Officer Follows Citizen After Asking For Complaint Form

[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 officer complaints the confrontation Clause and expectation of privacy and comes to us from news now Patrick's channel be sure to check out the description below and give them the credit that they deserved let's dive right in and audit the audit in the early morning hours of August 14th 2019 auditor Patrick Roth was filming in the lobby of the York Police Department in York Nebraska where he was contacted by sergeant Christensen and officer Kelly this version of the video will be heavily edited to save time but there will be a link to the full length version in the video description yeah I'm actually getting some information here is there an officer's complaint form here yeah an officer complaint form okay are you the supervisor yeah that'd be me oh okay how do I go about doing a complaint or an officer officer's name is there is it isn't there like a form you fill out or something or yeah what I'm trying to get at is in case it is our department or well it's it's it's your department I just wasn't in a form to fill out and right now what's his name well I just I don't want it I don't want to say really because you don't know if you guys know although there is no law that standardizes the policies associated with filing a complaint against an officer or department the International Association of Chiefs of Police in the office of community oriented policing services have produced expert guidelines for the complaint process which is sponsored and published by the Department of Justice these guidelines offer local Police Department a policy framework designed to maintain public trust and accessibility the expert guidelines included a report which examined 31 of Nebraska's largest law enforcement agencies websites for alignment with the guidelines recommendations of the 31 agencies surveyed very few met the guidelines for having an effective complaint process in the event of an ineffective complaint process at the local level the Department of Justice offers civilians an alternative to reporting misconduct locally on the official Department of Justice website I will link the site in the description below for anyone struggling with their own complaint issues it is important to note that mr. Roth's request for an officer complaint form is an element of his first amendment audit there was no incident that mr. Roth wishes to complain about and his request for a forum is intended to gauge and document the complaint process for this particular department I wonder I want to write down what happened on paper so that I can fill it out and get a copy of it because if I just tell you I don't know if you're actually going to do anything statement okay I just I usually there's a form and usually there's a process the process yeah sergeant so there's no you're saying there's no form I am unlike him I am not certain there is because we've never been asked that question okay so you're okay so you're uncertain but there might be one and I get it not to be out of here at you I'm here now there's got to be some kind of paperwork somebody writes out a statement you turn it in criminal that's what the complaint is I write it out he or she has a right to face their accuser the confrontation Clause found in the sixth amendment provides that in all criminal prosecutions the accused shall enjoy the right to be confronted with the witnesses against him this clause was intended to prevent the conviction of a defendant upon written evidence without that defendant having an opportunity to face his or her accusers and to put their honesty and truthfulness to the test before a jury in 1895 the Supreme Court outlined three fundamental purposes that the confrontation clause was meant to serve to ensure that witnesses would testify under oath and understand the serious nature of the trial process to allow the accused to cross-examine witnesses who testify against him and to allow jurors to assess the credibility of a witness by observing that witness's behavior while filing a complaint against an officer anonymously may result in an internal investigation and reprimanding of the officer it is unlikely that the complaint will result in any criminal action if an officer is the subject of a criminal complaint then the officer does retain the right to face their accuser but only in a trial setting okay what do you say anymore sergeant how do you know I can read okay can it cannot carry what is it come see you must be the gentleman from Utica Oh Waco Waco I'm not I don't live in Waco all right okay appreciate thank you yep all right okay see you let's see you later Kelly mr. Roth exits the lobby of the police department and proceeds to wait in the parking lot to meet up with his auditing partner sergeant Christiansen comes out of the department and engages with mr. Roth again we have NATO even in stop and identify' states like Nebraska reasonable suspicion of a crime is required for an officer to demand identification from a civilian Nebraska Revised statute - nine - eight - nine states that a peace officer may stop any person in a public place who may reasonably suspects of committing who has committed or who is about to commit a crime mr. Roth has not broken any laws and asking for a complaint form does not constitute reasonable suspicion therefore mr. Roth is under no obligation to identify himself to Sergeant Kristensen all right I go to jail for you you want to go to jail you want to take me to jail are you threatening us right now I'm telling you right now you don't want to go this route they don't huh what are you trying to bump into me I'm sure I promise you try to bump into me again yeah look at this guy I'm telling you you touch me that's battery yeah it is don't touch me sir I'm asking you sergeant do not touch me we're live on air no sir you do something stupid everybody's seeing it and you will and you won't have a job anymore so how is that good how you gonna feel about that hey are you gonna back this up look at this you're an idiot man what are you doing trying to assault me so here's what so here's what he did here's what he did I went in I left the building and he came outside to further antagonize me you came outside to further further intimidate and antagonize while I was leaving you came out to further intimidate so this is York Police Department guys this is a sergeant here so