RSIG Security at Transformer Packard set

**mauser** · September-12-10, 03:19 PM

http://www.detroitfunk.com/?p=4714

Anybody else had problems with the security guard company at Packard during the Transformers filming ? Not just me, but over a dozen other people have told me crazy stories about their behavior - to the point where we are starting to write letters to the Michigan AGs office about this RSIG company.

Threats of violence, fake tickets, lies about it being "government property", threatening equipment, swearing, following cars - its pretty crazy. One of the readers on my site stopped by with his kids to maybe see one of the big robots. They freaked out really hard on him, with the family in the car and everything .

Is that in anyway necessary or acceptable ?

I say 'no'.

And so what happened with the City finding the owners of Packard to hold them accountable for the conditions on that property ? Hollywood shows up and everything is forgotten with a few dollars ? Come on.

**Gsgeorge** · September-12-10, 04:33 PM

Not the classiest act in town. New Image Protection Services offers a much more professional & accommodating security service for Hollywood Films. I was surprised a film of this size went with RSIG, to be honest. They offer some of the lowest rates in town. Probably because they needed so many people. NPS [[New Image) is an amazingly professional outfit, very courteous with people and will only take action of the set is trespassed onto or there is a disturbance. Police are only called if absolutely necessary.

**gazhekwe** · September-12-10, 04:48 PM

In Chicago, their security was noticeable, but not intrusive. I don't know what company they used. A LOT of staff, all up and down the various streets near the filming, no uniforms, just name tags and walkie talkies.

**mauser** · September-12-10, 04:50 PM

Yep - some professional manners and conduct would go a very long way.

It is also annoying because you can not really see anything from Grand Boulevard, and if that limited view is so important to them, why didnt they spend an extra $530 dollars and put up a few more boards to block views of the set ?

Like I mentioned before, you could look straight into the set from Harper Avenue anyway. Their zeal seems very far out of place.

**wolverine** · September-12-10, 04:59 PM

The security service in Chicago were wonderful and very nice and professional people. My office building was right in the center of the set. We'd have to pass through a security checkpoint to get into our building as well as the corner bakery restaurant. They were very polite and also let tourists in as long as they were dining at the corner bakery. Photography and filming was allowed and encouraged so as long as you weren't being disruptive and blocking entrances and exits. They set up places where people could stand and pose for photographs. Security also gave helpful and clear directions for people who were lost or were looking for a particular location. While filming went for nearly 3 weeks outside our building, it was hardly a burden. We actually missed it when the crew left.

It's a shame that security in Detroit is ruining this exciting moment for people. From the several filmings I've seen they've always provided places to get close and watch without disrupting production. I think this is just one of those things on top of a thousand that will continue to give Detroit a bad reputation. I was going to make a trip to Detroit to capture a few photos from a distance like I did in Chicago, but I guess I'll pass.

Put it like this, Chicago was able to handle a logistically difficult filming in a downtown area with hundreds of thousands of tourists, office workers, and residents passing through the area. There were no problems. Meanwhile it seems there are difficulties managing maybe hundreds that pass through an area that is mostly vacant. That's just a shame....

Blarf · September-12-10, 05:30 PM

On Friday afternoon I rolled up on Grand Blvd to watch the set. when a little weasel guard came up to my window and told me if I didn't move an officer would issue me a $1000 ticket. It was probably bullshit, but I just went on my way. What a bunch of pricks. Fuck their stupid movie.

**Fnemecek** · September-12-10, 06:39 PM

Oh, man! This is really bad.

We're trying to promote Michigan as a filming location and we've got assholes like RSIG making the entire industry look bad. These guys simply need to be replaced.

Stosh · September-12-10, 06:47 PM

I think it's hilarious. You guys are used to playing fast and loose with the rules of private property, and now are brought back to reality when some big bad goons stop you from entering. I just love it.

Maybe you can cut your own entrance in the building? Seems like the thing to do.

**mauser** · September-12-10, 07:27 PM

Originally Posted by Blarf

On Friday afternoon I rolled up on Grand Blvd to watch the set. when a little weasel guard came up to my window and told me if I didn't move an officer would issue me a $1000 ticket. It was probably bullshit, but I just went on my way. What a bunch of pricks. Fuck their stupid movie.

