“You're being detained right now because you're audio recording and you're not supposed to,” officer

[The Straight Story]

A Rockville man's desire to capture on video the interaction that comes when police pull drivers over didn't go as planned.

Instead of being a quiet observer with a video camera, he ended up in the middle of a heated confrontation, harassed and manhandled by two officers.

Jared Parr, who runs a YouTube channel called Rockville CopWatch, says things got complicated when an officer realized he had a camera.

"At that point, I turned on the video camera," Parr says.

On the video, one officer is recorded saying, “I believe you're video taping. I believe you're audio recording.”

“Oh, I am,” Parr answers.

“Okay, you're not allowed to do that,” the officer says. “That's against the law to audio record without my permission.”

At that point, the camera was on Parr's lap.

But he tells the officer, he disagrees that it’s illegal to record an officer in public and he cites the law.

“Am I being detained?” Parr asks.

“You're being detained right now because you're audio recording and you're not supposed to,” the officer says.

http://www.wjla.com/articles/2013/02/rockville-man-harassed-manhandled-by-police-while-video-recording-from-his-car-85523.html

[msongs]

1. police are not your "friend" ever. they are only "the police" nt

[panader0]

2. Everyone should record (audio and video) any dealings with the police.

They are public servants. Recording them should not be illegal. If the cops knew that all of their dealings were on record they might behave legally.

[tblue37]

21. Probably not. Even when they have cameras on their cars videotaping them when they stop motorists,

they abuse the motorists and violate their rights.

Cops know that even with videotaped evidence of their abuses, they will never get called to account, or if they do, they will get a paid vacation (suspended with pay), a slap on the wrist, and then back to business as usual.

[medeak]

3. thank gawd had phone on speaker when pulled over

nutso cop accused me of having stolen car ..detained me for 50 min side of highway. Husband heard it all and called attorney who called sheriff. Everyone needs protection. Technology is best advocate.

[AtheistCrusader]

4. Predator/prey response.

Just flipped a bit in the officer's mind, and the dude became prey.

[annabanana]

5. Parr will win.

Every one of these cases brought by authorities has failed. Public servants doing the public's work in public can have no expectation of privacy.

If the videographer isn't interfering in the police business, he's not doing anything wrong.

[Downtown Hound]

6. We need to start putting police like these in jail

That's the only way they're ever going to stop this bullshit.

[Arctic Dave]

7. This guy has to be the dumbest cop ever.

For audio recording?

Like they do whenever they interact with the public. Durrrrrr.

[FailureToCommunicate]

8. Apparently the main reason the world saw many good videos of the meteor was

because so many people in that part of Russia had added dash cams to counter rampant police traffic arrests on trumped up charges. So citizens were arming themselves with an impartial 'witness'...

[reflection]

9. I downloaded Bambuser after a similar experience

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022330594

it will run in the background, even when the phone is in sleep mode protected by password. I've tested it extensively and it works wonderfully. Heck, sometimes it even uploads to the net automatically. I haven't quite mastered how it does that.

The cops would literally have to wipe my phone to get rid of the footage, and they couldn't even turn it on to see whether it's recording or not.

[Festivito]

10. Police car records and doesn't have my permission.

What's the difference here?

[Bernardo de La Paz]

12. Same reason as surveillance cameras can record ATMs and public spaces.

[Festivito]

14. Police car cams record video and audio, same as the OP's guy.

One can see that on TV's Cops.

[Mariana]

26. They're the police and you're not.

That's really all there is to it, as far as they are concerned.

[Festivito]

31. And we each get equal protection under the law.

Supposedly.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

11. You cannot audio record police. You can make still photos and video tape from a distance. But ...

You cannot audio record police without permission. The legal and law enforcement rationale is reasonable: it could record things like police radio traffic that can reveal private information about innocent third parties or victims even of distant crimes. There may also issues about police codes and identities of undercover officers. You can make still photos from anywhere you are permitted to be, and video tape from a distance from anywhere you are permitted to be, if it does not pick up or record audio of officer conversations or overheard radio traffic. But ...

... you may have a hard time convincing a cop that your still camera is not recording video. They can't look at it without your permission, unless they have "reasonable grounds" to search it which would be because they think you might have been video recording. So in practice they can look at it if they insist, though they may make procedural mistakes in doing so that could be to your benefit later.

