“C’mon...you have a reasonable right to photograph in a public space. Common sense dictates that you don’t videotape someone who is in a stretcher and being helped medically.”
First of all, you have an absolute right to photograph in a public place. There is no expectation of privacy in public places, therefore, you cannot violate anyone’s privacy in a public place.
Secondly, public officials (including cops and other public servants) have no expectation of privacy while performing their jobs. They all seem to be overly sensitive to this for one reason: the Rodney King beating video.
So to recap: the man who was being treated in a public place had no right to privacy. The cops and paramedics had no right to privacy. The cop who confronted the photographer thought he was protecting the victim’s right to privacy when he had none at all. In short, the cop and paramedic citing HIPPA had no idea what they were talking about and had no right to interfere with someone taking pictures of the scene. Now, you may think what he was shooting was tasteless, but that’s why we have a first amendment. The man taking the photos was no different than any photojournalist in that situation, and should have been accorded the same deferential treatment under the first amendment.
I see you failed to acknowledge my larger point about the morality and ethics of it and omitted that comment entirely. Just because ACLU lawyers solidified its legality doesn’t mean it’s morally acceptable. I also don’t think this Green urchin is a “photojournalist”. Lastly, there are many instances where names and pictures are withheld in reporting as a matter of decency...think rape victims. I think the officer used great restraint.