Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Recording police with your smartphone is a Constitutional right, says DoJ

digitaltrends.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 66 posts

Re: Recording police with your smartphone is a Constitutional right, says DoJ

#31

Post by 13rules »

sodafountan wrote: post #28

I've actually been arrested once for recording a police officer, I went up to her with my cellphone in hand when she was questioning my intoxicated friend on my college campus. She snatched my phone away from me and said I was prohibiting her from doing her job, and so I was taken in with my friend. Looks like i'll be fighting this one. Never thought HN would be a good source for legal advice ;)

"said I was prohibiting her from doing her job"

Translation: You've done something that I don't like, but isn't illegal, so here's a trumped up charge so you have to spend the night in jail.

Re: Recording police with your smartphone is a Constitutional right, says DoJ

#32

Post by guelo »

ori_b wrote: post #6

Why aren't the police equipped with recording devices that are active whenever they are interacting with the public? It seems that anyone with that sort of power should have an audit trail for their actions.

In Oakland all police officers are equipped with lapel cameras. But having been involved in Occupy Oakland's legal and anti-repression work what we have found is that since police have discretion as to when they can turn the devices on and off and when to upload, the video always seems to be mysteriously missing whenever defense lawyers request it. The officer will say that they forgot to turn it on or that it malfunctioned. If there is an instance of a protestor throwing a bottle that video is always available and is splashed all over the press.

Re: Recording police with your smartphone is a Constitutional right, says DoJ

#33

Post by guelo »

GFischer wrote: post #29
sodafountan wrote: post #28

I've actually been arrested once for recording a police officer, I went up to her with my cellphone in hand when she was questioning my intoxicated friend on my college campus. She snatched my phone away from me and said I was prohibiting her from doing her job, and so I was taken in with my friend. Looks like i'll be fighting this one. Never thought HN would be a good source for legal advice ;)

Don't substitute advice on HN for real legal advice. Also, going looking for legal trouble on this will get you people to cheer on the sidelines, but not to cover legal expenses (unless you get the EFF or something to sponsor your case). In my experience, it's better to pick your fights, this one doesn't seem worth it (but I don't know what your situation is, so ymmv).

All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent.

Re: Recording police with your smartphone is a Constitutional right, says DoJ

#34

Post by cookiecaper »

rpedroso wrote: post #21
ck2 wrote: post #14

But I wonder what they think of police downloading and cloning your phone's content at their whim.

"officers must not search or seize a camera or recording device without a warrant." The seizure clause of the Fourth Amendment would seem cover any case in which they wanted a copy of your data.

You should inform Michigan State Police.

>The CelleBrite UFED is a handheld device that Michigan officers have been using since August 2008 to copy information from mobile phones belonging to motorists stopped for minor traffic violations. [...] [I]t can copy everything on your smartphone in a matter of minutes.

http://thenextweb.com/us/2011/04/20/us-police-can-copy-your-...

Re: Recording police with your smartphone is a Constitutional right, says DoJ

#36

Post by ktizo »

Has anyone done a decently researched bust card website/app for smartphones that covers different laws for different worldwide jurisdictions yet?

I am sure that this could be funded by contextually advertising lawyers selected for their qualifications in each area, so that you can get their services with a button.

Also, have an off-phone media recording service to lots of different territories so as to preserve evidence. Very difficult to destroy evidence that is being recorded globally.

And if you want to make it nice and fluffy, you make sure that it is independent of the lawyers/sponsors and can kick them off and replace them if they are crap.

Re: Recording police with your smartphone is a Constitutional right, says DoJ

#37

Post by loverobots »

newbusox wrote: post #22

Not to burst anyone's bubbles, but just because the DoJ has issued a letter stating that they believe this is constitutional does not make it so. There are opinions, I believe, from the First and Seventh Circuits that state explicitly that this is the case, but, probably until there is a definitive decision from the US Supreme Court or the like, or of an appellate court in a given state, local police could still try…

Two appeal courts have said yes and DOJ said yes too. Personally I'd be more afraid of getting my @ss kicked for "resisting police" and having my video erased, than being arrested for taping cops.

Re: Recording police with your smartphone is a Constitutional right, says DoJ

#38

Post by ori_b »

matwood wrote: post #13
ori_b wrote: post #6

Why aren't the police equipped with recording devices that are active whenever they are interacting with the public? It seems that anyone with that sort of power should have an audit trail for their actions.

The Denver police have been trialing a program to do just this: http://blogs.westword.com/latestword/2011/10/denver_police_w... It's taken a lot of brutality cases and lawsuits to get them to this point though.

> * Officers will be able to turn the cameras on or off at their discretion.*

That part seems to render much of the experiment useless, sadly.

Re: Recording police with your smartphone is a Constitutional right, says DoJ

#39

Post by rpedroso »

cookiecaper wrote: post #34
rpedroso wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"officers must not search or seize a camera or recording device without a warrant." The seizure clause of the Fourth Amendment would seem cover any case in which they wanted a copy of your data.

You should inform Michigan State Police. >The CelleBrite UFED is a handheld device that Michigan officers have been using since August 2008 to copy information from mobile phones belonging to motorists stopped for minor traffic violations. [...] [I]t can copy everything on your smartphone in a matter of minutes. http://thenextweb.com/us/2011/04/20/us-police-can-copy-your-...

That's very alarming, but also pre-exists this DOJ precedent. Hopefully this gets tested and validated in court soon.

Re: Recording police with your smartphone is a Constitutional right, says DoJ

#40

Post by JshWright »

ori_b wrote: post #6

Why aren't the police equipped with recording devices that are active whenever they are interacting with the public? It seems that anyone with that sort of power should have an audit trail for their actions.

It's becoming more common. The local cops in my area wear microphones that activate whenever they're away from their vehicle (everything that happens near the vehicle is captured by the dash cam).

Every cop I've talked to about it is very positive. It often make their life much easier in court...

Post reply on HN