A man harasses a woman for wearing a Puerto Rico shirt, saying it's 'un-American'

[EverCurious]

I saw the clip of this exchange. He was quite far from her. The officer standing by was good enough. After all the cop was not about to tell the man to shut up, and that's an order.

There was nothing wrong with her shirt. It was fine.

But the officer should have told him to leave the woman alone.

Looked like a public park to me, cops can't really do that because of the 1st. "Feeling uncomfortable" about someone else's opinion does not make it a crime.

 

[Nia88]

I saw the clip of this exchange. He was quite far from her. The officer standing by was good enough. After all the cop was not about to tell the man to shut up, and that's an order.

There was nothing wrong with her shirt. It was fine.

But the officer should have told him to leave the woman alone.

Looked like a public park to me, cops can't really do that because of the 1st. "Feeling uncomfortable" about someone else's opinion does not make it a crime.

What that guy was doing was verbal harassment. When someone says stop talking to me and get away and that person continues to do so, that is harassment.

 

[J.E.D]

I saw the clip of this exchange. He was quite far from her. The officer standing by was good enough. After all the cop was not about to tell the man to shut up, and that's an order.

There was nothing wrong with her shirt. It was fine.

He got in her face several times. She asked the officer for assistance and he ignored her.

 

[J.E.D]

I saw the clip of this exchange. He was quite far from her. The officer standing by was good enough. After all the cop was not about to tell the man to shut up, and that's an order.

There was nothing wrong with her shirt. It was fine.

But the officer should have told him to leave the woman alone.

Looked like a public park to me, cops can't really do that because of the 1st. "Feeling uncomfortable" about someone else's opinion does not make it a crime.

She rented that space. Public park or not, she paid to use that gazebo.

 

[EverCurious]

You lefties opened up the door saying harassment and getting into peoples faces was fine and protected under the first. You got what you wanted, now deal with it.

 

[JoeB131]

But the officer should have told him to leave the woman alone.

He could have arrested him for public intoxication or disorderly conduct.

 

[JoeB131]

You lefties opened up the door saying harassment and getting into peoples faces was fine and protected under the first. You got what you wanted, now deal with it.

Yes, harrassing some poor woman because you don't like her tee-shirt is just like calling public figures to account for their policies and corruption.

 

[JoeB131]

Looked like a public park to me, cops can't really do that because of the 1st. "Feeling uncomfortable" about someone else's opinion does not make it a crime.

Again...

Disorderly conduct
Public Intoxication
Menacing

A whole bunch of charges they could have held this guy on or threatened him with..

and after this slug of a cop loses his job, you can bet the next guy will.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Looked like a public park to me, cops can't really do that because of the 1st.

What does it being a public park have to do with anything? The first amendment is a restriction on the government interfering with a citizen's free speech, it's not carte blanche for someone to verbally abuse or harass another person. And besides, the idiot made this an issue of bias when he made it clear he was harassing her because he thought she was not American. In my state that's considered "malicious" hassment which is a separate crime aside from the harassment statute when the harassment is based on protected class status including harassment directed at interracial couples, same sex couples, or actual or perceived national original (someplace other than "America" as this guy though), religion, due to being an immigrant, etc.

There is no excuse for his behavior and no excuse for the police "officer" to refuse to intervene particularly since the victim was practically begging him for assistance. The other police officers who showed up didn't have any problems with arresting the harasser so I don't know what the problem was with the first one unless he agreed with the jerk.

 

[2aguy]

A man harasses a woman for wearing a Puerto Rico shirt, saying it's 'un-American' - CNN

(CNN)An Illinois park is investigating after a woman accused one of its police officers of standing by as a man harassed her for wearing a shirt with the Puerto Rican flag, saying it was un-American.

Mia Irizarry says she was trying to celebrate her 24th birthday in the Forest Preserves of Cook County last month when the man approached her asking her why she was wearing the sleeveless Puerto Rico flag shirt, which also had "Puerto Rico" written below the V neckline.

