A grand jury has recommended a criminal-trespass charge against a Galveston police sergeant who arrested a self-described civil rights activist in November.

Police arrested Phillip Turner, of Austin, outside the Galveston Police Department headquarters, 601 54th St., on Nov. 4.

Turner, 25, was at the police station conducting what he called a “First Amendment audit,” a test of local police officers’ knowledge of laws regarding the right to film law enforcement.

Police Sgt. Archie Chapman was one of four officers who approached Turner while he was recording and asked for his identification.

Turner refused, and Chapman arrested him. Chapman then searched Turner’s car.

That search could be at issue in the trespassing case against Chapman. The Texas Penal Code defines criminal trespass as a crime that occurs when a person enters onto the property of another, while knowing that such entry was forbidden. The charge carries a possible jail term of up to 180 days, as well as a fine of up to $2,000.

“I’m actually pretty shocked,” Turner said. “I’m just glad that he’s being held accountable for his actions.”

Assistant District Attorney James Haugh, who presented the case to the grand jury, said grand jurors could have returned a variety of charges, depending on how they viewed the evidence presented.

In a video of the arrest taken by Turner’s friend and posted on YouTube, Galveston police officers repeatedly ask whether Turner was filming license plates around the police station lot.

After he was handcuffed, the officers turned off the camera that Turner was using to film the building.

Acting Police Chief David Smith said Chapman remained on duty Friday, but had been limited to administrative duty.

Turner is a correspondent for an Internet publication called Photography Is Not a Crime, which is dedicated to monitoring acts of police censorship. He also manages a YouTube page, The Battousai, where he has posted more than 100 videos of him and police officers. He said that if the case went to trial he would return to Galveston to testify against the man who arrested him.

It is not illegal to film police officers or police facilities from a public street in Texas.

According to the Texas Penal Code, failure to identify occurs when a person refuses to give identifying information to an officer who has lawfully arrested the person and requested the information. The charge carries a possible fine of up to $500.

City officials dismissed the charge against Turner in mid-November, days before his first scheduled municipal court appearance.

“It’s very important that people stand up for their rights, because when we don’t, those rights get trampled and eventually taken away from you,” Turner said.

Locations

(66) comments

Keith Gray

Officer Chapman, thank you for identifying a potential threat and not ignoring it, even if it is determined you broke a law. And for this Turner dude... how about auditing what you really accomplished? Do you think a police officer is going to just sit by and not approach a shady character...Lets see what POS files your lawsuit for you.

Zee L Usay

A cop that does not know Texas law, violates his oath of office and violates the 1st, 4th, and 5th amendment and makes false arrests is a good cop? Interesting.

The audit showed that the local PD is an over-reaching entity that is not interested in the laws at all, only in flexing there muscle.

Dwight Strain

I understand the idea of keeping the police honest but this is something else. Entrapment, outright setting a guy up, something very sleezy feeling about the way this was done. Feels like a good man is getting wronged here.

Zee L Usay

Entrapment? Then it is entrapment when cops leave a car with the keys in it with the doors open.
All the guy was doing was taking pictures. Just because YOU don't think the subject is interesting, or that it is somehow special, does not mean there is some sort of law against filming it.
The cops are the ones making the poor choice. They chose to be butthurt because Phillip didn't kowtow to them. They could have simply stepped back and watched or had a civil conversation, but no they chose to escalate the encounter.

Carlos Ponce

"All the guy was doing was taking pictures.'
Yes, taking pictures of women driving up to the police station and making them feel uncomfortable. I guess you don't care if women are being harassed in the name of "taking pictures".
Poor excuse for bad behavior.
If some "upskirts" a female would you say "All the guy was doing was taking pictures"?

George Croix

Personally, if I need help, I'd rather call a Policeman than an 'activist'.....or his mouthpiece....

A set up?
Of COURSE it was a set up. The 'activist' was only interested in provoking confrontation. The idea of an 'audit' only plays with similarly character challenged...characters....
The Policeman was interested in the safety of people in the area. ESPECIALLY with all the trash running around in this country inciting violence against the police.

Of course, I could be wrong...but I'm not.....

Doyle Beard

George I believe you are 100% correct although the anti law establishment will probably disagree but thats ok. Thank you.

Carlos Ponce

Texas law requires a person to provide their name, residence address and date of birth if lawfully detained by police. The perp knew and quoted that. The perp never responded to requests to identify himself. The perp was told he was acting suspiciously, video recording the license plates of private vehicles especially that of a woman driving ( Was he stalking her? It would appear so.......) The perp and his friend identify the YouTube Video as "1st Amendment Audit". Let's see: Prohibits the making of any law respecting an establishment of religion, NOT APPLICABLE, impeding the free exercise of religion-NOT APPLICABLE , abridging the freedom of speech - NOT APPLICABLE, infringing on the freedom of the press- NOT APPLICABLE, interfering with the right to peaceably assemble NOT APPLICABLE or prohibiting the petitioning for a governmental redress of grievances- NOT APPLICABLE. Galveston has lost the active use of one of its finest because some IDIOT wanted his 15 seconds of glory.Police Sgt. Archie Chapman's time and talents can be better utilized. Assistant District Attorney James Haugh should never had presented the case and the grand jury should never had indicted. WHAT A FARCE!!!!!!! My condolences to Police Sgt. Archie Chapman. You are a fine officer doing your job and the system does this to you.Shame on Phillip Turner. Shame on James Haugh. Shame on the not so grand jury. SHAME, SHAME, SHAME!!!!!!

john smith

"Texas law requires a person to provide their name, residence address and date of birth if lawfully detained by police."

