State appeals dismissal in Michael Allison case, 75 years in prison for recording the police


24 Responses to “State appeals dismissal in Michael Allison case, 75 years in prison for recording the police”

  1. lavardera says:

    seems like a good way to scare citizens away from exerting their rights

    just sayin

  2. WhyBother says:

    “What the hell is wrong with the Illinois government?”

    I literally do not know where to begin with this statement.

    • That_Anonymous_Coward says:

      “What the hell is wrong with the Illinois government?”

      Years of corruption and cronyism.
      Years of an apathetic public willing to accept what they are told they should believe.
      Years of “not my problem” because they never came for me, so why rock the boat.
      Years of the Amerikan way.

      It would be nice if the people stopped pretending that “it is just the way things are” and started demanding better.  But that takes a leader to show them the way.  We’ve seen what happens to these leaders, and sadly so few seem willing to take a bullet to make a point anymore.  We think we can vote and get change without having to raise our voices in protest.  We think people stupid enough to protest deserve whatever the police do to them.  We think free speech is a great thing, unless it slows down my commute or I have to walk around them and their damn witty signs.

      America – Land of the “Free*”, Home of the Apathetic.

      * Free as determined by jackbooted thugs who do not need to actually let you have the Freedoms promised by law.

  3. trefecta says:

    “What the hell is wrong with the Illinois government?”

    EDIT: Wow.

  4. millie fink says:

    “POLICE ARE ABOVE THE Illinois eavesdropping LAW.”

    Says it all, doesn’t it?

  5. Stonewalker says:

    Illinois is sort of the epicentre of rights violations…

  6. Kevin Faulk says:

    When witnessing excessive force, pull out your video camera and say, “Police officers, I am beginning to record you.  You may assent to this recording by continuing to use excessive force or by verbally or physically harassing me.  If you object to this recording, please peaceably leave the area.” 

  7. angusm says:

    “I hate Illinois Nazis.” ["The Blues Brothers"]

  8. EliZ says:

    This is a good thing. It means the supreme court will uphold the dismissal and uphold the legality of our recording rights on a national level.

    • Petzl says:

      Wait.  You used “uphold a civil rights decision” and “the Supreme Court” in the same sentence?   This Supreme Court?  Unless you build a time machine and go backwards or forwards 20 years, ain’t gonna happen.

    • flosofl says:

      It’s the State Supreme Court. So any decision will only bind Illinois.

  9. bluest_one says:

    Authoritarians like their athor-i-tay.

  10. Harry Palmer says:

    In the Lindenhurst case illustrated here the patrolman is already aware that he is being recorded by his own patrol car’s dash camera – with audio.  In effect he arrests the defendant for recording a conversation that the patrolman has already consented to have recorded!

    I think you can also make the argument that official acts by the police, including traffic stops, are “public acts”. They are certainly not provate – the police are acting in their capacity as public servants

  11. Culturedropout says:


  12. MrJM says:

    The Chicago Police routinely videotape the arrests of Occupy protesters.

    Who Videos the Video-men?

Leave a Reply