Arrested for Videotaping

[patric]

Same department one year before:

The embattled Fullerton Police Department acknowledged Wednesday that police arrested the wrong man for allegedly attacking an officer last year.  Fullerton's acting chief, Kevin Hamilton, ordered an internal affairs investigation after reviewing video of the incident shot with the cellphone of the arrested man, Veth Mam. The video shows a different version of events than police described in their reports and testimony.

"It contradicted the police reports and testimony of the officers in every way," he said. "The video proved what they said wasn't true."
Mam, 35, of El Monte said he was walking to his car after 2 a.m. when he saw a friend, Sokha Leng, being arrested by Fullerton police. Mam said he believed the police were mistreating Leng, so he pulled out his cellphone and began to record with its video camera.

On the video, a police officer identified as Kenton Hampton is seen knocking the cellphone camera out of Mam's hand. Another man then picked up the cellphone and continued recording. Mam can been seen being wrestled to the ground by officers and arrested.

In police reports about the incident, Officer Frank Nguyen alleged that Mam jumped on another officer's back and choked him. Nguyen wrote that he then pulled Mam off the officer's back and pushed him away. The officer claimed that Mam continued to approach the officers, who arrested him.

NSFW:  http://youtu.be/PiNOjG-xlPw

[patric]

Seems to be a nationwide trend.  Is some national police association advising officers if they want their word to be golden then they need to eliminate any other evidence?


Arrested For 'Resisting' Milwaukee Police After Filming At Fire Scene (VIDEO)

A veteran photographer was taken away in handcuffs shortly after filming footage of a Milwaukee house fire behind police tape.
Clint Fillinger, 68, was cited for "resisting and obstructing an officer," according to a report by Milwaukee's Fox 6, the station for which Fillinger was filming.

Fillinger told reporters he was approached by an officer, who told him to move back from the scene for his own safety.
In the video footage, the photographer can be heard defending his rights by saying, "If the public is out here, I'm allowed to be out here," TV Spy points out.

He said he put up his hand to slow down the officer, when he was knocked to the ground.
The event is stirring up some controversy among officials at media organizations, who are highlighting the photographer's right to access under the first amendment.

The National Photographers Press Association wrote a complaint letter to the police department, stating "Sgt. Thomas Heinz pretextually stated he has [sic] moving Mr. Fillinger "for his own safety" yet did not see fit to move any other persons back or to move the previously established police/fire lines.'"
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/21/photojournalist-arrested-filming-behind-tape-fire_n_974207.html



'As the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit underscored in the past month, "gathering information about government officials in a form that can readily be disseminated to others serves a cardinal First Amendment interest."  Mr. Fillinger was doing nothing more than his job, on a public street, behind police and fire lines, within his rights and within reason.' http://www.rtdna.org/pages/posts/rtdna-calls-for-dropped-charges-immediate-investigation-of-photojournalists-arrest-in-milwaukee1450.php



http://www.rcfp.org/newsitems/index.php?i=12164
A Milwaukee Fox news station and a number of journalism organizations are demanding today that all charges be dropped against a veteran photojournalist whose First Amendment rights they say were violated when police arrested him while filming a house fire outside of the police perimeter.
Clint Fillinger, a photojournalist with Fox6 Now for 45 years, was arrested for resisting and obstructing police on Sunday. The 68-year-old, who sustained some minor injuries when he fell to the ground during his arrest, is expected to return to work by the end of the week.

Late Sunday, a police sergeant ordered Fillinger to "back up" about 10 minutes into filming a house fire, according to Fox6. Fillinger was the only person -- despite a number bystanders watching -- who police asked to move. In the footage, it's clear that Fillinger is filming several feet outside of the police tape.
"But the public is out here," Fillinger can be heard saying to police in the raw footage taken from his camera. "If the public is out here, I'm allowed to be out here."

