Questioned by the FBI and Local Police

[JBrunner]

God I love this---it is amazing how some people can read something and come away with something quite the opposite---not even the same direction.

NO ONE SAID PHOTOGRAPHY IS ILLEGAL-----NO ONE

And last time I checked--when LE went out and questioned david b that was "good old fashioned police work" going out and investigating. I pretty much can guarantee this was not random---LE probable got a call from someone and they went out to do some good old fashioned police work and find out what the photographer was up to. Guess what they decided he was up to nothing big through that good old fashioned police work you wondered about. It's just not the good old fashioned police work is not what you think it is.

It's not, and this is not an isolated incident, just one that was handled politely. Last year, here in Salt Lake, a photographer was arrested. She was released and an apology was issued.

The problem remains. It's not just photography, I'm not as myopic as you think, just being OT. It is the entire birth of a surveillance society we are witnessing. Warrantless wire taps, sneak and peak entry, secret lists, random questioning, detention with out charge or habeas corpus, and so on. Look this stuff up, these are facts, not some black helicopter web crud.
Meanwhile, you feel safe. Yeah, safer than ever when the cage is finished.

 

[23mjm]

It's not, and this is not an isolated incident, just one that was handled politely. Last year, here in Salt Lake, a photographer was arrested. She was released and an apology was issued.

The problem remains. It's not just photography, I'm not as myopic as you think, just being OT. It is the entire birth of a surveillance society we are witnessing. Warrantless wire taps, sneak and peak entry, secret lists, random questioning, detention with out charge or habeas corpus, and so on. Look this stuff up, these are facts, not some black helicopter web crud.
Meanwhile, you feel safe. Yeah, safer than ever when the cage is finished.

Jd please read post 141

Brunner--I do hear what you are saying but a lot of these incidents start with Joe average citizen calling because they are paranoid that everyone is a terrorist--why they are that way is another topic. So when you as Joe citizen call the police to report something that you think needs looking into and the police stay at the station because no crime has been committed yet--thats OK?? You would expect them to investigate--ask questions. Like they did in david b incident.

I don't believe in all that black helicopter crap I also don't believe that everyone is a terrorist, but I do believe that LE should not be stopped for good old police work. Asking a question. Like a have said I work for the Fire Department and you should hear the calls we get BUT we have to go out and do our job, we can't triage them in the station! We roll out and have a look see ask questions---sometimes someone passed out is a car is just taking a nap---but we roll as if there is a grave medical emergency, why because there just might be one. And thats the way you the public would want it.

As for the thingy in SLT don't know what happen and truth be told don't care there are 3 sides to every store your, mine, and the truth. Maybe the police over reacted maybe she did or maybe both did.

Hell I want the government to wire tap my phones they seam to waste our money on everything else why not waste a little on me for a change

Viva la Bush---bringing stupidity to levels never thought achievable by one man!!!!!

 

[el wacho]

more crack please.

btw the black helicopter crap is actually white helicopter crap.

 

[el wacho]

....

 

[Andy K]

It is the entire birth of a surveillance society we are witnessing. Warrantless wire taps, sneak and peak entry, secret lists, random questioning, detention with out charge or habeas corpus, and so on. Look this stuff up, these are facts, not some black helicopter web crud.
Meanwhile, you feel safe. Yeah, safer than ever when the cage is finished.

Not to mention here in Britain calls from the police for a nationwide DNA database with everyone in Britain on it... calls for a compulsory biometric ID card... CCTV on every street corner and every road, with new versions being rolled out that listen to public conversation and others that have speakers to admonish people should they drop litter or light a cigarette in the wrong place... government agencies using lie detectors during phone calls with benefit claimants...


and not a helicopter or terrorist in sight.

An interesting article on how the British are sleepwalking into a virtually totalitarian state, all the time repeating the mantra 'If you've nothing to hide you've nothing to fear...'. If it is happening here, you can guarantee it is happening across the pond.

 

[Nigel]

The problem remains. It's not just photography, I'm not as myopic as you think, just being OT. It is the entire birth of a surveillance society we are witnessing. Warrantless wire taps, sneak and peak entry, secret lists, random questioning, detention with out charge or habeas corpus, and so on. Look this stuff up, these are facts, not some black helicopter web crud.

