Pixiq

"So the question boils down to whether or not he was actually trespassing.

Yes, he was standing on private property but this is an open-air commercial area with shops and restaurants that is open to the public.

And yes, at one point he was told to leave the property, but only because he was videotaping."

Hmmm let's see.

On private property? Check.

Told to leave? Check.

Didn't leave when told to? Check.

Then yes, he was trespassing.

Now do I think it is stupid that they didn't want him to film? Yep. However they were in the right to legally arrest him for trespassing.

Can you share details regarding the arrest such as booking number or case number?

Unfortunately the City of Tampa still has not caught up to the modern age and I cannot find arrest record inquiries online (Ybor is in Hillsborough County [which does have online inquiry database] but it is within the City of Tampa jurisdiction limits). I'd like to actually physically attend any hearings regarding the case just for my own knowledge and entertainment. I rarely see follow-ups on incidents reported here (except really big news events such as the critical mass bike ride in NYC a while back), so it'd be nice to see what actually happens in this kind of case. Once I get a case number I can follow it and try to provide an update as to the eventual final resolution.

Edit, added: Issues that would seem to be clear to a reasonably prudent and aware person.

James Cox was, as evidence in the recording, asked to leave private property and he refused. He attempted to employ a strawman argument by suggesting that he had a right to be there and film because there was no expectation of privacy. That is a completely different aspect and immaterial to what transpired. He may have gotten the attention of the 'security' guard because of the camera, but he could have just been as easily in violation of a 'no smoking' or a 'no wearing of red shirts on our property' policy. None of those categories would be considered a protected class (i.e. race, religion, nationality, etc) that would prohibit discrimination, so legally the authorized person had every right/obligation to demand Mr. Cox vacate the premises. So by the 1:05 point in the video he was clearly in the wrong when he was saying "it doesn't make a difference". It indeed does make a difference. If you are on my property (such as my home or business), I or my authorized representative have the right to demand you to leave (as long as it is not based on discrimination of a protected class). If I own a restaurant at the airport, I have the right to deny service to TSA agents in uniform should I so choose. The property owner cannot stop the filming per se or demand you delete the footage. Had he taken two steps forward onto public property when asked, this would have been avoided.
He further instigated by intentionally putting the camera and light in the face of the person that had moved away (~1:15) which then became a 'I'll put my light in your face as punishment" battle. He said "if you don't like it don't stand there. The person moved and Mr. Cox intentionally put the camera in his face again, seemingly to retaliate or instigate.
1:20 "Get a judge to warrant that". What does that mean? That was pulled out of thin air and is the most baseless statement he made the entire recording.
1:27 "Sir I know the law". Obviously he does not since he is making nonsensical and baseless statements using strawman logical fallacies.
The 'security' guards should have waited since the police had other issues more important with which to deal. They had a potentially combative domestic situation with the suspect standing just a few feet from active traffic. That seems like an immediate "I'm going to go tell mommy you poked me" kind of jerky response.
Cox did seem to instigate a lot more in causing a distraction by yelling to the kid to "go home" while the police were actively in control of the situation. I don't see how a reasonable person would think that by itself is acceptable behavior from anyone. Throw in the use of a video light to further draw attention and he is asking for trouble.
2:18 I'm not sure if he was flustered/nervous or if that is his regular level of speech, but I'm not sure what he meant by "The police is [sic] giving you ...." When a supporter or second person also chimes in with copy cat phrases of "go home" then that would reasonably be considered additional distraction. Why did Mr. Cox feel it was necessary to comment at that time? What was he trying to accomplish? Was he encouraging the kid to run at that point or actually think he was providing useful advice? I doubt it. If he wants to take the stance as a 'citizen journalist', then not interfering is a pretty significant part of the expected behavior.
2:33 I know my fifth amendment rights. What does the protection from having to make self-incriminating statements have to do with this situation at all. If he knew his rights then he would refuse to say absolutely anything.
2:37 Again he is using the wrong argument of property rights vs. right to record. If he was arrested for 'wiretapping' I'd be very much in support of this guy, but that never came up, so his right to video tape was not questioned, only his presence when told to leave.
2:40 I found it funny that he sounds so tough saying "I'm not driving, I don't have to have my license" repeatedly only to change tone, and pitch, very quickly once the arrest was initiated.

A little knowledge incorrectly applied causes problem. He fell to the old "am I under arrest or am I free to go" line. The police absolutely had reasonable suspicion he was committing a crime. They were told he was trespassing and when they turned around, he was still trespassing. How could this guy possibly think that was a good idea?