They cannot destroy the recording or force you to destroy it for several reasons. They can ask you to delete it and you can do so or you can refuse. They can't destroy the recording themselves because it is private property (personal, non-governmental). They can confiscate it and hold it as evidence, but if they destroy it they are destroying evidence and property. They can confiscate to hold for destruction, but I think they would need a court order to actually accomplish that because of property issues and potentially evidentiary issues. I can't think of any circumstance where imminent danger to a person or the public would necessitate destroying a recording.

In a confrontation, if you think a crime has occurred including police criminality, you could assert that it is evidence and demand that they take it and bag it and label it and issue you a receipt.

There are sleights of hand that can be performed, such as palming the real recording, inserting another card with some earlier innocuous photos / videos and making a quick small recording or still photo. However, they may ask you if you have any other cards and it is probably best to tell the truth (or at least not lie), but tell the absolutely minimal amount you can.

I am not a lawyer and this is not legal advice. I welcome any discussion of fine points of law and fundamental principles as they apply.

As always, standing up for your rights may lead to intense pressure and scrutiny and possibly even violence against you, not to mention malicious prosecution or even evidence tampering and lying under oath. Be aware and be careful.

Blessed are those who stand up for their (our) rights.

PS: Format your data cards in the camera every time you have downloaded all the photos and made backup copies. (Don't just delete the photos without formatting.) If you are expecting to challenge law enforcement officers, then do a full-format of the card on your computer to wipe all the bits to zero AND do a format in the camera to ensure the folder structure (directory structure) is appropriate for the camera. No point in deleting from the directory photos of your friends bong hits but leaving the image file blocks on the card for recovery by forensic software.

[DRoseDARs]

15. *States authoritatively, then adds disclaimer near end undermining own authority.*

Careful when doing that; always best to put disclaimers at the very beginning.

3 seconds on The Google and I found plenty of resources discussing the matter of audio recording. Cliff Notes: Check local/state laws. Illinois got denied an appeal to the USSC in November over their attempt to ban audio recording and making it a felony with up to 15 years in prison. 7th Circuit Court said, "Yeah... no. You're not doing that, Illinois." 10 states plus DC require all-party consent for audio recording. Given the defeat of the appeal, this reaffirmation of 1st amendment right to record (under the banners of free speech and freedom of the press) is likely to affect other wiretapping laws in other states as other cases are brought forth now that there's legal precedent with the USSC leaving the lower court's decision to stand.

Christian Science Monitor:
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2012/1126/Can-people-record-police-officers-Illinois-ban-gets-no-help-at-Supreme-Court

[Bernardo de La Paz]

16. Sure. I don't mind undermining my own authority. As said, I am not a lawyer & it is not legal advice

I do study and think about these kinds of issues.

As always, a lengthy, deliberately written, calmly stated post, with out ranting and obscenities, invites posts of a similar nature in response just by its very nature and existence. Thank you for posting in that manner. You made good points and provided interesting information.

Yes, do check local laws.

[Th1onein]

23. Bernardo de La Paz: WRONG

Absolutely incorrect. Court after court in state after state have thrown these cases out. Police officers have no expectation of privacy in a public place. They are public servants in a public place and there is no need to get their permission for recording their activities in any form, either audio or visual.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

25. Thanks, but DRoseDARs posted some information. You are wrong, laws are still on the books.

Though some states have had laws struck down, in particular the Supreme Court case cited, the laws still remain on the books, and cops are enforcing them which is to be expected.

But if you think I'm capital letters wrong, then feel free to become a test case. More power to those people willing to stand up for rights, as I said above. At the same time, I don't fault people who take care of their personal safety and their family's financial stability by not becoming test cases.

Further, as DRoseDARs mentions, there are states that have laws requiring both parties to a conversation to agree to recording it before it is a legal recording. I'm not sure that has been tested.

Do you have information about that and a theory as to how it applies?

[Th1onein]

27. Those laws pertain to PRIVATE conversations. Understand now?

This situation and all others in which cops are being PUBLICLY video and audiotaped are in PUBLIC places, where NO ONE has the expectation of privacy. The fact that the "laws are still on the books" does not automatically mean that those laws APPLY to these situations, and in fact, they do NOT.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

28. Those all parties must consent laws are for surreptitious recordings and are being misused by the...

... the police. Some of the charges are actually "wiretapping" charges for Christ sake.

