The current issue of the journal of the American Bar Association has a good article on the legal questions surrounding videotaping of the police by private citizens (Good Cop, Bad Citizen? As Cellphone Recording Increases, Officers Are Uneasy).
The article reviews several legal cases, completed and pending.
“The prevalence of cellphone cameras with high enough resolutions for people to record the police and then be able to disseminate it over the Internet” is a major reason for the video-recording, says Boston attorney Jeffrey P. Hermes, director of the Citizen Media Law Project.
But law officers are often uncomfortable. “Many officers are also uncomfortable that their activities might be displayed on the Internet and otherwise widely distributed,” says Portland, Ore., lawyer Bert P. Krages, who specializes in the area. “Some also have the impression that photography presents a security risk and are acting according to a post-9/11 mentality.”
Adds Krages: “Law enforcement personnel are still grappling with the idea that ordinary citizens have the right to take images, whereas previously such photographs and videos were taken by professionals employed by traditional media companies.”
“When you talk about citizen journalists, there is also a slightly different relationship between those individuals and the police and the relationship that many mainstream journalists have with the police,” Hermes says. “Those mainstream journalists who cover the police have developed an understanding with the police that many private individuals have not.”
Unfortunately, it doesn’t link directly to the court opinions or case documents, but it’s still a good overview of the issues.
Discover more from i L i n d
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I ain’t no legal eagle but it seems to me that in public areas it should be allowed, provided the one recording isn’t “in the face” of the police or actively impeding their work.
Well, that’s the logical, common sense approach, anyway, yet as we all know a future court’s interpretation may be as fleeting as a beautiful woman’s smile.
Maybe more importantly, like so much else it’s impacted by the customs and general practice in this case by the local law enforcement types.
Fortunately, it’s been my experience that we’re generally blessed with decent cops here in Hawaii. In the mainland it’s far more common to witness abuses of power by their police.
Pretty clear cut to me. Either you have freedom of speech or you don’t. A video taken in a public place is the property of the individual who taped it, and they are free to publicly post it on the Internet. Any attempt to confiscate, intimidate or censor is unconstitutional.
“Mainstream journalists who cover the police have developed an understanding with the police,” sounds like the arrangement the Nazi’s had with mainstream German media.
Everything is recorded nowadays. Cameras in every lift. Cameras at major intersections, highway overpasses, street corners… Big brother needs some competition from small brother.
My attorney and I have formally informed the County of Hawaii per HRS Sec. 46-72 that we will be asking for damages against the County of Hawaii for this exact thing:
http://damontucker.com/2012/02/02/from-the-desk-of-gerard-d-lee-loy-re-claims-of-damon-tucker/
A formal lawsuit will be filed shortly.
Go get em, Damon. Our constitution shouldn’t be subject to interpretation by thugs with uniforms. I hope you get a large settlement and force the county to re-educate their employees on the the rights of American citizens.