When Hillsboro, Oregon, resident David Emerson witnessed an officer-involved car crash he did what a lot of people do nowadays – he pulled out his cell phone to take photos. The unnamed Hillsboro officer objected (naturally) and told Emerson he had to delete the photos or he would confiscate the phone.
Emerson thinks the officer’s behavior was due to the fact that he was speeding through an intersection without his lights and siren on when he crashed into a Buick and then (to save his own butt) tried to convince Emerson otherwise.
Sorry, officer, but if you weren’t doing anything wrong and have nothing to hide why the paranoia over someone taking pictures of a public and newsworthy event? Is it because you really didn’t have your lights and sirens on when you caused that collision and sent yourself and the other driver to the hospital?
On the other hand, the Hillsboro cops are now trying to say that the unknown officer never told Emerson to delete his pictures, that the Buick driver “failed to yield” to the officer, and that the cop was only trying to tell Emerson that investigators could confiscate his phone for evidence.
Sure, fellas, keep telling yourself that. But why hasn’t the Buick driver been cited yet for “failing to yield”? And why haven’t investigators asked Emerson to see his photos? Seems like the photos would be very important and useful in determining what really occurred. However, that’s probably not what they’re trying to find out—cover-ups generally don’t involve getting to the truth.
Personally, I’m more inclined to believe a guy on the street who has nothing to gain or lose from this incident than a cop clearly trying to protect himself.
As KATU reported:
“…the officer never told Emerson to delete his photos. After all, they say, that would be completely against protocol.”
Indeed.
Article from KATU
boywithgrenade.org 