Appeals Court Unanimously Affirms Right to Videotape Police

Appeals Court Unanimously Affirms Right to Videotape Police

This is a discussion on Appeals Court Unanimously Affirms Right to Videotape Police within the Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; I was just sent link to a press release on the ACLU website that is dated 29AUG11. It claims that the U.S. Court of Appeals ...

Results 1 to 11 of 11
Like Tree3Likes
  • 1 Post By azchevy
  • 1 Post By jumpwing
  • 1 Post By Chad Rogers

Thread: Appeals Court Unanimously Affirms Right to Videotape Police

  1. #1
    Member Array mfcmb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    428

    Appeals Court Unanimously Affirms Right to Videotape Police

    I was just sent link to a press release on the ACLU website that is dated 29AUG11. It claims that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit ruled unanimously that Simon Glik had a right to videotape police in action. The link is:

    Appeals Court Unanimously Affirms Right to Videotape Police | American Civil Liberties Union

    Criminal charges were lodged against him for "...holding up his cell phone and openly recording Boston police officers who were punching another man on Boston Common in October 2007. "

    I think this is important because on one hand police officers in many areas routinely video and/or audio tape interactions with suspects, yet citizens are increasingly being charged with felony crimes for recording their interactions with the police.

    Given all the guidance I've read and stories I've heard about the importance and consequences of what is reported by police, your assailants and witnesses with regard to a self defense incident in which you are involved, I would think that being able to have your own recording of events could very important to your defense in after-incident legal proceedings. But if we have to fear, not only for our lives when attacked, but for felony wiretapping charges when we record what transpires, it makes protecting ourselves from harm (both physical and legal) that much harder.
    In the heat of the moment, what matters is what your body knows -- not what your mind knows.


  2. #2
    VIP Member Array Harryball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Lansing Mi
    Posts
    7,262
    Quote Originally Posted by mfcmb View Post
    I was just sent link to a press release on the ACLU website that is dated 29AUG11. It claims that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit ruled unanimously that Simon Glik had a right to videotape police in action. The link is:

    Appeals Court Unanimously Affirms Right to Videotape Police | American Civil Liberties Union

    Criminal charges were lodged against him for "...holding up his cell phone and openly recording Boston police officers who were punching another man on Boston Common in October 2007. "

    I think this is important because on one hand police officers in many areas routinely video and/or audio tape interactions with suspects, yet citizens are increasingly being charged with felony crimes for recording their interactions with the police.

    Given all the guidance I've read and stories I've heard about the importance and consequences of what is reported by police, your assailants and witnesses with regard to a self defense incident in which you are involved, I would think that being able to have your own recording of events could very important to your defense in after-incident legal proceedings. But if we have to fear, not only for our lives when attacked, but for felony wiretapping charges when we record what transpires, it makes protecting ourselves from harm (both physical and legal) that much harder.
    I agree we should be able to record public employees. Good for the court...I do have a question for you. Are you saying to carry around a recording devise just in case you have an SD moment? If you are, you must remember, you do not get to call time out. Its go, and go now...
    Don"t let stupid be your skill set....

    Never be ashamed of a scar. It simply means, that you were stronger than whatever tried to hurt you......

  3. #3
    VIP Member
    Array Mike1956's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Marion County, Ohio
    Posts
    10,671
    Quote Originally Posted by Harryball View Post
    I agree we should be able to record public employees. Good for the court...I do have a question for you. Are you saying to carry around a recording devise just in case you have an SD moment? If you are, you must remember, you do not get to call time out. Its go, and go now...
    Cell phones are, at most, a few seconds from "record" mode.

  4. #4
    VIP Member Array Harryball's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Lansing Mi
    Posts
    7,262
    Quote Originally Posted by Mike1956 View Post
    Cell phones are, at most, a few seconds from "record" mode.
    Yep, few seconds you do not have if someone is in your face......
    Don"t let stupid be your skill set....

    Never be ashamed of a scar. It simply means, that you were stronger than whatever tried to hurt you......

  5. #5
    VIP Member
    Array Mike1956's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Marion County, Ohio
    Posts
    10,671
    Quote Originally Posted by Harryball View Post
    Yep, few seconds you do not have if someone is in your face......
    I see now that you were referring to his final paragraph. Sorry.

  6. #6
    Ex Member Array azchevy's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Oceanfront Property
    Posts
    3,850
    This is good. Excellent win for the First Amendment.
    atctimmy likes this.

  7. #7
    Distinguished Member Array jumpwing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Washington
    Posts
    1,271
    People with authority should conduct themselves at all times as if they were being recorded anyway. Cops who conduct themselves professionally (as most of them do) will have nothing to worry about. Hopefully this will help weed out "problem" officers and make room for rookies waiting for a chance to prove themselves.
    Tzadik likes this.
    "The flock sleep peaceably in their pasture at night because Sheepdogs stand ready to do violence on their behalf."
    cafepress.com/bgstudios

  8. #8
    VIP Member Array mlr1m's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    okla
    Posts
    4,298
    We can only hope that this will soon become the law of the entire nation.

    Michael

  9. #9
    VIP Member Array Eagleks's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    7,785
    Anything that happens in public, is legal to tape here. Now, if it's in a private residence, it's up to the owners of the residence.

    That doesn't mean there have not been occassions where LEO's have not wanted to be taped, and tried to threaten people to stop or be arrested, but there are no "charges" to arrest them for , unless they want to go with "interference" which wouldn't hold up for 02 seconds in court. Police are always in the public eye, and those that don't want things taped, usually have reasons for it that are not necessarily positive ones.

    I think the whole thing about 'taping ' being illegal, is absurd.
    I don't make jokes. I just watch the government and report the facts. --- Will Rogers ---
    Chief Justice John Roberts : "I don't see how you can read Heller and not take away from it the notion that the Second Amendment...was extremely important to the framers in their view of what liberty meant."

  10. #10
    Senior Member Array Chad Rogers's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Metro DC
    Posts
    958
    I think the ultimate resolution of this issue will be that citizens have a right to record the police, but not all up in their face in a way that starts distracting from the cop's issue at hand.
    64zebra likes this.

  11. #11
    Administrator
    Array SIXTO's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    19,900
    What does this have to do with carry? Its not even a landmark issue. The courts have ruled over and over again that anyone and anything in the public eye is subject to be photographed. Much to do about nothing.
    "Just blame Sixto"

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Search tags for this page

court videotape police

Click on a term to search for related topics.

» Log in

User Name:

Password:

Not a member yet?
Register Now!

» DefensiveCarry Sponsors