reSee.it - Related Video Feed

A Winnipeg cafe owner and her family were believed to have been attacked, with the café trashed and anti-Semitic graffiti, sparking community shock and an outpouring of support. Police, however, say the incident was staged and have charged Oksana Behrendt, Maxim Behrendt, and Alexander Behrendt with public mischief. The family maintains their story, insisting they were victims of hate, and speaking on CBC Radio after the charges were filed. They described themselves as targets and said they did not stage anything, with statements like “In this moment, somebody grabbed me” and “They can find any evidence against anybody.” They also expressed that their business and home were under threat and emphasized their belief that the attack was real. Police maintained that the incident in Winnipeg was staged and that there was evidence of a crime, though not a hate crime. The cafe’s interior still bore signs of investigation as officers worked the scene. The backlash was swift: a Jewish LGBTQ advocacy group moved out of the building, and there was broad concern that the alleged stunt could undermine support for legitimate hate crimes. Community leaders and residents described feelings of betrayal and worry about future incidents, with comments such as “This is a betrayal of the community and a betrayal of also the police” and concerns that people might doubt genuine cases in the future. Court records show the Behrendts faced lawsuits over debts, and the family denied staging the incident for financial gain. They insisted they did not deserve judgment based on what they say is their truth, stating, “I don’t want people to judge us wrongly because we didn’t do it.” The charges were upheld by the court, and the broader community expressed disappointment and anger about the situation. Meanwhile, excerpts noted that hate-crime cases in Canada had risen to an all-time high in 2017, with nearly 2,100 incidents—a 47% increase from the previous year. Attacks on Jewish people accounted for 18% of all hate crimes, with attacks on Muslims a close second. Other items mentioned included international incidents: in Israel, police announced the arrest of an 18-year-old American-Israeli behind a series of bomb threats targeting Jewish communities worldwide; authorities said he used the Internet to mask his location, and the suspect faced a medical examination and legal scrutiny. In North York, a 67-year-old man, Avram Babrovsky, faced arson charges for allegedly setting a fire inside a synagogue, with a history of using his own access card to gain entry. In Schenectady, a man was accused of spray-painting swastikas on his own home, later charged with falsely reporting an incident and harassment. In West Bloomfield, Michigan, police credited technology for solving a case in which Sean Sammett allegedly fabricated an attack on leaving a synagogue; investigators found inconsistencies in his account, including elevated heart rate on an Apple Watch prior to the claimed assault, and evidence suggested he stabbed himself with a knife and used bloody tissues. Sammett was charged with filing a false police report, with authorities noting the impact on real victims and the community’s sense of safety. In Brooklyn and Manhattan, authorities reported 56-year-old David Haddad, who is Jewish, as the suspect in a string of antisemitic messages and swastika incidents, with additional phone threats to kill Jews. In Vancouver, a defamation suit was filed against HillelBC by UBC’s Social Justice Center over “iHeartHammas” stickers on campus; the stickers had circulated during a walkout for Palestine and a contractor who helped distribute them had been terminated. UBC stated it would not comment on the suit, and RCMP said no charges were laid after investigation. Additionally, Amsterdam’s mayor walked back the use of the term pogrom after violence following a match between Ajax and Maccabi Tel Aviv, amid political fallout from comments by a government official blaming Moroccans for the unrest. A separate report discussed viral video miscaptioning of footage from Amsterdam, showing Maccabi Tel Aviv fans fighting in a way that media outlets had miscaptioned as Jews being attacked; fact-checkers confirmed the video actually showed Maccabi fans chasing a Dutch man, and several outlets issued corrections.

In this video, there is a struggle between the staff and a man at the front of a store. The police are investigating what happened before this video and whether the force used was excessive. It is unclear if there was too much force, not enough force, or just the right amount. The investigation will provide more information.

In December 2020, federal agents approached Jeremy Brown to be an informant, but he exposed them instead. He later got arrested, and his legal team is presenting evidence that the grenades and national defense documents found in his home were planted by the agents. The agents turned off all recording devices during the search, and none of them had body cameras. DNA tests on the grenades did not match Jeremy's DNA, and a dog hair and carpet fiber found on the grenades did not match his dogs or carpet. Criminal counts found on a CD were proven to not be in Jeremy's possession. The government is now targeting people who were in Washington DC on January 6th. Jeremy is fighting for his freedom.

A woman was pulled over for an expired registration sticker, threatened with a gun, and tackled by the police chief. The incident was captured on video by a neighbor. The woman was held in jail on a high bond for five nights before charges were dropped. A town meeting is scheduled to address the incident.

An individual states they were not home when part of the house was destroyed. Their daughter reported the individual was calling, using vulgar language, and demanding a credit card. The individual said they were at work and unaware of the credit card. Later, law enforcement is present. An individual repeatedly says "I can't" and requests review of body cam footage, stating they did not resist. They request a person of color be on the team, not white. An officer responds that it is their show now. The individual claims they were not given a chance to exit the car and were immediately threatened with a taser. They state the restraints are too tight.

