# SMART Meters...Arrested...WTF?



## Tgace (Jan 26, 2013)

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/201...tallation-on-her-property-tells-us-her-story/



> Stahl said she waited on her porch for the workers to arrive at her house. When they did, she refused them access to her backyard through her locked gate. The police &#8212; including the police supervisor, a sergeant &#8212; were called. Stahl said the sergeant explained the workers had authorization to access the meter, but Stahl stood her ground saying she didn&#8217;t approve it. The sergeant continued to try and convince Stahl to comply and said if she didn&#8217;t, he&#8217;d arrest her.
> 
> &#8220;The city has always had and maintains the right to access our equipment, and today we were simply exercising that right,&#8221; City Manager Doug Kreiger told the Chicago Tribune, which reported Wednesday&#8217;s events.
> 
> The lock on Stahl&#8217;s fence was cut, and when Stahl wouldn&#8217;t step away from the meter, she was lead away by an officer, cuffed and waited for a marked squad car to arrive to take her to the department. When asked why she was being arrested, she was told it was for interfering with a police officer.



Arrest the homeowner??? Why not just turn off their utilities if they refuse to accept the providers equipment? But force your way onto private property w/o a warrant and arrest the owner??

WTF??


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jan 26, 2013)

They also arrested a neighbor for video recording.  Illinois seems to have this track record of rights violations.



> Illinois citizens are still being arrested under the state&#8217;s  controversial Eavesdropping Law even though police were ordered not to  make these arrests after the law was deemed unconstitutional last year.
> A woman was arrested Thursday in Naperville on an eavesdropping  charge as she video recordered her friend getting arrested trying to  block city workers from installing a smart meter in her home.


 http://www.photographyisnotacrime.com/


As to SMART meters, I came home and found one on my house.  I wrapped it in tinfoil and put a do not open until Christmas bow on it. They took my bow away. I was sad.


----------



## Tgace (Jan 26, 2013)

I don't know much about the meters and some of the protests over them seem a bit "tin hat". But just because the power co. has "rights on paper" to access their equipment that doesn't usurp the property owners rights. This should have been a civil matter...these coppers made an unlawful arrest IMO. They didn't even know what to charge so they fell back on the "interfering with a police officer" charge. 

I can't believe I'm saying this but I hope she sues....


----------



## arnisador (Jan 26, 2013)

They'll have reserved a right-of-way for this. I don't doubt it was legal but I do suspect it could've been handled better.


----------



## Tgace (Jan 26, 2013)

Yes they have a right of way...but denying them that right is not a penal law offense. They can cut off your power, they can jack up your rates, fine you...but you shouldn't be getting arrested. This was a civil law violation. The charge laid here is indicative that the cop couldn't find an arrestable violation of penal law.

If there was a public emergency necessitating immediate access to utility lines/connection I could charge "criminal nuisance" or perhaps reckless endangerment if the property owner interfered. What was the immediate emergency necessitating an arrest in this instance?


----------



## Carol (Jan 26, 2013)

The Trib article indicates the power company has an alternative plan for folks that do not want the "smart" meters....which makes it even more baffling that she was arrested over this.


----------



## Tgace (Jan 26, 2013)

Carol said:


> The Trib article indicates the power company has an alternative plan for folks that do not want the "smart" meters....which makes it even more baffling that she was arrested over this.




http://napervillesun.suntimes.com/n...aperville-outsmarted-by-smart-meter-foes.html



> Up until Wednesday when Naperville police foolishly *arrested two board members of the group opposing smart meters*, the city had been amazingly tolerant of those who object to the smart meters.



Ahhh...they were making an EXAMPLE out of em. That's all additional kinds of wrong.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jan 26, 2013)

"Bullies with Badges".  
Breaking the law because they "Are the Law" as they feel like.

I really detest bad cops. I know too many good ones who don't need the BS.


----------



## Carol (Jan 26, 2013)

Arrested for perpetrating an unpopular opinion.  Yikes...


----------



## granfire (Jan 26, 2013)

damn yankees...
Around here they give you a stack of post cards, tell you to mark the meter reading on there, then mail it in....


