Several folks have emailed this story to us over the past couple of days. It seems a group of Libertarians in DC went to the Jefferson Memorial on Saturday night to celebrate Thomas Jefferson’s birthday by dancing silently with their iPods (similar to our Mp3 Experiments.) The event was broken up by DC police, and one of the participants was arrested and detained for several hours.
DCist has the story:
In the [first video] you can watch the group as they quietly danced around the memorial (which, to be clear, is open to the public 24 hours a day, according to its web site). A U.S. Park Police officer can then be seen approaching the dancers and telling them to leave.
The second video, posted below, shows the dancers arguing with Park Police officers about why they’re being asked to leave. They say they were quietly dancing with headphones on to celebrate Jefferson’s birthday, and that they weren’t breaking any laws (which, as far as we can tell, they indeed were not). Toward the end of the video, you can see Oberwetter, 28, being handcuffed and taken into custody.
Might want to look into getting a permit next time.
Why would they need a permit to dance in a public place? That kinda sucks.
Having lived near DC for 15 years, I assure that what was seen on camera was not in fact illegal in any sense of the term. Dancing anywhere in a public place isn’t disorderly, or all the crazy people in the city would be in jail.
I didn’t see what she did off camera so this is all speculation. To detain someone for something like that is a bit stupid.
They were being a bit loud, but considering they were doing it at night when there wouldn’t be anyone else there to disturb… this is pretty ridiculous.
Ridiculous, yes. I don’t see how they would have been breaking any laws.
But… was it really worth the fight? Is it really that big of a deal? I mean, it may be now, but did it have to be?
We held a subway dance party in Toronto a few weeks back. We told all the participants beforehand that if any Toronto Transit Commission Employees asked us to stop, to listen to them, because we didn’t want to cause any problems.
Wow… I think next time any flashmobs do anything, they need to make sure they have a lawyer as a participant in the group. That way, there is no question as whether the cops are abusing their power, though I doubt the Rent-a-Cops that patrol these memorials have any knowledge of the law. I’m not saying hire a lawyer, but someone’s gotta have a lawyer friend out there somewhere.
@Blaise Alleyne
Yes, it is a big deal. They did nothing wrong. Even if it is a minor thing, why is it any different from them taking away freedoms that are a big deal? You can’t just let them do that.
Something I learned from the Burning Man organizers and the Black Rock City Rangers: just as we try to make our events so participants can enjoy them, so can we try to make our events so that cops can enjoy them too. Usually it means providing a layer of interface and introduction… e.g. a large, explanatory, inviting, fear-mitigating sign.
Okay the police overeacted and really fighting with themn only escalated the matter, still I believe that in this case the Police were in the wrong…. That being said here comes the devil’s advocate.
This is Washington D.C. the capitol of our country. With the current administration constantly reminding us that the “terrorists” are around every corner, people tend to be a little more uptight these days. This includes the police. Now as we know this “MP3″ like even took place in a city that is likely to be on the top of a terrorist’s hit list. This was also done at night. So a group of people acting strange resisting and defying the police in a city where the perceived threat level is much higher… was a bad equation. In some ways maybe the police believed on some level that suspicious activity like that needed to be stopped for safety reasons? Yeah… I know the argument sucks… but it made more sense in my head.
Sense of entitlement. Assuming that the video depicts exactly what happened they should have just cooperated.
Performing this stunt at a national memorial was not respectful to those who were visiting the site and to those being rememebered by the memorial as well. That’s just me being nitpicky, however, feuding with the officer was ridiculous. It reminded me of online viral videos in which teenagers skaters end up fighting w/ a property owner or officer. The right thing to do would have been to quietly leave upon the officers request - after all - they did seem more loud and annoying than anything else - not entertaining as Improv Everywhere missions are…
@SamMB
They did this late at night so that they wouldn’t disrupt any tourists. The Memorial, as you can see in the videos, is pretty much empty.
@Max P
Yeah, the do have a sense of entitlement. An entitlement to free assembly in a public place.
