Good to know: Cops don't like it when you video them in their station

A Charlestown man learned that lesson last week when he wound up under arrest inside the Brighton police station, the Tab reports.

The guy was there with a friend, who was filling out a report on an unspecified incident. Allegedly, the guy kept getting in the way, but when police told him to sit down, he refused, said he could stand anywhere he wanted, pulled out a camera and announced he was now streaming the officers live to his home computer. He was then arrested and booked on charges of disturbing the peace and videotaping somebody without his consent.

Sounds a bit like the Glik case earlier this year, only without any of those messy moral or ethical issues.

Smart until proven a dumbass.

Neighborhoods: 

Topics: 

Free tagging: 

    Comments

    Yup

    Quoting from the Glik link:

    In the "controversial 2001 Commonwealth v. Hyde ruling"... "Massachusetts’s highest court stated"... "that the defendant would not have been convicted had 'he held the tape recorder in plain sight'"

    up
    Voting is closed. 6

    "videotaping without consent"

    By on

    What a disturbing law... I hope this won't be used to keep video evidence out of trials, like, for example, police brutality (Rodney King) etc.

    What about when a cop pulls you over, and their car is videotaping the exchange? Certainly it can be used against either person (cop, driver) but I have never heard of a cop obtaining consent to videotape during a traffic stop.

    That said, it sounds like this person was being a douche, but I wonder if it could have been remedied without an arrest. Stern warnings can be effective on most people.

    up
    Voting is closed. 7

    who says it is a law?

    By on

    I've seen BPD make up all sorts of crap in BPDNews that I can never find in the MGLs.

    In this case, the only reference I can find is to MA laws preventing people from photographing or videotaping people who are a)partially or completely nude and b)not intending to be videotaped. Aka, the guy running down the street is fair game, the guy skinnydipping with his wife in their hot tub is not.

    If you're in a police station, public property- I don't really see how they can claim you don't have a right to videotape non-covertly.

    up
    Voting is closed. 10

    Yeah...

    That's what I was wondering. Is "videotaping someone without their consent" actually against the law? Don't people do that everyday? Seems that would put quite a stranglehold on the news.

    up
    Voting is closed. 10

    I think it is legal to

    I think it is legal to videotape as long there is no sound. With sound requires a signed contract to consent before broadcasting.

    up
    Voting is closed. 14

    Only for broadcasting?

    By on

    Isn't it one of those things where you can record all you want, but you can't play the segments with someone on it for anyone else without the taped person's consent?

    up
    Voting is closed. 5

    Heres what probably happened

    1)The cops are helping someone fill out a report (investigating a crime)

    2)Someone is intefering with the criminal investigation (the kid being annoying)

    3)The police tell the kid to stop

    4)The kid doesnt stop (he is now being disorderly)

    5)Who knows about the "secret" audiotaping. Thats one of those crazy crimes.

    Basically, the kid was an asshole, and if we had a videotape of everything that happened we would all want the kid beaten!

    up
    Voting is closed. 7

    pete could have nailed it

    By on

    anyone thats ever been in district 14 must have some knowledge of "the bench". when i was younger i had to go in to bail out a few friends and was always told to sit on the bench.sometimes they were nice, sometimes they were not so nice.i have also been in there in more recent years to pick up accident forms and been treated rudely and told to sit on the bench.its been a few years since the last time but sometimes these cops behind the desk are pissed off at the world and want to make sure you know who is in charge.

    the other side of this is the old "whats your badge number/"i'll have your job"/"i know my rights"/"do you know who my father is?" people. this kid was probably arguing with the desk officer and things got a little heated. then einstein decides to tell the cops that he has all this streaming back to his computer. once you threaten a cop with any kind of thing he is going to find a reason to lock you up ,even just to shut you up. it makes me wonder if this guy actually has this on video? did they get a warrant to search for this video? if there is no video does the charge get dismissed?

    up
    Voting is closed. 13

    Video or not ...

    The charges have to have legal justification. If they don't, charges will be dropped.

    Making shit up out of your ass because someone offended your sense of superior authority doesn't start with MGL.

    up
    Voting is closed. 8

    Just start with the disorderly

    and then you can add the other charges. The kid wasnt arrested for the audio taping, he was arrested for the disorderly (or thats the way the cops can get away with it). Then add on the other charge and see what the DA or clerk thinks. You have at least some sort of reasonable suspicion for the taping charge.

    And MGL Ch. 272 s.99 is the statute that would be used for the other crime. Its a stretch but basically a private citizen cannot record an oral conversation between two other parties.

    If the kid was arrested on just this charge then there might be a problem. He was basically arrested on the Disorderly charge (the asshole law) and the other one was added on.

    up
    Voting is closed. 23