Archive for the 'Police Harassment' Category

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »

Homeland Security Renews Photography Suspicion

Published August 5, 2009 Photographers' Rights , Police Harassment , Security Guard Harassment 1 Comment
Tags: , , ,

0382A012Critical infrastructure. Photo by discarted

Homeland Security head Janet Napolitano told reporters last week that we all need to be aware and on the lookout for terrorists on the prowl, and that means calling in photographers “continually taking photographs of a piece of critical infrastructure that doesn’t seem to make any sense.” Jeesh, way to set us back, oh, about eight years, Janet. I feel like I’m having flashbacks to a different administration.

Just when it looked like there was a little progress, with Amtrak and the NYPD revising or clarifying their policies – now, law enforcement has a renewed mandate to harass photographers who “continually” shoot, say, their local ports or skyscrapers. I can just see the cop or security guard who finds that type of photography just “doesn’t make sense.”

Article from PDNPulse

Read the National Press Photographers Association response here

Photography Police Issue Goes to High Court

Published July 27, 2009 Photographers' Rights , Police Harassment 1 Comment
Tags: , , ,

2583984586_5783c40aa6
Photo by danger joel

A woman in England is finally taking on the Met police for their harassment of people who film and photograph them. Gemma Atkinson is pursuing a High Court review (equivalent to our Supreme Court in the US) over the police practice of using the Anti-Terrorism law to basically criminalize all photography.

In March,  Atkinson was filming her boyfriend being detained in a London subway station as part of a drug search when she was approached by a plainclothes officer who told her what she was doing was illegal. (“Do you realise it is an offence under the Terrorism Act to film police officers?” he said.) When she refused to hand over her cell phone – having already slipped it into her shirt pocket – the officer was relentless in trying to get it from her, ultimately calling over two female officers for help. A struggle ensued for the next 25 minutes where she was physically overpowered, handcuffed and threatened with arrest.

Finally, when the officers called the station (presumably to speak with a supervisor who told them they had no cause), they let Atkinson go – no apology, no explanation, nothing. The original officer’s only rationale during the incident was that he didn’t want the video to be all over the internet, i.e., YouTube.

Interestingly, the premise of this case is at odds with the report that police in Manchester have filmed over 900 suspects and their associates, whether they’ve committed a crime or not, all in the interest of building a database for tracking criminals and maybe-someday-future criminals. Police at times have openly followed these suspects down the street with a handheld camera. Suspects are then sent a letter informing them that the footage could appear on YouTube. Oh, the hypocrisies!

Read the article about the Gemma Atkinson incident and an interview with Gemma  at The Guardian site.

Read the BBC report about the Manchester Police here.

Thanks to pixel.eight.

Calgary Police Delete Photos

Published July 24, 2009 Photographers' Rights , Police Harassment 2 Comments
Tags: , , ,

calgary police
Photo by Robert Thivierge

A photojournalist in Calgary found out the hard way that law enforcement will do whatever it takes to assert their power. Last Sunday, Robert Thivierge came upon a scene where four Calgary Police Service officers were arresting a man. He starting taking photos and was told to stop and delete his photos or – get this – he’d lose his camera for a year. 

What an outrageously asinine rule! Do these security guards live in a special fantasyland where they get to make up their own laws? Or is Canada just totally fine with trampling its citizens’ civil rights?

From Thivierge’s account:

The security guard on the left said the pictures I took didn’t belong to me, and I wasn’t allowed to have any of the images, and they’d have to be deleted.

Then, the other security guy talked to a cop, who said it was ok for me to go, with the images, saying the first security person “misspoke”.

Then, the next cop, said I couldn’t leave with an image that’s potential evidence. So, I would have to delete it, if I didn’t want to lose my camera for a year. When I said it would be illegal to delete evidence, they said it wasn’t evidence if it’s deleted. Make sense?

Thivierge says he is pursuing the matter and the police seem to be looking into it too, according to Metro News Calgary. I do hope he gets some answers. According to Thivierge, Canada does not have an ACLU equivalent or respect civil rights as we do in the US. To be sure, in this country, at worst, these officers (or whatever these guys are) are engaging in lying and stealing; at best, they’re just incompetent because they don’t know what their job parameters are.