But, if this is the problem that concerns you, it is not a recent problem. The steady erosion of freedom would have started much earlier. I would point to the LBJ administration as the post WWII period when it became apparent but perhaps we should consider McCarthy's role and the administration of Harry Truman. Also consider the militarization of the police under the Clinton administration as well as the passage of the Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996.

My point is that although it is popular to blame the current administration for an erosion of freedom. If the erosion has been happening, then it has been a long process. It is a bipartisan problem in that the vast majority of political parties have a broad interst in increasing the scope and power of government which decreases freedom. The only real solutions are either to vote for parties and candidates that will decrease the scope of government, or have a revolution every 2-300 years.

Damn, did I just get myself added to (another) government watch list?

 

[richard ide]

I think everyone should click on the link in Sean's post #5 on page 1 of this thread and also send it to everyone you know. It is amazing how short a time span is necessary to accomplish major (irreversible??) damage.
Hopefully we are not all screwed but it is beginning to look like it.

 

[snegron]

Interesting topic. What I don't understand about the fear some agencies have toward people photographing landmarks is that most images (very accurate ones) can be found on Google Earth!

I understand why local police would be concerned about someone taking pictures near children, especially a "stranger". I think that most parents would want law enforcement intervention before some pervert got ahold of pictures of their kids at the park.

As far as the bus stop images, that is a different story. Who's to say that they were expecting someone in that area and were waiting for the suspect to show, when suddenly the OP showed up with his camera? It could have been bad timing. After all, has anyone ever actually seen an FBI agent "on patrol" randomly checking out with people? Nope, neither have I. The FBI rarely responds to a bank robbery which is a federal offense, let alone check out with suspicious looking average citizens. My guess is that they probably were conducting an investigation and the OP happened to walk in during their surveillance. They were probably a bit upset because maybe they thought that a man standing with a camera and tripod "looked like an FBI agent" and would scare off the suspect!

Private security guards are a different story though. I have had one too many encounters with them in the past and realized that they are more likely to violate your civil rights than a police officer. Security guards are not required to study law and police procedures as much as an average police officer, therefore, they act according to the role they conjured up in their immagination.

I usually have several business cards with me and a few brochures of my business when photographing out doors. If I am encountered by local law enforcement I am able to prove who I am and what I am doing. The best way to deal with law enforcement is with politeness and courtesy. They are trained to respond to aggression. If you are nice, they will be nice. Good luck with security guards though...

 

[Nigel]

Private security guards are a different story though. I have had one too many encounters with them in the past and realized that they are more likely to violate your civil rights than a police officer. Security guards are not required to study law and police procedures as much as an average police officer, therefore, they act according to the role they conjured up in their immagination.

Private security have no authority to detain you, question you, or even ask you to identify yourself. The most private security can do is ask you to leave private property. If you are already on public property and are being harrassed by private security, your best recourse to to call the police.

 

[snegron]

Private security have no authority to detain you, question you, or even ask you to identify yourself. The most private security can do is ask you to leave private property. If you are already on public property and are being harrassed by private security, your best recourse to to call the police.

I agree. Problem is that once police show up they can have you "officially trespassed" from that location and not permitted to return, ever! Many security guards tend to be overzelous when it comes to "their territory".

No too long ago I had a run in with a security guard at a public, state -owned university in Puerto Rico while visiting the island. I was shooting pictures of my cousin and her fiance sitting in front of the main clock tower (a tourist attraction photographed many times a day by groups of visitors), when I was confronted by a security guard.

She told me that I was not allowed to photograph professionally at that location. All I had was one Nikon DSLR with a 28-105 lens (not even the hood attatched), no tripod. I have seen tourists with bigger, more expensive equipment at that location! I tried telling her that these were my cousins and that I was shooting them for fun (even they tried explaining to her), but she wouldn't budge. She stood her ground and told us that we all had to vacate the premises immediately. She then brought in a couple of other guards. I realized that logic and politeness would not win this argument, so I simply told her that I would leave as soon as I felt I was done and continued shooting.

