# Arrested for recording Police



## Terry Devine (Mar 11, 2008)

Man arrested for recording the police during a traffic stop.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/news/palm-beach/pb-recording-leads-to-arrest-20111101,0,7158455.story


----------



## Ricardo Ashton (Jun 3, 2010)

This is an example of how the laws that protect our privacy & civil rights can also be abused. Suppose the guy was being abused by those officers, either physically or verbally, they would have been able to legally & effectively eliminate all evidence of their misconduct. Just goes to show the slippery slope that legislation can create.


----------



## Christopher Jones (Feb 17, 2009)

And yet totally ok for the police to record you at a traffic stop.
One of the main indicators you have of been in a police state is when the Government becomes more secrative (ie dont record us) but the privacy of the citizens gets less (ie they record you).


----------



## Andy Sepulveda (Jun 19, 2010)

I thought it was only illegal in Illinois.


----------



## Charles Saul (Dec 12, 2008)

Different in every state. In Virginia an officer expects to be recorded and can be without consent.


----------



## David Frost (Mar 29, 2006)

It's not illegal in TN either. Record away, we do. Basically, as long as one person in the conversation knows it's being recorded it's legal. That is the short version, but pretty accurate. 

DFrost


----------



## mel boschwitz (Apr 23, 2010)

In texas too its record away. As long as one party knows about it its all good-as long as the person recording doesn't interfere. I have my camera going at all times-and its never hurt me. It has saved my butt several times tho.


----------



## Brett Bowen (May 2, 2011)

Yeah, I say record away. If it's hindering what I'm trying to accomplish, I MAY have a problem. Just depends. Everything I do is either recorded by my car and or my audio recorder. Lot of departments don't have a pocket recorder, but around here it's saved more people than hung them.


----------



## Rick Cadez Jr. (Dec 1, 2009)

Not certain of Flordia laws, but if he was advised it was against the law and continued doing so then he decided his own fate. I have no problem being recorded like mentioned earlier it helps cops more than it hurts them.


----------



## Ben Colbert (Mar 9, 2010)

Rick Cadez Jr. said:


> Not certain of Flordia laws, but if he was advised it was against the law and continued doing so then he decided his own fate.


And there's the BS. What ever happened to a police officer using his judgement in the execution of his duties? No, you're right. If there is a decades old law that was designed to prevent wiretapping telephone lines then we should definitely try and use that to arrest someone taping a public conversation in a public environment in which niether side has any expectation of privacy.


----------



## Rick Cadez Jr. (Dec 1, 2009)

Ben, Tell me this how would you have felt pre ( District of Columbia vs Heller 08 case) about the Police taking citizen's legal firearms because based upon their judgement those citizens were not apart of a militia and therefore had no right to bear arms ?? Thats the problem when people want Police to start using their discretion on only specific laws. I use discretion on a daily basis and it almost always benefits the citizen. But that being said it could always be used to harm the citizen also. Thats the problem who decides when its right to use judgement or discretion or when its wrong to use it?


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

When I was a teenager WAAAY back when the video cameras were shooting VHS...when I was 19...21 years ago.....me and this hot chick I had the Hots for, followed a police officer from our city around....and taped him....for about an hour...
he finally pulled us over and asked what the hell we were doing...I said..."seeing where my tax dollars are going"....

he promptly searched the car without my permission, found a joint in the ashtray..kept it and told us to leave him the hell alone...Didn't matter though, I still got some that night...

He did not take the tape though. I submitted it to the local news, they did not run it...Had him doing Hollywood stops...tailgating people..illegally switching lanes...and using his flashing lights to run red lights for "seemingly" no reason....

I started taping him and following him because he was driving like a total Douchebag...

I was really surprised it took him that long to pull us over...


----------



## Ben Colbert (Mar 9, 2010)

Rick,

I assume you are a police officer. I hope that you understand there is a difference between a police officer only enforcing the laws that he believes in (your DC handgun example) and a police officer choosing not to interpret a decades old law created for a different reason in a way that allows him to arrest someone in a public space just because he doesn't like being taped.


----------



## Rick Cadez Jr. (Dec 1, 2009)

The difference is a matter of opinion, but in the eyes of the law not so much. I had a scenario where a guy was video taping a adult women who was just walking through a festival. The women's husband asked the guy to stop filming his wife. The guy stated its not illegal and continued to film her. The husband was obviouslly pissed off about another guy filming his wife as would most husbands i imagine. Now based on that scenario whats the difference between the guy filming the cop ?


