portland independent media center  
images audio video
newswire article reposts united states

human & civil rights | police / legal

Filming the police - appeals case win in Boston

The obvious truth is respected:
A Boston lawyer suing the city and police officers who arrested him for using his cell phone to record a drug arrest on the Common won a victory today when a federal appeals court.

You can film the police while they are in public doing thier job.

In its ruling, which lets Simon Glik continue his lawsuit. The US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in Boston said the way [lawyer] Glik was arrested and his phone seized under a state wiretapping law violated his First and Fourth Amendment rights:
 http://www.universalhub.com/2011/court-says-state-law-banning-recording-police-offi

Court says public has right to video police in public places

By adamg - 8/26/11 - 4:29 pm
A Boston lawyer suing the city and police officers who arrested him for using his cell phone to record a drug arrest on the Common won a victory today when a federal appeals court said the officers could not claim "qualified immunity" because they were performing their job when they arrested him under a state law that bars audio recordings without the consent of both parties.

In its ruling, which lets Simon Glik continue his lawsuit, the US Court of Appeals for the First Circuit in Boston said the way Glik was arrested and his phone seized under a state wiretapping law violated his First and Fourth Amendment rights:


The First Amendment issue here is, as the parties frame it, fairly narrow: is 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. It is firmly established that the First Amendment's aegis extends further than the text's proscription on laws "abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press," and encompasses a range of conduct related to the gathering and dissemination of information. As the Supreme Court has observed, "the First Amendment goes beyond protection of the press and the self-expression of individuals to prohibit government from limiting the stock of information from which members of the public may draw." ...

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."

The court noted that past decisions on police recording had involved fulltime reporters, but said the First Amendment does not apply just to professional news gatherers.


Moreover, changes in technology and society have made the lines between private citizen and journalist exceedingly difficult to draw. The proliferation of electronic devices with video-recording capability means that many of our images of current events come from bystanders with a ready cell phone or digital camera rather than a traditional film crew, and news stories are now just as likely to be broken by a blogger at her computer as a reporter at a major newspaper. Such developments make clear why the news-gathering protections of the First Amendment cannot turn on professional credentials or status.

The court continued that while exercise of these rights do come with limits in certain circumstances, an arrest on the Boston Common, "the oldest city park in the United States and the apotheosis of a public forum," is not one of them.


•Complete ruling  http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/pdf.opinions/10-1764P-01A.pdf

homepage: homepage: http://www.joeanybody.com


check the link 29.Aug.2011 17:40

joe anybody

the 24 page "complete ruling" [link at end of the article] is pretty good - with lots of informations

Great news! But this needs to be settled at the federal level 29.Aug.2011 17:41

justsomedude

there is no reason someone shouldn't be able to film/record the police in a public setting.