Character Assasination Case ?

[MackRoe]

I would like to get some input from my associates on this forum as to how to respond to a situation that happened back in the spring of 2006. I was in a "buffet style" restaurant with my sister who was visiting from out-of-town. We had completed our early dinner, when I noticed a table nearby where a fairly large family was seated, with Mom & Dad and about 4-5 kiddies all having a great time enjoying their meal. I mentioned this family to my sister, and being the outgoing and personable fellow that I am, I went over to the table and complimented the parents for such a fine looking family, and then advised I was a photographer, and asked the parents if they would mind if I went out and got my camera and shot some inconspicious shots from my booth where the kids would not be paying me any attention, in order to get some "candid" shots. They were very nice and agreeable, laughing with me about their family size, saying what a job is was to control them all, and heartily gave me permission to shoot my pictures. My sister, seated about 10feet away, overheard my question and their affirmative reply, so theres no question about their giving me permission.

Well, you can guess what happened. Not lomg after I started getting some fairly decent shots of their kids clowning around as they ate their dinner, the restaurant manager came over and asked me why I had a camera inside his establishment. I very politely explained that I was a photographer and had the parents permission to take some shots. He and the female manager with him laughed and said, O.K. ,no problem, shoot away, but that he "had to ask" so he' would know what was going on. I may have shot 2-5 pictures after that, and then set my camera down on the booth seat. Next thing I know, a white male police officer comes up to my table and says "Sir, would you step outside with me, please ?" I was so stunned, I said "Excuse me ?" He then asked again, so off I went with this officer while the whole area I was seated in watched with great interest.

Anyway, I was detained outside for 30-45 mins, while customers went inside and came outside, embarrasing me extremely, as these officers searched through my camera bad, with my permission at 1st, until I asked what I was being charged with and did they have a warrant to search my vehicle. They almost took me to jail, made me stand outside for every bit of 30-40 mins while assumedly they conferred with InterPol, Scotland Yard and the FBI, since they had caught the ringleader of a large child pornography ring, operating as a pretend photog guy in a clandestine restaurant location in broad daylight with the parents express permission. At last, they made my sister and I flee the restaurant.

I have been debating for months about hiring an attorney to represent me against the restaurant at the least, and maybe name the police municipality in the action also. What say ye, my fellows, what would you do ???? Thanks much, Mackroe

[JCR]

Being a parent myself I am guarded against strangers with my kids. The police are only really doing their job. Look at it this way, you are likely harmless but if they catch just one 'nonce' then it's one less on the streets harrasing or harming kids.

I can understand your anger too as a photographer, I get prickly when my rights are infringed.
I love kids would never hurt one but that don't mean others are of same mind. Sad part of life in todays society I guess. My opinion is let it go, chalk it to experience and be satisfied the police are doing what they get paid to do, keep everyone safe including you, Although you asked permission from the family (doing the right thing) If I caught someone snapping off shots of my kids in a street without permission they would probably need a skilled team of surgeons to retrieve their camera.

I would ask to see a copy of the police report on the subject to be sure nothing detrimental was stored on you if its ok, let it go mate.

[SimonG]

I have been debating for months about hiring an attorney to represent me against the restaurant at the least ...
What did the restaurant do to deserve a lawsuit? Were they the ones to call the police in the first place? If not, how did the police become involved?

Also, did the family do nothing to let the officer know that you had their permission? :confused:

[dewmuw]

What for? Hurt feelings?

I once heard that there are more lawyers in the US than the rest of the world put together. Now I can understand why.

[Wazza]

Do you wish to get compensation for this? Was the restaurant even involved? Or just the cops secretly scoping out places for this sort of act?

At most, I could see an apology from the police if they stepped a bit over line, but that's their job.. guilty until proven innocence.

[SuzyView]

Even though people are in public, some do not like being even reflected in a photograph and think their rights are being denied. You may have had permission to take pictures of this family, others may have thought you were out of line. I live in the DC area and photography is not allowed in certain places due to the security restrictions. Yes, I feel my rights are being restricted, but it's in the name of security and authorities here are very sensitive to the possibility of "bad people" around. I don't know if you have any idea who called the police on you, but it is the state of affairs, I'm afraid. Everyone has a cell phone. That's why I don't take candid pictures of people on the street anymore, don't want the hassle.

[Becca]

What for? Hurt feelings?

I agree. You weren't hurt in any way except being embarassed. Did you deserve the treatment you recieved? No, but I don't think its worth legal action.

[tlc]

I agree. You weren't hurt in any way except being embarassed. Did you deserve the treatment you recieved? No, but I don't think its worth legal action.

me agrees. in this day and age, it is to be expected.

[DocFrankenstein]

At most, I could see an apology from the police if they stepped a bit over line, but that's their job.. guilty until proven innocence.
I think you have that reversed man...

I'll marry a lawyer. :confused:

[condyk]

Get over it ... IMO you should have just filed it as a learning experience on the day. If you hold onto this kind of stuff and let it fester then the only person that suffers is you.

