them before I go, that’s a fair trade. I swore an oath to the Constitution and I intend to honor it. I don’t expect to get out of this life alive anyway, so…

          • Difdi

            I agree with you (and I also once swore that same oath). But while it’s better to be a dead lion than a live jackal, being a live lion is better still.

          • Bob_Striffler

            Revolutions don’t happen without the spilled blood of patriots.

          • Difdi

            And tyrants too, or your revolution will fail. Remember, the tree of liberty needs both to prosper.

          • Voice-Of-Concern

            Perhaps you did not intend to use weasel words by dismissing “illegal orders” as an excuse that does not apply because the S/O is a civilian. Regardless of your intent, you are flatly wrong.
            1. The guard company can not legally be ordered to commit or have its employees commit illegal acts.. such as committing Civil Rights violations duing the course of their duties (such as preventing the free exercise of Rights granted by the First Amendment. . Including, but not limited to news gathering)
            2. Contractors hired by the Government to act in their stead are very much subject follow the same laws as anyone else. The biggest difference is, no qualified immunity like LEOs usually have. A potentially VERY expensive difference.

          • Jefft90

            I think there is a discrepancy in your view that will ultimately be decided by SCOTUS. Not all federally contractors are state actors therefore not all contractors get qualified immunity. If you are determined to be a state actor you are entitled to qualified immunity. Who is and is not a state actor is still ambiguous with most of the cases involving prisons. West v Atkins and recently Minneci v Pollard. The way I see it, if they are not state actors you have to sue them in Civil Court, if they are state actors they are entitled to qualified immunity

          • pinbalwyz

            LEO’s who violate your fundamental liberty interests LOSE their qualified immunity and are personally liable for their bad acts. That’s well known federal case law.

          • Jefft90

            My comment was regarding state contractors vs. agents of the state.

          • Difdi

            The state cannot contract someone to do what the state is forbidden by law from doing. It works in much the same way that hiring a hitman to murder on your behalf is also a crime.

          • Jefft90

            Duuh! The question is how do you determine a state contractor who has no power or limited responsiblity and contractor who is an agent of the state.

          • Difdi

            That’s actually fairly simple.

            If someone is a state actor and commits what would be a crime if you or I did it, they will be shielded from criminal liability by the state, who will claim they acted properly and not prosecute them.

            If someone is not a state actor and they commit what would be a crime if you or I did it, they will be arrested and prosecuted and imprisoned, just like you or I.

          • Jefft90

            So what if the someone says they are a state actor and the State denies it?
            How do you tell???

          • Difdi

            You just have to do what’s right, act like the law exists and hope for the best. Puppy dog eyes might not hurt if you guess wrong:

            “Well your honor, it’s well known that police and government officials are upstanding, moral professionals, so when I saw a person acting immorally and unprofessionally, well, any reasonable person could tell from that that the guy wasn’t any kind of cop or official.”

            In the end though, the courts expect every private citizen to be psychic, more expert in the law than trained law enforcement professionals and to never guess wrongly as to whether the masked hoodlum with no identifying marks on his clothes, screaming profanity at you is a cop or a mugger.

          • kurtsteinbach

            LEOs are also required to know the law. Most Police Academies teach the law. Security Guard companies do not teach courses in specific law. The only training a guard will get for this type of post is OJT. A supervisor explains the law. Me, I love to read, at some point, I will read that poster and ask questions…. Trust me, then the trouble begins….

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

            Except you’re wrong. That’s not the standard.

          • kurtsteinbach

            The difference is that of having a job and being fired. very hard to get another job as a guard if they fire you for not doing what you were told. It’s called insubordination. Unlike with the police department, their is no board of inquiry to clear a guard who refuses to enforce an illegal order of wrongdoing when he or she refuses the order. Maybe there needs to be such a mechanism in private employment….

          • Bob_Striffler

            A really good overview of 1983 claims is here http://www.constitution.org/brief/forsythe_42-1983.htm and defines who is an actor under color of law! However (and I can’t site this or provide link) in the Florida Legislature a bill was proposed some years back to grant immunity to privatized Guards! I don’t know what became of that bill! My guess is nothing as I would have heard of it…. probably. There is a clause in 1983 that provides for states to make the determination of who is classified as Actor under color of law. In 1961 it was Monroe v. Pape.[3] In Monroe, the Supreme Court held that a police officer was acting “under color of state law” even though his actions violated state law.[4] Further in this overview and the bodies of law concerning 1983 it covers what I’ve tried to explain on this PINAC site that even municipalities, when it can be shown that it is a custom or policy have no immunity either as a failure to train supervise and discipline “these actors under color of law” as it shows complete “indifference” to the constitution. And you are absolutely correct that “contractors” and their companies to these agencies and/or municipalities are not immune to civil law suits either. The immunity afforded cops and court minions is a Court Decreed Law that’s sole purpose is to undermine the Constitution and 1983 as plainly and purposefully written. Further violating someone’s rights is a felony crime punishable by imprisonment according to title 18 241,242 The word “Whoever” in this title provides for no interpretation. The guilt of Misprison of Felony carries right up the chain of jurisdiction every time the police/guards/metro workers etc.. are not held accountable by these laws which was the purpose of these laws! It’s what this free society is supposed to do to deter government oppression and mob rule! A Writ of Mandamus, Ultra Vires etc… needs to be filed challenged and fought like hell to enforce the enforcement of these laws! And put a stop to this assault and attack on sovereign citizens and THEIR Constitution! Media Spotlight needs to be put on Court Rulings regarding these matters. The Judicial Branch, the largest and most dangerous branch and their minions are no longer honoring their role and duty in these matters! The posting of rules (customs) and policies encouraging the violation of rights is blatantly “Unconstitutionally Abridging” these rights/ Constitutionally Protected Activities, which clearly shows a “custom or policy” as defined in 1983 and thus deliberate indifference to the Constitution! It’s a sign that says screw the law we are the law! This is what the NAZI’s did!

