Are Citizens With Cell Phone Videos Interfering With Law Enforcement Doing Their Jobs?

[x635 4,066]

I've been reading a few articles around the internet regarding citizens filming arrests and other police activity, and posting it on the web, and then those videos going viral. We've all seen what's been going on with NYPD.

Some of these citizens who are taking the video get really aggressive in getting the video, while the subjects involved often play it up for the camera. A lot of the subjects think that the video of them being arrested is going to be a golden ticket. Some even try and provoke officers to get involved in a physical altercation.

Another side of the issue is that some people, and some media, edit the video, so you don't see what led up to the officers actions, and the video becomes viral without the whole picture.

At what point do the people taking the video becoming an obstruction? Are their laws that could be enacted to try and control this type of behavior, without infringing on peoples rights? I mean, there are some videos that are destroying the careers of Police Officers who have had flawless careers and that cell phone camera gets that "1% of the time" shot that goes viral, and there goes that officers career. Should that depend on a video, and what steps are taken to get the complete and truthful story on what happened?

What do you think of all this?

[Bottom of Da Hill 76]

its wrong they only show what they want,lock them up to.

[FFPCogs 863]

its wrong they only show what they want,lock them up to.

Disagree. Civilian shot video of arrests can give clear evidence that proper procedures are being followed should claims of police brutality be made. On the flip side those same videos can give clear evidence that brutality has occurred if in fact it has. Those who perform their duty in accordance with the law, their department's procedures and a suspected perpetrator's constitutional rights have nothing to fear from being filmed. Now if the person or persons filming should interfere with the police doing their job or in some other way create a problem they should get whatever they have coming to them under the law.

Censorship in any form is a very dangerous road to travel once embarked upon especially when it concerns the actions of government or municipal agencies. To protect our rights every effort should be made to maintain transparency and allow scrutiny of these agencies, up to and including the public filming of arrests.

Edited July 30, 2014 by FFPCogs

[PC_420 28]

I stare at your initial post and I wonder.... 'Is this Vladamir Putin typing this post?'.. I am seriously heated about this. Arrest people for recording the actions of the State... Hmmm what's next? Not allow people who disagree with the State to testify at trials? Maybe restrict peaceful protests? Maybe re-education camps so no one disagrees with the actions of the police?

All kidding aside, (and I wasn't kidding)... The people, the citizens, have a responsibility to make sure the officers of the State act accordingly to the rule of law and that they are not above the law... All too often we assume the police are always or almost always right. And now you want to remove a new tool in the fight against abuse of power, a tool against the ever teetering balance of security and liberty, a tool against bad officers of the State... But your choice would be to make it illegal to record the police? Well hell why don't you just drive down to D.C., enter the National Archives and rip up the Bill of Rghts?! This may be the most uneducated post I have ever seen. Am I being a bit harsh? Maybe. But I like my rights as an American. And I appreciate my duties as a citizen. And one of my duties is to make sure the police don't violate my fellow citizens rights.

Finally, the only officers who need to worry about being recorded are 'dirty' officers. If you do your job right, then don't worry about being on video. Actually embrace it. And if the police are going to place video cameras every where to see me and watch my actions , then fair is fair, I'll pull out my camera and make sure the State is following the rule of law when it makes arrests.

I'm sure there will be some, if not many, who disagree with me, especially in the law enforcement field. I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will defend your right to say it.

Rant over and I'll try to avoid this post

[SRS131EMTFF 471]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2014/05/13/despite-court-rulings-people-are-still-getting-arrested-for-recording-on-duty-cops/

https://www.aclu.org/free-speech/know-your-rights-photographers

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2014-03-20/news/chi-supreme-court-eavesdropping-law-20140320_1_illinois-supreme-court-illinois-eavesdropping-act-cook-county-jail

[x635 4,066]

I stare at your initial post and I wonder.... 'Is this Vladamir Putin typing this post?'.. I am seriously heated about this.

I was simply presenting a topic for discussion. Notice the question marks in my post.

[FFPCogs 863]

I was simply presenting a topic for discussion. Notice the question marks.

