Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty
 

Spy Cameras Bust Victimless Criminal

August 31, 2012 by  

Spy Cameras Bust Victimless Criminal
PHOTOS.COM
Is Big Brother watching you?

The arrest of an Orlando, Fla., man for allegedly smoking marijuana illustrates how constant, real-time surveillance is changing the way law enforcement works.

According to an affidavit, an Orlando police sergeant was watching live video on the city’s Innovative Response to Improve Safety (IRIS) camera when he spotted 29-year-old Joe E. Haywood and a group of other men passing around what police suspected to be a marijuana joint.

According to WKMG Local 6:

Haywood was handcuffed and ordered to open his mouth but refused, so an officer tried for 30 seconds to use pressure points on his jaw to open his mouth, the affidavit said.  Officers said Haywood swallowed the joint during the incident and marijuana could be smelled on him, the report stated.

Officers said they then noticed a green leafy substance, which they described as a unburned cannabis leaf, on Haywood’s teeth, according the affidavit.

Haywood is jailed and charged with the misdemeanor of possessing 20 grams or less of cannabis, punishable by up to a year in jail, and felony tampering with physical evidence, punishable by up to five years in prison.

While many people would applaud the beefed up surveillance in crime-prone areas, with thousands of laws on the books and increasing law enforcement use of aerial video surveillance across the board, critics say the Nation is on a slippery slope to guilty until proven innocent.

Sam Rolley

Staff writer Sam Rolley began a career in journalism working for a small town newspaper while seeking a B.A. in English. After learning about many of the biases present in most modern newsrooms, Rolley became determined to find a position in journalism that would allow him to combat the unsavory image that the news industry has gained. He is dedicated to seeking the truth and exposing the lies disseminated by the mainstream media at the behest of their corporate masters, special interest groups and information gatekeepers.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Spy Cameras Bust Victimless Criminal”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

  • Harold Olsen

    I read a story similar to this a year or so back. Cops watching on camera, a man supposedly rolling joint and then lighting up and taking a hit off of it. He then handed it to his buddy who also took a few hits before passing it back. The police arrested the two men but could find no marijuana on either of them. The “joint” was a cigaret with tobacco only. The man was one of those few people who still roll their own cigarets. However, the cops decided that it was marijuana and booked both men for possession based on what they saw on the video and claiming that the men got rid of their pot before the police showed up, even though, on camera, there was no proof of this. The cops threw away the cigaret they were sharing instead of taking it into custody as evidence, which would have shown the men were not smoking pot. Fortunately for the two men, the case got thrown out but the two men were given a warning concerning their non-existent drug use.

    • Robert Smith

      Pot needs to be legal like booze is. It’s NOT for kids, but adults, as long as they aren’t endangering others, should be able to partake as much as they want.

      Rob

      • momo

        Legalize it, regulate it, tax it, make money.

      • vicki

        If you lived in a truly free society it would not be possible to make possession illegal.

      • FreedomFighter

        Mary Jane should be legal, taxed like booze and hard drugs stamped out.

        Laus Deo
        Semper Fi

      • Vicki

        FreedomFighter says:
        “Mary Jane should be legal, taxed like booze and hard drugs stamped out.”

        How can you call yourself “FreedomFighter” and then claim to want to prevent people from possessing and using materials you don’t like? How are you any different from liberals who want to take away guns cause they don’t like them?

      • Shane

        In regards to many of the comments about legalizing and taxing marijuana. Don’t let DaveH read your comments, and “your” opinion. I gave that same opinion a few weeks back, and received what he thought was a severe tongue lashing of verbage in hundreds of words, and on repeated multiple post. All because of my opinion to legalize and tax marijuana. He said because of that stance, I was a big government progressive.

        DaveH must be on vacation.

      • DaveH

        Shane says — “I gave that same opinion a few weeks back, and received what he thought was a severe tongue lashing of verbage in hundreds of words, and on repeated multiple post”.
        What he thought? How would you know what I was thinking, Shane? Mind-reader?
        How about sharing the proof for that “severe tongue lashing” instead of expecting the readers to just take your word for it.
        The only thing I might have said was to question why so many people fall right into the trap of condoning Government taxation on certain vices (as if them spending 40% of our GDP isn’t enough already). Probably you responded to that with a tirade of Government actions that you claimed were necessary as a result of the drug usage and I refuted those claims.
        At any rate, it’s a cheap shot for you to make a vague claim about my comments without divulging the whole context of those comments.