The right to film police in the performance of their public duties in a public space is a "basic, vital, and well-established liberty safeguarded by the First Amendment," a federal appellate court ruled just last month in the case of three Boston police officers who arrested a man filming them with his cell phone.

Flynn told Fox that he will treat the incident like a citizen's complaint against a police officer and look into it, but in an interview today it was clear that he thought Fillinger was at fault. "If the cameraman had simply complied with the instructions to back off from a working fire, none of this hullabaloo would be taking place," Flynn told Fox6 News today.

In the video, a police sergeant can be seen walking in front of Fillinger and ordering him to back up. The photojournalist does not stop filming and is walking backwards while asking why he must move and also asserting is that he has a right to be there.
Another sergeant tells Fillinger that it's for the privacy of residents of the burning home, but the sergeant in question corrects her and tells Fillinger that it's for his own safety. Fillinger says, "don't tell me that smile."

A few seconds later, Fillinger can be heard saying, "Hey, I'm walking backwards here." The sergeant says, "don't put your hands on me," then Fillinger and the camera fall to the ground. In the footage from the fallen camera, the photojournalist is seen in handcuffs and led to a police vehicle by the sergeant.
Fillinger maintains that he put his hand up to balance himself, according to Jim Lemon, the station's news director.

"How could (Chief Flynn) not see how it escalated? I don't understand," Lemon said. "We were following his directives. We were backing up from the scene. The reason this happened was that there was some incidental touch . . . and that sergeant elected to take a 68-year-old man to the ground and handcuffed him."

Fillinger, who sought medical attention the next day, had some bruising and swelling around his knee, according to Lemon. The station's high-definition camera --- worth $10,000 --- was damaged.
Mickey H. Osterreicher, counsel for the National Press Photographers Association, Inc., has sent two letters to Chief Flynn since the photojournalist's arrest.
"I agree with you that this entire incident should not have happened but assert that the blame lies with your officers' lack of adequate training and their failure to exercise proper discretion," Osterreicher wrote in response to Flynn's statement that Fillinger was at fault. "We would hope that common sense will ultimately prevail and once again respectfully request that the Milwaukee Police Department immediately drop all charges, fully investigate the incident, discipline the officers if necessary and most importantly adopt comprehensive guidelines by which to properly train its officers."

Osterreicher noted that there have been a number of similar cases recently.
In late July, for example, the Suffolk County police on Long Island, New York, arrested freelance photojournalist Phil Datz and charged him with obstruction of governmental administration after he filmed officers on the side of the road arresting suspects who had allegedly led officers on a police chase in Bohemia. The department later dropped the charges.

As recently as a few weeks ago, also in Suffolk County, an emergency medical services official was caught on tape attempting to wrestle a camera away from a freelance videographer. A police officer intervened between the two men and returned the camera to the videographer, but escorted him away.
And on Memorial Day, Miami Beach police allegedly confiscated video-recording equipment from at least one member of the public and a TV photojournalist after both witnessed officers fatally shoot a suspect on a public street.

[patric]

This MUST stop: people, arrested for videotaping the actions of police officers in public places. With the latest appeals court ruling, the tide may be turning. This is all about "We The People" having the freedom to hold "public servants" accountable. It's a right worth fighting for.
http://www.fox23.com/content/rant/story/FOX-RANT-The-Peoples-Right-To-Know/5Au4XkcRZk23egO6zjYUhQ.cspx

A while back Tulsa police threatened to arrest one of their photographers if they didnt immediately surrender their video, so they too have a dog in this race.

[Ed W]

From an ACLU press release:

Appeals Court unanimously affirms right to videotape police

Simon Glik broke no law when he used his cell phone to record police officers' use of force against another man on Boston Common.
...
BOSTON -- The U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit ruled unanimously late Friday that Simon Glik had a right to videotape police in action on Boston Common. Mr. Glik sued three police officers and the City of Boston for violating his civil rights after police arrested him and charged him with illegal wiretapping, aiding the escape of a prisoner, and disturbing the peace--all for merely holding up his cell phone and openly recording Boston police officers who were punching another man on Boston Common in October 2007. As a defense, the police argued the law was not clear, but the Court decisively rejected their claim of immunity from being sued.

