Maryland Capitol Police Chief responds to PINAC reader regarding incident


First I will share the email that a Photography is Not a Crime reader sent to various top officials in Maryland regarding the incident between a police lieutenant and a videographer who was threatened with arrest.

And beneath that, I include the response from Maryland Capitol Police Chief Phil Palmere.

The most surprising part of the response is that the chief says he “thoroughly investigated the incident” even though it took place just two days ago.

Usually cops use the excuse of “still under investigation” to delay responding to a particular incident.

It just goes to show you that we, as citizens, have the power to influence. At least every once in a while.

A big thumbs up to the chief.

Today I viewed a YouTube video showing Maryland Capitol Police Lt. Derwyn Parker’s ignorance of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. If you have not already seen the video, please watch it here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qe9QNdcRplw&feature=player_embedded

The people shooting the video were in no way impeding, causing a disturbance, or even demonstrating. They were peacefully standing and listening to the speaker like the other citizens in that square. They should never have been singled out because they were recording the event which was in a public space, on public land. While I am not an expert on Maryland law, but it would seem that the permit  mentioned would not give them the right to decide who could observe the event, and who would be excluded. If indeed they wanted to control who could attend they should have had the event in a private meeting room, not in a public square.

In addition, Officer Parker’s threat to incarcerate the person taking the video tape is upsetting and troubling. This person did not commit a crime, the officer had no reasonable suspicion that he had or was about to commit a crime. Then Officer Parker seems to back pedal and try to justify his reprehensible actions with several lines of nonsense. Officer Parker mentions that the person taking the video became a “Problem” and “An issue”, which in viewing the video is not the case. Since when does the State of Maryland decide who can attend and listen to a speech in a public square? Since when does the State of Maryland decide that they can stop someone from taking video of an event in a public square? You might want to consult the Attorney General about freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, and prior restraint.

In my opinion, Officer Parker should be sent to attend a high school civics class on the Constitution, and to re-attend his law enforcement training, both of which he seems to have forgotten. In addition, I would advocate for an official reprimand to be placed in his personnel file.

I thank you for your consideration in this matter.

XXXX

Now here is the response from the Maryland Capital Police Chief.

Dear Mr. (name removed by request),

Thank you for contacting me regarding the situation that occurred on July 21 at Lawyer’s Mall in Annapolis. I have thoroughly investigated this incident and have concluded that the situation should have been handled differently. I regret the way this was conducted and take full responsibility for any inconvenience or embarrassment this may have caused. We are already in the process of instituting corrective training measures to address issues of this nature in the future.

We are also in the process of modifying our website to include the rules and regulations on the utilization of Lawyer’s Mall for both those who apply and are approved for permits, for those who are observing, and for any counter-demonstrators.

Once again I greatly appreciate you bringing this issue to my attention. If I can be of any further assistance, please don’t hesitate to contact me at (410) 260-2901 in Annapolis, (410) 767-6744 in Baltimore City or by e-mail at phil.palmere@dgs.state.md.us.

Sincerely,

Phil Palmere
Chief of Police
Department of General Services Maryland Capitol Police

Comments

Anonymous
Anonymous

At least he was nice enough to respond

Anonymous
Anonymous

Lt. Parker begins by asking the photographer to accompany him to a different site for an interview.

He phrased it as an order “Turn me off the camera and let me come over and talk to you over here” directing the photographer to the second site.

Can anyone comment as to whether this order for removal to a second site constitutes arrest??

Anonymous
Anonymous

The reply is loaded with weasel-words, but I still think it’s a big victory. Contrition in 48 hours? This sort of story makes me wish I had a video camera implanted in my forehead.
Tim in SF recently posted..Facebook Safari FAIL

Anonymous
Anonymous

Big love for the reader that emailed the police chief on this, and big love for the chief’s prompt, and decisive response!

Anonymous
Anonymous

Nice words from the Chief. They’ll be even nicer if policies and behaviors are changed

Anonymous
Anonymous

I think this is a good thing.

Anonymous
Anonymous

Kudos to you for posting both the original story and this great follow-up! Please keep up the good work. You are doing a wonderful service!

Anonymous
Anonymous

The chief did replay promptly, which is a step forward. However what he said is mainly BS.

Anonymous
Anonymous

The response was ‘Yes, I unnerstan the constitution.’ That is a win. It might be a win simply on paper, but paper can help….

Anonymous
Anonymous

here’s the “gotcha” sections of their policy:

Section 6. Employees: Interference with Duties and Programs

A. No person may interfere with any Commission employee acting in the course of his or her official duties.

B. No person may disrupt or obstruct participation in a Commission program, activity or at a Commission facility.

Section 7. Unauthorized Presence

A person requested to leave Commission property by authorized personnel must do so immediately.

Anonymous
Anonymous

Strongly worded email, contrite and apologetic response. Good on both! Especially the chief for acknowledging the photog’s position as being right. Would that all LEO’s be so gracious.

Anonymous
Anonymous

As part of the return “apology” letter by the Chief in which he said..

“I have thoroughly investigated this incident and have concluded that the situation should have been handled differently. I regret the way this was conducted and take full responsibility for any inconvenience or embarrassment this may have caused.”

I agree with the above remarks that “Tim in SF” and “Roger” said.

What I find interesting though, is the lack of response.. from those who usually post here who seem to lean towards this type of LEO conduct as being acceptable!

Why (I wonder), is it in situations like this (and after receiving the apologetic response that we did from the Chief), the thoughts and views of those “Pro-LEO” posters here seem suspect when they come up with complete silence.

Thank You for allowing me to share my thoughts.

Rail Car Fan

Anonymous
Anonymous

The jackboot won’t even get a slap on the wrist.

I agree with Roger.

At least there was some admission.

Post new comment

Pixiq on Facebook

Join the 10161 Pixiq fans on Facebook

Share

  • Share

Subscribe

Get weekly updates from Pixiq. Short, sweet, and always interesting.