what lawful basis was there for you to ask for her ID somebody what do you have to have legally do you know I do not know the law legally okay doesn't there have to be reasonable suspicion that the person committed a criminal offense or violated a law because I'm gonna I don't know the law exactly you don't know when an officer is a lot of detain somebody Sergeant Jennifer Larson and Lieutenant Donald milazzo both police officers that had served for over 20 years being deposed for the illegal apprehension and arrest of a woman named Samantha AKA pink camera Magic on YouTube who had been recording at the Cook County courthouse building from outside ma'am you know this is a public building exactly that's why I'm recording it it's also a court facility yep which there is a Judicial law or judicial order that says that you cannot tape this building can I see that order yes come on in we're gonna check your IDs too oh and I'm not going out oh yeah no no we're gonna want you too no that's all right get your name we're gonna do a report and everything so come on in um no no yeah you're gonna come in now am I being detained yes for what because right now we you are doing something suspicious that's not a reason to detain anybody well it is for Donna come on it's really not what's going on he's gonna stay here and continue recording okay you're gonna come in and we're gonna find out who you are and what you're doing here no you're not okay all right who's got cuffs she does not want to go agreeably the interaction begins with Lieutenant milazzo approaching Samantha and stating that she can't record in a public building and that is enough reason for him to detain her as she didn't provide her ID but what milazzo doesn't know is that what he's doing is actually illegal as it is completely legal to take photographs or film public places in all states unless oral conversations are recorded which is not the case here okay I'm being detained for just taking pictures of the building yes ma'am you're doing something suspicious and we need to know who you are and why you're doing it okay are you familiar with First Amendment yeah yeah come on I tried to do this nicely you are aware of Homeland Security right after noticing multiple times that he was being recorded malazo finally decided to aggressively grab Samantha's camera with which she was recording him to later detain her and take her inside [Music] that includes my camera as far as um familiar with the Fourth Amendment oh great why do we always get the crazies I don't know that second person in the scene the one wearing the body cam is Sergeant Jennifer Larson in which she and Lieutenant melazzo don't seem to realize is that what they are doing is absolutely outside the boundaries of the law and that Samantha knows that denying yet again showing her ID Samantha notices that Lieutenant melazzo is doing something Shady with her camera delete my footage it is only making it worse do you want to give us an ID I'm amazing silent I don't get sent to searches if this wasn't enough the officers then mockingly laugh at her after she invokes her right to remain silent I don't know every every crazy loon in the building is coming tonight we're asking for an idea well don't report you go on your way with your camera otherwise I'm going to confiscate the camera and we're going to take it outside because you're suspicious I'm remaining silent seeing no cooperation on her side the officers then decide to give Samantha an ultimatum in an attempt to finally settle the situation this is your choice you can either give us an ID so that we could do a report on this and find out who you are or we're going to take you in front of the presided judge it's going to hold you in contempt means that he can hold you for as long as he wants remaining silent okay that's cool ten minutes went by and then Lieutenant milazzo finally came back with news or better called threads against Samantha Who as everyone should do just remained in silence okay he's gonna hold her in contempt for right now he's doing 90 days okay so is that okay with you remain in silence okay but you realize you're going to go to Cook County Jail for 90 days okay okay you have an option all you have to do is show us an ID so that we could do a report and we'll let you go on your way I have an option yeah we told you that before because right now you're just obstructed what you're expecting us from doing our job I'm remaining silent all right cuffer let's get her purse and get her stuff I don't consent to searches well we don't care anymore okay Samantha was finally handcuffed and arrested for obstruction to later be freed without any charges but what the officers are unaware of is that not only did they commit an illegal act but multiple unlawful detainment intimidation illegal arrest dereliction of Duty unlawful search and destruction of private property shortly after Samantha was able to hire one of the best lawyers in the country and sued Cook County for multiple civil rights violations the case has been going on for a few years now and the conclusion is not yet known but a part of all of this that we have is the following footage of both the deposition of lieutenant so and Sergeant Jennifer Larson what unfolded and the following never before seen footage is one of the biggest and most shocking proofs of ignorance of the law and ineptitude in police history is it against the law to take pictures of a courthouse from outside no not that I know is it lawful to arrest somebody for taking pictures outside of the courthouse of the courthouse okay is there something yeah okay sorry are you familiar with this case at all which case the case that brings us here today that you're testifying in yes okay and and in a nutshell what's the case about I would say that Amanda is I guess I called you to say that she was uh outside videoing when she shouldn't have been so she's saying we