Just remember this mantra, and repeat it to yourself if you’re ever in one of these situations: Police (or security personnel) do not have the right to take your property or delete your photos, and don’t be bullied into thinking otherwise.

Read a brief article on the Metro News Calgary site here.

See Robert Thivierge’s Flickr photostream here.

Don’t Take Photographs in Kent – Or Else

Published July 17, 2009 Photographers' Rights , Police Harassment Leave a Comment
Tags: , , , , ,

questions-1024x679
Photo by Alex Turner

It’s well known the English police have no mercy when it comes to photography. The craziest stories always seem to be coming out of there. And this one is no different.

Photographer Alex Turner was arrested last week in Kent after taking some photos of a fish restaurant. The grounds were “prevention of terrorism” under Section 44, the catch-all anti-terrorism law English police like to use to do whatever they damn well please. But really the officer was just annoyed he took a photo of her, and she claimed that was an unlawful obstruction.

As he tell it on his blog: Two men who claimed they worked for the town council stopped Turner while he was taking photos and requested his identity. When he refused, being that they didn’t fully identify themselves or explain their authority to stop him, they called police. When the officers showed up and Turner took a photo, he was handcuffed, arrested and detained in a police van.

Whilst sharing their views about the threat of terrorism officer xxxxx stated she had felt threatened by me when I took her picture. I cannot recall exactly what she said but I do recall her referring to my size and inferring she found it intimidating at the time (I am 5ft 11in and weigh about 12 stone).

Are these officers really that dumb? Because they come off like real lugnuts, going around arresting people taking photos on busy streets and actually bringing up terrorism. Terrorists are blowing up buildings in Jakarta; they’re not taking photos of Mick’s Plaice in Kent.

In his blog on the Guardian site, Henry Porter writes on the incident and the “The war on street photography,” saying “Clearly something has to be done about the police attitude to photography and filming.” It’s heartening that major media outlets recognize things are out of control. But still. It just doesn’t end.

The  Kent Police released a statement to The Register and basically just recapped the incident, noting that the officers felt Turner was suspicious. However, an investigation is underway.

Turner ends his complaint to the Kent police department with this, which I think sums it all up nicely for those people who side with the government in such matters. And there are always those people who just don’t see there’s a much bigger picture here than one man being arrested in one town.

I know a fair few people may say serves you right for a number of reasons. My reponse to that is it will serve you right when you wake up one day and realise you don’t live in a free country anymore. I’ve been stopped nearly a dozen time under section 44. Up until now I’ve always provided my details. Today I decided not to. Seems that when I choose to exercise my rights I get arrested, cuffed and detained for doing so. Yossarian would appreciate the logic in that.

Read Turner’s full account in his blog.

Protestors Arrested for Questions, Photos

Published June 23, 2009 Photographers' Rights , Police Harassment , Protests Leave a Comment
Tags: , , , , ,

The Guardian posts this interesting video about two women, Emily Apple and Val Swain, who were arrested during an environmental protest in England last year. The women were both members of Fit Watch, a group that documents police harassment and surveillance of protesters, so it’s extremely ironic that they were singled out. Obvious yes, but also just ridiculous that the police wouldn’t think better of it.

Arrested for obstruction, Apple and Swain ultimately spent four days in jail, and then all charges were dropped. As the footage shows – shot by the police – the women weren’t doing more than asking  for badge numbers and taking photos. An investigation is now pending.

The treatment they received, both of them mothers and hardly threatening, really highlights how scary law enforcement’s abuse of authority can be. (Be sure to watch how four officers bind Swain’s ankles, thighs and hands and lift her into a van.)

Video via The Guardian

Watchdog Says UK Police Better Watch It

Published June 19, 2009 Photographers' Rights , Police Harassment 1 Comment
Tags: , ,

2584319546_6b1212ca4d
Photo by cloudy images

In a heartwarming development, England’s terror legislation watchdog has warned police that they should stop abusing anti-terrorism laws by criminalizing photography of the police. Further, Lord Carlile said in his annual report that officers who do this could face possible criminal and disciplinary prosecution. 

