They have cams in pens already, just put it in a shirt pocket and your good to go. 
Woman arrested for filming police
-
- Thread starter c6h6o3
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale Very nice 300mm f/6.3 Komura Commercial in Copal 3S
- Started by Steve Goldstein
-
For Sale Very clean 90mm f/5.6 Super-Angulon in Copal 0
- Started by Steve Goldstein
-
Want to Buy Folding Pocket Kodak Plate Holders, Cut Film Sheaths, and Ground Glass
- Started by trichrome
Forum statistics
And the goons will also have access to it to use against us.
Sent from my SCH-I510 using Tapatalk
The "Sent from Phone" at the end there is classic (in the context of the comment).
Steve;
We agree, but the TV newsies seemed to think otherwise as does the city apparently. We just don't know yet what will happen.
PE
"TV newsies" ... well you know my opinion of journalists ...
I have said this before, and I will say it again, as more police officers find themselves becoming famous on You Tube and out of a job we are going to see stuff like this more and more.
Steve and PE. I don't ncesarily agree with your premise that "If one exceeds their authority while doing their job, the employer is not required to pay for the defense of the employee or any penalties." It seems like it should be that way but I don't think it really is. Where I live the police appear to be a city liability for actions of a police officer when they are actively working, whether on a scheduled shift or off-duty but acting under their sworn authority, because they are authorized to represent the city police department. The city is held responsible because "the city" failed to train adequately, monitor and manage adequately, and/or because the officer was rightfully representing himself to be using the city's authority in whatever action was being taken. As a taxpayer I seem to often end up paying both defense and liability costs for criminal action taken against police officers as well as the costs assoiated with the numerous "settlements" that keep our "boys in blue" out of jail. I believe that civil actions against police officers are matters in which they must foot the bill by themselves.
Last edited by a moderator:
She was asking for it... I think the officer had the right to ask her to move... she could have filmed from her porch.
They have the right to secure a perimeter even if that is "part" of your front yard.
If this really is a "Phone camera" she was waay too close, wether it is a traffic stop or a bank robbery.
I know of at least 8 Indiana officers that have been shot down and killed in "routine" traffic stops.
Too argumentative... (her). They had enough on their plate and she is arguing... they do have the right to ask her to move away.
You can argue with me... but she was being an idiot and she was given as I count 4 or 5 chances.
I have shot professionally for 20 years and have been "confronted" by police... if you are polite, and clear and concise about what you are doing they will either cut you slack, of stand their ground.
I am noting going to bash the officer in this case.
They have the right to secure a perimeter even if that is "part" of your front yard.
If this really is a "Phone camera" she was waay too close, wether it is a traffic stop or a bank robbery.
I know of at least 8 Indiana officers that have been shot down and killed in "routine" traffic stops.
Too argumentative... (her). They had enough on their plate and she is arguing... they do have the right to ask her to move away.
You can argue with me... but she was being an idiot and she was given as I count 4 or 5 chances.
I have shot professionally for 20 years and have been "confronted" by police... if you are polite, and clear and concise about what you are doing they will either cut you slack, of stand their ground.
I am noting going to bash the officer in this case.
Last edited by a moderator:
After reading the letters to the editor in this mornings Democrat and Chronicle, let me lead your attention to the posting on this site about the $250. ticket in NYC.
It is stuff like this that makes it important to all of us, that our rights to photograph not be stopped by some police man who finds it uncomfortable being photographed.
If it is all right for some people to attend political ralleys with loaded guns and the police do nothing about it, then I don't see the problem with photographing the police while standing in your own yard.
It is stuff like this that makes it important to all of us, that our rights to photograph not be stopped by some police man who finds it uncomfortable being photographed.
If it is all right for some people to attend political ralleys with loaded guns and the police do nothing about it, then I don't see the problem with photographing the police while standing in your own yard.
Again I have photographed police in action dozens of times with no issues, other than being asked for my credential.
Police need to control a situation... citizen journalists can not invade a reasonable perimeter.
YOU ARE ALL MISSING THE POINT,,,, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THE OFFICER WAS MORE CONCERNED WITH HER PROXIMITY NOT THE FACT SHE WAS POINTING A CAMERA. JUST DON"T POINT SHIT AT POLICE, MOST POLICE ARE AVERAGE JOES... ALL YOU PEOPLE AFRAID OF THE "MAN" DON'T CALL THEM IF YOU SHOULD EVER NEED THEM.
Also turn the table... say my daughter is beat up by an intruder... do I need my neighbors posting the "action" via phones on U-Tube... even if they filmed it from their front yards... get a life folks.
Police need to control a situation... citizen journalists can not invade a reasonable perimeter.
YOU ARE ALL MISSING THE POINT,,,, IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THE OFFICER WAS MORE CONCERNED WITH HER PROXIMITY NOT THE FACT SHE WAS POINTING A CAMERA. JUST DON"T POINT SHIT AT POLICE, MOST POLICE ARE AVERAGE JOES... ALL YOU PEOPLE AFRAID OF THE "MAN" DON'T CALL THEM IF YOU SHOULD EVER NEED THEM.
