Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Should it be a crime to take pictures of accident scenes?
Hot Air.com ^ | May 21, 2020 | JAZZ SHAW

Posted on 05/21/2020 5:10:26 PM PDT by Kaslin

After the crash of a helicopter carrying Kobe Bryant and several other people last year, a bit of a scandal erupted when it was determined that one of the sheriffs responding to the scene had taken photographs of the wreckage and the bodies of the victims. Those photos leaked out into the public over social media, causing distress to the families of some of the victims. But while certainly a tasteless thing to do, it wasn’t technically illegal so there wasn’t much to be done about it. That will change in the near future if a new bill introduced in the California Assembly makes it into law, however. The bill’s sponsors are seeking to criminalize the taking or sharing of photographs of crime scenes or accident scenes by first responders. (CBS Los Angeles)

A bill that would make it a misdemeanor for first responders to share accident and crime scene photos in the wake of the Kobe Bryant helicopter crash has passed through its first policy committee and is expected to get support Wednesday from Los Angeles County Sheriff Alex Villanueva. AB-2655 was introduced earlier this month by Assemblyman Mike A. Gipson, D-Carson, after eight Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputies had been confirmed to be involved in taking or sharing photos of the helicopter crash site where the Lakers star, his 13-year-old daughter Gigi and seven others died…

The photos that were shared were reportedly of the crash site and victims’ remains, and had been shared by a deputy trainee trying to impress a woman at a bar a few days after the crash.

Anyone found committing this “crime” could be in line for a maximum punishment of one year in jail and a $5,000 fine.

While it’s unsurprising to see California trying to criminalize virtually anything other than illegal immigration, this bill seems to have a number of problems. As I mentioned at the top, it’s obviously distasteful to photograph a tragedy (and particularly the remains of the recently deceased), but should it be illegal? Assuming the accident takes place out in public as most of them do, rather than on private property, people are generally free to take all the pictures they want. And unless you’re trying to profit from someone else’s image without their consent, you generally aren’t going to get into trouble for it.

This bill doesn’t apply to everyone, though. It’s specifically targeting first responders, including law enforcement officers, firemen and paramedics. That’s an awfully specific law, isn’t it? And even if you can single out first responders for punishment but not the general public (which is questionable to begin with), doesn’t that just massively dilute the intended purpose of the legislation? If two cars wind up in a head-on collision, the police and ambulance workers responding to the scene would be forbidden from taking pictures, but everyone else rubbernecking as they pass by could whip out their phones and live stream all the action on Twitter.

Even if such a law were restricted to only crime scenes instead of including accidents it would still be on shaky ground. When police respond to some perceived emergency situation, they frequently won’t know for a while whether it’s actually a crime scene or just an unfortunate accident. It’s understandable why the police wouldn’t want crime scene photos making the rounds in the early stages of an investigation, but it seems as if most first responders would already understand this and restrain themselves.

In order for this action to be limited to first responders, it seems to me that it would be better enacted as departmental policy in the first response units. They could provide for their own disciplinary measures for those found to be violating the rules. Making this a state law seems like an effort that’s doomed to fail if anyone challenges it.


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial
KEYWORDS: accidents; californina; crash; crimescene; firstresponders; helicopter; losangeles
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 next last

1 posted on 05/21/2020 5:10:26 PM PDT by Kaslin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

No such law needed.


2 posted on 05/21/2020 5:12:30 PM PDT by riverrunner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Not only no, but H*** NO!


3 posted on 05/21/2020 5:16:41 PM PDT by FreedomPoster (Islam delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

I agree, no.


4 posted on 05/21/2020 5:19:46 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; Not Averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

What kind of law will only be enforced on a small select few?
You already control them with their pay check. Do you need this kind of leverage over your employees? Just make them slaves instead.
Of course, more laws is always the answer.


5 posted on 05/21/2020 5:20:08 PM PDT by Delta 21 (Be strong & prosper, be weak & die! Stay true.... ~~ Donald J. Trump)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

If people are violating laws by crossing a police tape, or touching things, we already have charges for that kind of thing. Now if they cross a police line and arent supposed to be there and take pictures, their pictures ought to be forfeited as they were taken while breaking the law.


6 posted on 05/21/2020 5:21:38 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; Not Averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

NFW.