----------



## Howard Knauf (May 10, 2008)

In Florida you can tape...just get the hell out of the way otherwise you are obstructing. No expectation of privacy here while in the public. The wire tap case law is now separated from video taping in public per recent legislation here.


----------



## Brett Bowen (May 2, 2011)

Ben Colbert said:


> Rick,
> 
> I assume you are a police officer. I hope that you understand there is a difference between a police officer only enforcing the laws that he believes in (your DC handgun example) and a police officer choosing not to interpret a decades old law created for a different reason in a way that allows him to arrest someone in a public space just because he doesn't like being taped.


Here's the problem, officers can't just not enforce a law if they don't believe in it. Our role is not to make policy it's to enforce policy. We have a policy / city ordinance that we tow vehicles with no insurance. I'm not a big fan of that policy, but there are times when it's appropriate and there are times when I'm told I have no discretion in that decision.


----------



## mike finn (Jan 5, 2011)

Rick Cadez Jr. said:


> The difference is a matter of opinion, but in the eyes of the law not so much. I had a scenario where a guy was video taping a adult women who was just walking through a festival. The women's husband asked the guy to stop filming his wife. The guy stated its not illegal and continued to film her. The husband was obviouslly pissed off about another guy filming his wife as would most husbands i imagine. Now based on that scenario whats the difference between the guy filming the cop ?


 This is just a word game. It is common sense that these are two totaly unrelated situations. The Police officer is a gov. official, paid by the citezens. 
I do not pretend to know what happened when the guy was arrested. There is always two sides to a story. I am not a leo. I have a lot of respect for LEOs, but I also am a big believer in the Constitution and I do not like to see it stepped on, if that is what happened. When a Police officer stretches the interpretation of a law and violates some ones rights, he should be held accountable.


----------



## Ben Colbert (Mar 9, 2010)

Rick Cadez Jr. said:


> The difference is a matter of opinion, but in the eyes of the law not so much. I had a scenario where a guy was video taping a adult women who was just walking through a festival. The women's husband asked the guy to stop filming his wife. The guy stated its not illegal and continued to film her. The husband was obviouslly pissed off about another guy filming his wife as would most husbands i imagine. Now based on that scenario whats the difference between the guy filming the cop ?


In my opinion? None. She has no expectation of privacy while walking through a public festival. Does it suck? Yep. But so does having to look at "truck nutz" for an hour while sitting in bumper to bumper traffic. So does having a Klan Rally march through a black neighborhood. Freedom sucks sometimes. But it's the law.

Brett,

I'm not asking cops to enforce only the laws they agree with. I'm asking them to stop arresting people for blatantly unconstitutional interpretations of decades old laws that were never intended to legislate the video taping of a public official in a public arena.


----------



## Christopher Jones (Feb 17, 2009)

http://openchannel.msnbc.msn.com/_n...rested-for-videotaping-police-from-front-yard

A woman was arrested for videotaping a traffic stop while she was standing on her own porch, and didnt follow the gods order to go into her house.


----------



## Jim Engel (Nov 14, 2007)

Illinois is the only state not allowing concealed carry.
Apparently, it is almost the only state not allowing people to
exercise their constitutional rights to record cops in public.

Both more characteristic of a dictatorship than a true democracy.

In spite of this uneven playing field, both of our last two governors
are convicted of felonies and doing jail time.

In Illinois we have one of the most systematically corrupt governments
in the world.

Which is why the bastards don't want to be held accountable or recorded.


----------



## Brett Bowen (May 2, 2011)

Ben Colbert said:


> Brett,
> 
> I'm not asking cops to enforce only the laws they agree with. I'm asking them to stop arresting people for blatantly unconstitutional interpretations of decades old laws that were never intended to legislate the video taping of a public official in a public arena.


*If* it's been ruled an unconstitutional interpretation then yeah, shouldn't be happening and the guy would probably have a good case for a civil rights violation. *If* it's been that long since the law has been updated, probably needs to be looked at. Off the top of my head, I can't think of a law here in TX that's "decades old" that hasn't been updated in some way in that time frame. 