I wasn’t there so I can’t say what happened apart from the video evidence, but it doesn’t seem to me that they broke any laws.
This wasn’t the DC Police aka MPD Metropolitan Police Department, this was the US Park Police, possibly the most useless police agency ever.
Aren’t these the same Park Police that “investigated” Vince Foster’s “suicide”?
Want to know what was illegal about this? Failing to comply with the lawful order of a police officer to leave the premises. If you don’t like the order or feel it’s “illegal,” then what you do is note down his name, file a complaint, or file a lawsuit. If you really feel that’s not enough and you simply must protest through civil disobedience, then bloody well accept the consequences instead of bitching around about it. Yes, you fail to comply with an order you will be arrested. What did you think would happen?
You clowns are quite lucky the U.S. Park Police was that patient with you in the first place. Try that stunt in other jurisdictions and you
> Yeah, the do have a sense of entitlement. An entitlement to free assembly in a public place.
Did they have a permit? Since you want to play armchair lawyer, you do know about assembly permits, right? And you understand disorderly conduct?
> I wasn’t there so I can’t say what happened apart from the video evidence, but it doesn’t seem to me that they broke any laws.
Disorderly conduct. That’s a law and it was, arguably, broken (the police only need probable cause).
>Failing to comply with the lawful order of a police officer to leave the premises. If you don’t like the order or feel it’s “illegal,”…Disorderly conduct. That’s a law and it was, arguably, broken (the police only need probable cause).<
If “probable cause” means “whatever I feel like on any given day,” we’re in trouble.
If the order is illegal to begin with, then isn’t all subsequent legally required action (i.e. complying with the lawful order of a police officer) null and void? If a cop asks me to do something illegal, I should just do it because he told me to and then at some later date file a complaint that will certainly be ignored or disregarded? Don’t I have rights too? They weren’t making noise, they weren’t even protesting. As far as I could see, they were a group of friends having a little impromptu celebration.
>Disorderly conduct. That’s a law and it was, arguably, broken (the police only need probable cause).<
If “probable cause” means “whatever I feel like on any given day,” we’re in trouble.
> Did they have a permit? Since you want to play armchair lawyer, you do know about assembly permits, right? And you understand disorderly conduct?
According to the Jefferson Memorial’s own website, you only need a permit there if the group comprised of more than 25 people. This was less than that.
In my opinion “disorderly conduct” is what cops charge you with when they’re not sure what law you’re breaking, but feel like you must be doing something wrong. See: No Pants 2k6.
The whole mission behind this website is to stage events where people do things outside the normal bounds of orderly conduct.
I’m guessing that the officers were Baptists and did not like the whole dancing thing or anything like unto it. So much for separation of church and state…
As an organizer of several IE global events in DC, I can assure you that the Jefferson Memorial is on Park Service land and Park Services requires groups bigger than 25 people to obtain a permit to demonstrate on their land even if it is something like this.
I’m pretty sure the land is considered a public park and I don’t think they have the constitutional right to do this, but it is indeed a law in DC.
@Bruce
The DCist story said they had “about 20.” From the videos it looked like under 25 to me. I would also argue that this was not a “demonstration.” They were just dancing.
@Charlie Todd
I don’t doubt that it was less than 25, nor do I question their right to dance at the memorial, unfortunately though A “demonstration” as defined by Park Services is literally any organized gathering of people.
If it was less than 25 people then I would love for the girl that was arrested to find local law students and file a suit against DC police to get them to ease off.
@Bruce
Agreed.
@K Clem
I’m not sure what this has to do with separation of church and state (which, in fact, was a law to originally protect the church from the state; not vice versa). And I’m not sure what Baptists you know because the ones I know go dancing quite a bit. You have the wrong denomination for the “dancing is bad” theory. And even still to assume in a country where we have so many forms of religion that all the police officers/security guards there were one is a pretty uneducated assumption.