Irizarry recorded the encounter on her phone, saying she felt threatened, and posted the video to Facebook.

On Monday, Forest Preserves of Cook County tweeted that it was aware of the June 14 incident and video.

‏"After the incident, we immediately launched an investigation pursuant to our personnel policies into the response of our officer," it said, in a series of posts on Twitter.

"The investigation is ongoing and the officer involved has been assigned to desk duty pending the outcome. The intoxicated individual involved in the incident was arrested and charged with assault and disorderly conduct.​

So my only question is since Puerto Rico is a part of "America" anyone convinced that this wasn't "racism"?

It is obvious from the audio I heard, he was drunk.....

 

[EverCurious]

Looked like a public park to me, cops can't really do that because of the 1st.

What does it being a public park have to do with anything? The first amendment is a restriction on the government interfering with a citizen's free speech, it's not carte blanche for someone to verbally abuse or harass another person. And besides, the idiot made this an issue of bias when he made it clear he was harassing her because he thought she was not American. In my state that's considered "malicious" hassment which is a separate crime aside from the harassment statute when the harassment is based on protected class status including harassment directed at interracial couples, same sex couples, or actual or perceived national original (someplace other than "America" as this guy though), religion, due to being an immigrant, etc.

There is no excuse for his behavior and no excuse for the police "officer" to refuse to intervene particularly since the victim was practically begging him for assistance. The other police officers who showed up didn't have any problems with arresting the harasser so I don't know what the problem was with the first one unless he agreed with the jerk.

Who do you think the police work for idiot?

Your states harassment laws (which sound like hate speech laws and would likely be unconstitutional if brought to a real court) may not apply in this case; are you in the same state this incident took place in?

Dude, if arrested, was probably arrested for touching the other man at the very end of the video or just public drunkenness, not for anything he said to offend this gal. Though I'd love to see the report on his arrest if you could dig it up for us.

Also, I'll keep your "harassment" law in mind next time we hear about some righty getting harassed as per Maxine Waters order - perhaps we can throw her in the slammer for encouraging illegal behavior.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Who do you think the police work for idiot?

Your states harassment laws (which sound like hate speech laws and would likely be unconstitutional if brought to a real court) may not apply in this case; are you in the same state this incident took place in?

Dude, if arrested, was probably arrested for touching the other man at the very end of the video or just public drunkenness, not for anything he said to offend this gal. Though I'd love to see the report on his arrest if you could dig it up for us.

You probably shouldn't be calling anyone an idiot particularly since you don't appear to understand the legal "concepts" referred to in my response.

So instead of me guessing, why don't you explain who the police work for and why you think they shouldn't have intervened? They're more than happy to show up for a bunch of other BS calls people make, but having a officer standing there who refused to tell the guy to leave her alone makes him beyond useless. I don't know anyone police or security officers or even just men who are bystanders, who would have stood by and let him antagonize and harass her like that.

Oh and BTS I love your avatar.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

It is obvious from the audio I heard, he was drunk.....

That makes it better or worse?

 

[EverCurious]

Who do you think the police work for idiot?

Your states harassment laws (which sound like hate speech laws and would likely be unconstitutional if brought to a real court) may not apply in this case; are you in the same state this incident took place in?

Dude, if arrested, was probably arrested for touching the other man at the very end of the video or just public drunkenness, not for anything he said to offend this gal. Though I'd love to see the report on his arrest if you could dig it up for us.

You probably shouldn't be calling anyone an idiot particularly since you don't appear to understand the legal "concepts" referred to in my response.

So instead of me guessing, why don't you explain who the police work for and why you think they shouldn't have intervened? They're more than happy to show up for a bunch of other BS calls people make, but having a officer standing there who refused to tell the guy to leave her alone makes him beyond useless. I don't know anyone police or security officers or even just men who are bystanders, who would have stood by and let him antagonize and harass her like that.

