Forest Park Forums Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Local Political Arena > Police , Fire, Village Departments
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - cops turn off video cameras
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

cops turn off video cameras

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 4>
Author
Message
Carl Nyberg View Drop Down
Resident
Resident


Joined: 04/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 253
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carl Nyberg Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: cops turn off video cameras
    Posted: 18/September/2007 at 1:18pm
The Village of Forest Park paid for video recording cameras for all squad cars. These cameras begin recording when the sirens are engaged, if the camera is not disabled by the police officer.

Apparently officers have been disabling these cameras. And the judges are OK with officers doing this. BTW disabling the cameras is a violation of the putative policy of the FPPD.

See Proviso Probe.
Back to Top
dogcatcher View Drop Down
Local Authority
Local Authority
Avatar

Joined: 05/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 7377
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote dogcatcher Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18/September/2007 at 1:31pm
And everthing the Probe prints should be turned into a biblical work?
Back to Top
Carl Nyberg View Drop Down
Resident
Resident


Joined: 04/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 253
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carl Nyberg Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18/September/2007 at 1:46pm
Once again a defender of the Calderone administration and the FPPD responds to criticism of the police department with a personal insult.

dogcatcher, should the police department require officers to not disable the cameras?

Is this an important rule? How important?

Why do you think the police officers are disabling the cameras?
Back to Top
videoguy View Drop Down
Local Authority
Local Authority
Avatar

Joined: 02/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 2863
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote videoguy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18/September/2007 at 2:03pm
Originally posted by Carl Nyberg Carl Nyberg wrote:

Once again a defender of the Calderone administration and the FPPD responds to criticism of the police department with a personal insult.


Thats what you get from people with school yard mentalities.
Back to Top
piehead View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar

Joined: 05/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 11750
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote piehead Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18/September/2007 at 2:13pm
This brings to mind something that happened, I believe in the St. Louis area.  Guy had been stopped a couple times by police and didn't trust them so he set up his own video recorder in his car.  A police officer was caught in a verbal tirade with this guy.  http://www.ksdk.com/news/news_article.aspx?storyid=129127
 
Except in this case the officer is on Unpaid Leave.
 
Why are the police disabling their cameras?  You would think they would want the protection afforded them by having the situation recorded, unless they have something to hide.
Back to Top
Dr. Barbie View Drop Down
Resident
Resident


Joined: 05/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 518
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dr. Barbie Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18/September/2007 at 3:11pm
And this only happens in FP?  There has never been another case in any other location of a turned off video camera or a video tape with a police officer standing in the way of the camera making it useless?
 
 
Back to Top
Carl Nyberg View Drop Down
Resident
Resident


Joined: 04/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 253
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carl Nyberg Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18/September/2007 at 3:21pm
Barbie, what's your point?

That if other cops in other police departments behave badly (or illegally) we should give Forest Park cops a pass for the same bad or illegal behavior?
Back to Top
BBones View Drop Down
Resident
Resident
Avatar

Joined: 01/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 1339
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BBones Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18/September/2007 at 5:53pm
 What is the purpose of the camera?
Is it to prove that local journalists are lying when that say a man did not resist arrest and complied with officers.  Or is ith there to show that the police deal with idiots on a daily basis.
 
 Is this supposed policy in place to protect the cop?
 
 What does the fact that a camera did not record this suspects disobedience and piss poor attitude have to do with the fact that he broke the law to begin the incident in the 1st place? 
Back to Top
Sizzle View Drop Down
Resident
Resident
Avatar

Joined: 24/November/2005
Status: Offline
Points: 53
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sizzle Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18/September/2007 at 6:22pm
Well, I read your blog posting on this subject Carl.  I'm a little confused.  There's a "rumor" that police are doing this?  Do you have a source for that rumor, or is it just the attorney who's suing the department who's making this statement?  An officer did not have his camera turned on during a particular traffic stop, that has been documented.  Did this officer ever state that he willfully turned off his camera, or that he wanted it off to avoid being caught on camera doing something?  Or maybe he forgot to turn it on.  Either way, the "ethically challenged" chief disciplined this officer for that infraction, so how can you go on to say that the chief condones this behavior?  Ultimately, you keep referring to officers (plural) making a habit of not having their cameras on, or turning them off.  What do you have to substantiate that claim, Carl? 
Back to Top
citizen View Drop Down
Local Authority
Local Authority
Avatar

