Photography Is Not A Crime

Pertinacious Tom

Importunate Member
61,286
1,677
Punta Gorda FL
My hero for the day is Kyle Howell.

He had to know that he was going to wind up looking like this when he pulled out his camera to record a police officer, after being warned he would get his ass kicked for doing it.

Kyle-Howell-300x223.jpg


He did it anyway. I can't think of a single self-serving reason he would do that. He did it for all of us. A true public servant.

The "public servants" who beat him up when he was breaking no law were, fortunately, caught on another camera.

 

slatfatf

Super Anarchist
8,679
1,049
My hero for the day is Kyle Howell.

He had to know that he was going to wind up looking like this when he pulled out his camera to record a police officer, after being warned he would get his ass kicked for doing it.

Kyle-Howell-300x223.jpg


He did it anyway. I can't think of a single self-serving reason he would do that. He did it for all of us. A true public servant.

The "public servants" who beat him up when he was breaking no law were, fortunately, caught on another camera.
There is not enough money in the world to get me to move back to Long Island. Nassau County police have a long and storied history of this kind of shit. I remmebr when I still lived there they opened fire on an unarmed guy in a stopped car. I think in that case they put 40 or 50 rounds into the car.

 

mikewof

mikewof
44,173
1,022
Seems to be a good number of cops behaving worse than violent criminals. Presumably the only thing new about this is the preponderance of digital recording.

(Funny how the technology we worried would take away our freedom seems to be pretty good at taking freedom away from previous untouchables.)

Anyway, have any national law enforcement groups made any statements about these accused uniformed criminals?

 
Last edited by a moderator:

mikewof

mikewof
44,173
1,022
A particularly sickening story from PINAC today.

TN Deputy Fired After Choking Handcuffed Student Unconscious

Glad he was fired and I hope he is successfully prosecuted for attempted murder.

I think the two cops who were also holding the guy and who failed to stop the excessive use of force should also be fired and prosecuted.
What would elected Sheriff Jimmy JJ Jones have done with this if his NAME WASN'T PHOTOGRAPHED AS THE BACKDROP TO A POSSIBLE ATTEMPTED MURDER?

 

Mojo31

Super Anarchist
4,691
0
what i'll never understand is a cop or a rentacop going apeshit over someone holding up a big fancy camera taking a picture of something relatively mundane like a metro-train, supposedly for security reasons or who the hell knows - yet there is no way to tell if the other hundreds of people are sending a text or taking pictures to figure out where to place a bomb. This scenario is relatively commonplace on photo websites for things like trains, refineries, street photography airports (both inside and outside), etc. The next phase of the story, as im sure is referenced in the OP link, is the cop or rentacop accosting the photographer to delete the pictures from the camera. Those who shoot film tend to get away with not having to destroy their film, but i believe i read one case where the cop forced the photographer to hand him the film. Cops and rentacops go after people holding up an SLR because they are an easy target, but the fact of the matter is that if someone wants a picture of something for malicious purposes all they have to do is act like they're sending a text.
People also go ape-shit over someone holding a camera with a big sports lens at a little league or kids' soccer game. I doubt many pervs are walking around with $10,000 lenses the size of a duffle bag to sneak pictures of little kids for their private collection.

 

Pertinacious Tom

Importunate Member
61,286
1,677
Punta Gorda FL
Wiretapping Is Not A Crime

A woman (quite possibly a sailor) was busted for drinking and being disorderly on a Sunday morning. She activated an audio recording app on her phone.

When cops found the phone, she was also busted for wiretapping.

The issue here, straight from the Department of Redundancy Department, is two (or more) party consent. Do you have to let someone know you are recording them?

The answer is complex for citizens and state laws differ, but I think we should have one standard for all law enforcement officers at every level. If they are in a public place (not a Chicago style one, an actual public place) and performing their duties, they are fair game for recording, videotaping, photographing, sketching, whatever.

 

mad

Super Anarchist
Maybe this would solve the issue

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-27313500

Met Police officers are to start wearing cameras on their uniforms as part of plans to boost transparency and accelerate convictions.

The cameras are designed to capture evidence at crime scenes.

A trial will see 500 devices distributed to officers across 10 London boroughs. Firearm officers will also use them in their training.

But, Jack Hart from The Freedom Association says the move means "everyone is under suspicion".

The pilot scheme comes following criticism of the force over the death of Mark Duggan at the hands of armed officers.

The death of Mr Duggan, 29, in Tottenham, north London, in August 2011, sparked riots in the area that later spread across England
 

Pertinacious Tom

Importunate Member
61,286
1,677
Punta Gorda FL
Photography is not a crime, it's actually First Amendment-protected expression.

Another Blow Against Cops Who Think They Have A Right Not To Be Recorded

Three years ago, in Glik v. Cunniffe, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 1st Circuit upheld a man's First Amendment right to record an arrest on Boston Common. Last week, in Gericke v. Weare, the court upheld a woman's First Amendment right to record a traffic stop in Weare, New Hampshire. The combination of these two decisions is a powerful rebuke to cops who continue to harass people with bogus wiretapping charges when they dare to capture images or sound of police encounters on their cellphones.

