Las Vegas Police Beat man for videotaping them

Search

Member
Handicapper
Joined
Jan 15, 2010
Messages
24,808
Tokens
 

Honey Badger Don't Give A Shit
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
46,540
Tokens
It's a grim example of police officer(s) who nationwide are having trouble coming to grips with the legal fact that in most jurisdictions their actions can be videotaped and/or audiotaped whether they like it or not.

Here's the article with latest coverage this morning (Apr 23) (bolded emphasis below added by Barman)

======

Police beating of Las Vegas man caught on tape



LAS VEGAS ***************
Posted: Apr. 22, 2011 | 1:43 p.m.
Updated: Apr. 23, 2011 | 8:11 a.m.


When Mitchell Crooks checked out of the county jail last month and checked into a Las Vegas hospital, the 36-year-old videographer knew he had a fight on his hands.


His face was bloodied and bruised. His $3,500 camera had been impounded by police, and he faced criminal charges for battery on a police officer.


One month later, things have changed for Crooks.


The Clark County district attorney's office has dropped all charges, and Crooks has retained an attorney of his own. The Metropolitan Police Department has opened an internal investigation into the Las Vegas police officer, Derek Colling, who Crooks says falsely arrested and beat him for filming police.


And his camera -- which captured the entire March 20 altercation between Crooks and Colling -- has been returned.


The words are friendly enough, but the tone is tense:


"Can I help you, sir?" Colling asks from his patrol car after parking it in front of Crooks' driveway and shining the spotlight on Crooks.


"Nope. Just observing," Crooks responds, fixing his camera on the officer.


Crooks had for an hour been recording the scene across the street from his home in the 1700 block of Commanche Circle, near East Desert Inn Road and South Maryland Parkway, where officers had several young burglary suspects handcuffed and sitting on the curb.
As Las Vegas crimes go, the activity was fairly boring. Crooks wanted to use his new camera, and he figured his neighbors would like to see the suspects' faces.


When Colling loaded suspects into the back of his car and drove in a circle through the cul-de-sac, Crooks said he thought police were leaving. Then the officer stopped his car.


"Do you live here?" Colling asks.


"Nope," Crooks says.


Colling steps out of his patrol car.


Crooks said he now regrets not telling the officer that he was in fact standing in his own driveway. He realizes his response seemed cheeky, but he said the officer made him nervous. Colling walks toward Crooks, left hand raised.


"Turn that off for me," Colling orders.
"Why do I have to turn it off?'' Crooks responds. "I'm perfectly within my legal rights to be able to do this."


The officer repeats the command several times; each time Crooks reiterates his right to film.


"You don't live here," Colling says, now close to Crooks.


"I do live here!"


"You don't live here, dude."


"I just said I live here!"


As Crooks backs away, Colling grabs him by the shoulder and throws him down. On the ground, Crooks grabs the camera and turns it toward his face.


Colling's leg then enters the video frame. Crooks says he believes that was the kick that broke his nose.
The camera records the sound of Crooks screaming. He said that's when Colling was punching his face.


"Shut up!" Colling yells. "Stop resisting!"



YOU'RE IN A WORLD OF HURT,' OFFICER SAYS

In his arrest report Colling wrote that Crooks grabbed his shoulders "and attempted to take me to the ground. I in turn took him to the ground."


At Clark County Detention Center, Crooks was booked for battery on a police officer and obstruction of justice. He was released from jail the next day. On March 26, the *************** reported on his case. Four days later all charges were dropped.


Chief Deputy District Attorney Christopher Laurent said he dismissed the charges because the police report was vague.


"I asked for a more definite description of the battery because battery requires a violent touching," Laurent said. Police never provided that information.


Crooks said he always believed he'd be vindicated, but after police returned his camera he knew he had proof.


"I was confident I was doing the right thing, but I was excited they (the DA's office) weren't wasting any time, and that somebody was smart enough to know I was acting within the law," he said.


Crooks said the incident looks worse on tape than he remembered.


What bothered him the most, he said, was Colling's attitude after he was placed in handcuffs.


"Why did you do that? I live here," Crooks is heard pleading on the tape.


"You just told me you didn't live here," Colling says. "You live right here, in this house?"


Crooks asks for paramedics. Colling tells him to shut up and follow orders.


"If you fight again, dude Hey, if you (expletive) fight again, dude, you're in a world of hurt. You hear me?


"You're not in charge here, buddy. You hear me?"


Colling mocks Crooks' labored breathing.


