Posted on 06/03/2010 6:59:40 AM PDT by RoseyT
In response to a flood of Facebook and YouTube videos that depict police abuse, a new trend in law enforcement is gaining popularity. In at least three states, it is now illegal to record any on-duty police officer. Even if the encounter involves you and may be necessary to your defense, and even if the recording is on a public street where no expectation of privacy exists.
The legal justification for arresting the "shooter" rests on existing wiretapping or eavesdropping laws, with statutes against obstructing law enforcement sometimes cited. Illinois, Massachusetts, and Maryland are among the 12 states in which all parties must consent for a recording to be legal unless, as with TV news crews, it is obvious to all that recording is underway. Since the police do not consent, the camera-wielder can be arrested. Most all-party-consent states also include an exception for recording in public places where "no expectation of privacy exists" (Illinois does not) but in practice this exception is not being recognized.
(Story continued...)
(Excerpt) Read more at gizmodo.com ...
Recording the actions of our public servants is almost a civic duty, in my opinion. What do they have to hide?
Yet the government can put up CCTVs EVERYWHERE to watch the citizen they consider to be “mindless sheep to the slaughter”. But if we want to record them, we don’t have the “right” to watch them....
What’s next, will the congress critters make investigating congress illegal?
” Of course in cases where recorders capture evidence of “police brutality” or “oppression” there will be no problem.These laws are meant to protect political hacks and their friends....not law abiding citizens.At least that’s the case in Massachusetts. “
This is why cameras in police cars are a good thing, they help show an officer’s side fo the story. But yeah this all reeks of political favortism.
All three states are among the most screamingly liberal in the nation. Citizens, submit to the police state.
Obviously something that needs to be considered by the courts.Even the SCOTUS if necessary.Cockroach hack politicians and their "civil service" cronies fear "sunlight".
The police are objecting to being taped, therefore Big Brother is admitting they have something to hide.
I wonder how long it will be before someone contests a ticket they got because of a traffic camera. Using the logic of the law, “I didn’t consent to having my picture taken!”
I love www.thinkgeek.com
http://www.thinkgeek.com/gadgets/watches/b550/
Basically a Spy Camera video watch.
They also have spy cams in pens, key fobs, and sunglasses.
Bring it on.
Ha!
Video as you please.
Have someone else post it to YouTube.
Too late. The Congressional Black Caucus is already trying to get the ethics panel's powers reduced because they are investigating its members.
Garde la Foi, mes amis! Nous nous sommes les sauveurs de la République! Maintenant et Toujours!
(Keep the Faith, my friends! We are the saviors of the Republic! Now and Forever!)
LonePalm, le Républicain du verre cassé (The Broken Glass Republican)
If there is any doubt about your interactions with the police, you have to subpoena that recording and get it into your lawyers hands as quickly as possible so it isn't "accidentally" erased if it will show the police in a bad light. I would even say that if you plan on fighting a speeding ticket you need to work on getting that recording before the officer makes it back to the police station.
I would say that the information our own eyes capture is our own inherent right and any camera that we are holding right now is an extension of that memory that we record in our brain, consider it an “external memory device”.
While wiretaqpping laws should prevent unauthorized, autonomous cameras and microphones planted on another person’s or organization’s property without their consent. They should not prevent a person from using an “external memory device” that works in the within arms reach of the user’s own eyes. We have the right to our own “memories” be they in the form of brain patterns recordd by our brains or the electronic information in a memory card from a camera we are holding. On someons’e private property they can refuse us entry if we have such a device, but on public land there should be restriction on this whatsoever because public land is owned by the state and the state has no right to restrict your memory, internal brain patterns or external memory device.
I must apologize for my lack of spelling to myself.
“The argument Big Brother always uses in defense of his total-surveillance state is that the only reason you would object to being taped is because you have something to hide.
The police are objecting to being taped, therefore Big Brother is admitting they have something to hide. “
State Animals are more equal than Citizen Animals.
I think such cameras are,in theory,a good idea.If used "correctly" they have the ability to protect the cops *and* the public...and suspects as well.But in a thoroughly corrupt like Massachusetts you can bet your bottom dollar that when such a video might reveal police misconduct/error there'd always seem to have been a camera malfunction during that incident.And to the best of my knowledge police in this state don't use dashboard cameras...although I'm not sure of that.
“This is why cameras in police cars are a good thing, they help show an officer’s side of the story.
