Chelan County juror unlawfully removed from court house

[ghosthunter]

so since this last post I have called and talked to the court house judge who gave me the same attitude the kid got about the lock box.  They were very pissy about it told me to mind my business and that I don't know what I am talking about and to call the Jail Director the officer have nothing to do with the court house.
  Then I called the Jail director who just gave me attitude when I asked them about the whole thing.  I told them I am a concerned citizen that found at least what I saw on video "which is only one side" very unprofessional no matter what the circumstances are and that I was concerned that your officers don't know what their job title is "public servant" which means they should know the laws and if someone bring it to their attention that they are wrong they should look into it right away and not bully him out the door.   Was told we are looking into it I am hanging up!  Then I asked what you were looking into? They said I am hanging up click!   They are your typical attitude "I am better then you"  SO all you people that don't like your rights keep saying pick your battles while there will be a point when your chosen battle will be long too late to matter!!!!

Call the Director of the jail: 509 667 6462  hit option 7 ask for the county jail director.  Tell them how you feel as a citizen of the State and how their officer treated the public.   

Folks I have been down this road. You are calling the wrong people.
Call the Prosecuting Attorney for Chelan County.
If he is as dumb as the others call the Washington Attorney General.

Geez this has been hashed out for years hard to believe there are still problems.

[Special T]

Since you seem well versed in the history on the subject Ghost, perhaps you can share some insight as to the right track or direct us to well written information already published on the subject.
 

[ghosthunter]

The OP posted the state law.

What more do you need?

[ghosthunter]

Since you seem well versed in the history on the subject Ghost, perhaps you can share some insight as to the right track or direct us to well written information already published on the subject.
 

Here you go. This ship has already sailed.

http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/showthread.php?112987-Courts-encounters-with-locking-up-pistols-while-visiting

[Special T]

Perhaps how it was effectively fought in other counties that pulled this crap...

Or is it just a call to the Prosecuting office and filing a complaint and or following up withthe State office if nothing is done... Dunno just figured you might enlighten us a little...


Cool Thx

[returnofsid]

I've only watched 35 seconds of it and had to pause it to comment here.  So far, he's already completely WRONG!  The officer is absolutely correct about video/voice recordings. I am a photographer and I pride myself on educating myself, very well, on the laws and rights pertaining to both still photography and videography.  Still photos fall under a completely different law, and are allowed anywhere that is public, except for a few exceptions.  HOWEVER, video and/or voice recordings are completely different and permission is indeed required!  Back to the video...

[HawkCreek]

I've only watched 35 seconds of it and had to pause it to comment here.  So far, he's already completely WRONG!  The officer is absolutely correct about video/voice recordings. I am a photographer and I pride myself on educating myself, very well, on the laws and rights pertaining to both still photography and videography.  Still photos fall under a completely different law, and are allowed anywhere that is public, except for a few exceptions.  HOWEVER, video and/or voice recordings are completely different and permission is indeed required!  Back to the video...

Can you link to the ruling that you can't record police/public servants? I was under the impression that it's been ruled legal.

[returnofsid]

I have now watched the remainder of the video.

1.  The kid was wrong in insisting on recording, after he was told he did not have permission.  As I said earlier, unlike Still Photography, permission is needed to record video or voice.

2.  The officer definitely allowed his emotions to get the better of him, failing to handle this confrontation as well as he should have.

3.  The kid was absolutely right about a lock box, OR an officer, being required to secure his handgun.  HOWEVER, as soon as the officer asked the kid to show him that RCW, the kid should have, even though the officer should have already been familiar with it.  Instead, the kid continued to argue and push, doing so for the sole purpose of making a spectacle of himself and this officer.

4.  In the officer's defense, it doesn't sound like this officer regularly worked in the court house, but in a jail.  Most officers are more familiar with laws that directly pertain to their daily job than to laws that don't.  No officer can be expected to know ALL of the RCWs.

[returnofsid]

I've only watched 35 seconds of it and had to pause it to comment here.  So far, he's already completely WRONG!  The officer is absolutely correct about video/voice recordings. I am a photographer and I pride myself on educating myself, very well, on the laws and rights pertaining to both still photography and videography.  Still photos fall under a completely different law, and are allowed anywhere that is public, except for a few exceptions.  HOWEVER, video and/or voice recordings are completely different and permission is indeed required!  Back to the video...

Can you link to the ruling that you can't record police/public servants? I was under the impression that it's been ruled legal.

Yes I will find it.  In essence, Washington state is a 2 Party state, actually an ALL party state.  Anyone who's voice, or recognizable appearance may be recorded, has to be notified AND give consent.

[billythekidrock]

 In my opinion, he is playing fast and loose with the facts. He even admits they are lockboxes available, but he didn't have change.

There is a lot more to the story to be read in his comments on Youtube.
http://youtu.be/pR4KrhpGDlc



Juror thrown out for asking Chelan County to provide lawfully mandated lockboxes

[returnofsid]

As much as I've attempted to keep up on photography/videography laws, it appears I may not have kept up as much as I should have. Actually, it does appear that the 2 Party Consent law, in Washington state, when regarding public officials, may have actually been over-turned by the Ninth Circuit Court.  This would mean it is legal, even without consent, as long as you are not interfering with duty.  I'm going to keep researching this because I'm reading conflicting information...

[pat2bear]

I've only watched 35 seconds of it and had to pause it to comment here.  So far, he's already completely WRONG!  The officer is absolutely correct about video/voice recordings. I am a photographer and I pride myself on educating myself, very well, on the laws and rights pertaining to both still photography and videography.  Still photos fall under a completely different law, and are allowed anywhere that is public, except for a few exceptions.  HOWEVER, video and/or voice recordings are completely different and permission is indeed required!  Back to the video...

I may be wrong but I don't think that is entirely accurate. I know that at my work I have the ability to record conversations for record. (Even though I've never had to do it) But I believe the all party consent can can satisfied if announce to the other party that I will be recording the conversation before and after I start recording.

[returnofsid]

I've only watched 35 seconds of it and had to pause it to comment here.  So far, he's already completely WRONG!  The officer is absolutely correct about video/voice recordings. I am a photographer and I pride myself on educating myself, very well, on the laws and rights pertaining to both still photography and videography.  Still photos fall under a completely different law, and are allowed anywhere that is public, except for a few exceptions.  HOWEVER, video and/or voice recordings are completely different and permission is indeed required!  Back to the video...

I may be wrong but I don't think that is entirely accurate. I know that at my work I have the ability to record conversations for record. (Even though I've never had to do it) But I believe the all party consent can can satisfied if announce to the other party that I will be recording the conversation before and after I start recording.

Announcing to the other parties does not constitute consent.  They have to actually consent, in any "2 Party Consent State."  In other words, if they tell you, "you do not have permission to record this conversation," you either have to stop recording, or hang up.

However, I'm finding conflicting information, when it comes to public servants.  That WAS the law, even with public servants.  However, I'm finding information that that MAY have been over-turned, by the Ninth Circuit Court, only when it comes to public servants.

[dontgetcrabs]

That guy made a total fool out of that cop.   

[hoyt2002]

This isn't how you effect change. He should have complied with the orders given to him. After he needed to contact the county admin to get them to change policy and procedure concerning this issue to comply with state laws. The officers I'm sure were following the current policy and procedure they had at the time. They are not in a position to debate or change the policy's and procedures right there and then anyways. It might be the right fight but wrong time and place. I will say this the officer was in the wrong when it came to the additude and name calling. It was unprofessional.