"This is a resounding victory for the First Amendment right to openly record police officers carrying out their duties in a public place," said Sarah Wunsch, ACLU of Massachusetts staff attorney. "It will be influential around the country in other cases where people have been arrested for videotaping the conduct of the police," said Wunsch.

..."This case is significant not only for members of the public who use cell phone cameras to document police conduct. It is equally important for members of the media, since reporters and the public have the same right of access to information," said attorney Milton. The court noted that changes in technology have made it hard to draw a line between a private citizen and a journalist. This ruling applies to recording of all public officials. The Court noted the particular importance of recording police officers because they have "substantial discretion that may be misused to deprive individuals of their liberties."

(emphasis added)

http://aclum.org/news_release_8.29.11

[patric]

From an ACLU press release:

Appeals Court unanimously affirms right to videotape police
Simon Glik broke no law when he used his cell phone to record police officers' use of force against another man on Boston Common.
...
BOSTON -- The U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit ruled unanimously late Friday that Simon Glik had a right to videotape police in action on Boston Common. Mr. Glik sued three police officers and the City of Boston for violating his civil rights after police arrested him and charged him with illegal wiretapping, aiding the escape of a prisoner, and disturbing the peace--all for merely holding up his cell phone and openly recording Boston police officers who were punching another man on Boston Common in October 2007. As a defense, the police argued the law was not clear, but the Court decisively rejected their claim of immunity from being sued.
"This is a resounding victory for the First Amendment right to openly record police officers carrying out their duties in a public place," said Sarah Wunsch, ACLU of Massachusetts staff attorney. "It will be influential around the country in other cases where people have been arrested for videotaping the conduct of the police," said Wunsch.
..."This case is significant not only for members of the public who use cell phone cameras to document police conduct. It is equally important for members of the media, since reporters and the public have the same right of access to information," said attorney Milton. The court noted that changes in technology have made it hard to draw a line between a private citizen and a journalist. This ruling applies to recording of all public officials. The Court noted the particular importance of recording police officers because they have "substantial discretion that may be misused to deprive individuals of their liberties."

Abuses have continued with regularity since this ruling.
Despite the affirmation of the civil rights we've had all along, it only sounds like "wiretapping" is no longer the default pretext for harassing citizens using their cameras.

In the recent Milwaukee case the charge was resisting arrest and APO after the officer decided to knock the photographer down. 
In one Tulsa case the photographer was arrested for "delay officer – distraction" because the officer felt he had to go out of his way and stop what he was doing to take the cellphone camera away from the citizen (much like the Rochester case http://www.pixiq.com/article/rochester-police-arrest-woman-for-videotaping-them ).
In an Oklahoma City case the photographer was assaulted by OHP and OCPD because he did not obey an unlawful order to delete his photographs.
http://www.news9.com/story/8619179/witness-authorities-harassing-confiscated-pictures? 

[Ed W]

In an Oklahoma City case the photographer was assaulted by OHP and OCPD because he did not obey an unlawful order to delete his photographs.
http://www.news9.com/story/8619179/witness-authorities-harassing-confiscated-pictures? 

Unless they've been overwritten by subsequent data, deleted photos can be recovered.

http://www.z-a-recovery.com/

I've used this to recover photos when I've inadvertently 'erased' the files.

[patric]

Unless they've been overwritten by subsequent data, deleted photos can be recovered.
http://www.z-a-recovery.com/
I've used this to recover photos when I've inadvertently 'erased' the files.

The OKC photographer did that, and found no incriminating evidence that the OHP and OKCPD felt they had to destroy.
...but this isnt so much a technology problem as it is a mindset right out of the Soviet Union.