I think such cameras are,in theory,a good idea.If used “correctly” they have the ability to protect the cops *and* the public...and suspects as well.But in a thoroughly corrupt like Massachusetts you can bet your bottom dollar that when such a video might reveal police misconduct/error there’d always seem to have been a camera malfunction during that incident.And to the best of my knowledge police in this state don’t use dashboard cameras...although I’m not sure of that. “
You say the officer pulled you out of your car and beat you becasue you had a “Don’t tread on me” bumper sticker, and the officer was yelling about it while they were beating you up. That’s too bad.... The tape recorder in the car was busted that day, so sorry, Now for this charge of resisting arrest during that same arrest on the officer’s word, GUILTY, enjoy the book about to be thrown at you.
Of course if you cannot tape the police, I’ll bet any version of the “brownshirts” that may materialize int he future will get the same “privlidge”.
Man....I am a police officer....and this is bulsh&#T. I only have nine more years...will be glad to get out of this work...seriously...seen too much go on that makes me uncomfortable...just keep doin whats right...pray for the best...sighs. Do have the concern that the videos can be reworked to make things look a certain way...this goes for both sides by the way. Welcome to Amerika
Well now gee whiz, what’s all the fuss? After all EVERYBODY KNOWS that the police/bureaucrats/politicians/public union employees are the GOOD GUYS! It’s the “little people”...you know, the citizen-nobodies who need watched!!
As I’ve always said, the police aren’t citizens since they aren’t subject to our nation’s laws.
Pathetic.
Absurd. Illogical. Typical Statist protections (liberal / progressive control).
The NEA protects bad teachers through tenure and other means. Incompetent, redundant, or unethical government workers are next to impossible to fire. The UAW protects the lowest quality workers in their ranks versus enforcing a standard of excellence.
Protect your kingdom.
Completely unconstitutional.
So the public has "surrendered" their right to not be recorded but the police don't. No wonder they don't want cameras in the jails to catch them beating up those arrested.
It's good to be the king.
Those cameras are “not working” or the tapes are “lost” sometimes when the tapes don’t back up the officers’ stories.
“In at least three states, it is now illegal to record any on-duty police officer”
That’s a pretty stupid law. Nice way to alienate your constituents. It’s like passing a law that says you can’t give city councilmen funny looks. Except in that case, the law would encourage less beatings with heavy objects.
this law violates the exculpatory evidence rule and it flies in the face of laws which ALLOW police to record you if they arrest you how are holding you in custody, or just doing a simple terry stop.
Sure looks that way. I enjoyed your “Supreme Law” post. Very Screwtapish!
Thank you much.
I couldn’t agree more. What part of “Public Servant” do they not understand?
I think the age of citizen journalist is upon us ... Video is the new media and the tape will always tell the tale, unless it’s photo shopped.
Heck even our lame stream media could have found the tapes of the flotilla raid, if they had wanted to tell the truth.
I agree mostly with the author, the camera can be as powerful as the gun, just like the pen before it.
No need, they alone investigate themselves.
If two party consent is required, wouldn’t that prevent police dash cams from recording until the police officer got consent from the citizen being recorded?
bike800, As GraceG said, (and I wholeheartedly agree) this is just an initial step in protecting the brownshirt police state to come.
I don’t think of the problem being as much what we now call “police” as the problem, so much as will inevitably be the brownshirts to come. I respect the good law enforcement officers, but I increasingly see the deck being stacked, so to speak.
Dznutz, I pinged you because I thought it’s important to bring in all perspectives, if you care to add. I appreciate anything you can add, but know you may be busy. This is only relevant to 3 states for now, but may increasingly involve us all.
It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the law, guilty or not.
Not until the Court says it is, probably not in our lifetime either.
Does that thing work?
So they (governments, businesses, basically anyone that can afford a camera) can photograph us, private citizens, because we’re in public and have no expectation, but we can’t photograph them even though they’re public employees.
We *need* you. We *need* good police officers who understand the law and freedom.
“Not until the Court says it is, probably not in our lifetime either.”
With the rapidity of our degradation, I’m not sure it will have time to make it to the court.
“Nice way to alienate your constituents.”
Jury nullification is a good route to take. When in doubt vote for the citizen, especially in police brutality cases.
“...Illinois, Massachusetts, and Maryland...”
Cutting edge experts in Soviet governance. Lefties love police abuse as long as they are in power to control who gets abused.
Same should be true of recording devices used by a officers.
Cuts both ways.
What are you looking for? LOL /s
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.