Patriot Picket Civil Rights Suit FILED!

[TopTechAgent]

Not that this is persuasive or binding in any way, but my eyes caught the plan adopted by the Baltimore City Police Department in regards to how officers respond to protests, demonstrations, and other First Amendment-protected activities. Interestingly, they observe the existence of a 1A right to record the police.

https://www.baltimorepolice.org/tra...lic-order-forces-standard-operating-procedure

I've been following US v. BPD, the consent decree case, and happened to catch this.

Obstruction of traffic as a protected 1st amendment activity isn’t cool. Doesn’t that lean towards false imprisonment to those stuck in traffic ? Also a safety hazard.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[teratos]

Obstruction of traffic as a protected 1st amendment activity isn’t cool. Doesn’t that lean towards false imprisonment to those stuck in traffic ? Also a safety hazard.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I see obstruction of traffic as an act of aggression. It is not protected by the 1A as it prohibits my right to free movement on public roads.

 

[Glaron]

I see obstruction of traffic as an act of aggression. It is not protected by the 1A as it prohibits my right to free movement on public roads.

Unless you are a Canadian Trucker.

 

[TopTechAgent]

I see obstruction of traffic as an act of aggression. It is not protected by the 1A as it prohibits my right to free movement on public roads.

I agree. Apparently Baltimore Police don’t.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[teratos]

I agree. Apparently Baltimore Police don’t.

If I fear for my life, I am hitting the gas. Bye.

 

[DC-W]

I just find it ironic the allegedly progressive Brian Frosh is willing to defend a much narrower view of the 1st Amendment than the BPD is.

He’s going to retire while defending Qualified Immunity.

 

[BeoBill]

From the brief on page 11: "Third, with respect to Kevin Hulbert’s claims, the right to record law enforcement officers is not a clearly established First Amendment right."

This thinking strikes at the very core of why Maryland is not, in fact, "The Free State". Are things permitted if they are not explicitly forbidden by the Constitution, or are they forbidden unless explicitly permitted by the Constitution? Freedom and Liberty demand the first interpretation; tyrants demand the second. Maryland clearly has not yet thrown off The Crown.

In The Formerly Free State, only the latter is true. And the little which is permitted is either taxed or sustains a levied fee.

 

[BeoBill]

I'm dying to know who made that call as well.

I think that is the cardinal question in the suit.

 

[BeoBill]

Obstruction of traffic as a protected 1st amendment activity isn’t cool. Doesn’t that lean towards false imprisonment to those stuck in traffic ? Also a safety hazard.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

I see obstruction of traffic as an act of aggression. It is not protected by the 1A as it prohibits my right to free movement on public roads.

Unless you are a Canadian Trucker.

Or BLAntifa...

 

[Kharn]

I see obstruction of traffic as an act of aggression. It is not protected by the 1A as it prohibits my right to free movement on public roads.

For the Patriot Picket, they had to use the crosswalks to make a loop of the area per the understanding at the time that stopping would be loitering and thus ticketed. "Obstructing traffic" in the state's brief is a huge exaggeration, vehicles are obligated to stop for pedestrians in the crosswalks, they weren't lingering in the street.

 

[teratos]

For the Patriot Picket, they had to use the crosswalks to make a loop of the area per the understanding at the time that stopping would be loitering and thus ticketed. "Obstructing traffic" in the state's brief is a huge exaggeration, vehicles are obligated to stop for pedestrians in the crosswalks, they weren't lingering in the street.

I’m not talking about the Patriot Picket….not sure what got lost in translation.

Start at post #537

 

[Blacksmith101]

Frosh is fighting for Pope's "Qualified Immunity" because he knows that if Pope looses it and becomes personally liable it is likely Pope will spill his guts and tell everything he knows about what goes on and who makes calls from "the Mansion" and probably many other dirty little secrets in Annapolis. This could get interesting and result in lots more law suits. Pope better hope he doesn't know any secrets about the Clinton's.

 

[BeoBill]

Pope better hope he doesn't know any secrets about the Clinton's.

I'm sure someone in authority will tell him some. And then sponsor an evening trip to Ft. Marcy Park...

 

[DC-W]

Bunch of updates today to be found at the bottom of the case page: https://www.marylandshallissue.org/jmain/counselor-s-corner/hulbert-v-pope

Consent Motion to Extend Time: https://www.marylandshallissue.org/jmain/documents?task=download.send&id=301&catid=4&m=0
Of note, see the Amicus in support of Sgt. Pope: National Police Association. They have a brief due March 1st
Plaintiff-Appellees Motion to Dismiss Appeal: https://www.marylandshallissue.org/jmain/documents?task=download.send&id=302&catid=4&m=0
The Court has requested a response to this MTD due 3/7/22: https://www.marylandshallissue.org/jmain/documents?task=download.send&id=303&catid=4&m=0

 

[DC-W]

Bunch of updates today to be found at the bottom of the case page: https://www.marylandshallissue.org/jmain/counselor-s-corner/hulbert-v-pope

Consent Motion to Extend Time: https://www.marylandshallissue.org/jmain/documents?task=download.send&id=301&catid=4&m=0
Of note, see the Amicus in support of Sgt. Pope: National Police Association. They have a brief due March 1st
Plaintiff-Appellees Motion to Dismiss Appeal: https://www.marylandshallissue.org/jmain/documents?task=download.send&id=302&catid=4&m=0
The Court has requested a response to this MTD due 3/7/22: https://www.marylandshallissue.org/jmain/documents?task=download.send&id=303&catid=4&m=0

The State filed its response today: https://www.marylandshallissue.org/jmain/documents?task=download.send&id=307&catid=4&m=0

 

[DC-W]

Filed yesterday (3/14) - Appellee’s Reply To Defendants’ Opposition To Motion To Dismiss: https://www.marylandshallissue.org/jmain/documents?task=download.send&id=309&catid=4&m=0

 

[Bob A]

Personally, I'm waiting to find out who made the phone call that suddenly motivated the Capitol Police to move on PP after years of inaction, and who ordered the call to be made.

They're the real villains; tough on Sgt Pope, but he must have known his orders were full of bull.

 

[DC-W]

Personally, I'm waiting to find out who made the phone call that suddenly motivated the Capitol Police to move on PP after years of inaction, and who ordered the call to be made.

They're the real villains; tough on Sgt Pope, but he must have known his orders were full of bull.

Here you go.

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.mdd.414130/gov.uscourts.mdd.414130.83.0.pdf

 

[welder516]

WOW, the last set of documents are awesome and very important and telling that the MSP Lt. governor and Capital police were all playing a game of taking rights away all the time Knowing they had no right to do so.

 

[John from MD]

Jeff must be upstairs cheering you guys on.