@the topic
Do I think they were doing something wrong? No. However, I’m not certain that they weren’t hoping to get some sort of attention of that kind to begin with (especially looking at how self righteous and “victimized” they became the moment they were asked to move along). Were they being disruptive? Not really, but they were making a little more noise than is probably necessary or common in the middle of the night. And considering it was night all noise sounds that much louder simply because its a stark contrast to the normal silence. So in the end, taking into account that it is NOT illegal for a police officer to ask you to leave, the group should have moved on and done the complaint thing. And comparing the act of an officer asking a group in the middle of the night who look like they’re slightly spazzing out to leave with an officer asking you to do something illegal is a poor comparison.
Basically it comes down to respect. The group didn’t respect these people when they didn’t notify at least one member of the officers/guards there of what they were planning out of courtesy to their authority and the fact that it was night and they further didn’t respect them when they were asked to leave and not only resisted orders but blatantly stood arguing noisily with them.
>If the order is illegal to begin with, then isn’t all subsequent legally required action (i.e. complying with the lawful order of a police officer) null and void?
1) No. And the reason is to minimize self-righteous clowns from resisting the police because they think they’re right and the police are wrong. That’s why, for example, resisting arrest is illegal in ALL instances, whether the arrest itself is legal or not to begin with. The last thing the state wants is for people to play street lawyer and cause unnecessary confrontations with the police. If you want to squabble about who’s right and who’s wrong, save it for the judge.
2) The order was not illegal. The police have the lawful authority to ask you to leave a public place.
3) Whether or not you believe the order to be unlawful or not is actually irrelevant. An order from the police to disperse does not at any point become “null and void.” If you wish to take that stance, however, accept the consequence of your decision: arrest.
>If a cop asks me to do something illegal, I should just do it because he told me to and then at some later date file a complaint that will certainly be ignored or disregarded?
Hyperbole. Does you dispersing from a location require you to do something illegal? Come off the high horse. These people were ordered to disperse. Complying with said order requires no illegal action on anyone’s part.
>Don’t I have rights too?
You don’t have the right to resist a lawful order to disperse. Sorry to burst your bubble.
>They weren’t making noise, they weren’t even protesting.
They were making plenty of noise and were certainly protesting in that video. Which part of yelling at a police officer is not considered “making noise” or “protesting”?
>As far as I could see, they were a group of friends having a little impromptu celebration.
What I saw was a bunch of troublemakers who were looking for a confrontation.
>If “probable cause” means “whatever I feel like on any given day,” we’re in trouble.
That’s not what it means, so what’s your point?
And if you don’t feel probable cause was met, take it to a judge. Arguing with and resisting the police only weakens whatever ridiculous case you think you had in the first place.
“Legal View” just hit the nail on the head. This is just like the “don’t tase me bro” incident except less exciting. Sure, it would be nice if they’d been able to carry on, but the rule with these things is supposed to be that when it stops being fun you stop, and if somebody is getting ruffled by it it stops being fun. Seriously, what kind of police officer do you think wants to stand around at midnight making sure that a bunch of people really are just silent-discoing for the sake of it and nothing worse?
I’m not really surprised. IE Atlanta got kicked out ten minutes into our own silent dance mission (and in our case there was no music whatsoever).
“Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses…unless of course they can’t dance. Sorry, that’s a deal breaker.”
-Lady Liberty
So simple dancing is illegal now.
And legal view you forget to take a look at the fact that you need atleast 25 people to get a permit.
What was the cause of the officer to stop what they were doing? I mean all this procedural baloney you are espousing.
They could’ve stopped, but the question is why stop them in the first place? What law did they break, if you can answer that then you have a perfect case. But other than that you’re just telling us procedural baloney. That ain’t the important issue to deal with.,
The question is what law did they break? Disorderly conductat ? Is dancing so disorderly? When? So we should raid clubs now which are also btw public places.
@…
I didn’t mean to suggest that it isn’t a big deal now, but rather, was it really worth turning it into such an altercation? I agree with LegalView to a certain extent… I’m not sure that the subject matter really warranted such a stand off.
Anyone else having flashbacks to Kevin Bacon and “Footloose”?