And we are discussing it Seth. What troubles me is the idea that censorship is OK is even entertained or questioned. This is not intended as a slight against you Seth, you simply asked a question, but it is more than a bit disconcerting to me that the question would even arise in the first place. Preventing the public from filming the police performing their duty amounts to tyranny and as Thomas Jefferson said:

"When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny".

[x635 4,066]

What troubles me is the idea that censorship is OK is even entertained or questioned. This is not intended as a slight against you Seth, you simply asked a question, but it is more than a bit disconcerting to me that the question would even arise in the first place.

I didn't say the public should be censored, I more meant about the people taking the video getting in the Police Officers face, for example, questioning the arrest while the officer is still dealing with the suspect, and other "aggressive" forms of getting the video. And what are the consequences when the video is presented without any context? Also, on the side of the suspect or victim, what are their rights regarding the video being posted? Has social media changed the game?

Again, these are only discussion points I obtained from reading several different articles.

[thebreeze 194]

I absolutely disagree that everyone caught doing something wrong is a "dirty officer". Good people caught up in bad high pressure situations make mistakes sometimes. You're not in their shoes and you can't experience what they are going through at that moment. The idea of making chokeholds illegal is a little extreme. You can't absolutely say that it would ever ever be necessary to use in order for a police officer to protect himself or others. Would you rather they use lethal force? Or will they soon try to take guns away from the police too? Sure make chokeholds against policy, that's fine, and if it happens, review the incident as much as possible, discipline the officer in a manner commensurate with the findings of the investigation, a little if it seems it may have been justified or a last resort, a lot if it seems flagrant abuse. As for video taping, you can't stop it, nor should you, but if it's going to be used as evidence it should be required that the videos must be presented in their entirety, unedited. In fact if it is going to be considered evidence the person video taping it should be required to turn their phone over to the police as evidence or at least the unedited footage, it should then have to follow all the procedures and rules established for the chain of evidence.

[JetPhoto 626]

The only time I can say you should be stopped and are in the wrong is if:

An officer is trying to make an arrest and you interfere by sticking the camera in their face while they are trying to detain a perp.

You are inside a crime scene and you are taking photos / videos without permission

-may be other reasons but it's all common sense and the officer(s) should also realize that.

[FFPCogs 863]

I didn't say the public should be censored, I more meant about the people taking the video getting in the Police Officers face, for example, questioning the arrest while the officer is still dealing with the suspect, and other "aggressive" forms of getting the video. And what are the consequences when the video is presented without any context? Also, on the side of the suspect or victim, what are their rights regarding the video being posted? Has social media changed the game?

Again, these are only discussion points I obtained from reading several different articles.

I know Seth and in answer to your first question above, police officers need the ability to control a scene, including the proximity of any videographers that may be filming. When one of these would be Steve Spielbergs "crosses the line" and either gets too close or attempts to disrupt the officers in the performance of their duty than by all means at the very least they should be arrested and charged with interfering with a police officer. As far as the suspect and for the police too, there is not nor should there be any expectation of privacy when in a public space, such as a street corner, mall or movie theater, therefore if they are filmed either being arrested or arresting that video can be put out in the public realm without consent. If on the other hand a suspect is in their living room or on their front lawn, well then that's private property and a person has every right to expect what goes on there to remain private. The police though as public servants enjoy no such protection when on someone else's property, so Mrs. Jones has every right to film them arresting her husband in that living room or on the front lawn. And finally in answer to your last question, well I think we all know the answer to that one. Social media has indeed changed the game for all of us, public servant and civilian alike, and put us all under the harsh scrutiny of the public eye.

And while I understand that you did not call for the preventing of people of filming arrests, again it is disconcerting that the question was even asked because it belies a much bigger problem. We Americans have become desensitized to violence in our streets and in the world around us, and it is only natural that at some point we would also become desensitized to the curtailing our personal freedoms as a means of combatting that violence. On the surface yea sure the problem is dealt with, but at what cost? With each new restriction comes an acceptance of the loss of personal freedoms and it then becomes that much easier to take away more of them. We must be forever vigilant and protective of our First Amendment rights, including the right to film and share the police in action, for if we let them be curtailed we will not ever get them back.

