Second Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UClTjur-9cx8Bb4MW8r0K6xw
Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/audittheaudit
Twitter: https://twitter.com/AuditTheAudit
Submit your videos here: auditheaudit@gmail.com
Sponsorship inquiries: audit@ellify.com
Welcome to Audit the Audit, where we sort out the who and what and the right and wrong of police interactions. Help us grow and educate more citizens and officers on the proper officer interaction conduct by liking this video and/or subscribing.
This video is for educational purposes and is in no way intended to provoke, incite, or shock the viewer. This video was created to educate citizens on constitutionally protected activities and emphasize the importance that legal action plays in constitutional activism.
Bear in mind that the facts presented in my videos are not indicative of my personal opinion, and I do not always agree with the outcome, people, or judgements of any interaction. My videos should not be construed as legal advice, they are merely a presentation of facts as I understand them.
FAIR USE
This video falls under fair use protection as it has been manipulated for educational purposes with the addition of commentary. This video is complementary to illustrate the educational value of the information being delivered through the commentary and has inherently changed the value, audience and intention of the original video.
Original videos:
Amagansett Press’s channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCIYocUCja9Ug_XiYROeb_cw
Watching the Watchmen’s channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCq94tZvLY5-orEFs1YjKRSw
Sources:
Board of Airport Commissioners v. Jews for Jesus, Inc.- https://bit.ly/36u3Zkw
International Society for Krishna Consciousness v. Lee- https://bit.ly/37vbIyZ
Greer v. Spock- https://bit.ly/3ARC87B
Idaho Code § 18-705- https://bit.ly/3KGJVtU
Hiibel v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Nevada- https://bit.ly/3nYdxIV
Moreno v. Idaho- https://bit.ly/37vbXtT
Idaho Code § 18-7008 (current)- https://bit.ly/3ti3e75
Idaho Code § 18-7008 (previous)- https://bit.ly/3thip0g
State v. Korsen- https://bit.ly/3qdt9ux
Article on Sean Johnson’s arrest: https://bit.ly/3KSTxC2
Thanks for joining us! Watch to the end if you have the attention span for it! It helps the channel grow and it helps you be more informed!
EDIT: I generally try to avoid making an edit like this, but after reviewing the comments I think it is important to remind everyone that I do not make these laws. If you disagree with the way our legal system is structured then we probably have a lot in common in that regard. The point of AtA is to help citizens understand the legal system as it is currently interpreted. Often times, I wholly disagree with how the legislation and laws are structured, but again, the point is to showcase the law, not advocate for it to be changed. The moment this channel begins casting dissent on any particular law, it introduces political bias and ruins the objectivity and appeal of the show. You are free to disagree with how the content is presented, and I understand that this channel is not for everyone, but please be socially responsible and consider the fact that this channel is only reporting on the law, not making it. Channel your emotions regarding the law somewhere productive, such as at the voting booth or your next city council meeting. It is up to all of us to change the things about our justice system that we don't agree with. Hope this helped clarify a few thing. Have a great day!
EDIT 2: I stand by the grade I gave the officers considering the totality of the circumstances, however, I will admit that I should have chosen better phrasing to describe the officer's demeanor. One of the three officers involved was not necessarily "cordial". Officers do not generally get an F if there is some legal merit to their actions, and ultimately no one was arrested and the department accepted his complaint. If they had arrested Mr. Gutterman or done something to dramatically impair his quality of life in that interaction, then their grade would have been different. We have to reserve the F for those officers who commit blatant acts of maleficence to the detriment of others. As mentioned in the episode, there is some legal ambiguity involved in this encounter regarding the legality of the officer's conduct, and we must weigh those possibilities as evenly as we do the considerations of civilian rights. One last thing to mentions is that the grading section is designed to spark debate, disagreement, and perspective. If you disagree with the grades, that's normal. That is encouraged. But it is not an excuse to cast judgement and be hateful.
No corgill demmener by the cops there was no investigation demanded id right away the guy cop wouldn't identify saying talk to her then rescued her give her id or be arrested tyrants both of them they weren't in the store they stood away from entrance hey lackluster the cops went straight to trespassing without investigation you get a f
The request for a supervisor was essentially ignored, she says whoever shows up, who shows up is what can logically be construed as intimidation reinforcement. He shows up starts the contact with "you're talking to her" then he becomes the threatening individual flexing unlawful orders, Jason complies with the ID demand, and the threats keep coming. They ultimately leave without arrest, but that doesn't excuse the misconduct given he never entered the government owned liquor store, and was merely exercising his 1st right to record what he can see! Regardless of what Supreme Court government biased rulings imply. Those rulings need to be challenged and ruled of by justices with better understanding that we are endowed by the creator with certain inalienable rights, and they as mere mortals can not take lien against those rights, especially when laws were violated, or crimes committed. This government employee of the governments liquor store has no authority to trespass a citizen committing no crime. Not entering the liquor store or buying liquor there is not a crime or a trespass! Therefore no identification should have been demanded under threat of arrest. This stuff isn't rocket science, it's logic and common sense. But tyrants are gonna always do the tyrannical thing instead of the logically reasonable thing.
The moderator is classic maybe/maybe not!!! Don’t watch this channel. They do this in most of their videos
I give ata a D on this review
Update episode!
What happened?
Good stuff 👏
A+..freedom of speech is freedom of speech..never trust the government..
Why are cop not force to learn the law by the book!
And she solicited a trespass.
Keyword OF ANOTHER… PUBLIC PROPERTY ISN'T PROPERTY OF ANOTHER
Are you going to follow-up with a lawsuit? I hope so … otherwise nothing was learned here.
They weren’t cordial and professional narrator is wrong on this one
Fk, you're annoyed talking all the time.
A State Owned Liquor Store is most definitely a Public Forum. If you can go in the store, you can exercise your First Amendment Rights. Your first Amendment Rights cannot be abridged in or on the property of a state owned liquor store. In this case also, the first thing she did was to "solicit a trespass" from the store manager. Furthermore there is no Stop and Identify statute in any State in the Union (unconstitutional), where a person can be Stopped and Identified without Reasonable Articulable Suspicion or Probable Cause that said person committed a crime, is committing a crime, or is about to commit a crime. The term "Another" implies "Private Property", not Public Property. The term "Another" means a person, and Individual Owner of Real Property or Agent of that Owner. The Government cannot be "Another" [Person]. That much is obvious.
"While they maintained cordial and professional demeanor"…. Did you watch the same video I did. That second officer was anything BUT cordial and professional. Professional would have been doing ANY kind of investigation BEFORE treating someone like they'd committed a crime. You gave them a "C", satisfactory performance? A "D" is needs improvement, and the words you used to describe their behavior would indicate "needs improvement".
6:25 The correct response is “I’m taking to her.”
Typical female cop interaction!
Cops are the most ignorant cowards I’ve ever seen. Wow.
Jason Gutterman is nothing but a frauditor and the boy is not his son. We all would like to know who his dad really is.
Love these Guys!!!!
Sorry, but AP/Jason is not the best example. Jason SPEEAD MISINFORMATION ABOUT COVID.
It’s disturbing that the cops don’t know how trespass works. Just because somebody asks you to leave their property doesn’t give police the right to ID you unless you go back on the property, which is the actual crime of trespass. Of course, they want your ID for their incident report but they cannot demand it because no crime was committed. I haven’t watched one of these videos where police knew the law. The only people doing anything about police misconduct are auditors. Police departments clearly couldn’t care less about upholding our rights. It takes away power they think they deserve. Conduct that makes communities and police less safe.
Gutterman often threatens lawsuits for 'good content' but hasn't EVER followed through.
Cop said you're talking to her several times, now he speaks up and gets a bad attitude
Far too much was missed by AtA. ie, they were not requested to leave by anyone in authority. Without a demand to leave or a sign of prohibition, and then, a refusal to leave, there is no trespass.
Also the breakdown regarding expressive activity, filming is not really expressive. Holding signs, marching or chanting are expressive, a camera is a tool, like a pen, and therefore not expressive in its own right.
As for the describing the cops as maintaining a 'cordial and professional demeanour', I believe that was far from accurate. The male officer's repetition of "you're talking to her", even when asked to identify, was anything but professional, especially when he then chose to join in the conversation once it appeared the female officer was not getting what she wanted. Neither cop wanted to discuss facts regarding the event, and accepted the shop's manager's reporting of events as gospel.
AtA, I grade you a 'C' on your analysis of this video.
What's wrong with the cops? This is loitering? You were asked to leave…
I think you are wrong.The officers should get an F for thier actions and the cameramen should get an A.
The male officer gets an F. He wasn't professional and assumed things that nobody ever told him. It is also clearly established that when people are viewable from public they can be filmed. They do not have privacy in public. The two words are the exact opposite of each other. It would be different if he went inside the store to film. If the state wants to own and operate a business that was established with taxpayer money, they are subjected to public scrutiny.
I love Jason & Ben.!!! I support them 💯 percent.!!! 💪🏻🇺🇸
Again he wasnt told to leave he left hes gone how are u going to trespass him if he left ur public store i dont even think there on the property anymore
These dolts doing the filming know they are doing it to get a reaction from the police. I am getting sick of these attention whores seeking clicks and likes. If a person wants to act like an ass do not be surprised when someone calls their hand on it.
Guttermans right you are wrong
They were after ID Cookies
That was government property and the alcohol store is run by the state.
Can your please come to New Jersey brownsmills to the police station in trapment stop sign is behind the big tree and the cop is statch behind the tree waiting for people to turn on the stop sign that's behind the tree to give your ticket the cop can Not see the stop sign it happen to me now I have to plea guilty wen I no I stop and he wasn't sure that I stop he also don't want to show his body cam so be careful know I have to pay 2oo dollars because I have to plea guilty the car cam can see you stop but they only see taken the turn the cop and court have nasty attitude
The state leased the property. Liquor stores in Md are run by the state.That makes it public property. It is no different than when a state leases a building for their public assistance or any other office that has public access. The commandong officer he filed the complaint with agreed. When these moron cops realised they were wrong, they took off. The female almost ran an old man over while speeding from the lot. They never release them from detainment. The commander watched the video and wasnt happy
He knew a lawduit was coming. GI Joe in the green was a US Marshal. What was he doing there?. There wa slready to local Blue Crips on scene. Really, the US marshals have nothing better to do than show up to help his probable side piece? Which was the consenous of a majority of commenters on Shawn video.
More and more auditors are impressing me as just counterproductive PIA.
There is no good use served by annoying liquor store customers.
Even if Idaho is a Mormon, anti alcohol, contaminated state.