Wrong.

SHAME on you Carlos Ponce! If you are going to quote Texas law, you first ought to know Texas law. Texas Stop and Identify statues are simple and clear. 38.02 states a citizen is not required to identify themselves unless they are under lawful arrest.

SHAME on Officer Chapman for #1: For either not knowing the law..tor simply ignoring it. Either way it's HE who stepped in it of his own free will. It hardly matters what his intentions were..HE broke the law by arresting a citizen who had nothing illegal.. It's HE who's clearly got himself in this pickle. It's time for you apologist clowns to stop crying and making excuses for him. It's time for the officer to take responsibility for his actions.... just as Mr. Turner was prepared to own HIS actions.

Carlos Ponce

In my anger over what happened I neglected to point out that the LEGAL DETENTION led to the man's arrest where you're supposed to be COOPERATIVE and identify yourself. The man WAS ARRESTED. The man was not cooperative.
The officer has been indicted. That does not mean he is guilty And you say "He broke the law". I did not know John Smith would be the judge and jury in this case. If you are NOT then you are making a presumption. Let the trial begin.
I've been doing video work for three decades and know what the jerk video guy did was WRONG. It is amateur voyeur idiots like him that make true professional videographers suspect.And John Smith, I may have left off a phrase in quoting law but cooperating with police is something a TRUE professional videographer would do. Officer Chapman is a good officer. Mr. Turner looks like a voyeur suspiciously taking video of a woman at the Police station. What if that were your wife, mother, sister, daughter or girlfriend? You'd think the guy was a stalker, some sicko who records video of women he does not know as a fetish. That's what it looks like! Maybe not but the Police had a legal right to protect the community from someone acting suspiciously like a sick pervert.

Chris Gimenez

Carlos, you're position and anger on this issue is completely off base as are the majority of the commenters here. John Smith is exactly correct about the law and Sgt. Chapman did illegally arrest Mr. Turner, illegally search his car, and illegally search his video camera. It's pretty cut and dried.

The attitude that law enforcement should be able to ignore, bend, or break the law because that's what they want us to believe is necessary to keep us safe is exactly the opposite. We, as a country, are safer when law enforcement OBEYS the laws to which they took an oath to upkeep. I have seen firsthand the damage done to innocent civilians when law enforcement is allowed to do what they want and there is nothing worse.

The bottom line is going to be exactly what I said in the article about a federal judge blasting the DA Roady for trying to subvert justice in the Bledsoe case. This charge will be quietly dismissed and the GCDN will ignore what Roady does because that's what they do. Roady dismissed the FELONY CHILD ABUSE indictment against former TC Police Officer John Thorn and he's going to do the same thing here. It's what sleazy politicians who depend on law enforcement support for election do. Sgt. Chapman should be sent packing because he obviously has no respect for the laws he took an oath to uphold.

Carlos Ponce

With all due respect, Chris I was brought up to RESPECT the badge. As a three decade videographer I would have gladly identified myself. Whether or not the arrest was legal or not once arrested you have to confirm identity. And it is not for you nor I to determine whether it was a legal arrest or not. What the officers saw was a potential threat, a person videoing a woman for no apparent reason. I'd be suspicious too. Chris I'll ask you the same question I asked John Smith: "What if that were your wife, mother, sister, daughter or girlfriend? You'd think the guy was a stalker, some sicko who records video of women he does not know as a fetish. That's what it looks like!" Are you saying she has no rights, that anyone can acting in a suspicious manner can video her every action. Sounds like a STALKER to me. REALITY CHECK, Chris! You KNOW if it was some woman dear to you you'd want the police to arrest this guy. And bringing up the other stuff is just a red herring.

Chris Gimenez

Carlos, I'm not sure when and where the "respect the badge" stuff came from but I was raised to respect the law. As to the badge, I believe it's on law enforcement to respect the badge and the authority given to them to lawfully conduct themselves while wearing the badge. Perhaps it's become something like the BLM philosophy that it doesn't matter if a black individual commits a crime, you're racist if you don't agree with them. I respect our laws and I will respect anyone in law enforcement who endeavors to uphold the law rather than break the law.

As for the red herring accusation, I haven't watched the video that Mr. Turner recorded. Does it show him videotaping a woman or women or was that some nonsense that was drummed up in order to justify the unlawful actions of Sgt. Chapman?

You're correct to say that it is not up to you or I to say whether it was a legal arrest but let's look at the facts. The DA's office didn't accept a charge against Mr. Turner so it was left to the GPD to decide whether they wanted to pursue the municipal hold charge on failing to identify and they did not. Makes me think they had nothing legal to fall back on.

