Can cops demand to take your photo?

BetterSense

Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2008
Messages
3,151
Location
North Caroli
Format
35mm
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=92750

It seems to me that the real issue here is actually not about photography per-se. The man in the article was arrested because he refused to remove his hands from in front of his face so that the police could take his picture. He then spent 5 months in jail awaiting trial.

The real issue here is not the police photographing him but the police feeling that they can compel him to remove his hands from his face. Basically, they are saying that not only are they legally allowed to photograph you, but you are legally compelled to stand still, facing them, pose, and say cheese for it...without having committed any crime or anything. Of course they can arrest you and take your mug shot later, which exactly what they did.

It seems the shy subject got off with only 6 months in jail and a bunch of court fees...I guess he was lucky (sarcasm). But is there law in any other states about a citizen's requirement to comply with police's instructions on photography in particular? Sounds like it might be good to know.
 

BrianShaw

Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2005
Messages
16,523
Location
La-la-land
Format
Multi Format
Field Identification (FI), from what I understand, is a well-established policing practice... asking for proof of ID like a drivers license or other "official" ID is common even when no crime or violation of law puts a citizen in contact with law enforcement. They "like to know who they are talking to" is often the rationale. Sometimes they write the information down and retain it even when one isn't suspected, arrested or charged with the alleged commission of a crime/violation. Since legal ID has a photo associated with it I wonder why the officer felt he had a compelling need to take his own photo. This certainly is an odd case with an even odder conclusion. What if one turned around and faced the other direction rather than holding hands, arms, or the daily newspaper in front of ones face.. would that violate the new rules and be considered "obstruction of justice"?

From the article:
For those not charged with a crime, however, the policy states, "Individuals may not be required to remove their hands, or anything they are using to cover their faces so as to avoid being photographed."
 
OP
OP

BetterSense

Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2008
Messages
3,151
Location
North Caroli
Format
35mm
asking for proof of ID like a drivers license or other "official" ID is common even when no crime or violation of law puts a citizen in contact with law enforcement.
Click to expand...
True. But are you required to show it? To the best of my knowledge, you aren't actually required to carry official ID with you. It's just that most people do anyway.
 

nyoung

Member
Joined
Dec 10, 2006
Messages
388
Format
Medium Format
BetterSense said:
True. But are you required to show it? To the best of my knowledge, you aren't actually required to carry official ID with you. It's just that most people do anyway.
Click to expand...

This is common practice but legally a very questionable and "gray" area unless they are contemplating charging you with a crime.

SOP in Texas is that you must "identify yourself to an officer" however, that identification DOES NOT have to be substantiated by a document. Simply "politely" stating your name is all they can require you to do.

If you chose to identify yourself by something obviously untrue such a Donald Duck, you may be detained until your identity is established and possibly charged with "Failure to Identify" which IIRC can be a class B misdemeanor.

Because its a very marginal area constitutionally, lots of small time/ storefront lawyers are willing to fight the "Failure to Identify" charge.in county court and they are often successful.
 

BrianShaw

Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2005
Messages
16,523
Location
La-la-land
Format
Multi Format
BetterSense said:
True. But are you required to show it? To the best of my knowledge, you aren't actually required to carry official ID with you. It's just that most people do anyway.
Click to expand...

Good question. I've never asked the question, or refused to identify myself with the requested official ID. It doesn't seem like it would be worth the potential hassle. If one refuses to offer positive ID, can't they "take you downtown" until they can establish your identity? I think I've heard from TV shows. But you are right, there is no law (in our US) that seems to require that we carry ID.
 

domaz

Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2007
Messages
572
Location
Tacoma, WA
Format
Multi Format
He spent 5 months in jail because he didn't have money for bail?? Strange- almost anyone can go down to a bondsman and dig up the cash to get a loved one/friend out of jail. He most not have been well liked.
 

archphoto

Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2008
Messages
960
Location
Holland and
Format
4x5 Format
For those planning to travel to Holland and Europe: you are required to carry a proof of indentification (pasport, not a drivers licence) with you at all times when you are outside your house and show it to a police officer when requested.
You can de detained and fined if you can not do so.

Peter
 

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
50,359
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format
Back in the 70's I was hitchhiking to work with my helmet and motorcycle jacket to work after I dropped off my motorcycle for repair work. The motorcycle cop wanted my driver's license. Since I was on foot and I did not want a ticket, I gave him my draft card. He was not happy because he could not write a ticket to a draft card. So he demanded my driver's license and said that the draft card was not a valid form of identification.

I pointed out that the back of the draft card stated that I could be fined $10,000 for not carrying it with me. The draft card was required by the US government. And that there is no requirement that one must have a driver's license in California. Finally, US laws are higher than California laws.

After he stewed for a couple of minutes, he gave me a lecture about hitchhiking and finished with a verbal warning.

Steve
 

BrianShaw

Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2005
Messages
16,523
Location
La-la-land
Format
Multi Format
That's hilarious, Steve. You're right, of course, but I think a "valid goverment ID" is expected to have the following attributes: issued by a government organization, a current & clear photograph, and an expiration date.
 

k_jupiter

Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2004
Messages
2,569
Location
san jose, ca
Format
Multi Format
BrianShaw said:
That's hilarious, Steve. You're right, of course, but I think a "valid goverment ID" is expected to have the following attributes: issued by a government organization, a current & clear photograph, and an expiration date.
Click to expand...

Just remember, back in the 70's not all drivers licenses had photos. I drank in many a bar as an under aged indulger in California because my Maryland Drivers license had no photo and was totally incomprehensible without studying it for several minutes as to the age of the bearer.

Did I feel bad about breaking the law? Nope, I could legally drink in MD and couldn't figure out why a progressive state like CA wouldn't let us.

tim in san jose
 

BobNewYork

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2008
Messages
1,067
Location
Long Island,
Format
Medium Format
You go Stevie!!

I continue to be amazed at what the police get away with. There's no doubt it's easier to comply but then let's cut the crap about the constitution.

I'm amazed at the final comment in the article: "We're very pleased," Dye said, "that officers will now be able to do their job in a constitutionally correct way." Now be able? They've always been able - they just didn't!

As for the guy not posting bail, he took a flyer that he'd have a successful lawsuit - the damages would presumably be less had he been out on bail. Just shows that there's more than an ethics question here. We as taxpayers are required to pay for poor policing tactics.

Bob H
 
Last edited by a moderator:

BrianShaw

Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2005
Messages
16,523
Location
La-la-land
Format
Multi Format

I think you are right on both counts. But most cops, and their departments as well, wouldn't know "constitutionally correct" unless it bit them in the ass.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Sirius Glass

Subscriber
Joined
Jan 18, 2007
Messages
50,359
Location
Southern California
Format
Multi Format

Or you could have driven to Washington DC and drank beer or wine at age 18 legally at that time.

I remember the yellow/orange on white Maryland drivers' licenses. Better than the white on black which was a photocopy of the application form that they used before that.

Steve
 

k_jupiter

Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2004
Messages
2,569
Location
san jose, ca
Format
Multi Format

Drive five miles downtown to my local bar... or 60 miles to DC. Music was often better in DC (Georgetown) but the beer was cheaper in Westminster.

tim in san jose
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…