"Oh yeah, buddy. Hey, when you don't do what I ask you to do, then you're in a world of hurt. Then you're in a world of hurt. Aren't ya? Huh?"


Crooks was later diagnosed with a deviated septum and a chest wall injury. Crooks believes his ribs were broken, but never got X-rays that could prove it.



ACLU LAWYERS SAY OFFICER WAS WRONG


Allen Lichtenstein, an American Civil Liberties Union attorney, reviewed Crooks' video and said Colling was clearly in the wrong. Officers are trained to avoid escalating situations, but Colling initiated the incident and created a physical confrontation without provocation, he said.


"It raises serious questions about whether the officer used good judgment and whether he was properly trained," Lichtenstein said.

"Those questions require answers."


Police have no expectation of privacy, and it's perfectly legal to film officers as long as it does not interfere in their investigation, he said.

Colling erred in claiming that Crooks was trespassing. By law, only a property owner or resident can make a trespassing complaint, Lichtenstein said.


"Even if the officer didn't think he lived there, that doesn't mean he didn't have permission to be there,'' Lichtenstein said. "In the video I heard, that question was never asked."


Crooks' attorney, David Otto, on Thursday sent police a statement from Crooks, along with a demand for $500,000 to cover Crooks' medial care, pain and suffering.


Colling had no legitimate reason to approach Crooks that night, Otto wrote.


"Officer Colling was aggravated that a citizen should have the audacity to video tape, him -- a Las Vegas Metropolitan Patrol Officer,'' Otto wrote. "Officer Colling decided to use the fear and terror of his physical ability to beat Mr. Crooks into submission -- to teach Mr. Crooks and, by example, all citizens and residents of the Las Vegas Valley."


Clark County Sheriff Doug Gillespie declined comment, saying the internal investigation remains open. Colling remains on duty, and Crooks has declined requests to be interviewed by detectives.


The suspects in Colling's patrol car may have witnessed the event and given statements to detectives, but their names have not been released. Police said they were not arrested or booked, so their names are not public record.


Crooks said he doesn't want to talk to detectives.


A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE
Neither Colling nor Crooks are strangers to controversy.


Colling has been involved in two fatal shootings in his 5½ years as a Las Vegas police officer. In 2006, he and four other officers shot Shawn Jacob Collins after the 43-year-old man pulled a gun at an east valley gas station.


In 2009, he confronted a mentally ill 15-year-old Tanner Chamberlain, who was holding a knife in front of his mother and waving it in the direction of officers. Colling shot him in the head.


Both shootings were ruled justified by Clark County coroner's juries.


Crooks made headlines in 2002 when he videotaped two Inglewood, Calif., police officers beating a 16-year-old boy. One officer was fired and criminally charged but was not convicted after two trials ended with hung juries. The incident strained race relations in Southern California -- the police officer was white, the teenager black.


Crooks first tried to sell that tape and then declined to give it to prosecutors. He was then jailed on old warrants from unrelated drunken driving and petty theft charges. Civil rights advocates decried it as retribution.


In 2003 he moved to Las Vegas, where he makes a living, among other things, shooting video for nightclubs, and says he kept out of trouble right up until the night he met officer Colling.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

New member
Joined
Dec 20, 2003
Messages
9,069
Tokens
Was it wrong for the officer to do what he did?

Of course.

But why did the guy have to tape the officer for no reason? It is almost like being taunted.
 

Member
Handicapper
Joined
Jan 15, 2010
Messages
24,808
Tokens
It's a grim example of police officer(s) who nationwide are having trouble coming to grips with the legal fact that in most jurisdictions their actions can be videotaped and/or audiotaped whether they like it or not.

Here's the article with latest coverage this morning (Apr 23) (bolded emphasis below added by Barman)

======

Police beating of Las Vegas man caught on tape


LAS VEGAS ***************
Posted: Apr. 22, 2011 | 1:43 p.m.
Updated: Apr. 23, 2011 | 8:11 a.m.


When Mitchell Crooks checked out of the county jail last month and checked into a Las Vegas hospital, the 36-year-old videographer knew he had a fight on his hands.


His face was bloodied and bruised. His $3,500 camera had been impounded by police, and he faced criminal charges for battery on a police officer.


One month later, things have changed for Crooks.


The Clark County district attorney's office has dropped all charges, and Crooks has retained an attorney of his own. The Metropolitan Police Department has opened an internal investigation into the Las Vegas police officer, Derek Colling, who Crooks says falsely arrested and beat him for filming police.


And his camera -- which captured the entire March 20 altercation between Crooks and Colling -- has been returned.