A Grand Jury heard what was presented to them by the DA's office and they indicted the officer. He's innocent until proven guilty and the only reason it even went as far as it has is because Roady knew there would be public exposure that he's got to justify. At the end of the day it's all show for the DA's office. They are going to dismiss this charge so they don't make law enforcement in Galveston County upset with Roady come next election. The same thing he did with former TC Police Officer John Thorn who was indicted by a Grand Jury on felony child abuse.

The only question I have is whether the GCDN is going to continue the same shameful conduct and censorship perpetrated by Heber Taylor in protecting Roady from his conduct and public exposure or if they're going to start doing the right thing and holding this disgraceful DA accountable. I'm not holding my breath on that one.

Carlos Ponce

" I'm not sure when and where the "respect the badge" stuff came from...."
It was instilled by my parents, my teachers, my upbringing. It is a Biblical principle to follow civil authority.
BLM is just another red herring . The police officer in question is African-American, is that why you bring it up?
And this isn't the first time for Philip Turner bothering police."Turner has been involved in similar incident by other Texas police departments. In October, he filed a lawsuit against the Round Rock Police Department over a July 2014 incident where he was handcuffed and threatened with arrest after filming the police station in that city.""Turner has posted more than 150 videos on YouTube showing his and others’ interactions with police and other authorities throughout Texas. Turner was also arrested in Fort Worth."
And you haven't BOTHERED to view the videos online? That explains a lot!
And a grand jury can indict a ham sandwich if it wants. An indictment by itself does not mean guilt.
And there you go again, [offtopic][offtopic] Find another forum for your diatribe.

Chris Gimenez

Well Carlos, I hate to break the news to you but unless you were given some type of discretion with your GCDN subscription to censor those with who you disagree with I think I'll keep commenting on things of interest and concern to me.

I'm well aware of what Mr. Turner is doing and the fact that he also did the same thing in Texas City and League City and was not arrested should be an example of at least two agencies that know Mr. Turner's conduct was legal regardless of whether they like it or did not.

As I said, I respect the law but I certainly don't blindly respect those who commit criminal offenses under the color of law.

As for being off topic-well, that's a poorly disguised effort on your part to disassociate two very clearly similar criminal complaints against Galveston County law enforcement with biased treatment in at least one of them by the Galveston County District Attorney Jack Roady who wasn't going to risk convicting a criminal cop so he dismissed the charge. Sorry that your associative skills are so lacking but mine are not.

Carlos Ponce

It's my prerogative to tell someone who is responding directly to me when they're off topic. That's why the GCDN provides those emoticons. And the police that arrested Turner in other parts of the state under identical conditions had no charges pressed against them by their grand juries. That could mean the Galveston grand jury is off base. And the other towns you mentioned in addition to the County Jail were tipped off to leave this nutcase publicity hound alone. That's why nothing was done.
And I've dealt with ATTENTION DEFICIT INDIVIDUALS before who jump from topic to topic. It's not my associative skills, its just that those sections of your diatribe have NOTHING to do with the article, the matter in question or anything else posted in this forum. Better watch out, you might hurt yourself trying to STRETCH trying to fit what is there.

Chris Gimenez

It's your prerogative to state your opinion about whether comments are off topic. I call it running from the facts.

Now let's get to the facts. You still have not grasped-either intentionally or because you're unable to-the charge Chapman was indicted on. IT WAS NOT because of his false arrest it was because he illegally searched Mr. Turner's vehicle. Go to the County Clerk's site and read the indictment.

As to whether grand juries elsewhere failed to take action even though the exact same incident happened, that's just more of your nonsense. You provide no proof that any other agency that arrested or threatened to arrest Mr. Turner subsequently illegally searched his vehicle.

Carlos, you just keep spinning from one false narrative to another. Why don't you admit you're wrong, admit Chapman was wrong, and admit the public faces a greater threat when law enforcement breaks the law than when they follow the law.

BTW, you say other departments, agencies, etc. were warned to "leave the nutcase alone". You mean other departments intentionally ignored criminal conduct by Mr. Turner so they wouldn't get "trapped" or do you mean the other agencies were smart enough not to break the law in order to go after Mr. Turner's completely legal First Amendment rights? Can you clear that up for us?

Zee L Usay

"Texas law requires a person to provide their name, residence address and date of birth if lawfully detained by police."

FALSE

Texas law requires you provide your name if, and ONLY if you are lawfully ARRESTED.

Being arrested for failing to provide ID is as asinine as being arrested for resisting arrest. Neither is a lawful arrest. Also, Texas law does not, and CANNOT, override the 5th amendment. You can always choose to not answer a question and remain silent.

"infringing on the freedom of the press- NOT APPLICABLE,..."

FALSE

As decided by the Supreme Court in the Glick Decision, The press has no more, or less rights than the general public.

Your just wrong, just like the cops and those that choose to kowtow to them.

