Eastern Railroad Discussion > Charges against rail photog dismissed in NJ court

Forwarded message, from All_Aboard, by my friend John Harmon:

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [A_A] Boberwatch
Date: Fri, 30 Sep 2005 21:01:08 EDT
To: All_Aboard@yahoogroups.com

Interesting story in the current issue of Railpace.

Our hero, Bruce Barry (brother of Railpace editor Steve Barry) has his collar felt by the Greenwich Twp (NJ) police while taking pictures of a Baldwin switcher from a public roadway in the vicinity of a Valero refinery. Local gestapo, citing some "protocol of the Attorney General's office and the Glocester County Prosecutor's office", insist he turn over his digital camera flash card, and Bruce refuses. Gestapo advises he will be arrested for obstruction of justice. Bruce stands on his rights, and is taken downtown and booked, where he is subsequently advised of a "policy adopted by the US Department of Homeland
Security". He is released after several hours, with an admonition that he would be listed on two Homeland Security databases, and advised to "get a new hobby".

A month later, Bruce appears in municipal court and enters a plea of not
guilty. His attorney files a demand for Discovery, requesting copies of the protocols, AG guidelines, or any Homeland Security regulations which would require Bruce to turn over his film. Police offer a plea bargain, which Bruce refuses. One police offer becomes visibly angry in open court. The Judge grants the request.

Three months later, the complaint is dismissed by the court when no
guidelines or other information could be found to substantiate the grounds for arrest.

I hereby nominate Bruce Barry as Railfan of the Month.

JJH

I second the motion.

How a bunch of middle aged white guys, some of whom are a bit odd looking and stick out like a sore thumb, with huge cameras prominently hung around their necks ever became targets for Homeland Security escapes me.

And middle-aged white guys can't be
criminals or terrorists?

Dave


fmw Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I second the motion.
>
> How a bunch of middle aged white guys, some of
> whom are a bit odd looking and stick out like a
> sore thumb, with huge cameras prominently hung
> around their necks ever became targets for
> Homeland Security escapes me.

Just remember, that situation has now become "legal precedent". It would be wise to remember that in any future dealings with the law. Especially if you happen to be in NJ.

It is only applicable to NJ.

Dave


hoydie17 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Just remember, that situation has now become
> "legal precedent". It would be wise to remember
> that in any future dealings with the law.
> Especially if you happen to be in NJ.
>
>

I am going to let you in on a litle story....the town is real, but the names are not going to be used to protect the innocent.

Back in 2001, me and a bunch of railfans were in Varnell, GA, watching trains and one of the railfans had a monopod. After we watched the trains roll by, all of us got into our cars and headed to the next spot, before we did the Whitfield County Sheriif's Dept. grabbed us and we found out the person in the truck that called the WCSD was with the City of Varnell and was tailing us. The WCSD let us loose and we went back watching trains and left with the big weight off our sholders.

Jason/Chessie2018

Maybe it was "DAVE" who was in the truck. (grin)
He already sounds like he is on the side of NJT.

KRK

It may be directly applicable only in NJ; but it provides a mechanism that is useful in any US court: request that the specific rules and regulatioins of Homeland Seurity be produced in court. It appears that there are none. Gerry

> Three months later, the complaint is dismissed by
> the court when no
> guidelines or other information could be found to
> substantiate the grounds for arrest.


This sounds like a flase-arrest lawsuit to me. I hate to sounds like I'm promoting the idea since there are already way to many lawsuits in this country, but one against the officers involved, along with their department, might be embarrasing enough to get them knock off the bulls**t unless they have legitimate evidence of a legitimate crime.

I have a feeling that sooner or later it will come to that, especially in New Jersey.

dsktc Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And middle-aged white guys can't be
> criminals or terrorists?


Why, yes, they can.

But they can't be busted for unjust cause.

The Constitution and Bill of Rights win over the conservative-driven hype.

Wonder if the new Chief Justice of the US could possibly be a buff. But even if he were, as he has said, he couldn't let his passion interfere with his interpretation of the Constitution in a railroad equipment viewing/photographing case before the Supremes.

Of course there are white, overweight, middle-aged criminals and terrorists out there. They are probably not hanging around the tracks all day taking pictures of trains. If they are photographing trains, they are probably a bit more discreet about it, i.e. no NYC T-shirts and B&O buttons. One would think that NJ cops knew a little more about profiling than that.

Let's hear it for Bruce Barry! That situation in NJ is unconstitutional.

I agree.

I think Barry should sue the Greenwich Twp. Police
Dept.

Dave


TV-10 Wrote:

> Why, yes, they can.
>
> But they can't be busted for unjust cause.
>
> The Constitution and Bill of Rights win over the
> conservative-driven hype.
>
>
>

Once again, I must say that we railfans are not the enemy here. We represent another set of eyes that would see and report what the Police would not. That is something being out of place and a danger to the public.

Police and homeland security need to spend their time with what is not in plain site and obviously of no danger to anyone.

Although not the rule, and definatly NOT the exception, may police agencies in NJ (and in NY for that matter) near the city area's are a little too overjoyed in their work. This tends to happen in states in which everyone is elected to judical/sheriff posts. I don't know if NJ is like that. NY is, and it shows at times.

Nothing "unconstitutional" here. Bad bust, got tossed. Lawsuit to follow. FWIW, it's rather racist and elitist to assume all foamers are old, fat and white. And the Spanish tossed the charges on the terrorist thought to have done photo surveillance.

pennsy3750 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > Three months later, the complaint is
> dismissed by
> > the court when no
> > guidelines or other information could be
> found to
> > substantiate the grounds for arrest.
>
>
> This sounds like a flase-arrest lawsuit to me. I
> hate to sounds like I'm promoting the idea since
> there are already way to many lawsuits in this
> country, but one against the officers involved,
> along with their department, might be embarrasing
> enough to get them knock off the bulls**t unless
> they have legitimate evidence of a legitimate
> crime.
>
> I have a feeling that sooner or later it will come
> to that, especially in New Jersey.

Or at least a violation of Civil Rights. I'm not a big ACLU fan, but I think they would love to take a case like this; Even if you were only suing for court costs and and a verbal apology.

Later....
Jollymon

pacificeclectic Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> FWIW, it's rather
> racist and elitist to assume all foamers are old,
> fat and white.

Damned straight! I'm old and fat, but definitely not white!

:D

Kennedy