Video Taping Police a Felony?

[popsjumper 2]

Quote

Must be the police trying to stop all the people catching them on tape doing things they should not be doing...

Hit the nail on the head...with abuse of power on top of it.

Cop: You wanna video me? I got a gun and a badge. I'll bust yo ass on a felony, scumbag.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[Krip 2]

Quote

Quote

On the street there is no expectation of privacy. I know there is lots of case law supporting that, and I'm not even a lawyer.

True - I'll be interested to see how this one plays out...

edit to add: I think that if I were the defendant, I'd use that as a defense.

Either way you lose. Your lawyer always gets paid. DA's Over chargeing is a negotiating tactic to get a plea on a lower offense.

[BillyVance 34]

Those cops are a bunch of fucknuggets... They just don't want anybody trying to catch them at anything...

Remember the Rodney King beatdown video?

"Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Remember the Rodney King beatdown video?

Dont forget the dozens of others out there in recent memory....the sheriffs beating people along an LA freeway....etc.

[Krip 2]

Quote

Quote

Remember the Rodney King beatdown video?

Dont forget the dozens of others out there in recent memory....the sheriffs beating people along an LA freeway....etc.

We noticed a trend on the show cops. After the perp is thrown to the ground, knee dropped in the back, The cops start yelling "STOP RESISTING" STOP RESISTING"

We realise the cops have to deal with all kind of folks, but when/if we get stopped I expect to be put down, knee dropped, and worst case get charged with resisting after we get out of the hosp.

[Kennedy 0]

Boy, if the people here who seem so sure of themselves were defense lawyers, there would be a 100% conviction rate. I hate to break it to you, boys and girls, but lots of time watching Cops and Law & Order does not qualify you to know you asshole from your elbow in legal matters.

First, this is not a "goose-gander" situation, it is not an abuse of power, and it is not to prevent a video record form being recorded.

Quote

On the street there is no expectation of privacy. I know there is lots of case law supporting that, and I'm not even a lawyer.

It's a good thing you're not a lawyer because you don't know squat.
(about the law regarding electronic surveillance/recording)

This traffic stop was conducted in a public area. That means anyone can take pictures or record video of the stop. However, that does not mean anyone can go out and make a sound recording of you just because you are in public. Just as the police can take video of your actions when you are in public but cannot record you for sound or use sound gathering technology, the same rule applies to people.

If your conclusion that because someone is in public they can be recorded for sound as well as video, then the police could go around recording everything you say. That is not the case, and I don't think you want it to be. Instead you made an emotional leap to your inaccurate conclusion.

Quote

***If it was done outside, in a very public area there has been no crime committed.

This could have been recorded by ANYONE in that area

True . If you are in a public place. This kinda shit REALLY PISSES ME OFF.

NOT true. Try not to get pissed off about things that don't even exist. It's not good for your heart or blood pressure. DO try to educate yourself beyond television. It's good for your intelligence and understanding.

Quote

We noticed a trend on the show cops. After the perp is thrown to the ground, knee dropped in the back, The cops start yelling "STOP RESISTING" STOP RESISTING"

THey do this because if the person does stop resisting, the force being used against them will also stop. If they continue to resist, the force required to overcome the resistance will continue to be used against them.

Quote

We realise the cops have to deal with all kind of folks, but when/if we get stopped I expect to be put down, knee dropped, and worst case get charged with resisting after we get out of the hosp.

Well, you're in for a pleasant surprise the next time you are stopped, unless you plan on doing something that warrants an arrest and resist the arrest.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[Zipp0 1]

Huh? Cops record audio on those DUI stops. They wear a microphone and everything. Ar ethey breakign the law?

As far as understaning the law - a truly just and fair law should be written simply enough for all to understand and abide by without ambiguity. Otherwise, the law is unjust garbage, and should be thrown out.