          • Difdi

            The guard’s employer is irrelevant. He has a position of authority in a government facility and is exercising what he believes is his authority under the law — and is wrong. He is violating rights under color of law.

            An individual violating constitutional rights without violence commits a misdemeanor, that’s true. But a conspiracy against rights is ALWAYS a felony, and since the guard may have been given an illegal order and the guard may be obeying that illegal order, this could be a conspiracy against rights. We can’t tell from the available facts.

            Just because the government may sue or issue fines under civil law does not abolish criminal laws on the subject.

            You don’t need to be military or police for it to be illegal to obey an illegal order, nor do you have to be military or police to commit a color of law violation. It’s a lot harder for a private citizen to do, but not impossible.

            If shutting down the government is bad and proves a political party is wrong, you should probably be aware that the Democrats have done it about ten times more often than the Republicans.

            Pretty much everything you said is wrong except right at the end. You need to check your facts better. Maybe ask ECLS about it, he’s usually pretty good on legal facts.

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

            “[I]n civil life the rule is well settled otherwise, and that a person committing an illegal act cannot justify his conduct upon the ground of a command from another.” McCall v. McDowell, 15 F. Cas. 1235 (D. Cal. 1867).

          • kurtsteinbach

            You are just plain incorrect and going after the wrong people. Stop going after the guards doing their jobs. Go after the guard company and the client who is giving the illegal orders. If the guard refuses the order, he will simply be fired and replaced with someone who will do what they want. Private companies escort people from their facilities all the time. Sue the guard company for violating the law, and sue the government client in Court for violating the law. They cannot be replaced, but can be made to answer for their actions in very public ways.The guards don’t understand their rights, in other words, their right and obligations from enforcing illegal actions. They also don’t understand the EEOC regulations that protect them from simply being fired. They are told not to be boat rockers. If they were trained better, this would not be a problem, but who wants guards or cops who question the bosses. Compliance with the law is in the guard training and manual but is not emphasized. Perhaps if the guards were paid more than minimum wage, we would have smarter guards who knew the laws and their rights. I am no longer a guard for this reason, but I do know and understand the conflict. it’s why I never had this problem when I was a Security Officer. Employees are ultimately trained to do what their employer really wants. The law is explicit, so is the training. These things happen because private businesses don’t want to be recorded, and because some people said we have a right to privacy and not be recorded. If everybody has an absolute right to privacy, then who can be recorded? Because the people who work in government are individuals also, and they have rights. Legislators write laws, and they put in the exceptions, the loopholes as well. The ambiguity comes because of context. Everything cannot be absolute.

          • Jefft90

            Looking at case law, if the security guards have the power to arrest outside of what they physically see, they better bone up on the law.

            Romanski v.Detroit Entertainment and US V Day 2010

          • Ryan French

            Legal information is available all over the place so there’s little excuse for ignorance. “Following orders” is a poor excuse used by people who aren’t capable of making intelligent decisions on their own. If you go to work and don’t do anything to further yourself, such as researching legal guidelines concerning your duties then you get what you deserve. My college didn’t teach me anything about photography rights, so I learned on my own. Aside from that, assaulting someone who’s not being violent should raise questions if you have an ounce of common sense. So quite supporting mindless slugs.

          • Difdi

            Retaliation against someone for refusing to commit a crime when ordered to do so is itself an illegal act.

            And ignorance of the law is not an excuse. Doubly so when it’s the law that governs your specific profession.

            Why are you so forgiving of violent criminals anyway?

      • Dave in IL

        That protocol sounds correct to me. I have worked in security for a number of years and I would never, ever place hands on someone or their camera, even if they were in an area where they shouldn’t be recording or taking photos. But I’ve worked for proprietary agencies in healthcare and for a short time in the hotel-casino sector, so I think we have a different approach to a lot of things. And the hiring standards and training for S/O’s in the sectors I’ve worked in are different.
        We actually want people to be comfortable and to walk away with a positive view of our organizations. The contract security officers assigned to these government facilities apparently don’t care too much about that. Perhaps they, like many LEO’s and other government officials these days think we should “love it or leave it.”

    • inquisitor

      They are clearly power trippin’ and must have the psychological ego props of being called officers instead of guards as they regard themselves as so impotent, er I mean…important.
      They were not fond of this guy even taking a picture or recording the publicly posted public policy like it is some kind of a national security secret.

    • Raylan Givens

      Maybe Everyone should carry one of these flags along with their camera. It kinda looks like the U.N. version of Photography Is Not a Crime.

      • Difdi

        Sure. Then we could be sufficiently organized to be treated the same way by the feds as the Juggalos.

  • rust

    No WITNESSES! (to quote Richard Stallman)

  • William Skrainski

    Head butt to the bridge of the nose.

    • inquisitor

      A very effective form of communication.