Florida does have a stop and identify statute (§856.021(2)) that has to do with loitering which, though very stretched, might apply here. Under that law he must identify himself by his true first and last name but unless driving doesn't otherwise have to show ID.
I've been to that same property in Ybor many times and the 'security' guards there are indeed, IMHO, jerks patrolling around a few hundred square foot on an electric trike. I've been hassled when I only had my camera on a table in front waiting for a client that one of the tenants had me shoot.

In this case, Cox is in the wrong. Had he moved onto the sidewalk when told, remained at a reasonable distance, and kept his mouth shut and not instigated, then I'd be supportive, but I see not one act on his part that would be considered reasonable under the situation.

Well at least the cop wasn't too much of a brute. He was actually kind of polite.

Cox could have been charged with obstructing the trespass investigation as well because he didn't provide his ID when asked. I think I did hear the cop say he was investigating a trespass at one point. Need to read the arrest report to find out. It seems there was a person with him, was that person also arrested?

He wasn't given a trespassing charge so we probably will never know if he was actually trespassing because that won't be heard by a judge. There is plenty of case law around the country (I'm not going to bother to look it up because I'm not defending myself in court on this) where judges have decided that these types of places (for example: open areas of malls, areas inside malls but not in the actual stores, parking areas of malls) are public places and people have a right to exercise first amendment activity in them as long as certain time, place and manner restrictions are followed if the owners have such a policy. I'd check with the mall owner and manager to see if they have a first amendment activity policy. Making a video like he was is by definition a first amendment activity.

The reason I would check to see if they have a first amendment policy, it proves this functions as a public place, and if the security guard is wrong about that policy and he was allowed by the policy to make the video he wasn't trespassing. If the obstruction stems from the trespass than he's got a defense, the same way Carlos won his appeal. I would also check with the management of the mall to see if they want to keep the ban in place. The security guard in the moment and the mall management could have very different agendas.

Johnny, I'm sorry to inform you that making the determination if this space functions as a public place is way above your pay grade. My point is solely that it could be a public place not that I know for certain that it is or is not.

This guy was an idiot. Well Mr. "I know the law", apparently you don't if you think a judge needs to sign a warrant making you leave private property. All he had to do was walk down the sidewalk 15-20 feet in either direction and he would have been fine. Instead he chose to show his ignorance.

Once the officer asked him for his ID so he could trespass him off the property, that was a legal arrest, which would require ID. There is no protection in the constitution for stupidity, which I expect a judge will tell him. As for the obstructing charge, I don't know. I suspect he was charged with obstructing, because a cop had to stop the other investigation to let him know he was going to be trespassed, and arguing with a cop never helps your case.

Being polite and courteous while standing your ground has always worked for me, though thankfully I always know what ground I'm standing on, public or private.

I live about 45 minutes from Ybor City. Does anyone know exactly where this took place? I'd like to take some pictures of the security guards. From a public sidewalk of course.

Carlos, it's nice to have you back.

'At one point, police handcuffed the boy, but then they handcuffed him. The boy, however, hovered around arguing with police.'

Surely you mean '...but then they UNhandcuffed him' ?

'At one point, police handcuffed the boy, but then they handcuffed him. The boy, however, hovered around arguing with police.'

Surely you mean '...but then they UNhandcuffed him' ?

Does anyone know how I can find out what sidewalks are private property in the Seattle area (where I live)?

And if some sidewalks are private property, how can I determine if WA law is such that a proprietor can or can not dictate photography/videography on that space?

The public arrest booking record can be searched here;

http://www.hcso.tampa.fl.us/PublicInquiry/Arrest/Inquiry/Search;

Booking number is: 11013631

Charge as listed is: OBSTRUCTING OR OPPOSING AN OFFICER WITHOUT

I actually have to be in downtown Tampa today for a photo job, so I'll see if I can run by the records division and get a copy of the actual arresting report.

Arrested at 01:49 and released about 8 hours later. Was it really worth all this trouble?

I strongly support the right to record and oppose any action that stifles that cause, but this is not the kind of behavior that is appropriate. Mr. Cox seems to be quite misinformed as to what the laws, rights, and expectations may be. The 5th Amendment had nothing to do with this issue nor does a judge have to issue a warrant to tell someone to leave private property. The right to video tape certainly has nothing to do with it. The 'security' guy was a jerk and also handled things inappropriate, but Cox was verbally belligerent and combative. I think his yelling at the person while the police were attempting to resolve and diffuse a tense situation was highly inappropriate and that the video itself proves it was to the point of misdemeanor obstruction. Being a friend of Mr. Miller's and having been involved in this kind of thing before, in my opinion Mr. Cox is hoping to create a story to fit a past theme rather than actually try to serve a public good. On quite a few occasions Mr. Miller has stated he can be confrontational and it seems Mr. Cox was trying to emulate that.