Joined: 05/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 9659
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote citizen Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18/September/2007 at 7:50pm
before we get all whacked out, does everyone here agree that our officers should use their video cams per FPPD stated policy?
 
if not, why not?
 
i cannot imagine any circumstance/altercation/arrest where the cameras should not be used. it protects the accuracy of the situation, yes?
Back to Top
Pitbull View Drop Down
SG1
SG1
Avatar

Joined: 04/November/2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 466
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Pitbull Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18/September/2007 at 8:31pm
 I agree 1000% citizen.....Granted I'm not an officer but if I were one I couldn't see a single reason being I'm an officer of integrity that serves and protects to turn off my camera.....Well unless I had something to hide.....I think the best thing the FPPD could do is make it impossible to even turn them off by all officers being theres no reason they should ever be.....As far as the ethically challenged chief I don't think spanking the officer counts as discipline but maybe suspending them WITHOUT  pay may send a better message to the rest of the force.
I'm Dog The Bounty Hunter
Back to Top
piehead View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar

Joined: 05/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 11750
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote piehead Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18/September/2007 at 8:35pm
Originally posted by Pitbull Pitbull wrote:

 but maybe suspending them WITHOUT  pay may send a better message to the rest of the force.
 
My guess, union wouldn't allow that to happen.
Back to Top
Sizzle View Drop Down
Resident
Resident
Avatar

Joined: 24/November/2005
Status: Offline
Points: 53
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sizzle Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18/September/2007 at 8:39pm
It is policy, and therefore videotaping is endorsed and enforced by the police administration.  It isn't really an issue, until Carl Nyberg starts spewing rumors and innuendo, then leaves everyone here to discuss a discussion that was distorted to begin with. 
Back to Top
Pitbull View Drop Down
SG1
SG1
Avatar

Joined: 04/November/2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 466
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Pitbull Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18/September/2007 at 8:50pm
  Why isn' t it a more strict policy to "make" officers keep the cameras on?  There shouldn't be a choice......It Should be mandatory no questions asked. If its endorsed and enforced then why do any officers have thier cameras off at all, and in any case why is this even an issue.....If enforced the first officer or last for that matter wouldn't have this problem. I'm not the chief (Thank God ) but it should be an automatic dismissal if its policy w/o discussion to an officer that has his or her camera off.
I'm Dog The Bounty Hunter
Back to Top
Sentry View Drop Down
Resident
Resident
Avatar

Joined: 04/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 1037
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sentry Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18/September/2007 at 9:35pm
Originally posted by Sizzle Sizzle wrote:

It is policy, and therefore videotaping is endorsed and enforced by the police administration.  It isn't really an issue, until Carl Nyberg starts spewing rumors and innuendo, then leaves everyone here to discuss a discussion that was distorted to begin with. 


And we should believe you why? So we can now all rest easy because Sizzle says it's a policy and it's endorsed and enforced by the police administration which is made up of a bunch of serial liars? This is the same Sizzle that pontificated about investigative ethics and once confronted with Ryan's own words which debunked Sizzles "ethics" lesson he disappears. You and your administration wouldn't know the truth from a hole in the ground. And once again it will come out of the taxpayers pockets. How? Because this guy Davis will certainly file a civil lawsuit and all the things the judge didn't allow his attorney to subpoena that would probably prove that the cops don't use the cameras and the administration doesn't endorse and enforce the policy will be allowed for subpoena in civil court. That is of course unless the village settles the lawsuit before the truth comes out. Which is most likely going to be the case as usual with them. And once again we'll see Sizzle for the lying coward he is just like his mentor the disgraced Ryan.
Back to Top
Sentry View Drop Down
Resident
Resident
Avatar

Joined: 04/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 1037
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sentry Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18/September/2007 at 9:37pm
Originally posted by Pitbull Pitbull wrote:

  I'm not the chief (Thank God ) but it should be an automatic dismissal if its policy w/o discussion to an officer that has his or her camera off.