  • pinbalwyz

    I was beaten to the floor and hospitalized by baton wielding Thomas Doyle, a Paragon (of incompetence) security guard employee contracted with the FPS and FEMA at the time, 12-23-07, in a temporary emergency FEMA field office in Belfair, WA for the offense of reaching for my cell phone to call 911 due to his threatening/assaultive behavior. FEMA, Paragon, and the FPS all stonewalled the followup investigation I launched once released. But I have the photos (including of my injuries) and all the documentation. I’m willing to testify, if it would help.

    I discovered Paragon (their nearest corporate office was in Oregon at the time) was owned by Tri-S corporation (out of Florida, I believe), which, in turn, was owned by a subsidiary of Blackwater which changed its name due to all the negative publicity they received for their wanton murders in Iraq and paramilitary behavior in the states.

    These guys are truly the worst of the worst when it comes to incompetence and violence. NEVER (for your own safety) encounter one *alone* and without multiple recording devices for you and all your witnesses. Do NOT ‘ask’ them for permission to record. Just do it (in a public space) as unobtrusively as possible. My experience is they will lie in a heartbeat to save their skins, they are usually not competent enough to flip burgers, and they will thwart your every effort to unmask them.

    On the bright side, they do NOT have the ‘arrest’ powers of a LEO, they have NO qualified immunity, and because of their incompetence, their lies should be easily exposed with a little effort.

    Everyone has heard of the privatization of jails, prisons, and detention centers–these guys are the thin edge of the wedge for privatization of law enforcement duties–a virtual private standing army. They’ve been involved in creating preliminary detention centers (holding pens) and other facilities for vacuuming dissidents/arrestees. Mess with them but realize these ARE the real Nazi goons in today’s America. They’re extremely dangerous, violent, and perverse. Do NOT expect them to have an iota of understanding about the law. Paragon chooses them on the basis of how gullible they are and how willing they are to accept minimum level wages.

    • inquisitor

      I will never allow myself to be a victim or allow one of these maggots to get the better of me under any circumstances. I will snap a neck like a twig before allowing one of them to slap a baton on me. You can take that to the bank.

      • Difdi

        There are specific counters to baton strikes you can learn. You don’t necessarily need to be a better fighter than the guy attacking you if you know all the counters to the way he is trained.

        You might not win against someone with radically different training, but that one guy? You’ll clean his clock.

        Years ago, I learned counters for the standard riot baton training local cops get. I have no intention of going out and smacking a cop around proactively, but if I find myself in the wrong place at the wrong time and it’s my life and limbs or the cop’s, I’ll feed him that baton.

        • inquisitor

          When you read the following article narrating the whole ordeal, at which point would you have resisted and how would you have successfully resisted?


          This is also a case of rendition because jurisdictional limitations were suspended and the prisoner was transported from one jurisdiction to another to have unauthorized medical procedures performed upon his person.

          • Difdi

            I’ve read about it before. Going by the letter of 18USC241 & 242, all of the officers and doctors involved in ‘searching’ that man are guilty of capital crimes — punishable by life without parole or execution.

            Why? Because he had a fourth amendment right to be secure in his person from unreasonable searches. The definition of a reasonable search under the fourth amendment is that allowed by a specific, accurate warrant issued by a judge. But while the police did get a warrant, it was valid only in the county it was issued in, and then only for four hours. By taking the man somewhere where the warrant was not valid after it expired and searching him, the police did so without a warrant.

            18USC242 makes it a misdemeanor for an individual to violate rights without violence under color of law, a felony to do it with a threat or use of dangerous weapon and a capital crime to do so if a sexual assault occurs in the course of the violation — without the necessary warrant, an involuntary anal probing is rape (and arguably is anyway even with the warrant).

            18USC241 starts as a felony for all involved in a conspiracy against rights, and has the same maximum penalty (for the same reasons) as 18USC242. So it’s not just the cops who are on the hook for a capital crime here, it’s also the hospital staff who obeyed their unlawful orders.

            That’s what the law says, but I doubt that the DOJ will bother to prosecute. They have a web page outlining these laws, but almost never enforce them.

            As for your unedited post, I’d refuse to cooperate (to the point of violent resistance) until I saw the warrant. If the warrant was invalid (as this one was, since it had a time expiration and only applied within a single county) I’d have resisted as soon as it became clear the police were going to conduct the search anyway after the warrant expired. The resistance might not have been very effective, but I will NOT walk meekly into my own sexual violation or murder.

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

            It’s not a capital offense.

          • Difdi

            Actually it is. This sort of thing is why I said you’re usually pretty good on legal facts. Here’s why it is a capital crime:

            18 USC 2241 defines aggravated sexual abuse to include rendering someone unconscious in order to perform an act of sexual abuse upon them.

            The difference between a legal search and a rape in the case of anal penetration is the existence of a valid search warrant authorizing such a search. No such warrant existed. A warrant DID exist at one time, but it did not have any legal force in the county the sexual abuse took place in, and it had a time limit that had already expired when the abuse took place.

            18 USC 242 criminalizes violations of constitutional rights such as the ones guaranteed by the 4th amendment (among other rights) committed under color of law. The police presented the invalid warrant to medical personnel as if it were valid, which is absolutely under color of law. 18 USC 242 specifies that if aggravated sexual abuse occurs as a result of the rights violation, those who commit the violation can be imprisoned for any term of years, for life, or executed. That is absolutely a capital crime punishment there.

