Right to Record Police & No Immunity, 1st Fed Ct. of Appeals sez

[Kirk Freeman]

A Boston attorney prevailed in his right to record the police. Further, the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals denied the police "qualified immunity" for arrest the attorney.

Court says public has right to video police in public places | Universal Hub

 

[GBuck]

I can't believe that in some states you have to have permission from all parties to record something.

 

[CarmelHP]

There are relatively few "two-party" states, but we now have to get the Circuits that the others are in aligned with the 1st Cir. decision. At least the 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 9th have one of the 11 two party states.

 

[Prometheus]

1st circuit court of appeals unanimous decision- RIGHT to film officials.

ADDED BY MOD: Dupe, threads merged, this is the OP of the second thread. SmileDocHill

Some pretty bold wording for a unanimous decision.

A Victory for Recording in Public! | Citizen Media Law Project

I can't copy paste fromt he article itself but definitely read it, it's well written with a lot of back story from this courts earlier decision. i.e. they use terms like 'self evident'.

from the decision:

"s there a constitutionally protected right to videotape police carrying out their duties in public? Basic First Amendment principles, along with case law from this and other circuits, answer that question unambiguously in the affirmative."

"Glik filmed the defendant police officers in the Boston Common, the oldest city park in the United States and the apotheosis of a public forum. In such traditional public spaces, the rights of the state to limit the exercise of First Amendment activity are 'sharply circumscribed.'

"[A] citizen's right to film government officials, including law enforcement officers, in the discharge of their duties in a public space is a basic, vital, and well-established liberty safeguarded by the First Amendment."

"Gathering information about government officials in a form that can readily be disseminated to others serves a cardinal First Amendment interest in protecting and promoting 'the free discussion of governmental affairs.'"

 

[SEIndSAM]

It sounds like a pretty good outcome, but I wonder if it will be applied to the Illinois law because it's in a different Federal district?

 

[Kutnupe14]

It sounds like a pretty good outcome, but I wonder if it will be applied to the Illinois law because it's in a different Federal district?

Nope, whatever district IL is in, the Court will have to hear a similar case.

 

[Freedom_Bound]

A citizen should have the right to video tape law enforcement as long as that person is NOT interfering with an investigation and jeopordizing the officer's safety. The person video taping should be a considerable distance away!!!

 

[jmiller676]

A citizen should have the right to video tape law enforcement as long as that person is NOT interfering with an investigation and jeopordizing the officer's safety. The person video taping should be a considerable distance away!!!

So the person in the car can't film to protect his/her own ass?

 

[SEIndSAM]

Nope, whatever district IL is in, the Court will have to hear a similar case.

That's what I thought. Thanks for the confirmation Kutnupe.

 

[Westside]

A citizen should have the right to video tape law enforcement as long as that person is NOT interfering with an investigation and jeopordizing the officer's safety. The person video taping should be a considerable distance away!!!

What do you define as a "considerable distance away" 1ft 10ft a mile?

I agree with the first part of your statement. However the last sentence is too vague, and in my opinion not needed.

 

[CarmelHP]

Dupe.

https://www.indianagunowners.com/fo...ty_1st_fed_ct_of_appeals_sez.html#post2128130

 

[Kutnupe14]

That's what I thought. Thanks for the confirmation Kutnupe.

No problem, and be happy that's the way things are done. I shutter to think what would befall us all if the Wacky 9th Circuit (California) had any jurisdiction over us.

 

[SmileDocHill]

So is the bit about the "recorder" being in plain sight relevant to Indiana? Our law is written such that just so one of the parties involved know a conversation is being recorded you are OK (even if it is not known to the other parties.)

It looks like they are going rounds in their state because it would have not been OK if a recording was being made and all parties were not aware of it. In this case if the guy doing the recording kept the recording device in his pocket the wire tapping charge may have stuck.

 

[jedi]

Nope, whatever district IL is in, the Court will have to hear a similar case.

& the recent IL court case sadly went **FOR** the defendent (ie. she was found NOT guilty) so that case did not make it to the appeal level and thus the verdict only counts in her favor only.

 

[ryknoll3]

Nope, whatever district IL is in, the Court will have to hear a similar case.

Illinois and Indiana are both in the 7th Circuit Court district.

 

[Denny347]

So is the bit about the "recorder" being in plain sight relevant to Indiana? Our law is written such that just so one of the parties involved know a conversation is being recorded you are OK (even if it is not known to the other parties.)

It looks like they are going rounds in their state because it would have not been OK if a recording was being made and all parties were not aware of it. In this case if the guy doing the recording kept the recording device in his pocket the wire tapping charge may have stuck.

Actually Indiana law is pretty cut and dry on this issue. So long as one party knows they are being recorded, 100% legal. That is it. If you want to record your phone conversations with another person, you don't have to tell them. If you want to record a interaction with police, mailman, clerk, Jesus...great, as long as you know you are being recorded, they do not have to be informed. This is sillyness coming from other States. I am glad we are a bit more sensible here about this particular issue.

 

[Gabriel]

This is sillyness coming from other States. I am glad we are a bit more sensible here about this particular issue.

I agree. Being arrested for recording the police is ridiculous.