Storm chaser arrested in Texas

[J Kinkaid]

Has this ever happened to anybody else ?Brian Barnes was arrested today while chasing in Texas

http://www.kwes.com/global/story.asp?s=8286980

[Steve Miller OK]

Is he the same guy hanging out the window of a tour van shown in these pictures (http://hamwx.blogspot.com/2008/05/new-tour-feature.html)?

[Eric Treece]

Shane, you should post this link in the LEO forum..........looks like this guy wasn't doing anything wrong except sitting there watching the storm. Get their take on why this guy was arrested given the circumstances of the case.

EDIT: On second thought.............IF THAT was the guy, stupid is as stupid does.

[Tyler Allison]

Lesson learned here? Officer asks you to leave..you close your mouth and leave. You can complain about it later.

[Mikey Gribble]

That is phenomenal. What the hell is wrong with that guy. Who do these morons think does the reporting for TV stations and the NWS. Forget about the reporting and other good things chasers do out there. Do these kinds of people not understand that we have every right in the world to watch a storm, regardless of what county it's in. That is a total abuse of authority and IMO when you have a cop that has problems excercising common sense and restraint they ought to have their badge yanked. You can't have a person in that position that is willing to bully other people and abuse the special authority they have been entrusted with. What a joke.
I probably would have ended up going to jail for battery too because I think I would have a hard time not fighting with the guy when he tried to cuff me. I would be more than a little pissed off if I was on the recieving end of that screw job. I hope that cop gets what he deserves, but I'm sure nothing will happen to him.

[Tyler Allison]

That is phenomenal. What the hell is wrong with that guy. Who do these morons think does the reporting for TV stations and the NWS. Forget about the reporting and other good things chasers do out there. Do these kinds of people not understand that we have every right in the world to watch a storm, regardless of what county it's in.

True.

That is a total abuse of authority

Probably...we don't have all the details

and IMO when you have a cop that has problems excercising common sense and restraint they ought to have their badge yanked.

True..but it's not your job to yank it. That's the court's job.

You can't have a person in that position that is willing to bully other people and abuse the special authority they have been entrusted with. What a joke. I probably would have ended up going to jail for battery too because I think I would have a hard time not fighting with the guy when he tried to cuff me.

Wow...You better learn to control that anger or you'll end up more than in jail. You fight with a cop he has the right to shoot you. The proper thing to do is take it up in court...not on the street.

[Dan Cook]

Looks like Brian's a guide for Silver Lining Tours:

http://www.silverliningtours.com/silver2/Guides.htm#brian

[Dustin Wilcox]

Lesson learned here? Officer asks you to leave..you close your mouth and leave.

Screw that, officer tells you to jump off a bridge do you do it? As long as you're on public property not breaking any rules (appears this guy was not) they can't do anything, hell this guy gets a good attorney he'll probably end up making money in civil court, hopefully if he was indeed not breaking any rules he had the camera rolling...

[Warren Faidley]

Wow, I was on the same storm.... but l did not run into this... thankfully. I think this deputy went by me on the way to a brush fire call.

Yes, something "like" this happened several years ago near Silverton (?). There was a local deputy or city cop (?) who had it in for chasers. Never heard what happened to him.

The guy who was arrested yesterday, really needs to go after this deputy once the case is dismissed, not before, believe me on this. He should file a complaint with both the County Attorney's office and the local department's IA. Of course, he should only do this if indeed he did not commit a crime or moving violation. I'm guessing the prosecutor will at least want a moving violation to save face and future litigation against them for wrongful arrest. He was VERY lucky there were witnesses.

W.

Edit: The really upsetting thing about this is the cost. It's likely to run him anywhere from $500 to $3k + if he goes to court to fight it. However, it seems to me that he was charged with more than a simple moving violation if he was detained.

[Mikey Gribble]

A cop can't shoot you if you resist arrest Tyler. You can only retaliate with deadly force when somebody is trying to use deadly force against you. He could certainly mase you, but shooting you? No.... Settle down Tyler. I haven't fought any cops yet. Stop taking things so seriously. I am well aware of the fact that you can never win an argument with a cop on the side of the road. My dad was a judge and I've had plenty of dealings with the law. I know how it works.

I didn't say it was my job to yank his badge, hence me saying "they" ought to yank his badge. There should be little if any tolerance for police officers abusing authority IMO. It is extremely difficult to prove that a cop abused their authority since 9 times out of 10 it's just your word against his. You can't have somebody that isn't ethically sound in a position like that since it is so easy for them to get away with regularly abusing the authority they have. If that report is accurate then the cop should be ashamed of himself and he should also be fired. That is a flagerant violation of the chaser's rights and cops shouldn't be immune to punishment. In fact the punishment should be more severe when the person violating the law is charged with upholding it. One of my biggest pet peeves is cops that think they can bully people around because they wear a badge. They work for us. We pay their salary and they are supposed to protect us, not harass us.

[Tyler Allison]

Screw that, officer tells you to jump off a bridge do you do it?

Bad analogy.

As long as you're on public property not breaking any rules (appears this guy was not) they can't do anything,

What they can and can't do is not up to you to decide. You may be in the right, but you can very well end up in jail and spend thousands of dollars to prove you were right. Do what you like..but I'll simply move.

[Tyler Allison]

A cop can't shoot you if you resist arrest Tyler. You can only retaliate with deadly force when somebody is trying to use deadly force against you. He could certainly mase you, but shooting you? No.... Settle down Tyler. You don't know your deadly force law then. (ex Deadly Force trainer for Kentucky) You are struggling with an officer. Once you start down that road it's _HIS_ decision when deadly force is warranted, not you. Granted, the average officer would simply beat the crap out of you...but this guy has already shown an inability to handle his own anger. But that's beside the point and a jump to extreme on my part. The point is...you don't stand and argue with a cop. You take name/badge/etc and complain to his superiors.

I didn't say it was my job to yank his badge, hence me saying "they" ought to yank his badge. There should be little if any tolerance for police officers abusing authority IMO. It is extremely difficult to prove that a cop abused their authority since 9 times out of 10 it's just your word against his. You can't have somebody that isn't ethically sound in a position like that since it is so easy for them to get away with regularly abusing the authority they have. If that report is accurate then the cop should be ashamed of himself.

In this case you have a reporter on the scene that is unrelated to the specific event. I'm sure something will happen.

[Dustin Wilcox]

What they can and can't do is not up to you to decide.

No, but it's not entirely up to them either, their "powers" do not extend beyond the laws... Indeed probably in your best interest to move, but if the cop comes up with a bad attitude and no reason rather than a storm as to why I need to move, he is going to have to find a law I am breaking to get me to move.

[Chris Lott]

It just sounds like some punk deputy trying to make a name for himself.

[Bill Hark]

In dealings with law enforcement, one should always be polite and pleasant even if one believes the officer is out of line. It will help with the case if it comes up in the courts.

That being said, I think this quote in the paper tells alot, "Calls to the Crane County Sheriff's Office for comment, were not returned" They may already realize their officer was out of line and are trying to do damage control especially if the "court of public opinion" is siding with the chaser.

I will be interested in the outcome of the case as I have always had pleasant or at least fair experiences with law enforcement out on the Plains. We may not know the full details of the situation until later. I do feel bad for Brian. Even if the case was dismissed or found in his favor, a court fight would be a big hassle factor and expense.

Bill Hark

[David Drummond]

Warren pointed out the incident in Briscoe County, Texas last year. It may be important to note that Crane Count, Texas is a very similar type county. Extremely rural, very small population, very small town as the county seat. They are very similar and very many ways. There are only 5 people per square mile in that county.

[Mikel Shively]

I wonder if Mr Barnes had a lightbar? Some officers I know don't particularly like them, stating that they can be a "traffic hazzard", although, none of the ones I know are not located in TX.... just a thought.

[Mikey Gribble]

My encounters with cops have always been great too, but it seems like chasers have been screwed with more frequently over the last couple years.
I know it would get me in trouble, but I just refuse to show somebody respect that doesn't show me any. Cop or not, respect is a two way street. If he wasn't violating a law being parked there, the cop was wrong, plain and simple. I don't think you should bend over just because it's a cop. Wrong is wrong... doesn't matter who they are. I really hope this deal gets blown out of proportion down there because otherwise I can't see the cop getting in any trouble unless their is overwhelming evidence against him. Even then he'll probably just get a slap on the wrist and he'll do the exact same thing the next time he feels like, but he'll be more careful to cover his tracks when he does it again (if he's smart).

[David Drummond]

Nice. Lightbars got in the discussion in 2 pages this time. No, Mike, this thread will be over 10 pages by tomorrow, guaranteed!

[Tyler Allison]

Brian just posted on WX-CHASE with more details. Sounds like it comes down to the cop asked him to move and Brian refused (which is not an offense) and the cop didn't take too kindly to that.

I'm guessing the cop has never had somebody say "No" and he couldn't figure out what to do :)

I still would have moved...but then again I don't want to spend time in jail and spend my money on courts even though I may be right.

Oh yeah...forgot...just for David.


--> Lightbars <--

[Mike Peregrine]

Sorry David ... I deleted that too quick. Between patrol, parking habits, chasers hanging out of windows, chase tours, and now lightbars, this thread has EVERYTHING. It is a dream come true for anyone needing reading material. So yes, I think we should all make our predictions for how long it will go.

Welcome to The Perfect Thread.

Someday we will all talk about where we were when it happened.

[Warren Faidley]

When I worked as a newspaper journalist, I was "detained" and threatened with everything from "felony obstruction" to physical violence. Within 24 to 48 hours, I received an apology. The best thing to do is always remain calm and don't say or do anything stupid. Resisting arrest, even if you did nothing, is serious and can be easily molded into "assaulting a police officer." At best, make sure there are witnesses, or leave your video camera rolling or make a quick cell call with an open line to someone who can hear what is going on.

W.

Edit... well if he was told to move and did not, then he had it coming.

[Mikel Shively]

Nice. Lightbars got in the discussion in 2 pages this time. No, Mike, this thread will be over 10 pages by tomorrow, guaranteed!

Hey, it doesn't hurt to try ;)

[Ryan McGinnis]

I suspect this is going to get a much wider viewing audience in the near future. Having read Brian's account (and recognizing that there are two sides to every story), Brian probably got the short end of the stick on this one -- I'm sure time will tell -- it's a good thing he got it all on video.