            18 USC 241 criminalizes conspiracies to deprive someone of rights, and all punishments start off a step more severe than 242. Section 241 also includes the aggravated sexual abuse language and the same penalties (including execution). The police violated Section 242 individually and 241 collectively. When the doctors carried out the illegal medical procedures, they became co-conspirators in the color of law violation, as well as inflicting the aggravated sexual abuse upon the victim elevating the conspiracy from a felony to a capital crime.

            Put simply, you’re mistaken on this one.




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

            The Eighth Amendment prohibits capital punishment for non-homicide offenses.

            See Kennedy v. Louisiana, 554 U.S. 407 (2008) (Eighth Amendment prohibits the death penalty for the rape of a child where the crime does not result in death of the victim); Coker v. Georgia, 433 U.S. 584 (1977) (A sentence of death for the crime of rape of adult woman was grossly disproportionate and excessive punishment forbidden by Eighth Amendment).

            No death of victim, no death penalty.

          • Difdi

            So you’re saying that if no deaths occurred from, say, kidnapping or espionage or treason, then the death penalty is unconstitutional?

            Kennedy v. Louisiana is kinda problematic for the state in that it appears the police assumed there is only one blue ten-speed bicycle in the world and having found it in unridable condition, stopped looking…and then started working on getting the victim to change her story. The changed story was what was used to convict the defendant.

            Coker v. Georgia found that rape of an adult woman did not warrant death, but that it was possible that more brutal rapes might.

            I doubt the justices involved in either decision considered the possibility of a conspiracy among multiple government officials to render a man unconscious and rape him when they decided either Coker or Kennedy.

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

            No, I’m saying that is the consensus of how courts and lawyers read the two decisions.

            No death, no death penalty.

          • Difdi

            I know what you’re saying, I simply disagree with you.

            The problem is that there is the publicly available law, such as what I cited…and then there are all the modifications to it that are hard for non-lawyers to comprehend, or that use word definitions that are wildly different than what those same words mean when the general public says them, etc, that they effectively become secret laws.

            A layman reading what appears to be clearly written law in plain language is screwed, because the law isn’t what he thinks it is, and even if a court decision modifies the law, the modifications are almost never added to the text of the law itself.

            Some states, such as New York, go out of their way to make their written statutes so complex and riddled with incomprehensible phrasing that their entire body of law is effectively secret or overly vague long before case law even comes into the matter.

            As such, those of us who are not law students or lawyers must rely on the laws as they are published. If that makes our understanding incorrect, that is the fault of lawmakers and the courts, not us.

            It’s getting to the point where plainly written, plain language laws have been so altered by case law that non-lawyers cannot understand them to the extent that they are effectively unconstitutionally vague.

        • pinbalwyz

          Sir, I’m a 67yo photojournalist w/aggravated diabetes, an enlarged arrythmic heart and congestive heart disease/failure. I was SITTING in a folding chair when I was beaten senseless to the floor. I did NOT expect to be struck, but I was when I tried to call 911 for help. When the deputy sheriff arrived, he arrested ME (illegally, as it was exclusive federal jurisdiction in that temporary FEMA office which had signs on the windows stating, “U.S. Government Property”) rather than my attacker. The judge (Sheldon) refused to find probable cause (how often does THAT happen?!) on Christmas Eve, 2007 and ordered my release. I appeared with my arm in a sling from the hospital, bruised and disheveled after being held in solitary confinement overnight. I had nightmares about the incident for months afterwards, and although I’d never had problems before with my heart, discovered shortly after the attack I now had arrythmia. I suspect my solitary confinement overnight was to prevent my telling the tale to the inmates in the county jail. When I finally arrived after some months to SUE the bastard (Thomas Doyle), he’d sold his home and absconded to Texas to evade the consequences. FEMA’s investigator never provided me a report, and their employees refused to cooperate in responding to the investigation. The deputy sheriff lied on the arrest report and was obviously fishing for a pretext for the arrest.

          It was a powerful lesson about getting caught alone w/o a recording device in a government forum/venue by one of their goons. Don’t do it–EVER! You’re better off skipping the destination altogether than to show up as vulnerable as that. These people are vicious, malicious, and gloat about their ability to conspire with other government apparatchiks.

      • Fotaugrafee

        Amen to that. If they’re that brazzen to attack someone, they should understand the consequences of their assault on a citizen who has far greater discipline over the art of ‘ass kicking’ than they do.

    • Tijuana Joe

      How comforting.

  • Tijuana Joe

    Similar to TSA, uneducated goons who don’t even know
    their own rules. Do these guys seize toothpaste as well?
    PS Careful fighting these Federal guys. Like
    we saw with George Donnelly, they’ll tackle you, then
    charge you with resisting them or obstruction… and the Feds have a 90% conviction rate.
    1:43 That goofy deer-in-the-headlights looks is priceless.

  • nospamformo

    PIO Sharon Scheidhauer seemed to be a reasonable person when I spoke with her. She stated that she had not yet heard of the story or had been contacted by The PINAC Nation. I pointed her to the story and she promised that she would look into it.