That being said. I think this is one of those things where unions have pushed an issue to protect the people not doing their job correctly. I have not seen the video or know anything about the case other than the article. But it seems like this *could* be a case where he takes his authority a little too seriously. Unfortunately there are those officers out there. My opinion, you really become a "cop" when you realize you are just a person with a badge and the people you deal with are people too.


----------



## Ben Colbert (Mar 9, 2010)

Brett Bowen said:


> *If* it's been ruled an unconstitutional interpretation then yeah, shouldn't be happening and the guy would probably have a good case for a civil rights violation.


 
The problem is these cases never go to court. You get arrested for videotaping a cop. The cop tells you you're going to jail for 5 years. The DA tells you he wants to throw the book at you but he'll offer you a plea. You get a public defender that encourages you to take it and so you plea down and it goes away. It's a flaw in the justice system.


----------



## catherine hardigan (Oct 12, 2009)

Ugh... another example of the overreaching powers of cops coming back to bite us in the ass. And for those who haven't read the Patriot Act, you should. It pretty much negates the Bill of Rights.


----------



## Ben Colbert (Mar 9, 2010)

catherine hardigan said:


> Ugh... another example of the overreaching powers of cops coming back to bite us in the ass. And for those who haven't read the Patriot Act, you should. It pretty much negates the Bill of Rights.


What specific provisions viloate the bil of rights?


----------



## kevin holford (Apr 11, 2009)

Unfortunately, it's the 1% of the police that the make the other 99% of true professionals look like tools.


----------



## catherine hardigan (Oct 12, 2009)

Ben Colbert said:


> What specific provisions viloate the bil of rights?


There are others, of course, but here are a few:

Section 213: Allows for secret searches of home and property without prior notice, and extends "sneak-and-peek" authority from FISA to any criminal search. 

Section 214: Removes the warrant requirement for pen registers and trap-and-trace devices, as long as the government can certify the information to be obtained is "relevant" to an ongoing investigation against international terrorism.

Section 216: Extends pen register/trap-and-trace authority to internet surveillance, and broadens monitoring to any information "relevant to an ongoing criminal investigation."

Section 206: Authorizes roving wire taps. Expands FISA to permit surveillance of any communication to or by a target without specifying the particular phone line or computer to be monitored.

Section 505: Government can subpoena personal records without probable cause or judicial oversight.

Clearly, the PATRIOT ACT wipes its ass with the 4th amendment. However, it also allows the government to monitor religious and political institutions, prosecute librarians or keepers of other records for telling anyone about information being subpoenaed, monitor conversations between attorneys and clients in federal prisons, and hold individuals indefinitely without trial.


----------



## Randy Allen (Apr 18, 2008)

Catherine,
It's called habeas corpus. The Patriot Act erases that fundamental right as an American citizen.


----------



## catherine hardigan (Oct 12, 2009)

Somehow my post went up twice.

Yes, Randy, and Ben asked for specific examples to be cited.


----------



## Brian Anderson (Dec 2, 2010)

street cops are just people. They have a shit job that entails dealing with societies worst elements and problems nobody else wants to deal with. Yes there are some that mess up sometimes. They are the same ones that people cuss and put down and criticize right up until they get their ass in a bind and guess who gets the first call demanding help??


----------



## catherine hardigan (Oct 12, 2009)

Brian Anderson said:


> street cops are just people. They have a shit job that entails dealing with societies worst elements and problems nobody else wants to deal with. Yes there are some that mess up sometimes. They are the same ones that people cuss and put down and criticize right up until they get their ass in a bind and guess who gets the first call demanding help??


Yes, and just like everybody else they should be held accountable when they screw up or break the law.


----------



## Ben Colbert (Mar 9, 2010)

Randy Allen said:


> Catherine,
> It's called habeas corpus. The Patriot Act erases that fundamental right as an American citizen.


http://www.salon.com/2008/06/12/boumediene/


----------



## Ricardo Ashton (Jun 3, 2010)

I just want to know, who the hell is monitoring the people that are monitoring everyone else? And if there is a screw up or an abuse of power/authority, IMO, they need to be prosecuted just like everyone else. They always say cops are just people, they can fall victim to the same feelings and temptations as everyone else. Thats jst a cop out to cover the asses of other cops. Crooked or honest. There's a reason that training academies have an ethics module in their training programs. To help these same cops deal with these same temptations BEFORE they even arise after they're given authority over civilians. Just my 2 cents worth.