Are reporters breaking the law when they are live on the scene? No. Because the video is protected by the bill of rights. Well, in the world today, ANYONE can take video that will be used later in a news story, so a new legal definition of 'press' is in order. For instance, people who record cell phone video (like the guy at VT) shoulld be protected, as their INTENT has made tthem a de-facto member of the press.

If the guy in this story had the INTENT to submit this video to the media in the event of police misbehavior, IMO he should have legal protection from prosecution.

--------------------------
Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down.

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Just as the police can take video of your actions when you are in public but cannot record you for sound or use sound gathering technology, the same rule applies to people.

Aww gee if that is true why do all those dashboard police videos we see on so many shows... have the sound too....

Far too many cops seem to have a EVERYONE is against them mentality... everyone is a perp...

No.. some of us try really hard to support the police.. the ones who do the job.... the ones who respect the law.... the ones who respect the people they are supposedly supporting.....BUT the ones who do not do a disservice to all of you... why protect them.

Get rid of them... police work is not a good place for bullys and abusive people who give you all a bad name.

[mnealtx 0]

I don't necessarily disagree with what you've said in regards to recording, however -

At least in the videos I've seen, there's been an open mic from the officer's radio to the tape. If that is common practice, then the police ARE recording the voice of the person they're stopping and are equally at fault, since PA is a two-party state (for voice recording purposes at least) and I didn't see anything in the information listed that permission was given for the police to record them.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

Aww gee if that is true why do all those dashboard police videos we see on so many shows... have the sound too....

Quote

Huh? Cops record audio on those DUI stops. They wear a microphone and everything. Ar ethey breakign the law?

Quote

At least in the videos I've seen, there's been an open mic from the officer's radio to the tape. If that is common practice, then the police ARE recording the voice of the person they're stopping and are equally at fault, since PA is a two-party state (for voice recording purposes at least) and I didn't see anything in the information listed that permission was given for the police to record them.

OK, I hit reply to Mike's post, but this is for amazon and zippo as well. First, officers wear a microphone for many reasons, but right now reasons are irrelevant. Officers are justified in wearing microphones and it is legal for them to do so because the law (and case law) made a specific exception for them. Case closed end of story.

Quote

As far as understaning the law - a truly just and fair law should be written simply enough for all to understand and abide by without ambiguity. Otherwise, the law is unjust garbage, and should be thrown out.

Have you bothered to read the law and the case law regarding surveillance and recording? Are you claiming the law is written in a way that a reasonable person cannot understand it? Or are you just talking out of your ass? (again)


as an aside
Departments also like (or force) their officers to wear microphones as a control on their officers and as a way to address claims made against officers, especially during traffic stops.

With microphone
claim: "He's a racist, he called me a nigger"
reality: Officer called the driver "sir" and was courteous in the face of insults and epithets.
official reality: Above.
official response: "No sir, he did not. In fact, you called the officer a honkey inbred motherfucker, and he told you to drive safely."
activists say: Nothing, for once.
news headline: None.

Without microphone:
claim: "He's a racist, he called me a nigger"
reality: Officer called the driver "sir" and was courteous in the face of insults and epithets.
official reality: Unknown
official response: "The officer says he didn't, and we don't think he did."
activists say: "Department protects racists, shows official racism"
news headline: Claims of Racism Against _______PD. Protests, Boycotts Planned.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Officers are justified in wearing microphones and it is legal for them to do so because the law (and case law) made a specific exception for them

So.. basically they are above the law... just like speeding when they want to

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

Quote

Officers are justified in wearing microphones and it is legal for them to do so because the law (and case law) made a specific exception for them

So.. basically they are above the law... just like speeding when they want to

Try again. Officers have a legal exception for recording sound during official actions. They're not above the law. The law makes exceptions for them, in writing.

Think about it. If you forced someone into handcuffs, stuffed them into your car, and drove them to a place where they'd be locked up, you'd go to prison for kidnapping. (unless you are into some really strange games that they agreed beforehand...)

However, for police, that is a fairly routine activity. They do it because the law says the can. They're not above the law. THe law is writtten with exceptions for them. Otherwise police could not function.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[popsjumper 2]

"...not an abuse of power..."

