Posted on 12/11/2009 8:51:05 PM PST by Dallas59
If the photographer took a photo from the second floor balconey, you can’t complaint that he was focusing in on a child.
I hope he sues everyone. As an accredited member of the press, both here and in Vietnam, I have seen police greatly abuse their powers including one motorcycle officer trying to run me down as I covered a sorry. I’ve also been teargassed when there was no reason for its’ use (and I was an undercover operative for the govt at that time). Also been falsely arrested and jailed. In fact, I was arrested by an acquaintance of mine who told me what was really going on. The White House (Nixon) didn’t want any embarrassing demonstrations when French Premier Pompidou visited the US in 1971 after selling jets to Libya.
I have put at least three police officers thru Internal Affairs and I know that one was punished, and then disappeared from the force. Didn’t hurt to have the Deputy Chief of Police as my teacher in Police Science (and his last name was Justice). The others got at least a “letter” in their files which made advancement a problem for a long time.
I have also seen police coverups you wouldn’t believe, including failure to investigate a murder threat by an interstate drug dealer. (I helped put his ass in jail. Nice to have friends in the FBI and another police department with competent officers). They circle the wagons to cover incompetent as well as stupidity. Remember, I live near DC where police corruption and incompetence is a way of life.
I have an AA Certificate (equivalent to a degree) in Police Science, have worked for DOJ on an organized crime task force, and my son is a cop.
I know what I’m speaking about.
What on earth does that have to do with this story?
It shows that he was being polite. The photographs were legally his.
Go ahead and cite them. Feel free to cite federal and state law, too.
I wonder why.
>>”If he intended to sell the photos (stock agency, perhaps) he would’ve needed model releases from all the people he photographed and property releases from the mall.”<<
That statement is not true. What you are saying is that if I took a picture at the Superbowl or a Lakers game and wanted sell or display it for profit, that I would have to get the signatures of the entire crowd in that image. LOL
Our police department will get called a couple of times each summer to investigate someone taking pictures of children, usually at a beach. We treat these calls in a serious manner. We are also mindful that people who are in a public setting have a limited expectation of privacy.
Having said that, I recall one guy who was stopped last year at the beach. He had taken almost 1,000 (yes, 1,000!) pictures of girls between 12 and 15 years old. He said that he collected them for his own purposes. He then admitted that he liked to photoshop the pictures “for his pleasure.” Believe it, folks - they’re out there. And, for some of these mild-mannered perverts, the fantasy needs to be enhanced and the pics aren’t enough. That’s why these guys need to be investigated, imnsho.
Stop by if you ever get to my island and try to punch me in the mouth.
You will receive a life-affirming lesson.
Have a nice day.
I don’t see the guy’s need to photograph people without permission— especially when a child not his own is involved. I don’t think he was wrong to take the picture, but I do think he created a situation when he did.
I meant what I said. I was being intentionally vague. My understanding is that some malls have photography rules, in which case they can kick you out.
What I was thinking of, specifically, was the guy that took pictures of under aged girls in bikini’s on the beach in Florida that they tried to press charges against but since he was merely photographing what was being displayed in public, he committed no crime. Again, if he was taking pictures where there was an “assumption” of privacy, like “up skirt” shots, it would have been different.
When one takes pictures in a mall that prohibits photography, I do not believe they are violating any laws, but merely violating private rules, which do not carry the force of law.
Yes, but violating private rules is different then violating public laws. One can land you in jail. The other can merely get you thrown out.
>>Why would a stranger want to take pictures of children he doesn’t even know sitting on Santa’s lap? (NAMBLA alert!)<<
I used to do it as an amateur photographer. If you pick up a magazine such as life or National Geographic, you will see lots of pictures of children who are not related to the photographer. Yes, they may be a news photographer, but they are taking the pictures because they are of people, places and cultures of significant interest to the readers of the magazine that the pictures are taken.
Same with mall santas. The guy could be an amateur photographer and he is taking pictures of modern american culture from a human interest/cultural/historical perspective.
Someone said, decades ago, that if you followed the average person around for a day you would probably think they were up to something.
So are you now taking the position that a mall is a public place?
Or consistent with your previous posts, would you maintain that you couldn't be arrested for “public urination” (or any form of public indecency) if you pee’d into a trash can at a mall?
Those questions are rhetorical, you don't have to answer.
RobRoy, I didn’t mean you. That was a courtesy ping to you. Stingray is the one who was equating public places with public property, and claiming that neither one can be privately owned. That attempted deception went on for several posts.
You’re right about the difference between a property owner’s private rules, and the force of law. There is an absolute difference.
Mall owners do not have the authority to create criminal laws that the public is subject to.
ROFL
Touché.
Sorry. I should have been more careful. This public vs private thing is a pet pieve of mine. I pretty much ignore stop signs in mall parking lots, but I believe they carry the force of law. But then, I pretty much ignore all stop signs and traffic lights these days so, pfffth.
If you treat people the way the cops treated this photog, I’d be happy to.
It’s easy to be tough on-line.
That’s okay. They weren’t put there to make you stop. They were put there to make other people stop. Carry on. ; )
I worked as a mall Santa one year. All they cared about was that I had a pulse. This was a few years ago, so it may have changed in terms of background checks. Sometimes the mall hires the Santa, and sometimes they license space to the company that does the photography.
After reading more about the incident, it’s clear the mall cop was a jerk.
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.