[tiziano]

I don't see the problem. You have been questioned, checked, and then released. No damage to anybody. You wasted some time, ok, but it happens to all of us to waste time, it can be at the mail office, at the bank, or when cops stop you.
This is the other side of security. If you want to be defended, that's it.
How would you feel if you were the victim of a crime, and, when you reported it, police answered you that they cannot do anything, because if they go out, check people and ask questions, people gets offended.
Don't fell bad about what other people think when they see the police holding you. If you have done nothing wrong, who cares about what other people think?
Just my two cents.

[cosworth]

Do they have public book burnings in Atlanta too?

Cops went too far. But you have zero recourse. Complain to the local paper, maybe someone there has been harassed and will sympathize. You may get an editorial letter published out of it.

It won't be a deterrent to future unwarranted harassment but it will bring some closure for you.

[Steve Parr]

First off, someone doesn't need to call the police for the police to get involved. That very notion is silly. If a cop sees something which, in his opinion, is irregular, he has a duty to investigate it.

Honestly, it sounds like you have a very real problem with authority. Unless you were handcuffed at the time, why would it embarrass you to have people see you talking to a cop?

And what does "almost taken to jail" mean? You either are, or you aren't. It's like being "a little bit" pregnant. You either are or you aren't.

Frankly, I don't see any point in hiring an attorney over this. It just sounds silly, and seems to be the result of someone being waaaay too sensitive. Hiring an attorney, to tell you that you have no case, will only result in your having to give a lot of money to an attorney.

Tell ya' what, send me half of what you'd pay an attorney, and I'll tell you the same thing...

:rolleyes:

[gjl711]

You never did say if they told you why you are being detained. Was it a complaint from someone or the police just being nasty?

[Plan9]

First off, someone doesn't need to call the police for the police to get involved. That very notion is silly. If a cop sees something which, in his opinion, is irregular, he has a duty to investigate it.

Honestly, it sounds like you have a very real problem with authority. Unless you were handcuffed at the time, why would it embarrass you to have people see you talking to a cop?

And what does "almost taken to jail" mean? You either are, or you aren't. It's like being "a little bit" pregnant. You either are or you aren't.

Frankly, I don't see any point in hiring an attorney over this. It just sounds silly, and seems to be the result of someone being waaaay too sensitive. Hiring an attorney, to tell you that you have no case, will only result in your having to give a lot of money to an attorney.

Tell ya' what, send me half of what you'd pay an attorney, and I'll tell you the same thing...

:rolleyes:

And taken photographs of a family whose permission you had obtained is irregular in...what way exactly? You can bet I'd be furious if a cop even attempted to stop or search me for taking photographs, as its infringing on my first amendment rights. Its slightly different in a private establishment, but in this case, his intentions were made clear to the manager of that establishment. Shall we just start letting police detain photographers for unspecified amounts of times, at their discretion, if they feel their actions are "suspicious"?

And to people saying "Sounds like you have a problem with authority"...have you ever actually been detained or searched in a public place? Its not exactly the most pleasant thing in the world, especially if it happens right in front of a family establishment.

[dewmuw]

And taken photographs of a family whose permission you had obtained is irregular in...what way exactly? You can bet I'd be furious if a cop even attempted to stop or search me for taking photographs, as its infringing on my first amendment rights. Its slightly different in a private establishment, but in this case, his intentions were made clear to the manager of that establishment. Shall we just start letting police detain photographers for unspecified amounts of times, at their discretion, if they feel their actions are "suspicious"?

And to people saying "Sounds like you have a problem with authority"...have you ever actually been detained or searched in a public place? Its not exactly the most pleasant thing in the world, especially if it happens right in front of a family establishment.

For all we know someone else in the restaurant might have compalined to the police. The original post says "while the whole area I was seated in watched with great interest." Which implies that there were other people about who could see a guy in a restaurant taking pictures of kids.

I can't speak for the police in the US, but certainly in the UK the police are there exactly to stop and question people who are acting suspiciously.

[Plan9]

Being a parent myself I am guarded against strangers with my kids. The police are only really doing their job. Look at it this way, you are likely harmless but if they catch just one 'nonce' then it's one less on the streets harrasing or harming kids.

I can understand your anger too as a photographer, I get prickly when my rights are infringed.
I love kids would never hurt one but that don't mean others are of same mind. Sad part of life in todays society I guess. My opinion is let it go, chalk it to experience and be satisfied the police are doing what they get paid to do, keep everyone safe including you, Although you asked permission from the family (doing the right thing) If I caught someone snapping off shots of my kids in a street without permission they would probably need a skilled team of surgeons to retrieve their camera.

I would ask to see a copy of the police report on the subject to be sure nothing detrimental was stored on you if its ok, let it go mate.

