Psycho Woman Attacks Teen Over RC Drone.

[Rageaholic]

Warning: Video contains language.

So some kid is flying a drone around at a beach. This paranoid wackjob comes up to him and calls him a pervert and then assaults him. But here's what scares me. On another link, there's a forum post from the kid explaining what happened.

I went to a nearby beach that is a whopping 2 miles long, set up, talked to some people that were curious what my “thing” was, demonstrated the loiter feature (pulling the quad to one direction or another), demonstrated rtl (flying it away then having it return), and make a lot of people think the quad was just awesome. I never went below 50 feet save for take off/landing, then after the end of my last flight, some crazy lady came over and started taking pictures of me…and dialed 911 for the 3rd time in 15 minutes…she said something to the effect of, “There’s a guy here taking pictures at the beach with a helicopter plane.” (I distinctly remember her saying, “with a helicopter plane,” because that just sounds hilarious.) They basically said that they’d send someone when one gets free during each of the 3 calls she made, she decided they didn’t care enough about someone obeying the law so when no one was around she assaulted me and she decided to stop when she got a phone call. I called the police to report the assault, and boy was the response big…10 or more vehicles arrived (cops, DEEP, and an ambulance)…They first listened to her story of lies (she claimed I was taking close ups of people in bikinis, and that she had asked me to stop flying before calling the police, and that I was the one that assaulted her, and and and). The police approached me very aggressively, believing her full story, and before anything else was said I brought up something that she missed… The fact that the cell phone in my hand has a camera…that was recording. I had video evidence that she went nuts completely unprovoked, and was the one that assaulted me. She was then charged with assault, and breach of peace and I gave the cops a copy of the video for their prosecution. I then also showed them my last flight where you can make out her colorful shirt getting up from the beach then following it until it lands which proved that she lied when claiming that she asked me to stop flying before calling the police.
At the end of it all, one of the officers said to me basically, “Flying that thing the way you were is fine, you’re not in any trouble. You can come back and fly, but just be aware that some people can be alarmed.”

So let's recap: Coco Puffs assaults him unprovoked, he doesn't fight back, he even calls the police himself... yet he's almost arrested. The only reason he wasn't arrested was because he has actual video evidence. But if he wasn't thinking on his feet, he could have been charged when she was the instigator.

WTF is wrong with this picture?

[s_stabeler]

without knowing of what the kid and woman looked like, I can't be sure. (specifically, visible injuries on each) if the kid wasn't visibly injured, then it would look like the woman was telling the truth. Remember that the drone was landed when the police arrived- until the camera footage, all thye had was the woman's word what happened- and the kid DID have an RC drone that was capable of taking pictures like the woman described. Should the cops have been agressive? probably not ( although I have to be suspicious since this IS the kid's description- I haven't watched the video) but you could just as easily say it was "woman reports drone flight to police, police arrest woman following investigation"

[Ginger Tea]

I am not sure if the line

I then also showed them my last flight where you can make out her colorful shirt getting up from the beach then following it until it lands which proved that she lied when claiming that she asked me to stop flying before calling the police.

is about his phone footage or something from the drone, I have no qualms about RC but RC with a go pro or other built in video camera, well it does open up its uses for less moral reasons.

Many years ago when phones didn't have cameras there was an upgrade for one or more types that had a flexible camera and I knew it would be used for under the table/upskirt shots as it was not as in your face as a camera is, hell in my old clamshell that had a rotating camera I made a point to always cover the area of the lens (that was facing me 90% of the time) so no one would think I was taking pics of them whilst looking like I was texting, in truth I was actually texting.

[anakhouri]

Even if she wasn't wrong to be paranoid, there are better ways to handle the situation than calling the police multiple times and physically attacking the kid. Call the cops once, move your family and yourself away from the drone, and wait for law enforcement. It's not difficult.

[TheHuckster]

So let's recap: Coco Puffs assaults him unprovoked, he doesn't fight back, he even calls the police himself... yet he's almost arrested. The only reason he wasn't arrested was because he has actual video evidence. But if he wasn't thinking on his feet, he could have been charged when she was the instigator.

WTF is wrong with this picture?

"Approaching someone aggressively" might not be "almost arrested." They're asking serious questions to get to the bottom of something. If a woman is claiming someone is taking lewd photos on the beach with an airborne device, it's something you can't just dismiss. The only reason we know for sure who was right is because of the video evidence. Without that, it's he-said she-said and hence the police have to use whatever other evidence they might have.

Without the video evidence, and assuming both are screaming at eachother, the police should take both people aside, and get the story from each, and seek witnesses. I would assume this is a public beach with many people around, so surely someone must've heard or seen a scuffle if the woman assaulted him.

[Rageaholic]

Without the video evidence, and assuming both are screaming at eachother, the police should take both people aside, and get the story from each, and seek witnesses. I would assume this is a public beach with many people around, so surely someone must've heard or seen a scuffle if the woman assaulted him.