The words are friendly enough, but the tone is tense:


"Can I help you, sir?" Colling asks from his patrol car after parking it in front of Crooks' driveway and shining the spotlight on Crooks.


"Nope. Just observing," Crooks responds, fixing his camera on the officer.


Crooks had for an hour been recording the scene across the street from his home in the 1700 block of Commanche Circle, near East Desert Inn Road and South Maryland Parkway, where officers had several young burglary suspects handcuffed and sitting on the curb.
As Las Vegas crimes go, the activity was fairly boring. Crooks wanted to use his new camera, and he figured his neighbors would like to see the suspects' faces.


When Colling loaded suspects into the back of his car and drove in a circle through the cul-de-sac, Crooks said he thought police were leaving. Then the officer stopped his car.


"Do you live here?" Colling asks.


"Nope," Crooks says.


Colling steps out of his patrol car.


Crooks said he now regrets not telling the officer that he was in fact standing in his own driveway. He realizes his response seemed cheeky, but he said the officer made him nervous. Colling walks toward Crooks, left hand raised.


"Turn that off for me," Colling orders.
"Why do I have to turn it off?'' Crooks responds. "I'm perfectly within my legal rights to be able to do this."


The officer repeats the command several times; each time Crooks reiterates his right to film.


"You don't live here," Colling says, now close to Crooks.


"I do live here!"


"You don't live here, dude."


"I just said I live here!"


As Crooks backs away, Colling grabs him by the shoulder and throws him down. On the ground, Crooks grabs the camera and turns it toward his face.


Colling's leg then enters the video frame. Crooks says he believes that was the kick that broke his nose.
The camera records the sound of Crooks screaming. He said that's when Colling was punching his face.


"Shut up!" Colling yells. "Stop resisting!"



YOU'RE IN A WORLD OF HURT,' OFFICER SAYS

In his arrest report Colling wrote that Crooks grabbed his shoulders "and attempted to take me to the ground. I in turn took him to the ground."


At Clark County Detention Center, Crooks was booked for battery on a police officer and obstruction of justice. He was released from jail the next day. On March 26, the *************** reported on his case. Four days later all charges were dropped.


Chief Deputy District Attorney Christopher Laurent said he dismissed the charges because the police report was vague.


"I asked for a more definite description of the battery because battery requires a violent touching," Laurent said. Police never provided that information.


Crooks said he always believed he'd be vindicated, but after police returned his camera he knew he had proof.


"I was confident I was doing the right thing, but I was excited they (the DA's office) weren't wasting any time, and that somebody was smart enough to know I was acting within the law," he said.


Crooks said the incident looks worse on tape than he remembered.


What bothered him the most, he said, was Colling's attitude after he was placed in handcuffs.


"Why did you do that? I live here," Crooks is heard pleading on the tape.


"You just told me you didn't live here," Colling says. "You live right here, in this house?"


Crooks asks for paramedics. Colling tells him to shut up and follow orders.


"If you fight again, dude Hey, if you (expletive) fight again, dude, you're in a world of hurt. You hear me?


"You're not in charge here, buddy. You hear me?"


Colling mocks Crooks' labored breathing.


"Oh yeah, buddy. Hey, when you don't do what I ask you to do, then you're in a world of hurt. Then you're in a world of hurt. Aren't ya? Huh?"


Crooks was later diagnosed with a deviated septum and a chest wall injury. Crooks believes his ribs were broken, but never got X-rays that could prove it.



ACLU LAWYERS SAY OFFICER WAS WRONG


Allen Lichtenstein, an American Civil Liberties Union attorney, reviewed Crooks' video and said Colling was clearly in the wrong. Officers are trained to avoid escalating situations, but Colling initiated the incident and created a physical confrontation without provocation, he said.


"It raises serious questions about whether the officer used good judgment and whether he was properly trained," Lichtenstein said.

"Those questions require answers."


Police have no expectation of privacy, and it's perfectly legal to film officers as long as it does not interfere in their investigation, he said.

Colling erred in claiming that Crooks was trespassing. By law, only a property owner or resident can make a trespassing complaint, Lichtenstein said.


"Even if the officer didn't think he lived there, that doesn't mean he didn't have permission to be there,'' Lichtenstein said. "In the video I heard, that question was never asked."


Crooks' attorney, David Otto, on Thursday sent police a statement from Crooks, along with a demand for $500,000 to cover Crooks' medial care, pain and suffering.


Colling had no legitimate reason to approach Crooks that night, Otto wrote.


"Officer Colling was aggravated that a citizen should have the audacity to video tape, him -- a Las Vegas Metropolitan Patrol Officer,'' Otto wrote. "Officer Colling decided to use the fear and terror of his physical ability to beat Mr. Crooks into submission -- to teach Mr. Crooks and, by example, all citizens and residents of the Las Vegas Valley."


Clark County Sheriff Doug Gillespie declined comment, saying the internal investigation remains open. Colling remains on duty, and Crooks has declined requests to be interviewed by detectives.


The suspects in Colling's patrol car may have witnessed the event and given statements to detectives, but their names have not been released. Police said they were not arrested or booked, so their names are not public record.


Crooks said he doesn't want to talk to detectives.


A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE
Neither Colling nor Crooks are strangers to controversy.


Colling has been involved in two fatal shootings in his 5½ years as a Las Vegas police officer. In 2006, he and four other officers shot Shawn Jacob Collins after the 43-year-old man pulled a gun at an east valley gas station.


In 2009, he confronted a mentally ill 15-year-old Tanner Chamberlain, who was holding a knife in front of his mother and waving it in the direction of officers. Colling shot him in the head.


Both shootings were ruled justified by Clark County coroner's juries.


Crooks made headlines in 2002 when he videotaped two Inglewood, Calif., police officers beating a 16-year-old boy. One officer was fired and criminally charged but was not convicted after two trials ended with hung juries. The incident strained race relations in Southern California -- the police officer was white, the teenager black.


Crooks first tried to sell that tape and then declined to give it to prosecutors. He was then jailed on old warrants from unrelated drunken driving and petty theft charges. Civil rights advocates decried it as retribution.


In 2003 he moved to Las Vegas, where he makes a living, among other things, shooting video for nightclubs, and says he kept out of trouble right up until the night he met officer Colling.

Technology is great. When I was 18, me and a couple of friends were hanging out on a horse trail by our house. Some cops came out of no where tackled us and beat the crap out of us. They thought were gang bangers doing grafiti. When they found no spray cans or proof and realized their error they charged us with assaulting them even though we did nothing and were caught off guard. Wish they had video phones then. I plead not guilty, but ended up pleading down to a misdemeanor, because the DA threatened me with jail time if I didn't take that deal + I had no proof.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Member
Handicapper
Joined
Jan 15, 2010
Messages
24,808
Tokens
Was it wrong for the officer to do what he did?

Of course.

But why did the guy have to tape the officer for no reason? It is almost like being taunted.

That kind of thinking is why we are on our way to a police state. The guy was videotaping them cause they were arresting some burglars and he wanted to tape them so he could show his neighbors. Those cops are lucky to be alive IMO. Being a cop doesn't give you the right to come on private property. If someone were to come on to my property attack me and destroy my property, I'm well within my rights to go on the defense.
 

Professional At All Times
Joined
Dec 3, 2003
Messages
42,732
Tokens
That officer knew he was wrong and was lying when he said the guy didn't tell him that he lived there and was within his rights to film them. Pretty sure that officer is going to face suspension and a civil law suit.
 

New member
Joined
Feb 5, 2009
Messages
2,872
Tokens
I didn't read the article but it is obvious from the tape the cop is a moron. He said, you should have told me you lived here. WTF does that matter. He deserves all the public embarassment and a spot in the unemployment line.
 

Professional At All Times
Joined
Dec 3, 2003
Messages
42,732
Tokens
dsethi

he prob will face suspension and a law suit but the first time he asked the civilian if he lived there, the civilian responded no.

I just listened to the tape again and you're correct. My bad. Boy, would I make a horrible witness! :ohno:
 

Member
Handicapper
Joined
Jan 15, 2010
Messages
24,808
Tokens
I just listened to the tape again and you're correct. My bad. Boy, would I make a horrible witness! :ohno:
It still doesn't matter, he had no reason to approach the guy in the first place. Only a property owner can make a trespassing complaint. What if he didn't live there but was a guest of the owner and had permission to be there. The cop has no right to assume just because he doesn't live there he has no right to be there and beat the crap out of him. This cop will be fired as he should be, thank god for youtube. It almost like I'm getting some revenge vicariously through this.
 

New member
Joined
Mar 15, 2005
Messages
2,935
Tokens
This is typical cop behavior in Vegas as any regular readers of VegasRex can attest to.
 

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2006
Messages
2,455
Tokens
This cop has been caufght before I think. I live in this corridor and cops get fimed audio taped all the time. They never sweat it in area like this that I am aware of. Cant rightfully say I even heard someone get there stuff confiscated. At the level of income arond here, there nothing anyone can do abou it.
 