[SRS131EMTFF 471]

a suspect...on their front lawn...has every right to expect what goes on there to remain private

So long as you, the photographer, are on property you have the legal right to be present on (i.e. sidewalk, porch, car, etc.) you have the legal right to film anything in plain view.

Edited July 30, 2014 by SRS131EMTFF

[RES24CUE 168]

In a world where the police are just as out of control as the criminals I think that cell phone videos are the public's last defense against mistreatment and brutality at the hands of Law Enforcement. I think its an abomination that someone who barely got out of high school can tell a college educated citizen or even an attorney whether or not they are breaking the law when many of them can't even read the laws let alone interpret them. In a day and age where police officers require no higher intellect and no upper level of education and the liberal agenda is constantly trying to dumb the tests down to allow less qualified people to get hired in Law Enforcement, I have no faith in our enforcement system. These morons (most of whom are on a power trip) constantly overstep their bounds. The only difference between a perp and a cop is the badge in my opinion! I have no respect for the police (Don't get me wrong, I try to avoid them at all costs and not provoke because you never know how they will react).

[SRS131EMTFF 471]

In a world where the police are just as out of control as the criminals I think that cell phone videos are the public's last defense against mistreatment and brutality at the hands of Law Enforcement. I think its an abomination that someone who barely got out of high school can tell a college educated citizen or even an attorney whether or not they are breaking the law when many of them can't even read the laws let alone interpret them. In a day and age where police officers require no higher intellect and no upper level of education and the liberal agenda is constantly trying to dumb the tests down to allow less qualified people to get hired in Law Enforcement, I have no faith in our enforcement system. These morons (most of whom are on a power trip) constantly overstep their bounds. The only difference between a perp and a cop is the badge in my opinion! I have no respect for the police (Don't get me wrong, I try to avoid them at all costs and not provoke because you never know how they will react).

I cant agree with anything you are saying at all except this "...videos are the public's last defense against mistreatment...at the hands of law enforcement." however I must add that this is a two-way street and video will also be law enforcement's last defense against unfounded claims of harassment, mistreatment or violence lodged by the public as well.

[RES24CUE 168]

I didn't say the public should be censored, I more meant about the people taking the video getting in the Police Officers face, for example, questioning the arrest while the officer is still dealing with the suspect, and other "aggressive" forms of getting the video. And what are the consequences when the video is presented without any context? Also, on the side of the suspect or victim, what are their rights regarding the video being posted? Has social media changed the game?

Again, these are only discussion points I obtained from reading several different articles.

Hey Seth! If you don't believe that the public should be censored why are you censoring me? You took my post down yesterday for stating an honest opinion of Law Enforcement. While my opinion may not be popular, it was not derogatory, off-color, or explicit. And what's with this bullshit moderator queue that you put on my account. You are a complete and total hypocrite!

[AFS1970 504]

While there is some problem or at least the risk of a problem with interferance, the need to maintain freedom outweighs that concern.

I have a much bigger problem with the way the media edits these videos down to make them as incriminating as possible. Les Moonves the head of CBS once said that there was no more impartial news media. Look at what happened in the Zimmerman case when NBC removed a question from a dispatcher to make the caller seem to be saying things diferently than he was. Even more frightening was that a judge recently rules that NBC was not wrong for doig that.

[SageVigiles 1,194]

Meriden, CT just fired one of their Officers after several videos surfaced of him beating handcuffed, minority suspects on multiple occasions. IAD tried investigating him, but being the Chief's son, it took a federal civil rights charge to finally get him gone.

Is it annoying when people video the police? Absolutely. Does it get edited by those with an agenda? Sure does. Does it sometimes catch a good cop on a bad day? Without a doubt. Do we live in America, where people have a right to videotape in public? You're goddamned right we do.

[Bottom of Da Hill 76]

alot of people start to argue with the cops and set the stage for a cop to react then start to video tape the officer take action.i sees it happen 1st hand.if your not a cop you mite not understand this.

[Bottom of Da Hill 76]

alot of people start to argue with the cops and set the stage for a cop to react then start to video tape the officer take action.i sees it happen 1st hand.if your not a cop you mite not understand this.

seen it happen.

