But she’s claiming that it is in the video when it isn’t. That’s not prevaricating, it’s worse; it is completely contradicted by the video. If she was making the claim that the video didn’t capture it because the footage doesn’t show it all, that would be different. But that’s not what she’s saying. Honestly it seems bizarre to me that she didn’t just say that.
Again, I’ll repeat the quote…
Snopes asked Jones if she had additional video footage that might support those particular claims. In response, Jones claimed “the video shows” that her husband and children were at the top of the stairs. In reality, neither her husband nor her children are shown in the footage at all.
She is literally saying “the video shows it”. What don’t you get about that?
You can’t see her family upstairs. Maybe she could see them upstairs. This is an incredibly fine point to criticize her for.
What you can see is the cops pointing the guns upstairs and talking to people upstairs. If she could also see the people upstairs–or knew they were there–it’s not remotely surprising that she’d claim the video showed that.
You’re right that the video doesn’t literally show that, if by “show” you mean “visually prove” instead of “demonstrate”. Again, that’s an extremely small point on which to hang a charge of prevarication on.
It looks like Mrs. Jones was in the front doorway, underneath the staircase. I don’t think she could see who was standing on the stairs, she saw the officer point his gun up towards the staircase at :023 seconds. It must have been traumatic if she thought her husband and children were standing on the staircase at that time - the video does not show them there, but it doesn’t show the top of the staircase.
~Max
Are we assuming (or do we know) that she made those statements after she reviewed the video?
I know there’s been a handful of times that something in my store happened and I told people it was on camera, only to find out later that it happened just out of frame.
But in any case, I get that she claimed it was on video and it’s not on any of the video that’s been released, but it doesn’t seem fair to her invoke the ‘pics or it didn’t happen’ clause.
I’m sure the police body cams will clear up any confusion, right?
Body cams are optional under Florida law but there are regulations if a police department decides to use them. On the other hand it appears that these are FDLE agents, not local police. I don’t know whether they are required to wear cameras.
~Max
I meant that mostly as a joke. It seems like body cams tend to malfunction when they don’t support the police.
As of October of this year, the DOJ “permits” FLDE officers to wear body cameras when executing search warrants, and when local police require it.
~Max
I don’t claim prevarication, which is someone being evasive. She’s not being evasive at all. She’s claiming something that’s false.
She made the charged claim that guns were literally pointed at her face and her children. That is her tweet. Her video doesn’t show that. You agree with me about that.
So when asked if she had other video that does show that, she replies that no, her previously-presented video shows it. That’s false. It’s not a fine point, that’s significant. It’s like saying that you have video showing a ballot worker throwing away valid ballots, and you show a video where a guy tosses an empty envelope after removing a ballot from it. When asked whether you have other video showing ballot tossing, you insist that’s what your video is showing. At that point people are right to be skeptical of your election fraud claims.
This was third-world police state intimidation, plain and simple. She refused to participate in providing false propaganda to the public; So she had to be punished and an example made, so that others would stay in line.
Police state.
I would give regular people in this situation some slack in regards to their memories. If guns are being pointed around my house, my thinking is not going to be super clear. It’s common for panic response to take over rational thought in situations like these. But regardless, there are lots of bad things which can accidentally happen when guns are drawn. What might have happened if her confused kid started running down the stairs while the officer was pointing a gun in that direction? Or the husband tripped and fell towards the officer? Or a host of other things which might fluster the officer while he had his gun out? Was that really a situation where a drawn gun was necessary? This wasn’t a drug bust. This was serving a warrant for data analyst.
I don’t think this is a significant point at all. “Shows” it in the sense of visually proves it? No. But if she knows her husband and kids were upstairs, and the video shows the cops pointing the gun upstairs and talking to her husband, she may consider that the inference you need to draw is incredibly tiny.
Technically she misspoke, but hardly in a way that calls her credibility into question.
We’ll see, there is no evidence any of her claims are correct. It’s all her word which now is suspect.
The only thing the state is proven to have done which is BS is send a tactical force to serve a simple warrant, which was clearly overkill, and that definitely looks like intimidation to me.
But no forcible entry means no raid, no evidence of guns pointed at kids, or anyone’s faces, or any actual person, and so far all we have is her word about the propaganda. Maybe she’s a wronged whistleblower, and she’s trying to get the truth out to her peril. Maybe she’s full of shit.
No, it is not “suspect”. Your opinion does not have any impact on the veracity of her words. Your opinion is worth… not a great deal in this case.
You mean the facts that I’ve explained. I understand. I know better than to try to work on blind spots of forumites.
ETA: What facts do you have to counter mine? Any of you? Can you prove Snopes wrong here?
Some people, I swear. Get all bent out of shape and emotional when armed and unfriendly people enter their homes. Why, the police even went to the trouble to reassure her by going “up and out” with their weapons, alert and ready if any antifas fanatics spring out of the linen closet!
For fuck’s sake, Snopes called the claim “mostly true,” with the caveat that the evidence wasn’t 100% rock-solid. You’re splitting a very fine hair here, and it looks like your first statement backed you into a corner that you’re too proud to get out of.
Shrug. You’re not the first person who’s done that on the board.
Interesting.
Here, routinely drawing a weapon for search warrants would be disciplinable.
The same test is used for drawing a weapon as for discharging it: handguns can only be drawn if there are reasonable grounds to believe it is necessary to prevent loss of life or serious bodily harm.
Executing a search warrant on a private dwelling house for a non-violent offence wouldn’t meet that test.
Side-note: last year, I Googled the rules of engagement for police in Georgia, and was pleasantly surprised by how specific and cautious they were: police could only draw their weapons under extremely limited circumstances that demonstrated real danger. I linked to those results to show how certain cops had overstepped their authority.
Someone gently pointed out that I’d found the rules of engagement for the country of Georgia.
Turns out that ex-Soviet states have way more reasonable rules for their cops than the US does.
GOP lawyer appointed by Florida governor resigns in protest over raid on ousted data scientist’s home.
Paywalled, but here’s the first three paragraphs.
A Republican lawyer resigned Tuesday from a Florida judicial panel in objection to police raiding the home of a data scientist. That scientist was previously ousted from the state health department in what she has characterized as retribution for objecting to unethical requests during the pandemic.
Ron Filipkowski, who served on a nominating commission for the state’s 12th Circuit, wrote in a pointed resignation letter to Gov. Ron DeSantis’s general counsel that he considered the search warrant executed on Rebekah Jones’s home “unconscionable.” He also said it was indicative of the state’s “reckless and irresponsible” handling of the coronavirus pandemic.
“It just seems like it’s not really about any kind of criminal investigation,” Filipkowski told The Washington Post. “It’s about intimidation of her and sending a message to people currently working in state government that ‘This could be you.’ ”
Bolding of the last sentence mine.