[MRRiley]

Non-issue period.Child pornography is something that needs to be erradicated
from the face of the earth.How about a meaningful thread on that.

People being arrested for standing in front of their own homes and photographing police, which in New York is completely legal, is a big issue in my opinion. When the police begin arresting people for non-existent crimes, we have turned a corner that I don't believe we can without destroying our free and democratic society.

Mike

p.s. So start a thread on kiddie porn already... No one is stopping you!

[shooz]

I'm in complete agreement on both points.

[v5planet]

Wow, that was incredibly disgusting. I am speechless.

[seacapt]

It is clear that there was some discourse between the police and the woman prior to her filming. We do not know what transpired at that time.
Police frequently ask people to go inside for their own safety.
We know nothing about why the traffic stop was taking place.
Cops in dangerous situations really don't need to be distracted while doing their jobs since a moment's diverted attention can prove fatal.

I'm not going to make a judgement call on this simply based on 4 1/2 minutes of home video without complete context.

[MRRiley]

Yet without her video there would have been NO CONTEXT at all and in a "cop's word vs citizen's word" situation we all know who the judge tends to believe.

I don't believe there is evidence even on the tape that she said anything to the officer who arrested her before she started filming. It's just as likely that she was talking to the people accompanying her and the officer simply heard what he wanted to hear and assumed she was talking to him.

Fortunately "innocent until proven guilty" still largely reigns in this country though we'll probably never hear what the result of the "internal investigation" is.

[seacapt]

Mike I'm not saying the cops were right in this case there simply isn't enough info to make a fair judgement.
They did politely ask her to back off.
Many a situation has turned bad because of a brief distraction.
Cops don't wear kevlar because it's comfy.

How would you deal with someone following you around at work with a camera?

[Parallax]

They did politely ask her to back off.

There's the issue, Ken. What is the legal basis for telling someone they can't stand in their own front yard?

They did politely ask her to back off.

She declined their request. Again, where's the crime?

How would you deal with someone following you around at work with a camera?

The same way anyone is expected to deal with any downside of any job. Adapt or find a different job.

[MRRiley]

Ken,

I simply believe that their request was inappropriate and unnecessary and legally unenforceable. She did not approach either the officers, their or the subject's vehicles and appeared to remain on her own property (or perhaps on a public sidewalk) throughout the exchange. The officer's order to "go inside" was, to my mind, an illegal order.

Frankly, if I worked out in public there would be little I could do about it legally. There is no expectation of privacy in a public place and the street in front of this woman's house is a public place, so the officers have NO EXPECTATION OF PRIVACY.

But if they actually tried to "follow me around work with a camera" they would be breaking several federal statutes given where I work and would be quickly arrested by men with federal badges. I can't even bring my cell phone in my office because it has a camera in it.

Officer safety is indeed an issue, but the woman arrested was carrying a camera, not a gun or knife or baseball bat... Face it.. the police fear video cameras because they often show them to be acting improperly. The "officer safety" card is played simply because it gives them a stick to use on you, not because they think you might actually shoot them (using a firearm anyway).

[GeneV]

The sensitivity of the police on this issue points to something way beyond any legitimate concerns. High security areas aside, we are filmed and photographed constantly. It is a fact of life. I can zoom in to Google Earth and see the front of my house, and know pretty much when it was taken by looking at the car parked in front. We can view some of the busiest intersections in the world via web cams. When we look up in any building now, we see cameras.

We can discuss whether the entire world needs more privacy, but a public officer doing the work of the public on or around a public street makes a poor case for receiving more privacy than the rest of the population.

[GeneV]

Seems to me that people being arrested for taking pictures is an issue.

Especially on a photography forum.

[BillM]

destroying our free and democratic society.

What democratic society sir? Your rhetoric allready has other party tried and convicted.

Thanks for the ideal on thread,tremendously complex and difficult.Will take some time
but perhaps I shall.

[MRRiley]

What democratic society sir? Your rhetoric allready has other party tried and convicted.

Thanks for the ideal on thread,tremendously complex and difficult.Will take some time
but perhaps I shall.

Actually the fact that the charges were dropped and the police are investigating themselves speaks pretty loudly about this woman's innocence and the officer's, if not guilt, then his poor judgement.

Mike

[shooz]

Less than good judgement is not limited to being used against photographers.

https://www.courthousenews.com/2011/06/29/37770.htm

Tort reform, anyone?

[Parallax]

Tort reform, anyone?

??
The suit seems justified to me.

[KungPOW]

Police scare the shit out of me.