The Mystery of the Central District Surveillance Cameras

Comments

1
23rd and Jackson? They're looking in the wrong spot because my Posse's on Broadway.
2
They're all wired up, do you want me to turn them on? It's pretty easy. Not like you have rights, Serfs.
3
Seems like some nice obvious stickers at eye-level mentioning the cameras above could be stuck on those light poles...
4
They're trying to stop the Sauntering Jaywalker crisis on Jackson. Its RAMPANT.
5
@4:

Either that or trying to bust those people who park in the Walgreen's/Auto Zone parking lot, like, ALL DAY LONG!
6
I've installed cameras like that. Typically I put them put them up a few days at a time, then take them down, and never inform the public utility district or anyone that I don't phyiscally have to in order to get it done - it's just more chance for someone to get in the way or come up with some unfounded concern. Then again, we aren't using them in a way that might potentially violate one's bill of rights rights, and they aren't red-light/speeding cameras, so no one typically cares.
7
@3 naw, the point is that they don't get mentioned.
8
Looking forward to seeing this in the final issue of the year:
In an August 6 SLOG post about surveillance cameras in the Central District, Brendan Kiley gratuitiously and mystifyingly described an anonymous source as "a local resident in a wheelchair." The Stranger regrets the error.
9
I used to be a manager at a business in that complex, and lived nearby for a decade.

A whole shitload of stolen & illicit goods move from one car trunk to another in that lot. I would not be surprised if large quantites of guns are changing hands there as well... there are certainly plenty of armed people hanging out in that lot at all hours.
10
With all sincerity, good job. This is what newspapers should do, but rarely seem to.
11
I just love love love that you called this dude. Keep on it.
12
Great work Stranger! The residents of Seattle have spoken with the release of Seattle's privacy principles. But it's clear Ed Murray and Seattle gov either don't care or know how to abide by them.
13
@12, Do you cops troll ON duty, or OFF duty? Are you at the station next to Detective Whitcomb right now?

Fucking hilarious for a cop to talk about not caring about privacy. I mean, didnt you guys block, then destroy 10,000 hours of dashcam footage of your department doing racist, illegal, or just improper bullshit? Pot calling the kettle black? More like the Cat calling the dog pussy.
14
"Bennett says the ATF has an agreement with Seattle City Light that allows them to install cameras—covert or overt—without notifying other city agencies."

SCL doesnt have that authority. And the ATF (feds) would either have to go through the mayor/city, or provide some written notice to the city to do this. Holmes/Murray need to sue on behalf of the city. The cops are monitoring, sans warrant, targeted individuals. The SPD, ATF or not, has no authority to up and say "We dont follow the rules of the city government, we act as we want, and get approval as we want".

Thats gross insubordination, and illegal search and seizure. Sadly, Murray has rolled over for the neofascist bigoted SPD before, he'll do it again.
15
I say more cameras the better if they are used to make some busts and prosectors actually do their job and prosecute. Police don't arrest suspects and the prosecutor can't prosecute any more with out video. The suspect who fired off 5 rounds in the Cellars parking in January had her case dismissed (prosecutors chose not to prosecute) even though she had the gun on her and the bullets matched the scene. All big unsolved cases at SPD that have no video will remain unsolved.
16
Well! Isn't this interesting. Thanks very much for the article and looking forward to further updates.
17
Cameras throughout the shooting range that is 23rd seems like a pretty fucking good idea.
18
@ 17. I agree, but please see the last paragraph:

"The question is not whether gun violence is a major problem that needs to be addressed. The answer to that is an obvious yes. The question is whether Seattle can establish meaningful surveillance policies—don't suck up the identities of everyone at a protest with StingRays, for example—without federal agencies being able to summarily preempt them just by picking up the phone and calling Seattle City Light."
19
Seattle Residents: DO SOMETHING ABOUT CRIME

*Government tries to do something about crime*

Seattle Residents: WHY ARE YOU DOING THIS???!!
20
@18, I'd keep the tinfoil hat in the closet for this one.
21
I know very little about this part of the utility, but it may be that utilities in general have no choice in this matter. It's like cell phone antennas - certain people freak about about them, but the federal regulations about access to wireless say that if a cell phone company thinks a power pole is a good place for an antenna, the power company pretty much has to give them space for it.
22
@13 Araucania - I'm not an effin pig. I'm a citizen who cares about privacy and you are clearly illiterate. The comment I wrote exhibits anti-surveillance camera sentiment. And so what if I were a cop? I'm not trolling. I'm giving legitimate opinions.

