May 10, 2013  |  BALTIMORE (CN) - Baltimore police beat up a woman and smashed her camera for filming them beating up a man, telling her: “You want to film something bitch? Film this!” the woman claims in court.

Makia Smith sued the Baltimore Police Department, Police Commissioner Anthony Batts and police Officers Nathan Church, William Pilkerton, Jr., Nathan Ulmer and Kenneth Campbell in Federal Court.

Smith claims she was stuck in stand-still rush hour traffic in northern Baltimore when she saw the defendant officers beating up and arresting a young man.

She says pulled out her camera, stood on her car’s door sill and filmed the beating.     

“Officer Church saw plaintiff filming the beating and ran at her,” the complaint states. “He scared her and she sat back in her vehicle. As he ran at her, he yelled, ‘You want to film something bitch? Film this!’

“Officer Church reached into plaintiff’s car and grabbed her telephone-camera out of her hand, threw it to the ground and destroyed it by smashing it with his foot.

“Officer Church pulled plaintiff out of her car by her hair and beat her. Officers Pilkerton, Ulmer, and Campbell then ran to plaintiff’s car and joined Officer Church in beating plaintiff and arrested her using excessive force. At all times described herein, plaintiff’s two year old daughter witnessed her mother’s beating and arrest by the Officers, as did others.”

Smith claims the cops taunted her and threatened to take her daughter away. She says they refused to call her mother to her toddler.

“The officers, despite the pleas of plaintiff, refused to call plaintiff’s mother. Instead, the officers tormented plaintiff by telling her that her daughter would be taken from her and sent to Social Services. Seeing plaintiff’s distressful reaction to these tormenting threats, they continued,” the complaint states.

Smith says claims she was arrested and taken to jail on bogus charges that she assaulted Church and resisted arrest.

She claims Church failed to appear for her trial - twice, and prosecutors dropped the charges, but she had to hire a lawyer and spend more money recovering her impounded car.

She claims Baltimore police have a history of illegally seizing and destroying recording devices.

She seeks $1.5 million in compensatory and punitive damages for civil rights violations, conversion and infliction of emotional distress.

She is represented by Christopher Lyon, with Astrachan Gunst Thomas.

Police departments around the country have been accused of similar responses to citizens filming them abusing other people.

[Classic]

NO CHARGES against cops who killed a man with Down Syndrome in a movie theater, even though a coroner ruled it a homicide.

On Monday, March 4th, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a Statement of Interest supporting the right to record on-duty police officers in a second private civil rights lawsuit in Maryland federal court. Photojournalist Mannie Garcia was on a public street when he used his camera to document a rough arrest by Montgomery County Police officers in June 2011. An all-too-common scenario unfolded next: though Mr. Garcia was 30 to 100 feet away, an officer arrested him, placed him in a chokehold, seized his camera, threw him to the ground, and placed him under arrest for disorderly conduct. Mr. Garcia’s video card was never returned to him.

Mr. Garcia was acquitted of the disorderly conduct charges and brought a civil rights lawsuit alleging that his arrest and the seizure of his camera violated his rights under the First and Fourth Amendments of the Constitution. Though Mr. Garcia is a member of the press and even identified himself as such, it makes no difference for the First Amendment rights analysis, which is one issue rightfully emphasized in the D.O.J.’s Statement. Importantly, the Statement also expresses “concern” “that discretionary charges, such as disorderly conduct, loitering, disturbing the peace, and resisting arrest, are all too easily used to curtail expressive conduct or retaliate against individuals for exercising their First Amendment rights.

Read More

back to top