Defensive Carry banner

1 - 13 of 13 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,283 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 · (Edited)
Popular Mechanics
Real Title: Yes, You Have the Right to Record the Police: Analysis
By Morgan Leigh Manning
June 5, 2013 4:59 PM

My Comments: This is not a Police Bashing thread! This is intended to be informative, as well as to see what the LEO here think about recording of them on duty, in public places while not interfearing with them in any way.


.......While some facts surrounding the case remain unknown, it appears that the witnesses who recorded the Silva incident acted lawfully, and—absent a valid warrant—the law enforcement officials had no right to seize their property. And on May 14, the FBI launched an investigation amid questions over whether officials tampered with the cellphone videos confiscated from the witnesses.

Back Story:

On May 8, Maria Melendez, Melendez's daughter, Melissa Quair, and Quair's boyfriend reportedly witnessed about a half-dozen Kern County, Calif., highway patrol officers beating and kicking 33-year old David Silva in front of Kern Medical Center. Silva, the father of four young children, died early on the morning of May 8, presumably from the injuries he sustained from the incident.

Melendez recorded the entire episode on her phone, as did her daughter's boyfriend. But before she could send the videos to news media outlets, she later told reporters, detectives from the Kern County Sheriff's Office, acting without a warrant, confiscated their cellphones.


Read more: Yes, You Have the Right to Record the Police: Analysis - Popular Mechanics
Follow us: @PopMech on Twitter | popularmechanics on Facebook
Visit us at PopularMechanics.com
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,274 Posts
nevermind, off topic.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
36,326 Posts
it a felony to harass, annoy, or threaten a police officer while on duty.
Documenting public servants doing public business ... is a felony? What a world we're allowing to cave in around our ears, accomplished by our apathy plus the "skills" of the destroyer hirelings we're putting in positions of presumed authority.

:pat:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
1,892 Posts
In my State it has always been a crime to threaten an officer. The part of this Bill that concerns me is the part that makes it a class E Felony to annoy an officer. This is some pretty dangerous ground in my opinion. To touch or interfere with an officer in the performance of his duty should and is against the law in my state. What I want is a legal definition of what is annoy. Remember we are talking a felony here.

We have an unarmed citizen involved in first amendment activity and an officer who has Pistol, Tazer, Baton, Mace, Handcuffs, Radio to call for help, Bullet proof vest, Dog leash around his right ankle, Bug around his left ankle and a folding knife in his sap pocket and we are going to allow him to charge a class E felony for protestor annoying him or her?

This is a little scary for me to see. What job that deals with the public is free of annoyances?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
42,292 Posts
The ridiculus NY law requires "touching" the officer to be a violation. In FL, it is illegal to record someone where they have an "expectation of privacy." Roadside or the parking lot of a hospital would not qualify as a place where one would expect privacy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hogdaddy

·
Registered
Joined
·
770 Posts
In my career, I was recorded by the public many times - had no problem with it - and always assumed I was being photographed or recorded anyway - especially in an era where everyone has a cell phone camera.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
10,182 Posts
Here .... record away ...... anything in public and anyone in public, can be recorded, including police officers. It keeps everyone honest.

In a case here, they said audio recordings in a case were not admissible... and I had to remind even the attorneys, only 1 person has to approve the recording... and if you are "one" of the participants there, then you have given permission.

They were admissible ....... numerous people were given the "opportunity" to change their testimony, or the tapes would be admitted into evidence and they were likely to be charged with perjury. Everyone of them, (not police officers, but worked for the State) decided to "modify" their testimony. Ironic huh, and after that testimony...... 2 of them were fired, and every "case" that one of them were involved in and who's testimony was considered "key" evidence, was brought up to be re-reviewed by the Court.

People who will lie in court, will lie anywhere, and no one profession is exempt from people that will lie for one reason or another... and they need to be ferreted out of the system.
 
  • Like
Reactions: luvmy40 and ccw9mm

·
Banned
Joined
·
3,342 Posts
The ridiculus NY law requires "touching" the officer to be a violation. In FL, it is illegal to record someone where they have an "expectation of privacy." Roadside or the parking lot of a hospital would not qualify as a place where one would expect privacy.
It's not hard to say 'he touched me, and I was annoyed, so felony. Then he tried to walk off, which is felony eluding, so I shot him'. That's the problem with these vague laws.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,514 Posts
I have no problem with someone recording me, because I don't do anything illegal.
However, if they are going to record, they need to stay back....far back so they are not close enough to us to require us to pay attention to them and distract us from the job at hand. This usually comes in play when we are arresting someone that is not cooperating and the person wanting to video gets up in our business to the point we have to start getting them away. This is due to the fact that we have people that jump in to help their friend/family member, or take some of our attention away from the resisting/fighting suspect. At this point (here in Texas anyway) that is Interference with duties of a public servant.
If they stay away and video us and don't verbally heckle/distract us or incite others to get involved, absolutely zero problem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ccw9mm and luvmy40

·
Registered
Joined
·
36,326 Posts
I have no problem with someone recording me, because I don't do anything illegal.
However, if they are going to record, they need to stay back....far back so they are not close enough to us to require us to pay attention to them and distract us from the job at hand. This usually comes in play when we are arresting someone that is not cooperating and the person wanting to video gets up in our business to the point we have to start getting them away. This is due to the fact that we have people that jump in to help their friend/family member, or take some of our attention away from the resisting/fighting suspect. At this point (here in Texas anyway) that is Interference with duties of a public servant.
If they stay away and video us and don't verbally heckle/distract us or incite others to get involved, absolutely zero problem.
:yup: IMO, that's exactly how it should be. It's certainly no crime, merely to monitor what's going on publicly. It shouldn't be classified as such. And it's a good double-check on procedure and situations, to help document what is. As you say, so long as people don't interfere and disrupt directly, physically/verbally.
 
1 - 13 of 13 Posts
Top