Also, just because people may not be 110% onboard with every word you or the Stranger writes doesn't mean they're a cop. Keep your bullshit accusations to yourself.
23
I am a big believer in privacy rights, but I want to point out there is a huge difference in surveillance of your emails, texts, etc. which are private communications and come with the expectation of privacy, and surveillance of a public area that is viewable by all, and comes with no expectation of privacy. Although it does creep me out, as someone who lives a block from one of those cams, I say bring it on. I'm sick of assholes shooting off their guns and scaring the shit out of us.
24
Ask yourselves this:

With what we KNOW the SPD already does with cam footage, texts, recovered pictures, etc....do you trust them within an inch of public photos? How many SPD'ers have been busted for stalking women already?
25
@21: They dont have the right to violate the 4th amendment without notice to SOMEONE, ANYONE within the city government. They are literally saying "fuck the government/checks and balances, we asked the power company *who probably has zero understanding of the legal ramifications and requisites" and they said yes!"

Its the equivalent of a kid asking the mailman if they have permission to go outside. Then when the mailman says "I dont know, do you", saying "thanks for allowing me, fuck you mom and dad, they told me I could!"
26
Sorry, that should have been @22. Also, 100% of your comments involving police here defend cops. Lol, thought you would 'throw off the scent' by referring to them as 'pigs'? Do you not use the Internet much?

And while not everyone who disagrees with me is a cop, every troll here who defends these racist, fascist bullies and bigots likely is. Because NOBODY, and I mean NOBODY else defends cops so rampantly. Not even republicans, or libertarians, or even your most die hard right winger. Only cops defend their own abuses and bullshit with such fuhrer.
27
@26 why does every thread have to devolve into Hitler references?
29
LOL! Araucania you're a fucking tard. Reread comment 12. I'm not defending cops or gov surveilance. Im against it.

The more i read your comments the more i think you're just a paranoid troll of who you believe to be cops/trolls. You clearly don't take the 5 seconds to read before lashing out and losing all credibility.

By the way, i find it ironic that you're now accusing people of being racist when you advertised for the kkk by hyperlinking their site in another thread.

If you were reasonable you'd realize your absurdity and drop this. But i don't think you are or will. As i stated above, you're a fucking tard.
30
@29

Lol, so surdog, you defend yourself by deflecting the argument + the claim that you (honestly) defend police abuses in all your comments by calling the person pulling your card a "fucking tard".

Sure bro.

Also, dumbshit, I didnt hyperlink their site, I posted examples of the top sites visited by cops. Including the klans website. How did you see the halflink, but not read that? Lol. Either you are a fucking idiot, or you are full of shit.

Ask yourself, who are you trying to convince? A majority of Seattle citizens are aware your department is full of unaccountable, untrustable bigots. Even wealthy white citizens dont trust your bullshit (maybe thats because 85% of SPD officers dont live in Seattle, and spend most of their offtime shitting on the city, and its minority/gay/poor populations).

Dude, take that bullshit somewhere else. You arent dealing with some high school graduate bully or skinhead who finished the academy. Most slog commentors and readers have 3 brain cells or more to rub together.
31
Hahah. Too hilarious man. I'm not a cop.
33
I think the freedom-from-surveillance folks and the drone enthusiasts could come to some sort of middle ground where the drone operators contribute to society by having their drones slip little opaque baggies over these cameras.
34
@33 some privacy enthusiasts are also drone operators.

Putting a bag over the ATF cameras would probably constitute interference with a federal investigation. I wouldn't touch that with someone else's airjacked drone.
35
It's a joke, dicknose.
36
I love you, too.