As long as the cop is a member of Ryan's goon squad and he doesn't god forbid, swear at another cop he is fine. No dismissal. Just a promotion. Right Sizzle the liar?
Back to Top
citizen View Drop Down
Local Authority
Local Authority
Avatar

Joined: 05/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 9659
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote citizen Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18/September/2007 at 9:43pm
Originally posted by Sizzle Sizzle wrote:

It is policy, and therefore videotaping is endorsed and enforced by the police administration.  It isn't really an issue, until Carl Nyberg starts spewing rumors and innuendo, then leaves everyone here to discuss a discussion that was distorted to begin with. 
 
sizzle, could you please explain what you mean by 'endorsed?' that sounds like a suggestion, not quite a policy. how do you 'enforce' a suggestion? please, clarification.


Edited by citizen - 18/September/2007 at 9:50pm
Back to Top
Sentry View Drop Down
Resident
Resident
Avatar

Joined: 04/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 1037
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sentry Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18/September/2007 at 9:47pm
Easy. It is double talk from a liar.
Back to Top
Pitbull View Drop Down
SG1
SG1
Avatar

Joined: 04/November/2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 466
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Pitbull Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18/September/2007 at 11:05pm
 I may be wrong Sentry but it sounds like it to me too.....More than endorsed citizen I'm more in to the enforced rule yet officers may turn off the cameras....If enforced I'd say there wouldn't be an option.
I'm Dog The Bounty Hunter
Back to Top
videoguy View Drop Down
Local Authority
Local Authority
Avatar

Joined: 02/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 2863
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote videoguy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18/September/2007 at 11:30pm
Once again, a lot of bullcrap clouding a simple issue. WE paid for the cameras, not Ryan, not Calderone. They are in the cars for a reason. They should ALWAYS be on. Maybe some cops just forget to turn them on, in which case it should be made clear to do that. If they come on automatically, then there is no reason for the camera to be turned off, NONE.
Back to Top
Pitbull View Drop Down
SG1
SG1
Avatar

Joined: 04/November/2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 466
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Pitbull Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18/September/2007 at 11:35pm
 I said that a long time ago....Don't allow them to even go off....But lets be honest VG if you were the chief you may feel better to do so because you can hide the wrong doings of your staff that you want to protect (If you were chief VG) and May I say and I hope you agree you're not.
I'm Dog The Bounty Hunter
Back to Top
videoguy View Drop Down
Local Authority
Local Authority
Avatar

Joined: 02/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 2863
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote videoguy Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18/September/2007 at 11:40pm
If I was the Chief the wrong doers would be fired, I would make all the cops and dispatchers live in town, and I would make all the cops say "yes sir" and "yes ma'am" to any complainant. I also wouldnt comment to the paper on internal stuff, and I would put together such a dossier on Calderone and Rita that they wouldnt dare fire me.
Back to Top
Pitbull View Drop Down
SG1
SG1
Avatar

Joined: 04/November/2007
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 466
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Pitbull Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 18/September/2007 at 11:57pm
 All I can say to that is VG for police chief. Bad thing is that it won't happen in my life time but a man can dream can't he?
I'm Dog The Bounty Hunter
Back to Top
KPO'M View Drop Down
Local Authority
Local Authority


Joined: 04/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 3031
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote KPO'M Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19/September/2007 at 12:01am
It seems there should be a simple way to determine whether a video camera has been disabled.  How many hours was the officer on duty, and how much space has been used on the disk?