violated her Amendment rights you're correct um when you say when she shouldn't have been what does that mean was she doing something wrong just something unusual but us as officers would consider unusual unusual okay having shown zero knowledge of the law Samantha's lawyer then decides to push Sergeant Jennifer further to try to make her slip even more um depending on where you are in the country Mormons are unusual right depending on where you are it might be unusual to see a Mormon do you get to detain Mormons in those places I don't I don't know people detain Mormons I don't know if they detain Mormons would it be lawful just because it's unusual no I don't okay is there something unlawful about recording outside of a building I'm sorry what was the question let me ask you this was Miss doing anything illegal when she was detained I know I would say it was not illegal unusual talking about unusual things the statement that follows is something a police officer should never even be allowed to say in order to detain somebody what do you have to have legally do you know I do not know the law legally and if you still think that at least Lieutenant milazzo knew what he was doing well you're wrong what would you do if one of those people said to you what's the difference between arrest and detain what would your answer be illegal Mr Gorman seated to your left no Sheriff has their own legal oh okay their own legal who helps them understand things like the difference between arrest and detained yes gotcha was there a lawful basis to handcuff her yes okay what was that lawful base officer safety here Lieutenant milazzo has just confirmed not to know the difference between an arrest and a detainment an occasion in which if they need help he indicates they just go ahead and call the office's lawyer to help them the question remains then how can someone work 27 years as a police officer and not know the law did you have any reasonable suspicion that she was committing a crime we had reasonable sufficient to ask her what she was doing and why she was doing it just to get who she was and why you and I agree on that that you had the right to ask her whatever you wanted to ask her did you have the right to put her in handcuffs offices safety for the security of the officers yes okay what made her a threat her refusing to give any information that was requested of her was she legally obligated to give that information when an officer has asked her for security purposes to give her identity up yes we do have the right to ask for an identity of somebody for our safety 20 years of service and Sergeant Larson believes that she's not safe unless she runs your name not the kind of cop I would like to encounter if I'm being pulled over have you ever heard of something called the Terry search or a Terry Frisk I have okay what is that um I'm not going to say exactly I don't know the law okay seeing how she has no clue of anything related to law Samantha's lawyer then decides to make up a hypothetical scenario to further prove his point on how wrong the arrest was police officer goes over to somebody on the street let's call the person Mr plaintiff Okay police officer goes to Mr plaintiff and says hey let me see your ID and Mr plaintiff says uh no is the officer now allowed to put Mr plaintiff in handcuffs and detain him hello jacked it's a hypothetical and calls for speculation yeah foreign I do believe yes for officer safety they do have the right doesn't there have to be reasonable suspicion that the person committed a criminal offense or violated a law because I'm gonna I I don't know the law exactly at least we saw so far how Jennifer takes responsibility and accepts that she doesn't know the law in big contrast to her Lieutenant who instead pretends not to understand any of the questions the lawyer asks and makes fun of the situation if you could go back in time to the day that you arrested her would you still arrest her so you're asking me if I can go back in time yeah I don't know how I could do that okay did you understand my question I did and you're asking me to suppose whether or not I can go back in time I can't so you can't tell me if you would still arrest her I can't tell you what would happen on that day if I went back in time now okay um are you is this an attempt to be funny not a bit are you trying to answer my questions I'm trying to answer your question you really can't figure this out because you can't wrap your head around time travel again I mean is getting to be harassing again I mean is this what the question is hypothetical time travel backwards is that really how you interpreted the question is that what you're asking if you could go back in time would you do it differently is that not what you're asking yeah that is what I asked him going back to Sergeant Jennifer the interrogation continues and her responses don't get any better as time goes on is there any reasonable suspicion that she was committing a crime yes or no [Music] not sure what she was doing okay so if you don't know what somebody's doing do you have reasonable suspicion that they're doing anything in particular no but we have a reasonable response to ask what she was doing right agreed you could ask her what she's doing and when she refuses to answer are you now allowed to detain her yes who told you this that you get to detain people who are videoing and refuse to identify themselves when asked thank you that is the face of someone getting caught being held accountable and humiliated for their illicit actions despite always refusing to admit that she had done wrong everything was captured on camera and the answer is clear as water at this point but this is not over as in complete opposite to Sergeant Larson Lieutenant milazzo wasn't going to go down without a fight are you familiar with the fourth amendment by the way vaguely what does it say in your own vague terms no illegal