>I’m confused. What law says you’re not allowed to snap a photo of under cover cops while they’re conducting a search warrant? If they’re under cover, there’s nothing to see. If there’s something to see, well I guess they blew their cover.
But Randy Dean Sievert is being charged, and accused of violating his probation. Since when was not taking a picture a condition of probation? It seems like they were really looking to grab this guy. Sure he was a known drug dealer, but if they were doing their jobs, i.e. wearing masks, there wouldn’t be anything he could do with this picture. I mean, what could he do? Could he warn his druggy friends to stay away from some guys in ski masks who drive a non-descript car? Could he warn the guy whose house is being searched? It’s a little too late for him to do anything about it now, isn’t it?
The best part of this whole case is when they saw him snap snap snapping away, they threw him on the ground and made him destroy the photo! So, they now have 0 evidence for whatever crime they can dream up that he’s committed. I just don’t get it. If they’d just let him snap away, they would have still been under cover. But now, everybody knows who’s involved, and there’s a big uproar. This whole thing kinda backfired, didn’t it?