Angry Officer Refuses To Leave

[Music] welcome to audit the audit where we sort out the who and what and the right and wrong of police interactions this episode covers fire department scene authority threats and fighting words and is brought to us by noj news 1's channel be sure to check out the description below and give them the credit that they deserve on march 18th 2021 firefighters from the montgomery county fire department responded to a call about a fire in a private parking lot in takoma park maryland the owner of the youtube channel for the national organization of justice who we will refer to as mr justice had been supervising a small fire in a fire pit box and upon the firefighter's arrival informed them that the blaze had been extinguished and asked them not to enter the property the firefighters ignored the request as well as mr justice's subsequent request that they leave the property mr justice began to record the incident after the firefighters had entered the parking lot we have tacoma park montgomery county fire department trespassing i've asked them to leave the property and they refused to leave the property so uh i'm again i'm gonna ask you to step off the private property you're not telling me you're not telling me anything sir step off the property please no what's your name captain brady miller montgomery county fire director i want you all i want i want you off the property it'll be back on in a few minutes but i want you off the property we guarantee you we'll see you up in green belt okay now get you get off the property no you're refusing to get off the private property right you see where it says no trespassing yes do you see where it says no trust me okay so i want you you you off the proper one paramedic into 702 to montgomery could i have the county police yeah please have the county police come down here i want you off the property right now no you're refusing to leave the property captain private property correct okay that says no trespassing that's correct okay captain miller continues to refuse to leave the property despite mr justice's repeated requests in general firefighters have the legal right to enter private property to investigate a reported fire and extinguish it with or without the property owner's consent property owners do not have the same legal rights to refuse fire department assistance that competent adults have to refuse medical treatment this distinction is primarily due to the fact that firefighters have a legal duty to respond to a fire and can be held accountable for their failure to do so and that an unextinguished fire can spread putting the entire community at risk the fire department's right of entry is explained in section 9-803 of the maryland public safety code which states that quote at any time and without liability for trespass a fire official may enter a building including a private dwelling or on-premises where a fire is burning or where there is reasonable cause to believe a fire is burning to extinguish the fire however some open fires such as a recreational bonfire or a cooking fire are permitted according to section 3-2 of the montgomery county code of ordinances an open fire is defined as quote a fire in which any material is burned in the open or a receptacle other than a furnace incinerator or other equipment not in conformance with the design requirements of the applicable building code of the county or the air quality control regulations of the state the county ordinances also contain a series of regulations regarding when open fires are permitted including section 3-8 which states that quote a person may set an open fire such as a campfire for recreational purposes if the fire does not produce visible emissions that exceed 20 opacity for a total of more than three minutes in any 60 minute period and is not larger than three feet in diameter and section 22-88 which lists various rules for conducting open fires including the requirements that quote open fire shall be attended at all times until completely extinguished and that quote no person shall kindle a fire upon the land of another without permission of the owner or his agent as the specific details surrounding mr justice's parking lot fire are unknown it's impossible to determine whether the fire complied with county regulations on open fires however a court would likely find that at the very least the fire department had the legal authority to enter the property to investigate if not extinguish the fire despite the broad grant of authority to enter private property given to firefighters it is important to note that the supreme court has repeatedly affirmed the fourth amendment prohibition against unreasonable searches still applies to firefighters for example in the 1978 case of michigan versus tyler the court held that quote there is no diminution in a person's reasonable expectation of privacy nor in the protection of the fourth amendment simply because the official conducting the search wears the uniform of a firefighter rather than a policeman or because his purpose is to ascertain the cause of a fire rather than to look for evidence of a crime or because the fire might have been started deliberately searches for administrative purposes like searches for evidence of crime are encompassed by the fourth amendment eventually officers from the tacoma police department arrived on the scene what are we waiting for captain the police oh and what are they going to do to come here no no you called them i told you to get off the price i told you no okay all right as long as you say no okay and refusing to follow that order of someone who owns a plan that is correct okay don't go nowhere tough guy what are you gonna do about it no what are you gonna do i'm gonna show you what i'm gonna do about it i'm gonna have your money up in greenville for violating my civil rights when i tell you to get the problem don't play don't worry federal i don't montgomery county get your dumbbells out here a public service i don't give a [ __ ] what you just said are you threatening me i'm telling you i'm gonna take your monkey the federal court and you can take that any kind of way you want to take it that is correct okay it's a promise it's a promise threatening me it's a promise yo okay if you think taking you to civil court in a felony court for