Yes it is bullshit, I was told "$5,000.00" ticket by khaki pants kid. One of the readers on my site was told he would get his ticket "in the mail".

You can sue people for intimidating you with a lie to prevent you from doing something you have every right to do. That is NOT legal behavior.

You also cant lie and call it "government property".

You cant confiscate or demand film or take cameras. That is a legal term known as "conversion", and you can sue for anyone attempting to do this to you. [[aside from a full blown Homeland Security agent with a damn good reason - maybe)

Having cars followed around by security guards in the neighboring streets is illegal harassment and intimidation.

Taking pictures of people - ANY people - in public places is 100% legal. There is absolutely no expectation of privacy standing out in the open. Through somebodys front window -that is a different story.

You never need to explain to anybody what you are taking photos of or why, so long as you are on public property. Personally, if a police officer has some legitimate reason to ask about your photography, I dont think it is a big deal to explain yourself. But you do not have to. [[cops at accident scenes usually ask if you are media, and then you just flash your ID)

The post 9/11 world of security guards is pretty wacky sometimes. I had a guy run out of a hotel and yell at me for taking photos of the skyline of Dallas once....the WHOLE skyline. Apparently the President had left this hotel lobby guard in charge of Dallas that night......heh. He threatened to call the FBI and scared my brother. I wanted to meet the FBI and ask them who killed JFK.....but thats another story.

Blarf · September-12-10, 07:39 PM

Originally Posted by Stosh

I think it's hilarious. You guys are used to playing fast and loose with the rules of private property, and now are brought back to reality when some big bad goons stop you from entering. I just love it.

Maybe you can cut your own entrance in the building? Seems like the thing to do.

East Grand Blvd is private property? I thought that was a public street. I must be wrong.

**wolverine** · September-12-10, 07:58 PM

Originally Posted by Stosh

I think it's hilarious. You guys are used to playing fast and loose with the rules of private property, and now are brought back to reality when some big bad goons stop you from entering. I just love it.

Maybe you can cut your own entrance in the building? Seems like the thing to do.

Can you clarify? I wasn't aware that Detroit's streets are privately owned. Or maybe you have absolutely no clue as to what's going on.

Stosh · September-12-10, 08:33 PM

Originally Posted by Blarf

East Grand Blvd is private property? I thought that was a public street. I must be wrong.

Yes, you are, apparently. Must be the confusion of the treatment of Packard Properties as public property for so long, and the street.

Stosh · September-12-10, 08:35 PM

Originally Posted by wolverine

Can you clarify? I wasn't aware that Detroit's streets are privately owned. Or maybe you have absolutely no clue as to what's going on.

Why should anyone clarify? Why should anyone be accountable for anything? Private property is still that. You have no presumption of access. And yes, I suppose that extends to the securing of their interests from potential tresspassers.

**Jimaz** · September-12-10, 08:41 PM

This thread ties in so perfectly with the theme of "Fabulous Ruins of Detroit."

People dramatically disputing each others' right to photograph a subject that is commonly regarded as beyond hope, as if valiantly fighting over the corpse of The Iliad's Hector!

Ruins really are fabulous!

Blarf · September-12-10, 10:51 PM

Originally Posted by Stosh

Why should anyone clarify? Why should anyone be accountable for anything? Private property is still that. You have no presumption of access. And yes, I suppose that extends to the securing of their interests from potential tresspassers.

How can you trespass on a public street?

**wolverine** · September-12-10, 11:46 PM

Originally Posted by Stosh

Why should anyone clarify? Why should anyone be accountable for anything? Private property is still that. You have no presumption of access. And yes, I suppose that extends to the securing of their interests from potential tresspassers.

No one has trespassed, no one has walked on the Packard plant grounds or the alleys that run through it. The issue here in question is whether spectators have been unfairly treated watching from a distance on public sidewalks and streets that T3's hired security team has absolutely no control over.

While agree with you stosh that people have no right to be in the Packard or any vacant property in the city, I think you've completely misunderstood the situation here. We are aware they are filming in this property, but what about the neighborhood around it?

When filming happen, streets and properties used for staging and filming are typically well defined. They include checkpoints and sometimes fencing. Doesn't seem like the case here.

I've had very few run-ins with rent-a-cops in my life. The most notable example I can think of reminds me of what is being discussed in this thread.

