Slashdot Mirror
Citizen Photographers v. The Police?
"Police told Hairston that they did take Cruz into to custody, but they said Cruz was not on his property when they arrested him."
OK. I'm more inclined to believe the cops... wait a second...
"A neighbor said she witnessed the incident and could not believe what she saw."
"He opened up the gate and Neffy was coming down and he went up to Neffy, pulled him down...
Oh, you dumb, dumb cops. Of course Neftaly Cruz was "not on his property" during the arrest if you went onto his property and dragged him off! Why would you do that in front of witnesses?
To tomstdenis's argument that, even if the police really did violate people's rights, they should be treated leniently because "[P]olice are people and do bad things," reader alienmole points out a crucial difference:
The difference is that police have powers which ordinary citizens don't have, so when police do bad things, it can have severe consequences. Quite often, they're not held accountable for that, which again results from an abuse of power. That's what this is all about: accountability for the actions of public servants, particularly those with extraordinary powers. Cops in general are not the enemy, but bad cops are certainly an enemy which needs to be guarded against and eradicated whenever possible.
Reader BINC wants to know whether Pennsylvania actually has a law which would illegalize Neftaly Cruz's cellphone photo of police in the act of arresting a suspect. He writes
Many readers linked to online information and commentary on the recognized rights of photographers (at least in the U.S.). Reader pen was one of several to point to Bert Krages' site:This seems to be part of a national push. In Montana it extends beyond photography. I have recently been threatened with being charged with "Obstructing" for not yielding to a warrantless search of my property, so I looked it up. See data.opi.mt.gov/bills/mca/45/7/45-7-302.htm especially paragraph (2). !!
General defense in Montana is insisting on trial by jury — provided one represents himself; otherwise it invites rapid bankruptcy — but trial by jury is not guaranteed by all states' consitutions for all crimes.
Reader hacker linked to an informative PDF and offers a useful summary:Here is a handy pamphlet called The Photographer's Right that provides some advice for dealing with a situation like this.
Except in special circumstances (e.g., certain government facilities), there are no laws prohibiting the taking of photographs on public or private property. If you can be there, you can take pictures there: streets, malls, parking lots, office buildings. You do not need permission to do so, even on private property.
Trespassing laws naturally apply. If a property owner demands you leave, you must. But if a place is open to the public — a mall, office-building lobby, etc. — permission to enter is assumed (although it can be revoked).
In terms of the law, trespass and photography are separate events; the former is illegal, but the latter is not. Only if the use of photographic equipment itself violates a person's privacy (e.g., by using a long lens to look into someone's private room) might it violate privacy law. Further, while people have a right of privacy, businesses do not except as it relates to trade secrets.
Subject to specific limits, photographers can publish any photos they take, provided those photos do not violate the privacy of the subject. This includes photos taken while trespassing or otherwise being someplace they shouldn't be. Taking photos and publishing photos are two separate issues.
Please read the full PDF here with much more detail. I print copies of this on 4x5 index cards and keep them with me at all times when I'm taking photos in any public place.
Also, if someone demands your "film" or your camera, let them know that it is not legal for them to take it, unless you have been arrested of a crime involving that camera and that film. The crime for someone to demand and take your camera or film, is called theft, and threatening to do so (or to "break your camera"), is called coercion. Don't tolerate either of them, and if your equipment IS taken or broken, call the police and file charges.
PsychosisC contributed a link to a short video called " BUSTED - The Citizen's Guide to Surviving Police Encounters," writing "I've only had two encounters with police officers... but both of them sort of leave me thinking less of them."
Rights on paper aside, many readers posted horror stories of arrest-happy police; leereyno pointed to one that made the news in the Mid-Atlantic region, writing
According to reader rs79, this sort of thing on wouldn't happen north of the border; rs79 writes "I've photographed cops here in Canada arresting people a couple of times. They don't care." To this, RajivSLK says[T]here does seem to be an increase in cases of police officers getting confused and thinking they work for the Gestapo. There was a case a month back or so where the daughter of a police officer was arrested for "trespassing." She and a friend were lost and had stopped to ask a police officer for directions. The officer refused to help them, stating that they would have to find their own way out. A few moments later they spotted another officer and drove over to where he was to ask for help, at which point the first officer rushed over and berated them for daring to ask her partner for help when she had already told them to get lost. ... A few minutes later these same officers arrested them for "trespassing" ..... on a public street. The girl and her friend spent the night in jail. They weren't charged of course because they hadn't committed any crime.