[Stuart Robinson]

Can I just point out that Brian Barnes is NOT a driver for SilverLining Tours – and Brian has had no association with STL what so ever for a number of years now –


That web page link that was posted is an old link – current Drivers / Guides can be found on the correct link here --> http://www.silverliningtours.com/AboutUs/tabid/55/Default.aspx


Again I stress that Brian is nothing to do with SLT in any shape or form.

Mods – can you please correct that post please as it is misleading.

[Scott A. Kampas]

There are other previous incidents of chasers being arrested. Jon Davies was detained in Kansas in 1993 (http://www.stormeyes.org/tornado/jd5may93.htm); and I recall other incidents as well but not the details.

[Warren Faidley]

Photo of deputy just released:

http://www.firestock.com/crane.jpg

[Steve Miller TX]

http://www.co.crane.tx.us/ips/cms/

[Scott Weberpal]

Can I just point out that Brian Barnes is NOT a driver for SilverLining Tours – and Brian has had no association with STL what so ever for a number of years now –


That web page link that was posted is an old link – current Drivers / Guides can be found on the correct link here --> http://www.silverliningtours.com/AboutUs/tabid/55/Default.aspx


Again I stress that Brian is nothing to do with SLT in any shape or form.

Mods – can you please correct that post please as it is misleading.

I would think the best thing to do would be to have Dave or whoever runs the website to take that page down. If anyone googles Brian Barnes, his SLT bio will come up eventually.

I wouldn't be so defensive, he did nothing wrong and hey - it's free advertising ;)

I should start a pool on how long it'll take for the charges to get dropped. Winner takes 50% of the money, and the rest will go to Brian to help pay for his defense. Any takers? :cool:

EDIT: I googled "Brian Barnes Storm Chaser" and his SLT bio page was the 6th link on the first page!

[Mike Peregrine]

Like Barney says:

Nip it in the bud, Andy! Nip it, nip it, nip it!

Doesn't sound like much will come of this. My bet is for charges to be dropped before the weekend.

[Alex Fisher]

Link to the story just got on the front page of Fark.com

Should start getting some serious publicity soon.

[Matthew Havin]

Oh man......... Fark.com! Looks like this story will hit the big time pretty fast with a million eyes looking at it.

[Joe Grunow]

At the risk of being tarred and feathered :), I had to add my two cents. Having been on both sides of this type of issue (I was a street cop then a criminal investigator for 25 years), I can kind of see both sides. On the chaser's side, we all know (or maybe should know) where the actual "danger" zone is and how close we can get without being in jeopardy. We go places where normal people think everyone dies, and think nothing of it because we have the training, experience, and the love of Jesus in our eyes. We do provide a valuable service to the NWS, Emergency Management, and the local media by being the purveyors of "ground truth" of the storm environment. Having said that, local police and sheriff's deputies usually don't have even basic spotter training knowledge, and don't really understand that chasers are doing anything constructive. What I'm going to say next is under the assumption that the storm was in close proximity to the parking area. If not, then the deputy was probably way off base...not knowing for sure, here goes. Keeping traffic moving and limiting "rubbernecks" in an area impacted by some hazard (traffic accident, fire scene, storm damage, etc) is an important part of maintaining public safety. Even though it sounds like BS that the deputy wanted to keep other people from stopping and clogging the area, think about it...how many times do we get followed by John Q Citizen (or sometimes a whole convoy of them) in a storm environment just because we have a couple of antennas or some weather instruments on our vehicles? Happens all of the time. If other people were pulling over to see what was going on, the deputy should have rightly been concerned about traffic problems. Impeded traffic flow can limit escape options for drivers in case of worsening conditions or a turning storm. In the past, I asked people to leave areas where the public had full legal access but their presence was a possible hazard or impediment. I never had to curse people out or "slam" them against the car to gain compliance, but then maybe the deputy didn't take the Dale Carnegie course. If the deputy asked the guy to move, and the request was refused, the deputy was well within his legal rights to arrest the guy. According to the Texas Penal Code, anyone who refuses to comply with a "reasonable request" to vacate the area....not necessarily an order or demand...of a police officer of firefighter who is discharging their duties in "maintaining public safety by dispersing those to maintain public safety by dispersing those gathered in dangerous proximity to a fire, riot, or other hazard" is guilty of a Class B Misdemeanor. Keeping people moving out of an area of a hazard, regardless of their motives for being there, is part of maintaining the public safety.

It sounds like the deputy may have gone about it all wrong, especially if he was being verbally abusive, etc, but the unfortunate reality is when a police officer tells you to "move along" you need to do it. B*tch about it later, call the deputy "Barney" to your cohorts, complain to the Sheriff or the County Judge, etc, but plain and simple...move on. It is the responsibility of the police officer to protect the safety of the public. If he felt that restricting the use of a parking area normally open to the public was necessary to protect the public and keep others from creating a traffic hazard, that is his call. This is the same authority the police use to block access to areas after a storm. How many times do we as chasers "sweet talk" our way past roadblocks to do damage surveys or continue a chase so we can pass on information to the NWS, etc? The only reason we get through is the cops feel like being nice to us. They don't have to allow us to pass, even though the roads are public property.

This is how the Penal Code lays it out:
§ 42.03. OBSTRUCTING HIGHWAY OR OTHER PASSAGEWAY.
(a) A person commits an offense if, without legal privilege or
authority, he intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly:
1) obstructs a highway, street, sidewalk, railway,
waterway, elevator, aisle, hallway, entrance, or exit to which the
public or a substantial group of the public has access, or any other
place used for the passage of persons, vehicles, or conveyances,
regardless of the means of creating the obstruction and whether the
obstruction arises from his acts alone or from his acts and the acts
of others; or
(2) disobeys a reasonable request or order to move
issued by a person the actor knows to be or is informed is a peace
officer, a fireman, or a person with authority to control the use of
the premises:
(A) to prevent obstruction of a highway or any of
those areas mentioned in Subdivision (1); or
(B) to maintain public safety by dispersing those
gathered in dangerous proximity to a fire, riot, or other hazard.
(b) For purposes of this section, "obstruct" means to render
impassable or to render passage unreasonably inconvenient or
hazardous.
(c) An offense under this section is a Class B misdemeanor.

Like I said, I will probably be tarred and feathered, but what the hell. A little controversy is good for the soul.

[Joe Grunow]

Just found that Brian Barnes is the Owner/Operator and "Tour Director" of Violent Skies Tours (www.violentskiestours.com).

[Susan Strom]

This is a bit odd-
"Barnes adds, 'He continued to say that I was the example why people were stopping and that I was putting those other people at risk, because they were stopping behind me.'"

We can hardly control what other people do...

I have been approached 3 times I can recall while just standing doing photography and nothing else. Once in Kansas because it was 4:30am and I was alone shooting CGs over grain elevators and I think he was just wondering 'what the heck..' and twice in Arizona - one because I was close to the border where everybody is checked out, and in '06 I stumbled into a crime scene w/o realizing it, there was no way to know. He was concerned I would be accosted by suspects. "No problem" was my response to that, and I was out of there.

Being non-emotional helped out a lot. Even though sometimes (like in Kansas) I was left with a big question mark and a lost vantage point, emotions never lead to anything good with police, so to me it is worth just leaving. Sometimes we don't know why we're being asked to leave (like in the crime scene).

Still though, there is nothing a chaser can do when people follow in their cars. Police should take that into consideration...bystander possies. This is not solicited by us, it is just what people do.

[Adam Lucio]

I have spoken with Brian several times privately before this incident. He has nowcasted for me as well.

I spoke with him on the phone tonight and he gave me a more detailed account of the events that happened. I mentioned to him people here on stormtrack were already talking about it and he said he plans to come on here and provide more information so I wont go into too much detail but regardless

All was caught on camera! There is already a huge local publicity story about it. Apparently there were also news media on the scene at the time. The sheriff in question is the "new sheriff" in town and apparently has a hot head....hes already being sued over this incident for cussing out a reporter who was also there.

Brian owns violentskiestours.com, [and yes...has NOTHING to do with silver lining tours] he asked me earlier this year to help them out with a special tour they offer at the end of May [without pay before all you chaser paparazzi try and judge me] he was raised by a police officer and even offers a law enforecement discount on his website and for over 10 years has operated a fully law abiding business.

He made several reports to the NWS just prior to the incident, those have already been captured and will be used as evidence AGAINST this sheriff as to what he was doing out there. Just because he is running a business doesn't mean he still cant provide the basic public service we chasers like to pride ourselves on as far as helping the public goes.

The officer acted out of line. Plain and simple and I hope he pays for it...its easy for us to sit here and claim we wouldnt have a problem but lets face it...if we're just sitting there observing a storm, pulled over LEGALLY and not breaking any laws, and a hot headed officer came up and started acting out of line...Im sure most of us would have an issue with that, I know I would.

There was a thread I read in here the other day where people talked about how the local law enforcement in NW Kansas is towards chasers...so we all know this is a bit of a problem in some areas.

[Anthony Silver]

Some additional information from the ABC 33/40 Weather Blog:
http://www.alabamawx.com/?p=6757

[Chris Strahan]

my information had already been posted. forgive my repeat information

[Karen Politte]

Brian owns violentskiestours.com, [and yes...has NOTHING to do with silver lining tours]

Whoah whoah whoah - yes he does. He is one of their ex-tour guides, right? Or did I just imagine the past few pages of tinder, uh - posts?
Anyways - it's not like it really matters or has any significance - but let's just say it - the guy who was arrested for chasing yesterday has connections in the past to the biggest chasing tour company out there. OK. I feel better now that's out in the open. I don't think that SLT could have done anything about the fact that one of their archived tour guides pages happens to have a bio and mugshot of this Brian guy. They obviously keep that information on there for posterity...or something. If they don't want this sort of thing happening - then maybe SLT need to do some webpage housekeeping.

Aaaanyway - regardless of who is right or wrong in this case, if an officer tells me to do something (within the bounds of the law), then I will do it - no questions asked.

KP

[Brian Emfinger]

I am not sure what Brian could have done. Would I have moved if he told me to? Absolutely. BUT I would probably only travel a couple miles or less before I pulled over again. In this case I have a feeling that if he did that he may have ended up in the same place except the officer would have been even more PO'd. From what Brian and the newspaper guy both say... I just doubt the officer would have afforded Brian another opportunity to vacate his location if the officer had indeed stumbled upon him a second time.

[Benjamin Smith]

I have one philosophy when it comes to law enforcement.

Never there when you need them...always there when you don't.

This officer was completely out of line, and I hope he gets reprimanded for this incident. Brian was obviously helping the public and that is something he doesn't HAVE to do. This officers job is to help the public, and instead of doing his job, he decided to let his hot head get the best of him.