I thought the idea behind having the tapes on is that it could help investigations (e.g. by leaving evidence in case a suspect attacks the officer, or by resolving disputes of facts).  Particularly given all the allegations that have dogged the police department in recent years, if it isn't policy, it probably ought to be policy that the tapes be on.
Back to Top
citizen View Drop Down
Local Authority
Local Authority
Avatar

Joined: 05/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 9659
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote citizen Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19/September/2007 at 8:54am
does anyone know the FPPD policy regarding video taping? verbatim, please.
 
can one call the PD and get the text?
 
 
Back to Top
piehead View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar

Joined: 05/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 11750
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote piehead Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19/September/2007 at 8:56am
Originally posted by videoguy videoguy wrote:

If I was the Chief the wrong doers would be fired, I would make all the cops and dispatchers live in town, and I would make all the cops say "yes sir" and "yes ma'am" to any complainant. I also wouldnt comment to the paper on internal stuff, and I would put together such a dossier on Calderone and Rita that they wouldnt dare fire me.
 
Back to Top
Sentry View Drop Down
Resident
Resident
Avatar

Joined: 04/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 1037
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sentry Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19/September/2007 at 9:01am
The cameras are there to protect the cop AND AND AND the citizens these cops interact with. And this goof Sizzle wants us all to believe that this is some isolated incident that a camera isn't turned on? I guess were all just stupid because we're not smart enough to be a cop? All these smart cops have to do when they get in their squad cars is make sure it has gas and to turn the camera on stand-by. Two things is all they have to do. I bet they always make sure there is gas. If the camera is on stand-by then it automatically goes on when they turn their sirens and lights on unless they intentionally shut it off or never turn it on. And I guess now according to the liar Sizzle with this one it is all Carl Nybergs fault. Typical coward cop. Always blaming someone else for their criminal activity and stupidity.
Back to Top
citizen View Drop Down
Local Authority
Local Authority
Avatar

Joined: 05/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 9659
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote citizen Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19/September/2007 at 9:11am
are we saying the use of the cameras is optional?
 
uh, then what's the point? it's sort of like heated seats.
Back to Top
Sizzle View Drop Down
Resident
Resident
Avatar

Joined: 24/November/2005
Status: Offline
Points: 53
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sizzle Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19/September/2007 at 9:23am
Sorry if the use of the word "endorsed" confuses anyone.  The reason I chose that word is that it has been inferred here and on Nyberg's blog that Chief Ryan might have an unwritten standard, the old "wink, wink" to his officers about this issue.  He does not, plain and simple.  It is policy and it is enforced.
 
I won't begin to get into an insult match with Sentry.  We all know that if I or any officer saved a baby from a burning building, not only would Sentry cry foul for not saving the family dog, but she would claim that the baby must be a Calderone donor, and the family dog must not have paid his dues, so we watched him burn.  Sentry's hatred and vendetta against the village and police department are obvious.  But that's her problem.
Back to Top
Sentry View Drop Down
Resident
Resident
Avatar

Joined: 04/November/2007
Status: Offline
Points: 1037
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Sentry Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 19/September/2007 at 9:24am
Of course it is optional. Cameras don't lie. Crooked cops do. Crooked cops don't use their camera. And a crooked police chief does nothing about it of course until the horses are out of the barn. Then he endorses their use. And probably wrote a very firm letter of reprimand to the cop who accidentally didn't use his camera when he tasered a black guy multiple times until he crapped in his pants. Just another day at Hedonism III aka the FPPD.   
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 4>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 10.03
Copyright ©2001-2011 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.063 seconds.
A.Lange & Sohne Langematik Tourbillon Replica Watches ,and it must be a dream replica watches. Brand, style, visibility, features are absolutely assiduous, they not only added to their own sort of power in the rolex replica sale, and certainly can bear, "handed down" in the name. Now here is a fantastic choice for you, if you heard of Langematik Tourbillon rolex replica sale , this article will be much helpful to you. The function of a breitling replica sale is no longer confined to more of a symbol used to reflect personal taste. For men, the rolex replica uk is a symbol of their status; the contrary, a woman wearing a replica watches in addition to at the time, the greatest use is decorative, fashion Langematik Tourbillon breitling replica sale , elegance, style, simplicity, there is a pressing vulgarity temperament.