      • DaveH

        By taxing vice we not only give Government more money to waste, but we create a moral hazard for those who are responsible. If the people who use responsibly have to pay for those who don’t, then where is the incentive for them to continue being responsible users? Those who don’t use responsibly should be made to bear the costs for those whose bodies or property they have trespassed. The responsible users should be left alone.

      • Shane

        DaveH says:

        August 7, 2012 at 11:48 am

        Shane says — “I favor the decriminalization of marijuana with a heavy tax imposed upon it’s sale”.
        Why the “heavy tax”? Why should Government profit from its legalization?

      • Shane

        DaveH says:

        August 7, 2012 at 2:51 pm

        Shane says — “A victim rights fund can be set up for reimbursing the victims, both bodily and property, along with loss of income”.
        What? Again you want other people to pay for the actions of the perps? So you want to socialize the actions of a few?
        Shane says — “The approved and licensed seller of this now proposed legal product, will need various means of enforcement to ensure the tax “stamp” is paid on each pack or carton of marijuana. Fifth, border enforcement to ensure that our American Farmer is duly protected from outside and alien influences, that would smuggle cheaper, un- regulated, and most importantly…..un-taxed product into our consumer market. To not protect our legalized domestic marijuana farmers and distributors, would be like allowing other food products to reach market with no tax, while taxing the hell out of our domestic orange, apple, peach, corn, lettuce, etc farmers”.

        ((((So there you have it, Folks. The guy who claims he doesn’t want to be labeled has laid out just about every rational for Big Government that a Progressive can lay out.
        Anybody who knows anything about Progressives, Shane, can figure out that you’re one of them.))))
        The Progressive Era (and what motivates them):
        http://mises.org/daily/1259

        ————————————————————————————————

        So according to DaveH, I’m a Progressive, because I believe in taxing the use of marijuana, after making it legal.

        Gee, harsh and rigid labels imposed by DaveH, over the taxing of maryjane. Next will be the leg shackles and a round with the cat-of-nine tails.

      • Shane

        DaveH says:

        August 7, 2012 at 4:11 pm

        As usual, Shane and his Progressive fellows want the Irresponsible people to pay for the Responsible people. So when we do that, what are the incentives to behave? None.
        When all the marijuana users are responsible for the actions of the negligent ones, why should the responsible ones behave? And the misbehavers certainly aren’t going to try harder to behave when somebody else must share their bills.
        That’s why Progressivism always fails when they run out of other peoples’ money.

        —————————————————————————————————–

        One opinion, makes the rule under DaveH’s authority. Tar and feathered and forced to wear the scarett word “Progressive,” because one wants to legalize marijuana and tax it. Lot’s of liberterians in that boat, who believe the same way. I know. Because of read their comments. Spoken to them in person.

        We are now all Progressive according to DaveH.

      • Shane

        DaveH says:

        August 7, 2012 at 4:16 pm

        Rather than respond to the points in my comments about marijuana taxes, Shane changes the subject with — “So DaveH, can you name the taxes that you approve of that will pay for our defense budget, and other necessary federal budget items?”.
        Isn’t that one of the Alinsky tactics? Oh yeah, #2 — “Go off on tangents”.

        *****************************************************************************************************
        Gee, DaveH, you’re more than a little paranoid. But Paranoid was a cool album in the 60′s. Liked the cover, thoe a little dated for our times now.

        But as to your extreme suspiciousness, and lack of serenity towards others you disagree with. I will still play along with you. But you are very callous.

        I merely replied to your comment on taxes, as you called me a big government type because I wished to fund those issues that I raises that would be affected by legalizing marijuana. I took it from your comment that you dislike all taxes. I realize that no one really wants money taken by the federal, state, or local governments for even those items we agree needs to be funded by an enity of government. But some realize, including myself, that some taxes are needed. I merely asked that you provide some of those good areas that need federal, state and local funding. Be it a direct tax, fee, or whatever. If it taken, its a tax.

        So what is it DaveH.

        Which areas need funded, and how do we get those fund. But since the mere mention by me of a Marijuana tax makes me a Big Government type, I guess we can become buddies when you admit that some taxes are necessary.

        Talk with you later buddy. But I don’t hang out here much. I really do have other more important things to do. But my business, has been slow the last week. So I’ve humored myself here, and am trying to make new friends. Want to be mine, DaveH. Pretty please.