If it turns out that Brian was not obstructing the road, this cop should be fired. That officer could have been out helping people in need instead of harassing good samaritans.

[Shane Adams]

IMO the area this cop patrols simply needs to post signs along all roads: IT IS ILLEGAL TO BE HERE

Seems that would solve all issues.

[J Kinkaid]

Is there a stormtrack get out of jail and legal fee paypal donation button ?

[Brian Emfinger]

its on drudgereport (http://www.drudgereport.com/) - middle left side

[Adam Lucio]

Whoah whoah whoah - yes he does. He is one of their ex-tour guides, right? Or did I just imagine the past few pages of tinder, uh - posts?
(within the bounds of the law), then I will do it - no questions asked.

KP

Sorry I meant to say NOW has nothing to do with SLT...it was late [or should I say early] when I posted that.

[Steve Miller TX]

This just in...video of the deputy in a previous incident when he used to work for the Southpark, CO Police Department.....

http://youtube.com/watch?v=Ea7DnYYXPGg

[Joe Grunow]

After reading the additional information that the ABC station says was quoted from Brian's blog, I'm a little less inclined to be on Brian's side on this one. He apparently was conducting a tour and says he pulled far enough into the rest area to keep his customers safe from the traffic. If the tour customers were out of the van milling around the rest area and the deputy felt that was causing a hazard in close proximity to a storm that had previously produced a brief tornado, I can more understand why he would ask Brian to move. While we can't be responsible for the actions of other people who stop and gawk at us, we are responsible for our own actions that cause this to happen. It also shows that while Brian may have been reporting to the NWS, he was in that location for one main reason, to further his business...making what originally sounds like a noble endeavor a little more capitalistic in nature. Whether Brian was raised by a law enforcement officer or by wolves in the wild, and even if he offers a police discount, etc, he was in the wrong by refusing the request of the deputy to move on. A lot of people complain that the police are never there when we need them and are only out there to harrass us, and say that they need to understand that we are providing a public service by reporting what we see. If we were to be truthful, how many chasers are out there reporting to the NWS? Most of the chases I have been on or watched in the hundreds of storm videos this is one aspect that is lacking. Most of us (me included) are more interested in getting the still or video shot or communicating with our nowcasters or media bosses than calling in to the NWS. When we are out there for our own purposes (storm photography, conducting tours, reporting for a distant media outlet like a TV station chaser reporting on storms out of their viewing area) we are no more providing a public service than the next guy.
My bottom line is that while Brian may be a great guy and may have been calling reports in to the NWS, he was a tour director who was trying to get his customers their money's worth. He should have complied with the deputy's request and moved on.
I also think that getting himself arrested while he had a van full of customers to think about was a little careless and unprofessional. I realize he probably had another guide/driver, etc with him to take care of the customers, but I'm sure the tour was interrupted while Brian cooled his heels in the lockup for a few hours....all time that the customers had paid for and could have spent in pursuit of the storms.

[rdale]

He apparently was conducting a tour and says he pulled far enough into the rest area to keep his customers safe from the traffic. If the tour customers were out of the van milling around the rest area and the deputy felt that was causing a hazard in close proximity to a storm that had previously produced a brief tornado, I can more understand why he would ask Brian to move.

Clarify that please... They were at a rest stop. Where people stop along the road and get out and mill about, away from traffic. There's no law against that. The police cannot order you out of an area because a thunderstorm is on the horizon. Would it be better for them to move a mile down and pull off on the highway? Why does the reason for his stopping there matter?

[Scott Weberpal]

I also think that getting himself arrested while he had a van full of customers to think about was a little careless and unprofessional. I realize he probably had another guide/driver, etc with him to take care of the customers, but I'm sure the tour was interrupted while Brian cooled his heels in the lockup for a few hours....all time that the customers had paid for and could have spent in pursuit of the storms.

I think if he knew he was going to get arrested he would have moved on. He stated he was simply trying to inform the officer of what he was doing when he was asked to move. It's not like he TRIED to get arrest or knew that would happen by calmly speaking with the officer.

[Tarmo Tanilsoo]

Brian has posted an account of the events on WX-CHASE, which is definitely a must-read. I will reserve my opinions until all the details come out, as he requested in his post.

However, I will tell you this that I am at a loss for words after hearing this news. However, I will wait for all the details before loudly speaking out on ST.

[Joe Grunow]

If the deputy felt that they were causing a hazard by their actions or presence, he can ask them to move on. Even though the area is meant for stopping and getting out of a vehicle, it goes back to the "public safety" in a hazardous situation or environment that was mentioned in a previous post. Under normal circumstances, there would be nothing wrong with what Brian was doing. With a recently tornadic storm producing another wall cloud, a potentially dangerous situation exists and the police have the right to tell people to vacate the area....that's not just my opinion, that's the way the law is written. Like I said in a previous post, a lot of local law enforcement personnel wouldn't know a wall cloud from a Wal-mart, and in the need to protect the public, may just want to get people out of the area to ensure their safety.
Unfortunately, our rights in this country are not as broad as we like to think they are. We always assume that we have freedom of movement so we can go where we want anytime we want, especially in public places. For what may seem like no reason at all to us, the police CAN restrict our access to areas or rights to do things when it is in the interest of public safety or in the discharge of their authorized duties. Maintaining the safety of the public, whether they want that safety maintained or not, is part of that discharge of duties. Even the all powerful media is subject to the orders of the police. If a police officer tells a reporter or photographer to move, they normally comply because they know they can be arrested if they don't.
The deputy sounds like an a**hole, having allegedly been verbally abusive to Brian and a reporter, and he needs to be disciplined for that. As far as being fired or facing a lawsuit for requesting Brian and the others to move on, I'm not too sure.

[Tim Shriver]

In my mind he had two choices. Neither one was wrong, just different.

1. Express his thoughts and what he thought was right.
2. Comply and move on.

If I thought I was in the right and the officer was in the wrong and it was
important to me, I would express my thoughts and risk the arrest and/or fine.
We have this right and one that has been used many times in the past.
Often resulting in positive changes.

If I thought it was not worth the effort then I would simply move on.

So no right or wrong here in the act of questioning the officers motive or
legality. We have that right in this country, despite what some may
say or think. It is then up to the courts to decide who was
correct and who was not.

Tim

[Darin Brunin]

It comes from law enforcement in rural areas having nothing to do 98% of the time they're on duty and when they get some action in their county...it's time to shine. They seem to become very territorial in a sense like a lot of stationary spotters when you enter their area of responsibility. It has to be a big rush for them to get so many vehicles on their roads that they probably get overly excited and I don't see this being any different in this situation.

And no Joe, if he is pulled off the road in a 'public' area. There's nothing a police officer can do unless there's a law against storm chasing? If I was taking a photo of a skyscraper in New York on a public street and a police officer told me that I couldn't I would in other words tell him to F off because I would have the right to(barring there's some law telling me that I can't) and this is same thing in a sense.....it all comes down to it being a public area.

[Susan Strom]

a lot of local law enforcement personnel wouldn't know a wall cloud from a Wal-mart, and in the need to protect the public, may just want to get people out of the area to ensure their safety.

I thought most law enforcement in the Plains would have a basic recognition of dangerous weather; esp if patrolling anywhere in Tornado Alley. If this is not the case, they should all be required to go though spotter training. Seems like a no brainer to me.

[Joe Grunow]

Actually there is such a law in the State of Texas, and probably most other states for that matter. Without researching the entire Penal Code for all of the times a police officer is authorized to move people from an otherwise public place, here is the cite in question (which just happens to be the violation Brian was apparently charged with):

TEXAS PENAL CODE
§ 42.03. OBSTRUCTING HIGHWAY OR OTHER PASSAGEWAY.
(a) A person commits an offense if, without legal privilege or
authority, he intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly:
1) obstructs a highway, street, sidewalk, railway,
waterway, elevator, aisle, hallway, entrance, or exit to which the
public or a substantial group of the public has access, or any other
place used for the passage of persons, vehicles, or conveyances,
regardless of the means of creating the obstruction and whether the
obstruction arises from his acts alone or from his acts and the acts
of others; or
(2) disobeys a reasonable request or order to move
issued by a person the actor knows to be or is informed is a peace
officer, a fireman, or a person with authority to control the use of
the premises:
(A) to prevent obstruction of a highway or any of
those areas mentioned in Subdivision (1); or
(B) to maintain public safety by dispersing those
gathered in dangerous proximity to a fire, riot, or other hazard.
(b) For purposes of this section, "obstruct" means to render
impassable or to render passage unreasonably inconvenient or
hazardous.
(c) An offense under this section is a Class B misdemeanor.

This makes it legal for a police officer or fireman to request or order people to move when maintaining public safety in dangerous proximity to a hazard. Arguments can be made all day about just what "dangerous proximity" means, and that would be an issue for a court/jury to determine. Like I said earlier, our rights are unfortunately absolute, even though we like to think they are. The portion of the law the Brian violated came from refusing to move along when the police officer told him to. He allegedly said that he made the decision that because of what he was doing, he was not going to move. Reporting to the NWS is not "legal privilege or authority" which would exclude him from the reasonable request to move. His right to be in the rest area was superseded by the police officer's need to maintain public safety. According to the News West 9 story, Brian said he thought it was his "obligation to stay and follow the storms" after being told by the deputy to leave. Apparently the deputy told him to leave and he said he was "helping out the NWS in San Angelo" to which the deputy replied that he didn't care and Brian had to leave. At that point Brian decided not to comply. He was given the second chance when the deputy listened to his explanation for being there and repeated his request.

For the issue of storm spotter/recognition training, some departments do train their officers. The departments I served with had good relations with the fire department and civil defense (forerunner to Emergency Management - guess I'm dating myself there), so we had basic spotter training and functioned as spotters during times of severe weather, as the area did not have an organized spotter group and the nearest NWS office was 50+ miles away. Sadly, a lot of departments don't have these strong relationships, or the money or time to do this, but rely on the local spotter network to tell them what the dangers are. It would be great to mandate training for all law enforcement personnel, but I don't think that's going to happen any more than us getting all chasers to get the basic or advanced training or to drive safely, etc.

[Joe Grunow]

My previous post should have read "our rights are NOT absolute..." Fingers couldn't keep up.

