still illegal to videotape? - DPChallenge Forums

Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Canon Mount

09/01/2011 11:06:05 AM · #1

even with the recent precedents being set that it is NOT illegal to video police in the public domain, they are still going through trying to make an example out of this guy.

kudos for him standing up for his and our rights, here hoping he doesn't get an idiot jury...

//www.infowars.com/man-faces-life-in-jail-for-recording-police/

DrAchoo

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

09/01/2011 11:27:46 AM · #2

On the one hand, I agree with him that similar cases have been thrown out in other states (most recently in Florida as posted). On the other hand, this guy obviously has an agenda and without watching the video I didn't see any details of the case. That always raises a red flag.

I'm at work, did the video go into the details?

Mike

Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Canon Mount

09/01/2011 11:57:36 AM · #3

the video is 3 local news reports. the reports also show many other similar cases, in fact the report goes on to say they, the news organization, were doing the same thing this man did, but they are protected under the constitution for being "journalists".

its interesting that no one for for the prosecution will talk about the case to the reporters.

adigitalromance

Nikon D750

Nikon AF-S NIKKOR 24-70mm f/2.8G ED

09/01/2011 12:10:40 PM · #4

Makes me want to walk around the police holding one of these.

Spork99

OM System OM-1

Canon EF 100mm f/2.8 USM Macro

09/01/2011 12:10:58 PM · #5

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Of course he has an agenda. Most people who stand up for their rights in the face of oppression have agendas. The Colonists fighing for independence had an agenda, MLK had an agenda etc.

DrAchoo

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

09/01/2011 01:59:45 PM · #6

Originally posted by Spork99:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:
On the one hand, I agree with him that similar cases have been thrown out in other states (most recently in Florida as posted). On the other hand, this guy obviously has an agenda and without watching the video I didn't see any details of the case. That always raises a red flag.

I'm at work, did the video go into the details?

Of course he has an agenda. Most people who stand up for their rights in the face of oppression have agendas. The Colonists fighing for independence had an agenda, MLK had an agenda etc.

I'm not saying his cause isn't just, I'm just saying people who write with such an obvious slant can leave out important details that detract from their cause. For example, the man could have been videotaping covertly, which may look very different under the law. I have no idea because I have no details from the case. That's all I'm saying.

Mike

Tamron SP 24-70mm f/2.8 Di VC USD Canon Mount

09/01/2011 02:09:20 PM · #7

Originally posted by DrAchoo:

Originally posted by Spork99:

Originally posted by DrAchoo:
On the one hand, I agree with him that similar cases have been thrown out in other states (most recently in Florida as posted). On the other hand, this guy obviously has an agenda and without watching the video I didn't see any details of the case. That always raises a red flag.

I'm at work, did the video go into the details?

Of course he has an agenda. Most people who stand up for their rights in the face of oppression have agendas. The Colonists fighing for independence had an agenda, MLK had an agenda etc.

I'm not saying his cause isn't just, I'm just saying people who write with such an obvious slant can leave out important details that detract from their cause. For example, the man could have been videotaping covertly, which may look very different under the law. I have no idea because I have no details from the case. That's all I'm saying.

i agree the article is slanted, but watch the video, the local news cast give a lot more info.

DrAchoo

Panasonic Lumix DMC-LX5

Canon EF 24-105mm f/4.0L IS

09/01/2011 02:24:21 PM · #8

Ya, I watched another video I found and agree it's a pretty abusive case. I hope he doesn't get screwed and justice prevails.

09/01/2011 06:34:43 PM · #9

As with all things involving legal issues, the matter will remain before the courts until such time as the prosecution either opts not to proceed with such matters, or the Supreme Court sets a precedent that must be adhered by all.

I watched a portion of the news cast and really got a kick at the suggestion that this person could be incarcerated for 75 years. Most instances involving multiples charges result in sentences that are concurrent (eg: 15X5 =75)...that too is a bit of a slant.

Ray

09/01/2011 06:35:06 PM · #10

...double post.

Ray

Message edited by author 2011-09-01 18:35:33.

09/01/2011 06:36:26 PM · #11

Originally posted by mike_311:

its interesting that no one for for the prosecution will talk about the case to the reporters.

...could it be that they did not wish to "Prejudice" the case?

Ray

Canon EF 70-200mm f/2.8L IS USM

09/06/2011 05:29:03 AM · #12

Originally posted by mike_311:

...I guess we will simply have to wait till the Supreme Court renders a decision to finally hear the end of this type of outrageous activities.

While it is true that the police actions are reprehensible, one has to wonder about the reasons why the attorneys pursue such matters... surely they know better.

Ray

amsterdamman

Canon EOS-5D

09/06/2011 06:03:42 AM · #13

Another painful example of authority using force and the intimidation of the system to oppress the people.
One simple evolution for the oppressed people would be to disable the audio recording portion of the video camera.
Then they are perfectly legal, period. You do not need to hear police excessive force being used, the visual is more than powerful enough.
I wouldn't be surprised if the media corporations resist making non-audio recording difficult to do.
They are, after all, deep in the control, fear and depression business (great for viewers and advertising dollars) That story, after these commercial messages...

BrennanOB

Canon EOS-1D Mark II

Tamron SP AF 28-75mm f/2.8 XR Di for Canon

09/06/2011 01:26:15 PM · #14

Originally posted by RayEthier:

I watched a portion of the news cast and really got a kick at the suggestion that this person could be incarcerated for 75 years. Most instances involving multiples charges result in sentences that are concurrent (eg: 15X5 =75)...that too is a bit of a slant.

Ray

Which is the part you can't take as being too slanted? The part where they tell you the maximum prison sentence he could be facing? While only 25% of prisoners in California are serving consecutive sentences, I would not ignore news stories that talked about them as being too slanted to be worthy of attention. I for one do not find it funny that the D.A. felt it was worth charging the man with a video camera with 5 class one felonies.

Of course you are right, he will never serve 75 years. For this man, given his age and weight, anything over twenty years amounts to a sentence of life in prison. I wonder if his case would be any worse if he had shot the police with a gun rather than a camera.