George Croix

I've always heard that you can get a Grand Jury to indict a ham sandwich, but in this case it appears the jury itself is made up of ham sandwiches.... [whistling]

George Croix

The consequences of being a self-centered jerk just wanting to provoke an incident are many and varied.

Zee L Usay

You are talking about the op right?

Mike Trube

The police of today, are not those of yesterday. I see the change in officers not staying with one department for any real length of time. They are young and inexperienced. And many(not all) are not community friendly. Some have an ego problem with a badge and gun. I have watched many of the videos of officers giving anyone videotaping any situation a hard time. But I have also watched videos of officers supporting those who are exercising their right to videotape. Those are the officers that should be commended for upholding the citizens rights. I see police departments choosing to wear all black uniforms. To me, that represents more of a police state. I don't want to see the day where any innocent citizen is stopped for no apparent reason than to 'show your papers.' As long as it is still legal to videotape on public land, they should be left alone. How many videos are there that show the license plates of cars? And it's done with no ill intent in mind. Until an officer has just cause to inquire who someone is, then stop making an innocent situation such a big deal. Just my opinion.

Connie

Chris Gimenez

Connie, not to mention the GCSO has a Task Force truck on I-45 almost every day taking pictures of our license plates.

Carlos Ponce

Really, Chris? I hope you know the difference between a video camera and a radar gun. I'll tell Henry Trochessett of your allegations.[rolleyes]

Chris Gimenez

You can tell Henry Trochessett anything you want Carlos. I would hope he knows his Task Force vehicle is recording license plates but it appears you do not. Your anger at even the appearance of law enforcement being held accountable is pretty bizarre. Let me reiterate Carlos, it is just an appearance.

Carlos Ponce

And Chris, all you have to do is hook up to the traffic cams, zoom in and they have you on video. No GCSO task force needed, just some good computer software to read the plate, or don't you watch CSI?
http://www.gcoem.org/go/doc/1913/2182793/Traffic-and-Webcams

Carlos Ponce

As someone who has videotaped for over three decades I can assure you there are some out there who do not exercise common sense while videoing. I'm not ashamed to identify myself to anyone, even those not in authority like the police. I surmise some are ashamed of their name or what they are doing . Otherwise they'd be glad to ID themselves. Even if Joe Citizen came up and asked while videorecording, "Who are you and what are you doing?" I'd be more than happy to tell them. I'm not hiding anything.I'm proud of what I do.
"Like the pine trees lining the winding road
I've got a name
I've got a name
Like the singing bird and the croaking toad
I've got a name
I've got a name
And I carry it with me like my daddy did
But I'm living the dream that he kept hid
Moving me down the highway
Rolling me down the highway
Moving ahead so life won't pass me by"
And I've never seen an officer who did not act professionally. I've taught many a young man and woman who now "Protect and Serve".
Connie how would like to be video recorded without your consent as the woman at the station was? Wouldn't you feel "Uncomfortable"? Wouldn't you feel "violated"? Most would.

Mike Trube

Carlos, if women don't want to be videotaped, then they need to stay out of grocery stores, department stores and restaurants. And probably all utility companies as well as city owned buildings such as city hall. Cameras are everywhere. As long as I am not illegally taped in a restroom or dressing room, I don't have a problem. Let me rephrase that. I do have a big problem with 'big brother' watching my every move. But that's the way things are, and I wish that could change. But it won't. I do think the police should be held accountable for overstepping the bounds of the laws. And you have to admit there are many that do. I think this whole issue was blown way out of proportion. Meaning, the officer should have just let him tape, and he would have gone away. The officer just flunked the test. I guess one sees things differently when one has been wronged by law enforcement. And I was. That's just the way I see it.

Connie

Chris Gimenez

Yeah Connie, people who say they support law enforcement because they ignore criminal conduct by law enforcement are the problem and not the cure. Holding bad cops accountable is the answer and ultimately benefits the good cops and society in general.

Carlos Ponce

You don't see individuals singling out anyone in "grocery stores, department stores and restaurants" just out of the blue recording them to video. Notice that I posted "singling out". Why Turner singled out that woman is what the police wanted to know. The woman in question complained. That's why the police responded. Note that Turner was arrested in multiple cities in Texas under identical circumstances. Did the other city's grand juries indict their officers? No. Turner's suit against Round Rock PD for "illegal arrest" hasn't produced any results.I hope you're never in a situation where you feel uncomfortable with someone unknown to you looking at you from behind a camera. This woman felt uncomfortable. She asked the police for help and they responded. His attitude upon questioning and lack of cooperation speaks to his arrest.Why did GPD drop charges? They found out he has pulled this exact stunt in various cities in Texas and was out to find his 15 seconds of fame. This was a set up.