  • Paschn

    And we never hear about it in the controlled media, ever. Perhaps that explains these actions;


    The American people have forgotten how to show their anger, their rage by hitting the streets and SUPPORTING each other. The occupy Wall Street movement was attacked by the FBI, sycophant cops etc. Hell even their fellow citizens ridiculed and belittled them. Perhaps “we the people” think it’s just down-right RUDE to question authority even when authority shoves our collective faces in the dirt? A few years back, in France, millions took to the street to protest the plans by government to boost retirement from 60 to 61, (we retire at 67 if born after, I believe ’59). Cops gravitate to POWER, not justice, not honor, certainly not our constitution. Hell, I’ve watched video clip of people at phony political town hall meetings where citizens DARED to ask our elected civil servants legitimate questions where their fellow citizens booed them and they were removed. Bizarro World, nothing less. I believe it was Ben Franklin who said people have a tendency to have the government they deserve or something to that effect.

    • Jamesdiamond

      Joseph de Maistre “Every nation gets the government it deserves.”

      • Paschn

        Thank you.

    • pinbalwyz

      Yes, indeed!–and his famous, “A republic, Madam…if you can keep it,” reply was out of concern for corruption in the people as much as in the government.

  • SF Guy

    I was in the post office yesterday mailing something and, as I put it on the counter, went to take a picture of the package for record-keeping purposes. The agent immediately stopped me, stating that photography is not allowed in post offices.

    Now looking at the rules, you can see that it’s actually totally ambiguous:

    Photographs for News, Advertising, or Commercial Purposes

    Photographs for news purposes may be taken in entrances, lobbies, foyers, corridors, or auditoriums when used for public meetings except where prohibited by official signs or Security Force personnel or other authorized personnel or a federal court order or rule. Other photographs may be taken only with the permission of the local postmaster or installation head.

    Look at everything wrong with this rule:

    1) It addresses the legality of photography only in the context of three purposes: news, advertising, or commercial activity. It doesn’t cover at all the reason that I wanted to take a picture, which was to document my transaction. Nor does it encompass the purpose of “I just like to take pictures” or “I am an artist.” A strict reading of this section would tend to suggest that photographs without permission are prohibited unless they are for “news” purposes.

    2) Is the part of the post office where you hand your package to an agent and pay a “lobby”? I kind of think it is. In fact, it seems to me that the posted hours at post offices generally refer to “lobby hours.” At the same time, I could see someone claiming that the term “lobby” only refers to foyer-like spaces, since the word in the regulation is between “entrances” and “foyers”. It’s hard to understand why the USPS is so vague here. Every post office I have ever been in has a main space where you interact with the agents. Can you take pictures here or not?

    3) Was the agent who told me that I couldn’t take pictures an “authorized personnel” as referred to in the regulation? How am I to know?

    Also, FYI, I counted at least 10 cameras in the post office pointed at customers.

    • Clark

      $7 Billion boondoggle. Time to shut the USPS down! Let Mica take his cheap swipes at that instead of Amtrak! (yes, I know he’s not int he USPS committee)

      • inquisitor

        Think twice about that.

        The postal service is actually a Constitutional right and a guarantee to every citizen.

        The post office was never financed by tax payer dollars but financed itself.
        It was always self-sustainable.

        When the post office was unreasonably mandated to finance its pensions fifty years in advance, a feat that no private business could successfully pull off, the post office actually covered that mandate.

        Then the government decided it would raid that pension fund and take from this non-tax payer funded organization and use the money to bail out tax-payer funded government organizations that were mismanaged and defunct.

        This is what caused the financial shortfalls and problems with the postal service.

        The purposeful destruction of your postal service is just another demolition of your rights. Having the ability to send or have private, low cost, physical mail delivered to you in the most harsh of conditions and even during war time is your right.
        They want you to go electronic so you can be monitored by the NSA.

        • pinbalwyz

          Congress refused postal blandishments to be relieved of having to prefund its pension plans. There are many retired government workers (Detroit, Orange County, et ux) who wish THEIR pensions had been prefunded. Congress understood the importance of funding pensions for such a huge proportion of American workers who do NOT pay into social security or receive benefits from it. They aren’t eligible as postal workers pay into a federal pension fund instead. If that goes south, they’re done–stick a fork in them.

          The last contract negotiation with the postal union had the USPS threatening the union members with filing bankruptcy, and eliminating any pension liability they had in the process unless the union approved a scheme gutting the wages and benefits of new hires…which they DID! :(

          It is well Congress insisted (and continues to) the USPS prefund its pension obligations. An organization which threatens to renege on its obligations cannot be trusted.

          • inquisitor

            My mother just retired in 2013 from the USPS at the Pembroke Pines, Florida facility.
            They just shut that facility down.
            She started working with the USPS back in 1980 down in Miami.
            Just a few years after she started Reagan was in office and changes were made in employee contracts that made working for the post office less desirable. Since then, incrementally, it has been made less and less of a decent job.
            Fortunately, she had one of the better contracts before the changes.
            But in the past two or three years the level of harassment to get people close to retirement to quit early has been tremendous.
            But she stuck it out to the end.
            A lot of USPS detractors talk about how it is an overpaid, cushy job with excessive benefits.
            I just don’t see that argument as they worked her and her colleagues pretty hard over the years.

          • Fotaugrafee

            IF it’s “overpaid & cushy”, that’s only because of all the technology that has been introduced in the past 30 years.