        —————————————————————————————————————–

        Now we are all “Alinsky’s” now, according to DaveH. That would be news to my Ron Paul friends, neighbors and acquaintances. None have ever come close to even saying that I’m a moderate. Much less a Progressive or an Alinskyite. I live in a very conservative county, city and neighborhood. The Ron Paul influence is quite strong in this area. So they are not judging my beliefs and actions on some northeastern curve. Probably one of the two or three main reason for the lack of my complete embracing of the party, the Ron Paul Party, is those individuals like one sees too much on this site and a few others, that are down right authoritarian,paranoid and hyper judgemental. Now when one reads the policy positions of Ron and other leaders in the movement, including those non party officials such as my friends and neighbors, they are the opposite of those miscreants often found for some reason on this site.

        Only on this site have I been labeled a liberal, progressive, Alinskyite and other left of center terms. I can honestly say, that I can not remember ever being judge to be lined with that political classification.

        The real danger to the libertarian, conservative, liberal or whatever party. Are those that are authoritarian and hyperjudgemental. Takes very little movement of political thought, for one to suddenly go from friend to in the line of site.

      • Shane

        DaveH says:

        August 7, 2012 at 6:28 pm

        Oh of course, you have a business. Why is it that most Progressive commenters on here who have stated their occupation say they have their own business? Must be one of the talking points given to them by their handlers.
        Another question, why don’t you Progressives wear your label proud? You act like helping the unfortunate (with other peoples’ money) is a noble endeavor, so I would think you’d be proud to admit it. Yet, there’s only been one Progressive commenter (that I know of) who has admitted that he is Progressive (Eric the Red).
        I am proud to admit that I’m a Libertarian. Why aren’t you proud to admit you’re a Progressive, Shane?

        —————————————————————————————————————

        Well DaveH, I would gladly admit and state that I’m a progressive, and wear the label proudly, if I was. But I can’t state that I’m a progressive, because that would be lying. That just would not be prudent would it?

        Gee, that paranoia is strong with DaveH’s internal force. You really need to have someone check your mental state, before you do something dangerous. Accusing me, without proof of not owning my own business. A normal person would have dealt with the real issue, and that was the discussion on whether the taxing of weed is proper as a conservative or libertarian. Could have kept this interaction on the up and up. But you insist on keeping it a personal negative. Even after I offered to be your Buddy. I mean, from your writings, it would appear that you don’t get out much, and you have problems relating to others.

        But back to your comment, that I don’t have a business. Because that’s what you indicated on your diatribe. Well, I do. I do have a business. That business is not doing so well the last year, but over the last ten, exceptionally well. Hoping for a bigger positive change come November.

        Thank you for admitting that you DaveH are a proud Libertarian. I don’t know if I was in the leadership position within the movement, if I would want to admit that you are part of my team. Not real inclusive are we DaveH. Got that, can’t be civil and get along with others issue, don’t we DaveH.

        P.S. There is a way to settle whether I have a business. But going to cost you some big charity contributions. I won’t accept your money personally, but I know a few worthy charities that could use a large influx of cash. You may even take the charitable taxable donation deduction.

        Want to play?

    • vicki

      ” The cops threw away the cigaret they were sharing instead of taking it into custody as evidence,”

      Sounds like felony tampering with physical evidence. Were the cops arrested. Not likely.

      • JimH

        Hi Vicki, There wasn’t a camera covering the waist basket. So no one witnessed the felony tampering with evidence.

      • Vicki

        :) Good point.

    • CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON

      “Harold Olsen,”

      ROLLING YOUR OWN CIGARETTES IS VERY POPULAR IN MEMPHIS. A GENERIC PACK OF “BLAND-TASTING” CIGARETTES COSTS FOUR DOLLARS. ROLLING YOUR OWN IS THE CHEAPEST “WAY TO GO” FOR THOSE WHO SACRIFICE FLAVOR FOR PRICE-TAG.

  • DonnaAngelStar

    Our government brings in the drugs. Yes, we need marijuana legalized and taxed.(choke)
    “We the People” are not the enemies of the state and there is no reason for any city in our country to have surveillance cameras watching us 24/7. The police state that has become our country needs to be reined in by nullfication of the Patriot Act for starters.
    We have many more true guilty people within the halls of the DOJ and the White House, not to mention Homeland “No” Security. Let us charge them for all the crimes that have been commited against “We the People of the World.”

    • Shane

      Your stance on taxing marijuana to some regulars on this site, would place you in with the Big Government type. Taxing maryjane, is akin to marxist thought. Might as well break out the hammer and sickle flag DonnaAngel.