I walked out of my apartment building and crossed the street to take a photo of my building. As I took a photo, a rent a cop walked up to me and demanded I not take any pictures. I replied "I'm sorry but I'm going to get this photo." Again he told me to stop and said pictures weren't allowed. "I said, well I live in that building, and I'm going to get a picture." He then said that I couldn't take the picture because there was retail on the ground floor, and that the retailers did not want photos of their store. He said it was maybe okay if I took pictures of the top floors of my building.

I called b.s. and said that rule only applies to the inside of the stores [[on private property) and that's probably what the retailers meant. Furthermore I told him my own building security [[that actually lets the public photograph the lobby) and the Chicago police trumps his authority and he should leave before I call them and report his harassment. He immediately walked away.

So stosh, maybe you should hire a rent-a-cop so when the streetview google car passes by your place next time, you can have them stopped.

**Gannon** · September-13-10, 03:21 AM

Heya F, you've got a video camera, right?!

Why don't we start RECORDING this abhorrent behavior on the part of RSIG Security?!

Why don't we? For the sake of the industry stake in Detroit...

On the plus side, we might win big in court, too. Pay for better video equipment...maybe get that Red you've been lusting after?!

Cheers

**56packman** · September-13-10, 08:28 AM

And so what happened with the City finding the owners of Packard to hold them accountable for the conditions on that property ? Hollywood shows up and everything is forgotten with a few dollars ? Come on.

The Packard plant was owned by a private party who was denied proper due process in making good on the back taxes on the property, a long and unpleasant story. The City of Detroit, in cahoots with the State of Michigan seized the property from the owner, kicking out all but one of the 117 tenants who were renting space in the plant, and were the source of income for the owners. The owners made a substantial payment against the taxes owed, enough to call of the dogs, the City cashed the check and one month later the State of Michigan [[who had acquired the deed to the complex through some EPA superfund machinations) signed the deed over to .................the city of Detroit. The city had a commercial/industrial real estate broker talking in their ear, and he had a hard-on to get the property through the city, use EPA brownfield superfund money to pay his son's demolition company to clear the site so that he could have a nice 64 acre site with rail access, mostly with OPM.
The city kept police officers on the site for two years to deny the owner's management right to 1) leave and 2) come back in once he had to leave for medical reasons. Then the city paid a rent-a-cop to "watch the place" during which time the wanton destruction began--ON THE CITY'S WATCH. A lengthy court battle ensued and the Michigan Supreme Court finally ruled that the city acted improperly and awarded the property back to the owners.
So the city would have some pretty big balls to go to the owners of the plant and start demanding things. The city caused the "abandonment" and allowed the scrapping and destruction under their watch. Prior to all of this intrigue the plant was in equal or better shape than the Russell industrial center or former Ford Highland Park plant.
The city should pay for the demolition.

**Detroit Stylin** · September-13-10, 08:36 AM

Originally Posted by 56packman

The Packard plant was owned by a private party who was denied proper due process in making good on the back taxes on the property, a long and unpleasant story.

Doesnt change the fact that while they were earning and income from the plant they had to be FORCED to pay their taxes so INITIALLY the city acted properly however subsequent actions were questionable. The PP Owners should have acted as responsible owbners in the first place and alot of this would not have transpired.

Stosh · September-13-10, 08:40 AM

Originally Posted by Blarf

How can you trespass on a public street?

Depending on who hired the rent-a-cops, will give you an answer. If the COD did, you are shit out of luck.