...The 1st Circuit ruled that the First Amendment right recognized in Glik also applies to traffic stops, although it may be reasonably restricted in that context to protect the safety of officers and the public. In this case, Gericke says police never asked her to stop recording or to leave the scene; they just arrested her afterward. "Based on Gericke's version of the facts," the court said, "she was exercising a clearly established First Amendment right when she attempted to film the traffic stop in the absence of a police order to stop filming or leave the area."

New Hampshire's wiretap statute, unlike the Massachusetts law, applies only to situations in which the people who are recorded have a reasonable expectation of privacy. The 1st Circuit noted that police officers performing their duties in public have no such expectation, especially when the person recording them announces her intention to do so....

What's especially significant about both of these cases is that they allowed lawsuits against the police officers themselves to proceed. The court decided that the officers did not qualify for immunity because the rights they violated were clearly established at the time of the arrests. Cops who continue to mistakenly believe they have a right not to be recorded while on duty should understand that they cannot hide behind their real or professed ignorance of what the Constitution requires.
 

Pertinacious Tom

Importunate Member
61,286
1,677
Punta Gorda FL

ACLU press release on that case

CAPE GIRARDEAU, MO—Police Officer Jerry Bledsoe sent a written apology to Second Amendment advocate Jordan Klaffer, and agreed to pay damages, court costs and attorneys’ fees. The Village of Kelso, where Bledsoe works, also assured Klaffer in writing that they will instruct police officers to not seek court orders to censor individuals who are critical of police officers’ actions.
The government obviously should not be seeking court orders to censor citizens who are critical of government, but WTF is wrong with the court that actually granted such an order???

 

tuk tuk Joe

Super Anarchist
8,757
0
SEA

ACLU press release on that case

>CAPE GIRARDEAU, MO—Police Officer Jerry Bledsoe sent a written apology to Second Amendment advocate Jordan Klaffer, and agreed to pay damages, court costs and attorneys’ fees. The Village of Kelso, where Bledsoe works, also assured Klaffer in writing that they will instruct police officers to not seek court orders to censor individuals who are critical of police officers’ actions.
The government obviously should not be seeking court orders to censor citizens who are critical of government, but WTF is wrong with the court that actually granted such an order???
Seems perfectly reasonable.. :lol:

 

Pertinacious Tom

Importunate Member
61,286
1,677
Punta Gorda FL
Maybe this would solve the issue

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-27313500

Met Police officers are to start wearing cameras on their uniforms as part of plans to boost transparency and accelerate convictions.

The cameras are designed to capture evidence at crime scenes.

A trial will see 500 devices distributed to officers across 10 London boroughs. Firearm officers will also use them in their training.

But, Jack Hart from The Freedom Association says the move means "everyone is under suspicion".

The pilot scheme comes following criticism of the force over the death of Mark Duggan at the hands of armed officers.

The death of Mr Duggan, 29, in Tottenham, north London, in August 2011, sparked riots in the area that later spread across England
"Solve" might be a strong word, but "help" would be an understatement.

Cops wear cameras, complaints against cops fall dramatically

Edit to add, but sometimes those cameras malfunction <_<

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Pertinacious Tom

Importunate Member
61,286
1,677
Punta Gorda FL
Cop pulls over Internal Affairs Lieutenant and they fight

Oops. This one is interesting because there's a dashcam video, but it's not a police department dashcam. The officer ran a personal GoPro on his dash and when he realized he had tangled with the big brass, he hid it.

This cop had a prior suspension for failing to report a use of force, so is not a perfect angel, but I like any cop who wants his professional actions on camera. It suggests to me he only intends to do his job and wants proof that's all he did.

 
2,399
0
"Funny" how the cops' mantra is typically something like, "anything I can see from a place I'm allowed to stand" when it comes to photographic fair game, evidence collection, etc.

The trick would be to have two cameras rolling - the one that the fuzz insists you put down or else, and, another one hidden away to document how they act when they think they'll get away with the goose-stepping stuff. Not all cops, of course, just the rare & occasional asshole.
The first paragraph sounds remarkable similar to the laws concerning photographers selling photos without obtaining permission from the subjects. There is an element of whether the subject was in private and therefore had "a reasonable expectation of privacy" (i.e., you can't use a telephoto lens to shoot someone in their living room) vs whether the subject was in public and therefore had no such reasonable expectation. In the latter case, the laws are considerably looser as to whether a photographer is free to monetize the image.

If a cop sees you commit a crime in Times Square, the evidence is more admissable than if said cop were sneaking around in the ducts of your house waiting for you to break the law.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Pertinacious Tom

Importunate Member
61,286
1,677
Punta Gorda FL
Stealing from a dying man is a crime, but it's not so bad if you're a cop.

A Connecticut state trooper is due in court this fall for sentencing, after he was found guilty of stealing from a motorcyclist who was dying on the side of the road. Dash cam footage from the officer’s patrol car showed him stealing cash from the dying man, as well as a golden crucifix.

On Wednesday afternoon, Aaron “AJ” Huntsman, a 19-year veteran of the state police, pleaded guilty to two felony charges of third-degree larceny and tampering with evidence.

Although your average person would face up to ten years under these same charges, officer Huntsman is looking at a maximum of a year and a half, plus five years probation. He even has the ability to plead for a lesser sentence, just because he is a cop.

WTF? A cop who commits a crime like this one should, if anything, receive a harsher sentence than an ordinary citizen. I'd be fine with just treating criminal cops like any other criminal. Treating them better than other criminals will just encourage more criminal behavior.

 
Top