    • DaveH

      Why should Government profit from peoples’ choices of what to put in their own bodies, Donna?
      You can answer that if you want, Shane, so people can see what I really say instead of what you claim I say (you aren’t very credible, you know, Shane).

      • Shane

        Thank you DaveH, for the invitation to play. Just scan the previous (top) comments. You’ll find my answer to your present question and the your statements previously.

        I could be redundant, but your answer has been answered above.

      • Shane

        Credibility? What would you know DaveH on credibilty? What makes you king of this blog? Your mindeye I suppose! Yet you feel that you are credible, while making statements that are totally false. But we could see just how credible you really are. Want to play? It would really help a lot charties. Simple to play. Simple to decide. We can play, do I have a business? Am I a progressive, big government type, ie@ alinsky type? I guess we could also include, am I credible? Kind of subjective, but is doable, just by using some common measures of credibility in our present society.

        So lets play. Have the cash ready.

  • http://Yahoo.com Bill

    Seems the 4th amendment has been thrown out. I believe this was an unwarrented search.

  • http://PLD FRENCHIE

    critics say the Nation is on a slippery slope to guilty until proven innocent….ON A SLIPPERY SLOPE TO IT ? REALLY ??? TRY GETTING ARRESTED & HAVING TO RELY ON A “PUBLIC PRETENDER” FOR YOUR DEFENSE BECAUSE YOU CAN’T AFFORD A REAL LAWYER. IT’S BEEN MANY, MANY YEARS SINCE I’VE HAD THAT PROBLEM, BUT I’VE NEVER FORGOTTEN THE LESSON FROM IT. HERE IN DAYTON, OHIO – COP SAYS YOU DID IT, YOU DID IT. DOESN’T MATTER WHETHER OR NOT YOU ACTUALLY DID, IF YOU CAN’T AFFORD A REAL LAWYER, YOU’RE GUILTY !!! OUR COUNTY PROSECUTOR BOASTS OF A 97% CONVICTION RATE. IS THAT BECAUSE OUR POLICE ARE JUST SO DAMN GOOD ? NO. IT’S BECAUSE OF “GUILT BY ACCUSATION” & LACK OF FUNDING FOR PROPER DEFENSE. THANK GOD I HAVEN’T BEEN ACCUSED OF ANYTHING FOR MANY YEARS. I WAS SENT TO PRISON IN ’92 FOR TRYING TO STOP A BURGLARY ACROSS THE STREET FROM WHERE I WAS LIVING AT THE TIME. THE COPS KNEW I WAS INNOCENT, THE PROSECUTOR KNEW IT, & SO DID THE JUDGE. TO THE JUDGE’S CREDIT, IT DISGUSTED HIM TO HAVE TO SENTENCE ME TO A YEAR IN PRISON DUE TO PRESSURE FROM THE PROSECUTOR & HIS DISGUST WITH IT SHOWED ON THE BENCH. THE REAL BURGLAR MADE A PLEA DEAL WITH THE PROSECUTOR TO TURN “STATE’S EVIDENCE” AGAINST ME IN RETURN FOR A REDUCED SENTENCE WHEN I REFUSED TO PLEAD GUILTY. WELL, I WASN’T GUILTY OF ANY WRONG DOING. LUCKILY, A LAWYER OWED ME A FAVOR & I ONLY GOT A YEAR, INSTEAD OF 7-25 YEARS. IF HE HADN’T STEPPED IN, I’D HAVE BEEN SCREWED. “GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT” HAS BEEN AROUND FOR A LONG TIME, PEOPLE. IT’S JUST NOW COMING TO LIGHT. I KNOW FIRST HAND – I WAS CONVICTED OF A CRIME FOR TRYING TO STOP ONE FROM HAPPENING. TAKE THIS LESSON TO HEART, IT COST ME A YEAR OF MY LIFE & MY 2nd AMENDMENT RIGHTS ‘TIL I DIE – DON’T TRY TO DO THE COPS’ JOB FOR THEM, IT WILL END BADLY !!!!! AVOID INTERACTION WITH LAW ENFORCEMENT AT ALL COSTS, THEY ARE NOT YOUR FRIENDS & WILL TURN ON YOU IN A FLAT SECOND IF THEY THINK THERE’S A BUST ON THE LINE. THEY DON’T CARE ABOUT GUILT OR INNOCENCE, ONLY WHO THEY CAN SLAP THE CUFFS ON – RIGHT OR WRONG, DOESN’T MATTER TO THEM AS LONG AS THEY CAN JUSTIFY THEIR PAYCHECK. EVEN IF IT’S AT THE EXPENSE OF AN INNOCENT MAN…………….

