The following was submitted by Camron Wiltshire.
From the video description:
“Man filming a street march in Norfolk, Virginia, USA, when an unmarked police car pulls into the camera frame. A high-ranking cop becomes furious and threatens the citizen, and another cop breaks the camera when he knocks it out of the citizen’s hand and it falls to the ground.”
Beautiful example of recording the police! He filmed everything around him.
As a bonus it sounds like he already has a lawyer. I hope to hear more about his successful lawsuit
Great film! The filmer has some large attachments. I respect that. I do not think he chose the best way to interact with the officers. Note that the officer was very polite (even if wrong). It is possible and recommended to be polite in return, but there is no reason to relinquish your rights. If there was actually a situation of “causing a disturbance” it was definitely the officers causing the disturbance.
My best wishes that the filmer prevails in court, if that’s where this is going. Sometimes expensive, but worth every penny. Unfortunately, you do not necessarily get the justice you deserve, but you usually get the justice you can afford (with a good attorney). Been there. Done that.
© December 10, 2011
NORFOLK
Alton Robinson was doing what America’s judicial system has ruled is his right when he recorded video at a New Black Panther Party march in April on Goff Street.
Robinson panned the area with his flipcam, which included a Salvation Army event nearby being attended by his daughter. It also included several Norfolk police officers observing the march.
The officers approached him and told him he was not allowed to record them. After Robinson protested, police arrested him.
Robinson, a former president of the Park Place Civic League and a member of the city manager’s budget advisory committee, was jailed and bail was set at $1,000. Police also took his cameras and a bag of lenses.
On Nov. 29, a Norfolk General District Court judge dismissed the charges against Robinson. The American Civil Liberties Union represented him.
“What all of this was was the police just hassling him,” Patrick Anderson, one of the lawyers who handled the case, said in a statement. “If this thing had not been on video, then this man would have had to face the word of two police officers and
would have been in trouble in court.”
The incident brings to light the realities that police now operate in, where many people carry camera phones and think nothing of recording officers as they go about their work.
Filming police is a constitutional right. But in some cases, police tell people that recording them violates wiretap laws.
The Virginia ACLU says it has noticed an increase in recent years in the confrontations that occur between police and people filming them. Stories and videos about police seizing cameras are abundant online.
- Last month, Washington, D.C.’s police chief apologized to a news videographer after an officer threatened him for filming at a crime scene. “You can’t be out here videotaping. They’re going to seize your camera as evidence,” the officer told him, according to video on WTOP’s website.
- Richmond police arrested a photographer for RVA Magazine on Halloween on a trespassing charge as he crossed the street while police were clearing the city’s Occupy Richmond camp. Other people on each side of the street without cameras were not arrested, the magazine reported.
- A woman in Rochester, N.Y., was arrested in May for videotaping a traffic stop while she stood in her front yard.
In an August ruling, the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that filming police officers performing their duties in public “fits comfortably” within basic First Amendment principles and can aid in uncovering abuses.
The case involved Simon Glik, who was arrested in 2007 on charges that he violated Massachusetts wiretap law and disturbed the peace while using his cell phone to record police officers arresting a young man in Boston Common park.
The court affirmed that Glik was exercising his First Amendment rights and that police violated his Fourth Amendment rights by arresting him. The appellate court also rejected a claim by three officers that they were immune from being sued.
Local police departments say they tell officers that they will be recorded.
“We tell them, ‘Not only can you be videotaped, but you need to expect to be videotaped, especially now in the era of smartphones,’ ” Norfolk police spokesman Chris Amos said.
Amos said he could not comment on whether the officers involved in the Robinson incident were disciplined or given instruction, because it was a personnel matter. Officers are told not to interfere with people videotaping them unless those people are interfering, he said.
As in Norfolk, police in Virginia Beach give similar instructions, said Jimmy Barnes, a department spokesman.
“Everybody has camcorders or phones,” he said. “At the Oceanfront, can you imagine how many cameras are down there on a weekend night during the summer?”
Robinson is known within the Norfolk Police Department. A video he made of officers detaining and releasing a young man in 2007 in Park Place was placed on YouTube with his commentary, which criticized the officers’ actions.
The video from Robinson’s recording at the Black Panther march shows that he filmed the Panthers as they lined up. He then videotaped several police cars. An officer waved at him, the video shows, and Robinson waved back.
The video shows another man filming, and Robinson said several others were also filming with camcorders or cell phones.
Robinson also recorded Sgt. Phillip Dixon, who was sitting in uniform inside an unmarked car also holding a camera.
Dixon got out, walked to Robinson and asked, “Why are you recording me, sir? I’m not giving you permission to record me.”
He asked who Robinson was, and Robinson gave his name.
“Mr. Robinson, I know you very well,” said Dixon, who told him he was only allowed to record the march.