????

As a general rule, I used to support the police but not any more. Too much Rodney King going on. Too much abuse of power going on. Too much lying in court going on. Too much BS all the way around. It's like it has become US vs THEM with the law protecting them, not us.

It's a shame the good cops get lumped in with all the bozos carrying guns and badges.

One of these days the general populace is going to get fed up and start responding in kind.

My reality and yours are quite different.
I think we're all Bozos on this bus.
Falcon5232, SCS8170, SCSA353, POPS9398, DS239

[Krip 2]

No reason to resist the police unless a person is a dumbass and wants big guy's jumping on their back drop kicking etc. But sometime it appears to be a SOP.

Question:
I'll be polite if I get stopped by the manbut yes sir no sir no way. Is that a bad thing?

When the perp is on their stomach and the police are sitting on them I'm guessing sometimes they can't get their hands behind their back. Which only escalates the situation and makes it appear that their resisting.

Sometimes the perps don't want to because they maybe be going for a weapon. How are the cops supposed to know, so the cops have to assume the worst case.

The perp is resisting because their going for a
weapon.

On cops a lot of the perps run from the police thru all kinds of shit and get caught most of the time. The cops are running their butts off with vests, and all their other stuff and never fire a shot.

Question:

Do the police spend more time on the track then on the range? And do the perps run since the lawyers are going to plead the case down so fleeing ends up being freebee?

[Krip 2]

John

I can undeerstand the police wanting to have a audio and video record for cya puposes.

I don't undestand why all the police depts can't make audio recording of all interviews of suspects in the station house. Instead of just the confessions.

As far as expecting the police to treat everyone in a professional manner unless their forced to do otherwise. I think your statement below says it all.

"Or are you just talking out of your ass? (again)"

We're not perps we're voicing our opinions in cyber space in SC. if this is you attitude after a couple of years on the job

I would hope you can understand our concerns on what to expect if we get stopped by more "seasoned officers" in the field.

STOP RESISTING!!!!!!

[diverborg 0]

Quote

This traffic stop was conducted in a public area. That means anyone can take pictures or record video of the stop. However, that does not mean anyone can go out and make a sound recording of you just because you are in public.

Although this maybe the law, I'm gonna hafta say its a pretty stupid one that leaves way too much room for interpretation. Technically If I'm on vacation videotaping a tour thru (insert vacation spot here), then I can get a felony charge for having audio on that video camera because I could be recording people's conversation around me. Maybe there is something in the way the law is written to prevent this. But, from what I gathered so far, you better not have any audio recordings anywhere unless you have everyone around you's permission. I just don't get this.

This is really gonna take the fun out of Couch Freaks best dress contest this year.

[mnealtx 0]

I think the attempted wiretap charge is bogus. However, MOST recording laws have to do with telephone conversations, and many states only require consent to recording from one side.

I know that there was a court case on a similar issue fairly recently and, as I recall, the verdict was that there was no reasonable expectation of personal privacy while in a public place or venue.

I'll do some searching around and see if I can find it...

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[1969912 0]

So what do cops do when the guy with the cameras says "the sound is off"?

Waht would YOU do?

"Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ."
-NickDG

[Krip 2]

Quote

So what do cops do when the guy with the cameras says "the sound is off"?

Waht would YOU do?

You won't know the truth until it happens. Might vary from cop to cop

Worst case your get thrown on the ground, drop kicked in the middle of the back. Hooked up and charged with who knows what.

Spend $$$ on a lawyer. IMO not worth it.

Now STOP RESISTING!!!!!

Wonder what a taser would do to tape

[Zipp0 1]

Quote

Or are you just talking out of your ass? (again)

Fuck you.

And for talking out my ass (again) it appears some lawyers agree with my interpretation of things:

Attorneys defend taping of police during traffic stop

Posted by Matt Miller/The Patriot-News June 14, 2007 04:00AM

Cumberland County District Attorney David Freed said he will review all evidence before deciding whether to prosecute an 18-year-old Carlisle man for taping a police officer during a traffic stop.