Chris Gimenez

That is completely nonsensical. You sound like obama's spokesperson trying to explain away the Liar-in-Chief's misconduct. That's some wild stuff there Carlos. [beam]

Carlos Ponce

Chris, you're the one who sounds like "obama's spokesperson trying to explain away the Liar-in-Chief's misconduct" The misconduct was performed by Turner and you've tried unsuccessfully to toss away the FACT that what he did was wrong. Actually you sound more like one of Hillary Clinton's supporters who cast dispersion on those who call her out.[beam]
FACT: Turner made a woman feel uncomfortable by videoing her . And she asked the police for help. And Chris thinks its OK to make her feel uncomfortable. Misogyny is not fashionable as it was in the days of Bill Clinton, Chris. I don't think it ever was.

Chris Gimenez

You're losing it Carlos. Turner was not charged so he did nothing wrong. Chapman was charged with FELONY criminal trespass. You can keep bringing up some anonymous woman who was in a public place and was made "uncomfortable" by some young black man with a video camera but it has absolutely nothing to do with what the situation is.

As for Turner's suit against Round Rock not yielding any results, well, it hasn't gone to trial yet so once again you're being pretty ridiculous. I know you've bought into a position that can't be justified and those are the hardest ones to admit to being wrong to but you are wrong. Facts are not what you perceive to be facts but rather what the law says are facts.

Chapman is under felony indictment and Turner has not been charged with anything. Doesn't take anyone with any common sense and half a brain to understand that.

Carlos Ponce

It's obvious I'm trying to debate with someone who does not have all his facts straight or a distorted view of what happened. Get educated, Chris.

Chris Gimenez

Carlos, you've put your "facts" here for everyone to see. I don't need to debate. It's painfully obvious you want to believe your opinion is fact.

Chapman is indicted on felony criminal trespass.

Turner had his phony failure to identify charge dropped.

Turner was handcuffed and threatened with arrest in Round Rock even though the lead officer admitted early that he was not doing anything illegal. (it's on video)

The officer was disciplined. (according to newspaper account)

The civil suit has not gone to trial so no "results have been yielded".

You assert GPD dropped the charges because they "realized Mr. Turner was allegedly seeking 15 minutes of fame". I suppose it had nothing to do with whether their actions were lawful or not lawful.

Your comments have been based solely on emotion:
-a mysterious woman was made "uncomfortable". Okay, so let's violate someone else's First Amendment rights and commit a felony in response.
-you initially stated the failure-to-identify law so completely wrong it was obvious you didn't have a clue what it said.
-you seem to believe that law enforcement should be able to subvert the law just because. (that is really bizarre)
-you continue to assert as factual your opinion and without anything to back up your statements.

And you think I need to get educated? [cool]

Carlos Ponce

Can we wait until after Sgt. Chapman's trial or has "Judge Gimenez ALREADY tried, convicted and sentenced him? Then you can see that all you really have is a distorted view of what really happened. Really Chris, get educated!

Carlos Ponce

Lesson 1:
Turner: instigator, has pulled this scam in various Texas Cities and been arrested by several officers throughout the state
Officer Chapman: Public servant, protects and serves the people of Galveston, a good, honorable man
Once you have learned this, Chris you would have learned much. Now learn your first lesson, Grasshopper. Master Po has much to teach you.[beam]

Chris Gimenez

You're too much Carlos. I suppose with age comes the idea that some know everything and of course that's a big fallacy. With age often comes the inability to suffer the facts without blowing a gasket.

Turner has the legal and lawful right to do what he did. Sgt. Chapman on the other hand did not hence the felony charge. As for the ridiculous-and I do mean ridiculous comment that we should call an activist rather than 911-it proves my point that some people can't handle the truth so they resort to hyperbole. From my perspective, calling a bad cop is worse than calling no cops. I've lived in Bayou Vista for too many years to not understand that truth. What Sgt. Chapman did was not the mistake of a rookie officer so I'm not sure at what point-if at all-Carlos and George would ever see an instance where police should be held accountable.

To Carlos' previous comment about waiting until after the trial-there won't be a trial. This felony will be dismissed covertly just like the felony against former TC officer John Thorn. And of course George abjectly refused to state whether he thought the very serious FELONY child abuse charge against Thorn should have been dismissed without going to trial. But it's clear at this point that George and Carlos would look the other way no matter what so kind of hard to argue the facts with mindsets like that.[cool]

Carlos Ponce

Wrong answer, Grasshopper. Go back and study Lesson 1. You have much to learn.

George Croix

Need help, call an 'activist'.....

As long as trash are in the streets protesting and in the news advocating for killing Police I hope our Law Enforcement err on the side of caution, and don't wait until something besides feelings get hurt to take action...
What a bleeped up mess it's become when attention seeking jerks can run the gamut from attacks to threats to inciting and get good press and even a payday out of it....or an army of 'Justice Dept.' lawyers trying to make a case to save somebody's face....
I hope our Law Enforcement people realize that not everyone wants their hide. Some of us appreciate that they don't get to wait until Monday to be a quarterback...