hopefully chief gets a ton of compliance the interaction between mr. Roth and sergeant Christensen continues to escalate and the sergeant begins to act progressively more erratic as mr. Roth antagonizes him and bruises his ego eventually mr. Roth and his partner leave the police station and returned to their vehicle only to find that sergeant Kristensen followed them back in an effort to obtain their identity by running their cars TAC Nolan get to close it and then Bluff the tag close it and block the tag look what are you doing don't let him see that okay no no sir I don't need anything I need you to stop harassing me sir can you please stop stalking and harassing us no she doesn't have to you don't touch her don't touch her sergeant don't touch her she's not on the road she doesn't have to show it she's not driving on the road now you won't hey you won't sergeant if you don't stop this intimidation you're gonna be in trouble with your department guys this is York Police York police look what they're doing this is York Police has anyone called it in your hands no sir stop stop it this is my vehicle ow many court cases have held that police officers may randomly run a vehicle's tag because it does not meet the standards of an official search as defined by the Fourth Amendment and there is no expectation of privacy associated with a publicly displayed license plate in 2017 the New York Court of Appeals took this a step further and declared that an officer's use of the information within the Department of Motor Vehicles database associated with the license plate also does not violate a citizen's Fourth Amendment rights in the case of the People v Bush II given that mr. roffe's vehicles VIN is observable from public there is no expectation of privacy attached to the number and Sergeant Kristensen may legally run it however this does not grant the sergeant the authority to smash mr. Roth's hand with a flashlight in order to gain access to the VIN sergeant Christiansen has effectively committed assault by forcing mr. Roth to move his hand and battery by crushing mr. Roth sphingo flashlight the sergeant could have simply waited for the couple to get in their vehicle to leave and ran their tag instead he used his authority to physically harm mr. Roth to get the information he was after ow this is York Police Department he just assaulted me he just hit my hand this is York police look what he's doing guys York Police York police York police he just smashed my fingers I'm gonna sue the [ __ ] out of you dude he freakin smashed my fingers with his flashlight look what he's doing this is York police guys York police this is the sergeant Christensen here hold this Wow guys well here at the in York Nebraska at the corner at the sheriff's office he smashed my fingers with his flashlight look what he's doing guys can I help you no I'm not he doesn't have to you know it is it is yeah see I have the D right here block nobody called it in suspicious nobody called it in suspicious no they did it no be there but her officers so you want to handle he freakin smashed my fingers dude ow he did it twice - he did it he did it - both my hands the live streams video fails but the audio continues to capture the encounter no no unless you're gonna force me no no you can't put your hands on me dude this is assault yes I can if I'm not driving I can you just assaulted me you just assaulted me dude you're a piece of you are real you are trash you a piece of trash idiot you a piece of trash according to the audio sergeant Kristensen pushes mr. roffe's partner aside and forcibly acquires their license plate information after running mr. roffe's plates sergeant Kristensen leaves the scene without further incident mr. Roth and his partner get back into their vehicle and leave the downtown area later that day mr. Roth uploaded a follow-up video alleging that sergeant Kristensen had fractured his finger with the flashlight overall sergeant Kristensen gets an F for assaulting intimidating and instigating mr. Roth because his fragile ego was shattered sergeant Kristensen had no reason to continue engaging with mr. Roth but his ego wouldn't let him just walk away police officers with the rank authority and ego of Sergeant Kristensen are dangerous to society because they not only commit acts of contempt and misconduct but they demonstrate tolerance for bad policing to their subordinates and ultimately cultivate deeply rooted systemic corruption within local departments officers like Kristensen have shredded the fabric of trust between local departments in their communities to a point that has risen to a societal epidemic bad policing has become a nationally recognized issue at the hands of maniacal ego driven officers who consistently overstep the bounds of their authority it goes without saying that sergeant Kristensen should be fired immediately and is not fit to serve his community in this instance mr. Roth gets a B during the making of this video I personally reached out to mr. raw in an attempt to ascertain whether he had pursued legal action against sergeant Christensen but after a brief exchange mr. Roth did not respond the news now Patrick Channel has been in operation since 2017 and mr. Roth has been involved in countless police interactions but very few if any of those interactions have resulted in legal action so it is safe to assume that Sergeant Kristensen will face no serious repercussions as a result of this encounter although it is safe to assume that there will be no legal action I am unable to confirm that and the potential lack of legal action cannot be reflected in mr. roffe's final score however in the full version of the video mr. Roth was antagonistic and provocative mr. Roth's auditing style lacks authenticity and conviction and his disregard for professionalism is detrimental to the constitutional activism community as a whole I sincerely hope that mr. Roth decides to pursue legal action against sergeant Christiansen and that all of mr. Roth's auditing efforts were not as fruitless as the sergeant's harassment let us know if there's an interaction or legal topic you would like us to cover in the comments below thank you for watching and don't forget to Like and subscribe for more police interaction content [Music] you

Channel: Audit the Audit

Views: 943,031

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: b-Rcfz_Urrc

Length: 16min 31sec (991 seconds)

Published: Wed Sep 18 2019