Did Dayton Police Honor U.S. Constitution First During Protest Encounter?

[votesparks]

Run time: 09:32 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ABzV2sdz3Yc   Posted on YouTube: November 11, 2011 By YouTube Member: daytoninformer Views on YouTube: 4   Posted on DU: November 11, 2011 By DU Member: votesparks Views on DU: 1239

 
A discussion of free speech issues surrounding the Dayton Police Department and Occupy Dayton, with University of Dayton Law School Graduate and lifelong Dayton Citizen Rockwell Patterson.

[OilemFirchen]

1. With all due deference

Rockwell needs a refresher course or three...

That said, a few observations:

Neither "speech" nor "art" are defensible acts of defacement. What IS defensible, however, is chalk, as it does no injury.

The county-owned private property canard has nothing to do with Dayton's incorporation. A public square is public, period. County property ON the square, like a parked van or a generator could be successfully argued as "private" - as in not for public use - but not the square itself.

Dayton Police represent the city, not the citizens. Thus, it DOES matter if a sign was erected with a permit, versus a violation of a noise ordinance.

The police are obligated to respond when a complaint is lodged, though in this case it doesn't seem that they could come up with any actionable offenses. Were any citations issued? If not, this seems like a slight ado over nothing.

BTW,and slightly OT, I think that the Downtown Dayton Partnership is being quite reasonable, and OD should take them up on their offer to relocate to Dave Hall Plaza, while still having a presence on Courthouse Square via an information table. The city and DDP have been very accommodating and it would be a win-win for OD to reciprocate.

[nineteen50]

2. If you can't write it and you can not voice it how do you

petition government for redress of grievances, throw money at
them? Oh, I forgot that is free speech.

[Peregrine]

3. I'm sorry, these guys are idiots.

The sidewalk is a forum, and as long as the city is content neutral they can ban all writing or art drawn upon them. Not all public property is open to public access. Not all public property that is open to public access is open to demonstrations. Once again if they are content neutral.

[JDPriestly]

4. We shall see. Lawyers argue the law. Courts decide the law.

You can't be sure till the judge . . . .