[Jacque Tiegs]

Tyler is right about deadly force. In Kenosha WI, the police shot and killed 4 unarmed men for resisting arrest. This was all in 14 months time. One was shot in front of his girlfriend, 2 in front of their mothers, and one was shot while holding his 2 year old and while his 3 other kids looked on. I suggest never fighting with any LEO in WI. All they have to say is that they felt their lives were in danger.
And on that note, abusive of power...one name Drew Peterson. Need I say more?
The cop here was a first rate Butt..I hope he gets in some type of trouble.

[rdale]

My previous post should have read "our rights are NOT absolute..." Fingers couldn't keep up.

You can hit the EDIT button and fix.

[Dustin Wilcox]

What Would 2Pac do.... (rated R)

http://youtube.com/watch?v=P0CK7-yJ4BM

[david diehl]

reading all the information on this I belive that the officer was out of line.
From what Brian has stated he was off the road, in a parking spot if I understand correctally. How is he obstructing the flow of Traffic? I think the the officer just got a big head, and in the wake of already having a brief tornado in the area IMO he was getting freakd out, and letting things get out of hand, even though the officer thought he was helping out.
and on that matter, if there was already one tornado in the county, why was the officer out to handle traffic, shouldn't he have been in the area the tornado hit to see if there was any damage done?

Just my 2 cents

[Adam Lucio]

What if he didnt have another driver?

The cop claims he was posing a threat to the public, but now he hauls away the ONE person in the area who actually knows about the weather and what is going on...and now theres a bunch of stranded tour guests with potentially no driver. So how is that helping the public? Brian is a chaser, just like all of us, and knows how to safely view a tornado and where to position.

It doesnt matter if there are laws about obstructing the highway or whatever, you have to BREAK them first, judging by the account and the suposed video evidence this does not appear to be the case...if proven otherwise then maybe the officer can have some justification for his side....but Id be quite suprised if Brian was actually blocking the very heavy flow of traffic at a REST STOP.

I hope the TIV + DOW + crew never run into this guy...

[Randy Denzer]

I have to add that I have always had good experiences with law enforcement while in West Texas and west NM. My hats off to Texas DPS. This seams to be an isolated situation and I would like to know what the officer's side of the story. I am not advocating either side. It's a bummer it happened.
I would hate to see one incident get blown up enough for this to effect all of storm chasing. This is a very real possibility. I can see this story becoming a big national news story. If it does, be prepparred to defend pictures like the guy hanging out of the van at high speed while filming (good shot Steve!) or any of the stories of chase convergrence blocking roadways and preventing passage of emergency vehicles. We can debate all we want about this unfortunate incident, but there is a very real and ugly side to civilians blocking roadways during emergencies, as chasers we are civilians. I have seen this from both sides of the fence and can tell you how frustrating it is from both sides.

And then there is the lightbar thing....

OK, Karen, Hows my spelling?

[Darin Brunin]

and on that matter, if there was already one tornado in the county, why was the officer out to handle traffic, shouldn't he have been in the area the tornado hit to see if there was any damage done?


Because the cop was apparently having a bad day and just wanted to single someone out. Unfortunately, Brian was that target. If a storm chaser being parked in a parking lot is grounds for arrest? What's next? Any law enforcement official could pull that law out of their ass any time of any day on any storm chaser. I would have done the same thing as Brian without question.

And yes Adam...the whole DOW/TIV crew is consistently among the people out there I have seen who are blocking or obstructing traffic the most. You may say...they are doing scientific research etc. etc. etc. but they still have to follow traffic laws. Something that they probably should realize they need to get better at.

[Mike Hollingshead]

If only he had some chaser certification sticker on his vehicle, this all could have been avoided.

Sorry, we got lightbars in here, and I didn't see any mention of chaser certification....

[Mikel Shively]

If only he had some chaser certification sticker on his vehicle, this all could have been avoided.

Sorry, we got lightbars in here, and I didn't see any mention of chaser certification....


oooh thanks, I forgot about that one!;) I *think* that now means everything has been mentioned. :p

[Darin Brunin]

oooh thanks, I forgot about that one!;) I *think* that now means everything has been mentioned. :p

What about certain 'people' let's say...trying to get legislation passed in Oklahoma that would ban chasing unless you had an 'official' reason to be out?

[Andrew Stoller]

It all depends on the officer. Two weeks ago in eastern CO, while observing a tornado warned cell, a sheriff pulled up behind me as I was parked on the side of a county road. He came up and asked if I was out storm spotting and I indicated I was actually an amateur storm chaser, but that I do call in storm reports to the various NWS offices. He asked if the storm we were watching was warned or dangerous, and I pointed out the updraft base and clear slot wrapping in and that was the area where a tornado would form. He thanked me for taking the time to storm spot and call in storm reports and said he was gonna go to the next town up (Kirk, CO) and notify the residents.

So I do think it's essential, that if a cop stops to talk to you, indicate that you do relay reports to the NWS, even though most of us are just chasers.

Also, make sure your lightbar is turned on at all times. :D

[Andrew Stoller]

What about certain 'people' let's say...trying to get legislation passed in Oklahoma that would ban chasing unless you had an 'official' reason to be out?

That wouldn't stand the test in any court of law. You'd have to make a) driving in, through, or around a thunderstorm illegal, and b) parking on the side of a road illegal.

[Jody Radzik]

Just to reiterate what's already been said by some, if the LEO asks you to move, you better move, regardless of how you may feel about that.

[Chris Lott]

Look at this youtube clip. Do you think that this is too many lights?:eek: And to the person this vehicle belongs to, sorry, not trying to single you out.

http://www.chase-1.com/index2.htm

[Darin Brunin]

Just to reiterate what's already been said by some, if the LEO asks you to move, you better move, regardless of how you may feel about that.

Why? We as citizens still have rights if we aren't breaking the law. If we are then that's another story but to assume a police officer is right 100% of the time is wrong. Stand up for yourself but be respectful at the same time.

That wouldn't stand the test in any court of law. You'd have to make a) driving in, through, or around a thunderstorm illegal, and b) parking on the side of a road illegal.


Did I just light a fire?

[rdale]

I don't think Andrew knows the "history" of that comment ;)

[Darin Brunin]

I don't think Andrew knows the "history" of that comment ;)

Well, I guess the fish took the bait :p

[Andrew Stoller]

I don't think Andrew knows the "history" of that comment ;)

Indeed I don't. What's the history?

[Joe Grunow]

Hey David, we're almost to 10 pages!

[Ryan McGinnis]

Look at this youtube clip. Do you think that this is too many lights?

*uncomfortable silence* That's no moon.

[Eric Treece]

This has turned into quite the thread! I guess there are a couple of ways you can look at this....... We all have choices that we make everyday. Some right. Some wrong. When the law gets involved it ups the anty. So ask yourself this.........is sitting in this particular spot and testing this LEO's authority WORTH the possible BS that could come with testing him? And I am sure everyone would have their standards as to what it is worth to them. Only issue I have ever had was at a Subway in Andover, KS a couple of years ago and what the officer told us was that "your antenna's are scaring the people inside." (No Lightbars!!)......nevermind that we still had our Subway lunch bags on the bumper of my truck at the time. She asked us some questions and reiterated that the antenna's were disturbing to the customers and we said ok and left. Other than that particular incident, every single officer I have talked with has been curtious and seemed to genuinely appreciate anything weatherwise I have offered up to them. Sure we are going to run into an occasional LEO that has littlemans syndrome or was picked on in school and this is his way of getting revenge. It is just a fact of life.......whether you are in the right or you are in the wrong....... what is it worth to you?

[Alan Broerse]

Here we go...... I almost didnt post on this because it started out as a good vent of frustration for a select few.....but lines have been drawn in the sand and a few individuals have shown their FANGS and youth.. on an event that doesn't directly involve them:mad: Most of us on this thread are reading only what little information that was disclosed to us and now it is truely a west Texas wild fire. I will try to remain as neutral as can be, but I have to rely on my 25 year Police career to shed some insight (just as JOE GRUNOW has......) First of all--- - was you there? Neither was I....Never second guess anyone ....either side -until both side have been heard, evidence observed and all is laid out....thats what courts are for. The law is based on a "reasonable mans thoughts".....face it most reasonable men and women....dont park on the side of the road (or in the middle of it either) and watch rotating wall clouds, 100-300 mile per hour tornadoes....and gorilla hail. It is any officers responsibility and duty to OATH to protect and serve.....If he thinks you are in a dangerous enviroment, He can order you to leave...failure to do so is dereliction of his/her duty....fireable offense and civilly liable in court if he allowed yourself to be killed or injured (families of dumb and departed individuals) have won law suits for just that. Most officers have, use and rely on COMMON SENSE as a guide to law enforcement and survival. He or she may see 300 chasers a year...and we as a body of chasers know that for every 1 so called trained chaser....there are 15 others...yahoos...locals....thrill seekers and 1st year college students with out enough training to be putting themselves or a car full of others in a hazardous situation. As far as public property goes....Any individual has certain rights to use public property....but it is certain....you dont have many rights. You dont have the right to pee on the side of the road...but most of us have.....you dont have the right to partially block a traffic lane...but most of us have....but rest stop, shoulder, parking lot....it doesnt matter...you will be held accountable and face consequences when you are caught doing something questionable or illegal..DOW truck and TIV included....If an officer believes that your presence and efforts might assist in saving lives....their discretion may allow you to go on.....if you impede...or fail the attitude test with a LEO in performance of their duties....you most likely will suffer some inconvenience. Growing a pair of courage orbs in the company of you buddys will get you in trouble fast. Like Darin Brunin mentioned fighting the cop during arrest, this will only educate you NOT to repeat that mistake and leave you as the topic of our next thread. If you are unsure of the LEO's instructions....In a polite fashion...without anger, cursing and being an ASS ask them were you might be allowed to perform your duties. The more your inform them on your task, the better off you will be....again they see alot of problem chasers....and may not know you are not one... If they ask you to leave....back off a mile and redirect your efforts...If it turns into a pissing contest...just shut your mouth and leave. ON THE OTHER SIDE ....if you feel that the LEO is not right.....gather some information on your way out..his last name...what jurisdiction they are out of, unit number on the back of the patrol vehicle...BE PROFESSIONAL.and you can file a complaint on them. There are LEO's out there who should not be in that position...but thats not your call. There are officers who make split second decisions on information that happening before them. They can and do make errors. Sometimes they dont have time to listen to your story...sometimes they dont care to hear the entire story with an event unfolding now. If they are out of line ...there is recourse. But make sure you havent drawn them out of line with your words or actions. No ...officers arent supposed to talk down to you...or curse at you....but in heated situations...its going to happen ....roll with the punches....dont throw them!!! I have sat on both sides of this issue...and being a retired LEO...now working as a chaser...I hope this helps those individuals who have not allowed the day in court to unfold before they twist off. LIFE experience is a valuable resource...gather it as you grow older, share it with others as they need it. I hope that the disposition of the court case is posted for all to see and learn from Remember anyone can armchair quarterback....but only professionals get to play.