So what is it about the smart meters? They interfere with pace makers? make younger people stronger old ones sick so they die?


----------



## Tgace (Jan 26, 2013)

granfire said:


> damn yankees...
> Around here they give you a stack of post cards, tell you to mark the meter reading on there, then mail it in....
> 
> 
> So what is it about the smart meters? They interfere with pace makers? make younger people stronger old ones sick so they die?



From what I read it's an issue with tracking of your power consumption and throttling it down or cutting you off entirely if "someone" decides you are using too much.....


----------



## Tgace (Jan 26, 2013)




----------



## granfire (Jan 26, 2013)

Tgace said:


> From what I read it's an issue with tracking of your power consumption and throttling it down or cutting you off entirely if "someone" decides you are using too much.....



:lol:
really?

Al Gore or billie?


----------



## Tgace (Jan 26, 2013)

granfire said:


> :lol:
> really?
> 
> Al Gore or billie?



I dunno...the whole "tin hat" thing is besides the point though. Arrests? 

This is a civil matter.


----------



## Tgace (Jan 26, 2013)

The fact that the government is going to these extremes to install this device will only reinforce any conspiracy theories already circulating....


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 27, 2013)

Unless the woman arrested isn't quite telling the truth and she actually did something arrestable like assault a police officer etc. So often these reports are very one sided with people already having an opinion on the various 'sides'.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jan 27, 2013)

Tez3 said:


> Unless the woman arrested isn't quite telling the truth and she actually did something arrestable like assault a police officer etc. So often these reports are very one sided with people already having an opinion on the various 'sides'.



1 woman was arrested for recording while standing on private property and not interfering.  Goons don't like it when they can be held accountable for their actions.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 27, 2013)

Bob Hubbard said:


> 1 woman was arrested for recording while standing on private property and not interfering. Goons don't like it when they can be held accountable for their actions.



However that's one side of the story she could for instance have been swearing, threatening etc as well. Just because she was doing something that wasn't illegal when filming doesn't mean her behaviour was that of an angel lol! What makes me laugh is so many on here go on about the bias of newpapers and other media yet instantly believe everything must of happened the way that self same media report merely because it fits in with prejudices they already have. People rarely look at both sides of a story like this. Yes she may have been filming but was she also abusive? perhaps, perhaps not but whatever happened there is only one side of the story being reported here. Of course it's not so much fun looking at all sides of a story......... 

We had a big story in the UK a while ago and a big campaign mounted because a man had shot an 'intruder' and the man was jailed. People went on about rights, being able to defend themselves etc etc but what they didn't look into was the fact the man had actually enticed the lad into his house, trapped him there then when the lad escaped down the path he shot him in the back. People only read what they wanted to, that story still gets trotted out even on here about how bad our laws are on self defence but nobody looked at the whole picture.


----------



## celtic_crippler (Jan 27, 2013)

American will never be a Police State. Wait... what?


----------



## Tgace (Jan 27, 2013)

Tez3 said:


> Unless the woman arrested isn't quite telling the truth and she actually did something arrestable like assault a police officer etc. So often these reports are very one sided with people already having an opinion on the various 'sides'.



Except that is not what was charged. I'm all for giving the LEO the benefit of the doubt but you don't just charge interference/obstruction....especially on private property if there was a "real" offense you could charge.

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 27, 2013)

Tgace said:


> Except that is not what was charged. I'm all for giving the LEO the benefit of the doubt but you don't just charge interference/obstruction....especially on private property if there was a "real" offense you could charge.
> 
> Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2



However, you, like everyone else are going from the media reports, all I'm sayng is look at all sides. It doesn't give any explanations of why the thinking was what it was, media reports never do. They pick out the juicy bits of an incident, pander to local prejudices and sell newspare/advertising etc. people go along with whatever is reported, where's the cynicism here?
It's not so much giving anybody the doubt, it's about realising there may be more to an incident than one first thinks when one reads the write up, there could be far more to it from either or both sides than one imagines that caused this to happen. Perhaps it was set up to make the police look bad, perhaps the police bungled it worse than this makes it seem, whatever though there's more to it than this.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jan 27, 2013)

Last I checked calling a cop an ******* isn't illegal, except for the "contempt of cop" charge where they find something to charge you with to harass you.


