Get all outdoorsy with Pentax's Optio WG2 and WG2-GPS
Canon's complement of compacts
How to use a grey card
We’re All Bozos On This Bus--The Red Bus to Hell
Worlds Fastest Camera
The New Sony NEX 7
Choosing your first dSLR
Photojojo iPhone Telephoto Lens review — AudioCast
Photo Accessories that Fail Security Checks
My week with Q
Studio equipment buying guide for beginners
VSCO Film Studio Review
Lessons in Lighting
The russellgraves.com Photo Minute - Truck Blinds
Photographing Children in the wedding party 
Cattle Country
Creative Photo Valentine Surprise 
How to Use Multiple Lights for Dramatic Portraits
Making your own flash diffuser 
LR4 free presets: Faded series
Using Sync for Video in Develop
A gift of flowers: unfold your senses
On Set of "Love & Robots" the Film
My Night with Ilford Galerie Gold Silk Fibre
FOTOMOTO - Why I Left
Silhouettes & Photo Contests
Cyan, not just another color
Our 26 best photo projects of 2011
A Year of Blogs In Review About Experimental Digital Photography By Rick Doble
Family Ties That Bind
Animal Group Portraits
A Brief History Of Light & Photography: Part 3 of 3
A Brief History Of Light & Photography: Part 2 Of 3
Lightroom Interview: Kevin Tieskoetter
Always Dream Big
Gallery: Embedded with the Territorial Army
Getty Villa Malibu — 4 Old Faces, 1 Sunken Garden — GALLERY (6 photos)
Wildlife photography for the masses
The 110 page guide to post-processing 
How much should you charge for a photograph?
Santa Pictures + Marketing for your BusinessIllinois photographer frisked after photographing smokestacks
An Illinois photographer who was being harassed for taking photos of smokestacks ended up getting frisked because he placed his hands inside his pockets.
Jason C. Romero said an Officer Garcia whirled him around, forced his hands behind his back and spread his legs before emptying Romero’s pockets, which was a huge violation of his Constitutional rights considering all he was doing was taking photos.
Garcia ended up pulling Romero’s iPhone out of his pocket, which was set to record audio, and told him that it was illegal for him to record their conversation.
That is a lie.
Romero told him he was recording the conversation for his own protection, but it turned out, the recorder was not actually turned on.
But even it had been turned on, it would not have been illegal. Police in recent years have used the illegal wiretapping law to arrest people who are recording them on audio or video, only for those cases to be thrown out of court.
The illegal wiretap charge mainly applies to phone conversations where people have an expectation of privacy.
Speaking of which, the officer ended up reading through Romero’s notes and notebooks, which he had no right to do because Romero did not give him a reasonable suspicion.
Two more officers pulled up, giving Romero the old line about how “in this day and age” anybody with a camera is considered armed and dangerous with terrorist intentions.
Via Discarted
Comments
If you photograph any pollution, illegal dumping, or other similar activities associated with big business the cops will be all over it. They work for the elites, not us peasant class.
In this day and age police is armed and dangerous with terrorist intentions, would fit the bill also quite nicely.
Well this should equal a nice payday for Mr. Romero. Although just once, I’d like to see a victim push for charges instead of taking an out of court settlement. I’m sick of hearing department X getting off with the “admits no wrongdoing as a result…” line.
He should sue their asses off. I mean the actual police officers and the department. This shit HAS to stop.
At the very least force a requirement of the settlement to read that the LEO looses his/her certification for good. I would guess if LEO’s knew that their job is on the line instead of hiding behind a city insurance policy you’d see a lot less of shit like this happening.
I can dream right?
Workingindust´s last blog ..USAF MH-60A
Adam, the problem with pressing criminal charges is that prosecutors are very reluctant to put cops on trial even when the event is egregious enough to cause a public outcry. And even when they do come to trial it is very easy to pack the jury with cop family members to ensure that the bad cops go free.
Section 1983 is pretty much all we have to keep cops in line, and since both unions and the police agencies themselves will indemnify, that isn’t much help.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Terrorism
Funny how the vast majority of ‘terrorism’ in the United States is actually state-sanctioned.
I just don’t understand why cops can be so weird when a camera is around. They seem to mind even if they are filmed doing their jobs in an exemplary and highly professional manner.
Rob´s last blog ..San Diego Reader Story: We Don’t Want You Taking Pictures
“I just don’t understand why cops can be so weird when a camera is around. ”
They do just fine when the cameraman
is one of their own. Take the show Cops; officers relish in the spotlight. Move the camera
to the hands of an impartial bystander, where the bad stuff (Misconduct) doesn’t get edited out and you have a whole different scenario.
Post new comment