I continued shooting despite noticing that the guards appeared to have been turning several shades of irate red. My cousin and her fiance decided to leave because they were uncomfortable with the guards standing by and staring at them.

I don't know if the security guard thought that I was a pro trying to sneak a portrait shot without getting the propper permit, or if she thought that we were a group of terrorists trying to plan an attack. All I had was the camera with a lens and a small (very small) camera bag. Maybe I have that "pro look" about me! Or maybe I just look like an evil terrorist! Who knows!

 

[Removed Account]

Not to mention here in Britain calls from the police for a nationwide DNA database with everyone in Britain on it... calls for a compulsory biometric ID card... CCTV on every street corner and every road, with new versions being rolled out that listen to public conversation and others that have speakers to admonish people should they drop litter or light a cigarette in the wrong place... government agencies using lie detectors during phone calls with benefit claimants...


and not a helicopter or terrorist in sight.

An interesting article on how the British are sleepwalking into a virtually totalitarian state, all the time repeating the mantra 'If you've nothing to hide you've nothing to fear...'. If it is happening here, you can guarantee it is happening across the pond.

I think I'm going to vomit...

 

[Nigel]

I agree. Problem is that once police show up they can have you "officially trespassed" from that location and not permitted to return, ever! Many security guards tend to be overzelous when it comes to "their territory". p

I don't see the problem. As previously stated, all private security can do is ask you to leave private property. On public property, call the police. You can't be trespassing on public property. Of course, on private property, if you are asked to leave by the owner or their agent (private security) and you don't, you are trespassing.

 

[MP_Wayne]

OK, now for my dumb question. -- If he threatened to call the police, then backed off, why didn't you call the police? You were in a public place, minding your own business and were being harrassed. I certainly would have called the cops and explained in my complaint that I was being harrassed by some deranged bozo who was threatening me.

Hi Nigel,
A good question. I had enjoyed success in 4x5 View Camera "action" photography shooting a vintage steam train in motion. SO, I thought I might try something similar shooting landing aircraft very near the end of their approach. This public location afforded me the opportunity to try this experiment of presetting the camera with film and then awaiting a low flying aircraft.

The reason I elected to give up is that this "bozo" told me that the Operations Manager of the airport had diverted traffic from Runway 16-34 (I was shooting aircraft landing on 34) to Runway 10-28. The winds that day from the NNW supported either runway and the my traffic had been pretty sparse. Whether what he said was true or not, the fact was that I had only managed to get one shot attempt in over 2 hours.

Had there been more air traffic, I would have stood my ground more firmly. I opted to save that battle for a more productive day. I will try it again soon and see what happens.

 

[JBrunner]

No terrosists in my bran flakes this morning. I guess the random paranoa is having an effect on them. I did see a guy in an Al-Qaeda T-shirt yesterday, but he got away before I could call the rangers on my cell phone.

 

[23mjm]

Private security have no authority to detain you, question you, or even ask you to identify yourself. The most private security can do is ask you to leave private property. If you are already on public property and are being harrassed by private security, your best recourse to to call the police.

NIgel---your half right (at least in California) If you are on public property a private security guard has no authority so if they do confront you, just remind them you are on public property and they have no authority. BUT on private property that a different story, they can detain you until the proper LE shows up, it happens all the time at stores, shopping malls, amusement parks, and stadiums. All they have to say is they want to charge you with trespassing. You as a citizen can legally detain someone---if a bad guy breaks into your house you can detain them with reasonable force until the police show up, you can also do it if you witness a crime, like a guy punches his girlfriend in an argument on the street. Would you want to?? That is only a question you can answer. If I were to witness an attempted child kidnapping I would give chase and if I could detain the person I would in a heart beat and I would be well with in my rights to do so.


As far as Private Security Guards---if you really want to piss them off, ask then " So you couldn't pass the Physc-exam to be a real cop so you became a rent-a-pig" Yea that I'll piss em off but you are just exercising your 1st amendment rights.

 

[23mjm]

No terrosists in my bran flakes this morning. I guess the random paranoa is having an effect on them. I did see a guy in an Al-Qaeda T-shirt yesterday, but he got away before I could call the rangers on my cell phone.