I don't know how this case turned out for the officers involved, but it shows a serious lack of oversight when two cops are able to run wild and abuse the public in that manner.
[...]
In most parts of the world, being a police officer is met with about the same level of respect as a personal injury lawyer would be here, if not less. The police are held in contempt because in most parts of the world, particularly the 3rd world, corruption and abuse are almost part of the job. Police officers in the U.S. are, at least among healthy segments of society, viewed with respect if not admiration. But this esteem is fragile because at the end of the day the police are armed agents of the state and that makes them difficult to love. So when officers abuse and betray the trust of the public and make false arrests, all it does is make life that much more difficult for them and and their fellow officers. Things like these are noticed, and remembered.
It's not so rosy up here in Canada. This past Canada Day the Victoria police instituted a policy of mandatory searches on all buses heading downtown. They can get away with this because, on Canada Day, the bus is used mostly by young people going to clubs. I objected to being searched thinking that I would simply not be allowed back on the bus. Instead, to my complete surprise, the officer began to become very verbally abusive and I was arrested for "Drunk and Disorderly Conduct."
No breathalizer, no sobriety test, nothing. 100% solely based upon the officers "observation." I was processed and thrown into a dirty cement holding cell that lacked even toilet paper let alone a bed. As it stands, the Victoria police can arrest anyone at anytime under the charge of "Drunk and Disorderly" with no evidence and no sobriety test.
I can't wait for the day when *I* can video tape everything. That should provide a little balance to things.
ZorbaTHut suggests the sort of technological answer that RajivSLK's looking for, which might remind Neal Stephenson fans of the "gargoyles" in Snowcrash.
I've been waiting for a mini-stealth-camera-and-recorder to appear. I want a little device, the size of a cellphone camera, that fits in a button or a necklace or a belt buckle or something equally inconspicuous. It should be connected to a waist controller, which would include battery pack, storage (hard drive or flash), and wifi. Wifi so that, whenever it can find an available internet connection, it can upload its contents to a secure server located elsewhere.
Just imagine that. "Sorry sir, you took a picture of something you weren't supposed to. I'm going to have to confiscate your camera." "The pictures are already in Texas, and in ten minutes they'll be posted online. Same as the recording of what you're saying right now. You really want to illegally take my possessions, Officer Frank, Number 3894?"
Many thanks to the readers (especially those quoted above) whose comments informed this discussion.
Despite what some might believe, this is not uncommon. It has to do with the way police are trained, and will remain an inherent flaw until something changes. I personally see it all the time. I live in Isla Vista, California, which is what I affectionately call the nicest ghetto in the world. It is only one to two square miles, with a population of about 20,000 people (not a typo). It is comprised almost entirely of students attending UCSB and Santa Barbara City College, as well as a large latino population. Here, we have the Isla Vista Foot Patrol, which many people don't exactly like. They constantly lie to students, illegally enter property, and illegal search people, usually in the name of writing an alcohol or marijuana possesion ticket. I was at a friends house when the IVFP entered the party for a "noise violation" and proceeded to bang on the door of the room we were in. The door was opened and the office claimed that he could smell marijuana. No one would admit they had any, and no one had been smoking atleast since I had entered the room. The cop proceeded to take people out of the room one by one. When he called me up, he stuck his hands in my pockets, and I immediately objected, claiming he had no probably cause or consent from me to enter my pockets. In my pockets, I had nothing illegal, though I did happen to have rolling papers, which I made quite clear were legal. This caused me to be taken into another room, and tested to see if I was drunk. As RajivSLK mentioned, this is what happens when you anger a police officer. Aslo, as he pointed out, there is no evidence(i.e. breathalyzer) required to cite you with drunk in public, or drunk and disorderly conduct. After determing I was not drunk, the other officer said he was "going to be nice and let me go this time" as if I had commited a crime. No marijuana citations were issued that night.
