PSA: First Amendment Auditors

[Seeed]

Has anyone run across this? Pure insanity outside Draegers in Menlo Park today. I ran across three agitators who were harassing customers at the entrance and also filming them, then threatening to pepper spray me if I got close enough to capture their faces, all while hiding from my phone camera. F--- these guys. Police won't do anything, they (wrongly) claim nothing these guys are doing is illegal. Someone is going to get hurt here, no joke-- they should try this in West Oakland and see how that goes! I've just learned that the technical term for what they are doing is First Amendment Auditing. These guys are trying to provoke people or the police into preventing them from filming in a public place, complete with insults and other provocations. They do this regularly and are coming back, for sure. The officer who took my report said they were getting constant complaints all day about this group, and, this is at least the second time they have done this in the last few months. They appear at random high-end stores across California and try to get content for their YouTube channel by harassing people. The crimes include threatening to use the pepper spray on me while displaying the canister to me-- clearly "using" pepper spray for other than self defense purposes under the law, which is chargeable as a felony (PC 22810(g)(1)). Also harassing customers of a business at its entrance (PC 602.1), occasionally trespassing on the business property (PC 602), threatening to cause me great bodily injury while I was engaged in protected activity (PC 422), and of course disturbing the peace (PC 415). You be the judge: https://www.andrewwatters.com/hall-of-shame/agitators/Draegers.mp4

I can't stand these fkin people. Using the guise of the 1st Amendment "audit" to harass everyday people, stuff cameras in their face to get a reaction for clicks, cause they can't keep a regular job. They're almost always masked, sunglasses, hat, complete cover up. Cowards.

 

[raellic]

Per the request above-- case no. 5:26-cv-02808 in the Northern District of California. I have added the un-filed copies to this folder, which is where I will be posting things moving forward: https://www.andrewwatters.com/hall-of-shame/iimpctmedia/

The TRO was denied by District Judge Noël Wise, however, the judge denied me a hearing entirely, which is inconsistent with precedent, and that's why I took it to the 9th Circuit. I think I should at least have been allowed to play the video at a hearing so the judge can see what I saw when considering this. I also filed a motion in the 9th Circuit to provisionally reverse the denial pending the appeal. Has a low chance of being granted, but I have to at least try. The opening brief on the injunction is due May 1. I also have to amend the complaint once I serve the defendant (21 days to amend), which will be a much more detailed and comprehensive effort devoted to his and others' history of violent behavior.

At this point, it's probably 20 emails and 5 phone calls of support. Nobody on the other side, so far.

 

[adrkwan]

Per the request above-- case no. 5:26-cv-02808 in the Northern District of California. I have added the un-filed copies to this folder, which is where I will be posting things moving forward: https://www.andrewwatters.com/hall-of-shame/iimpctmedia/

The TRO was denied by District Judge Noël Wise, however, the judge denied me a hearing entirely, which is inconsistent with precedent, and that's why I took it to the 9th Circuit. I think I should at least have been allowed to play the video at a hearing so the judge can see what I saw when considering this. I also filed a motion in the 9th Circuit to provisionally reverse the denial pending the appeal. Has a low chance of being granted, but I have to at least try. The opening brief on the injunction is due May 1. I also have to amend the complaint once I serve the defendant (21 days to amend), which will be a much more detailed and comprehensive effort devoted to his and others' history of violent behavior.

At this point, it's probably 20 emails and 5 phone calls of support. Nobody on the other side, so far.

Goodluck. I'm predicting a default but I have a bad record on Kalshi.

 

[nakatomi]

Per the request above-- case no. 5:26-cv-02808 in the Northern District of California. I have added the un-filed copies to this folder, which is where I will be posting things moving forward: https://www.andrewwatters.com/hall-of-shame/iimpctmedia/

Thanks for sharing had a chance to go through it. Here is the transcript.

Watters: Here I am walking up to a group. I wasn’t happy with my first video so I’m taking another one.

Troyan: If you get within reach of me I’m going to be concerned for my safety. I’m gonna hurt you really bad.

Watters: Why would you hurt me?

Troyan: I don’t know what you’re capable of. If you get close to me I’m gonna hurt you.

Other person: Stay back. Stay back.

Watters: I’m staying back. I’m just filming you.

Troyan: If you get any closer I’m going to do it. I’m gonna defend myself.

Troyan: I will get you with pepper spray. I will defend.

Other person: I have more than pepper spray.