Clearly a "wire tap" law wasn't meant to prohibit filming in public but that doesn't stop cops from abusing the laws. It's what they do. Cops have a saying: "you can beat the rap but you won't beat the ride"

In a lot of cases, cops know damn well they won't get a conviction but they arrest anyway. There is a DUer with several cases against the Miami police for illegal arrests.

Illinois took it a step further to actually amend wiretap law to protect the police. As you noted, it was struck down.

As for your comments about sensitive information being broadcast and picked up by video. Then the cops should keep a better lid on what they broadcast over their radios that can be picked up by video (or a criminal) in a PUBLIC place. It's not like these citizen videographers are barging in to the poice stations to film goings on there.

[Mariana]

29. Can't anyone with a scanner listen in on that radio traffic?

And can't they (legally) record whatever said scanner picks up, for that matter?

[Hassin Bin Sober]

30. Good points.

[Logical]

13. Many cops are bullies and clueless.

[A HERETIC I AM]

19. Majority. n/t

[tblue37]

22. And hyped up on roids. nt

[Matariki]

17. Someone needs to make a phone app that instantly uploads video & audio as it's captured.

[The Straight Story]

18. there is one (nt)

[Matariki]

20. What is it?

[Sirveri]

35. One is CopWatch. The other is OpenWatch.

http://boingboing.net/2011/06/24/copwatch-and-openwat.html

Can read up on them here. Google or your app store will get you access.

[treestar]

24. From watching COPS

I had the impression the police themselves record everything now for their own protection. There is a lot of film from the front of a police car.

[gitgeeks]

32. situation!!

This situation and all others in which cops are being PUBLICLY video and audiotaped are in PUBLIC places, where NO ONE has the expectation of privacy. The fact that the "laws are still on the books" does not automatically mean that those laws APPLY to these situations, and in fact, they do NOT.

architects in gurgaon

[Turborama]

33. Welcome to DU!

Interesting observation.

What does interior design have to do with any of this, though?

[In_The_Wind]

36. Hello ~ gitgeeks. I hope you find all that you are looking for at DU.

[img][/img]

In The Wind
[img][/img]

[Turborama]

37. Hiya, ITW!

Love that pic, stealing!

[In_The_Wind]

38. You may not remember NY99. I collected so many welcomes back then.

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

steal alway

[Rhiannon12866]

40. Believe she hasn't been here since mid-2007

But she was my first friend on DU, welcomed me on my very first post.

[In_The_Wind]

41. We never became friends ~ NY99 that is. She was a wonderful part of DU.

[Rhiannon12866]

42. She was indisputably the best!

A kind heart, a welcoming spirit and incredibly helpful, especially to newbies (as I was at the time - 2003). I don't know if I would have had the nerve to stick around without her and my other supportive first friend, God_bush_and_cheney. I miss them both still...

[In_The_Wind]

43. I totally agree.

I never got to know God_bush_and_cheney.



I'll try to welcome more of the newbies to DU.
It means so much to a new DUer ~~~

[URL=.html][IMG][/IMG][/URL]

From in the wind ~~~

[Rhiannon12866]

44. Yes, you did.

He later changed his DU screen name to Andy Stephenson.

[In_The_Wind]

45. I still have emails from Andy Stephenson

[img][/img]

[Rhiannon12866]

46. I'd have to check, but I think most of mine were on DU.1

I managed to save them at one point, but that was a couple of computers ago.

[In_The_Wind]

48. I can forward them to you if you wish. They're from Andy's yahoo support group.

[IMG][/IMG]

[img][/img]

His light will always shine in my heart ~ may he rest in peace.

[JesterCS]

34. I need to start

carrying a pocket constitution and an excerpt about it being legal to videotape/audiotape situations such as this.

If I'm pulled over on any road, it should be 100% legal to CYA ( cover your ass ). There is NO expectation of privacy on any public road.

[Earth_First]

39. Be sure to have a swipe lock on your smartphone device...

LEO's cannot demand access to a phone with a swipe lock without a warrant.

[woo me with science]

47. K&R