A month later, at another house, police arrived, again for a noise violation. One of the officers promptly recognized me and called me "the marijuana man", and proceeded to pat me down. He stayed over my clothes, keeping the search legal this time, however he kept yelling at me to spread my legs farther apart until you would have sworn I was an olympic gymnast. Furthermore, I was lucky. I can't even fit on one hand the number of friends I have had arrested for saying something to the police when someone else was being arrested. Things were so bad here at one point that the student government had to launch a campaign against the police, informing students of their rights and accepting police complaint reports that they would then file for you. Thankfully we also have free legal advice available to all students and are currently forming an official position called Office of the Student Advocate.
Anyways, here is the point:
Police officers operate this way on purpose. This is how they are trained! It is not really good cop bad cop thing as much as you would believe. The police's job is not really to uphold the law. That is the court's job. The police are there to investigate crime and catch "bad guys". If the 4th ammendment gets in their way, oh well, let the courts decide that. They are trained to lie, decieve, and push the boundaries, usually in search of a verbal confession. Most cops don't even know the law, they are just there to do what they were trained to due. Read Breaking Rank, by Norm Stamper, former Seattle police chief, to learn about how the police system fosters violence, racism, and homophobia as a matter of practice. Finally, if you don't know how to deal with police and refuse a warrantless search, please please please watch Busted. There is a YouTube link already in the slashback. Finally, if you are afraid to talk to police officers in such a situation, keep something like the NORML Freedom Card in your wallet. Simply invoke your right to remain silent, and hand the card to the officer. Its simple yet very effective.
Moderation Totals: Flamebait=2, Troll=1, Redundant=1, Insightful=6, Overrated=1, Underrated=1, Total=12. (not mine)
[Where were the repercussions for the offending officer though?]
Most likely nothing. And that's as it should be. Why? Because he most likely thought that he was in the right
That doesn't matter -- he was out of line, no matter how justified he believed his actions to be and he needs to be accountable for them. By your logic, very few crimes of passion would be punishable... unless you believe there's a different standard for members of law enforcement. In point of fact, I believe there is a different standard, but it is and must be a more strict standard than that applied to the general public. If we cannot expect those who enforce the law to avoid even the mere appearance of impropriety, how dare we expect the general public to abide by, much less the law those individuals enforce?
I honestly think some cops are bad, but most (like most people) just want to do a good job, make the world better or at least not any worse and go home to their happy and safe little home. If you really were a sadistic bastard who just wanted to mess with the world, there are easier and more lucrative ways to do it than going into law enforcement.
Do you know any cops? I do. My brother used to be a cop and I got to know quite a few of them both through him and by just talking to them. Almost every cop and even security guard I've ever talked to has had issues with anger and control. When within ten minutes of meeting someone they express to you how they wish they had a good excuse to shoot someone or how they became a cop because they could not get into the military and really just wanted to learn to be a better killer you start to have a very different view of cops. Most of them are people who grew up too slowly and did not realize that all the action shows on TV were just revenge fantasies and not life goals. A whole lot of them have sadistic tendencies and/or a strong desire to assert dominance over everyone they can. Every cop I've ever asked has a "funny" story about how they broke the law and did things normal people can't because they can get away with it. Most cops abuse their power.
You say that most cops just want to do a good job, but in the opinions of many of the cops I've talked to "doing a good job" might mean driving those "niggers" out of town or making sure those weird guys are properly frightened so they know it is not alright to be different from the NASCAR watching majority.