Honey Badger Don't Give A Shit
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
46,540
Tokens
That kind of thinking is why we are on our way to a police state. The guy was videotaping them cause they were arresting some burglars and he wanted to tape them so he could show his neighbors. Those cops are lucky to be alive IMO. Being a cop doesn't give you the right to come on private property. If someone were to come on to my property attack me and destroy my property, I'm well within my rights to go on the defense.

On the contrary, this is a good example of why we are NOT on the way to becoming a "police state".

Police and other government employees are far less able to abuse their positions and their authority when they are subject to more open observation.

Why else would the cited officer begin the confrontation by asking for the camera to be turned off.
 

Honey Badger Don't Give A Shit
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
46,540
Tokens
he prob will face suspension and a law suit but the first time he asked the civilian if he lived there, the civilian responded no.

It's an utterly moot point. Unless the property owner were to file a trespassing complaint, it's absolutely no business of the police officer.

The guy was admittedly foolish to act smarmy and initially reply No when asked if he lived there.

A much smarter response would have been, "I sure do live here. And I would appreciate it if you removed yourself immediately from my private property."
 

Member
Handicapper
Joined
Jan 15, 2010
Messages
24,808
Tokens
On the contrary, this is a good example of why we are NOT on the way to becoming a "police state".

Police and other government employees are far less able to abuse their positions and their authority when they are subject to more open observation.

Why else would the cited officer begin the confrontation by asking for the camera to be turned off.

I do agree that the internet is taking us in the right direction, but for how much longer?
 

Honey Badger Don't Give A Shit
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
46,540
Tokens
I do agree that the internet is taking us in the right direction, but for how much longer?

For perpituity, my friend

When people living in wood huts and tents can successfully resist armed invaders equipped with the mightiest military weaponry in the history of our planet, it's almost absurd to fear that agents of the same government can impede true 21st century mankind.
 

I'll be in the Bar..With my head on the Bar
Joined
Oct 3, 2004
Messages
9,980
Tokens
This is typical cop behavior in Vegas as any regular readers of VegasRex can attest to.

My thoughts exactly.....i was there over the new years holiday and the paper was full of police stories, killed an unarmed man in his yard on X-MAS eve, then when they realized his wife ( and 6 kids) had witnessed it they hauled her to jail until she changed her mind on what she saw. The paper told of at least 3 on going investigations that the Police Unions were telling the officers involved not to cooperate with.
The main story in the Sunday paper was about a very good police candidate who walked out of the training school when he was told by the instructor "we are at war out there and the people are the enemy"... And thats exactly what they think ......and its reenforced by memos from HomeLand Security everyday....
 

Oh boy!
Joined
Mar 21, 2004
Messages
38,362
Tokens
I read about a guy in the Midwest who was doing a repair job on a house so he was new to the area. A girl in the neighborhood told her mother she was molested by a stranger so the cops investigated this guy. The cop had a voice recording device that would have shown he was in the wrong for taking this guy into jail. When the guy sued the cops the cops said the recording had been erased.

I'm surprised this recording was not erased. How would the guy even prove that the camera was even on when recording?
 

Honey Badger Don't Give A Shit
Joined
Sep 21, 2004
Messages
46,540
Tokens
QL, it's not unusual for police to try (and often succeed) to erase the files from a cell phone that show them on tape.

But fortunately it doesn't always happen.

Rolling the clock all the way back to 2001, I and three other friends were involved in an encounter with a Melbourne FL police officer wherein one of us was running an old school videocam on the cop. The officer asked him to "step back", which he promptly did several steps. Then he demanded he turn off the camera. Then he advanced and knocked the camera from dude's hands.

He detained him for like three hours on supposed claim of "interfering with police investigation" and then released him without arrest or charges.

By that time we had already taken the camera to Melbourne PD (at about 1am) to report the incident and that included running the tape back to show the officer's actions.

The sergeant on duty took our report and then asked us if we could leave the camera with them so they could "check it out further" and we of course laughed and said No Way.

It took almost six weeks, but the officer was suspended for a week without pay and removed from normal "patrol car" duty and assigned to running traffic intersections on foot. He left the force within a year.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,106,765
Messages
13,438,764
Members
99,336
Latest member
incclutchmarketing
The RX is the sports betting industry's leading information portal for bonuses, picks, and sportsbook reviews. Find the best deals offered by a sportsbook in your state and browse our free picks section.FacebookTwitterInstagramContact Usforum@therx.com