“If you’re going to place my photograph on Facebook… I am telling you that there will be repercussions.”
Officer DeAndre Hyman told Robinson, “It’s against the law to record without a permit.”
As Robinson protested, Hyman grabbed his camera and put it face-down on a car, where it continued to record audio of the confrontation. Police wrote Robinson a summons charging him with unlawful filming, he said. He was arrested after he refused to sign it.
A magistrate did not grant police that charge, but charged Robinson with two misdemeanors – unlawfully refusing to give his name and disorderly conduct. Based on evidence provided by Dixon and Hyman, the magistrate wrote, Robinson “tried to incite ‘New Black Panthers.’ “
@common sense-You found the article that goes with this post. But what are you trying to say?
thanks for the info Common
Let the pig arrest him and sue him and the state for false imprisonment and civil rights violations. Hey ANY OF YOU COPS PLEASE ARREST ME FOR FILMING YOU, I need a quick payout…….
..!.(‘_’).!..
Sadly, the article, like some that have been posted, lack details, locations, names, even dates. Its difficult to have faith in articles put forth by a ‘submission’ page that lacks proof/support.
Unless it was posted on PoliceOne or some other bootlicker site, of course. Then it would be gospel.
Seeing how this is a site which allows various people to post their stories and opinions, and not a news outlet, journal, or research library, there’s no reason to include extensive verification information. These are not scientific or research papers. If you are concerned about the accuracy of the information you can spend (or waste) your time fact checking independent sources yourself. Nobody here needs to prove shit.
Seeing how when we do hear stories like this with facts they usually are as this one is written. True! Police have a fundamental issue with being filmed and how many more court decisions do we need? Lawsuits? The fact the Court of appeals for the 1st had to issue a ruling on a denial of qualified immunity to the police who arrested Glick is uneblievable. In that ruling they stated what should be obvious to anyone in this country that citizens have a right to film, record, document and disseminate information on their public officials. The fact that departments need retraining or memos or policies on how to deal with those that film them is a testament to the colossal failure of the so called constitutional law training cadets receive.
YF: Not to start a pissing contest…but go back to the video. I’m not in anyway saying that, within the constraints of this video, that the Filmer was wrong. But there is obviously a history between the officer and said Filmer. Now I certainly don’t know what that is, but it clearly exists. If this Filmer posts defamatory, slanderous or libelous things about him….he should seek relief through the civil court system. The types of things that I just listed are not protected speech. He should have used the correct outlet.
Maybe the cop was Amish, and this was a transgression against his faith, thus a 1st Amendment violation.
Once again (lack of) Common Sense shows he has no idea what the Bill of Rights is about.
All cops lie, all the time.
Disarm cops for a safer America.
videographers need to learn that the less said the better when confronted by leos for filming. Are you lawfully detaining me? I don’t wish to have a conversation with you. Please go about your business and leave me alone. Am I under arrest? That’s about the extent of it.
Here’s a perfect example of what’s wrong with the police – at least some of them. The first officer – let’s call him officer dumbass – doesn’t like what the filmer is doing, nevermind that it has been established as a lawful activity, and uses his position of authority to accost and harass the filmmaker – including threats of repercussions (doesn’t a threat like that fall under the heading of official oppression?). Meanwhile, his buddy, officer number 2 – let’s call him officer sycophant – comes to his aid with either a complete misunderstanding of the law (showing an utter lack of ability to properly perform his duties) or an outright lie (showing an inability to morally and ethically perform those duties). These two retards – sorry, I meant officers – attempt to physically intimidate the filmmaker with confrontational body language – moving in close and surrounding the filmer, with support officers in the background – causing a scene, then suggesting that the filmmaker is the cause of the disturbance, after confronting him for doing absolutely nothing wrong. Finally, as if leave no doubt as to their thuggish behavior, they destroy his property. And cops wonder why the people that have to endure antagonistic behavior like this from them are not inclined to be civil to them…
I sense a rather large settlement check for the filmer in the future. And from the smell, somebody needs to change common senses diaper.
Who created the history, T? The cop or the fimlmaker? I think that would matter.
I will says this as well. When we see stories like this it is usually the officer who is the issue. Not always but a most of the time and they do misquote laws or misuse them when making an arrest and what I said overall still stands as police just do not seem to get it in this area. If this guy was at fault he is an ass. If there is a history, where did it begin abnd who started it?
It doesn’t matter what their history is. All that matters is what happened HERE in this story.
YF: Not to be disrespectful, but I know you know better than what you just wrote. If filmer guy….is the one FILMING….and said filmer guy is the one posting said film on-line….how can it possibly be anyone other than filmer guy??? Dude, come on. I said that this wasn’t handled right, but all you come back with is that?