George Croix

"....ever see an instance where police should be held accountable."
Talk about hyperbole.....
Feel free to let your own experiences paint your opinion of as many other law enforcement entities as you want, Chris. No law against that. I might even do the same....maybe......
But even a cursory reading of my comments show a general appreciation, and thus more far reaching than just local departments or politics, for not just this Officer's efforts to find out what some character with an attitude was doing but also for all Law enforcement doing so. They do not sign a suicide pact upon employment, and the country is currently 'enjoying' outbreaks of the type of trash that calls for bloodshed of our law enforcement personnel.....something perhaps not happening in Bayou Vista, or even in the DA's office, but it is ongoing in other places.....
That's my opinion.....that it does not match yours or anyone else's does not matter in the slightest to me, and does not make me willing to accept any activities by Police, either.....each case to it's own....
I hope the Officer in question get's off scott-free, and that the 'activist' gets his eventual comeupance....
But, that's just me.....

Chris Gimenez

Fair enough George. I just want to make sure I understand your position(s).

1. You believe in the First Amendment but only under certain circumstances and local police can decide to ignore or violate depending on where you are, what color you are, and whether they just feel like jacking you up.

2. No "activist" should be afforded First Amendment rights just because you don't like activists. Especially black ones. Especially black ones with video cameras even though a white activist with a video camera is doing the exact same thing at the exact same time and at the exact same place and the white one is allowed to keep on filming and isn't falsely arrested or illegally has his vehicle searched.

3. You have no problem with law enforcement conducting illegal searches of your person and your property if that's what they think they need to do and of course they should be able to determine that on a case-by-case basis rather than what the law allows or permits.

4. If law enforcement appears to be held accountable for unlawful conduct you think they should get a pass because you respect the badge even though they obviously don't.

5. If a law-abiding citizen exercises his rights-and nothing more than his rights-under this state's laws and refuses to obey UNLAWFUL orders from law enforcement then he "has an attitude" that needs to be adjusted by a thug cop.

You know George, the mindset that you and Carlos and the currently-indicted-on-a-felony-criminal-trespass-charge Sgt. Chapman have is more frightening and threatening to the republic than anything Mr. Turner has done. Chapman's a thug cop with a belief that he can do anything he wants regardless of the laws or citizen's rights and he needs to be held accountable as a lesson to others who wear a badge and maintain that same mindset. You and Carlos can spin "the facts" any way you want but it won't change what they are.

Carlos Ponce

Calling Sgt. Chapman a "thug cop" is VERY WRONG.[thumbdown]

Chris Gimenez

Kicking someone in the head with your boots while they're lying face down in the sand and the surf is VERY WRONG.

http://www.courthousenews.com/2013/08/13/60212.htm

Falsely arresting someone and then illegally searching their property and vehicle is VERY WRONG.

We all know your stance on the criminal conduct of Sgt. Chapman. It doesn't change the facts of what he did.[thumbup]

Carlos Ponce

Chris must be a member of the ACLU - American Criminal Liberties Union.
Let's see, Reggie Davis was sleeping in his car on Seawall Blvd which you cannot do, was asked by police to leave the car and place his hands atop the car. Instead he threw something into the water then jumped into the surf. 1:45am was a little early to go swimming don't you think? The video shows four officers on the scene arresting Reginald Deon Davis described by Chief Poretto as "having a lengthy criminal history with the Galveston Police Department, including two felony drug convictions." Davis also was arrested in 2006 on a charge of assault of a public servant. The video in question shows four officers trying to subdue Davis who was "fighting with the officer and of landing an elbow to the officer’s face," according to the GCDN. Oh gee, the man was fighting police and got hurt.
“He put officers’ lives at risk,” Porretto said.
Porretto had the matter investigated internally before a complaint was filed. He said he doesn’t tolerate any excessive use of force. None of the officers was disciplined, as their actions were within guidelines of the department, he said. “Police work is dirty sometimes,” Porretto said. “Of course, it looks terrible. It is what it GCDN
An internal police investigation completed before Davis filed a complaint determined that officers used necessary force, Porretto said. Houston Chronicle
Reginald Davis record also shows arrests in Webster County, Texas
"I fought the law and the LAW won", is the way I see the video. How's the lawsuit against Galveston PD going? Reggie has died.Died last year two years after the incident. Result of his "unique" lifestyle of being on the wrong side of the law perhaps.
As to the rest of your diatribe under American law aSgt Chapman is innocent until proven guilty but Judge Gimenez has already tried the officer and found that he was "Falsely arresting someone and then illegally searching their property and vehicle". I say Let the trial begin. In the Reggie Davis case the incident was investigated and no officer was reprimanded, "heir actions were within guidelines of the department" and Gimenez disagrees with their findings. I see a pattern now.

Carlos Ponce

Let's see what other GCDN readers thought of the 2013 incident. None of the comments were made by you nor I.
posted at 5:42 am on Tue, Aug 13, 2013.Fine job GPD! This was a big guy and he's still able to walk away, he wasn't hurt too bad. I agree with Chief Porretto and am glad to see him stand behind his troops.
posted at 10:11 am on Tue, Aug 13, 2013.If the investigation proved that the treatment was not violating anyone's civil rights or there was no evidence of brutality - then I would think it is on the level. No reason to beleive otherwise.No one should feel they need to run but tell me why has this guy repeatedly assaulted officers and either had it dismissed or plea bargined out???? Officers know who are turds and who aren't.
posted at 11:08 am on Tue, Aug 13, 2013.From the video I saw he looked impaired, on something, drugs or alcohol. And asleep, more like passed out. Good job GPD.