7 posted on 05/21/2020 5:21:47 PM PDT by eldoradude (Boycott Chinese made goods)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
In my home state it's my understanding that it's illegal for a person to record,video or audio,a police stop.If true this could be seen by cops as a license to engage in illegality with a particular motorist.

The Amazon Compost's masthead is,in fact,correct: "Democracy Dies In Darkness".Of course the problem with that masthead is that the Compost doesn't give a rat's hindquarters about democracy.

8 posted on 05/21/2020 5:23:22 PM PDT by Gay State Conservative (The Rats Just Can't Get Over The Fact That They Lost A Rigged Election!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

First Amendment.


9 posted on 05/21/2020 5:23:28 PM PDT by Jeff Chandler (BLACK LIVES MAGA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Would it pass 1st amendment challenge?


10 posted on 05/21/2020 5:23:59 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (Joe Biden- "First thing I'd do is repeal those Trump tax cuts." (May 4th, 2019)l)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

We have enough laws.


11 posted on 05/21/2020 5:25:04 PM PDT by Husker24
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
My neighborhood has a Facebook page, as many neighborhoods today do. Someone posted a photo of a bad car accident, much like the pic in the OP, as a warning to other residents that traffic will be backed up. Another resident recognized the car involved as belonging to a family member and this was how she learned that their loved one was involved in a horrific accident. Not from the police. From Facebook.

No law is needed but people should be aware of potential unintended consequences when they post pics like the one above.

12 posted on 05/21/2020 5:26:31 PM PDT by Drew68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
But while certainly a tasteless thing to do, it wasn’t technically illegal so there wasn’t much to be done about it.

Yes, there was a great deal that could have been done about it.

Was the person who took the photos fired?

Was their pension and other privileges revoked?

Was their name published along with pictures of them?

Oh, there is a great deal that could have been done.

13 posted on 05/21/2020 5:26:43 PM PDT by Harmless Teddy Bear (Leave it to me to be holdin' the matches when the fire truck shows up & there's nobody else to blame)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

With today’s technology, cameras in every hand, the first responders to a scene are generally not cops or firemen, but everyday people who happen to be there first.


14 posted on 05/21/2020 5:31:31 PM PDT by dragnet2 (Diversion and evasion are tools of deceit)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Too many taxes
Too many laws


15 posted on 05/21/2020 5:33:09 PM PDT by BenLurkin (The above is not a statement of fact. It is either opinion or satire. Or both.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

Nope. No problem with restricting on duty cops ability to use photos for personal use (technically they are evidence)

But a HUGE problem with stopping the general public. There are numerous historical photos this lunacy would have prevented. Howard Hughes crash scene, Oswald being shot, the Hindenburg, the Michael Hastings Mercedes crash, etc etc.

This is police state bullshit. If a citizen is standing somewhere legal, they should be able to photograph all that they can see with their eyes. This post 9/11 restricted photo zones crap is reminiscent of the USSR mentality.


16 posted on 05/21/2020 5:33:35 PM PDT by DesertRhino (Dog is man's best friend, and moslems hate dogs. Add that up. ....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

EIGHT deputies did this.

Also, did the media run ANY of these photos?

Did the media PAY anyone for the use of the photos or did they just take them from the web and credit “twitter” etc?

A forensics photographer would be on scene regardless of these deputies and under Freedom of Information Act said photos could be obtained and released by anyone who sought them. Even the security camera footage of the Columbine Massacre was obtained by a FOIA request.


17 posted on 05/21/2020 5:35:44 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (Joe Biden- "First thing I'd do is repeal those Trump tax cuts." (May 4th, 2019)l)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin
In order for this action to be limited to first responders, it seems to me that it would be better enacted as departmental policy in the first response units. They could provide for their own disciplinary measures for those found to be violating the rules.

This is a more reasoned approach.

18 posted on 05/21/2020 5:35:49 PM PDT by ChildOfThe60s (If you can remember the 60s........you weren't really there)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DesertRhino

“Journalistas” would be granted an exemption, no doubt. But this law is targeting the first responders. I guess because the family tried suing the deputies and discovered it wasn’t already against the law.


19 posted on 05/21/2020 5:37:11 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (Joe Biden- "First thing I'd do is repeal those Trump tax cuts." (May 4th, 2019)l)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Harmless Teddy Bear

Quite the repressed fascist, aren’t ya?


20 posted on 05/21/2020 5:42:17 PM PDT by E. Pluribus Unum (Who could have guessed the Communist Revolution would arrive disguised as the common cold?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson