In Under Two-Minutes, This Ohio Cop Shows Exactly What’s Wrong with Police in America

[Garion_55]

Zanesville, OH — Early Friday morning, Patrick Solomon was out for a stroll. He had committed no crime and had harmed no one when Zanesville police officer Andrews pulled in front of him to block his path.

Just prior to officer Andrews pulling up, Soloman was filming a state trooper from across the street, when he began walking home shortly after.

Solomon explains what happened next, “As I was crossing Monroe, Andrews drove his patrol car up behind me at a high rate of speed, started to turn on Monroe, while I was still crossing. He then turned toward me, diagonally, and coming to a stop right beside me and blocking the left side of Monroe. Within moments, a second patrol car pulled in behind, blocking the other side of Monroe.”

Obviously taken aback, Solomon says, “Can I help you? You’re blocking the street here.”

As Andrews begins to exit his vehicle he then says, “What’s going on man? You alright?”

Solomon just replies back saying he’s out for a walk, and nothing is going on. He then says, “Have a nice evening,” before walking away. But officer Andres noticed that Solomon did not have shoes on, and apparently in a police state, this is grounds for asking for ID, Name, and Date of Birth.

Solomon then legally refuses to provide his name and ID. Although Ohio is a Stop and Identify State, Solomon was well within his rights to not provide his name. According to Ohio State Law 2921.29, a person must only give their name if any of the following are true:

(1) The person is committing, has committed, or is about to commit a criminal offense.
(2) The person witnessed any of the following:
(a) An offense of violence that would constitute a felony under the laws of this state;
(b) A felony offense that causes or results in, or creates a substantial risk of, serious physical harm to another person or to property;

(c) Any attempt or conspiracy to commit, or complicity in committing, any offense identified in division (A)(2)(a) or (b) of this section;
(d) Any conduct reasonably indicating that any offense identified in division (A)(2)(a) or (b) of this section or any attempt, conspiracy, or complicity described in division (A)(2)(c) of this section has been, is being, or is about to be committed.
None of the above criteria fit Solomon’s case as he had not committed a crime, and the officer had not accused him of committing a crime. But these facts did not stop officer Andrews from proceeding to violate this man’s rights.

When Solomon asks again if he is being detained, Andrews replies, “Yes you are.”

When Solomon asks why he’s being detained, Andrews answers, “Till I figure out what’s going on. It’s not normal for someone to be walking around.”

After three more attempts at getting Solomon’s name, Andrews then places him under arrest for “Failure to identify.” However, as noted above, the Failure to Identify law only applies in the presence of a crime. There was no crime. The arrest was illegal.

After realizing that he had arrested a man for a law that did not exist, Andrews then changed the charge after bringing Solomon to jail. According to Solomon, “Having nothing to charge me with, a charge of disorderly conduct was manufactured sometime after my arrest.”


Read more at http://thefreethoughtproject.com/two-minutes-ohio-cop-shows-wrong-police-america/#0dRlGdaSuzyTXFJM.99

[Angry Dragon]

1. Police State .......... coming to a state near you

[Old Crow]

2. It's already here.

Now that police can do this kind of control and oppression--and much worse--without fear of any meaningful repercussions, even if it's captured on video, they're in control. This affects the behavior of every citizen who hasn't been living under a rock and who is aware of the current state of affairs. We're all a little less bold, a little more timid, and a little more afraid.

This control only ends when citizens take to the streets, demand a MASSIVE curtailment of police powers, and take their liberty back.

I don't know when or if that will occur. Black Lives Matter is a step in that direction. I hope it helps.

[Unknown Beatle]

6. "This control only ends when citizens take to the streets, demand a MASSIVE curtailment of police

powers, and take their liberty back."

They tried that in Ferguson and they came at them with a militarized police department. But I know what you mean, a massive nationwide protest. Millions out in the streets with a million or two in DC.

[Old Crow]

7. Good point.

Yes; a single-city demonstration won't do it, as seen by your timely example of Ferguson. It has to be nationwide.

My head spins when I think of the powers most Americans now seem willing to give the police: militarized hardware, warrantless searches, license plate readers, cell phone intercepts, reading of personal email, drones.

When I grew up in the 1970s, when the big, bad Soviet Union existed and we were in the midst of the Cold War, the phrase "police state" was constantly on the lips of conservatives as a way of illustrating how superior our lives were compared to anything communism or even socialism could offer.

Now the Soviet Union's gone and we have a police state right here at home that borders on what once existed behind the iron curtain. And your average American doesn't seem to give a damn.

[passiveporcupine]

3. I hope the charges are dropped.

Since it was all recorded, I don't know how they came up with the disorderly conduct. Unless of course, walking around at night in bare feet is considered disorderly conduct.

I think it had something to do with him filming a state trooper. I wonder what the state trooper was doing that made him want to film him?

[Locrian]

4. doesn't matter

Likely nothing. But any sign of not bowing down to the police is cause for retaliation by them

[GoneFishin]

5. Yep. In their emotionally stunted melons knowing your rights is a personal insult for which

they must discipline you so the other kids won't laugh at them.

[passiveporcupine]

8. You are right

It shouldn't matter, but it sure seems to.