I don't think there were any witnesses though, which means it's a he said/she said situation. However, it seems like there was still plenty of evidence that she assaulted him.

-His shirt was ripped in the scuffle.
-The drone camera. It would have been clear that he was just filming the vicinity and not harassing anyone. That is unless the woman broke the drone somehow (which would fall under destruction of property?)

[s_stabeler]

again, though, the police were coming in after the scuffle was already over- so for all they know, the shirt could have already been ripped. As for the drone camera, that's true enough- which us why it was cleared up when the operator of the drone provided the footage of what happened.

I repeat, we a) only have the operator of the drone saying they were aggressive-
and we don't know what exactly he means. I imagine the conversation went something like: POLICE- "We've been told you have been taking inappropriate pictures with that drone and assaulted that lady. what do you have to say for yourself?" DRONE OPERATOR "She hit me! and the drone was flying 50 feet up, and the pictures aren't inappropiate- and she was the only one who cared. I've got proof- my camera was recording" POLICE " Can we see the recording" and then, with proof, the situation was resolved.

in short, I can see a scenario that fits, while not actually having the police acting unreasonably at all.

[siead_lietrathua]

I don't think there were any witnesses though, which means it's a he said/she said situation. However, it seems like there was still plenty of evidence that she assaulted him.

there is video though. so it's not he-said-she-said. very far from it.

i dunno the big reaction to this though. the kid had everything solved on scene, the woman was charged and is looking at probably a year in jail time. *shrug* score one for common sense.

[mikoyan29]

One of the times I was staying in California, the hotel I stay at gives me a pretty good view of the planes coming into John Wayne. I was taking pictures of them one night and there was an argument down in the parking lot. Next thing I know, I'm faced with a gorilla who had to preen for his girlfriend (even though he was arguing with her). He asked me what I was doing and I told him. IT was getting dark at the time....so I showed him my pictures and he left convinced. I sure as hell wasn't taking pictures of his ugly ass or ugly girlfriend...


Just about anything has a nefarious use though....so should we just ban stuff for that reason?

[Aethian]

There was a witness who was calling the cops.

[TheHuckster]

I don't think there were any witnesses though, which means it's a he said/she said situation. However, it seems like there was still plenty of evidence that she assaulted him.

There might be evidence that she assaulted him, but without the video, there's no evidence that he was committing voyeurism. Surely, if there isn't attainable evidence, he shouldn't be prosecuted, but that doesn't mean the police can't question him about it. It's just fortunate that, thanks to the video, it's a open-shut case.

This is a major strawman: You seem glad there was enough evidence to support the guy's story, and then go on to claim that had there not been video evidence he'd be the victim of some kind of injustice. It didn't happen, so we'll never know what would come of it if the guy couldn't back up his side of the story. Simply being "aggressively approached" by the police is NOT injustice.

[AccountingDrone]

"Approaching someone aggressively" might not be "almost arrested." They're asking serious questions to get to the bottom of something. If a woman is claiming someone is taking lewd photos on the beach with an airborne device, it's something you can't just dismiss. The only reason we know for sure who was right is because of the video evidence. Without that, it's he-said she-said and hence the police have to use whatever other evidence they might have.

Without the video evidence, and assuming both are screaming at eachother, the police should take both people aside, and get the story from each, and seek witnesses. I would assume this is a public beach with many people around, so surely someone must've heard or seen a scuffle if the woman assaulted him.

Sorry, but if the kid had been arrested and the woman wanted to push some sort of charge for his taking pictures of her, on a public beach you have no expectations of privacy anywhere other than inside toilets, changing cabanas or privacy tents. I never assume that I have an expectation of privacy anywhere I am not inside a closed room. Just like I never assume any cell phone, skype or other internet based communication is private unless I have arranged encription at both ends.

[TheHuckster]

Sorry, but if the kid had been arrested and the woman wanted to push some sort of charge for his taking pictures of her, on a public beach you have no expectations of privacy anywhere other than inside toilets, changing cabanas or privacy tents. I never assume that I have an expectation of privacy anywhere I am not inside a closed room. Just like I never assume any cell phone, skype or other internet based communication is private unless I have arranged encription at both ends.

Depending on the beach, some have rules against taking closeup shots of sunbathers that you don't know and consider it a form of harassment. Perhaps it is not a criminal issue, but they could ask you to leave the beach if they catch you creepily doing so or at least confiscate your camera.

[Rageaholic]

I think the thing that gets me with this is the double standard. If the roles were reversed and it was a man attacking a teenage girl for taking pictures, he would have been instantly arrested and seen as a creep (and rightfully so). But I can't help but wonder if this kid did one thing 'wrong' (ie fight back or fail to provide evidence), if she would have been let off easier, or worse, him being punished. I might actually start a different thread on that issue, because it's one that's disturbing to me.

[Gilhelmi]

When investigating crimes, I notice that police get (what civilians call) "Aggressive". They have to be because when most people get intimidated they are more apt to tell the truth (or at least get bad at telling lies).