I get along just fine with cops for the most part. I never get tickets and know enough about martial arts and guns and have enough good stories about the military and crimes so that they generally consider me one of the "good guys." I'm also something of a social chameleon and am almost universally accepted in any clique. I don't, however, have an illusions about the fact that for the most part cops are bigger criminals than the average person, they abuse their authority, and they are violent and prone to use violence unnecessarily. They also always want to be in control and are more likely to respond with violence or by arresting someone with no legal justification than they are willing to cede that control. For example, from stories I've heard from cops, most are likely to arrest anyone who points out that they are wrong and that the act they are claiming is illegal (like photographing them) is legal. It is a challenge to them and the fact that what they are doing is illegal is only a technicality to them. Most cops feel anyone doing anything that is not what they direct is in the wrong, because most don't ever admit that they could be wrong.
I find your view of the police to be very naive.
Well, there *are* things the police can do today they couldn't do fifty years ago. For instance, there's the whole seizure of personal property (including bank accounts and homes) for minor drug busts. In some cases, you don't even have to be convicted, just arrested. The seized property is sold. Some police departments are funded by the selling of seized property.
Then there's the whole widespread phone tapping craze. This is something that could not have been done fifty years ago. Sure, US government resources were spent monitoring regular citizens, but it happened on a case-by-case basis, not wholesale.
We most likely do not live in an Orwellian society. But, y'know, I'd like to keep the government from obtaining the tools required for 1984 to come true. They are currently creating them in front of our very eyes. You may be a pollyanna, but there are some of us that are worried.
Honestly, we have the right to be worried. It's called "oversight of our government." As responsible citizens, it is our right and our duty to question everything the government does in our name.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
Driving while Black.
I worked as a database admin in a fairly well-to-do district. I and just about everybody else on our team never had any problems with cops there, but the operations manager would get pulled over on average about once every three months. As an amazing coincidence, he was also the only black guy on our team.
At least he never got arrested.
Most likely nothing. And that's as it should be. Why? Because he most likely thought that he was in the right
That doesn't matter -- he was out of line, no matter how justified he believed his actions to be and he needs to be accountable for them. By your logic, very few crimes of passion would be punishable... unless you believe there's a different standard for members of law enforcement.
Ok. I load our criminal code onto our police department's cars, and they all have easy access to it. Now, I'm sure it's in the general orders manual that they should know/read and be famailiar with everything in the criminal code book. That's an ideal. Usually, they train to a given standard and for all types of crimes write up the report in a form manner. Patrol's charge's usually have to be revised by CID. CID usually determines if a crime actually fits what the state criminal charge is or revises the charges to the closest one that they can charge the suspect with. When I stated he most likely thought he was in the right, I'm saying that the cop most likely actually thought that what the guy was doing happened to be illegal and for CID to find the charge/a charge to make it stick. What most likely happened is CID looked through their Lexis Nexis criminal code and couldn't find any mention of public citizen's taking police officer's photos being against the law.
If the person was using the images to threaten undercover policemen, then it might have been, but just the act of taking photos shouldn't be. The person incharge of CID should have sent a memo/called the person in charge of Patrol and had him make and annoucement at all the shift's roll call that it wasn't illegal and not to do it again. Police aren't perfect. They revise their standards, and what their written policies are all the time.
The problem is that the public usually just sees the lowest level patrol person on the street. That person isn't responsible for changing policy or running things. Usually a Captain writes/changes policy so that's the level that you'd need to complain to. The individual patrol person should be just carrying out their general orders manual with some slack every now and then for the unexpected. Do you really want to know the number one thing that the general public complains to their local pd about? I'll let you in on it. Animal services is the number one section that recieves the most compliants, and citizens will not be happy with whatever the policies are. Take animal's to the animal shelter and the citizen isn't happy if their critter dies when it isn't picked up after 2 weeks. I've heard of an entire shift chasing down a stray animal that there was a complaint over when nothing else more important was going on.
You want to change your police department? Communicate with it. Find out who you need to talk to and phone them up about once a month or so. Make sure all your neighbors also know the individual to contact. You will be listened to, and the police in your neighborhood will change their policies when it is possible and within reason for them to do so.
I don't know if your police department offers this, but mine has these "close watches" and any citizen can request for the police to keep and extra eye on their property if they are going out of town for week or have seen strange people in the neighborhood. Both individuals and business owners request this from the police department. They send out a group e-mail for the close watches.