J-go read post #177 david b incedent most likely wasn't random as you keep stating--infact most are not random I would bet.

I said "most" not all

 

[MP_Wayne]

Jd please read post 141 I do hear what you are saying but a lot of these incidents start with Joe average citizen calling because they are paranoid that everyone is a terrorist--why they are that way is another topic. So when you as Joe citizen call the police to report something that you think needs looking into and the police stay at the station because no crime has been committed yet--thats OK?? You would expect them to investigate--ask questions. Like they did in david b incident.

I have read the comments between 23mjm and several other posters with interest. 23mjm, while I respect and PARTIALLY agree with your point that good police work involves investigation on tips from the public. LE cannot be everywhere. While I believe the public should be vigilant, I think too they have been "over-amped" with a fear campaign, but that is another topic. I want to focus of this post to be on "good" police work.

I was an active duty police officer very early in my working career, and a key investigative tool in our training was the skill of observation before intervention. Therefore, no one here is suggesting that LE should not respond to public tips by staying in the station. The real issue is how they respond.

We were taught to respond and observe the situation before deciding to intervene - ESPECIALLY when the situation was innocuous. Before I receive a flurry of posts suggesting inactivity, this is not the case. If we responded to a public call that someone was trying to break into a car (even if it turned out to the owner), we would immediately intervene. Or if two individuals were in a wrestling match that could have turned out to be friendly, there would be immediate intervention after virtually instantaneous observation and assessment of the situation. As a civilian, I was changing a tire, in the dark, late at night when I was checked by an officer. He wanted to be sure I was ok. As I was on the side of a public thoroughfare and although I was not doing anything illegal, his observation would have then switched to assistance mode and he was justified to verify my well-being. Again, good police work and public service.

The sight of someone taking photographs would not justify a direct intervention unless that person had his tripod set up in a hazardous location (like in the middle of the street) or on private property. The notion that public buildings are somehow "targets" is absurd given the previously posted sources of photographs available extensively throughout the web. As a police officer, observe certainly, but go up and harass him/her with questions? No, that is intrusive.

If this is permitted for photography, where will it end? The OP is standing in the same place sketching a street scene (as an artist) and gets hassled? Or the OP is hassled for filling in notes in his daytimer, at that same place, as he happened to have a creative thought about some business problem totally unrelated. This is a slippery slope where potentially the act of 3 people standing together conversing becomes a suspicious assembly. Welcome to Germany in the late 1930s!

Back to the point about good police work. Contrast the hassle I received (as outlined in a previous posting by me) for photographing NOTHING of national security importance. Two police officers harassing me on a public street corner, questioning what I was doing and still demanding ID after I provided a completely plausible, polite reply, and then running my ID through the car computer when I complied (for expediency).

Then, on a completely different occasion, I am a mile or so outside a nearby town waiting to photograph a steam train due to go by on a single set of rail tracks. No one is around me for several miles/kms. My car is safely parked off the road on an approach to a farmers field. My tripod is set-up in the ditch well off the gravel road and the rail tracks with my MF RB67 on it, awaiting the steam train. During that time, someone must have called me in, as a local police car from that nearly town (I still know the car codes) comes up and stops about 1/2 mile away from me. She watched me for a bit, then she drives by on the road, has a quick look at what I am doing, and then drives off. THAT is GOOD police work. There was NO REASON for her to stop and question me. THAT is what should have happened to the OP - not getting rousted with intrusive questions by the FBI. If I had been on the rail tracks that day, then I was a trespasser and a hazard on private property and THAT would justify a full LE intervention.

I remain convinced that our freedoms are being eroded by sloppy and intrusive police work encouraged by draconian legislation changes driven by keeping an ignorant public amped up with unnecessary fear. Unfortunately, we photographers, by virtue of the curse of the visibility of our tripods, are an EASY and ACCESSIBLE first-order target for this type of harassment and intrusion. We should be Ghandi-like in our non-violent resistance to this unwarranted harassment when engaging in a perfectly legal pursuit in a so-called "free" society.

 

[MP_Wayne]

I did see a guy in an Al-Qaeda T-shirt yesterday, but he got away before I could call the rangers on my cell phone.

JBrunner - your comment is a classic and put a smile on my face today. Thanks!

