Police wrongly arrested photographer for.....

[dannyp19]

Here is a disturbing story.


http://carlosmiller.com/2009/06/03/c...ndcuffing-him/


Cops dont even know the 1st. amendment.



Comment # 31 states my feelings exactly.

[praline3001]

This is opening a can of worms ~ seriously

It really goes along one of my most famous quotes

"It is our right to question our government but its our responsibility to protect the very government that gives us this freedom."

Having a right and having a responsibility are two VERY different things and they should NOT BE.

All I can imagine is if that were my loving husband, children ... wow would I be even more devastated if I opened up the Sunday paper and saw them photographed in less than a respectful manner ... meaning their death.

The photographer might have had a right ~ though they are not allowed to photograph crimes scenes before the scene has been processed ~ He should have USED his responsibility to this right and not photograph someone's father, mother or child laying on the pavement dead.

In this case I have to TOTALLY agree with the cops. Had I been a private citizen on the scene I would have trashed the camera myself and paid the fines for doing so. There are just some places photographers DO not need to be... nor should they record it for public gawking.

[bethard728]

I agree with what the officer did legal or not. The info may have been newsworthy, but there is a respectable way to handle things and a disrespectable way. The videographer chose the latter. This article is pretty vague but I'm going to assume that the victims of the accident were still present. If they were not, then sure, he could go ahead and shoot away. If they were, he was being very disrespectful. Just because it's his legal right, doesn't make it morally (sp?) ok. Unfortunately I have been in front of the camera during an unfortunate "newsworthy" event and the news videographer was very rude and disrespectful. Sure makes a sad and stressful situation even harder when the people around you have no empathy or respect for your feelings. I agree whole-heartedly with praline!

[candleman]

well..news needs to be reported, but it needs to be done respectfully.
what this DOESNT tell us, or show us, is the manner in which it was being done.
it also doesntr say if he was an actual reporter/videographer for a news agency, or if he was some guy with a camera hoping top make a quick buck.

i think its entirely possible he was doing it in an inappropriate manner.

[Sime]

Sorry - I strongly disagree.

If we as photographers / journalists went around (I am a UK Press accredited photog) photographing only nice things - the world would be a very one sided place.

There is the degree of respect, there is also a legal angle - crime scene etc. If you're out of the way and acting in a manner appropriate to the scene - fine.

For a police officer to touch you, let alone knock your equipment from your hands is so very wrong, legally. A police officer (in the UK) is not allowed to touch / turn on or off your camera per chance he or she deletes your photos.

"Washington was filming from an overhead embankment so he was not interfering. The cop obviously had no problem with him standing there. She just didn’t want him to film"

How can you agree with the police? - you don't know the situation? As for places photographers should be, please - don't get me started. They are allowed to photograph a crime scene, if they're outside a police line and on public property - they might get some stick for doing it, but thats called news.

There are MILLIONS of examples on the web - here's one you may have seen...


I organised the ONLY (so far) public meeting of one of the UK's leading press associations and Scotland Yard police to work out why SO MANY incidents like this are happening in the UK - The answer on the night was a gross lack of training on the Police side of things. A lot of "talk" came out of that public forum - no action, to date.

Respect peoples rights. Do your job.

If you're not a journalist / Have no clue what you're doing / Are just there to put a video or photo on YouTube - You give the rest of us a bad name, but you're legally able to do so.

Don't get me wrong Brook, I'm all for people having their privacy - but you are not allowing people to choose if you sheild them from things that YOU don't think they should see.

Sime

[candleman]

Originally Posted by candleman

well..news needs to be reported, but it needs to be done respectfully.
what this DOESNT tell us, or show us, is the manner in which it was being done.
it also doesntr say if he was an actual reporter/videographer for a news agency, or if he was some guy with a camera hoping top make a quick buck.

i think its entirely possible he was doing it in an inappropriate manner.

d'oh,.. there was more to the article i didnt see..

he was filming from an overhead embankment.. but still its a 50/50 situation.
were there bodies of children he was filming... how high or far away was the embankment?
not enough detail to make a call on it IMHO
either side could be right depending on the situation.

bear in mind this entire site is dedicated to making the cops look wrong, and as far as i've seen its written by one guy.
so i doubt the full story is being told in this article.