[patric]

Cellphone video leads to murder charges against police

CA, United States (AHN) – Fullerton police officer Manuel Ramos, 37, charged in the fatal beating of an unarmed, mentally ill man, has been freed after posting bond.

Kelly Thomas, a 37-year-old drifter with schizophrenia, died last month after being beaten by several officers in the parking lot of the Fullerton Transportation Center.
Thomas had tried to comply with Ramos' instructions, but he was confused by whether he should stretch his legs or put his hands on his knees.
When Thomas failed to do both, Ramos threatened him by putting on a pair of Latex gloves, making two fists with his gloves on and saying, "Now see my fists? They are getting ready to f*** you up."

The altercation ensued and Wolfe and, later,  officer Cincinelli, came to assist, pinning down Thomas to the ground with their weight. Cicinelli kneed Thomas twice in the head, Tased him four times. In addition, he hit Thomas eight times in the head and face with the front end of his Taser.

After the beating, paramedics brought Thomas to a hospital. He suffered brain injuries, facial fractures and broken ribs. He never regained consciousness and died five days later of asphyxiation due to "mechanical chest compression with blunt cranial-facial injuries sustained during physical altercation with law enforcement."

Evidence that led to the charges against officers Ramos and Cincinelli include two cell phone videos from witnesses, footage from a Fullerton Transportation Center camera, and downloaded information from seven Tasers. Prosecutors also relied on DNA results.

http://gantdaily.com/2011/09/30/fullerton-police-officer-accused-of-murder-released-on-bail/


Police Recordings Key Part Of Calif. Beating Case

LOS ANGELES (AP) — As Fullerton police Officer Manuel Ramos approached a homeless man at a bus stop in July, he did what members of his department have been doing for a decade. He clicked on an audio recorder normally used to capture witness statements and exonerate officers accused of misconduct.

But prosecutors say the recorder captured something entirely different: the officer murdering a defenseless man suffering from schizophrenia.

Fullerton uses a device sold by Riverside-based Versatile Information Products Inc., which contracts with electronics-maker Olympus to customize standard digital voice recorders.
At the end of each shift, officers transfer files onto a server that backs them up as long as needed. The devices, used by hundreds of police agencies, do not let officers edit files, and they show if anything has been deleted.

Even before Fullerton police started using audio recorders, the department employed dashboard video cameras and microphones, but these proved unreliable, Sgt. Andrew Goodrich said. Recorders are now standard issue and officers are taught to switch them on every time they interact with a member of the public.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=140771606

[patric]

KOTV's story seems to have been written entirely from a police report, so I have no idea what her side is, whether or not she was just asserting her legal rights to photograph in public, parked stupidly, or what.   I do know that reporters are not required to be licensed by the police, however.


OHP arrests professional photographer covering accident

Tulsan Mary Bradshaw says she was stuck in traffic on I-44 when she saw a car dangling from a tree. The arrest report says troopers saw Bradshaw pull over and start taking pictures. When troopers questioned her, she claimed to work for the Associated Press.

She doesn't have credentials, so troopers asked her several times to leave, the report states. Bradshaw refused, and a trooper handcuffed her and took her to jail. She was booked on two misdemeanor complaints: obstruction and resisting arrest.

"In this particular case, when someone comes on our crime scene and actually stops, gets out of their vehicle and then starts taking pictures, we have to address that pretty seriously, and we have to address it quickly," said Officer Craig Murray of the Tulsa Police Department.

"Just coming on the scene alone does it, but screeching to a stop. What if she had bad tires? What if she hit some oil or leakage from the fluids of the vehicle? She could have slid into another car or some person that's trying to do their job," Officer Murray said.

Bradshaw says she used to be a photojournalist -- and when she saw the car in the tree, the instinct to get the best picture kicked in. She says she's embarrassed her attempt to cover the news as a citizen, made the news.