[Jody Radzik]

Why? We as citizens still have rights if we aren't breaking the law. If we are then that's another story but to assume a police officer is right 100% of the time is wrong. Stand up for yourself but be respectful at the same time.

As others have pointed out, a LEO has the right to determine safety and take action as he or she sees appropriate. Regardless of what you may find appropriate at that time or after the fact, his/her decision still has the force of law when it is made. Standing up for your right to oppose a LEO's judgment will not affect that judgment. As much as a chaser may have been correct in asserting his right to be there, he's still up against the law and the training of the LEO, which is to maintain control at all times.

I'm not saying the LEO was right. If the facts as they've been presented are true, he wasn't. He was a jerk. However, he's got a mandate to be a jerk if he feels he needs to exert control of a situation. If it were me, I would have moved to a different place, not because I thought the officer was right, only because I knew I wasn't going to win any debates with him or her about it.

[Jay McCoy]

Look at this youtube clip. Do you think that this is too many lights?:eek: And to the person this vehicle belongs to, sorry, not trying to single you out.

http://www.chase-1.com/index2.htm


If you read their bios on that page you would notice the owner of that vehicle is also a fireman which is why so many lights.. especially the red/blue which only LEO/Fire/EMS can have. Enough about lightbars.

Now back to the topic at hand. There is no way a charge of blocking traffic can hold up with him being parked in a rest stop. If he was on the sie of the road they may have an argument but a rest stop is a parking lot not a thoroughfare. The deputy says the guy was in danger and he was trying to protect them. I can promise he knew a hell of alot more about what wx was going on than that deputy. THe deputy was actually the one in danger and from what I read drove through the hail to take Bryan in..

The sheriff standing by his deputy is no surprise considering its his son-in-law. I have as feeling this will get ugly for them. No city likes bad press. I am sure the mayor and city council will be saying something to the sheriff's dept soon.

Wouldnt it be fun as hell to have a major chase convergence at that rest stop with about 50+ cars and no weather around. Just a bunch of chasers sitting there having a picnic. All with Barney Fife pictures taped to their cars.... he wouldnt know what to do with himself...

This is exactly like last year near Silverton/Brice on 3-28-07 when Jason Boggs and a few others chasers were harrassed by some local Barney there thinking it was his job to save us all from the bad bad weather monster. Small town cops in rural areas= bored cops with big egos and little training.

[Mike Hollingshead]

If a cop ever tells me to leave because he thinks a storm is dangerous, I'll tell him to report his sherrif nadoes and leave me alone. It's that or I'd say ok, then turn onto the road and drive straight into the storm.

[Mike Hollingshead]

If you read their bios on that page you would notice the owner of that vehicle is also a fireman which is why so many lights.. especially the red/blue which only LEO/Fire/EMS can have. Enough about lightbars.


Are people that blind in that area? Around here they don't look like an Alien UFO version of pimp my ride abducted the vehicle and brought it back.

*burble gurble beeple beepo(alien talk - "That's how we ride")

[Mike Peregrine]

It's that or I'd say ok, then turn onto the road and drive straight into the storm.

I can imagine you doing this. Actually, I've seen you do it without the help from the police.

I was parked in a long driveway one time when a patrolman came up and yelled at me through the loud speaker that I was parked facing the wrong way on the road. I promptly drove to the next driveway.

Driving straight into the storm is even better, though ... I would totally pick the blackest point in the sky and aim the vehicle accordingly.

[Gerard Jebaily]

Is this the same guy? Looks like chasers are having more and more trouble with the law these days :(. I shot this video last year March 28th near the silverton Tx storm after the tornado roped out...

http://youtube.com/watch?v=yYY3JNR38_4

[Mikel Shively]

Are people that blind in that area? Around here they don't look like an Alien UFO version of pimp my ride abducted the vehicle and brought it back.

*burble gurble beeple beepo(alien talk - "That's how we ride")

While maybe not quite that bad, I have seen some volunteer firmen with a crapload of lights on their vehicle... I'm not sure, but I think the light permit gives them a power trip or something. I think just enough lights to get the job done is good enough. Anything more is overkill.

[Paul Redmond]

As this thread approaches ten pages, it has obviously struck a nerve regarding a concern and at times fear that we all feel at one time or another.
99 out of 100 LEOs are generally concientious people, but its the 100 that gets the negtive attention and can potentially ruin your day.

I have had a few encounters with LEO's who pulled up behind me wondering what I was doing. In each case I explained that I was an amature storm chaser. In all cases so far that seems to have been enough to keep them happy and allow them to move on. Still there is a moment of tension each time, because you cannot anticipate how they will react. Such concerns about being pulled over in rural areas is one of the reasons why I am hesitant to get a CCW in texas. I would not carry during chases, considering it silly of course as I perfer to shoot severe weather with cameras and not hand cannons. But having a CCW permit will appear on their computer and raise the tension as they approach your car. An thats just a bit of adrenaline I could do without thank you.

[Jay McCoy]

Are people that blind in that area? Around here they don't look like an Alien UFO version of pimp my ride abducted the vehicle and brought it back.

*burble gurble beeple beepo(alien talk - "That's how we ride")

The amount of lights is just sortof a "boys with toys" type thing I am guessing. LIke who can have the highest jackup pickup. Its a Texas redneck thang...lol. I have actually seen worse in a couple of LEO vehicles that they got to set up themselves.

[Gerard Jebaily]

I got stopped by a Tx cop that same day near Aspermont, Tx. He said i was speeding, but he didnt issue me any citation. He jus asked for my liscense, what the weather was going to be doing in his area, then said to slow down a little. FYI, I had the cruize set at 5 mph above the 70 mph speed limit. I think he jus wanted to pull me to ask about the weather honestly.

[Jay McCoy]

Is this the same guy? Looks like chasers are having more and more trouble with the law these days :(. I shot this video last year March 28th near the silverton Tx storm after the tornado roped out...

http://youtube.com/watch?v=yYY3JNR38_4

It is not the same guy. Same local rural small town deputy ego and attitude though. The guy in your video works in the SE Texas panhandle near Silverton. The deputy in Bryans incident works in SW Texas southeast of Midland. Its a few 100 miles apart.

[Bill Tabor]

My thoughts as posted on Wx-Chase in reply to Brian's post:

>From: "Brian Barnes" <wxchase@VIOLENTSKIES.COM>
But, I'm sure when you see the video you'll agree completely that I was
doing nothing illegal. Under the law (as it was recently explained to me)
a police officer can tell me to move, but he can't arrest me if I decide to
stay (which is why the charges were manufactured they way they were), and
this will be considered a "wrongful arrest".
>

I've just read this, and haven't read other responses yet, but here are my initial impressions:

1) My inclination is if a Peace officer tells me to move...I move whether I like it or not, and
technically / realistically whether I like it or not, and regardless of my rights. Sure I would miss
the storm and be pissed, but I would chase another day.

2) Seeing someone 'upset, nervous, erratic' is the first clue for me to avoid someone. It is a sign
of an impending problem which we usually don't need when basically out in the middle of desolate,
unpopulated country miles from civilization.

3) My knowledge and impression of the law (and I did take some college courses in it), are that the
public safety official has the right and obligation to tell you to move, or do whatever he deems
necessary to protect the public (and that includes you), in a time of local disaster - such as a
tornado, fires, accidents, etc. It doesn't matter if it is true that you are in danger, or that you
are causing a hazard, or nuisance. He is put in charge and so it is he who decides for that
community at the time, and it may be an on the spot decision. It's not unusual for public safety
folks to 'wig out' when a tornado is threatening their community. As chasers we should generally
respect that and give them our cooperation.

4) Litigating this case could likely only hurt chasers as far as our rights and priviledges are
concerned. By dragging your feet and making a case or 'spectacle' of this instance larger audiences
could pick up this case. At that point the magnifying glass is also on all chasers, and what rights
we should have, and 'oh maybe they are just a nuisance, or public hazard anyway and we should
legislate this hobby'. I think I could see the issue make it to national media, and you could be
interviewed on Gretta Van Susteran... not good. We don't want introspection in storm chasing by the
courts, police, and the media...certainly we will lose that war.

5) In retrospect you have to also ask yourself - 'Was it worth it"? You could have simply been
cooperative and moved your Tour a mile or so down the road and continue watching the storm with
minor disruptions, or you could disrupt / interrupt your Tour and freak out all your paying Tour
guests and spend the night or whatever time in jail rather than looking at the storm. This would
have been a clear choice to me, but we all have our 'priorities'.

I hope you handle this carefully, and properly not just with due respect to yourself but with the
interests of all other storm chasers in mind as well.

I'll check out others viewpoints now.

[Jay McCoy]

I got stopped by a Tx cop that same day near Aspermont, Tx. He said i was speeding, but he didnt issue me any citation. He jus asked for my liscense, what the weather was going to be doing in his area, then said to slow down a little. FYI, I had the cruize set at 5 mph above the 70 mph speed limit. I think he jus wanted to pull me to ask about the weather honestly.

Same thing happened to Steve and I on Tuesday. Doing 5 over and got stopped and got a warning. It was a DPS. To be honest I think they were doing drug interdiction stops. They stop vehicles for any cause thay can just to check them out. The panhandle thanks to I-27 and I-40 are major drug routes and a majority of Texas' largets drug busts happen in the panhandle. There isnt a week that goes by we dont hear about somebody getting caught with 1-2 million worth of cocaine or cash etc.. He talked to us also for about 5 minuts about the upcoming weather that day. I think he also noticed my badge in my wallet when i got my liscense out ;). LIke I told Steve if we were in my truck we wouldnt have even been stopped.:cool:

[James Langford]

Good response Bill, and pretty much right on IMO.

