Legal issues from videotaping with a helmet camera in the DC area.

[David Lowenstein]

Just for some formal legal reinforcement of the points made in this thread last year, the DC MPD has now provided formal guidance to officers regarding the legality of photographing or recording their public activities:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/crime/dc-officers-are-directed-to-leave-citizen-photographers-alone/2012/07/23/gJQAYKcI5W_story.html

[The Mad King Pepe']

Good to see it becoming more and more official, thanks for the post.

Here's a few relevant quotes:

“a bystander has the right under the First Amendment to observe and record members in the public discharge of their duties.”

“It tells police to leave people alone,” Spitzer (Arthur B. Spitzer, the ACLU chapter's legal director) said. “It makes it clear that if a person is in a place that interferes with police operations, the officer can ask or tell them to move to another location, but they can't tell them to stop taking pictures.”

And in case this part was not already obvious:
"[...] makes it clear that citizens with cameras are not permitted to cross police lines, stand in areas not already accessible by the public and cannot interfere with officers doing their jobs."

[potomacduc]

This is not legal advice, but common sense that probably doesn't need to be said, but here goes anyways.  One thing to note is that in a situation where one was actually speeding or otherwise breaking the law before being pulled over, it might make more sense to be compliant if the officer asks you to stop recording.  Doing so politely may pre-dispose the officer to being kind and letting you off. Otherwise, you are insisting on recording in the very small chance that he/she might decide to "violate your civil rights".  In my humble opinion if you go into a situation with a police officer expecting conflict, you are much more likely to find it. Of course if you sense a problem is unavoidable then insisting on recording may make sense.  In the end, my guess is that your people reading skills in this situation are much more valuable than your legal knowledge. 

[The Mad King Pepe']

+11ty billion to the above. ^^^

I started this thread because I wanted to understand and share the legal implications of wearing a camera while riding and, potentially, around the police and not as an excuse to be a prick with them.


I ran into the rangers while riding Michaux State Forest earlier this year: I had my helmet cam on and pointed it out to them as in 'just FYI'. I was cool, they were cool, we could have been buddies... 

[potomacduc]

Park Rangers, whether state or federal, seem to cover the two ends of the spectrum as far as law enforcement goes.  It seems a large number of them are exemplary officers with a great public demeanor while a certain percantage are ball busting pri#&$ over the smallest perceived offense. Entirely anecdotal, but I haven't met many in the middle.

[extra330]

imo unless you are out to make a policy stance, its best to do whatever cops say.  They have guns and a huge weight of governmental coercive authority behind them that has a lot of momentum.  Whether they are legally in the right seems not to matter a whole lot in the short term. Courts are slow and expensive, you could be legally right, but if the cop says otherwise it'll take lots of cash and lots of time to prove your point.  Might not be worth the trouble.

IMHO that's a very short sighted point of view, at least constitutionaly speaking. 

[The Mad King Pepe']

IMHO that's a very short sighted point of view, at least constitutionaly speaking. 

IMHO it sounds like the sad reality some people have to face.



And now for some levity:

[potomacduc]

Very nice.....

[Real Recognize Real]

And now for some levity:

Absolutely brilliant comedian. This reminds me of his "I love black people, but I hate _______" skit. It's the funniest shyte I've ever seen