Stosh · September-13-10, 08:43 AM

Originally Posted by 56packman

The Packard plant was owned by a private party who was denied proper due process in making good on the back taxes on the property, a long and unpleasant story. The City of Detroit, in cahoots with the State of Michigan seized the property from the owner, kicking out all but one of the 117 tenants who were renting space in the plant, and were the source of income for the owners. The owners made a substantial payment against the taxes owed, enough to call of the dogs, the City cashed the check and one month later the State of Michigan [[who had acquired the deed to the complex through some EPA superfund machinations) signed the deed over to .................the city of Detroit. The city had a commercial/industrial real estate broker talking in their ear, and he had a hard-on to get the property through the city, use EPA brownfield superfund money to pay his son's demolition company to clear the site so that he could have a nice 64 acre site with rail access, mostly with OPM.
The city kept police officers on the site for two years to deny the owner's management right to 1) leave and 2) come back in once he had to leave for medical reasons. Then the city paid a rent-a-cop to "watch the place" during which time the wanton destruction began--ON THE CITY'S WATCH. A lengthy court battle ensued and the Michigan Supreme Court finally ruled that the city acted improperly and awarded the property back to the owners.
So the city would have some pretty big balls to go to the owners of the plant and start demanding things. The city caused the "abandonment" and allowed the scrapping and destruction under their watch. Prior to all of this intrigue the plant was in equal or better shape than the Russell industrial center or former Ford Highland Park plant.
The city should pay for the demolition.

Which gives you the answer as to who is ordering the rental goons to act as they are. Call city council if you have a problem with the street access.

Blarf · September-13-10, 10:24 AM

Originally Posted by Stosh

Depending on who hired the rent-a-cops, will give you an answer. If the COD did, you are shit out of luck.

Ahh, well they didn't post any "No Trespassing" signs on Grand Blvd, as they are required to by law. So any ticket they would give wouldn't hold up.

**56packman** · September-13-10, 10:46 AM

Originally Posted by Detroit Stylin

Doesnt change the fact that while they were earning and income from the plant they had to be FORCED to pay their taxes so INITIALLY the city acted properly however subsequent actions were questionable. The PP Owners should have acted as responsible owbners in the first place and alot of this would not have transpired.

Stylin--there are laws on the books, procedures that were set in place in the late 19th century, early 20th century that protect the little guy from having his land stolen by the big and powerful. These laws are necessarily combersome, and seem illogical to landlords [[ask anyone who has owned rental property) but the bottom line is, they are on the books to protect the little guy from being screwed by the wealthy over land because they have an opportunity to make money off of it.
These laws were made in the wake of the actions of 19th century robber barons like Jay Gould and the other railroad tycoons who preyed on individuals to take thier land for pennies on the dollar.
It gives chances, and there are procedures [[several steps) to allow those in arrears to make good on their taxes before siezure takes place. These laws were ignored for the sake of convenience in the case of the Packard plant and the siezure was fast tracked [[ignoring these laws and procedures) with implicit help from individuals in the Archer administration, the EPA and the State of Michigan. If Matty Maroun or someone else of his wealth behaved the same way and took your home, or that of one of your family members you would be equally outraged.

Stosh · September-13-10, 10:50 AM

Originally Posted by Blarf

Ahh, well they didn't post any "No Trespassing" signs on Grand Blvd, as they are required to by law. So any ticket they would give wouldn't hold up.

Well I never said that their ticket threats were legit, did I? This is Detroit, after all, they probably would try to give you a ticket for parking and tow your car while ou are being mugged. Easier to enforce parking law than personal crime.

**bsu** · September-13-10, 11:47 AM

Me and my wife ran into these guys two nights before the Eminem and Jayz concert. We went for a walk after dinner at Detroit Beer Company and could hear all the noise coming from Comerica Park. We walked up John R toward the stadium. John R was completely free of any kind of blockades, warning signs or any security/police personal. As we approached Adams two guys wearing red jackets and khaki pants raced up on a golf cart. One of them jumped off the cart as it was still moving and got right in my face. He told me to turn around and out of there. I was shocked at how aggressive he was. so I turned right away from the stadium and headed toward the Elwood. This POS jumped in front of me, did a belly bump and said I had to leave the area immediately or he would call the Detroit police. At this point I started returning the aggression. I got back in his face and told him to call them. I said this is a public street and he no right to keep me from walking down the side walk. We argued for a few minutes and then he said there was a Detroit police officer at the other end of the block, at Grand Circus. Which is right where I headed. Now if this guys goal was to keep me away from the stadium he failed because I walked half the length of the park and could see and hear everything. When I got to the cop he said really politely " All I know is they told me to keep everybody out." and then ask nicely not to back into the area. Which we did because he was cool with us.
I'm still amazed with how aggressive these guys were. After I told a few people this story they said the first thing I should have done is tell the cop what this guy had done. A friend of mine said this was assault. I think that's a bit of an overreaction but I can see how this could lead to more and more aggressive behavior.