This strikes a major blow to English police who have used the powers accorded them under Section 58A of the Counter-Terrorism Act to their great benefit, harassing, detaining and roughing up photographers however they saw fit. 

In his report, Carlile wrote: 

It should be emphasised that photography of the police by the media or amateurs remains as legitimate as before, unless the photograph is likely to be of use to a terrorist. This is a high bar. It is inexcusable for police officers ever to use this provision to interfere with the rights of individuals to take photographs. The police must adjust to the undoubted fact that the scrutiny of them by members of the public is at least proportional to any increase in police powers – given the ubiquity of photograph and video enabled mobile phones.

It is interesting he acknowledged the ubiquity of photography, as we’ve long thought law enforcement agencies have been slow to recognize that their days of unchecked authority are coming to an end.

Article via Daily Mail

Officer Doesn’t Like Photograph of Misdeed

Published June 18, 2009 Photographers' Rights , Police Harassment 3 Comments
Tags: , , ,

IMG00061-20090617-1914-300x225
Photo by Terence Eden

We’ve heard how hostile those UK police are to photography, and  blogger Terence Eden found that out firsthand. Eden writes on his blog that he took a photo of a police van parked in a disabled bay – or handicapped space for us Americans – and was approached by an officer who wanted to know what he was doing. The officer explained she was there to respond to a call, which Eden accepted, but then she asked to delete his photo. Eden writes:

I asked her why she wanted the photo to be deleted, she told me that “in the current climate” the police had been asked to stop people from taking photos of sensitive buildings and of the police.

He told her that wasn’t the case. She wanted to take down his information. There was some  more back and forth. They resolved the matter amicably without any photos being deleted.

My guess would be that she didn’t want any proof of her transgression. Legitimate call or not, it still looks bad for the police to be taking a handicapped spot. I don’t know about in England, but here in the US there are loads of other illegal parking spots an officer could park in in a hurry and still not take up a handicap spot. (But that’s just conjecture on my part.)

At any rate, there is one thing I disagree with in Eden’s post: He advises uploading important photos as soon as possible (which may not always be possible in a confrontation, but okay), and he says if you’re asked to delete photos it may be worth it to comply since they can be recovered later.  Actually, deleting photos from your camera when there is no law on the books backing that up is just  foolish. That’s giving in, admitting guilt, relinquishing power and saying you were in the wrong and your private property isn’t yours and you’re fine with being bullied. I don’t recommend that at all.

Read the whole post at Terence Eden’s blog here.

Selective Outrage for Journalist Arrests

Published June 10, 2009 Photographers' Rights , Police Harassment 2 Comments
Tags: , , , , ,

I feel for the Current TV journalists, Laura Ling and Euna Lee, that are being held in North Korea right now for illegally entering the country. They’ve been sentenced to 12 years of hard labor, and they must be scared to death. But journalists get arrested and convicted all over the world, and right here in the US – all the time.

Reporter Diane Bukowski was just fined $4,000 and sentenced to 200 hours of community service for doing her job in Detroit. Photojournalist Mike Anzaldi was arrested twice – and put in jail – for doing his job in Chicago. Democracy Now! host Amy Goldman was arrested at the Democratic National Convention in Minneapolis. The list goes on.

So why does this story provoke such outrage? A big part of it I’m sure is because one of the journalists is the sister of TV personality Lisa Ling. But the other side of it is that we like to act high and mighty and righteous, as if our country is so much more evolved that we’d never trample on the rights of a member of the press. It also doesn’t hurt that the offending country is much-hated, nuke-loving North Korea, one-third of the famed axis of evil. Implicitly we’re saying “What barbarians, those North Koreans!”, but the fact that most mainstream media outlets don’t cover these domestic incidents says a lot about us too.

NPRO Rally: Free State vs. Police State

Published June 9, 2009 Harassment , Photographers' Rights , Police Harassment , Protests , Rally , Security Guard Harassment Leave a Comment
Tags: , , , , , , ,

Here’s the second installment of a series of our NPRO Rally videos that will be posted throughout the week, culminating on Friday with a recap of the whole weekend rally. 

