Cops Arrest Journalist Investigating Food Hazards

[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 public easements identification laws and trespassing and is brought to us by the delaware defenders channel be sure to check out the description below and give them the credit that they deserve on october 27 2020 youtuber and independent journalist known as the delaware defender who i will refer to as mr defender was gathering content for an ongoing story about the health and food industry outside of the poultry processing plant amik farms in herlock maryland mr defender began recording at the northern entrance to the facility and was initially contacted by officer lee of the herlock police department after a brief discussion officer lee concluded that mr defender was not doing anything illegal and left the scene without identifying mr defender or discouraging his conduct once officer lee left the scene mr defender began making his way to the southern entrance when he was contacted by sergeant garby of the hpd what did lee not do a good enough job what's that lee already responded out here you can't be on private property videotape what's that sticker say on it that's department of transportation well liam the state of maryland put this here yeah well this here is private property that's not where i'm standing dude yes it is you got an idea on you let's go arrest me i'm telling you just arrest me i'm not because i'm not this is this is a public street sign look at it you're ridiculous lee was perfect you just ruined it for you guys you just ruined it garvey you have a badge number yeah zero one four two why did you ruin it you got an idea i'm not giving it to you i'm not trespassing your own private property buddy this is a street sign it's public property they don't i don't want to play it either arrest me for new identification come on i'm not going to resist you at all i'm not giving it to you i'll give it to you at the station i want you to do i want you to take it all the way you think you're a bully then let's take it all the way i'm not a bullet i'm seeing what you're doing you're on private i already told me what i was doing i'm not on private property you need to go look at the map well i'm telling you you're on private property how do you know this is the road that's the land that's private property there's this thing called an easement right yeah because i don't have to walk in the street and i can walk here that's why these signs are here on private property videotape you hear this dude what's that you hear this dude you were perfect why is he going to ruin it for you guys he's not ruining nothing you weren't on the property earlier now you are i was in the same exact spot oh you were down the street do you know what this is what's that a street sign they can't put their street signs on amick farms property so this cannot be amik farms property because there is a maryland sign here here mr defender asserts the notion that because the city has placed street signs and utility poles along the roadway that renders the land publicly accessible however publicly accessible lands are not always subject to first amendment protections it's important to draw a distinction between general easements and right of ways because the protections associated with one may not always extend to the other an easement is an agreement that grants an individual or municipality the right to use certain private property for a specific purpose there are several different types of easements and their functionality depends upon the agreement established when the easement was created for example easements may be either affirmative or negative depending on their purpose an affirmative easement gives the owner of the easement the right to use the land of another in a particular way and a negative easement prevents an owner of land subject to the easement from using his or her land in a particular way easements may also be expressed or implied an express easement is generally created by the execution of a deed or reservation recorded in the county's public records and must be in writing implied easements are created through a property owner's actions or inactions if a property owner has consistently dedicated a portion of their land for others to use over the course of several years then an implied easement generally exists right of ways are a specific type of easement that grants the owner of the easement the right to travel over another's property right-of-ways do not grant the public ownership of the property where an easement exists and the existence of utility poles or government signage does not dictate where a right-of-way begins or ends contrary to popular belief there are no universal rules or measurements for determining the location of a right-of-way and the width of right-of-ways varies depending on road classification as mentioned in many episodes of ata free speech is subject to certain limitations depending on the time place and manner in which the speech is expressed the major hurdle facing first amendment protections on right-of-ways is whether or not they are considered traditional public forums for expressive acts and courts have done little to bring clarity to the subject in the 1939 supreme court case of hague vs committee for industrial organization the court famously noted that quote wherever the title of streets and parks may rest they have immemorially been held in trust for use of the public and time out of mind have been used for purposes of assembly communicating thought between citizens and discussing public questions such use of the streets and public places has from ancient times been a part of the privileges immunities rights and liberties of citizens although this ruling affirmed the notion that public streets are protected under the first amendment it suggested that each forum should