Western Railroad Discussion > Photog 1, police 0

A Seattle photographer won a legal claim for being arrested for taking a photo of police activity.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/338880_aclu09.html

His situation wasn't home-made security related, but interesting none the less.

Of more interest were the related incidents. Maybe and ACLU isn't such a bad bunch of wackos after all! Better keep their card handy when foaming!

A) Quit job and stand out there with camera in hand

B) Get arrested, file against city

C) Profit!

Wash hands, repeat.

F40PHR231 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A) Quit job and stand out there with camera in
> hand
>
> B) Get arrested, file against city
>
> C) Profit!
>
> Wash hands, repeat.


And law enforcement can prevent this from happening by upholding the Constitution like they're supposed to, right?

As I have said before, the terrorists have already won! We have driven ourselves crazy!

KK

And the gangs and the homeless are laughing themselves sick!

KoloradoKid Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> As I have said before, the terrorists have already
> won! We have driven ourselves crazy!


Like a recent episode of South Park wherein the terrorists attack our imagination and our government wants to nuke our imagination to stop it from running wild.

Yes, that's exactly right. Two police officers in this particular incident made BIG mistakes. Appropriately, the officers were disciplined and the photographer was not charged with anything. I don't know if the ACLU was actually necessary in this case, as a simple internal affairs investigation (following a complaint by the photographer) would have taken care of it. But be that as it may, when law enforcement did something wrong, it was handled the way it should have been. A few cases here and there of law enforcement's wrong actions does NOT mean "the terrorists have already won".

toledopatch Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> And law enforcement can prevent this from
> happening by upholding the Constitution like
> they're supposed to, right?

In addition to Krages' "Photographer's Rights" summary, this article is also now in my camera bag. I'll be happy to let any officer who gives me a hard time have a chance to check it out before I go to jail and collect my cheque.

My comment was directed toward the person who suggested a cottage industry could be made of baiting police into violating their rights.

As a person who has had a lot of reasonable encounters with police concerning railroad photography, but also a couple of very unreasonable ones, I'd hesitate to cast my lot with an internal-affairs department in the latter case if it ever got to that -- especially if I were from out of town in the situation.

The police are in an unenviable position in this case. On the one hand, they get a lot of "requests for service" from citizens made paranoid by 9/11 and the ensuing Bush administration anti-terrorism drumbeat. On the other, they've got Constitutional rights to respect. But part of their training is, or should be, to know where that line is properly drawn. The cops I have a problem with are the ones who wish we "troublemakers" would all just go away so they don't have to answer those pesky "suspicious person" calls and instead have more time for coffee and donuts.

smitty195 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yes, that's exactly right. Two police officers in
> this particular incident made BIG mistakes.
> Appropriately, the officers were disciplined and
> the photographer was not charged with anything. I
> don't know if the ACLU was actually necessary in
> this case, as a simple internal affairs
> investigation (following a complaint by the
> photographer) would have taken care of it. But be
> that as it may, when law enforcement did something
> wrong, it was handled the way it should have been.
> A few cases here and there of law enforcement's
> wrong actions does NOT mean "the terrorists have
> already won".
>
> toledopatch Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > And law enforcement can prevent this from
> > happening by upholding the Constitution like
> > they're supposed to, right?

Sounds like you're prepared for going to jail? How about trying to be prepared NOT going to jail? If you encounter law enforcement while railfanning, the first good rule of course it to make sure you're not breaking any laws. If you are, well, what more can be said? But if you're not breaking any laws, a good attitude and sharing with the officer(s) what you're doing, and why, will take care of it in almost every circumstance. I know several railfans who have had law enforcement encounters many times over the years, and never a single problem. I believe that we only hear about the occasional negative encounters, and that's bound to happen no matter how prepared we are. The documents that you wish to carry in your camera bag may make you feel better, but they're worthless should you ever have a law enforcement encounter. Officers are not judge and jury.

M-636 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> In addition to Krages' "Photographer's Rights"
> summary, this article is also now in my camera
> bag. I'll be happy to let any officer who gives
> me a hard time have a chance to check it out
> before I go to jail and collect my cheque.

Very valid points (except the coffee and donuts part.....now it's latte and croissants). But there is no way to train officers specifically about the topic at hand, unless the academy is going to last for 10 years. In that case, cops would all have to become lawyers. There are many, many, many sub-specialties in law enforcement. Railfan photographers is not one of them. Cops messing up and making mistakes, incorrectly interpreting laws, "contempt of cop", these things have always happened----even pre-9/11. I'm sure there are more instances of it happening now, in a post-9/11 world. But I strongly feel that we should give the cops a break. With the exception of a few bad apples (which usually makes the headlines), cops work their tails off on a daily basis trying to keep things safe for us all. They are judged and evaluated by the public, the media, the courts, defense attorneys, the internet blogs, the cop-haters and their web pages, and so on......the checks and balances are MORE than present every single day.

toledopatch Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> The police are in an unenviable position in this
> case. On the one hand, they get a lot of "requests
> for service" from citizens made paranoid by 9/11
> and the ensuing Bush administration anti-terrorism
> drumbeat. On the other, they've got Constitutional
> rights to respect. But part of their training is,
> or should be, to know where that line is properly
> drawn. The cops I have a problem with are the ones
> who wish we "troublemakers" would all just go away
> so they don't have to answer those pesky
> "suspicious person" calls and instead have more
> time for coffee and donuts.

smitty195 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The documents that you wish to carry in your camera
> bag may make you feel better, but they're
> worthless should you ever have a law enforcement
> encounter. Officers are not judge and jury.

The "Photographer's Rights" material indeed is probably worthless in the face of an officer who is determined to violate a citizen's Constitutional rights. But they might just persuade an officer who hadn't really thought about a situation in those terms to reconsider his course of action.

You can only hope you don't run into a "Hotshot" whose only desire is to get the most busts so his record looks good. They are also the ones who get into trouble for false arrest, excessive force, etc. Only thing is, when you're on the recieving end it's hell getting it cleaned up. And these "Hotshots" just keep bouncing from one department to another when they get fired, becuase there's a shortage of trained cops with experiance. Catch 22. So the ACLU has some use that benifits the general public, IF you can get them to take on the case of a average middle class cit. Unless the ACLU can get some press, it ain't likley.

There is no crime and police should not feel intimadated when photos are taken of them in action, BUT I wouldn't do it only 10 feet away. Get yourself a good telephoto.

chris bekiaris