[bethard728]

Sime, the photo you posted is fine IMO. I don't see any "bodies". I think the article posted here is very vague and biased to take the photographer's side. There are many details left to the imagination in the article. From the sounds of the article, he was asked several times to stop shooting and chose to keep shooting anyway. He very well may have been doing everything legally and respectfully but I'm guessing with the officer's reaction he must have been being disrespectful at the least. Not saying the officer had a right to do what she did, but not saying I disagree with what she did either. Just my 2 cents.

[kirbinster]

"though they are not allowed to photograph crimes scenes before the scene has been processed"

Please show me where in the constitution the above claim is made!

[praline3001]

I see where your coming from Sime ~

There is a great service respectful journalist provide. They keep the rest of the world honest. This is a good thing.

The example of the bus is a good one. There are no dead bodies hanging out of the windows, there is no screeching mothers holding their dead children. It tells a story and brings to the viewers eye the need for policy change.

To photograph and record something for the sheer shock value or to make a quick buck off of a family's grieving moment is far different.

There are lines photographers should not cross. Photographing dead accident victims is where I see that line crossed.

As I stated, The photographer had the right to take the photos. But where does rights and decency (ethics) mesh? KWIM?

I will use a bit of my personal experience. My cousin was 17 and a dumb teenager who had just broken up with his grilfriend. He was flying down an old country road and smashed into a tree. They had to use the jaws of life to get him out of the car. He spent almost 3 months in a coma and has SEVERE mental retardation from this accident. He is more like a 6 year old child than the 30 year old man he should be due to one stupid mistake.
I just so happened was driving by right after the accident and saw the jaws of life, the news crew and police. I pulled over and introduced myself as family to my cousin. After that I was bombarded with news crews asking me if he was on drugs or drinking ... with cameras in my face ~ all the while I couldn't talk to the cops to find out if my cousin was still alive, where was he taken and important information so I could contact the rest of the family. What is the news value in photographing me?! I wasn't even there nor did I know what happened. It was for the sheer shock value. During the 10pm news my grandfather saw his grandson's head nailed to the car and the jaws of life pulling him out. We had NOT told grandpa yet as he was (he has since passed away) very old with a very weak hear. We wanted to get all of the facts before calling him. It was a horrid horrid moment for that old man to see that on TV =(

There are many ways of telling a story, of showing people the world without being disrespectful. I find photographing the dead without the family permission wrong.

[Sime]

Originally Posted by bethard728

Sime, the photo you posted is fine IMO. I don't see any "bodies". I think the article posted here is very vague and biased to take the photographer's side. There are many details left to the imagination in the article. From the sounds of the article, he was asked several times to stop shooting and chose to keep shooting anyway. He very well may have been doing everything legally and respectfully but I'm guessing with the officer's reaction he must have been being disrespectful at the least. Not saying the officer had a right to do what she did, but not saying I disagree with what she did either. Just my 2 cents.

The photo I posted was fine - sure. We didn't get to see the guys footage. The photos of people coming out of the tube station with blood running down their faces after some person set off a nail bomb... They were fine too. (The general public were not forced to watch, but there was a duty to report)

I'm not being argumentative - but journalists have a duty to report what they see / what is news worthy. We don't get to decide what is news worthy. (Like comment 31 says) I'm a nice journo and if asked to move on, 6 times out of 10 I will... But if I feel that something needs covering, if people need to know (The people that choose to watch / read etc)

Police have NO right (within the law) to do what they did, and it keeps happening world wide.

Sime (A very calm Sime that just wants BOTH sides of the story in perspective - which is what we don't have from that article)