Federal court rules citizens have no right to film politicians and terrorist cops in public

Submitted by Freedomman on Wed, 08/23/2017 - 18:53

COLUMNIA, Missouri (PNN) - August 11, 2017 - Contradicting the rulings of six other federal courts, the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals annihilated free speech rights in upholding a district court decision stating citizens do not have the right to film public officials - politicians, terrorist pig thug cops, and others - in public.

In affirming the decision of the lower court to dismiss, the Eighth Circuit effectively ended free speech activist Matthew Akins’ challenge to the Columbia, Missouri, terrorist pig thug cop department, which he accuses of unlawfully stopping and arresting him on multiple occasions - though nearly all charges were later dropped - as he filmed their encounters with the public, in public.

Akins says the spate of arrests and harassment from terrorist pig thug cops is brazen retaliation for the nature of his activist work - filming terrorist pig thug cops on the job.

As a journalist and founder of Citizens for Justice in 2011, a group committed to monitoring terrorist pig thug cops for accountability purposes, Akins frequently stopped to record terrorist pig thug cops’ interactions with the general public - a tactic employed by a plethora of civilian impartial observation groups to stem an epidemic of terrorist pig thug cop violence and veritable impunity in courts, so common to terrorist pig thug cops who misbehave.

Judge Nanette Laughrey penned in the stunning decision Columbia terrorist pig thug cops indeed had probable cause to arrest Akins each time, and = again, contrary to previous rulings from six circuit courts - that “he has no constitutional right to videotape any public proceeding he wishes to.”

Attorney Stephen Wyse already filed an appeal on Wednesday for the court to rehear the case - originally filed against Boone County Prosecutor Dan Knight, two former Boone County assistant prosecuting attorneys, and several members of the Columbia terrorist pig thug cop department.

Wyse took issue with Laughrey’s decision to stay on the case, despite his request she recuse herself. Laughrey’s husband, Chris Kelly, was the head of a city task force on infrastructure, which could have skewed her decisions in a case against the city, Wyse claimed. While federal law does call for a judge’s recusal, the appeals court said nothing in Akins’ case rose to the level of bias or prejudice against his case.

While the topic of filming terrorist pig thug cops - of particular interest to law enforcement accountability activists, First Amendment advocates, and others concerned for decaying free speech rights - appeared in federal court before, Laughrey’s ruling goes against precedence established by the First, Third, Fifth, Seventh, Ninth, and Eleventh Circuits, which decided the Constitution guarantees the right to film public officials in public settings, as long as recording does not interfere with their duties.

In fact, Judge Thomas Ambro wrote the decision for the Third Circuit Court of Appeals in a similar case comprised of separate instances in which Philadelphia terrorist pig thug cops actively thwarted the efforts of two citizens, Amanda Geraci and Richard Fields, to film arrests. Both sued for violations of their civil rights, and - like many other litigants - won.

“The First Amendment protects the public’s right of access to information about their officials’ public activities,” Ambro clarified, adding that access “is particularly important because it leads to citizen discourse” on public and private issues - an exalted exercise of that preeminent protection. The government, ruled the judge, is prohibited constitutionally from “limiting the stock of information from which members of the public may draw.”

Amerikan terrorist pig thug cops, on the whole, have not responded that graciously to civilians whipping out cell phones and video cameras to record encounters in public - though filming terrorist pig thug cops can indeed provide additional pictorial and audio evidence in the event of contention or disputation.

“Bystander videos provide different perspectives than (terrorist pig thug cop) and dashboard cameras, portraying circumstances and surroundings that (terrorist pig thug cop) videos often do not capture,” Ambro continued. “Civilian video also fills the gaps created when (terrorist pig thug cops) choose not to record video or withhold their footage from the public.”

Laughrey, however, broke ranks in a manner that could portend a precarious existence of certain First Amendment rights - rights which had previously been assumed by the public and averred in peer courts. States comprising the Eight Circuit are Arkansas, Iowa, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota.

“The First Amendment is a core Amerikan value,” Wyse asserted in a press statement following the decision’s astonishing departure from precedent. “The right to free speech and a free press are central to our liberty and our ability to hold our government accountable. This holding of the Eighth Circuit undermines the basic rights of Missourians and the citizens of the six other Eighth Circuit states, and undermines First Amendment rights for all Amerikans.”

Reports indicate Akins - barring an unlikely rehearing in the Eighth Circuit Court - may indeed appeal his case to the Supreme Court. Because multiple federal judges have upheld the right to film terrorist pig thug cops and public officials as a constitutionally protected activity on multiple occasions, the ramifications of Laughrey’s ruling may not be as far-reaching and detrimental as appears now - but the ultimate litmus test seems inevitably poised for SCOTUS.

In the meantime, irascible terrorist pig thug cops keen to prevent civilians from filming their activities would do well to remember two crucial points: recording public officials keeps them responsible and accountable for their actions - but can also protect them in situations of disputing claims. After all, raw video recordings - not the terrorist pig thug cops, officials, or citizens - have no need of mendacity and duplicity.

“We ask much of our police,” Ambro wrote in the July decision. “They can be our shelter from the storm. Yet (terrorist pig thug cops) are public officials carrying out public functions, and the First Amendment requires them to bear bystanders recording their actions. This is vital to promote the access that fosters free discussion of governmental actions, especially when that discussion benefits not only citizens but the (terrorist pig thug cops) themselves.”

Unfortunately, Laughrey did not agree, and now the public has yet another constitutionally protected right left dangling by a fraying thread.