Oh and BTS I love your avatar.

Thanks, I've disliked the MSM for probably a decade now... They're little more than late night talk shows anymore; **** ton of [biased] opinions with occasional news sprinkled in - total crap.

Anyway, yeah, so the police work for the government, typically municipal government; that's why they paint city names on their cars and have city names on their badges and patches. Sometimes they work for the state, when policing state lands, we have a lot of those variety in Alaska - they're called "Alaska State Troopers" there was a TV show about them on Discovery for years. (Are you even American?)

"legal concepts" - Well you are arguing "bias harassment" which is a bullshit term that attempts to apply "racism" to pretty much any un-liked speech. The fascist lefts latest attempt to make freedom of speech illegal. Again though, IF that is actually the law in your state, then it may not (probably doesn't) apply in most states. Like in Alaska, what the guy did isn't illegal. Annoying and shitty, sure, but not a crime - which means an officer wouldn't be able to arrest him; it would be a governmental infringement of the first amendment for him to do so. In your state apparently the first isn't protected (unless you're making shit up/wrong about the application of the "law" you're citing) and would likely be struct down as an infringement of free speech were it heard in a real court. You'd have to actually show that the woman was harmed by his words; considering that she was actively bitching back at him - aka engaged in verbal debate with him - it's highly doubtful such a legal argument of harm would fly.

 

[Fang]

I have a Puerto Rico shirt. I wonder if that idiot would have said something to me.

 

[Fang]

Many RWs still don't know PR is part of the US. Like trump, for example.

Remember when trump was lying about Obama being a Muslin, Kenyan, Communist, whatever, RWs then didn't know Hawaii is a state. My bet is that trump didn't either.

Obama thinks they are part of the 57 states.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Democrats wanted this ever since they encouraged people to confront others. Did they imagine it would not happen to them?

 

[Camp]

Who do you think the police work for idiot?

Your states harassment laws (which sound like hate speech laws and would likely be unconstitutional if brought to a real court) may not apply in this case; are you in the same state this incident took place in?

Dude, if arrested, was probably arrested for touching the other man at the very end of the video or just public drunkenness, not for anything he said to offend this gal. Though I'd love to see the report on his arrest if you could dig it up for us.

You probably shouldn't be calling anyone an idiot particularly since you don't appear to understand the legal "concepts" referred to in my response.

So instead of me guessing, why don't you explain who the police work for and why you think they shouldn't have intervened? They're more than happy to show up for a bunch of other BS calls people make, but having a officer standing there who refused to tell the guy to leave her alone makes him beyond useless. I don't know anyone police or security officers or even just men who are bystanders, who would have stood by and let him antagonize and harass her like that.

Oh and BTS I love your avatar.

Thanks, I've disliked the MSM for probably a decade now... They're little more than late night talk shows anymore; **** ton of [biased] opinions with occasional news sprinkled in - total crap.

Anyway, yeah, so the police work for the government, typically municipal government; that's why they paint city names on their cars and have city names on their badges and patches. Sometimes they work for the state, when policing state lands, we have a lot of those variety in Alaska - they're called "Alaska State Troopers" there was a TV show about them on Discovery for years. (Are you even American?)

"legal concepts" - Well you are arguing "bias harassment" which is a bullshit term that attempts to apply "racism" to pretty much any un-liked speech. The fascist lefts latest attempt to make freedom of speech illegal. Again though, IF that is actually the law in your state, then it may not (probably doesn't) apply in most states. Like in Alaska, what the guy did isn't illegal. Annoying and shitty, sure, but not a crime - which means an officer wouldn't be able to arrest him; it would be a governmental infringement of the first amendment for him to do so. In your state apparently the first isn't protected (unless you're making shit up/wrong about the application of the "law" you're citing) and would likely be struct down as an infringement of free speech were it heard in a real court. You'd have to actually show that the woman was harmed by his words; considering that she was actively bitching back at him - aka engaged in verbal debate with him - it's highly doubtful such a legal argument of harm would fly.

