The video taken by Hartford appears to show that the officers only arrested the original student because Hartford began filming. One officer, who began dancing when the camera was turned on, looked into the camera and said, “Watch this.” He then asked the student who they were questioning whether he was with Hartford. When the student replied yes, the officer turned to another officer and said, “Cuff him up.”
Article from The Quinnipiac Chronicle
This past weekend, the One Nation Working Together march was held on the National Mall in Washington, DC as an event to build a more united America fueled by hope not hate. But for Human Events reporter Emily Miller, her day was filled with nothing but hate. She was repeatedly attacked by an unknown woman who did not want Miller recording her.
According to Human Events:
The reporter, Emily Miller, was first hit from behind while she was taping Rangel as the Harlem congressman glad-handed supporters in front of the Lincoln Memorial. Miss Miller is heard on the video saying, “Please don’t hit me.” The protester proceeds to yell at the reporter, “Well get out of the way! What do you think this is? A–hole.” The activist was attempting to meet Rangel herself. Miss Miller continued videotaping the event, when suddenly the same unhinged protester lunged at her, hit her on the arm, and yelled, “Don’t take my picture.”
Isn’t it wonderful knowing that this unknown woman will now be “attacked” via YouTube.
Article via Human Events
Photo by Shawn Nee / discarted (Used to show that photographs of patients and ambulances are not illegal)
Justin Kenward, photo editor of the Chaffey College student newspaper, The Breeze, is facing criminal charges (that will likely be dropped by a level-headed judge on October 18), after photographing a car accident victim near the school’s newsroom.
According to the Student Press Law Center, Kenward began photographing the victim as he was being loaded into the ambulance on a stretcher by emergency personel. Kenward claims that the victim did not have an issue with being photographed, and that the man (who was talking on his cell phone at the time) even smiled and waved at him. But fire personnel attending to the patient are saying the opposite, claiming that the man objected to being photographed and that Kenward was interfering with them.
“Firefighter medics reported that while they were attending to a person experiencing chest pain, a photographer began taking photographs of the patient despite the patient’s objections, and allegedly interfered with the care of the patient,” according to a press release from Chaffey College.
According to SPLC’s report, a paramedic then told Kenward he was not allowed to photograph the patient due to doctor-patient confidentially. So Kenward obliged and moved back.
Minutes later, campus cadets arrived on scene, and like fire personnel, told the photo editor that he could not photograph the incident. However, Kenward identified himself as press, which caused the cadets to walk away.
“I took that as a green light and continued shooting,” Kenward said.
However, at that point, another firefighter again told Kenward he could not take pictures.
He was about twenty feet away when a firefighter said no pictures were allowed. Kenward argued with the man, took down his name and went inside.
Putting morals aside (which is simply one man’s opinion versus another man’s opinion), photographing a victim inside of an ambulance, which still has its doors open, is not against the law, nor does it violate doctor-patient confidentially. And how can someone even argue that this does violate doctor-patient confidentiality when a doctor isn’t even present? Is it maybe because this paramedic was inventing a non-existent law based on their own morals, rather than following actual law? Possibly.
But if the paramedics’ claims are true, and the victim did object to being photographed, it doesn’t matter because the accident occurred in public where an expectation of privacy does not exist. Which means, anybody (including accident victims) can be photographed despite their objections. So it appears these paramedics, firefighters, and campus cadets need training regarding photographers’ rights and the First Amendment.
Seriously though, when are firefighters and police officers going to realize that they are not victim watchdogs in charge of censoring anybody trying to document an incident scene that involves injured people? That is not their job. Nor is it their job to threaten college reporters with expulsion if they do not kowtow to their unlawful demands, such as what one officer tried to get Kenward to do.
Shortly after, an emergency team member came in with a police officer. Kenward, the newspaper adviser and a Breeze reporter spent about an hour discussing the matter with the police. The officer wanted the images but the group refused. Kenward said the officer threatened to expel him from campus for two weeks if he did not hand over a copy of images.
Thankfully, the officer’s threats had no effect on Kenward who held strong to his position and did not hand over the photos.
“I knew he wasn’t able to actually expel me, that’s up to the school board,” Kenward said.
More important, law enforcement does not have the legal authority to demand the images either. Especially in California, which has very strict shield laws that protect journalists from the prying eyes and hands of cops. Greg Leslie, an attorney for Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press explains:
“You cannot seize the work product — including notes and photographs — even if you have a search warrant,” Leslie said. “The proper route would be for them to subpoena the photos.”
Greg continues, bolstering the fact that law enforcement or firefighters can not prevent photographers (or anybody as a matter of fact) from documenting accident or crime scenes, including when victims are inside ambulances:
“You can always take pictures at a crime scene, but you can’t interfere,” Leslie said. “Even taking pictures inside an ambulance is not necessarily illegal.”