James

[Dustin Wilcox]

I'm surprised by the response of so many who seem to suggest that they just bow down to the police. Sure if your doing something wrong and get caught, follow directions and comply, but when your obeying all laws and you get a bad attitude, power tripping cop trying to push you around, to hell if I'm going to let it fly, it's no different then if were at the bar enjoying a beer and some big bad biker dude who says its his territory tells me to leave, I'm gonna have to get thrown out. As long as you haven't done anything wrong, you got the leverage in that situation. Many of my friends have gone on to be cops, I know, and have had pleasant experiences with many cops, yet like anything else you get your bad apples (though with LEO's it seems more common). From some of my observations, I have seen instances and trends where victims of bullying at a a younger age tend to become cops, and end up being power trippers trying to get back at society, I can think of two specific instances of this. These guys are typically easy to recognize right off the bat, your best defense is knowing your rights and having witnesses, or a video camera recording the events. It is very discouraging when law abiding citizens are targeted by the bad apples (not sure, but seems to be the case here) I hope this guy gets just compensation in the end. For those outside of the plains, don't let this discourage your image of the plains, 99.9% of are LEO's are great people who will treat you more than fairly.

[Scott Weberpal]

Just found another TV station which ran the story. Apparently the deputy who arrested Brian is the Sherriff's son-in-law, and is standing by the arrest. It also states that an attorney from Midland has offered to represent Brian for free.

http://www.cbs7.com/news/details.asp?ID=5998

You have to click on "more" by the videos to find the actual newscast video.

[RickRutledge]

Longtime lurker here...since I get VERY little worthwhile action in my neck of the woods, this is my first post.

In all my encounters with the law (mostly in my younger years) conviction has been based on evidence that proves your guilt beyond the shadow of a doubt. Which in this case, I don't think, or see any evidence that proves he violated the charge he's being hit with. Now, if an officer requested him to move and he refused, that's a different charge. I'm NOT a lawyer nor a judge, but I still really feel like this officer acted way out of line and has no business being a Sherrif sworn to protect and serve the public he is employed by. While there is, admittedly, some guilt on the part of Mr. Barnes, I still feel like this is officer is doing the opposite of what he took an oath to do, IMO.

As for the John Qs who were "stopped" behind him, the officer should have spent more time getting those people off the road then someone who had the right and assumed duty to serve a purpose for the greater good, even if it's only for 5 people per square mile...LoL

I'm so upset by this that I've written to the Governor (overkill? Maybe.) who should know first hand the importance of what we do.

Here's what I wrote:

Dear Governor Perry:

As a former citizen of the State of Texas and avid storm chaser I am appalled at the conduct of the Crane County Sheriffs Department concerning a case that was brought to my attention today.

Conducting a routine spotting, warning and documentation mission in support of the National Weather Service Office in San Angelo, a storm chaser named Brian Barnes (whom I've never met before) was arrested for "Blocking a Public Street" as he was relaying information on a Tornado on the ground, to ensure the safety of the citizens of Crane County.

While I don't have to tell you the importance of safety for citizens during severe weather season I should point out the vital role that these trained spotters play in both research for better warning systems in severe weather situations as well as relaying vital information to the agencies that inform and direct the public in a weather emergency. Again, as an avid storm chaser, I have seen lives saved due to the information that storm spotters gather while observing these weather events on public roads. In almost all cases (in every event in my career) law enforcement supports and encourages us to continue, thus supporting their missions of protecting the public.

Unfortunately, the deputy involved in this case did quite the opposite. The deputy was quite abusive with his language and attitude to those who were, just trying to help.

Luckily, KEWS-TV in Midland-Odessa, has documented both raw video of the arrest as well as statements of the witnesses of the event.

Although I am not a current resident, I do ask, on behalf of other storm chasers that you please step in and request that the charges be dropped against Mr. Barnes. In addition, I ask that there be both a formal apology and reprimand of the officer involved. Otherwise, the risk of increased danger to citizens could be a real possibility since we will have gotten the message that we are not welcome in West Texas. In fact, I personally think that the deputy should be terminated as he is violating the oath that he took to protect the citizens of Crane County at any cost.

I would like to hear a response and I will be forwarding this correspondence to both the State Attorney General's office as well as the County Attorney's office in Crane County.

Thank you for your time and consideration and I look forward to reading your response.

Rick Rutledge


Call me crazy, but I think it's worth his attention. Could there be a license to chase in the State in the future? Maybe, but at least we'll know our rights and WE can continue to "protect and serve."

[Mikey Gribble]

I just read that article. It's pretty funny when you have a cop telling chasers where they are and are not safe on a supercell. If the guy has even taken so much as a spotter course I would be surprised. They don't call them sheriffnadoes for nothing.

FYI Tyler deadly force laws vary by state. It's not a federal statute and resisting arrest in Texas (or any other state for that matter) is not justification for anyone to use deadly force.

The deputy that did this is the sheriff's son in law? Shocker... And he is standing by the arrest? Another shocker... I'm sure the good sheriff could explain how his deputy/son in law was justified in telling an experienced chaser where he is and is not safe around a storm. I'm also sure the good sheriff could cite the law that empowers them to play usher on severe storms. In their minds I'm betting there are few limits to their authority. They know best, period. If you don't want to listen and respect their authority then they'll show you by throwing you in jail for no reason. The cop should be the one behind bars in this situation and I really hope he gets what he deserves. I applaud Brian for standing his ground when that cop tried to bully him.

I am also very surprised too at some people's instinct to bend over just because it's a cop. I totally agree with Dustin. Being a cop doesn't make you right. I just can't understand the "thank you sir may I have another" mentality. I don't want to go to jail as much as the next guy, but I have to take a stand on principle at some point. Yeah it will probably get me in trouble in the short term, but I feel better about myself knowing that I have a firm set of beliefs don't waiver from them when confronted with adversity.

[Shane Adams]

I thought most law enforcement in the Plains would have a basic recognition of dangerous weather; esp if patrolling anywhere in Tornado Alley. If this is not the case, they should all be required to go though spotter training. Seems like a no brainer to me.

The kid who was being trained by the FTO who stopped us on May 6 had no clue part of his job was to spot for severe weather; he was most-displeased when he found out. Hence my 10-minute speech of how to get started in SKYWARN training and all that crap.

LEOs in Tornado Aley are no more educated/enlightened about severe weather than your average spotter - scary.

[Shane Adams]

oAnd yes Adam...the whole DOW/TIV crew is consistently among the people out there I have seen who are blocking or obstructing traffic the most. You may say...they are doing scientific research etc. etc. etc. but they still have to follow traffic laws. Something that they probably should realize they need to get better at.

This is another great point...they've been out there 11 years, what have we learned? There's a reason the TIV is even involved in the DOW 'research', which is available on almost any night of the week via some channel. Nobody cares, and the DOW expedition continues to exist solely because of the TV gimmick the TIV brings to the mix. Kind of an "I'll scratch your back you scratch mine" deal.

IMo the DOW/TIV circus has no more reason to block a road than me or anyone else...otherwise, show me some applicable scientific results from all these years of intercepts. I'm tired of being expected to kiss DOW ass and I have no more info in 2008 than I did in 1997.

[Shane Adams]

What about certain 'people' let's say...trying to get legislation passed in Oklahoma that would ban chasing unless you had an 'official' reason to be out?

That will never happen. The day some f*ckhole tells me the guy ahead of me can pass while I cannot, will be the day I get real evil real quick.

[Alan Broerse]

LEOs in Tornado Aley are no more educated/enlightened about severe weather than your average spotter - scary.---Shane Adams
__________________
Shane...while some of that may be true, I can vouch for Oklahoma City Police. Over the past 10 years...approx. 400 of the 1000 officers have had at least Basic spotter training by the NWS...and in addition to that visits by the 3 major TV stations chief mets. I have taught over 200 officers myself...or participated in teaching Basic. The last class was just over a month ago......at the police training center with co-worker Michael Armstrong (broadcast meteorologists) with KWTV. We target working street officers and their supervisors....trying not only to educate them on storm safety/ structure ect.....but holding HAM radio classes to certify them to report to NWS. This effort must be broadened....because it is successful . We have some great city wide spotters. Spread the word when you encounter a LEO....NWS will teach your department for free...all you have to do is ask them....The more knowledge they possess on the matter....generates more interest from them and more understanding for both chasers and the LEO's....you will never reach them all....but you will never get every chaser to complete compliance either....we just need to close the gap..............Alan

[Scott Weberpal]

IMo the DOW/TIV circus has no more reason to block a road than me or anyone else...otherwise, show me some applicable scientific results from all these years of intercepts. I'm tired of being expected to kiss DOW ass and I have no more info in 2008 than I did in 1997.

Quite often results (or a solution to a problem) are not released until after the full study is complete. It could be a number of years until any significant results come to pass.

[Shane Adams]

Quite often results (or a solution to a problem) are not released until after the full study is complete. It could be a number of years until any significant results come to pass.

Obviously. VORTEX comes to mind, and that was 13-14 years ago.

But they're not out there every chase causing a huge scene, or keeping a DDC motel booked for 3+ years with television crews who invade the residents of Greensburg, KS almost daily.

[Darrin Rasberry]

TEXAS PENAL CODE
§ 42.03. OBSTRUCTING HIGHWAY OR OTHER PASSAGEWAY.
(2) disobeys a reasonable request or order to move
issued by a person the actor knows to be or is informed is a peace
officer, a fireman, or a person with authority to control the use of
the premises:
(A) to prevent obstruction of a highway or any of
those areas mentioned in Subdivision (1); or
(B) to maintain public safety by dispersing those
gathered in dangerous proximity to a fire, riot, or other hazard.
(b) For purposes of this section, "obstruct" means to render
impassable or to render passage unreasonably inconvenient or
hazardous.
(c) An offense under this section is a Class B misdemeanor.

This makes it legal for a police officer or fireman to request or order people to move when maintaining public safety in dangerous proximity to a hazard. Arguments can be made all day about just what "dangerous proximity" means, and that would be an issue for a court/jury to determine. Like I said earlier, our rights are unfortunately absolute, even though we like to think they are. The portion of the law the Brian violated came from refusing to move along when the police officer told him to. He allegedly said that he made the decision that because of what he was doing, he was not going to move. Reporting to the NWS is not "legal privilege or authority" which would exclude him from the reasonable request to move. His right to be in the rest area was superseded by the police officer's need to maintain public safety. According to the News West 9 story, Brian said he thought it was his "obligation to stay and follow the storms" after being told by the deputy to leave. Apparently the deputy told him to leave and he said he was "helping out the NWS in San Angelo" to which the deputy replied that he didn't care and Brian had to leave. At that point Brian decided not to comply. He was given the second chance when the deputy listened to his explanation for being there and repeated his request.


(NOTE: The videos from the first post are mentioned once again below, so I'll repost the link to them here (http://www.kwes.com/global/story.asp?s=8286980) for reference.)

