Arrested for filming from the front yard?

[Paladin132]

A Rochester, NY woman was arrested for filming police during a traffic stop and not going inside when police ordered her to do so. Anyone else seen the story?

http://www.13wham.com/news/local/story/woman-arrested-shoots-video-of-traffic-stop/r6Z4v_17V0uckYqBOMIsGg.cspx

Edited June 22, 2011 by Paladin132

[1gewehr]

These incidents are getting a lot of attention. That's good!!! The proliferation of cell phone cameras and small video recorders can only help keep police, politicians, and others honest.

Remember, nobody in a public place has any expectation of privacy. Not even police or politicians!

[Guest GunTroll]

Fear the camera! Both sides of the law!

[Guest mcgyver210]

From what I have seen there is a good reason for LEOs to not want to be recorded since these recordings are being used to prove they all aren't as trust-able as the legal system portrays they are. Of course they don't mind recording us where they know how they are being recorded. Cameras can & have leveled the playing field when dealing with LEOs with no other witnesses on your side.

As for this New York incident I believe it could be said the LEO in this case was up to no good since if he has nothing to hide he wouldn't mind being recorded HM this statement sounds very Familiar...........

This statement isn't a blanket statement I personally know some really good LEOs but one bad APPLE can spoil the whole batch at least in appearance unfortunately. Also for everyone caught how many didn't get caught since LEOs are a highly trusted protected class held above regular citizens in most cases.

Edited June 22, 2011 by mcgyver210

[Caster]

I don't know why cops do this. There's a guy here in town who was arrested after a cop told him to leave. The cop had his son {A minor at the time} pulled over and was searching the vehicle. The dad just happened by at the time and whipped in the parking lot. The cop told him to leave to which he replied NO, that's my son, he's a minor and I am responsible for him. He got arrested for obstruction. He got out of it, but it cost him a days work and court costs. I'm not a cop hater but that cop should have been reprimanded. As it is, he wasn't. Our force is 50/50 here in the 'view. 50% good folks, 50% douche bags.

[DaveTN]

The Police should never be concerned with anyone filming them unless they are jeopardizing a crime scene or the identity of a victim. I never was.

In before the lock.

[Guest mcgyver210]

I don't know why cops do this. There's a guy here in town who was arrested after a cop told him to leave. The cop had his son {A minor at the time} pulled over and was searching the vehicle. The dad just happened by at the time and whipped in the parking lot. The cop told him to leave to which he replied NO, that's my son, he's a minor and I am responsible for him. He got arrested for obstruction. He got out of it, but it cost him a days work and court costs. I'm not a cop hater but that cop should have been reprimanded. As it is, he wasn't. Our force is 50/50 here in the 'view. 50% good folks, 50% douche bags.

Intimidation with intent to punish anyone who questions their Authority. I wouldn't listen to them either when it comes to my Family period.

[Dolomite_supafly]

Realize this, if an officer gives you an order you are required to follow it. If it turns out what he ordered you to do to be an illegal you can later sue in court. If you refuse the order, no matter how screwed up, you are still refusing the orders of a officer.

Think of it as the same as an arrest that is unlawful. You have no right to refuse the arrest even I you are innocent.

As far as taping any incident I am all for it. An officer should not fear the camera if he is acting in good faith. Even if he isn't in the right as long as what he thought he was doing was right he should not have anything to be concerned about. It is the officers that are accustomed to doing wrong and often do that fear the cameras. An officer should want every possible witness.

Dolomite

[Guest WyattEarp]

A Rochester, NY woman was arrested for filming police during a traffic stop and not going inside when police ordered her to do so. Anyone else seen the story?

Rochester Woman Arrested After Shooting Video Of Traffic Stop - Rochester, News, Weather, Sports, and Events - 13WHAM.com

she doesn't have to go inside her house. wth?

From what I have seen there is a good reason for LEOs to not want to be recorded since these recordings are being used to prove they all aren't as trust-able as the legal system portrays they are. Of course they don't mind recording us where they know how they are being recorded. Cameras can & have leveled the playing field when dealing with LEOs with no other witnesses on your side.

As for this New York incident I believe it could be said the LEO in this case was up to no good since if he has nothing to hide he wouldn't mind being recorded HM this statement sounds very Familiar...........

This statement isn't a blanket statement I personally know some really good LEOs but one bad APPLE can spoil the whole batch at least in appearance unfortunately. Also for everyone caught how many didn't get caught since LEOs are a highly trusted protected class held above regular citizens in most cases.

there is nothing in the law that states you can't record a police officer. there should be no reason they should have any problem with it whatsoever.