Troyan: If you get over here I’m gonna hurt you.

Watters: I’m just filming you.

Troyan: Get the f*** away from me.

I assumed there was more footage beyond the clip.

I actually studied a lot of these cases in California. Not a judge or attorney but IMHO the threats in the complaint are clearly framed as self-defense conditions not random aggression. The auditor is consistently telling you to stay back. You admit you approached them to film again.

Contrast your case with this scenario:

The FAA’s “Temporary” Flight Restriction for Drones is a Blatant Attempt to Criminalize Filming ICE

Legal intern Raj Gambhir was the principal author of this post.The Trump administration has restricted the First Amendment right to record law enforcement by issuing an unprecedented nationwide flight restriction preventing private drone operators, including professional and citizen journalists,...

www.eff.org

This article is about a nationwide FAA "temporary" drone restriction that blocks people from flying drones within about 1/2 a mile of federal law enforcement vehicles like ICE / CBP. It lasts 21 months (which is not really temporary) but the bigger issue is you often cannot tell where these vehicles are since many are unmarked. So you can get penalized without even knowing you broke a rule.

This interferes with the right to record law enforcement in public. Regardless of your political ideology you need to be saying to yourself WTF.

This ties directly into the 1A auditor conversation. Auditors are based on the idea that you can record public officials in public even if it annoys/trolls people. That right still exists but this kind of rule makes it harder to actually use. It does not ban recording outright it just creates a moving zone where doing it becomes risky.

This is contradictory.

Auditors are annoying but should be protected. However federal government rules like this will limit how effective that protection really is.

I'll bet good money this lawsuit goes nowhere. Despite the fact I find these auditors to be loser neck beards it's better to live in a world with those protections vs ones without.

 

[Coolguy]

Thanks again, everyone's comments are helpful and sometimes insightful. As I specifically said in this thread, someone "only" pepper spraying an adult victim does not warrant deadly force. My main concern was this other guy who recklessly said he has "more than pepper spray" and was prepared to use whatever weapon that is on me. And this same group has felony charges pending in Los Angeles County for beating a man at a Post Office. If you watch that video, they put him in a chokehold, stomp on his head, and send him to the hospital. Had I known there was a probability it would go there, of course I would have done less in this scenario-- but keep in mind, this was an ambiguous situation and reasonable minds could disagree over what to do.

Here is the second article that came out: https://www.almanacnews.com/menlo-p...-amendment-auditors-after-menlo-park-dispute/

You can agree with my style or not, but I've received at least a dozen calls and emails expressing support for what I am doing. I can do a case like this in-house at the law firm, and in addition to actually potentially getting a permanent injunction, at least there is a deterrent factor if these guys have to consider being sued as a cost of doing business. The complaint will be amended in the near future with additional detail.

I mentioned this earlier, but I saw someone else posted one of the guys was a convicted felon, and from what I understand its illegal in California for a convicted felon to possess pepper spray. Is that correct, and if so wouldn't his possesiion and threatening you with it be a crime in itself?

 

[nakatomi]

I mentioned this earlier, but I saw someone else posted one of the guys was a convicted felon, and from what I understand its illegal in California for a convicted felon to possess pepper spray. Is that correct, and if so wouldn't his possesiion and threatening you with it be a crime in itself?

Andrew is an attorney so it’s reasonable to assume he has already explored that. If there were clear verifiable evidence that the auditor was a convicted felon unlawfully possessing pepper spray (tear gas), that is the kind of fact you would expect to see included in the complaint or at least mentioned publicly.

The fact that it hasn’t been raised suggests there is no confirmed conviction and at this point the claim is just speculative. Again these folks are annoying AF but we need to be the clinical party.

 

[timthetwin]

There was one of these guys with a phone on a pole mount and a mask on at the Chico farmers market Saturday. He was getting people to bait into his shenanigans. He will go home and act like a tough guy posting those videos.

 

[NaboombuLagoon]

Andrew is an attorney so it’s reasonable to assume he has already explored that. If there were clear verifiable evidence that the auditor was a convicted felon unlawfully possessing pepper spray (tear gas), that is the kind of fact you would expect to see included in the complaint or at least mentioned publicly.

The fact that it hasn’t been raised suggests there is no confirmed conviction and at this point the claim is just speculative. Again these folks are annoying AF but we need to be the clinical party.

This video discusses his 1988 conviction and 18 month prison sentence for theft in Arizona. It also includes his mugshot.