But despite all of that, the unknown officer did not relent and eventually returned hours later, charging Kenward with “interfering with a firefighter and disobeying an order from a firefighter.” Which, as we all know, are your standard “contempt of cop” charges that all cops use when somebody hasn’t violated any laws but stood up for their rights and didn’t acquiesce to their imperious tactics and empty threats.
“I wanted to scream,” Kenward said.
So do we.
Article via SPLC
You know what, Carol Williams, I don’t care if you lose your job because you were dumb enough to step in front of a moving vehicle and have your gorilla foot run over by Paris Hilton’s boyfriend because he was blinded by hundreds of your buddies’ strobes. If I was there during your pleas to not be photographed, I would’ve shot away and posted your image all over the place because you are not partially at fault for this accident—this was ALL YOUR FAULT! And thankfully your image IS being plastered all over internet because of your stupidity.
What a hypocrite you are to tell someone not to photograph you while in public! When your own job requires you to chase down celebrities and photograph them against their will. More important, in the process of harassing celebrities, you violate various laws to get your precious photos. Just curious, would you have stopped photographing Ms. Hilton if she had asked you to stop?
And how do we even know that you didn’t intentionally get run over so you could file a frivolous lawsuit against Cy Waits and Paris Hilton and settle out of court for some big payout that you don’t deserve? Personally, I can’t wait to see you get fired and charges pressed against you and your photog gang for being a menace.
For the record, I strongly support photographers (including law-abiding paps) and their right to photograph people in public without consent. But when someone breaks the law to get their images, gets injured in the process, and then tells people not photograph her (as if the rules don’t apply anymore). Well, that just irks the hell out of me.
Here’s another angle of the accident with a nice long shot of Carol Williams—the law-breaking paparazzi who caused this mess.
Photo from City of Kentwood’s website
So it looks like a small town mayor and his utilities manager picked the wrong bees nest to throw a rock at, and are now learning things the hard way via the World Wide Web (social media).
If you haven’t heard yet, Ed Heil, a 40-year-old amateur photographer (terrorist), was caught last week photographing the City of Kentwood’s water tower (“high profile terrorist target”). His “nerdy” hobby (suspicious activity) brought the wrath of the city’s utility workers (vigilantes) who followed Heil all the way to the library (terrorist hideout) where they harassed and threatened him until he finally caved in and gave up his name to these “brave patriots” (self-anointed assholes).
But rather than apologize to Heil for the utilities workers’ behavior, Richard Root, Kentwood’s mayor (fascist leader) praised their actions:
Mayor Richard Root said no one takes chances any more. He said he was proud of city workers for their diligence, adding that they responded appropriately.
Long story short—everybody on the internet (especially photographers) who can think clearly and see right through the last decade of terrorism hysteria and Homeland Security (Theater), are rightfully annoyed. But not JDnew (see the comment he left on our original post).
So a group of photographers (al-Qaeda sympathizers) from the Grand Rapids, Michigan, flickr group are organizing a photowalk (recon mission) this week to show Mayor Root and the town’s utilities manager, John Gorney, that they can’t push photographers around and get away with it.
To get in on the action, click here.
To read our original post about Ed Heil, go here.
Article by MLive.com
You might remember Duane Kerzic as the photographer who was detained and cited for trespassing in 2008 by Amtrak police for taking pictures inside New York’s Penn Station while participating in Amtrak’s annual photo contest, “Picture Our Train.” Kerzic was later vindicated by an undisclosed financial settlement and an appearance on “The Colbert Report,” and now he’s a plaintiff in a federal lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s laptop search policy at the border.
According to NPPA:
In July 2007, Kerzic was returning to the United States from a trip to Canada where he’d been photographing lighthouses and national parks for a story. He was riding his motorcycle and his laptop and camera gear were in his saddlebag when he arrived at the Customs and Border Protection inspection point at the Thousand Island border crossing. When agents asked him where he was going and then referred him to secondary screening, he was asked to wait inside a building while his motorcycle and saddlebag remained outside. Kerzic could see CBP agents going through his belongings outside, and in a few minutes a CBP agent came into the building with Kerzic’s laptop in his hands.
After looking through the photographer’s laptop for about 15 minutes, Kerzic was permitted to leave and to enter the United States.
The policy authorizes US Customs and Border Protection agents to conduct suspicionless searches on U.S. citizens’ electronic devices at international borders and then copy and distribute the devices’ contents (even after the individual is permitted entry into the United States). And that, needless to say, is deeply concerning to journalists who rely heavily on protecting their sources from disclosure and possible retribution to do their jobs.