Realize this, if an officer gives you an order you are required to follow it. If it turns out what he ordered you to do to be an illegal you can later sue in court. If you refuse the order, no matter how screwed up, you are still refusing the orders of a officer.

Think of it as the same as an arrest that is unlawful. You have no right to refuse the arrest even I you are innocent.

As far as taping any incident I am all for it. An officer should not fear the camera if he is acting in good faith. Even if he isn't in the right as long as what he thought he was doing was right he should not have anything to be concerned about. It is the officers that are accustomed to doing wrong and often do that fear the cameras. An officer should want every possible witness.

Dolomite

negative. if it's an unlawful order, you are NOT required to follow it (same as in the military). The order he gave was in fact unlawful. The First Amendment of our Constitution guarantees our right to freedom of speech, the press and peaceful assembly.

In my mass media law class I took at MTSU, anyone in possession of a camera, audio recording device or video recording device is deemed "the press" and therefore a member of the media and protected by the Constitution, due to the fact that anyone can post their video or picture online, on a news site (such as iReporter for CNN, etc) and so on and so forth.

The order was illegal, therfore the arrest was illegal, and if this woman has any common sense, she'll get any attorney and sue the piss out of the police department and this officer for violating her constitutional rights and win a truckload of money.

the officer had no grounds to say "I don't feel safe" when she's standing on her own front lawn with a video recorder. lamest cop out I've ever heard in my life.

And I'm still laughing at the "obstruction of governmental administration" charge. she didn't get in the way of him. she didn't interfere with the traffic stop. she was a bystander with a video camera. cops getting dumber and dumber by the day, and more ignorant with their bogus charges.

[Guest TackleberryTom]

I saw this on Drudge. This kind of stuff really makes me mad.

I think the lady made one mistake, she should have immediately told the officer to get off of her property when he walked up. He has no official business there and he would then be trespassing and in violation of the law and immediately subject to arrest. Then, when he grabbed her it would also be assault and battery and possibly a felony. A felony committed with a firearm none the less.

[peejman]

negative. if it's an unlawful order, you are NOT required to follow it (same as in the military).

Confirmed:

55-8-104. Obedience to police officers. —

(a) No person shall willfully fail or refuse to comply with any lawful order or direction of any police officer invested by law with authority to direct, control or regulate traffic.

( A violation of this section is a Class C misdemeanor.

Acts 1955, ch. 329, § 4; T.C.A., § 59-804; Acts 1989, ch. 591, § 113.

Source: Legal Resources

Though I'm sure refusing would be a matter of submitted to arrest for non-compliance and proving yourself right afterwards.

... and IBTL.

Edited June 22, 2011 by peejman

[Guest Arch]

Well I guess that depends on what would be considered lawful? Is standing in your front yard against the law...not that I know of. Is filming from your front yard unlawful...not that I have ever heard. Any peace officer that takes it upon themselves to make up laws in order to justify arresting a person standing in there front yard openly should not be wearing a badge.

[Guest bnoland]

Depending on where you are it is in fact against the law to record an officer without his or her consent. You can also be told to go inside even on your own property depending on the situation. It all comes down to where you are, what is actually going on, and what you are doing.

[Guest UberDuper]

I think an "unlawful order" is generally defined as an order to do something illegal. Not an order that an officer has no legal basis for giving or even when such an order would violate your rights. The courts give the police a lot of leeway during an investigation and while you may be able to get any charges against you dropped, you shouldn't be surprised if you get arrested for refusing an order you deem to be 'unlawful.'

[Glock30]

Confirmed:

55-8-104. Obedience to police officers. —

(a) No person shall willfully fail or refuse to comply with any lawful order or direction of any police officer invested by law with authority to direct, control or regulate traffic.

( A violation of this section is a Class C misdemeanor.

Acts 1955, ch. 329, § 4; T.C.A., § 59-804; Acts 1989, ch. 591, § 113.

Source: Legal Resources

Though I'm sure refusing would be a matter of submitted to arrest for non-compliance and proving yourself right afterwards.

... and IBTL.

"Lawful" is ultimately defined by a judge. There probably isn't much case law as most folks will just move about their business.

[vontar]

Well I guess that depends on what would be considered lawful? Is standing in your front yard against the law...not that I know of. Is filming from your front yard unlawful...not that I have ever heard. Any peace officer that takes it upon themselves to make up laws in order to justify arresting a person standing in there front yard openly should not be wearing a badge.

I believe standing in one's yard is lawful, and taping is lawful. (at least in TN ) I don't know about New York City.

To expand on this, I looked this up alone time ago, found a state by state, can we tape. Some states you can, some states you can not. However Even in those states it is being tested in the courts. Give me time I know of a case that was tested if I can find it before the lock.