ATF agents raided a home, covering the doorbell camera. When the homeowner investigated, he was shot and killed by the ATF. His wife was detained for hours. Despite policies requiring body cameras, none were used. This raises concerns about government overreach.

The exchange centers on a confrontation in a public/Louisiana parish building during a first amendment audit conducted by Justin (Speaker 0). Justin explains that he entered a public area and was subjected to aggressive behavior from a man who grabbed his belongings, attempted a headlock, and threw Justin’s phone. Justin asserts that this occurred in front of a deputy, who did not intervene. He claims the man (Ellis Booth) took his phone, assaulted him, and tossed it across the parking lot, while the deputy “did nothing.” Justin emphasizes that he was having a polite conversation when Booth acted aggressively, grabbed his property, and threw his phone multiple times. He argues that if he had done any of these actions, he would be in cuffs, and he questions why Booth has not been arrested. He challenges the deputy’s handling of the incident, insisting that the deputy witnessed the events and should have acted. He also claims the deputy’s inaction contradicts the duty to protect the public and enforce the law, noting he has a large social media following and intends to publicize what he perceives as misconduct. The dialogue includes several attempts to obtain formal statements and to follow proper procedure. Justin asks for a statement from the deputy who witnessed the incident, and for access to video footage (body cam) and other evidence. He asserts that the deputy’s eyewitness account should be sufficient to pursue charges, and he questions why extra steps or warrants are being pursued if the deputy clearly witnessed the events. He also mentions he has filed a Freedom of Information Act request for the body cam footage. Speaker 4, Detective Adams of the Cattle Parish Sheriff’s Office, enters the conversation and tries to mediate. He explains that a new process is necessary: a written statement and a signed affidavit from Justin before any warrants or arrests can proceed, since there is no direct on-site arrest of Booth by the acting officer. Detective Adams clarifies that if a judge signs a warrant based on the deputy’s statements and Justin’s signed affidavit, Booth could be arrested. He notes that the deputy did not witness the exact moment of the phone being thrown in Justin’s hands, but did witness the assault and the destruction of property. He emphasizes following chain-of-command and needing a judge’s warrant to proceed. The discussion includes comparisons of how officers would be treated if the roles were reversed. Justin argues that the officer’s standards should be the same regardless of whether the person is a private citizen or a Homeland Security employee. Detective Adams explains that the Homeland Security director (Beeson) was not present to arrest on-site and that Booth’s arrest is tied to the body camera and the deputy’s written report. The exchange touches on past incidents, including a controversial encounter involving a black officer and other officers, which Detective Adams says he plans to address separately with superiors. Towards the end, it is confirmed that Booth was arrested previously (yesterday) for simple battery and criminal damage to private property, but the battery charge was kept separate from the damage charge after Justin notes his phone’s condition. Booth bonded out at $1,255 cash and would have a court date set by the district attorney. The district attorney asks Justin to forward any video and his written statement. Detective Adams states he will present the materials to a judge, and if a warrant is signed, Booth will be arrested. Beeson is identified as the online security director who previously attended the incident, and there is a discussion about obtaining more video and verifying all witnesses’ statements. In sum, the transcript captures Justin’s allegation of police inaction during a visible assault and property destruction, the procedural requirement for statements and affidavits to pursue warrants, and the subsequent administrative steps that led to Booth’s prior arrest and ongoing cooperation with the district attorney’s office.

An uninvited drunk man accused of inappropriate touching at a quinceanera in Mesa, Arizona led to the godfather confronting him. Police arrived, misunderstood the situation due to language barriers, and violently arrested the godfather. Body camera footage revealed officers lied in their reports, but faced no consequences. The victim is now suing the Mesa Police Department. The full footage can be viewed on ABC 15's website. Fortunately, the victim survived, unlike many others in similar situations.

A childcare worker, Kendra Harris, was arrested and charged with child neglect after allegedly mistreating a child, Silas. The parents claim video footage shows Harris carrying Silas by his arms, flinging him into a chair, and forcing something into his mouth, which they suspect was another child's melatonin. Harris says Silas flipped out of her arms and she gave him a lifesaver, not melatonin. The mother believes Harris was too comfortable behaving that way, knowing there were cameras. The parents had just signed up for video access the day before the incident. They hope Harris will never work with children again, fearing other potential incidents went unseen because their child is unable to fully communicate.

A man was mistakenly arrested for credit card fraud while enjoying a Chinese meal. He protested, claiming innocence, and his theatrical response was caught on camera. Despite the attention, he denies any wrongdoing and is surprised by the viral fame. He plans to capitalize on his notoriety by allowing his image to be used on wine bottles. The man, Jack, showcases his cooking skills and reflects on the incident, emphasizing his innocence. He hopes others will enjoy his cooking as he continues to live freely in the bush.