trespassing violating my civil rights a threat then you take it any kind of way you want to take a public safety official right you sound stupid captain miller accuses mr justice of threatening him after mr justice warns him he plans to take him to court and one of the other firefighters on the scene informs mr justice that he is committing a felony while assaulting a firefighter can be a felony offence under maryland law and threatening one can be a misdemeanor assault mr justice's statements in no way constituted an illegal assault section 3-203 of the maryland criminal code describes the offense of assault in the second degree stating that a person who intentionally causes physical injury to a firefighter engaged in providing emergency medical care or rescue services is guilty of a felony and outlining other circumstances where an assault is considered a misdemeanor in the 2013 case of snyder vs state the maryland court of special appeals explained that quote the statutory offense of second-degree assault encompasses three modalities one intent to frighten two attempted battery and three battery the intent to frighten variety requires that the defendant commit an act with the intent to place another in fear of immediate physical harm and the defendant had the apparent ability at that time to bring about the physical harm clearly a threat to sue someone would not constitute the type of threat that would cause another to fear immediate physical harm threatening litigation is likewise not the type of threat that can constitute extortion which section 3-705 of the maryland criminal code defines as verbally threatening to quote accuse any person of a crime or of anything that if true would bring the person into contempt or disrepute or cause physical injury to a person inflict emotional distress on a person cause economic damage to a person or cause damage to the property of a person with the intent to unlawfully extort money property labor services or anything of value from another arguably threatening litigation could constitute a threat to accuse the firefighters of something that would bring them into contempt or disrepute or cause them economic damage however in the 2008 case of state versus rendelman the maryland supreme court held that quote as a matter of law threats of litigation regardless of merit do not constitute wrongful threats of economic injury and that quote threats of litigation regardless of merit do not constitute unlawful extortion therefore even if mr justice was threatening to sue the officers to coerce a payment or another thing of value from them which he was not he could not be charged with any crime based on threats of litigation how you doing officer tim all right all right i asked these gentlemen to leave the property they refusing to leave first of all if there's a fire they have this fire i understand i understand the fire rule this fire is contained there is no uh evidence of any kind of destruction with this fire and what's the ccn numbers and they're calling them on this please you wanna put that on there also oh i do not have that i'm not talking to you yo man right now you are defending the director okay i'm not directing none i was talking to this officer right here so take your smart through that gate and get on out of here okay i'm on private property my man you know you're not talking to nobody i'm on private property you trespass it i'm gonna tell you once okay you're trespassing i'm gonna tell you once calm down wait a minute i'm on my property okay you're okay you're doing something he's doing too much no he's doing too much let it go i got this let it go well i got it if you got this shirt then tell him i'm directing my call i'm talking to you not to him let it go okay let it go i've asked him to leave the property now let it go okay you back you need to back up a little off of me man back up you need to back up off of me because now you're starting to irritate me okay that's right get on out the gate i'll leave when i want to leave oh yeah yes okay give me your card and i'm gonna show i'm gonna prove a part to y'all you're not giving me your name i'm giving you nothing okay i gotta complain i have you all right don't worry about it i know where to go at you'll be next to me you'll be next to me retired sir thank you you'll be next to be retiring eat this one go ahead man leave me leave make me leave make me leave i ain't gonna make it because she that's what you want me to do but i'm gonna show you how to do it with a pen i'm gonna show you how to do it with the pen after mr justice orders officer sims to leave the property officer sims responds make me move and later says anytime any time any time implying that he is willing to fight mr justice it is possible that these statements could be found to be unprotected speech that falls outside the scope of the first amendment as we've discussed before on ata the first amendment does not protect all speech and states are constitutionally permitted to ban certain categories of speech such as true threats and fighting words as the supreme court explained in the 2003 case of virginia vs black quote true threats encompass those statements where the speaker means to communicate a serious expression of an intent to commit an act of unlawful violence to a particular individual or group of individuals the speaker need not actually intend to carry out the threat rather a prohibition on true threats protects individuals from the fear of violence and from the disruption that fear engenders in addition to protecting people from the possibility that the threatened violence will occur intimidation in the prescribable sense of the word is a type of true threat where a speaker directs a threat to a person or group of persons with the intent of placing the victim in fear of bodily harm or death while officer sims's statements could be considered a threat they may better be characterized as invitations for mr justice to fight him rather than an expression of his intent to fight mr justice which would more likely fall under the fighting words exception to the first amendment in the 1942 case of czeplinski vs new hampshire the supreme court held that quote there are certain well-defined and narrowly limited classes of speech the prevention and punishment of which have never been thought to