    • 4204life

      The system is designed to protect the wealthy criminals. People that serve the system bow to mammon. The cameras need to be in boardrooms, where crimes are committed in mass scale. Sorry you experienced the hypocrisy firsthand.

    • CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON

      “FRENCHIE,” FANTASTIC COMMENTS.

  • GRAMPA

    Must have been a real eventful bust. The dispatchers actually cost the citizens more in time paperwork and court costs than the bust was worth. My question what other crimes were missed by dispatching officers to this “crime site”? I believe we would be further ahead putting our time and effort in looking who is infiltrating our country with the intention of doing real harm. The political answer is evident! It is a lot easier to bust some poor schmuck than to perform real investigative work that our officers who put their lives on the line everyday would gladly do. We instead want to show action taken so the politicians demand a lot of inconsequential action that will make it seem they are doing something. I commend our officers and offer them my sympathy on the BS they put up with. When they do confront real problems they are tossed to the wolves without hesitation if the smallest thing goes wrong. well I would like to see what any of our leaders who have the benefit of hindsight perform under pressure like our officers.
    Some of us out here understand and are trying to replace these leaders who make things harder by being politically correct.
    The definition of politically correct is trying to pick up a piece of [expletive deleted] by the clean end!
    God bless our officers, And God bless America.
    Grampa

  • Thinking About

    Cameras often act to deter crime against our citizens. If you are not doing wrong it should not worry you. I use cameras in my home and yard, if you are breaking into my home, you should smile, you are on camera. I have a right to protect my property. Cameras has been used in determining who committed crimes, it is a good thing. Just as law enforcement has used dashboard cameras to determine if their officers are performing properly and to find unwarranted charges against an officer.

    • Smilee

      There is a big big difference in watching and filming your own property than having big brother watching for the purpose of catching you in a no no, where is the probable cause to watch you, it is a fishing expedition not law enforcement. At least if we are going to and you get arrested and not charged or convicted they should pay you for your time and pain and be made whole, this would also make law enforcement more responsible.

    • CHRISTOPHER ALLEN HORTON

      “Thinking About,”

      I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH HOME CAMERAS. WE DO NOT NEED PUBLIC CAMERAS.

  • r.p.

    Sam:
    We’ve been on that “slippery slope” for a very long time. What about denying one’s right to work should they test positive for THC or cannabinoids. The national drug testing scam is a black mark on our constitution. It does nothing to address the country’s problem with drugs as it fails to identify the abuse of alcohol. cocaine, meth, ecstasy or the other “hard” drugs even if those drugs were used less than 4 hours previous. But if you had any MJ in the past 4 weeks you will test positive, you will be fired and you will be required to enter a drug rehab program and your chances of ever being gainfully employed again is thrown out the window and still it does nothing about the real problem of “hard drugs”. The “National Drug Testing Scam” becomes a persecutorial law that only identifies the POT user as the problem, and skewers the data identifying our real and bonafide drug problems. Slippery Slope Indeed!! Total surveillance was just logically “The Next Step”.

    • JimH

      Hi r.p., those tests also detect cocaine. Drivers who have CDL’s are subjected to “random” drug testing. Every 3 months 25% of the drivers are randomly chosen to do the wiz quiz.(the only test I can pass without studying)
      If drugs are found some employers alow employees to go to rehab and keep their jobs.
      If someone is caught the randomness, seems alot less random.

  • AJ

    And why arn’t our elected officials tested the same way? Oh maybe it’s because it’s ok for them to work under the influence.

    • r.p.

      Exactly: The drug testing laws are only applied to specific groups and as T. Jefferson identified in the federalist papers “It becomes a persecutorial law and therefore is unconstitutional” All laws are to be applied fairly and across the board to every citizen in every aspect. Congress shall not be immune to their laws.

    • DaveH

      Because the laws are meant to subjugate US, AJ, not THEM.

  • charles

    This illegal intrusion on your privacey is not going to stop untill we stop it.And please save your breath if your going to say the way to stop it is by voteing thats just plain BS. If we as citizens in a free society dont stand up and stop it no matter what it takes trust me its not going to stop.I f I were stopped on the street by a cop and he told me I was under arrest for some thing he observed on a vidio my first response would be you might arrest me but I wont go willingly so you are going to need back up, And just to let you know that statement is comming from a former police officer.

Bottom
close[X]

Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to PersonalLiberty.com,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.