search and seizure all right unless there's probable cause or that's a bottle I know okay all right good enough he said that's about all I know all right um now there was somebody else who asked you the same question that I just asked you about your familiarity with the Fourth Amendment uh who's in this room right now do you know who that person was let's just ask you that didn't she I don't recall she asked you are you familiar with the Fourth Amendment you don't remember that no Lieutenant milazzo admits not to recall neither the location in which this happened nor who actually asked him when in reality all of us know that it was Samantha and he's just playing dumb and everything was recorded as we saw before okay call your lawyer that includes my camera as far as um consent well it's already yeah it's really the Fourth Amendment why do we always get the crease after recalling the incident the lawyer brings up his offensive comment towards Samantha at the time if I tell you that your answer was oh great why do we always get the crazies would you dispute that no does that sound like something you would say to somebody that's something I did say that day yes so you remember saying that yes okay do you remember saying that in response to the question are you familiar with the Fourth Amendment no I just remember saying it why is it that you felt she was one of the crazies people acted a way that not in their best interest how is she acting that was not in her best interest while at any time all she had to do was identify herself we could have done our report all you have to do is show us an ID so that we could do a report and let you go on your way written everything could have gone the own and if if somebody were to threaten you that unless you comply with their demands they're gonna put you in handcuffs would you automatically necessarily comply with their demands yes you would also speculation he was able to answer so you would so even if uh even if there's somebody who is acting as a law enforcement officer giving you an unlawful order threatening you with detainment or arrest or 90 days jail if you don't comply with their unlawful demands you would still comply yes alrighty is that what you expected her to do to comply having heard multiple times the need for a person to identify himself when requested by a police officer the lawyer then decides to question Lieutenant milazzo further in the topic is there a law that requires people to identify themselves when requested by law enforcement asked if he deleted the files from his camera he blatantly denies it despite it all having been recorded by the body cam the sergeant had at the moment did you delete her pictures no by the time you got in front of Judge Peter Felice they were deleted weren't they as far as I know they were still on there grabbed her camera away from her outside did you not yes from that point until you were in front of Judge Peter Felice did she ever hold her camera again no okay so you had it the entire time yes didn't judge Peter Felice talk to you about whether the pictures had been deleted he asked for the the memory thing so he could delete them he asked for the memory thing so he could delete them not only did milazzo prove the lawyer's point of the pictures being deleted but he also had just involved a judge in the same illicit act he's being accused for you just said that he asked you for the memory card because he wanted to delete the pictures is that your testimony yes okay and if he were to testify at some point in time that he absolutely categorically did not delete those pictures then would you want to change your answer as to whether you or one of your folded I'm gonna object calls for speculation you don't want to hit custody of the camera but me would it have been lawful for you to delete her pictures I don't know but what do you think are you allowed to go over to people's pictures and delete them no without a court order no right that would be a violation of which amendment do you know no if up until now he had been able to resist when questioned about his unlawful actions against Samantha when she requested a lawyer after being arrested was the last nail in the coffin for lieutenant melazzo what do you do if somebody says they want to talk to a lawyer and you have them in handcuffs we allow him to call a lawyer did you ask them questions depends on the case oh I got you okay tell me the case in which you would continue to ask questions of somebody in custody after they asked for a lawyer if we're doing an investigation we're going to ask I got you okay do you know which amendment it is that allows people to demand a lawyer you have any idea no have you ever read anybody the Miranda Rights no you've never read anybody they're Miranda rights no have you ever arrested anybody no other than Ms brookquist no um and uh and you don't know the Miranda Rights yeah not offhand though all right um when you arrest somebody you have to advise them that they have the right to remain silent yes do you have to advise them that they have the right to an attorney yes do you have to advise them that if they cannot afford an attorney one will be provided to them yes okay um now what if somebody says yes I want to talk to an attorney do you get to keep asking them questions or do you have to call a lawyer for them before you want to ask any more questions I don't know you don't know you don't know if you're allowed to keep asking questions of somebody in custody after they ask for a lawyer Cook County Sheriff's 27 years 27 years I imagine you only became a lieutenant recently no how long ago did you become a lieutenant 22 years ago you've been a lieutenant for 22 years and you don't know the Miranda Rights the case remains open but this is immaculate evidence proving how wrong the police officers were against Samantha if you enjoyed this video watch this one and we'll see you next time