 

[nakatomi]

This video discusses his 1988 conviction and 18 month prison sentence for theft in Arizona. It also includes his mugshot.

Thanks. I seen that. We need to separate identities, entities and sources.

Let me spell it out and please correct me if I'm wrong here. I'm just asking questions.

In Andrew's Menlo Park complaint, the only named individual is Richard Troyan associated with "True North Transparency" and he is the one alleged to have engaged in the pepper spray conduct.

The other individuals in that incident are not identified by name (bunch of John Does).

The YouTube video above is a separate source that claims Conrad Jack Rankin had a 1998 Arizona felony theft conviction but here is the thing no docket or court record has been provided. That is all public information and super easy to share. A conviction of that kind should be verifiable through public records.

I don't see Conrad Jack Rankin mentioned in the Menlo Park complaint. He is associated with "iiMPCT Media" (Impact Media), and along with Nick Rankin (Simple Media / Sheeple News) and Alex Fulton (Lizard Media) is part of the trio discussed in the YouTube video, but none of them are defendants in Andrew's filing.

Under CA Penal Code 22810 a convicted felon cannot possess or use pepper spray (tear gas), but that only applies if the same individual involved in the incident is confirmed to be a convicted felon. Here the complaint attributes the conduct to Richard Troyan while the felony claim circulating online refers to Conrad Jack Rankin from the YouTube. These are not the same person.

What a confusing sh*t show and why if one is going to go after these guys we all need to be clinical. None of this RICO bullsh*t (no way that will work). Remember P Diddy was found not guilty RICO.

I think these 1A auditors are neckbeard dipsh*ts but verifiable court record should be produced and linked and posted. Lets not be like Reddit.

 

[NaboombuLagoon]

Thanks. I seen that. We need to separate identities, entities and sources.

Let me spell it out and please correct me if I'm wrong here. I'm just asking questions.

In Andrew's Menlo Park complaint, the only named individual is Richard Troyan associated with "True North Transparency" and he is the one alleged to have engaged in the pepper spray conduct.

The other individuals in that incident are not identified by name (bunch of John Does).

The YouTube video above is a separate source that claims Conrad Jack Rankin had a 1998 Arizona felony theft conviction but here is the thing no docket or court record has been provided. That is all public information and super easy to share. A conviction of that kind should be verifiable through public records.

I don't see Conrad Jack Rankin mentioned in the Menlo Park complaint. He is associated with "iiMPCT Media" (Impact Media), and along with Nick Rankin (Simple Media / Sheeple News) and Alex Fulton (Lizard Media) is part of the trio discussed in the YouTube video, but none of them are defendants in Andrew's filing.

Under CA Penal Code 22810 a convicted felon cannot possess or use pepper spray (tear gas), but that only applies if the same individual involved in the incident is confirmed to be a convicted felon. Here the complaint attributes the conduct to Richard Troyan while the felony claim circulating online refers to Conrad Jack Rankin from the YouTube. These are not the same person.

What a confusing sh*t show and why if one is going to go after these guys we all need to be clinical. None of this RICO bullsh*t (no way that will work). Remember P Diddy was found not guilty RICO.

I think these 1A auditors are neckbeard dipsh*ts but verifiable court record should be produced and linked and posted. Lets not be like Reddit.

Andrew specifically named Rankin as one of the guys he encountered. He's just not the one that he got into it with.

 

[nakatomi]

Andrew specifically named Rankin as one of the guys he encountered. He's just not the one that he got into it with.

Then it's up to providing that evidence of him with pepper spray to law enforcement and hopefully they kick that up to the DA. Whoever filed a complaint to law enforcement needs to help them connect those dots so law enforcement can investigate.

As it relates to this complaint, Conrad Jack Rankin is not a defendant and even Andrew acknowledges in his complaint that Rankin is "reportedly a convicted felon".

 

[NaboombuLagoon]

I identified these individuals through a combination of luck and tips.

Conrad J. Rankin, San Diego, CA, convicted felon.
Rick Troyan, Woodville, Ontario, Canada, activist.

https://www.youtube.com/@truenorthtransparency

Canadian YouTuber facing felony charges after pepper-spraying incident in Menlo Park

A Canadian YouTuber has been charged with two felonies after he bragged about pepper-spraying a man in front of the Menlo Park Ace Hardware.

www.almanacnews.com

A warrant has been issued for Troyan.