raise any constitutional problem these include the lewd and obscene the profane the libelous and the insulting or fighting words those which by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace the court built on this definition in the 1949 case of terminiello versus chicago holding that the fighting words must quote produce a clear and present danger of a serious substantive evil that rises far above public inconvenience annoyance or unrest and in the 1989 case of texas vs johnson defining fighting words is quote a direct personal insult or an invitation to exchange fisticuffs while the law on this subject is murky at best it is possible that a court could conclude officer sims's statements constituted fighting words that could constitutionally be criminally prosecuted under an appropriate statute however maryland law does not include a relevant statute so it is doubtful that officer sims could be charged for his conduct saying no you shut up and get the in your car and get the phone down the street don't tell me where to go okay and you know anytime you get ready do you think that my goddamn uniform scare somebody do you think that you kill somebody i don't need this i mr justice and officer sims continue their heated exchange for several minutes and eventually mr justice requested a supervisor officer sims called a supervisor to the scene and as they awaited his arrival their discussion slowly became more peaceful by the time the supervisor arrived on the scene officer sims was calm and he truthfully reported what had happened and took responsibility for his emotionally charged outbursts after airing out his grievance with officer sims's conduct to the supervising officer mr justice made his peace with officer sims and everyone left the scene without further incident it is unclear whether mr justice pursued any further legal action regarding this incident but based on the conversations featured in this interaction it's safe to assume that he has experience filing federal complaints against members of law enforcement and may very well have taken further action overall captain miller gets a c-minus because although he was likely within his authority to enter mr justice's property and investigate the fire complaint he remained on the property for much longer than necessary to conduct his investigation extinguished what appeared to be a controlled fire that presented no danger to life or property and maintained an overall rude and condescending demeanor throughout the interaction while there is a strong argument to be made that captain miller was within his authority to enter the property and investigate the fire the video clearly shows that the fire was small controlled and likely legal and it is difficult to understand why the captain was so adamant about extinguishing such a fire captain miller's condescending demeanor and failure to employ any measure of de-escalation dissolved the credibility he was attempting to enforce and instead of working to compromise with mr justice the captain invoked his authority in an effort to gain control of the situation this interaction highlights the importance of de-escalation training in every sector of the public emergency management industry as it could potentially save municipalities from frivolously wasted resources and costly lawsuits officer sims gets a b because although he did engage in a heated verbal altercation with mr justice he eventually calmed down admitted fault to his superior and reconciled with mr justice remaining calm while dealing with distraught individuals is a major aspect of police work and officer simsa's outbursts had the potential to escalate this encounter into a physical altercation much like captain miller officer sims failed to employ any measure of de-escalation and maintained a hostile and confrontational attitude for a majority of the interaction all that said officer sims did eventually manage to calm down and apologize for his behavior and called for a supervisor upon mr justice's request once the supervisor arrived officer sims gave an honest account of the preceding events and admitted that he lost control of his emotions and threatened mr justice it is clear that this was more so a case of a man losing control of his emotions and not necessarily a case of an officer maliciously abusing his authority and i commend officer sims for being honest and taking responsibility for his actions mr justice gets a b plus because although he was within his rights to order the officers off of his property he failed to invoke his right to remain silent and allowed his emotions to dictate a majority of his conduct although the firemen were within their authority to enter mr justice's property it is easy to understand why he was so upset that they wouldn't leave upon his request from mr justice's perspective it likely appeared as though the firemen were abusing their authority to spite his orders to leave the premises and there may very well be some legitimacy to that perspective much of the turbulence of this encounter can be attributed to the egos of both mr justice and the public officials and this interaction may have unfolded much differently if mr justice had approached the firemen in a different manner however that does not excuse the conduct of the public officials involved and their failure to de-escalate was certainly a major factor i commend mr justice for standing up for his rights but i also believe that he may have benefited from invoking his right to silence more effectively let us know if there is an interaction or legal topic you would like us to discuss in the comments below thank you for watching and don't forget to check out my second channel for even more police interaction content you

Channel: Audit the Audit

Views: 782,706

Keywords: amagansett press, first amendment audit, 1st amendment audit, auditing america, news now california, sgv news first, high desert community watch, anselmo morales, photography is not a crime, san joaquin valley transparency, first amendment audit fail, walk of shame, news now houston, police fail, 1st amendment audit fail, public photography, auditor arrested, police brutality, highdesert community watch, pinac news, cops triggered, news now patrick, east hampton

Id: OgpgDAQkK3g

Length: 17min 41sec (1061 seconds)

Published: Mon Jul 26 2021