----------



## Randy Allen (Apr 18, 2008)

Yeah Ben, that is until they decide to hold one as a terrorist.
Any one have a handle on how many Gitmo detainees (they are not POWs) have been tried for anything? Anything at all, military or otherwise?
And I think there's still some on going litigations about American citizens held and 'rendered' with no charges filed.

Any ways for a quick run down of what the Patriot Act is today here's the Wiki version:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USA_PATRIOT_Act

Note that only the most grievous (not all by a long shot) of the trespasses have been revoked.


----------



## Brian Anderson (Dec 2, 2010)

catherine hardigan said:


> Yes, and just like everybody else they should be held accountable when they screw up or break the law.


catherine it doesn't take a scientist to deduct that out. I would hope that any reasonable person would assume that. When your able to make the patriot act go away let me know would ya?


----------



## Randy Allen (Apr 18, 2008)

Back to the op,
Haven't read the headline, but from what I gather from reading the thread the person was arrested for taking pictures from their porch!!!??? 
Do I have that story right?! Not interfering with the officer or getting in the way, but taking pictures from their own porch!

Excuse me! But I don't care what state I'm in, if I'm on my property not interfering with anyone else I'll take a picture of any damn thing I want to.

If I were to live in 'one of those states' and I had survailence camera on my front porch would I need to put a big sign in front on the front lawn informing all passer-bys of the fact?
Ugh, too stupid.


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

My GF is going to our cities' Citizen Police Academy here in IL..
It is run by the Gurnee Police Dept. as an educational experience. I told her to ask them...

She was told in IL it is NOT illegal to film, it is only illegal if it has sound...
Due to the 2-party recording law....

I then asked her, what filming device these days DOES NOT HAVE SOUND?
I suppose if you were in a car with closed windows...maybe??

Here is my question...when I used be a stoner kid, what did the police do with all the stuff they confiscated from me, when they did not issue a citation, or file a report?

Like the weed, the diving and hunting knives, parephenalia (sp?)and other stuff? they just took it and let me go...

Some cops made me dump things, crush them or ruin them... others put it in the trunk of the squad..one guy took a diving knife, a steamroller, and 1/2 ounce of 80's skunk weed and let me go...where did that stuff go with no paper trail? one guy took 4 six packs of Mickey's ICE out of my car and sent me on my way....granted I did not complain...but what happened to that stuff? did he give it to his cousin?


----------



## catherine hardigan (Oct 12, 2009)

Brian Anderson said:


> catherine it doesn't take a scientist to deduct that out. I would hope that any reasonable person would assume that. When your able to make the patriot act go away let me know would ya?


No, it doesn't take a scientist. But many supposedly reasonable people supported the PATRIOT ACT; apparently without realizing that laws do not simply "go away." 

If anything, reasonable people of discerning mind are in the minority in this country. Recall that more people have been arrested for protesting Wall Street's mortgage fraud than for committing said crimes. I think you assume too much.


----------



## Brian Anderson (Dec 2, 2010)

catherine hardigan said:


> No, it doesn't take a scientist. But many supposedly reasonable people supported the PATRIOT ACT; apparently without realizing that laws do not simply "go away."
> 
> If anything, reasonable people of discerning mind are in the minority in this country. Recall that more people have been arrested for protesting Wall Street's mortgage fraud than for committing said crimes. I think you assume too much.


I did not support the patriot act. since the law wont simply go away then your protestations are for what? You could possibly be making assumptions as well ;-)


----------



## kerry engels (Nov 7, 2010)

kevin holford said:


> Unfortunately, it's the 1% of the police that the make the other 99% of true professionals look like tools.


 

You mean like this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cWf41Ce-hg


----------



## Joby Becker (Dec 13, 2009)

catherine hardigan said:


> No, it doesn't take a scientist. But many supposedly reasonable people supported the PATRIOT ACT; apparently without realizing that laws do not simply "go away."
> 
> If anything, reasonable people of discerning mind are in the minority in this country. Recall that *more people have been arrested for protesting Wall Street's mortgage fraud* than for committing said crimes. I think you assume too much.


Is THAT what they are doing? How did you come to that conclusion, that does not seem to be the central theme of the protests.


----------