Also turn the table... say my daughter is beat up by an intruder... do I need my neighbors posting the "action" via phones on U-Tube... even if they filmed it from their front yards... get a life folks.
Ok... this is really messed up I will give you that!
Brian;
Please re-read my posts. I am more in agreement with you than with Steve based on the TV news reports.
PE
Please re-read my posts. I am more in agreement with you than with Steve based on the TV news reports.
PE
I don't believe that either. An employer is responsible for his employee's actions whilst in their employment.
Steve. (a different Steve to the Steve being quoted above).
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes, of course. I should have written, "I don't necesarily agree with Steve's (AKA Sirius Glass) premise that ..." instead of the all-inclusive "yours" since I addressed bith you and Steve simultaneously. Sorry.
Last edited by a moderator:
One of the few measured and reasonable replies here. It's not like she was filming the Rodney King tragedy... step away 10 feet and don't be all bitchy about it girl.
Yes, you are correct. And i can erase it if I choose.
But it is a new phone (2 days ago ), I am not overly concerned about this posting, and I'm tired of erasing it for now.
As soon as I figure out where the string is stored I'll insert a witty saying.
But your observation is absolutely correct. For the most part we are handing the goons the rope after we put the noose around our own neck.
Sent from my SCH-I510 using Tapatalk, but before I found where the witty saying locker lives!
I went though this dilemma back in October. I got too close because the lens I brought was too short. The police officer was nice and asked me to move back a little bit but never said I could not photograph him.
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)
How do I read the article?
Im sorry, this is my first time on this website, this topic is really interesting and I cannot seem to find the link to read the story...any help? Thanks!
Im sorry, this is my first time on this website, this topic is really interesting and I cannot seem to find the link to read the story...any help? Thanks!
Just to be clear (and a bit pedantic) no one can be arrested for filming police if it is not illegal to do so.
Steve.
Im sorry, this is my first time on this website, this topic is really interesting and I cannot seem to find the link to read the story...any help? Thanks!
Click on the word 'this' on the quote below:
In most professions, if an employee exceeds their authority and violates the law "in the pursuit of "doing their job", the employers will not defend them. The police are an exception because they are "special". As a result, they can, and some [not all] repeatedly flout the law because they know that they will not be punished. That is what I was obliquely referring to.
Steve, the better looking one
Nevermind, got it
MattKing
Moderator
With respect to the city's liability for police officer's actions, the law will vary from state to state, and country to country.
If it is the same as around here, the city's liability could arise in two different ways:
1) if they were specifically fulfilling the city's instructions, the city would be directly liable, along with the police officers themselves;
2) if they were acting within the general scope of their employment, the city would be vicariously liable, in addition to the police officer's direct liability.
The question of whether the city would be vicariously liable would be determined by whether the police were involved in actions that would normally be a part of their work? In this case (a traffic stop) it seems clear that they were. If they were filmed doing something totally inconsistent with their work (e.g. off duty water skiing) then the city would be unlikely to be found vicariously liable for the police officer's actions.
If both the city and the police officers were found liable, the liability would likely be what is known as joint and several - the woman would be entitled to seek payment for any award made from either the police officers or the city. She wouldn't be entitled to be paid twice, but if she elected to get all her money from the city, the city would have to pay.
The city may very well have a claim against the police officers for indemnification for what they had to pay out, but that might very well be almost worthless.
All of this is how it works where I am. In particular, the joint and several liability rules have been varied by legislation in a number of jurisdictions.
The city may or may not have insurance to cover some of this.
If it is the same as around here, the city's liability could arise in two different ways:
1) if they were specifically fulfilling the city's instructions, the city would be directly liable, along with the police officers themselves;
2) if they were acting within the general scope of their employment, the city would be vicariously liable, in addition to the police officer's direct liability.
The question of whether the city would be vicariously liable would be determined by whether the police were involved in actions that would normally be a part of their work? In this case (a traffic stop) it seems clear that they were. If they were filmed doing something totally inconsistent with their work (e.g. off duty water skiing) then the city would be unlikely to be found vicariously liable for the police officer's actions.
If both the city and the police officers were found liable, the liability would likely be what is known as joint and several - the woman would be entitled to seek payment for any award made from either the police officers or the city. She wouldn't be entitled to be paid twice, but if she elected to get all her money from the city, the city would have to pay.
The city may very well have a claim against the police officers for indemnification for what they had to pay out, but that might very well be almost worthless.
All of this is how it works where I am. In particular, the joint and several liability rules have been varied by legislation in a number of jurisdictions.
The city may or may not have insurance to cover some of this.
Thanks!!!
Steve, the better looking one
.... which is why my avatar image is my guitar!
Steve.
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |