PDA

View Full Version : Massachusetts Case Will Set Precedent Regarding Videotaping Of Cops



Tylerdurden
06-15-2011, 10:18 AM
By Carlos Miller (http://www.pixiq.com/contributors/carlosmiller) - Pixiq (http://www.pixiq.com/article/massachusetts-case-will-set-precedent)


Four years ago, Boston police officers arrested a man for videotaping them making an arrest in a public park.
They charged Simon Glik with felony wiretapping, disturbing the peace and aiding the escape of a prisoner – even though all he did was hold up a video camera – and the man they were arresting did not escape.
The charges were quickly dropped and Glik eventually filed a lawsuit for false arrest, claiming his First and Fourth Amendment rights had been violated.
The police officers filed a motion to dismiss his complaint on the basis on “qualified immunity,” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Qualified_immunity) which is their way of claiming they had no idea videotaping cops in public was completely legal.
A judge denied that motion and they appealed, which brought the issue back to court last week.
Now another judge will decide whether the cops will be granted qualified immunity, which would set a legal precedent that cops can basically make unlawful arrests of citizens who videotape them without fear of repercussions.
The Citizen Media Law Project (http://www.citmedialaw.org/blog/2011/first-circuit-hears-argument-right-record-public) attended the first day of the hearing last week and did a thorough job of summarizing and analyzing the case on hand.
The ACLU has strongly backed Glik and has summarized the case on this site, (http://aclum.org/glik) including producing the above video, which shows the clip that got him arrested.
The case once again highlights the absurdity of police using wiretapping laws – which were created to prevent telephone conversations from being secretly recorded – to crack down on citizens videotaping them in public.
Massachusetts is a two-party consent state, meaning you are not allowed to secretly record another person without their knowledge.
But Glik was openly recording the officers in Boston Common as many other witnesses watched.
However, because the cops were busy beating up on a man, they did not notice Glik recording them, so they are arguing that it was done in secret.
Under their interpretation of the law, as they told the judge, the man who videotaped the Rodney King beating back in 1991 would have been committing a crime had it been done in Massachusetts instead of California.
It’s pretty much an open-and-shut case, but police are doing all they can to wear Glik out in the hopes he gives up.
But Glik is a Massachusetts-licensed lawyer who emigrated from Soviet Russia, so apparently he is not taking the Constitution for granted.
Let’s hope the judge doesn’t take it for granted either


http://www.blacklistednews.com/Massachusetts_Case_Will_Set_Precedent_Regarding_Vi deotaping_Of_Cops/14294/0/0/0/Y/M.html

genglandoh
06-15-2011, 10:33 AM
Video taping cops and all Government officials in public is a good thing.

It protects the good cops from false charges and acts as a deterrence against excessive force.

There is a guy in NYC who video tapes Government officials breaking the law.
Good for him.

Tylerdurden
06-15-2011, 10:35 AM
Notice the Lawyer and defender of all things progressive never post about this stuff even in their own state. Instead we get Palins E-mails, Blind gun owners and Obamas mother love fests.

Tylerdurden
06-15-2011, 12:02 PM
If you weren't such a total jerk to condemn me for not speaking about this before trashing me about it, I might have told you that I'm in complete agreement: the MA law against videotaping cops is VERY wrong.

But you just HAD to make it personal, didn't ya.

You have quite an ego.

Ian McColgin
06-15-2011, 12:22 PM
Many of us in the state and about the nation have been involved in this case for a few years now. Glad that it's gaining a bit of attention. However, the fact that one does not remember mention of this three and four years ago does not mean that one is the only person on board with the issue.

Dr. Arthur Trollingson
06-15-2011, 12:51 PM
I'll just leave this here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copwatch


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17v2rvR7O1I

ccmanuals
06-15-2011, 01:00 PM
Video taping cops and all Government officials in public is a good thing.

It protects the good cops from false charges and acts as a deterrence against excessive force.

There is a guy in NYC who video tapes Government officials breaking the law.
Good for him.

Why do you have such disdain for gov't workers? It's pretty obvious in your postings. Just curious.

Tylerdurden
06-15-2011, 01:07 PM
Why do you have such disdain for gov't workers? It's pretty obvious in your postings. Just curious.

Because most of them are on the dole. In days past you would never see a government worker openly espousing his political views. Now most are like brownshirts trying their level best to get away with more and more pushing an agenda. Get a real job like the rest of us or shut up and give your service without complaint. No one forces you to live on the backs of the people.

Ian McColgin
06-15-2011, 01:08 PM
There are two sides regarding videotaping, given how very easily it can be edited and even if raw, stance - perspective - point of view - call it what you will - can make a huge difference in what you think you see and what you are missing. The legitimate police argument is that the video creates the impression of all seeing objective truth when it's not.

My own belief is that we've grown sophisticated enough, what with the exposure of that guy Brightbug's frauds, to cut through that, just as we in the normal problems of court testimoney must cut through the many layers of misrepresentation and self-interest that are problems for even the most good faith testimoney. For those reasons, I feel that making taping public actions in public spaces a crime should remain legal and that the arguments against the taping have little merit, being mostly weak and generally defensive bad faith.

BrianY
06-15-2011, 01:29 PM
Count me as another Massachusetts resident who disagrees with the law against video taping police. I can't believe that this law is on the books here and I sincerely hope that it is overturned.

wardd
06-15-2011, 01:32 PM
if ordinary citizens have no privacy against taping while out in public why should government employees?

how about private security cameras?