The law you stated above - which was the law apparently applied to Brian to charge him - does not itself give the officer legal authority to move Brian and his van due to danger, since this law deals directly with unlawful road obstruction. The officer must state to Brian under this law not that Brian himself is in danger, but that he is presenting an obstruction to the dispersement of others from a dangerous area. Section B, in bold but not underlined above, is written with the intention that this officer has authority to ask Brian to move his vehicle if and only if his position potentially obstructs others from safely evacuating. Note on the side this can mean that the officer can ask Brian to leave even if he would have otherwise had total and complete legal right to stay in a normal situation.

Some notes proving that the local department was incorrect in their charge:

*Brain's position was in a rest area, parked correctly on the side of the throughway designated for vehicle stoppage. Evidence for this statement comes from the fact that trash cans are present on the side of the rest area's throughway, and also that the throughway was wide enough to allow reasonably safe passage relative to the size of the throughway itself. Therefore, Brian's vehicle did not potentially impede traffic flow from the danger area in the physical sense.

*At any rate, the officer stated on the video that the above was not the actual charge for Brian. The officer clearly charged on the tape that he believed Brian's position wasn't physically impeding anyone, but instead was impeding dispersement due to the deputy's judgment that the chase vehicle presented a distraction to those leaving the area. This statement was given to Brian to present how the officer believed the law was broken and why he was arresting Brian; once again, it can be heard plainly on the raw video.

*Should that department stuck with the shaky reason the officer gave Brian for the arrest (presenting a distraction that impeded evacuation from a dangerous area), Brian could still have been easily acquitted in court; however, the department did not follow correct procedure, and changed the nature of Brian's charge significantly (changing to charging Brian with obstructing the park sideroad). The raw video as opposed to Brian's actual charge shows this change. Even though the same law is still stated against Brian, law enforcement cannot change the way in which they believe the law was broken if they lack sufficient evidence to both overturn the officer's stated reason for arrest and establish a new angle to the charge. As I stated above, there was no evidence for, and there is plenty of evidence against, Brian's vehicle presenting a "reasonable" impediment to evacuation from a dangerous area. The department should have followed procedure and stood by the deputy's word. They didn't.

*Therefore, Brian could probably be acquitted by Harvey Birdman, more or less a hired attourney, if the case even survives to trial.

------------------------

Some other points to make:

*The deputy, if he knew his stuff, would have recognized his right to force Brian and his chase crew to leave the area under the following law, of which everyone should be aware while in Texas:

§ 545.305. REMOVAL OF UNLAWFULLY STOPPED VEHICLE.
(a) A peace officer listed under Article 2.12, Code of Criminal
Procedure, or a license and weight inspector of the department may
remove or require the operator or a person in charge of a vehicle to
move a vehicle from a highway if the vehicle:

... (9) is, in the opinion of the officer, a hazard,
interferes with a normal function of a governmental agency, or
because of a catastrophe, emergency, or unusual circumstance is
imperiled.
(b) An officer acting under Subsection (a) may require that
the vehicle be taken to:
(1) the nearest garage or other place of safety

This means any officer can issue a "nice" reason to any chaser parked near a storm the officer considers dangerous, to move their vehicles, as this law states clearly that officers may require drivers to move their property off of public roads that are in what he considers a dangerous area. Note the officer's decision is now directly about the danger of the situation where the vehicle is present, and no longer (as in Brian's case) about deciding whether the vehicle presents a risk somehow to motorists exiting the danger area. So be aware - at least in Texas - that peace officers do have the right to ask you to move your private property off of public roadways they consider in danger, if you are parked alongside such an area. It doesn't mean it's moral for them to do so, but they do have the legal authority to tell you to do so - and you have the right to attempt to convince the officer (peacefully) why you are not placing yourself in the danger he believes is present for you.

* The officer is not some bully looking to pick fights. He was nervous and disheveled about the storm, as was said by Brian on his blog, and probably thought he was being some superhero by "saving" the chase van's occupants and all the lookie-loos from what he no doubt believed to be Brian's evil clutches and poor decision-making. He probably believes everyone out on a storm is trying to be in their own version of Twister, and his harsh language against Brian during his scolding really proved that. Imagine hearing about a chaser on these boards intentionally driving headlong into an EF-5 thinking he's gonna be fine - we'd call him the same names and drag him by the neck out of there if it came to that. From this deputy's perspective, Brian is the same kind of fool, and such misinformation is yet another clear case for severe training for all emergency personnel.

He wasn't looking to start a fight or flex his muscle or take out all his childhood anguish on Brian. If he was, he would've thrown Brian to the ground and broken his nose at the six-second mark in the "raw" video, when Brian turned straight into the officer's face and lunged angrily at him before wisely thinking twice and stopping himself a few inches in. What Brian did wasn't at all threatening in and of itself, but given that I've seen Wichita Falls cops gang-tackle arrested people for simply arguing with them, this deputy could have reacted violently to Brian's lunge and probably gotten away with it. It's probably for that reason that there will be no reprimand on this officer, since his superiors will overblow Brian's reaction and say "the guy was violent and uncooperative anyway."

*Related to all this mess, I dread truly for the day where an officer lays a reckless endangerment felony charge on the driver of a chase van if the driver initially complies then is caught turning right back around into the storm. I don't think this particular story will be of significant national importance, but I can see a true chaser-hater LOE leveling a felony RE charge on a chase van driver while the hapless passengers with cameras strapped around their neck look on with wide, horrified eyes. A wandering LOE could see the van heading straight in to a tornado, for instance, and as experienced and trained as the driver may be, a judge and jury of laypersons might still look at the stigma of a tornado above all of that. Knock on wood if such a thing ever happens, but reckless endangerment could be a viable charge a true arsehole LOE could levy knowing that Joe Public in the courtroom won't understand the concept of being trained to reasonable safety.

[Mikey Gribble]

That's a very good letter Rick. If you have the address for the governor already please share it. I sent an email yesterday to the station that had an article on this and asked for information on who to contact in order to file a formal complaint, but unfortunately they haven't responded yet. Obviously we aren't going to get any help out of the sheriff, so I think sending a letter to the governor is the best approach.
It definitely isn't overkill to send in a formal complaint IMO. If nobody ever took the time to do things like that then these kinds of problems would never get fixed. Somebody has to take the initiative and in this case I'm happy to do it too. That cop blatantly abused his authority. Now the sheriff is backing him up, so you have to go higher up the food chain. Please post the contact information for the governor if you have it. BTW I think a letter gets more attention than an email.

PS I'm on fire lately. I just sent a letter to the Kansas governor last week compaining about the fact that we are in the middle of tornado alley and don't have a mesonet. All I got back though was some generic letter telling me to complain to my representative in the state legislature.

[Darrin Rasberry]

Furthermore, if we as chasers are pulled over, if we are unclear as to why we are being detained, we need to ask what law is being broken. If the officer does not state a law, you have the right to move up to the next rest stop or safe shoulder. If the officer states you are in a dangerous area and should move, you have the right to ask the officer's judgment on where he does not consider the area dangerous.

If he acts nervous and erratic and just tells you "to leave," then leave, phone the Highway Patrol or the deputy's higher-up to report his erratic behavior (he is a nervous man with a gun, after all) and then get from those LOE's their thought on the danger area, if they believe you are in one as a trained spotter. They will likely relay to the officer what they told you, and will probably tell him to get his arse out of there. If your phone is dead, call it quits. No storm is worth a legal risk, even if the LOE is clearly in the wrong as in this case.

[Alan Broerse]

PS I'm on fire lately. I just sent a letter to the Kansas governor last week compaining about the fact that we are in the middle of tornado alley and don't have a mesonet. All I got back though was some generic letter telling me to complain to my representative in the state legislature.
---------------------------------------------------------------------Mikey.....I think a task force comprised of fellow Kansan Chasers, T.V. mets. and Possibly a KU or KSU representative....would be a great ground breaking team of getting a mesonet for that state. I suspect the local NWS office would generate interest for not only scientific purpose ....but to assist in saving lives. Senators love to be attached to popular ideas that make them look good......fire it up!!!! sounds like positive energy in action......

[Bill Tabor]

Look at this youtube clip. Do you think that this is too many lights?:eek: And to the person this vehicle belongs to, sorry, not trying to single you out.

http://www.chase-1.com/index2.htm

Yeah, that's Jeff Draper. I see him every once in a while on local storms. I believe he lives near me. Actually I drove past him just a couple of days ago and didn't see any lights. It didn't totally register at the time because I was thinking about other stuff, but now that you mention it's odd they are all gone now. I was unaware that he had the red/blue. I think he also helps out with some emergency services stuff. I forget if it's legal for the public to run those. Anybody know what the rule on that is? Anyway...back to the real topic.

[Jay McCoy]

Yeah, that's Jeff Draper. I see him every once in a while on local storms. I believe he lives near me. Actually I drove past him just a couple of days ago and didn't see any lights. It didn't totally register at the time because I was thinking about other stuff, but now that you mention it's odd they are all gone now. I was unaware that he had the red/blue. I think he also helps out with some emergency services stuff. I forget if it's legal for the public to run those. Anybody know what the rule on that is? Anyway...back to the real topic.


Like I said in a previous posts he is also a fireman which gives him authority for the red/blues. I seriously doubt he uses them while chasing. Same as me. I have authorization to have red/blue but I dont use them on chases. NO it is not legal in pretty well every state in the US for citizens to have red/blue lights. those are for emergency workers only (police/fire/ems/dem). I have seen a few chasers that have clear strobes in their headlights or tail lights. those are also illegal in Texas and many other states (as are headlight wigwags). You can only have yellow.

PS... How the hell do we always end up talking about freakin lightbars??? Hasnt this topic been beaten to death in numerous threads yearly for about a decade?? Some people like and some dont.. There will never be a concensus.

NOw back to the topic. We all mostly agre the charges will ne dropped or he will be found not guilty cause the charges are as bogus as can be but even so Bryan is out the $$ he had to spend posting bail etc.. Yes he has the right to a fair trial but a LEO shouldnt have the ability to make a flase arrest costing you legal fees. If the charges are dropped I think the county should have to repay the bail. Bryan shouldnt be out a dollar if he is found not giulty or the charges are dropped. I know when people are found guilty that many tims they are assessed court costs etc.. If found not guilty then they should be reimbursed for the trouble. It should work both ways. Lost wages, bail, attorneys fees etc...

[Olivier Staiger]

Photo of deputy just released:

http://www.firestock.com/crane.jpg


this photo has been edited. originally that deputy has a black mustache, german accent and some weird broken cross ornament on his right stretched arm.