Chris Gimenez

Well Carlos, if we're going to use reader's comments as the litmus test for this why don't you read these.

http://thepolicenews.net/default.aspx/act/newsletter.aspx/newsletterid/59502/category/News+1-2/MenuGroup/Home.htm

Polar opposite of yours, Keith Gray's, and George's and it appears several of these come from LE officers who apparently understand that what Chapman did was illegal.

As for GPD investigating GPD and finding that GPD did nothing wrong, that's the same as Loretta Lynch investigating Obama and Hillary and finding they've done nothing wrong. It's the exact outcome we would expect from people like that.

Houston PD is currently being sued by a group of plaintiffs who allege that HPD investigated all the fatal shootings by HPD and found that-you guessed it, they were all justified. A federal judge has just denied the HPD attorneys request to dismiss the suit and if the plaintiff's win this it will by YUUUUGE! because HPD will not have immunity if proven there is a pattern of covering up bad shootings.

I'm going to share something with you Carlos that very few people know except for the majority of the public. When police investigate themselves they invariably find themselves to be not guilty of misconduct or criminal behavior UNLESS there is a video recording (as in the murder by Officer Michael Slager) or public pressure or it simply can't be hidden from the public. Otherwise, we all know what the outcome is always going to be.

Look Carlos, we all know you support cops who violate their oaths and commit criminal acts and that's okay. Officers like Chapman and DA's like Roady need people like you to help keep them in office and behind the badge.
[beam][beam]

Carlos Ponce

After the 2013 incident, the matter was investigated, the officers were found to be operating within department guidelines. No disciplinary action taken nor needed. But “Vigilante Gimenez” sees things different. Are you going to lynch the officer, Chris? Watch out sheriff, he’s got a rope! And so far Loretta Lynch seems to be doing an adequate job nailing Hillary, just dragging her feet a bit. Did you see the FOX interview with her?
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/is-there-any-double-standard-foxs-baier-grills-loretta-lynch-on-hillary-emails/
Unlike you I’ll reserve judgment on the Attorney General until I see a flagrant show of favoritism towards Hilla the Hun.
One day you will know the truth. Sgt. Chapman is a GOOD man, he's on the streets of Galveston to protect and serve and doing a good job. Police should be scrutinized and he was.In 2013 no problem. In the recent incident, let the trial begin.

Chris Gimenez

The matter "was investigated" by the GPD Carlos. Nobody in their right mind expected an outcome other than what it was. As for being a vigilante, Carlos you've lost any semblance of understanding the difference between right and wrong so I won't bother with giving you the definition of vigilante.

Keep on displaying your boot-licking servitude to that group in law enforcement who think they're above the law. Chapman is OFF the streets right now and that's a good thing. As for the trial, it won't happen. The charge will be dismissed and I'll be watching for that because the GCDN won't report on it.

Chris Gimenez

So Carlos, did you read the comments from the link I gave you or are you so entrenched in your thinking that you only read and listen to what supports your narrative? You may fancy yourself to be an educated thinker but your comments here prove otherwise.

Carlos Ponce

The writers based their statements from the Chronicle and PINAC articles so there is really nothing of substance there.

Chris Gimenez

Nice dodge Carlos but completely feckless. The Chronicle article is substantially different from the GCDN article? The people responding to the local online edition of the Police News are less informed than you or Keith Gray or George? There are none so blind as those who will not see. I guess you're feeling pretty beat up about now Carlos so I'll stop hammering you with the facts and let you go wallow in your abject inability to deal with reality.

Carlos Ponce

There are TWO links on the page the PINAC article was one sided and biased. Not feckless by realistic. Let the officer have his trial Chris. Don't be his judge, jury and executioner.Presumption of innocence is not an interesting concept, it's the basis of jurisprudence in the United States.

Chris Gimenez

I noticed you didn't actually state what was biased in the PINAC article but I understand why. I did see they identified his charge as a misdemeanor but court records show it to be a felony so maybe that's what you meant. As for the comments, not a one of them could be summarily dismissed because you think one of the links was somehow biased. That's a cop-out. No pun intended. What your comment does prove is that you can't handle the truth when it doesn't fit your own beliefs, opinions, and narratives. Pretty sad indeed.

And I'm not pretending to be the judge, jury, and executioner and that comment shows you're out of blanks while trying to justify your failed and baseless position. You're the one who keeps saying Mr. Turner is the one at fault so maybe your presumption of innocence stance is the biased one in this instance.

Carlos Ponce

"I noticed you didn't actually state what was biased in the PINAC article." If you cannot see the BIAS then that's part of your problem. That or you need a reading lesson. "And I'm not pretending to be the judge, jury, and executioner" Then wait until after the trial. You have already condemned the officer as if you were the high and mighty. Sorry Gimenez but you're just a police hater. [ohmy]

Chris Gimenez

You're a gutless liar Carlos. Just like Doyle Beard. You two can't stand the facts so you're only recourse is to lie and make baseless accusations. I've hammered you with facts and your lies about the law and about the incident are documented here for everyone to see. Just an old coward who can't handle the truth.