Her studio:  http://www.marybradshawphotoart.com    

[nathanm]

It seems that the bar for being arrested for obstruction and resisting arrest gets lower every single day.

[Hoss]

It seems that the bar for being arrested for obstruction and resisting arrest gets lower every single day.

I'll see if I can get something out of Craig about this on Friday; I talk to him at nearly every Oiler home game and he has worked every one of them I can remember, going back to 1996.

[dbacks fan]

It seems that the bar for being arrested for obstruction and resisting arrest gets lower every single day.

Sometimes I think that "bar" is now the rubber hose you ran over at the gas station to make the bell go "ding".

[nathanm]

Sometimes I think that "bar" is now the rubber hose you ran over at the gas station to make the bell go "ding".

lol

[patric]

I'll see if I can get something out of Craig about this on Friday

He's already on record -- it's the people KOTV was too lazy to call that might be able to round out the story.

Meanwhile, the ACLU is suing this genius:

A video shows Deputy Richard Gylfie telling Nee: "Al Qaeda would love to buy your pictures, so I want to know if you are in cahoots with Al Qaeda to sell these pictures to them for terrorist purposes."
http://articles.latimes.com/2011/oct/28/local/la-me-aclu-lawsuit-20111028

[patric]

Twenty years after George Holiday's grainy video of Los Angeles police officers beating motorist Rodney King spawned worldwide outrage and later incited riots across the city, last year's protests in Iran, this year's protests all across the Arab world and now the Occupy movements have all demonstrated just how far personal technology has come to empower citizens to combat government abuse. Political leaders, police and security officials around the world now crack down on protests with the knowledge that their actions could and quite likely will be beamed around the globe. It's not only altering the balance of power and bringing new transparency and accountability to police and public officials, it may even be altering how police and governments react to dissent.

Smartphone apps like "Qik" and "UStream" now not only allow users to stream video in real time, but they also then archive the video. That means a copy of every user's video is preserved off-site. If police or other government officials destroy a phone or confiscate a memory card, there's still a copy of the video elsewhere. Users can also set up accounts to notify email lists or post updates to their Twitter or Facebook accounts the moment they stream a new video. Which means that even if police are later able to get into a protester's phone, access a "Qik" or "UStream" account, and delete an incriminating video, by that time dozens of people may have already downloaded it.

The power-shifting nature of cellphone video may be most prominent in the court proceedings that take place after the protests are over. In the past, courts, prosecutors and juries have mostly accepted police accounts of altercations with protesters as the official narrative. Now, in both criminal proceedings of protesters charged with crimes and in civil suits brought by protesters alleging police abuse, it's likely that any significant protest will have independent video shot from multiple angles to ferret out what actually happened.
"We've had cases in the past where police justified arrests or brutality with these completely false, fantastical stories. It would take months of painstaking litigation to demonstrate just how absurdly false the police account was. We now often have video, which cuts that process down considerably."

If there has been more respect for the right to record, it may be due to awareness. The spate of stories about arrests for recording police have resulted in campaigns by the ACLU and other civil liberties groups to make citizens aware of their rights if they're confronted for recording police in public. Earlier this year, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the First Circuit threw out the conviction of a man charged with recording police with an opinion that affirmed a First Amendment right to record public servants. In just the last year, state judges in Illinois and Maryland have also overturned similar convictions on First Amendment grounds. Those decisions, and the coverage of them, may have further ingrained the idea that cellphone cameras are now ubiquitous, and that in the overwhelming majority of the country (save for Illinois, and possibly Massachusetts), recording on-duty cops is perfectly legal.

Miller adds that the reluctance to harass citizen recorders may have more to do with the sheer number of cameras around than any newfound respect for the First Amendment among police and political leaders. "There's an amazing difference in attitude you get when everyone has a camera."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/29/occupy-protesters-armed-with-technology_n_1063706.html


Cops Vs. Cameras: The Killing of Kelly Thomas & The Power of New Media