"Can We Tape?" (can we tape)

check the state by state. I looked up TN a long time ago I understand it we are safe in TN at least. As long as one party know and I consider myself one of the parties.

saving this and looking for that other case, as it was in a state that you were not suppose to tape police.

[vontar]

Here is the event I was referring too.

THis youtube video

The motocyclist was taken to court after posting this video for filming the LEO

Motorcyclist jailed for 26 hours for videotaping gun-wielding cop

Motorcyclist jailed for 26 hours for videotaping gun-wielding cop | Pixiq

Following forum rules You will have to read it at the link.

[DaveTN]

The officer says he doesn't feel safe with Good standing behind him so he asked her to go inside her house.

The Officer said the magic words. I know I've done it myself when I had friends of someone that I had on a traffic stop and pull up behind my squad. I wasn't about to try to conduct a traffic stop and have to watch two vehicles. The driver said he had a right to be there and I told him if he didn't drive away I would arrest him for obstructing Police and tow his car. He left.

I don't care who they are or what they film, but if they require the Officer to continually divert his attention from a traffic stop, they are committing a crime. Under Illinois law it was called obstructing a Police Officer. I don't know what the law is in Tennessee (I'll look later) but I'm sure they have something that prevents you from putting a Police Officer in danger after you have been warned.

As I said I had no problem with someone filming, but apparently in this case there was more to it.

Court isn't held on the street and if you try to interfere you will probably find yourself in jail.

[strickj]

I didn't see anything in the article that said she was arrested for filming. She would have been arrested whether she was filming or not.

In my mass media law class I took at MTSU, anyone in possession of a camera, audio recording device or video recording device is deemed "the press" and therefore a member of the media and protected by the Constitution, due to the fact that anyone can post their video or picture online, on a news site (such as iReporter for CNN, etc) and so on and so forth.

.

Either you misheard or he was wrong. By that definition, anyone with a cell phone is the press and that is just not so.

Anything captured on a device, such as video or audio, is protected by the first amendment when used by, or in the press. That means that the government cannot stop or

impede the publishing of such.

That does not make anyone holding a video recorder or a phone "the press". It also doesn't make anyone holding such device, press or not, above the law.

Meaning, you cannot disobey the law simply because the content in your camera, and what you do with that content, is a protected right, no more then I can disobey the law because my gun is a protected right.

[Guest GunTroll]

He was facing her from what I could tell from the video. He had two other officers on scene too (3 total if I counted right) and he felt unsafe? Says something to me.

Seems the officer on the passenger side of the vehicle was the only officer who had his backside exposed.

[Paladin132]

I am finally going to weigh in. This is my own take, but as a pretty educated individual of the CJ system, and a conservative.

An individual on their own property should not be ordered into their home for observing their protectors at work. Nor should officers fear the camera, in fact they should welcome it.

However the amount of ridiculous lawsuits against officers for every little thing have made officers fear for their livelihood and protective.

All that being said, I believe officers should be able to exercise control of a scene without infringing other citizen's rights. The entire CJ system is misunderstood and looses the PR fight. I remember a time when officers were thought of as pillars of the community that you could go to for advice and directions, now people avoid them.

[DaveTN]

I'm going to ask you one more time, we don't feel safe with you standing right behind us while we are doing a traffic stop. I'm going to ask you to go into the house.

Sounds pretty resonable to me.

She obviously has mental problems. She is crying and saying she didn't understand. I don't think the cop could have been much clearer. I doubt this will go to trial, the DA will probably dismiss charges if she agrees to go see a shrink.

[Paladin132]

I respectfully disagree. We have no idea if she has mental problems, although in this day and age there seems to be a mental problem associated with nearly every behavior. Indeed, many people would be very frantic and upset to be arrested for doing what they see as a perfectly legal, normal action.

[Guest UberDuper]

Yeah but she's one of these "am I detained?" people. I'm having a hard time mustering up any give a.. err poop. Crying about what was an obvious outcome from her actions. The only psychoses she's suffering from is stupidity.

[DaveTN]

I respectfully disagree. We have no idea if she has mental problems, although in this day and age there seems to be a mental problem associated with nearly every behavior. Indeed, many people would be very frantic and upset to be arrested for doing what they see as a perfectly legal, normal action.

So you think she was crying because she was totally taken by surprise that she was arrested?

Did you not understand what the Officer was saying? Would you not have understood what was going on when they started putting cuffs on you? Would you feel better about it if during the part of that video that you are not seeing the Officers told the woman she would be arrested if she didn't go back inside?

yea, we will have to disagree on this one.