While driving, officers observe “something black in his hand, and he's moving it like it's a pistol” and pull in to investigate. The man says, “I'm filling up gas, man,” and “I was just showing her the thing to let her know to get the gas.” The officers argue it “looked like a handgun,” with one noting, “you understand you're holding it like this and it looks like a handgun. Right?” The man protests, “I ain't did shit, I ain't been detained,” while a store employee notes he “coming here every day faithfully after work” and “don't cause nothing.” The exchange shifts toward profiling, with the man saying, “Stop profiling. Can you talk to me for a second?” and the officer replying, “I really don't want to. For real” before the man states, “you know what you did, and you know you're dead ass wrong” and “You go and have no fucking gun.”

Great Manchester Police executed a search warrant on where I live. Eight officers, five in full riot gear with tasers, face shields, batons, riot shields, dragged my disabled mother downstairs and did a full search of my property. They said it was for burglary and they took all my electronic devices. I was taken to a police station and charged with burglary: 'entering the Best Western Crestor Court Hotel and getting a chicken pasta meal and not paying for it.' I am now on bail with strict conditions. 'Eight police officers to your house in full right gear to fully arrest me.' I’ll be posting CCTV of all the riot police entering at the end of this video. I’m asking for a good lawyer who specializes in this type of thing; please share this. I’ll be away for a couple of weeks but will stay on social media, not posting.

A person, reminiscent of a "Shadowgate" incident, claims false arrest while uploading a documentary featuring whistleblower ex-shadow government operatives. The arrest involved a grand jury indictment for burglary, but details were initially vague. There were veiled threats from police, and the person alleges defamation led to job loss. The person claims the arrest happened right before releasing a "world changing" documentary. They cite a grand jury indictment with felonies/misdemeanor charges that occurred while grand juries were supposedly canceled due to COVID, and a judge with a drunk driving record. They allege a Democrat prosecutor covered up abuse allegations and CPS workers tried to take their children under false pretenses. Court records of the arrest and charges allegedly disappeared. The person claims they were taken to a Department of Homeland Security emergency center next to an airport, with transports ready to take them to Wright Patterson Air Force Base, suspecting "Shadowgate" violated the Federal Espionage Act. They were eventually released.

An individual is questioned on private property after loud noises and vandalism to a car are reported. The individual claims to have been walking home from the store and investigating the noise. The questioner notes the individual is on private property and asks if they always walk on strangers' properties. The questioner asks if the individual is targeting Tesla vehicles due to disliking Elon Musk. The individual admits to disliking Musk but denies vandalism. The questioner points out the individual is holding keys and questions why they aren't in a bag with groceries. The individual is asked to empty their purse and bag. The questioner finds keys with paint on them and a weapon allegedly used to damage the car. The individual attempts to flee but is apprehended and read their Miranda rights. The individual accuses the questioner of targeting a poor older lady.

The video shows a confrontation where someone is being arrested. The person being arrested asks why they are being arrested, but the police officers do not provide a clear answer. The person also asks for their phone and microphone, but it is unclear if they receive them.

A person asks why the speaker called the police on two men at CVS. The speaker explains that it is CVS policy to call the police if someone shoplifts. The person questions if it's worth risking someone's life for a low salary. The speaker believes there was no risk and ends the conversation. The person asks for the speaker's name, but the speaker refuses to give it due to being recorded. The person accuses the speaker of inciting violence against the two black men. The speaker mentions that one of the men had a warrant but was let go by the police. The person reminds the speaker that they work with black people.

Francisco Longoria’s case unfolded in San Bernardino, Southern California. He was stopped in his car with his teenage son in the passenger seat and another man in the back seat by border patrol agents. The situation is depicted in two separate cell phone videos and a video from a surveillance camera across the street. In these videos, one border patrol agent is seen smashing the car’s glass. Then Longoria drives away. Importantly, the surveillance video across the street clearly shows there were no federal agents or federal vehicles in front of or in any way in the path of Longoria’s vehicle when he drove away, yet that moment is when a border patrol agent discharged his firearm at him multiple times. The Department of Justice charged Longoria with assault on an officer. However, prosecutors dropped the case within less than a month of filing it. This is not an isolated outcome; it is part of a broader pattern observed in several cases. The narrative notes that this dropping of charges is not unique to Longoria’s case, and that there are other instances where cases have been thrown out by judges. From the reviewed material, only four of the cases examined actually have ongoing criminal prosecutions. This total is described as a much smaller number than might be expected given the DHS’s public claims accusing individuals of assaulting federal officers. The speaker underscores that assault on a federal officer is a serious and prosecutable charge, yet the current landscape shows relatively few active prosecutions amid numerous accusations. In summary, Longoria’s episode involved border patrols, a glass-breaking incident, and Longoria’s subsequent drive-away during which a border patrol agent fired multiple shots. The DOJ dropped the assault-on-officer charge against Longoria in under a month, and among similar cases, only a minority remain under active prosecution, with four cases still ongoing. This pattern is highlighted as notable in the discussion of how these cases are proceeding relative to the public accusations by DHS.