Now it would be stupid for Mr. Cox to publicly comment on anything until after the case is resolved, but I wonder if he has the dignity and bravery to come back after the issue was closed and then try to support his actions. No doubt he is reading this considering his relation with the blog author, so we'll see how truly brave he is in explaining his behavior. In fact I'm sure sure he will not, if he comes back after the case is complete and engages in an informed debate to support what he did, I'll donate $100 to the 501(c)(3) charity of his choice.

Mr. Cox just seemed like he was hoping for an incident that he could post on Mr. Miller's site as an example of a right being stifled. Of course it seems to be a given and the consensus among commenters that this wouldn't have even been necessary if the security guard wasn't quite a jerk about it all. There was no reason to see that Mr. Cox was hindering the flow of traffic, when he in fact stepped back to provide plenty of room. They were just enforcing some rule without real cause or necessity and caused the problems to escalate when there was no real issue to resolve. The police even acknowledged his right to record which is what we ultimately want to accomplish and applaud. Objectively, I think the police handled it all well, but of course would have been even more pleased if they told the 'security' guy to go away while they were dealing with more important issues.

Half-time score:
Mr. Cox: 0
Centro Ybor property 'security' guard: 0
Police: 4 (1 point for acknowledging the right to record in the very beginning, 1 point for not using an inappropriate charge such as disorderly conduct, and 2 points for not taking the video as "evidence" as we have seen used as an excuse so many times)

If this cause is to succeed, those who are challenging law enforcement need to 1) understand the actual laws; 2) respect private property; 3) behave with dignity. Any other approach does more harm than good.

I'm sorry. He wasn't there to record the story, he was trying to become part of it and got his wish. There are many times I covered events as a photojournalist and have had more than a few run ins with security guards and police. Never did I make it an issue where they stopped doing their job to give full attention to me. He's carrying on a conversation with other passerbys and putting himself in the middle of whatever investigation that the police were doing. He brought this one on himself.

Is it just me or does it seem like some comments are missing now?

I live about 20 minutes from Ybor City. Use to work down there on the weekend 15 years ago..

As of 2007, Cetro Ybor was "owned" by the city of Tampa by using community investment tax money.

http://www2.tbo.com/content/2007/aug/29/me-offer-for-centro-unacceptable/

I can't tell if the new owners, M&J Wilkow, has paid off the loan yet, so it still may be partially funded by the public.

Well I finally did what we all should have done on the first day. They actually have a code of conduct for Centro Ybor that can be found here, http://www.centroybor.com/code.asp

There are a couple of sections that I'll put here:
"Photographing, videotaping, and filming the interior or exterior of the property for any purpose, without the prior written consent of property management, is prohibited."

He wasn't photographing the interior or the exterior of the property. So I'd say he's clear on this one. Also if they are letting people take photos with some cameras and not with others then they aren't uniformly inforcing this rule.

"Standing or stopping on stairs or escalators in such a manner as to impede the flow of pedestrian traffic is not permitted. Improper use of escalators, elevators or stairs is not permitted."

It looked to me like he could have been on some stairs but it didn't look like he was impeding the flow of pedestrain traffic.

"Respect others. Disorderly or disruptive conduct which annoys, obstructs, interferes or endangers others is prohibited including: the use of obscene, insulting or sexually explicit language or gestures; yelling or playing sound-generating equipment; fighting, boisterous or threatening or hostile behavior of any kind; throwing objects or littering; running, skating, skateboarding, rollerblading or use of “heelys” or motorized devices; or unnecessary staring or following someone through the property."

He was yelling and that could break this one to get him trespassed off the property.

I think he needs to sit down with someone at the managment company and say he's sorry and see what they are willing to do.

Several comments on this one...

I've always known Tampa Police to be professional around cameras, compared to other neighboring agencies. Carlos, you should join me when I work at night as a stringer. Some of the agencies here would make your blood boil.

The security guards and bouncers in Ybor City are notorious for not handling confrontations appropriately. One of my still friends got his a** beat and robbed by guards there.

I don't see where Cox is on private property. It looks like he's on a sidewalk along the street.

Finally, I think Cox was asking for trouble by communicating with the detainee like that. He certainly got it. Had he kept his mouth shut I'm sure the situation wouldn't have escalated like it did.

Exercise your rights but don't interfere.