          • kurtsteinbach

            Forcing the USPS to prefund pensions for the next 50 years and to do it within 10 years (by 2017) is killing the USPS. It was not meant to save them. It was meant by the GOP, who 1st suggested it, as n undue burden to kill the USPS and make it appear to lose money, so they could kill it and give the business over to private industry such UPS and FedEx. By the way, the Federal government guarantees pensions. When a company declares bankruptcy, the pensions are picked up and guaranteed by the The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC) of the U.S. and Social Security. Personally, I think SS is a better option at this time, since Wall Street is being so reckless with invested funds, including invested pension funds. They keep losing them. SS is not invested and cannot be lost. It would be solvent almost indefinitely, if they;d simply stop raiding the fund….

          • pinbalwyz

            That’s not what the government employees impacted by the Detroit (and pending Illinois) bankruptcy are saying. They’ll be lucky to get pennies on the dollar. The rest is gobbley gook by the upper echelon union officials and postal management, just like the sellout divide and conquer strategy Boeing shoved down the throats of the rank & file Machinists Union members. The postal union doesn’t care about its pensioners because most of them no longer pay union dues. If it had any b*lls to begin with, it wouldn’t have caved in when management asked it to sacrifice the benefits new hires would otherwise have been entitled to. Today, there is tension between the more senior postal workers and the new hires because their pay scale, benefits, and working schedule/conditions are starkly different. Don’t drink the Kool-Aid!

          • Jefft90

            PBGC only cover private companies, no public service pensions.
            PBGC has a max of $57,500 a year for a 65-year-old retiree. So the very highly paid PSU wont go for it

          • Fotaugrafee

            $57500 per year is fucking PLENTY for a pension!!!

          • pinbalwyz

            A cap is not an average. It’s a limit.

        • kurtsteinbach

          No the Post Office is not a Constitutional Right. Article I Section 8 of the Constitution is the only place in the Constitution where any such agency is mentioned, and it says, “Congress shall have the power…to establish Post Offices and post Roads;”. This mentions no right to a Post Office; it merely gives the Congress and Federal Government the power to create one. Many, especially Republicans, also think it gives them the power to uncreate it and want to do just that. While we have many rights in this country in the Bill of Rights, only few are mentioned in the Constitution itself. The Federal Government is forbidden from doing a few things, but few individual rights such as Free Speech, Press, religion, privacy, or fair trial or treatment are in the Constitution, that’s why so many clamored at the time for a Bill of Rights. You may think it’s just semantics, but it’s important in how we interpret and establish our rights. You do not have right to a Post Office. Right now, what prevents its dissolution is the U.S. Senate and our current President, who consider it a vital link.Rights are not absolute, and can be taken away, which is why we must fight for them constantly….

          • Elliott Whitlow

            If it gives the power to create something why wouldn’t there be the power to destroy it? How is that partisan or irrational? You are ONLY allowed to create it? That makes no sense.
            I’m not sure the right to mail something is an established right, I can’t remember a case testing that and I don’t see it enumerated, but with that said the 10th Amendment is capable of handling that issue.
            Also the rights specified are protected from governmental intrusion, not intrusions by private parties, I can abuse and restrict 99% of your rights as a private entity and you have no recourse. I don’t have to let you speak at my house, no more than you have to let me speak at yours..

          • pinbalwyz

            Natural rights (and we have many) are inalienable and cannot be legitimately taken from us because we didn’t get them from government largess to being with, but were (in the words of JFK in his address to Congress) “endowed with them by our Creator.” We do not plead/beg for what is rightfully ours–we TAKE it!

          • Fotaugrafee

            Soooo, my mom gave me those rights?

          • pinbalwyz

            If you want to think of it that way, yes. We are born with them, they are inalienable. We are endowed with them due to our humanity, i.e. that we are human beings with certain fundamental needs and abilities stemming from the fact. These are self evident. They do not exist because someone or some government granted them to us. They are inherently ours ab initio. These can be thought of as natural rights and violating them as natural crimes.

        • Clark

          You don’t think they have the capability of scanning through envelopes? If so then you’re really naive. On a news program one morning, they demonstrated a scanner the secret service could use to read through a scribbled-out message even if the message and scribbles were written in the same ink, and this was YEARS ago! At least there are real-time countermeasures to electronic snooping, since the letter is completely out of your hand, there’s no accountability with it. Heck, for all we know, the glue used in envelopes will dissolve when exposed to a certain chemical, then when re-treated, return to its glued state, the chemistry is quite a bit easier than them breaking any kind of encryption, and wouldn’t necessarily require complicity by the glue manufacturers.

        • Fotaugrafee

          And for the asswipes who LOVE Paul Ryan, he (and others) is trying to do the same thing to the employer/employee funded Railroad Retirement system, too!!!

      • Difdi

        The USPS wasn’t a boondoggle until it was turned into one by an act of Congress. The USPS was actually making a small profit every year until it got hit by a requirement to fully fund the pensions (in totality) of every employee it will ever have for the next 50 years, some of whom have not even been born yet, RIGHT NOW.

        If the requirement (which is not imposed upon ANY other agency) were removed, the USPS would become profitable again.

        • pinbalwyz

          That’s high postal union officials and management claptrap. If a private company files bankruptcy, thus eliminating its pension obligations to its retirees, they can still draw on their social security benefits. Postal employees do not pay into social security, and thus have no such benefits. We prefund (in essence) Social Security too by paying into it long before we collect benefits from it. Some of us (who don’t live long enough) get NOTHING in return for what we contribute to it. Inasmuch as postal pensions serve as substitutes of a type for Social Security, it is well that Congress forces the USPS to underwrite the solvency of its workers pensions.

