Legal to video/audio tape in public?

srothstein · Post by **srothstein** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 11:05 pm

Jim has the point. There were other words used besides gratifying, but I could not think of a way to put it with the ten year old daughter rule in effect. Check out the penal code for the exact terms.

ELB · Post by **ELB** » Wed Sep 26, 2007 11:23 pm

Again, I am glad I live in Texas, if only half the stuff in this article is true...

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/19/1988.asp

elb

Liberty · Post by **Liberty** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 5:53 am

ELB wrote:Again, I am glad I live in Texas, if only half the stuff in this article is true...

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/19/1988.asp

elb

Wow!! Scary that these cops are so vindictive.

frankie_the_yankee · Post by **frankie_the_yankee** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 6:10 am

Sounds like the PD's in that area need a thorough housecleaning.

seamusTX · Post by **seamusTX** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 7:07 am

This kind of thing is not uncommon. It happened frequently in the Chicago area. If someone successfully filed a complaint about a cop, they would ind themselves stopped and ticketed often, sometimes arrested, and sometimes their relatives as well.

If I were in that situation, I'd move.

- Jim

frankie_the_yankee · Post by **frankie_the_yankee** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 8:53 am

seamusTX wrote:This kind of thing is not uncommon. It happened frequently in the Chicago area. If someone successfully filed a complaint about a cop, they would ind themselves stopped and ticketed often, sometimes arrested, and sometimes their relatives as well.

If I were in that situation, I'd move.

- Jim

That kind of behavior has no place it law enforcement. I'm glad we have an official oppression statute here in TX. I think more states should follow our lead.

seamusTX · Post by **seamusTX** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 9:12 am

frankie_the_yankee wrote:That kind of behavior has no place it law enforcement. I'm glad we have an official oppression statute here in TX. I think more states should follow our lead.

Every state has laws against police misconduct, and it's a federal civil rights violation. Every department has policies against it. The question is enforcement.

Part of the problem is that the people complaining about police retaliation or brutality often are not squeaky clean.

- Jim

Liberty · Post by **Liberty** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 11:55 am

seamusTX wrote:
frankie_the_yankee wrote:That kind of behavior has no place it law enforcement. I'm glad we have an official oppression statute here in TX. I think more states should follow our lead.
Every state has laws against police misconduct, and it's a federal civil rights violation. Every department has policies against it. The question is enforcement.

Part of the problem is that the people complaining about police retaliation or brutality often are not squeaky clean.

- Jim

In this particular case at least legally I suspect he probably is pretty clean. Mr. Darrow seems pretty adept at watching his P's and Q's.
He is getting a lot of popularity and is perhaps even achieving folk hero status:

Despite the official harassment, Darrow has been comforted by an unexpected level of support from the general public. Motorists who recognized him from various television interviews have stopped to thank him or give him the "thumbs up." A judge also dropped charges from the June traffic stop after a Saint Louis police officer failed to show up at a trial where Darrow had been prepared to defend himself with video evidence.

It looks to me that because of this and other scandals along with all the publicity and national attention, St Louis PD is going to see some changes.

Sangiovese · Post by **Sangiovese** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 9:59 pm

I'm certainly not a lawyer, but I believe that any laws about audio and video recordings **in public** would fall under the same umbrella as taking still images (photography). In other words, if a person is in a public place, then they have no reasonable expectation of privacy.

What that boils down to in plain english is that if you are in public, I can legally take your picture. I don't have to ask for your permission. I don't have to stop if you yell at me not to take your picture. (I'm not a jerk... so I wouldn't do that - but legally, I could and I would be on extremely solid ground.)

However, what I can use those images for DOES have restrictions. (Far too many worms in that can to try to explain them here.)

It makes sense that video/audio would fall under the same rules.

As for all the thoughts on traffic stops - Police routinely record audio and video of traffic stops. Why would it be legal for them to record the interaction and not for us to record the same?

srothstein · Post by **srothstein** » Thu Sep 27, 2007 10:08 pm

seamusTX wrote:
frankie_the_yankee wrote:That kind of behavior has no place it law enforcement. I'm glad we have an official oppression statute here in TX. I think more states should follow our lead.
Every state has laws against police misconduct, and it's a federal civil rights violation. Every department has policies against it. The question is enforcement.

As much as I dislike them, I have to point out that the FBI investigates corrupt police and civil rights violations on a regular basis. They do have to get a complaint that alleges a federal violation before they can do anything though. The bad part is that they sometimes will decline to investigate if there is not a large amount of corruption. They really do like their headlines.