Caroline Miller claimed a man attempted to kidnap her two-year-old son at an Atlanta Walmart on March 18. She stated the man grabbed the child from her lap after she pointed him to the Tylenol. 56-year-old Mahendra Patel was arrested for suspicion of kidnapping and has remained in jail. Walmart surveillance footage allegedly contradicts Miller's account. The footage shows Patel helping the child back onto Miller's lap when he appeared to be falling. Later, after Miller backed up, causing her daughter to fall, Patel picked the girl up. He then located a Walmart employee to help him find the Tylenol, thanked Miller, and left. Miller told a Walmart employee that Patel tried to take her son. Questions are being raised about the delay in releasing the footage, why Patel is still in jail, and what will happen to Miller.

The video involves a heated confrontation between individuals claiming a false arrest warrant was issued. They argue that the arrest is illegal and express frustration over the situation. The authorities try to calm the situation and suggest moving inside for a discussion. The individuals are upset about the treatment of a family member and demand answers. The authorities maintain they are following protocol and need to contact their team. The individuals continue to express their anger and disbelief at the situation. Ultimately, they agree to go inside for further discussion. Translation: The video shows a tense argument over an alleged false arrest warrant, with emotions running high and demands for clarification. The authorities attempt to de-escalate the situation and propose moving the conversation indoors. The individuals express outrage at the treatment of their family member and demand explanations. Despite their frustration, they eventually agree to continue the discussion inside.

Terry, a gentle man, was handcuffed today. It's unbelievable to see him in a perp walk on Blaze TV.

In December 2020, federal agents approached Jeremy Brown to be a paid informant, but he refused and exposed their request to the media. As a result, he was arrested in September 2021 after an illegal search at his home. Jeremy's legal team is presenting evidence that the explosive grenades and national defense documents found in his home were planted by government agents. The agents turned off all recording devices and had no functioning body cameras during the search. DNA tests on the grenades did not match Jeremy's DNA, and a dog hair and carpet fiber found on the grenades did not match his dogs or carpet. The evidence suggests that the CD and grenades were planted. Jeremy is fighting for his freedom and American freedom.

A person confronts the store manager at CVS, asking why they called the police on two men. The manager explains that it is CVS policy to involve the police if someone shoplifts and leaves without paying. The person clarifies that they didn't press charges, but wanted the men barred from the store. The manager defends their actions, stating that they followed company policies. The person questions if it's worth risking someone's life for a low salary. The manager dismisses any risk and refuses to provide their name. The person argues that calling the police on the men was a form of violence against them. They mention that one of the men had a warrant but was let go by the police. The person reminds the manager that they work with black individuals and should remember that.

We're addressing claims made by a witness in a recent story. This witness alleged our officer shot a suspect, Jalen Robinson, in the back as he was surrendering, but that's not what happened. Dashcam and body camera footage shows Robinson, who fled a traffic stop, turned and shot at our officer. The officer attempted to use a taser, but it was ineffective. Robinson shot the officer in the stomach. The released footage clearly shows Robinson facing the officer, pointing a handgun before the officer drew his weapon. The officer was hit but saved by his vest. Officers returned fire, hitting Robinson, who later died despite medical assistance. Our officers have the right to defend themselves. The Mississippi Bureau of Investigations (MBI) is now handling the case, gathering evidence and witness accounts, including from the witness who made the false claims. The officers involved are on paid leave pending the investigation.

In an affluent neighborhood called River Oaks in Houston, Texas, a young black woman delivering packages for Amazon encounters a situation where residents refuse to let her deliver a package directly to them as instructed. An older white woman becomes aggressive and assaults her, while another woman threatens to call security on the delivery person. The incident is captured on video, highlighting the unjust treatment the delivery woman faced. Without the video evidence, she could have been falsely accused of theft. The incident occurred in the Houston, River Oaks area.

A man named Larry Morrison was unjustly arrested by Detroit police officers when he was trying to open his own car after locking his keys inside. The family tried to explain this to the officers, but they refused to listen. The situation escalated, with Morrison resisting arrest and officers using force to subdue him. The family is upset and questioning the police's actions, wondering if proper protocols and training were followed. The officers involved have been taken off street duty while an investigation is ongoing. Morrison was released without charges but is currently in the hospital for injuries sustained during the arrest. The family continues to ask why the officers wouldn't listen to their explanation.