be considered on a case-by-case basis and various circuit court rulings have concluded that defining a space as a public forum is highly circumstantial for example in the 1999 10th circuit case of hawkins vs city and county of denver the court held that a sidewalk in a performing arts complex was a non-public forum because it was only used by those visiting the complex this ruling suggests that mr defender may not have been in a protected form because amik farms property is not generally open to the public on the contrary a district court within the 7th circuit has specifically held that the shoulder of a highway is a traditional public forum on which picketing was allowed in the 1991 case of jackson versus city of markham and based this conclusion on several rulings from both higher and lower courts there are several other cases both in the supreme court and lower courts to tackle this issue but the circumstantial variables at play significantly impact whether the forum is considered public it is difficult to draw any rigid conclusions about whether mr defender was in a public forum that enjoys first amendment protections and there are many factors which i have not explicitly mentioned here that would come into play the point of this section is to highlight the fact that right of ways are not universal and are not always subject to first amendment protections and it is entirely possible for a court to find that mr defender was not in a public forum at the time of this interaction that said there is equally a possibility that a court would find the opposite to be true and without a court ruling on this interaction in particular no legitimate conclusion can be made come on dude come on garvey i'm not going to give it to you i'll go that's fine um not really no i got a phone and keys and a water bottle this is ridiculous guys you guys are a joke just a business card that's me brother why are you going in my pockets i actually got anything you said now here sergeant garvey tells mr defender that if he does not surrender his identification then he will be arrested and mr defender continues to refuse maryland is one of the few states that does not have any laws which compel citizens to identify themselves to members of law enforcement in most other states citizens are required to identify themselves if an officer reasonably suspects them of committing a crime but in maryland citizens are under no legal obligation to identify themselves unless they are driving and citizens cannot be arrested solely for failing to present identification in states with no failure to identify statute it is common practice for officers to arrest citizens for obstruction of justice instead but like most states maryland's obstruction code requires that a citizen obstruct an officer by threat force or corrupt means in order to be arrested outside of driving or lawful arrest there are no circumstances in which sergeant garby could force mr defender to identify himself but the sergeant takes it a step further by conducting a search of mr defender's pockets as discussed on many episodes of ata officers may only conduct a warrantless search if they have probable cause to make an arrest and even if sergeant garby had reasonable suspicion to detain mr defender that would not authorize him to search mr defender's pockets we will discuss whether sergeant garby had met the reasonable suspicion standard in a moment but it is important to highlight that much of the sergeant's conduct during this interaction is based on mr defender's refusal to identify himself despite the fact that it is not illegal to do so what do you i just told you a strap that's it that's a lens cap this might be the lens because it's circular oh then a bone yeah so why are you making this difficult you're making it difficult lady was perfect i'm not trespassing you're ridiculous i'll go to jail for it cause you're full okay this is no way that this is their property it has a sticker on it because maryland owns it they don't stick it on other people's property call the plant manager out here and tell you that you're on it get the property lines he's got no idea why are you listening to them you're the police yeah i know you don't know clearly you know the property i'm not on their property buddy so you want me to stand in the street and get a ticket across the road that's their property too then that's a public bird right there that's right so is this you're not on the road you're on the grass oh my god you are ridiculous garvey you want me to go on the other side of the street and i'm gonna ask you one more time for your name i'm not giving it i'll move you have a lawful order you give me your you asked me to leave i'm gonna leave i gave you a lawful order to give me your name sergeant garby orders mr defender to leave the property but then steps in front of mr defender when he attempts to do so it is clear that sergeant garby's purpose for being on scene is to issue a trespass warning to mr defender and at this point mr defender has not committed any crimes title vi subtitle four of maryland's criminal code is entirely devoted to the crime of trespassing and under these codes an individual must be warned that they are trespassing before they can be arrested for committing the offense subsections 6-402 and 6-403 are the only codes that could apply in this interaction subsection 6-402 requires that the property be clearly marked with signage or paint marks and subsection 6-403 requires that an individual be notified by the owner or the owner's agent that they are not welcome there are no signs or markers in the area mr defender was filming from and no one asked mr defender to leave until sergeant garby arrived on the scene mr defender has committed no crimes and was attempting to obey the sergeant's order to leave the property before he was prevented from doing so not