Surveillance: When everyone is being watched some feel they are above the law aka Police.
Chris Drew staged to be arrested to
fight against the laws pertaining to selling art in public and ended up getting
charged a felony not for illegally selling his art “but for violating the
Illinois Eavesdropping Act.” This
is ridiculous because he was in public and its not like he was spying on the
cops. In the video, the cops
clearly see the video being recorded and do nothing about it as well. Drew’s charges for not having a peddlers
license and peddling in a un authorized space were dropped yet he still was
prosecuted for a felony for illegal recording which he could serve four to
fifteen years in prison.
Are cameras new guns?
“Illinois, Massachusetts, and
Maryland are among the 12 states in which all parties must consent for a
recording to be legal unless, as with TV news crews, it is obvious to all that
recording is underway.” How does
one make sure to be obvious that recording is underway? With the new age of technology do
Internet news crews count or is it limited to TV crews? What about security cameras? Would this not entail that having a
security video camera in your storefront be considered wiretapping?
They have made exceptions for
public spaces being recorded because there is no expectation of privacy. I think this applies to being a police
officer. When on duty police
(unless they are detectives for a missing person or murder case) they should
have no right to privacy. They are
public servants here to serve the US citizens. They have so much power and authority that they should be
expected to be scrutinized and constantly under heavy surveillance. Not to mention they get paid very well
for their jobs as well. If they
can’t handle the pressure of a camera, how can they handle a murder or hostage
situation?
It is interesting and hypocritical
that if cops have pictures taken of them doing good things like rescuing kids
or dogs they have no qualms. Yet,
once they are doing a bad job they are up in arms and arresting people. In the case of Anthony John Graber,
Graber we motorcycling on the highway with his video camera already recording
his actions when a un-marked cop pulls in front of him and draws his gun. I watched the video and it is clear
that Graber is being compliant and the police officer is trying to show his
dominance and power. Graber was
not arrested until ten days later when he posted the video to YouTube and they
charged him for wiretapping. I
find this utterly disgusting. I
have been watching videos of police brutality online since they existed and I
have not heard the case of being charged for wiretapping yet. I’ve seen videos where cops tell people
to stop recording or try to block the camera with their hands or body. This is usually due to cops saying that
the videographer is interfering with the crime or too close which is way more
understandable than wiretapping.
One more point about this case is that Graber was already recording when
the police voluntarily got into view of the video. This should apply similarly to if news cameras are
“obviously” already recording.
1 comment:
I had the same reaction you did when reading the Anthony John Graber account. What I found particularly ludicrous was the fact that Garber was arrested after the fact especially when it shows the officer exhibiting unnecessary force. I'm curious to know if there were any consequences for the officer pulling the gun on Garber, as this was an obvious attempt to cover up the officers actions. Like you mentioned earlier, had the camera captured the cop doing something noble or kind the video probably would have been posted to the departments homepage or gone viral with the title "theres still hope for humanity" or some other hyperbolic sentiment.
Post a Comment