As a First Amendment concern NPPA’s lawyer, Mickey H. Osterreicher, believes that “government officials’ unfettered ability to search journalists’ laptops and other electronic devices will have a chilling effect on their ability to gather and disseminate the news once it becomes widely known that any information they gather may be subject to search and seizure without probable cause or reasonable suspicion.”
“This will directly impact their ability to provide confidentiality to their sources,” Osterreicher said. “One can only imagine the added difficulty, if not impossibility, for journalists to conduct interviews, report on foreign relations or cover stories involving allegations of corruption when news sources believe that the information gathered abroad may be reviewed, copied and shared by agencies of the government without any of the normally guaranteed Constitutional protections.”
More important, these DHS policies not only impact journalists, but all Americans.
“Allowing government officials to look through American’s most personal materials – the things we store in our laptops, cameras, and cell phones – without reasonable suspicion is unconstitutional and inconsistent with American values, and a waste of limited resources. It doesn’t make us ‘safer’. Instead it ‘builds a bigger haystack’ and diverts resources away from proven law enforcement methods.”
The lawsuit, which was filed on behalf of the National Press Photographers Association, the American Civil Liberties Union, New York Civil Liberties Union, the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, graduate student Pascal Abidor, and Duane Kerzic as plaintiffs against Janet Napolitano, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security head, argues that Americans do not relinquish their constitutional rights when they decide to travel outside the United States, i.e., protection from unreasonable searches and seizures that are protected by the Fourth Amendment.
Source: NPPA Joins Federal Lawsuit Challenging Constitutionality of DHS Laptop Search
Yesterday, the National Press Photographers Association (NPPA) issued a press release detailing their objection to the TSA’s poster depicting a photographer as a potential terrorist:
“Photography by itself is not a suspicious activity, and is protected by the First Amendment. Unfortunately the reliance by law enforcement officers to question, detain and interfere with lawful activities by photographers under the guise of preventing terrorist activities has become a daily occurrence. The abridgement of a constitutionally protected activity because of that erroneous belief is only reinforced by your generalized statements and the depiction of photography as some sinister act.”
Source: NPPA Protests TSA Poster Depicting “Suspicious” Photographer
It’s been the case that has served as the flash point of the photographers’ rights issue lately–and now justice, and common sense, has prevailed. Judge Emory A. Pitt Jr., the Harford County Circuit Court judge presiding over Maryland motorcyclist Anthony Graber’s felony wiretapping case, ruled today that police do not have an expectation of privacy when in public while performing their duties.
“Those of us who are public officials and are entrusted with the power of the state are ultimately accountable to the public. When we exercise that power in public fora, we should not expect our actions to be shielded from public observation. ‘Sed quis custodiet ipsos cutodes’ (“Who watches the watchmen?”).”
Judge Pitt also ruled against Hartford County State’s Attorney Joseph I. Cassilly’s (the prosecutor behind this entire fiasco) claim that Graber should be charged with possessing a “device primarily useful for the purpose of the surreptitious interception of oral communications” because of the camera he used to record the encounter between himself and Joseph Uhler—the Maryland State Trooper who pulled his gun and ordered Graber to “get off the motorcycle” before identifying himself.
The judge disagreed with the prosecutor that the helmet cam was illegal, and concluded the state’s argument would render illegal “almost every cell phone, Blackberry, and every similar device, not to mention dictation equipment and other types of recording devices.”
And as was reported by The Washington Examiner:
“This ruling upholds the fundamental right to hold police accountable to the public and constitutional principles they serve,” said attorney David Rocah of the American Civil Liberties Union of Maryland, who represented Graber along with a team of private attorneys who took the case pro bono.
Now who wants to see Cassilly and Uhler held financially liable for pursuing these frivolous charges against Graber, and then thrown in jail for 16 years (which is the amount time Graber was facing) for wasting taxpayers’ money? And let’s not forget about the anonymous judge who signed the search warrant that allowed the cops to illegally enter Graber’s home and steal his private property.
Joseph I. Cassilly
Circuit Court, 1st Floor
20 W. Courtland Street
Bel Air, Maryland 21014
410.638.3500
410.879.3204
Article from The Washington Post and The Washington Examiner
Now, most logically thinking people would gather that the City of Kentwood, MI, is the last place on Google Maps that terrorists would target. But if you make the mistake of photographing Kentwood’s “octopus” water tower (which of course, is featured on Kentwood’s website, Google street view, and within eyeshot of Kentwood’s police and fire stations), then you will likely be harassed, threatened and followed until you are forced into providing your name to a group of people who have no authority to order anybody to do anything.
It all started when 40-year-old computer programmer and photo hobbyist, Ed Heil, was minding his own business and decided to photograph the water tower located on Walma Avenue SE, but instead, attracted the attention of Kentwood’s finest—its city utility workers—who wanted to know Heil’s name and why he was taking pictures of the tower.
