1. Ah, Illinois. The Land of Lincoln. Abraham Adolf Hitler Lincoln, that is. (I can say that. I live here.) This was so far downstate I don’t recall this EVER being addressed with the television media closer to Chicago.

  2. I didn’t know the state could appeal a case that’s been thrown out of court. Wouldn’t that be double jeopardy, or does that only apply when the defendant is declared innocent?

    Either way, this is total B.S and should be changed.

    At the same time, I’d like to see a paparazzi get busted for filming a cop.

    1. It’s unclear from the news report, but it sounds like the judge addressed the constitutionality of the statute before the case went to trial, which would mean that it’s not double jeopardy. Jeopardy (the risk of conviction and punishment) must attach at the trial-court level before a defendant can claim double jeopardy protection. Jeopardy attaches when the jury is impaneled.

      The prosecutor may actually end up having done the First Amendment cause a favor by appealing. This law needs to be reviewed by a higher court in the light of public attention, and ultimately to have a size 12E Boot of Justice(tm) lodged up its ass.

  3. I can see the demonstration now… a long line of people with video cameras. The first starts recording a cop. As they are arrested, the second person begins recording the arrest. As the second person is arrested, the third records… and so on.

    1. That would be awesome. Even better if they all shut off the microphones (which would turn out to be legal in the end, but that might backfire the “protest” aspect of it). Then again, if they’d pepper spray a group of students for sitting still on the ground, what would they do to protesters “armed” with cameras?

Comments are closed.