But two defense attorneys versed in wiretapping cases said Brian D. Kelly shouldn't even have been charged.


The state Supreme Court has ruled that taping police in such public situations is legal, they said.

Freed said the evidence he'll study will include not only police recordings of the May 24 incident, but the audio and video Kelly shot before Carlisle police arrested him on a felony wiretapping charge.

"Once the evidence is reviewed, we'll be in a better position to speak about it," Freed said yesterday.

Kelly is charged under a state law that forbids the recording of oral communications without consent. That count carries a penalty of up to seven years in prison.

"When people interact with the police, they ought to be able to record that to show a judge and a jury what happened," Camp Hill lawyer Dennis Boyle said.

The key, said Simon Grill, a Reading attorney, is that police can't expect privacy while performing their public duties.

"If it's a public interaction, I think the police have a tough row to hoe" to secure a wiretapping conviction, Grill said.

Dozens of phone calls, e-mails and comments on the original story on Kelly's arrest have been overwhelmingly critical of his arrest.

Police said Kelly was riding in a pickup truck that was pulled over for traffic violations and was arrested after obeying an officer's orders to turn off his camera and hand it over.

Kelly said he spent 26 hours in county prison until his mother posted her house as security for his $2,500 bail.

Freed said that, in general use, the wiretap law is more a curb on the police than a hindrance to the public. The law requires court approvals before police can set up wiretaps to monitor suspected criminal activity, he noted.

Still, he said, the law is "so broad" it could be interpreted as barring recording of anyone's conversation without consent.

Wiretapping cases his office handles usually involve people locked in bitter romantic or business disputes who are trying to secretly record another party doing something wrong, he said.

Grill and Boyle said case law is firmly on Kelly's side.

Boyle cited a 1998 state Supreme Court decision that voided a civil lawsuit filed by a York County police officer who accused his chief of violating the wiretapping law.

The court ruled that Officer James Agnew Jr. had no grounds to sue Hellam Twp. Police Chief Michael Dupler for secretly using an intercom to listen to officers' conversations in the squad room.

Agnew had no "justifiable expectation of privacy" in such a setting, the court found, noting that other officers could overhear what was said.

The court also cited an earlier ruling that voided wiretapping charges against a corrections officer who secretly tape-recorded a state trooper interrogating him about alleged wrongdoing while another person was present.

"Pennsylvania is a state that says all [recordings of conversations] require prior consent. But you have to have the expectation of privacy first," Grill said. "There's no expectation of privacy with a police officer."

Boyle, who has offered to help Kelly in his legal battle, said citing the Agnew ruling is usually enough to persuade prosecutors to drop wiretap charges in such cases.

"I'd like to clarify this so no other people are arrested like this," Boyle said.

http://blog.pennlive.com/patriotnews/2007/06/attorneys_defend_taping_police.html

--------------------------
Chuck Norris doesn't do push-ups, he pushes the Earth down.

[Krip 2]

Quote

Quote

Or are you just talking out of your ass? (again)

Fuck you.

And for talking out my ass (again) it appears some lawyers agree with my interpretation of things:

Attorneys defend taping of police during traffic stop

Posted by Matt Miller/The Patriot-News June 14, 2007 04:00AM

Cumberland County District Attorney David Freed said he will review all evidence before deciding whether to prosecute an 18-year-old Carlisle man for taping a police officer during a traffic stop.

But two defense attorneys versed in wiretapping cases said Brian D. Kelly shouldn't even have been charged.


The state Supreme Court has ruled that taping police in such public situations is legal, they said.

Freed said the evidence he'll study will include not only police recordings of the May 24 incident, but the audio and video Kelly shot before Carlisle police arrested him on a felony wiretapping charge.

"Once the evidence is reviewed, we'll be in a better position to speak about it," Freed said yesterday.

Kelly is charged under a state law that forbids the recording of oral communications without consent. That count carries a penalty of up to seven years in prison.