----------



## Tgace (Jan 27, 2013)

Tez3 said:


> However, you, like everyone else are going from the media reports, all I'm sayng is look at all sides. It doesn't give any explanations of why the thinking was what it was, media reports never do. They pick out the juicy bits of an incident, pander to local prejudices and sell newspare/advertising etc. people go along with whatever is reported, where's the cynicism here?
> It's not so much giving anybody the doubt, it's about realising there may be more to an incident than one first thinks when one reads the write up, there could be far more to it from either or both sides than one imagines that caused this to happen. Perhaps it was set up to make the police look bad, perhaps the police bungled it worse than this makes it seem, whatever though there's more to it than this.



The levied charge tells me volumes.

You also have to look at the reason the cop is there in the first place as well. If a power company shows up and the homeowner refuses to let them on the property the charge in the end shouldn't be interference....what was the legal action the COP was performing that the homeowner interfered with? The power company had the "right of way"....not the officer. We have the ability to arrest on a crime that happens in our presence or on probable cause. Keeping someone off your property in this situation is not a crime in the legal definition.

Believe me..I have first hand experience with the temptation to arrest and charge for "contempt of cop"...but that statute doesn't exist.

And the fact remains that the two arrested just HAPPENED to be leaders of an organization that was protesting these meters...


Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Tgace (Jan 27, 2013)

Tez3 said:


> Unless the woman arrested isn't quite telling the truth and she actually did something arrestable like assault a police officer etc. So often these reports are very one sided with people already having an opinion on the various 'sides'.



And that video of the man...his story is very similar to the woman's. Tell the power company NO and they call the police who threaten you with arrest? And even threaten to kill your dog in the mans case? The only difference in the stories is that the man decided that the trouble wasn't worth it and let them in. 

My job isn't to be a goon for the electric company....yes you sign a contract with the power company giving them rights to access their equipment, but violating that is a breach of contract...not a crime. That's not something you should even have a cop showing up at your door for.

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2


----------



## Big Don (Jan 27, 2013)

Bob Hubbard said:


> Last I checked calling a cop an ******* isn't illegal, except for the "contempt of cop" charge where they find something to charge you with to harass you.


 Flipping one off has netted people $50,000


----------



## CanuckMA (Jan 27, 2013)

Tgace said:


> The levied charge tells me volumes.
> 
> You also have to look at the reason the cop is there in the first place as well. If a power company shows up and the homeowner refuses to let them on the property the charge in the end shouldn't be interference....what was the legal action the COP was performing that the homeowner interfered with? The power company had the "right of way"....not the officer. We have the ability to arrest on a crime that happens in our presence or on probable cause. Keeping someone off your property in this situation is not a crime in the legal definition.
> 
> ...




The power company has a right of way. It is not conditional. The woman was denying them access to their equipment. The power company employee has no means to enforce that right of way himself. For that he must rely on law enforcement. Not all that different from calling LEOs to enforce an eviction notice.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 27, 2013)

Big Don said:


> Flipping one off has netted people $50,000



I just flipped off 3 cops Im going to be rich


----------



## Big Don (Jan 27, 2013)

ballen0351 said:


> I just flipped off 3 cops Im going to be rich



Friends and family probably don't count...


----------



## arnisador (Jan 27, 2013)

CanuckMA said:


> The power company has a right of way. It is not conditional. The woman was denying them access to their equipment. The power company employee has no means to enforce that right of way himself. For that he must rely on law enforcement. Not all that different from calling LEOs to enforce an eviction notice.



But if I have a right-of-way on my neighbor's property--as someone does on my mother-in-law's--I'd have to get a court order and then ask a LEO to help me enforce it. Should the utility have done this?


----------



## Tgace (Jan 27, 2013)

CanuckMA said:


> The power company has a right of way. It is not conditional. The woman was denying them access to their equipment. The power company employee has no means to enforce that right of way himself. For that he must rely on law enforcement. Not all that different from calling LEOs to enforce an eviction notice.