:)

[Olivier Staiger]

....... Apparently the deputy who arrested Brian is the Sherriff's son-in-law, and is standing by the arrest......

wow ! a family affair ! let me guess ... the Sheriff's name is Don Corleone, right ?
A clear cut case of Mafia biz.

yeah well... that deputy needs to go to mental clinic, and his father-in-law needs a good spanking !

I sure hope Brian wins the case and both son and father-in-law get fired.... but the deputy REALLY needs to visit a mental doctor .... ( or even better : let them have a promotion! send them on special assignment in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba each year from mid-March to early July .... ;-)

[Dave Kaplow]

It seems to me that although the officer was clearly in the wrong and way out of line, Brian should still have moved, or at the very least made some minimal attempt at looking like he was gonna move soon. Why do I say this? It's not because I have any great respect or for that matter fear of Law Enforcement. But think for a minute: this guy was running a chase tour and had paying customers in the van. His first duty is to them, I would think.

Having worked for a tour group myself I have some knowledge of how chase tours operate, and IMHO those customers should not have been put through the stress of seeing their tour operator taken away in handcuffs, not if there was any way it could have been avoided. Brian should just have sucked it up and deferred to the deputy. When you have paying customers with you it changes a lot of the equation, and among other things it means that you should not choose to make a stand then and there on principle when an angry cop is telling you to do something, no matter how badly you want to. Even if you know damn well you're in the right, you still owe it to your customers to just get on with the tour and leave the arguing about legal rights for some other day.

If he had been alone, though, it's another story. Sometimes you really do have to stand up for your rights in the face of blatant abuse of authority.

[RickRutledge]

For Governor Rick Perry's Office you can find multiple ways to contact him:
http://www2.governor.state.tx.us/contact/

For the State Attorney Generals Office:
http://www.oag.state.tx.us/agency/contacts.shtml

For the Crane County Attorneys Office:
http://www.co.crane.tx.us/ips/cms/countyoffices/countyAttorney.html

[Dennis Sherrod]

I must agree with Bill Tabor and his post (#90) as the correct method of handling the situation. All of the talk and interpretations of the alleged applicable and non-applicable laws, people's and chasers' rights by the non-legal, nor, trained legal profession of that particular jurisdiction or state is only likely to lead to more problems for all of us on a wider range.
The man got arrested by an Officer.
The Right or Wrong issue can be resolved in a court of law and not by any of us here.
The same as some of us read the Law Enforcement Forums, I would dare say they are reading ours too and that is good until this kind of debate arises. Some of you have become so inflamed and incensed saying you would refuse these kind of orders, argue, get physical, etc, etc. That will only resolve to land you in jail and cost you lots of time and money. You will not win a physical confrontation with an Officer. Even if you could win one on one, you will lose even more when the blue swarm comes calling afterward.
And should you win at having the Officer fired or disciplined over something such as this, again this will likely lead to retaliatory actions by some Officers, right or wrong. If that is really what you want and the life you chose, then by all means act like that. But your actions out there will most likely affect the rest of us.
I would dare say by the arrested person's comments and blogs, he might have wished he had Simply Moved. It would have possibly all been done. But, now, for what ever reason, he states he would not eat, spent the night, would not lie down on what he jail house analyzed as various stains on the mattress and other deplorable conditions that really had no bearing on the arrest at all. He then goes on to say that someone advised him of some supposed legal bearing on this matter. Why not get the advice and comments of your attorney instead of someone said....?
Again, the easiest and least expensive way would have been to just simply move. Not a very Big Deal. You don't have to agree with the Officer or like him, his remarks, or attitude. Deal with that at a later time and get back to what you were out there for in the first place, especially if you have a group with you. I don't really want any publicity, but definitely not that kind of publicity nor expense. Even if he wins, the arrest record will always be on his NCIC and public record, unless he endures the expense and the unlikely fortune to have the record expunged or sealed. It may say; Not Guilty, Null Prosed, Charges Dropped, or similar wording, but the fact is the record is there.
By all means state whether you agree or disagree here, but don't make it potentially harder on some of us that just want to go chase, spot, and maybe help save some lives.
Personally I have not had any real problems with the Police. I had the one and first in 21 years of a "strange" encounter with the Ardmore, OK Officer a few weeks ago who said dash cams were illegal. No major deal, just very strange. No ticket, no warning, did not have to move the camera. Irritating somewhat, but that is all. I was able to move on within a few minutes, after he finished what he was doing.
Just last week I had 7 Local, County, and State Officers in Arkansas, all at one time, escorting me between 3 tornado warned cells in the area. They asked me if I would go since I had the radar and away we went. They were very happy and I got through the traffic easy and quickly. Whoo Hoo.
I would think that kind of interaction is better for our image than one of hostility and belligerence.
I bet this response will fire some more people off who just want to argue.

[Susan Strom]

wow ! a family affair ! let me guess ... the Sheriff's name is Don Corleone, right ?

omigosh that's the funniest. "I'll make him an offer he can't refuse." ROFL

[Aaron Dooley]

I have never seen a public park/rest area close before dark and unless something illegal was being done, the officer violated his civil liberties and was way out of line. Many times cops abuse power by testing people to leave an area or do something they do not have do, even when they are well within their right to be there as it was not private property and they probably weren't interfering with any investigation or anything remotely similar that would warrant that reaction.

Leaving and then complaining later is one of the acts that keep officers like this guy doing the same thing over and over and you aren't doing your duty as a citizen if you don't stand up for what you know is right. Sometimes you have to take the arrest, get media attention, and then sue them. Police main job are to "protect and serve" and to enforce the law and let courts decide the rest. Many times however, the "you can beat the wrap(sp), but you can't beat the ride" is abused by police knowing they will be let off for not doing anything wrong and most of the time people are just happy with that and never file a suit, meanwhile the cop knows they just wanted to put you through the process to teach you a lesson. Police know this, so if they simply don't like your attitude, they way you talk, or whatever, they will simply arrest/cuff you to try and make you do something more like "resist arrest". Of course, then you would be resisting the arrest that was done for no illegal act. It happens over and over.

I would like to see what law was broken to initiate contact with police, and what got him in handcuffs prior to him walking away from the officer and then slammed up against his vehicle ALREADY HANDCUFFED!

Evident by the officer's body language, and the way he talked to those people, this is another example of a hot headed ego-cop screw-up on tape. I am actually surprised he didn't get tazed and then had the officer's knee pressing his head into the pavement to release his frustration like they do in Austin.

No other public official could speak to a person in that way and not get fired, much less possibly violate someone's civil liberties in the first place. He could have acted much more professionally and courteous even if someone did do something wrong or say something wrong.

I myself don't have anything against police in general and all my experiences have been positive while chasing on and off for 10+ years. In fact, I was on the same storm in Crane County that evening and on my way back home I got pulled over for speeding in Upton County (1 county to the east) by a Deputy and was treated with nothing but respect and courtesy, and was not given a ticket or even warned.

So I totally disagree that you blindly "shut your mouth and leave" and let a public servant get away with that crap, "IF" it was totally legal to be doing whatever they were doing. They serve us, not the other way around, respect should be on both sides, and citizens need not bow down to the police. My concern though is getting a bad name for chasers in general by mouthing off to cops unless the cop did something way out of the norm. I bet when it's over though that cop and department will think twice no matter what actually happened. In a way, it's kind of like a cop arresting an off duty cop, fireman, or member of the news media. I mean dang we work together.

"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty."

-Thomas Jefferson


-Aaron Dooley

EDIT: I also noticed on the raw video I just watched that he wasn't initially handcuffed but had his hands behind his back. I also heard the officer say he cuffed him because he told him "to move" then he stated "it's for ya'lls own safety". To me, that's kind of like telling a fireman to get out of a burning building, or telling media they can't report on the side of the road like they do every night on camera. I think most storm chasers are much better informed than that Deputy, and safety is being used as an excuse. If he was really concerned about safety he would have consulted Brian about the situation. If he was really concerned about highway safety, he must know that police pulled over probably causes more rubber-neckers than a van. It also wasn't a highway, it was a rest area, they were obstructing no one and the Deputy was "so concerned" he didn't even have his lights on and pulled on the side of the van further obstructing traffic as opposed to behind. He was looking to book someone who challenged him. Appropriate question would have been, "where do you suggest I go to do what I want to do".


Lesson learned here? Officer asks you to leave..you close your mouth and leave. You can complain about it later.

[Aaron Dooley]

So if a volunteer fireman (which by the way many smaller population counties/cities have) is heading to a fire, should the police stop him and tell him it is for his own safety? Only difference is that one may be appointed and one may not, both are providing a service for free to the public. Guess a firefighter would "have it coming" to him too?

Also, you mention journalism. The constitution provides for Freedom of the Press. One of the attributes that has been decided in court and that Wikipedia points out is that: "It also extends to news gathering, and processes involved in obtaining information for public distribution". This would extend to us by definition since many of us are affiliated with some news organization or consider ourselves independent and disseminate ourselves via the internet, ham radio, or cell phone. If someone wanted to really get technical, the Constitution protects us.

Remember, the issue in the law mentioned and what the Deputy said was that it was for protection and a hazard to others on the highway. No doubt the law says so, what is challenged is the Deputy's opinion that is was in fact dangerous. I didn't see him stopping any other cars going toward the storm and what is to stop him from misinterpreting other situations in which he is also not trained which he simply, out of ignorance, thinks is dangerous.

-Dooley

When I worked as a newspaper journalist, I was "detained" and threatened with everything from "felony obstruction" to physical violence. Within 24 to 48 hours, I received an apology. The best thing to do is always remain calm and don't say or do anything stupid. Resisting arrest, even if you did nothing, is serious and can be easily molded into "assaulting a police officer." At best, make sure there are witnesses, or leave your video camera rolling or make a quick cell call with an open line to someone who can hear what is going on.

W.

Edit... well if he was told to move and did not, then he had it coming.

[Aaron Dooley]

If I were judge, I think it is very difficult for an officer to fit a REST AREA as a passage way or highway. To me, it is actually the exact opposite of a passageway. What if he would have gone on to private property right off the road?

-Dooley

At the risk of being tarred and feathered :), I had to add my two cents. Having been on both sides of this type of issue (I was a street cop then a criminal investigator for 25 years), I can kind of see both sides. On the chaser's side, we all know (or maybe should know) where the actual "danger" zone is and how close we can get without being in jeopardy. We go places where normal people think everyone dies, and think nothing of it because we have the training, experience, and the love of Jesus in our eyes. We do provide a valuable service to t