You are so full of crap it is pathetic. The cop should have immediately stopped the drunk and removed him from the pavilion and detained him on suspicion of being under the influence of alcohol or drugs. The cop had the legal right and an obligation to hold him for 20 minutes (Supreme Court ruling) while he questioned him and ascertained if a crime was being committed. Hence, the cop could have and should have prevented the altercation and harassment as soon as the drunk began speaking and approaching the lady with the legal permit and permission to be where she was and doing what she was doing.
What a real cop would have done.

 

[EverCurious]

Who do you think the police work for idiot?

Your states harassment laws (which sound like hate speech laws and would likely be unconstitutional if brought to a real court) may not apply in this case; are you in the same state this incident took place in?

Dude, if arrested, was probably arrested for touching the other man at the very end of the video or just public drunkenness, not for anything he said to offend this gal. Though I'd love to see the report on his arrest if you could dig it up for us.

You probably shouldn't be calling anyone an idiot particularly since you don't appear to understand the legal "concepts" referred to in my response.

So instead of me guessing, why don't you explain who the police work for and why you think they shouldn't have intervened? They're more than happy to show up for a bunch of other BS calls people make, but having a officer standing there who refused to tell the guy to leave her alone makes him beyond useless. I don't know anyone police or security officers or even just men who are bystanders, who would have stood by and let him antagonize and harass her like that.

Oh and BTS I love your avatar.

Thanks, I've disliked the MSM for probably a decade now... They're little more than late night talk shows anymore; **** ton of [biased] opinions with occasional news sprinkled in - total crap.

Anyway, yeah, so the police work for the government, typically municipal government; that's why they paint city names on their cars and have city names on their badges and patches. Sometimes they work for the state, when policing state lands, we have a lot of those variety in Alaska - they're called "Alaska State Troopers" there was a TV show about them on Discovery for years. (Are you even American?)

"legal concepts" - Well you are arguing "bias harassment" which is a bullshit term that attempts to apply "racism" to pretty much any un-liked speech. The fascist lefts latest attempt to make freedom of speech illegal. Again though, IF that is actually the law in your state, then it may not (probably doesn't) apply in most states. Like in Alaska, what the guy did isn't illegal. Annoying and shitty, sure, but not a crime - which means an officer wouldn't be able to arrest him; it would be a governmental infringement of the first amendment for him to do so. In your state apparently the first isn't protected (unless you're making shit up/wrong about the application of the "law" you're citing) and would likely be struct down as an infringement of free speech were it heard in a real court. You'd have to actually show that the woman was harmed by his words; considering that she was actively bitching back at him - aka engaged in verbal debate with him - it's highly doubtful such a legal argument of harm would fly.

You are so full of crap it is pathetic. The cop should have immediately stopped the drunk and removed him from the pavilion and detained him on suspicion of being under the influence of alcohol or drugs. The cop had the legal right and an obligation to hold him for 20 minutes (Supreme Court ruling) while he questioned him and ascertained if a crime was being committed. Hence, the cop could have and should have prevented the altercation and harassment as soon as the drunk began speaking and approaching the lady with the legal permit and permission to be where she was and doing what she was doing.
What a real cop would have done.

You don't even know if the cop had already talked to the guy. You don't even know if this woman started it. You don't even know if that guy had a permit to be there as well.
You have a what three minute clip that this person put up specifically to get your sympathy.

I got some questions; why was an officer already there? Pretty interesting that a police officer is in a seemingly empty park isn't it? I mean isn't the saying "where's a cop when you need one" - Bet that cop was called there - before the recording started. And on that matter, so how long had the girl been recording? Pretty interesting that she's got both this asshat and a cop there don't you think? I mean what are the chances that she'd have a cop there to complain about while this guy debated with her?