I think it will be a very 1984ish/”Footloose” kind of day when people are not even allowed to dance… it is just dancing. :-( I love dancing! More dancing I say!
“So a group of people acting strange resisting and defying the police in a city where the perceived threat level is much higher… was a bad equation.”
What kind of scared faggotry is this? Terrorists try to blend in. If someone is acting strange and captures the attention of the people, he’s not a terrorist. For God’s sake, you won WW 2 63 years ago, and now you Americans are scared of your own shadow.
@Legal View - The letter of the law and the spirit of the law are two different things. I will pretty much completely agree with you on the whole resisting arrest/protesting bit, which was probably not in the spirit of the mission, but just the people being anti-establishment(or troublemakers, however you want to put it). However, I think saying that they were troublemakers looking for confrontation is completely off base and just plain silly.
My only point is that their gathering did not look unlawful nor too disturbing and that you reciting the letter of the law doesn’t make what they’re doing completely illegal. The officers used their discretion(which, about %55 of the time, is speculative and rude) to decide to try to tell everyone to leave and the actions of the IE agents to resist was unjustified as the officers seemed to be somewhat normal, until IE agents resisted, then things got out of hand.
Like I said, I agree with you to a point, but don’t come in here and spew the letter of the law and call us a bunch of troublemakers, especially telling us to get off our high horses. We don’t go on your lawyer forums and call you a bloodsucker and tell you about all the unethical things lawyers do(even if you aren’t a lawyer, please read between the lines of what I’m trying to tell you).
America was built on freedom, not asshatery. I’m saying that to the IE agents on this mission, the police, Legal View, and a couple of the other incredibly silly comments on here.
@Will - “Seriously, what kind of police officer do you think wants to stand around at midnight making sure that a bunch of people really are just silent-discoing for the sake of it and nothing worse?”
I believe, the phrase that most police abide by (or swear to) is “To serve and protect”.
I’ve had a few times where I was filming somewhere and police have come by to ask what we were doing. I politely informed them as much on the current project and I invited them to stay and watch if they felt it was going to be a problem and ask us to leave if they felt it was going to be a problem. That’s part of there job, man, to make sure things don’t get out of hand.
Unlike what you see on television and movies, police officers are not omniscient, nor perfectly grounded in customer service. They also aren’t inherently evil, or trying to take out frustrations on random civilians.
In confusing situations, the police will first try to gain complete control. Failing that, they will try to disperse or end the confusion. If necessary, they’ll end the situation by arresting people who don’t do what they want.
The police may or may not know that the arrests will not result in prosecution — they probably don’t care. All they want is for the situation they don’t understand to end. They don’t really want to learn about the situation, they just want things to be normal.
As more people get involved in organized events that transcend normal behavior, this type of confrontation will be more and more common. Perhaps IE could post a notice and advice regarding encounters with authority (security guards and peace officers both).
The first video clearly shows they were not being quiet. The camera isn’t even near the people dancing and you can hear plenty of noise. When the guy asks them to leave because they are noisy, he was well within his right. What makes it worse is that this was in DC in a time in society where the country is paranoid.
This was definitely not a smart idea.
In confusing situations, the police will first try to gain complete control. Failing that, they will try to disperse or end the confusion. If necessary, they’ll end the situation by arresting people who don’t do what they want.
yes this is what police do. However this is not what police are supposed to do.
Police are supposed to determine if soemone has broken the law. If the answer is yes then arrest that person with a supportable charge. If the answer is no then you LEAVE THEM ALONE.
As a native DC’er, I can tell you the problem has more to do with the noise & WHERE they decided to stage their event. As one enters the columns, there are signs asking for quiet & respect. This event clearly ignored that….had they done this outside the columns/on the steps, I suspect the officers would have let it go.
Talking back/getting confrontational only further exacerbated the issue.
cops have become power hungry, they just taze’ or arrest everyone that bugs them in the least.
Also people need to get over their terrorist paranoia, by feeling like we should be afraid we admit part of our defeat.