Carlos Ponce

Quit crying Chris. You have provided no facts.Unfortunate there are police haters in the world.What's the problem Chris, when you were a child did the your parents make you behave by threatening to take you to the police? Did the sight of Matt Dillon taking down a bad guy on a Gunsmoke re-run frighten you? Was Clint Eastwood in Dirty Harry just a little too dirty for you? You have a problem Chris. I hope you resolve it and quit defending the real bad guys in the world. And bloviating does not make you right, just boisterous.

Chris Gimenez

Right Carlos, you're the hero because you can't differentiate between right and wrong. Same philosophy as Black Lives Matter. My parents obviously had higher moral standards than yours because they taught me to stand up for those in the right even if I didn't agree with them.

According to the facts the bad guy in this incident has been charged with a felony just in case your blind ignorance kept you from seeing that. I bet you're the kind of person who'd lie to protect bad cops because "you respect the badge". That's not courage, that's cowardice and you wear it well.

Carlos Ponce

I know right from wrong, It's so sad to see an adult who hates police.And Chris, being charged is not the same as a conviction. Anybody, anything can be indicted. And you are ready to make the leap that he is guilty? How presumptuous. As I keep posting, "Let the trial begin." At least one thing, your posts on the GCDN will keep you off this man's jury since you've already convicted him in your mind.

George Croix

As i have already said, Chris, but you ignore my words, my comments have been about THIS incident/activist/jerk in particular and the trials of Law Enforcement in general in a time when they are threatened with harm and even death as part of a 'movement; by the perpetually agrieved, and have to put up with clowns out to do nothing more than precipitate an incident for another 5 minutes of fame, or a payday in court....slimey....
Take all the umbrage you want about anything, and write up all the what I-must-have-meant 'position's you want. I stand by what I said, and would cheerfully repeat it in person to any and all parties involved, as I try hard to stand behind whatever I post.
Again, I sincerely hope the Officer gets his case wiped clean and the 'activist' gets a case of laryngitis.....or maybe even a few working, non-trouble making for show brain cells.....
This is no more a case of 'First Amendment rights' than it is a case of canned baked beans...It's all about a character, a repeated one, looking to bait the Police, get mouthy when asked to cooperate, then get some air/paper time, then find a willing mouthpiece and civil sue. imho
Jerks have Constitutional rights, too, but Police don't have the luxury of powdering every 'activists' behind when so many of them are likely these days to try to draw blood or worse, and even a 5 year old knows, at leats the ones taught manners, to listen to the Police and not be a smart mouth with them.
I heartily endorse that teaching to all.

I feel terrible for having made you feel frightened and threatened, Chris....get well soon.....

Chris Gimenez

Hey George, I'm re-posting what I wrote since it got past you the first time. You haven't frightened me or threatened me-at least not in the sense that Mr. Turner obviously frightened Sgt. Chapman and the rest of the pack that went after Turner. I was speaking in a broader perspective when I referred "to the republic". Guess it's getting harder for you to separate what you read from what was written as you dig your heels into supporting the criminal conduct of Sgt. Chapman.

"You know George, the mindset that you and Carlos and the currently-indicted-on-a-felony-criminal-trespass-charge Sgt. Chapman have is more frightening and threatening to the republic than anything Mr. Turner has done."

So I understand clearly what you hope the outcome will be and as bizarre as it is, you're not alone. However, separating facts from fiction and reality from perception sometimes requires us to put aside our own biases. This grand jury wasn't a "ham sandwich" any more than any other grand jury. They make decisions based on what is either presented or not presented to them and knowing the specimen that Jack Roady is, I would be surprised if he didn't minimize the facts as much as possible in an effort to get a no-bill.

I happen to think that any time we can get criminal cops off the street it's a good thing for everyone. Sounds like you and I will just have to agree to disagree on that point.

Doyle Beard

just another law hater although you try to pretend otherwise.

Chris Gimenez

Beard, I think you're pretty much known as mental lightweight on this forum and usually incapable of stringing together more than a dozen words at a time so your comment perpetuates your reputation.

I know this is going to blow your comprehension skills to smithereens but I'll ask anyway. The comments on the Police News from those in law enforcement who were quite critical of Chapman's stupidity, are they also "law haters"? Have you always been incapable of understanding the difference between right and wrong or is that a more recent occurrence?

Doyle Beard

doesnt take many words to describe one like you. You have put out hate many times against law enforcement people.

George Croix

They were your words, Chris, not mine.
We're done.
I don't do attitude except in person......feel free to stop by for a cold Diet Coke and we'll discuss it.....
Bring Fritos.....

Chris Gimenez

OMG, a Diet Coke? Do you know how bad that stuff is for you? Take a look at this.

http://www.health.com/health/gallery/0,,20739512,00.html

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.