An eviction notice is issued by the court after process. We enforce a COURT ORDER. The landlord CANT just call the cops to kick you out whenever he wishes....you are wrong here. Denying the power company its access is a violation of contract. Short of a public emergency its not arrestable.


----------



## Tgace (Jan 27, 2013)

arnisador said:


> But if I have a right-of-way on my neighbor's property--as someone does on my mother-in-law's--I'd have to get a court order and then ask a LEO to help me enforce it. Should the utility have done this?



Yes.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 27, 2013)

Big Don said:


> Friends and family probably don't count...



Should have saw that before I flipped off my LT opps


----------



## Tgace (Jan 27, 2013)

CanuckMA said:


> The power company has a right of way. It is not conditional. The woman was denying them access to their equipment. The power company employee has no means to enforce that right of way himself. For that he must rely on law enforcement. Not all that different from calling LEOs to enforce an eviction notice.




I'll say it again...

Yes they have a right of way...but denying them that right is not a penal law offense. They can cut off your power, they can jack up your rates, fine you, or get a court order demanding you give them access (then you can be arrested for disobeying the order)...but you shouldn't be getting arrested. This was a civil law violation. The charge laid here is indicative that the cop couldn't find an arrestable violation of penal law.

If there was a public emergency necessitating immediate access to utility lines/connection I could charge "criminal nuisance" or perhaps reckless endangerment if the property owner interfered. What was the immediate emergency necessitating an arrest in this instance?


----------



## CanuckMA (Jan 27, 2013)

Tgace said:


> I'll say it again...
> 
> Yes they have a right of way...but denying them that right is not a penal law offense. They can cut off your power, they can jack up your rates, fine you, or get a court order demanding you give them access (then you can be arrested for disobeying the order)...but you shouldn't be getting arrested. This was a civil law violation. The charge laid here is indicative that the cop couldn't find an arrestable violation of penal law.
> 
> If there was a public emergency necessitating immediate access to utility lines/connection I could charge "criminal nuisance" or perhaps reckless endangerment if the property owner interfered. What was the immediate emergency necessitating an arrest in this instance?



They can't dut off your power or jack your rates.

As far as I remember, utilities right of way is different than me having a right of way to my neighbour in that it does not require a court order to enforce. We all make the assumption that the power company called the cops who immediately arrested the homeowner. Methinks there is something missing from the middle of that story.


----------



## Tgace (Jan 27, 2013)

CanuckMA said:


> They can't dut off your power or jack your rates.
> 
> As far as I remember, utilities right of way is different than me having a right of way to my neighbour in that it does not require a court order to enforce. We all make the assumption that the power company called the cops who immediately arrested the homeowner. Methinks there is something missing from the middle of that story.




Regardless..its a *civil *violation..not a *penal *law violation. This is a violation of a contract you sign. Not a violation of PENAL LAW. Refusal does not mean a warrant-less intrusion onto private property and arrest. You would need a court order. 

What arrestable charge is there for refusing the power company access? There isn't one. You need a court order and then you can arrest for refusal to comply to it. The power company needing access for a public emergency is an entirely different matter from access for equipment maintenance.

As far as I REMEMBER during my career as an LEO...I don't pick a side in civil law disputes....


----------



## Tgace (Jan 27, 2013)

CanuckMA said:


> They can't dut off your power or jack your rates.




The certainly can depending on the wording of your contract. Granted power cut-off in winter would be a NO-GO but they could fine/fee you for refusal to allow equipment upgrades.

Remember...you give the power company right of way onto your property as part of a contract with them (power lines or poles on your property are another matter). This woman was in violation of a private contract...not public law


----------



## CanuckMA (Jan 27, 2013)

There is something missing in that story.

As I said, as far as I can remember, utilities don't need a seperate court ordewr to enforce their right of way. So 
1)the power company shows up and is refused entry. 
2)Thet call the local LE to enforce thir rights. 
3)The homeowner is arrested. 