 

[23mjm]

MP--

While I agree with a lot of what you say and you are welcome to your opinion. I have stated many many times that being questioned by the police is not harassment. I too have been question by the police and they were out doing their job, I was polite they were polite I went on taking pics they went to get coffee n donuts In my little world that we all share there is no problem with asking a question, but there is a problem with being harassed. The FBI were polite got their answers and went on their merry way. I hate this slippery slope argument people always give.....well if they do that then they will ban everything....it's a load of crap....it'a like saying well if they give cars speed limits it's the first step to banning cars. I own many firearms and I do believe there needs to be laws about firearms, but I don't believe that every new law means the next is going to ban firearms. Times change laws need to grow and change with the times some new laws will be introduced some will go away that has happened throughout the history of the USA. The diminishing availability of traditional B&W supplies is more troubling to me that being question by LE. Why because I feel it has more impact on my everyday life than a cops saying " hello so watch-ya doin"

 

[JBrunner]

There's our special friggin times again... the record is broken... I'm out. Ciao.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

No terrosists in my bran flakes this morning. I guess the random paranoa is having an effect on them. I did see a guy in an Al-Qaeda T-shirt yesterday, but he got away before I could call the rangers on my cell phone.

I seen one too an' got his pitchur--

He had a film camer an' everything.

 

[JBrunner]

I seen one too an' got his pitchur--


He had a film camer an' everything.

No doubt servelin the stashin.... we'd better gitim.

Hey wate a minit, wat you doin in the stashin w a camer? You must be anothr un....

 

[23mjm]

There's our special friggin times again... the record is broken... I'm out. Ciao.

I have to ask you a question and I really want to know the answer. I am not trying to be disrespectful but I feel I need to ask.

Can you read? Did you read my post? Or did you read what you wanted to read with no regard for what was actually written?

No where did I say "special times" or anything as such. I checked my record collection the "special times" wasn't in there. Sorry--

What I was trying to say is that things evolve through time we can not stay stagnate our law will evolve also they have to. So please read then comment and not comment on what you wanted me to say because it fits in to you argument.

Again no disrespect intended but I feel you are disrespecting me by miss quoting me so it fits you argument.

 

[MP_Wayne]

MP-- I have stated many many times that being questioned by the police is not harassment.... The diminishing availability of traditional B&W supplies is more troubling to me that being question by LE. Why because I feel it has more impact on my everyday life than a cops saying " hello so watch-ya doin"

23mjm, we'll have to agree to disagree and move on.

Being questioned by police whilst doing something legal is, in Canadian law, "unreasonable search and seizure", at least it was before 9/11 and subsequent dilution of that provision. Now, in the age of paranoia, any questioning or slight pushback gets one immediately identified as a troublemaker or worse.

Being questioned by police doing some that is legal is not justification for public rousting and questioning, and livingin a city that now has made spitting in public a crime (as a way to target homeless people without solving the root causes of the social problem of homelessness), it IS the start of a slippery slope.

I was harassed, unnecessarily in the first case (in an earlier posting) where demands were made for ID after providing a polite explanation of what I was doing (testing a new lens in a public place). With my past LE training, I recognized the pre-emptive action cues (one police officer positioning himself behind me, opening his handcuff pouch), when I was pushing back on the ID demand verbally. I knew the game was up and complied because I did not want to spend more time dealing with a potential "obstruction" charge. However, I was violated that day.

In an irony, when I mentioned this episode to my father, a retired 24 year member of the federal police in Canada, he was LIVID at this intrusion - even more so than me. And my father is so much more "Law and Order", in a conservative sense, than me. His reaction was surprising and refreshing as he has an acute sense of the difference between good police work and harassment.

23mjm, as I indicated earlier, I guess we will have to agree to disagree on this point. Thanks for your perpectives.

 

[MurrayMinchin]

I was escorted away from a place I was photographing once, and even had to climb a tree because the dude looked so unpredictable. I stayed in the tree until he calmed down, then when he got more interested in getting something to eat I gathered up my gear and skulked off. That'll be the last time I ever have a battle of wills with a teenage Moose

Murray - Living where people aren't crammed together and all uptight.