    • Pat Lane

      This is a totally legit reason to take pictures in the USPS. I myself packaged an iPad in the post office while recording it, recorded my wait in line and recorded giving it to the attendant and paying. No one did anything, but I was using an iphone and was being pretty discrete.

      For those wondering, people do this for (especially) electronics they have sold so that buyers can’t say we sent them the wrong item.

    • stk33

      > It addresses the legality of photography only in the context of three purposes: news, advertising, or commercial activity. It doesn’t cover at all the reason that I wanted to take a picture, which was to document my transaction

      Why, it does cover: “Other photographs may be taken only with the permission of the local postmaster or installation head.” So, if it’s neither news, nor advertising, nor commercial activity, then you must get permission.

      It’s not that I try to advocate this aggressive bureaucracy, but logically that’s what it says.

  • Bob_Striffler

    What this amounts to is, the government is going to DELIBERATELY continue to Fail. Train and Supervise agents of the government, acting under color of law to uphold your rights. They’ve gone out, had these signs and rules printed up so as to tell agents of the government acting under color of law that it’s ok, even encouraged, to DELIBERATELY continue to violate your rights and Constitution! If they post a sign, your rights don’t mean shit! They are being encouraged to look right at these videos that we film and out right lie about what the video exposes and clearly shows as fact! These scum bags all work in unison all the while propagating your divide. The government and media in this country have endorsed, being caught in red-handed lies as truth! And even for when that happens, a large enough pulpit will never be heard from the masses who are against this! The media won’t allow that! This is not freedom. It’s not even a shade of freedom! This if you don’t realize it is the Official Endorsement (Rubber stamp) and you’ll either have to really do something about it or you better learn to live with it and be willing to take far more abuse! Soon some won’t even recognize America anymore! The media is obviously not on the same side as the mission “Enduring Freedom” described, is it? As a matter of fact this government and media are spitting in the face of all the soldiers and family members of this country who fought the Revolutionary War, the Spanish American War, WWI. WWII, Korean War, Vietnam War, Iraqi War and Afghanistan, Bosnia and Serbia, to be continued…..! Oh and you’ll still have the assholes spewing their programmed and propagated patriotism for the next war! My guess is there are people in high places in the government and media who actually laugh when our troops die overseas! They laugh because their kids are not the ones dying and because it’s amazing that it’s so easy to get people to believe they’re fighting for freedom, when that’s not the case at all! With this disrespect, if this country were to ever be invaded, I wouldn’t lift a finger to stop it! That’s when I’d start laughing too!

    • Bob


      I bet you just had to whip the sweat from your brow after that round of typing.

      get me wrong, I agree. Just keep in mind, the one you preach against
      are also our brothers and sisters. You do preach the passion of this
      issue very well.

      I personally would like to avoid those conflicts you referred to.

      I love the passion, hate the violence it calls for.

      I just wonder, someone like you, who types as elegant as that. Can he type that passion into just sayin NO! to civil war.

      According to what I heard about history, everyone lost.

      Then you finished by sayin you would not lift a finger! I say! Dear Sir! Continue on, your compassion is mine too!

      sincerely another


      • Bob_Striffler

        The only pacifist to ever win anything was Jesus! But as far as rocking chair theology “Just set back, pray and wait for Jesus” isn’t what’s supposed to happen. The proof of that is in Revelation when the Armies are amassed at Armageddon and Christians are out numbered. They wouldn’t have been there if they weren’t fighting! Now would they? The Jews never would have been liberated without violence. And Jesus himself taught about “Righteous Anger” in the Bible when he went into the temple with a whip and used anger and violence to throw out the money changers! Who is it again that runs this country? Oh! That’s right the money chargers and their minions!

        • Bob

          That is what you read, out of what I said?

          You wrote so well and articulated your point so eloquently.

          That is the best you could respond with?

          Are you a bot?

        • pinbalwyz

          Every tyrant who ever lived claimed they had God on their side. Violence is just another religion manipulated by those seeking to serve their own ends…and the last refuge of the scoundrel/incompetent.

    • pinbalwyz

      Your sentiment is reminiscent of the fable: The Frog King and the Stork. It’s about a querulous pond full of frogs constantly harrumphing about their Frog King as noisily as possible…every night–until one night a large stork arrived and gobbled up the Frog King in one bite. After that…the pond was very, very quiet!

      • Bob_Striffler

        Is this website also the frog? Will it be silenced soon when the stork comes?

  • inquisitor

    Former South Florida cops sentenced to prison for gun dealing, tax evasion
    By David Ovalle

    A husband-and-wife pair of South Florida cops was sentenced to
    prison Thursday for illegally dealing in stolen guns and filing false
    tax returns

    U.S. Judge Donald Middlebrooks sentenced ex-Golden
    Beach Officer Tammy Valdes to 3 1/2 years of federal prison. Her
    husband, former Hialeah Officer Rafael Valdes, got five years prison.

    A federal jury convicted the Valdeses in October. Federal prosecutors
    said the husband and wife had a lucrative but illegal side business
    selling firearms at South Florida gun shows. The income went unreported
    to the IRS.

    The couple’ defense was that they were fervent gun enthusiasts who didn’t realize their activities were illegal.

    The sentence was considerably less than what they could have faced. The
    government sought to put away Rafael Valdes for 10 years, Tammy for 7

    The couple is considering an appeal of the guilty verdict.
    “Under the circumstances, the sentence was fair,” said their defense
    lawyer, Michael Feiler.