I'm simply feeling that the woman ain't as innocent as you want to assume. Guys an ass, and she's actively engaging him, one might say keeping him in the conversation with her instead of just ignoring his drunk ass. Why?

 

[Camp]

Who do you think the police work for idiot?

Your states harassment laws (which sound like hate speech laws and would likely be unconstitutional if brought to a real court) may not apply in this case; are you in the same state this incident took place in?

Dude, if arrested, was probably arrested for touching the other man at the very end of the video or just public drunkenness, not for anything he said to offend this gal. Though I'd love to see the report on his arrest if you could dig it up for us.

You probably shouldn't be calling anyone an idiot particularly since you don't appear to understand the legal "concepts" referred to in my response.

So instead of me guessing, why don't you explain who the police work for and why you think they shouldn't have intervened? They're more than happy to show up for a bunch of other BS calls people make, but having a officer standing there who refused to tell the guy to leave her alone makes him beyond useless. I don't know anyone police or security officers or even just men who are bystanders, who would have stood by and let him antagonize and harass her like that.

Oh and BTS I love your avatar.

Thanks, I've disliked the MSM for probably a decade now... They're little more than late night talk shows anymore; **** ton of [biased] opinions with occasional news sprinkled in - total crap.

Anyway, yeah, so the police work for the government, typically municipal government; that's why they paint city names on their cars and have city names on their badges and patches. Sometimes they work for the state, when policing state lands, we have a lot of those variety in Alaska - they're called "Alaska State Troopers" there was a TV show about them on Discovery for years. (Are you even American?)

"legal concepts" - Well you are arguing "bias harassment" which is a bullshit term that attempts to apply "racism" to pretty much any un-liked speech. The fascist lefts latest attempt to make freedom of speech illegal. Again though, IF that is actually the law in your state, then it may not (probably doesn't) apply in most states. Like in Alaska, what the guy did isn't illegal. Annoying and shitty, sure, but not a crime - which means an officer wouldn't be able to arrest him; it would be a governmental infringement of the first amendment for him to do so. In your state apparently the first isn't protected (unless you're making shit up/wrong about the application of the "law" you're citing) and would likely be struct down as an infringement of free speech were it heard in a real court. You'd have to actually show that the woman was harmed by his words; considering that she was actively bitching back at him - aka engaged in verbal debate with him - it's highly doubtful such a legal argument of harm would fly.

You are so full of crap it is pathetic. The cop should have immediately stopped the drunk and removed him from the pavilion and detained him on suspicion of being under the influence of alcohol or drugs. The cop had the legal right and an obligation to hold him for 20 minutes (Supreme Court ruling) while he questioned him and ascertained if a crime was being committed. Hence, the cop could have and should have prevented the altercation and harassment as soon as the drunk began speaking and approaching the lady with the legal permit and permission to be where she was and doing what she was doing.
What a real cop would have done.

You don't even know if the cop had already talked to the guy. You don't even know if this woman started it. You don't even know if that guy had a permit to be there as well.
You have a what three minute clip that this person put up specifically to get your sympathy.

I got some questions; why was an officer already there? Pretty interesting that a police officer is in a seemingly empty park isn't it? I mean isn't the saying "where's a cop when you need one" - Bet that cop was called there - before the recording started. And on that matter, so how long had the girl been recording? Pretty interesting that she's got both this asshat and a cop there don't you think? I mean what are the chances that she'd have a cop there to complain about while this guy debated with her?

I'm simply feeling that the woman ain't as innocent as you want to assume. Guys an ass, and she's actively engaging him, one might say keeping him in the conversation with her instead of just ignoring his drunk ass. Why?

Like I said, you are full of crap. You are desperate to project a defense for the drunk harasser and the negligent cop. We don't need a long list of what if's and excuses. The cop has a standard by the book protocol he should have followed. Police policy in every jurisdiction in America dictates he should have done what I posted. Separate the parties, question the antagonist, determine if a law was or is being broken. Basic and simple. He did not follow police procedure and policy.