[TimesUp 148]

As far as staying back far enough as to not interfere? Who decides whats "far enough"? The cop who might be trying to keep you from filming him? Some cops might think a good distance is three blocks away. Now what?

[Dinosaur 844]

As far as staying back far enough as to not interfere? Who decides whats "far enough"? The cop who might be trying to keep you from filming him? Some cops might think a good distance is three blocks away. Now what?

I think most would agree that if you're sticking your body parts into the melee you're too close and we've all seen those videos lately. If you are close enough to reach out and touch the cop, you're close enough for him to be worried about someone reaching out and trying to take his gun.

[TimesUp 148]

I think most would agree that if you're sticking your body parts into the melee you're too close and we've all seen those videos lately. If you are close enough to reach out and touch the cop, you're close enough for him to be worried about someone reaching out and trying to take his gun.

So you think just out arms reach? Thats sounds reasonable. I would agree with you as well as most would.

[FirNaTine 370]

How about put your f****** phone away and go to work if you even have a Job. Most of these people are skells and usually have a criminal record themselves. They just be after the Po Po!

[PC_420 28]

How about put your f****** phone away and go to work if you even have a Job. Most of these people are skells and usually have a criminal record themselves. They just be after the Po Po!

It's these kind of remarks that make me realize some people don't care how our system of government is suppose to work... Thank you for showing your intelligent side

[N1Medic 69]

How about put your f****** phone away and go to work if you even have a Job. Most of these people are skells and usually have a criminal record themselves. They just be after the Po Po!

It's these kind of remarks that make me realize some people don't care how our system of government is suppose to work... Thank you for showing your intelligent side

I think FirNaTine scores the point on this one...

Man who recorded fatal police chokehold arrested on gun charges

http://news.yahoo.com/man-filmed-nypd-choke-hold-video-arrested-weapons-234046410.html

[AFS1970 504]

Sadly I can't find the video on line I was looking for that clearly shows the interference angle. Interestingly enough I can still find some news coverage of the incident where the chief praises his guys for doing everything right even though they eventually tassed the guy 3 times. The news media only showed small clips that were designed to make the police look like they were ignoring calls by the girlfriend to get their supervisor. Later on in footage not shown on the news the supervisor shows up and ultimately arrests the girlfriend taking the video.

How about put your f****** phone away and go to work if you even have a Job. Most of these people are skells and usually have a criminal record themselves. They just be after the Po Po!

I think FirNaTine scores the point on this one...

Man who recorded fatal police chokehold arrested on gun charges

http://news.yahoo.com/man-filmed-nypd-choke-hold-video-arrested-weapons-234046410.html

And this morning on the news it seems that this fine gentleman's wife was just arrested for fighting with another woman. But of course these arrests were only to harass them because they video taped the police.....yeah right!

[FirNaTine 370]

It's these kind of remarks that make me realize some people don't care how our system of government is suppose to work... Thank you for showing your intelligent side

Your quite welcome! Anytime!

[TimesUp 148]

Somebody filming a police interaction could in some cases aid the police against somebody else's edited video. I know if i had video footage that disputed a edited video that made the cops look bad I would give it to them. Thats one of the reasons dash cam video camaras were placed in many patrol cars.

[FFPCogs 863]

Although a bit off topic, troubling nonetheless.

http://www.redflagnews.com/headlines/nbc-news-crew-threatened-with-arrest-for-filming-a-fema-camp-you-will-be-stunned-by-what-the-officer-says-to-the-reporter

I have no problem with the police (or in this case COs) doing their job, but a badge is not a license to practice Gestapo tactics...EVER!!!

[PC_420 28]

Although a bit off topic, troubling nonetheless.

http://www.redflagnews.com/headlines/nbc-news-crew-threatened-with-arrest-for-filming-a-fema-camp-you-will-be-stunned-by-what-the-officer-says-to-the-reporter

I have no problem with the police (or in this case COs) doing their job, but a badge is not a license to practice Gestapo tactics...EVER!!!

I thouroughly enjoyed the journalist's laugh when the 'lieutenant' told him he couldn't record at a historical site. Freedom of the Press is as much an essential right as Freedom of Speech and Religion.