Police seize DJs' laptops

Police seize DJs’ laptops

Police seize DJs’ laptops

New police chief apparently condones policy that critics call illegal and punitive

By Joshua Emerson Smith

news@sfbg.com

San Francisco Police Department officers have added a controversial tactic to their aggressive raids on house parties (see “Fun under siege,” 4/22/09): they’re seizing laptop computers from DJs at the events.

While SFPD officials deny the laptop seizures is a new policy, they admit it has been condoned by Police Chief George Gascón, who took over in August and last month told the Guardian’s editorial board he wants to make the SFPD more transparent and accountable to the public (see “New coach, new approach,” 10/14/09).

“The police chief is aware that officers are being proactive in gathering evidence,” Sgt. Lyn Tomioka told the Guardian when asked about a string of laptop seizures by undercover cops over the last 10 months, most of them in cases in which the DJs weren’t even charged with a crime.

Many of the raids have occurred in SoMa, and were spearheaded by undercover officers who penetrated the parties and were followed by uniformed officers. San Francisco Entertainment Commission member Terrance Alan called the crackdown a “disappointing and dangerous trend.”

Tomioka said it’s a judgment call for officers to seize laptops as evidence of an illegal party, but Alan said the tactic is a punitive measure that proves nothing: “Taking laptops [is] not necessary to prove the underlying crime, and in many cases damages people’s ability to earn a living.”

One of the most recent raids happened on Halloween. It was about 2:30 a.m. and music was pumping out of a warehouse party on Sixth Street. The people throwing the party had hired a doorman, and attendee Eric Dunn was standing in line waiting to get in.

“We were right at the front of the line,” Dunn told the Guardian, when, he said, two plainclothes officers drove up on the sidewalk, jumped out of an unmarked car, and rushed up to the doorman. “[The officers] pretty much started demanding entry right away. The doorman was really polite. He basically told them that you have to know somebody to get into the party.”

Dunn said the officers waited until an exiting guest opened the door from the inside and then made their move. “One guy barged in, and the other guy followed. They never asked permission or received permission to enter the building,” Dunn said.

Inside, the two undercover officers immediately shut down the event. Justin Miller, a DJ at the event, said she remembers it very clearly. “The cops at that point were telling everybody to leave the party, telling me to turn the music off. I turned the music off. Everyone was quietly leaving.”

But Miller said it didn’t stop there. One of the undercover officers approached her and asked if she had a laptop. She said she did. “I was a little confused at this point because I didn’t know what my laptop had to do with anything. I was playing CDs.” She said she pulled her computer out from underneath a table and unzipped it from a case. The officer then “grabbed it from me.”

The undercover police officer — later identified by witnesses and the evidence receipt as Larry Bertrand — instructed Miller to follow him down to the street to get a property receipt for her laptop.

At this point there were uniformed officers on the scene as well. Miller started to cry. “I begged him. I said, ‘This is my livelihood. You’re talking my laptop. This is my livelihood. I hope you realize that.’ He said, ‘This is how you’re going to learn then, I guess.’”

Miller said Bertrand (who did not return Guardian calls for comment) then told her he was “going to take it upon himself to shut down every illegal party in San Francisco.”

She said he then opened the trunk of his car, revealing several other laptops. A person at the party pointed out that one of the laptops belonged to a friend of his, and asked if he could get the property receipt for the laptop. Miller said Bertrand turned to the inquiring person and said, “You will never see this laptop again.”

She continued: “He then looked at me and said, ‘I’m going to make sure your paperwork gets so tied up that maybe you won’t see this laptop until December, January, February, who knows when.’ I felt so violated.”

Miller has been working as a DJ in the Bay Area, under the name DJ Justincredible, for more than 10 years. She says she’s never had any of her equipment confiscated by the police before. But at that party, three DJs had their laptops confiscated, even though none were charged with a crime.

Shortly after the Halloween incident, Miller and the two other DJs who were at the party contacted the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit advocacy group specializing in technology and privacy issues. Jennifer Granick, a civil liberties lawyer with EFF, said most people haven’t heard about this because few of these DJs, if any, ever get convicted of a crime.

“DJs and the police department know that sound equipment and laptops are being unlawfully seized. But the public and the courts haven’t heard much about it because every time a DJ asks for a hearing, the cops just give them their property back rather than show up and defend the practice in open court before a judge,” she said.

Sean Evans has been working as a DJ in San Francisco, under the name DJ 7, for more than 10 years. He said that over the summer he had his laptop seized by police during an after-hours party in SoMa. He was given no property receipt, and his case was dismissed. But it took him three months to get his computer back.

“To lose our sole means of income, it’s a huge setback. It puts us out of work. In this recession, we’re struggling, and we need our laptops to get by,” he said. Evans grew up in the Bay Area and he said has never had anything like this happen to him before.

Granick argued it is illegal for police to seize property without issuing citations or arrests. She also said there are serious privacy issues at stake. “If we were to find out that the police were doing something else with the laptops, like searching through them or copying the data, we would definitely go to court,” she said.

SFPD Sgt. Wilfred Williams said he could not say what was currently being done with the laptops. In general, he said, private events that emit “extraordinary amounts of sound” need permits. And if they don’t have the proper permits, he said, property can be seized as evidence, “be it the speakers, be it the laptops, be it a mixer.”

Both Tomioka and Williams say the seizures aren’t a new policy. “If you look back in time, laptops haven’t been used for music,” Williams said. “There used to be old types of equipment that was taken in the past. But now laptops are being used. So yes, today, laptops [are] being seized.”