I get the feeling that there is a 2.5 in there. I don't see the LEOs just arresting the woman for the initial refusal. Matbe I'm naive, but I tend to give LEOs more credit than that.


----------



## Bob Hubbard (Jan 27, 2013)

> Two vocal opponents of Naperville&#8217;s initiative to install wireless  electric meters on homes were arrested after interfering with the  installation process, according to city officials.
> Police are accompanying crews this week as they install smart meters at homes that previously sent away installers.
> &#8220;The previous installation attempts were met with some resistance and  we wanted to ensure our employees&#8217; safety,&#8221; City Manager Doug Krieger  said.


http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...e-smart-meter-arrest-20130123,0,6519967.story



> The city, which has repeatedly declared the wireless meters to be safe,  offers a non-wireless alternative meter to residents with concerns.  There is a $68.35 initial fee for a non-wireless meter plus a $24.75  monthly fee for manually reading it. Stahl said residents who want a  non-wireless meter should not have to pay for it, and said she  represents other homeowners who were not able to continue to refuse the  wireless meter installation.





> The two women arrested Wednesday are leaders of the group.
> Malia "Kim" Bendis of the 2200 block of Mercer Court was charged with  two misdemeanors &#8212; attempted eavesdropping and resisting a peace  officer.
> Jennifer Stahl of the 1400 block of Westglen Drive, received two  ordinance violation citations &#8212; interfering with a police officer and  preventing access to customer premises.



Those are the charges.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 27, 2013)

Well then they got what they deserved.  The power company provides the service.  They say if you want our service you need to use our meters.  They say "I dont want your meters". So company's says OK here's an alternative but its more work for us so we will charge you for the work.  They still don't like it.  Workers come out and the woman interfere and got arrested.
I'm not sure about the lady just recording if she was not in the way she should have been left alone to record but the lady who's house it was violated the law.  
If she doesn't want the electric companies product get solar panels or wind turbine or both.  
I wonder if Mrs Stahl who's worried about the "wireless" meter has a cell phone


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 27, 2013)

According to the story they Already have a federal lawsuit in courts.  She should have called her lawyer and asked him to file an injunction to prevent them installing the new meters the first time they tried.


----------



## Tgace (Jan 27, 2013)

If she was in violation of a local code..i.e. "_preventing access to customer premises"..._that does change things. Local codes however are not a universal rule. We have no such code here and if I were the supervisor on the scene the power workers would have been informed that this was a civil matter.....


----------



## Tgace (Jan 27, 2013)

Hmmmmm....this is Napervilles Own Municipal Code regarding utility enforcement.

http://library.municode.com/index.aspx?clientId=14853&stateId=13&stateName=Illinois

*ARTICLE C. - ELECTRIC SERVICE RATES*

8-1C-3: - TERMS AND CONDITIONS:

Sure enough in section 7:

_7. Access To Premises: Properly authorized agents of the City shall have free access to the customer's premises at all reasonable hours for the purpose of reading, examining, inspecting, repairing, replacing, or removing the Department's meters or other equipment or property.

_Fair enough...but further down in section 26, the all important Enforcement section:

_26. Enforcement: When inspections on private property are necessary for purposes of enforcing the provisions of this Chapter or Title, the Director of the Department or his or her designee shall first attempt to secure the permission of the owner or legal occupant of the property. *If permission is refused, or if the owner or occupant is unavailable, the Director or his or her designee, with the assistance of the City Attorney, shall apply to the appropriate court for the issuance of an administrative search warrant*.
_
I can find nothing (didn't say it's not there...just cant find it) in their Electrical services code stating that violation of  section 7 is punishable by fine or incarceration. The enforcement section of the code requires a warrant. Interfere with THAT and yes..then you can and should get yourself arrested.

Which reinforces what I have been saying about this case all along. The power company/Cop should have had a court order/warrant authorizing access to the property before arresting this woman.


----------



## ballen0351 (Jan 27, 2013)

Yeah if they didn't have a warrant they screwed up.  I would think if there is already a law suit tho this issue was addressed.  I would hope the city was smart enough to have gotten some type of court order prior and its just not in the story.  If not she's getting paid


----------