Honestly, I hope that all of you aren’t adults, because I’m 15 and even I can tell that that event wasn’t silent or coordinated - it was a little bit of chaos, I’d say…and I think the guy with the camera couldn’t really make a decent argument, I mean, “This is the Jefferson Memorial…we’re, we’re just dancing for his birthday,there’s nothing wrong with that; we’re just silently dancing…read the walls…” I don’t know, I just don’t think it was very silent or orderly - everyone was laughing and clapping their hands - and giving that policeman a hard time was unnecessary when he just asked them to get out.
Also, the terrorist assumption is pretty screwed - I think that everyone knows the police knew they weren’t terrorists…if you who think that the police thought they were terrorists are so paranoid, then what is America about when you ARE America? Your generation has become scared of just an immature group of dancers…this had nothing to do with terrorists at all. I believe that you have taken things way out of proportion…they were dancing, making noise, they were asked to leave, fought with the police, one girl got arrested…it was probably predictable if they’d thought it through, and now it’s done. There isn’t anything left to argue about.
I dont think these guys were necessarily kicked out for dancing but more because they were in a big group and they suspected something out of the ordinary might escalate. It was obvious they were all together but maybe if they were spread out more it wouldn’t have been a big deal.
Although there weren’t any music, they weren’t really being ’silent’. I’m pretty sure it’s standard to be quiet at memorials anyways so this was just stupid.
OH NO THE TERRORISTS ARE DANCING WITH HEADPHONES ON AROUND THE JEFFERSON MEMORIAL!!! WELL THEY’RE NOT GETTING THEIR 40 VIRGINS ON MY WATCH!!!
When i was watching the video, i did notice that the dancers were being rather loud. true, they had headphones on, but that didnt mean that they were being quiet. Then when the police officer came in and they started arguing with them, i couldnt help but notice that they were being rather petulant. Was it really so hard to just leave?
@ Nichole - i think you had the right idea. I’m pretty sure that they went in there hoping for attention of any kind, good or bad. i highly doubt they really cared about jefferson and his birthday, i think they were just looking for an excuse to act in a way that would make people notice them.
Once they were asked to leave, they began to argue, as the video shows. Imagine if the cops had asked them to leave, and the people had argued, and instead of arresting them, the cops listened and left them alone: would it really be fun after that? I’ve noticed that whenever youre doing something fun and get yelled at for it, its not usually fun if you keep doing it anyway.
And if they had really wanted to celebrate jefferson’s birthday, they would have gone to the memorial to look at it, not to dance in it. they didnt care, they just wanted to attention.
@ GreyBear
>The question is what law did they break? Disorderly conductat ? Is dancing so disorderly? When? So we should raid clubs now which are also btw public places.<
yes, clubs are public places, but the purpose of a club is specifically for dancing. the jefferson memorial (any memorial) is not, its purpose is for people to pay respects, and none of those people were being very respectful, even if they had gone at night.
one last thing: Their arguments were really flimsy. “read the walls you protect”? “If jefferson were here right now he would be very dissatisfied”? and is it any wonder that the police officer got angry with them? the camera carrier was taunting him: “youre angry…wow…”
Willow, why do you hate America?
@LegalView
i admit that u should let a police officer do his job - unless he imposes on ur rights as an american citizen.
#1 - There were under 25 people - there is no problem with the Jefferson Memorial rules - nothing is being broken
#2 - Yes, he may ask people to leave, but what purpose was it for? if anything, he should have a complaint written against him for for doing the unnecessary in the first place by asking people to leave.
#3 - only wanna-be-cops do s*** like that. he probably needed to feel important once in his life - all the rent-a-cops do that to me when im doing something that isnt necessarily illegal.
@everybody else
it is pretty weird to dance in the jefferson memorial…very weird. feel free to do what u want to do - even if that means dancing for jefferson. the cop probably saw this as very awkward and prepared himself for the “worst”
But my honest opinion - the cop is a jerk who never got anywhere in life - just like all the wannabe-cops/rent-a-cops