[ofer4]

"A man using a cellphone to record a police officer giving him a ticket for smoking on a San Diego boardwalk spent a night in jail after refusing to give up his cellphone, which the officer said could be used as a weapon."

Man arrested for taping officer who claimed cellphone was a weapon | ksl.com

[Kerrowdown]

This is unbelievable, police forces wonder why they are not respected, the answer is, because respect has to be earned.

That having been said, the guy doing filming comes over as being quite a confrontational individual, so hey, it does take two to tango.

[VisualDarkness]

That sounds like a, totally, ridiculous charge. I don't know everything in this case but it is common with people who search power, to behave like this, when the power is taken away from them.

[Bramela]

The police officer may have gone a bit far, but, I think the guy taking the shots was pushing his luck a bit as well. Both at fault IMHO.

[VisualDarkness]

The police officer may have gone a bit far, but, I think the guy taking the shots was pushing his luck a bit as well. Both at fault IMHO.

In what way is taking photo's of a person that initially confronts you any kind of assault? One of the biggest tools to bring up injustice and corruption is by using video. At least here in Sweden video capable phones has brought many important issues to the surface the last few years.

[DSims]

That having been said, the guy doing filming comes over as being quite a confrontational individual, so hey, it does take two to tango.

I expected to see this after reading your comment, but I really don't see the guy doing the filming as being confrontational - at least, not at the point he is asked to put the cell phone away. He was being a little bit confrontational by beginning to film, but not at the point he was asked to put it away.

I understand the officer may not like being filmed, but he has to take it. The man is just properly standing up for his rights. The idea that the cellphone here was being converted into use as a weapon is absolutely absurd. As long as the guy can still use his other hand to sign the ticket, or whatever else he has to do to interact with the police man, the officer should do nothing.


It sounded like the guy had a buddy there - the officer could have suggested handing it off to him if he genuinely believed the cell phone was a threat as he came closer. But he didn't do this and he should be disciplined. This is a fundamental American right which is deeply embedded in our Constitution and our history.

There were two highly trained officers and one guy "armed" with a cell phone - really, who has all the power here? Unfortunately the officer felt he had to prove who that was, as if it wasn't obvious enough already!

[Docrwm]

This is unbelievable, police forces wonder why they are not respected, the answer is, because respect has to be earned.

That having been said, the guy doing filming comes over as being quite a confrontational individual, so hey, it does take two to tango.

Absolutely. Today my son asked me why police cars speed all the time. I tried to tell him that we might not know that they are on a call. He then pointed out to me that we were on the interstate in county X and the car that passed us doing 90+mph was from a county 5 counties north of us. I realized that there is a police training facility on that Interstate that we pass on trips and LOTS of police cars from far off pass us going 90+ on the way to that facility. It's hard to instill respect for hypocrites who give out tickets for 70mph when they themselves often go 90+ when it suits them and not for actual pursuit or getting to a scene of an accident/crime. This one is worse because someone spent a night in jail because Barney Fife couldn't restrain himself.

[bossa]

Next they'll be shooting people using phones because they are weapons.... let's not forget about hair-clips either right?

[MRRiley]

Pringle does not get "confrontational" until the bicycle officer objects to being taped and invents his unreasonable "cellphone weapon" excuse. Courts across the land have overwhelmingly upheld the public's right to film interactions with the police. Some of them just don't get it.

[Robot camera]

Mr Pringle has spent 9 hours in jail, and it's not clear if he is to be prosecuted for anything (other than what he was stopped for) His day was wasted.

This has happened in the UK, usually where people are taking photographs quite legally and the police want to stop them. They are arrested, then released some eight hours later without charge, having been punished for nothing.

[mrNewt]

WOW ... almost comical in a way. Kids with toys I guess ... the one with the bigger one wins .
Both at fault as far as I can tell...

[Blue]

Pringle does not get "confrontational" until the bicycle officer objects to being taped and invents his unreasonable "cellphone weapon" excuse. Courts across the land have overwhelmingly upheld the public's right to film interactions with the police. Some of them just don't get it.

In some states, they allow police to search peoples cell pones without a warrant. Chicago is one jurisdiction. However, it seems that any reasonable person would consider that as personal papers and effects and protected under "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, . . . "

[Docrwm]

In some states, they allow police to search peoples cell pones without a warrant. Chicago is one jurisdiction. However, it seems that any reasonable person would consider that as personal papers and effects and protected under "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, . . . "

Funny, I read an article about that a couple of years ago by a constitutional lawyer and his take-away message was - keep a few PDFs of actual documents (not merely photos) on the phone and that argument is more likely to fly with a Court.

[MRRiley]

In some states, they allow police to search peoples cell pones without a warrant. Chicago is one jurisdiction. However, it seems that any reasonable person would consider that as personal papers and effects and protected under "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, . . . "

I wasn't talking about "phone searches." I was talking about the act of filming police. It's pretty clear in this case that the gestapo bike officer's main issue was that he didn't like being on candid camera... not that he thought the citizen might have something on the camera worth searching.

[Blue]

I wasn't talking about "phone searches." I was talking about the act of filming police. It's pretty clear in this case that the gestapo bike officer's main issue was that he didn't like being on candid camera... not that he thought the citizen might have something on the camera worth searching.

Video files and image files are stored on camera or card. If they have the power to take a phone and search it for what ever reason, photography files are not given any kind special exception.

Edit: We have a bill in the legislature in Florida to cover photos on all digital devices including cell phones.

Miami Herald, Mar 4, 2013
TALLAHASSEE -- Police would need court approval to seize pictures, text messages or other material on cell phones or other personal electronic devices under a bill approved Monday by a Senate committee over the objection of police and prosecutors.
"It’s very important that we secure information that I believe is private," said the bill’s sponsor, Sen. Jeff Brandes, citing the proliferation of personal information that now is stored on people’s cells and tablets.

Read more here: http://www.miamiherald.com/2013/03/04/3266886/bill-would-require-warrants-fo...#storylink=cpy

I guess if the device is considered a dangerous weapon, it would be a work around. It is probable that the officer really wanted to access those image files.