As you see, this encounter at the Port of Long Beach was drama-free. The Harbor Patrol were friendly and civil and took the appropriate tone, as opposed to many law enforcement officers who see a camera and immediately get suspicious, aggressive and condescending. The main officer seen here is probably an amiable guy in general, but I think he was also playing the game differently, being funny and congenial and conciliatory in order to get the same information they all want – names, addresses, social security numbers. I called him on this and he played it off like I was crazy to even suggest a thing – who me?! He must have thought he was being pretty clever asking where we were parked (“Do you guys have a car or something?”), assuming he would ID us through our license plates. He knew that when you’re not breaking any laws you can refuse to identify yourself – as we did.

So, it was fine enough, but a few things still bothered me. 1) The call the refinery security guard put out after speaking with us was that it was a physical altercation, and that’s just a complete fabrication. How did this conversation get blown into a physical altercation, necessitating the need for four patrol cars? And 2) The female officer at the end of the video said we should have informed them of our plans to shoot at the port, framing it as a “common courtesy.” 

Yes, sure. We could also notify the police when we’re going grocery shopping and jogging in the park. That’s what you do in a police state.

Photographers’ Rights Rally Weekend 2009

Published June 3, 2009 Harassment , Photographers' Rights , Photojournalism , Police Harassment , Protests , Rally , Security Guard Harassment 7 Comments
Tags: , , , , , , , ,

nprd_blog

 

It’s been a year since we held our first National Photographers’ Rights Organization (NPRO) rally in Los Angeles, and a lot has happened since then. Over the past 12 months, hundreds of us have been harassed by security guards and law enforcement for practicing a perfectly legal activity while in public. Some of us have even witnessed or personally experienced an unlawful arrest by an out-of-control cop. But with the help of our cameras, the grassroots mobilization of the internet and our lobbying of companies and public officials, we have stood up to this abuse and forced change.

For instance, Amtrak finally released a policy on photography and the NYPD’s leaked policy document says to stop the harassment of photographers shooting in public. So in order to progress even further, promote even more awareness and stand up for our rights, NPRO is holding a Photographers’ Rights Rally Weekend this year that will kick off in the Los Angeles Harbor/Port of Long Beach on Saturday June 6th, and end on June 7th in Downtown Los Angeles.

Before attending this event, it is important that we all educate ourselves about the law and photography. To learn the essentials it’s best to start with Bert Krages’ ubiquitous “The Photographer’s Right.” Read it. Memorize it. Print it. The knowledge you obtain from this document will help protect yourself when confronted by law enforcement or security staff when taking pictures in public.

You can also check out the numerous links in section 9 of this blog’s sidebar, which provide you with even more information regarding the law and photography.

Most importantly though, no matter what we are told by law enforcement, California Wiretapping Law legally permits us to secretly record police, or anybody for that matter, when they are in public and there is no expectation of privacy. We do not need a cop’s acknowledgment or permission to record their threats.

It’s extremely important that we bring video cameras and/or audio recording devices to document the unlawful actions of  cops and security guards.

So put on your rally lens caps and clear your schedules for the first weekend in June.

NPRO Rally – Saturday, June 6th
Location: Los Angeles Harbor/Port of Long Beach
Time: 6:30 p.m.
Directions From Downtown Los Angeles: 110 S to Anaheim St Exit, Turn Left on Figueroa Place, Turn Left on W Anaheim St, W Anaheim St Turns Into E Anaheim St, End At N Henry Ford Ave, Park On Street
Directions From the 405 N/S: Exit 33B S Wilmington Ave, Travel West on S Wilmington Ave, Take First Left at E 223rd St, Right on S Alameda St, Continue on S Alameda St, Veer Left on to N Henry Ford Ave, End at Intersection of E Anaheim St and N Henry Ford Ave, Park on Street

 

NPRO Rally – Sunday, June 7th
Location: Pershing Square, Corner of S. Hill St. & W. 5th St., Los Angeles, CA 90013
Time: 11:30 a.m.

Spam Blocked

1,139,139 spam blocked by Akismet