    • Bob_Striffler

      How does one fight this type of corruption? This is not new! Whistleblowers are attacked left and right in this country, every time one comes forward as a matter of fact! Surely even the newest people to this activism for accountability from government abuse can see just from what’s posted here and other activism websites that even in court seeking redress, the truth and the truth of rule of law are thrown out the window! And you can forget about morals, character and ethics in the court process! The laws I’ve mentioned here in my postings Title 18 241,242 do not have exceptions, especially for Public Servants. “Whoever” is what this code says verbatim! Misprison of felony is for those who ignore and look the other way as crimes are committed and especially to include Judges, Prosecutors, the FBI, the different states Attorney Generals, the different states Judicial Oversight in both houses all the way up to the Justice Department and beyond! This is absolutely disgusting and unbearable and It’s far worse when it’s done blatantly under the Brethren Code! This is public servants against the people, the flag, the constitution and the American Way of Life, for God’ sake! Every time one of these bastards gets away with this kind of crap, Satan stands there laughing! These aren’t a whole coincidental string of isolated incidences as they are OBVIOUSLY being portrayed in the media and totally ignored by all branches of this government at municipal, state and federal levels! And these punk cowardly cops are their thug enforcers! These public servants are showing clearly that they feel an entitlement to this complete autonomy and immunity! These conspiratorial crimes are also supposedly enforceable by law violations, when it becomes “policy” or “custom” as is quoted verbatim in Rico Laws. Do you think 10,000+ and growing videos show a policy or a custom? The writs of Mandamas, Ultra Vires etc…, I’ve cited were in place to constitutionally challenge up to and even entire agencies and branches of the government! It’s called freedom! All these laws I’ve cited were to keep our Constitution alive and breathing! These domestic terrorist bastards are openly and publically choking the breath out of it! This country is showing you clearly that they can stand there with a paper law, hold it in your face and then send thugs to enforce it against you and your family. But under the clearly established American Way when you hold these paper laws back to hold them in check, they’re just laughing at you, like Satan! What does a free people do, when even videos with the absolute truth of these obscene violations show clearly and these same people, the ones who’ve been violated, have their voices stifled and suppressed, time and time again! These talking head Ken and Barbie Doll media pundits are shiny happy bullshit! These absolute truths are stifled in America’s own media. They’re stifled by absolutely no voice or representation in the halls congress or from their elected representatives in a country that houses over a third of the entire planet’s incarcerated, yet only 3% of the planets total population! And has more than 85% of the worlds lawyers? How does that equate to freedom in anybody’s mind? And this country is doing this shit for sick greedy profits like every damn thing else it does! What do you think Lobbyism is…it’s bribery the American Way! What more could actually be shown that would define Officially Sanctioned Oppression more absolutely? That’s America Strong! What bull$hit! This country has become worse than even George Orwell ever imagined! If you’ve got family fighting and dying overseas, you’d better tell them to come home, if you have a conscience! God sent Jeremiah into Israel looking for one person to tell the truth so God wouldn’t destroy and enslave Israel! What do you think Jeremiah would make of all this in this Great Christian Free Country that just so happens to be the largest military and globalist expansionists the history of this world has ever seen? There is no freedom and there is no constitution! This is a Tyrannical Government that no longer accepts any form of accountability what-so-ever! Our country was undermined from within, just like predicted, without a shot being fired yet!

      PS Their defense lawyer was an Officer of the Court Brethren Dickhead! It should have been declared a Mistrial when the judge cut their defense arguments and their presentation of witness testimony way short after the prosecution presented theirs for a week, because the Judge and one of the Jurors had plane tickets and were going on vacation or some crap nonsense! That is absurd and their lawyer didn’t say shit! That Judge should be held in deliberate error! Further after I listened to their account of selling guns at gun shows and all the other gun collectors there doing the same, I wonder did the prosecution prove intent beyond a reasonable doubt? That is an element of the crime and clear jury instructions should have been read to the jury regarding this? Their attorney should have been hammering the need to prove intent into the jurors heads! Was that done? I’ve seen far too often where it and the Jury instructions weren’t….conveniently of course!

  • Bob_Striffler

    Carlos today was the day wasn’t it? What did those to Whistleblower Cops get sentenced to? Anybody notice what happens to whistleblowers in this country….the same thing happens as what we hear about in all those evil countries……that we just happen to be doing a lot of business with!

  • David

    just IMHO, one should not put those ignorant persons on alert without just reason. if you were honestly attempting to acquire copies of public records, was the journalistic attempt an attempt to document such a procedure for viewer information on what to expect, or was it an intentional act to get the guards attention.

    you dont poke the bear first then tell it your its cousin. you identify yourself first and ask permission to document, before you put a camera in their face.

    the difference is remaining honorable.

    • inquisitor

      The citizen stated their intent to security.

  • rust

    Cripes but these guys seem to have short fuses. It’s less than 10 seconds from when Baldy the Enforcer points out the “acceptable behaviour” sign to when he commits assault on the videographer

  • Bob_Striffler

    These out of control antics as described above at that border crossing is goimg to have to be dealt with by citizens. It is completely out of control and the government is standing by doing nothing to stop it! And by court rulings, it is being encouraged! It has become an Officially sanctioned crime spree!

  • Oliver

    Ok, it says except where security regulations, rules…….prohibits it. You guys have to understand what your reading. As for the assault, it’s absent in the video.