Entertainment advocates have called on Mayor Gavin Newsom and Gascón to come forward with an explicit policy concerning these raids and seizures. The Mayor’s Office did not respond to Guardian inquiries. Critics of the policy say it’s having a chilling effect on nightlife in San Francisco.

Wednesday November 25, 2009

W…t…F

EDIT:
Just out of curiosity. What local shifts in illicit activities, if any, caused UC police become focused on illegal parties? Otherwise this seems to be personal or some new guy looking to make waves. What constitutes an illegal party in SF?

Indeed.

Fuck that, anyone who got their property illegally seized should be raising hell. It’s also the the responsibility of the DJs to take a stand and not let this go unheard of and continue, at least it has media attention now.

what crap, utter blatant disregard for the founding principles of this country.

Wtffff

Need to know if this was a legal event “in all manners” in your country or not.

If not then is just like the coppers coming to a house party and removing the Soundsystem which is totally legal in UK if you are Breaching The Peace.

I guess someone has done some homework and figured you can replace the system and the CDs but no so easy the laptop.

Problem is if the event is illegal , what ya gonna do ?

Not saying i agree with it but im surprised that you guys are surprised its happening. Seems like a logical step to me (if i was the Police that is).

The difference is that a laptop is multifunctional so its gonna hurt more than just taking the CDJs cus the police are aware that you can just call someone and they will bring another pair.

Seems like the Police got one up for a change.

Hey , just saying, dont butcher me:smiley:

holy snap! i would sue for damages due to loss of work.

You cant. The Police have a right to do this.
Seriously. Even Trading Standards Ageny when accompanied by the Police and a warrant can impound your laptop under the suspicion of using illegally downloaded music.

I live with someone who works for T.S. and they have unreal powers.

Of course this isnt the story here but… illegal activity get you in the shit. Period.

Suing for loss of work when your commiting a crime is like burglar suing for being in Prison cus he aint free to do his job.

The Law Is An Ass.

I guess one has to live in the UK to find this bullshit acceptable…

Not exactly. But the current trend in the American political drive coarsing towards a more European sentiment troubles me. But that’s a whole other discussion.

My question is still something must be happening to warrant this sort of action. Are kids going home after a night in the hospital? Getting killed? Destroying property or stealing things? This kind of crap happened in Atlanta in the early 90s and had nearly ruined a scene.
I’m not saying it’s legal but the tactics employed here are obviously intended to cause long-term disruption. The next step in our country is a courthouse.

Er… what !!!

I dont find it acceptable. Where did i say that ? Read my post again.
What a stupid and frankly needless fucking thing to say .

My reply should be “I guess one has to live in Austria to make an offensive comment” but thats not my style, light xenophobia isnt that cool.

Fucking hell. Uncool mister , very uncool , very unDJTTs.

I have no idea if the event was illegal. Different States/ cities have differnt policies. Here in NY, one of thee most agitating laws on the books is the Cabaret Law. The law was created in the 20s’ and basically restricts dancing to specific areas (for info, chieck out tis link: http://www.metropolisinmotion.org/node/6 ). At the end of the link, you can read the following:

Although there are currently over 5,000 liquor licenses in the five boroughs you can only legally dance about 200 places. You are not allowed to dance to the jukebox or DJ at your local bar. You are not allowed to move to the rock band or jazz act at your neighborhood club.

While the policy of taking laptops has not come to the city as far as I know, this new enforcement policy does pose a chilling precedent for us folks in NY as the city can, adopt policies that appear to be effective in other parts of the counttry or even the world.

Read this:
California PENAL CODE
SECTION 403-420.1

Looks like there is a little wiggle room for the interpretation of what constitutes a rout and riot. Section 407.

Now that is fucked up. I have heard that NYC has had its party hands tied in recent years by the Police. Way to fuck up a great City eh.

“Largely or wholly repetetive beats”.

Remember that one? The first time a music genre was singled out by law. They hate us. :disappointed:

Yes, it has. To be fair though, part of the blame has to go directly on the venues and its patrons for the severe crackdowns. Folks strollin up in a spot and sparkin up, selling dope (sometimes with unspoken approval of the mgt), or just plain drunk, starting a fight, and then come the gunshots; and that was in licensed venues.

And then came the Happy Land tragedy: 87 souls were lost when a boyfriend torched the place after an altercation with his girlfriend. Even though the place was an illegal venue, then mayor Guilliani, decided to put the screws on everyone. It didnt matter if the place was totally up to spec or not, pretty much everyone that ran a club, bar, lounge, diner, church, rib-shack, office building, garbage can, was under heavy scrutiny; if you could fit more than a few folks int he spot, and folks knew about it,m chances are you were going to get a visit from THE MAN.

And nightlife in NY has never been the same ever since.

Interestingly enough, one of the prime reasons for NYs Cabaret law, was to prevent the mixing of races (even if it was not openly implied). Even after more than 80 yrs, the law is still in existence in most of its original form. This speaks volumes about how well we’ve progressed as a city and a people.

i don´t understand? what do u mean political trend coarsing towards a more european…i do a lot of house parties and they are always damn fuckin loud. so mostly the police arives and tells the owner of the flat/house to turn down the volume a bit and thats it. after they are gone we are crannking it up again and from that point it mostly takes another hours till the cops are knocking on doors again and telling u the same shit. it most situations they are allowed to crash the party at the third time they knock on ur door. there was just one party were the swat team kicked in the doors and raided the party, but that because the house was way to instable for having 400 people bouncing in it (the roof came down and shit like this one floor under us)…yes but i think here in germany the police can be quite polite if u are nice to them…

If it was an illegal party, I guess I think they had the right to sieze whatever they wanted to put a halt to it… but the situation wasn’t exactly handled smoothly by the copper