As reported by MLive.com:
Heil said he just wanted to be left alone Thursday afternoon. If police asked, he would talk; but he didn’t think he had to answer to city workers.
Heil’s position was correct, but the interrogation didn’t cease. And even though the water tower is within view of the police station, the utility workers chose not to involve the police, but decided to take matters into their own hands and go beyond their non-existent authority and continue to harass Heil, following him to the library — where they prevented Heil from working and ultimately bullied him into providing them with his name. Real heroes, right? A mayor would be so proud.
“I was physically shaking with anger and fear, and let them know in no uncertain terms that I did not believe this was a legitimate exercise of authority, and I wanted them to cease harassing me and let me work,” Heil said. “I told them they had no right to demand any personal information from me, but they were so intimidating and threatening, I did give them my name and they finally went away.”
In most situations, when something raises a concern, i. e., real suspicious people or real potential terrorist attacks, most logically thinking people would contact law enforcement to handle the situation. But that is not what happened in Kentwood and the city’s vigilantes believed that they had the legal authority to handle the situation the way they wanted to handle it.
So Mayor Richard Root and John Gorney, Kentwood’s operations and utilities manager (who was summoned to the scene), are justifying the utility workers’ harassment of Heil by using—you guessed it—terrorism as the rationale. Which, nowadays, is standard operating procedure involving these kinds of incidences. Since we all know in these hyped-up times of synthetic threats and manufactured fear, “terrorism” and “homeland security” are used to condone all kinds of illegal and questionable behavior that is carried out by our federal, state and the smallest of local governments.
As Mlive.com wrote:
But Mayor Richard Root said no one takes chances any more.
More important, Root, in an attempt to support his position and create some sort of false threat of terrorism in the City of Kentwood (I’m curious to know when Root is up for re-election), equates Kentwood’s water tower to Michigan’s Mackinac Bridge (ironically, and contrary to Root’s presumptions, the bridge’s own website has a photo gallery). So we’re supposed to believe that the third longest suspension bridge in the United States and it’s likelihood of being attacked by terrorists is equivalent to a water tower in a small city located in the southeastern part of Michigan with a population of 45,000?
Root said:
“I’m sure you’d find the Coast Guard very excited if somebody (was photographing) the Mackinac Bridge.”
No disrespect Mayor Root, but stop the terrorism histrionics—the City of Kentwood is not in any real danger of a terrorist attack, so please act like a Mayor and apologize to Mr. Heil for the behavior of your city’s utility workers. Don’t you see the danger in criminalizing perfectly legal activities? (Not likely.)
He said he was proud of city workers for their diligence, adding that they responded appropriately.
And just so you know Mayor Root, but I already think you do, as one of Michigan’s major tourist attractions, the Mackinac Bridge is photographed by people every day (try a simple Google search) and the Coast Guard does not harass these people for performing an activity that is protected by the First Amendment.
As far as John Gorney is concerned:
…he made no apologies.
And, as MLive.com reported:
…the incident would be referred to U.S. Department of Homeland Security.
I wonder if the The Department of Homeland Security (Theater) is tired of receiving ridiculous reports like this, or if they have paranoid morons working for them too.
Let’s hope not.
Mayor Richard Root
Kentwood City Center
4900 Breton Ave. SE
P.O. Box 8848
Kentwood, MI 49518
Phone: (616) 554-0771
Email: Mayor@ci.kentwood.mi.us
Article from MLive.com
When it comes to watching security guards harassing photographers, Tom McElvy’s video of his encounter with a Wackenhut/G4S security guard at the Bank of America Center in Norfolk, VA, is one of the more cordial exchanges that’s been uploaded to the web this year. Maybe I’m partial to blonde haired girls with blue eyes and a nice Virginia accent, but most photographers would likely prefer an encounter with this Wackenhut/G4S guard than with the US Bank Tower’s Patrick Silver or the Port of Long Beach guard who didn’t care about the law.
No, there’s not much excitement occurring in McElvy’s video (both people handle themselves well), but based on the text and what is said in the video, there is evidence pointing to a history of harassment and an illegal policy that is creating a hostile environment for photographers who shoot around this Bank of America location. More important, the people in charge of this place, such as Chris Taylor and this girl’s “superior,” who is informing this girl to tell people they can’t photograph the property, may not know what the First Amendment entails.
But maybe they do and simply don’t care about constitutional rights and will continue harassing photographers as long as they can get away with it.
So maybe a flash mob at the Bank of America Center is needed to help educate whoever is running this operation?
Bank of America Center
1 Commercial Place
Norfolk, VA 23510
boywithgrenade.org 