"When people interact with the police, they ought to be able to record that to show a judge and a jury what happened," Camp Hill lawyer Dennis Boyle said.

The key, said Simon Grill, a Reading attorney, is that police can't expect privacy while performing their public duties.

"If it's a public interaction, I think the police have a tough row to hoe" to secure a wiretapping conviction, Grill said.

Dozens of phone calls, e-mails and comments on the original story on Kelly's arrest have been overwhelmingly critical of his arrest.

Police said Kelly was riding in a pickup truck that was pulled over for traffic violations and was arrested after obeying an officer's orders to turn off his camera and hand it over.

Kelly said he spent 26 hours in county prison until his mother posted her house as security for his $2,500 bail.

Freed said that, in general use, the wiretap law is more a curb on the police than a hindrance to the public. The law requires court approvals before police can set up wiretaps to monitor suspected criminal activity, he noted.

Still, he said, the law is "so broad" it could be interpreted as barring recording of anyone's conversation without consent.

Wiretapping cases his office handles usually involve people locked in bitter romantic or business disputes who are trying to secretly record another party doing something wrong, he said.

Grill and Boyle said case law is firmly on Kelly's side.

Boyle cited a 1998 state Supreme Court decision that voided a civil lawsuit filed by a York County police officer who accused his chief of violating the wiretapping law.

The court ruled that Officer James Agnew Jr. had no grounds to sue Hellam Twp. Police Chief Michael Dupler for secretly using an intercom to listen to officers' conversations in the squad room.

Agnew had no "justifiable expectation of privacy" in such a setting, the court found, noting that other officers could overhear what was said.

The court also cited an earlier ruling that voided wiretapping charges against a corrections officer who secretly tape-recorded a state trooper interrogating him about alleged wrongdoing while another person was present.

"Pennsylvania is a state that says all [recordings of conversations] require prior consent. But you have to have the expectation of privacy first," Grill said. "There's no expectation of privacy with a police officer."

Boyle, who has offered to help Kelly in his legal battle, said citing the Agnew ruling is usually enough to persuade prosecutors to drop wiretap charges in such cases.

"I'd like to clarify this so no other people are arrested like this," Boyle said.

http://blog.pennlive.com/patriotnews/2007/06/attorneys_defend_taping_police.html

We, Me, myself, I, and us all think Zipp0 has a valid point anyone one going to rebute it?

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Me, Me, myself, I, and us all think Zipp0 has a valid point anyone one going to rebute it?

I think Grill and Boyle have a valid point. Anyone should be able to record their own interactions. Especially public interactions like being stopped by police.

99% of the time, it would favor good cops' actions.

As far as bad cops? We should have proof so we can move them to something more suiting their dispositions. Like programming, or dentistry.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Krip 2]

Quote

Quote

Me, Me, myself, I, and us all think Zipp0 has a valid point anyone one going to rebute it?

I think Grill and Boyle have a valid point. Anyone should be able to record their own interactions. Especially public interactions like being stopped by police.

99% of the time, it would favor good cops' actions.

As far as bad cops? We should have proof so we can move them to something more suiting their dispositions. Like programming, or dentistry.

Zipp0 has been given a two week time out due to his remarks made in this thread. Want to rebut it ask the green hat. It's not clear if anyone else involved in this thead was also given a time out for inappropiate behavior.

The only reason rehmwa is able to argue that Grill and Boyle have a valid pt is because Zipp0 did the research.

Zipp0 is the man!

[akarunway 1]

Quote

Are you joking? I'm busy enough as it is without having to make up pony offences.

What is a pony offense? Sex w/ a horse or something?

I hold it true, whate'er befall;
I feel it, when I sorrow most;
'Tis better to have loved and lost
Than never to have loved at all.

[Amazon 7]

They can always meet over in the similar forum on Rockclimbing. com.. a true breath of fresh air... where the thought police are far less stringent when you tell someone to go fuck themselves with their inadequate equipment..