only did sgt garby have no probable cause to arrest mr defender and force him to identify himself but no reasonable suspicion existed to detain mr defender at all if mr defender had refused to leave the property then he would have been subject to arrest but that was not the case so what is your name oh my god i guess i'm going to jail today that's fine what is your name i'm going to jail it's fine let's go i'm not giving it i'm not trespassing you can't arrest me for trespassing because i'm not trespassing this is not their property it's not the whole property it's it's an easement this is county property city property it's city property i do know i don't know if it's a county maybe it looks like a county road sign to me but that's the junction for the road up there that's why there's light poles here they don't own the electric company come on garvey there's a public easement it's probably 33 feet from the center line of the road or 18. one of those guys well it's just facts what's your name i just want to go to jail man you want to go to jail i guess yeah because this is just getting bad just because there isn't a paved piece of concrete here doesn't mean the same rules don't apply i do this everywhere you do you i do this all over the place typically delaware like you've seen but the same laws apply state to state they blind well easement laws yeah i mean the fetage might be different but i'm not even two feet off the road here you were right up here when i see you i was standing right in line with this piece of wood right i mean i got it on video though i'm still videoing now that's what i'm on it's great so you won't really want it you want to take me for trespassing now if i wanted to take you for transplants without to take you i mean what are you doing so you're going to take me for failure to id yeah what law am i breaking pay the bail off order i've given you what would you give me your name maryland is not to stop an id state garvey you have to accuse me of a crime that's the fourth amendment just flat out one you're trespassing i'm not you just said i'm not trespassing i said i'm not locking you up right now for trespassing why i just said to you this is ridiculous after going back and forth the sergeant eventually decides to arrest mr defender and take him to jail mr defender was placed into a holding cell for approximately 20 minutes before being issued two citations and released i recently spoke to mr defender and he informed me that he is still waiting for the citations to show up in the system over a month after this interaction occurred he also told me that he is considering hiring an attorney but is waiting to see if the citations will be entered into the court system before he takes further action overall sergeant garby and officer lee get an f for displaying a fundamental misunderstanding of maryland's identification laws conducting a search without acquiring probable cause and for arresting mr defender when no crime had been committed as mr defender mentions if the interaction had ended after officer lee's initial contact then the hurlock officers would likely have received an a-plus for their conduct but that was not the case sergeant garby's entire purpose for contacting mr defender was to issue a trespass warning and remove mr defender from the property even if a court were to find that mr defender was on private property and was not entitled to first amendment protections nothing about this encounter would have granted the sergeant the authority to detain and identify mr defender in order to be guilty of trespassing mr defender would have had to have been told to leave the property and refuse to do so but no one contacted mr defender before the sergeant arrived on the scene and the sergeant's contact effectively served as mr defender's warning the sergeant hinged mr defender's arrest on his failure to identify himself and as mentioned earlier in the episode mr defender was under no legal obligation to do so sergeant garby turned what could have been a respectable and reasonable police interaction into an illegal arrest and i sincerely hope that the herlock police department is able to correct the sergeant's conduct and educate him about maryland's identification laws mr defender gets an a for remaining calm and cordial throughout the interaction maintaining a balance between asserting his rights and complying with the sergeant's orders and for engaging in a challenging but respectful dialogue with the officers although it is debatable whether mr defender was on private property or not there's a good chance that where he was standing would be considered an implied right-of-way unless amick farms trespasses every citizen who walks along the roadway then there is significant merit to the notion that mr defender had a right to film from that location mr defender was willing to compromise with the demands of the officers and move across the street which would have accomplished the sergeant's purpose for being there but the sergeant refused to allow him to comply nothing mr defender did was criminal in nature and his refusal to surrender his identification was valid although mr defender was mistaken about the scope and nature of public right of ways and certainly could have invoked his right to remain silent more effectively he did a fantastic job of challenging the logic of the officers and maintaining his innocence i commend mr defender for his conversational dexterity and constitutional awareness and i highly recommend giving his channel your support you can find a link in the description below 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 like and subscribe for more police interaction content you

Channel: Audit the Audit

Views: 755,500

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: ns7iF_Gec8M

Length: 16min 18sec (978 seconds)

Published: Thu Dec 17 2020