...and if anyone laid a finger on me or my camera while photographing anything whatsoever in a public area, I'd make sure they'd need a skilled team of lawyers to keep a penny to their name! :]

If you don't want your kids to be photographed, maybe you should just pull a Michael Jackson and get them a veil. I mean who knows what sick perverts might even want to look at your kids faces! God forbid!

[dewmuw]

...and if anyone laid a finger on me or my camera while photographing anything whatsoever in a public area, I'd make sure they'd need a skilled team of lawyers to keep a penny to their name! :]

If you don't want your kids to be photographed, maybe you should just pull a Michael Jackson and get them a veil. I mean who knows what sick perverts might even want to look at your kids faces! God forbid!

So we should be allowed to photograph whatever and whoever we like? No restrictions?

[tiziano]

have you ever actually been detained or searched in a public place? Its not exactly the most pleasant thing in the world, especially if it happens right in front of a family establishment.

Yes. many times. Lately, everytime I fly to US. When I was younger, while driving my bike, about once a week. There was a special police team called "the hawks", in my own city, whose habit was to stop you, shout a lot, give you a couple of slaps, search you, and then send you away with a couple of more shouts.
And they were even too nice to me, given the way I used to drive...

[Becca]

...and if anyone laid a finger on me or my camera while photographing anything whatsoever in a public area, I'd make sure they'd need a skilled team of lawyers to keep a penny to their name! :]

If you don't want your kids to be photographed, maybe you should just pull a Michael Jackson and get them a veil. I mean who knows what sick perverts might even want to look at your kids faces! God forbid!

:rolleyes: Just shaking my head in disbelief...

[tiziano]

...and if anyone laid a finger on me or my camera while photographing anything whatsoever in a public area, I'd make sure they'd need a skilled team of lawyers to keep a penny to their name!
If you take a picture of me, and I see it, and I don't like your attitude, maybe I'll need a lawyer, but you will need a doctor to search for your camera... :)

[dewmuw]

I think we should be careful not to be making threats - even in jest.

[tiziano]

I think we should be careful not to be making threats - even in jest.

Sorry. I didn't mean to make any threat.
I was just pointing out that I wouldn't let anybody take pictures of me or of my family, without my permission, doesn't matter where I am.
maybe I was too colorful. :o

[dewmuw]

Sorry. I didn't mean to make any threat.
I was just pointing out that I wouldn't let anybody take pictures of me or of my family, without my permission, doesn't matter where I am.
maybe I was too colorful. :o

I have to say that if I was in a restaurant and someone starting taking pictures (even if they were not directly of me and my kids) I wouldn't be happy. I probably wouldn't call the police though.

[tommykjensen]

Sorry. I didn't mean to make any threat.
I was just pointing out that I wouldn't let anybody take pictures of me or of my family, without my permission, doesn't matter where I am.
maybe I was too colorful. :o

Yes you might have been too colorfull ;)

Question: leaving the family/kids out. Why even get bothered by someone taking a photo of you? Someone could be taking your photo without you ever knowing about it. They could be using a long tele and zoom in on you from a distance and you would probably never know you were the subject so you could never prevent everybody taking your photo.

My point is if you are in a public area somebody can and probably will take your photo.

I don't like anybody to take photos of me but when I am out in public there is no way I can prevent that to be done so I don't care about it.

[PeaPicker]

I'm going to a high school football game tomorrow morning. (son in the band)
Can I sit in the stands with a 70-200 and take pics? :confused:

[Curtis N]

Your thread title says "character assasination", though you didn't mention anyone saying or writing bad things about you that weren't true. So I think you can forget that idea.

Since the restaurant manager gave you the all-clear, it's doubtful he called the police. More likely it was some paranoid moron with a cell phone who will forever remain anonymous. So I don't know what kind of case you think you might have against the restaurant. There's no evidence they did anything to harm you or even stop you from taking pictures.

When police get a call about suspicious activity, it's their job to investigate it. It's unfortunate that sometimes innocent people get questioned, but I would like to think that if I made such a call, it would be taken seriously.

If you have any friends in law enforcement, it might help you to tell them what happened to get their take on whether or not the police acted appropriately in this case. They might help you understand why the cops did what they did.

[jfrancho]

Someone gave me a hard time, who can I sue? Please.

[tiziano]

Question: leaving the family/kids out. Why even get bothered by someone taking a photo of you? Someone could be taking your photo without you ever knowing about it. They could be using a long tele and zoom in on you from a distance and you would probably never know you were the subject so you could never prevent everybody taking your photo.
My point is if you are in a public area somebody can and probably will take your photo.
I don't like anybody to take photos of me but when I am out in public there is no way I can prevent that to be done so I don't care about it.

First answer is that, being I an ordinary guy, I can't image any reason why someone should take a shot of me...not interesting at all! this would automatically make the photographer suspicious. :)

Now, seriously, I have been thinking about your question. I really would get upset, but not for the picture, but for not being asked the permission.
I would feel it like a lack of education and respect to myself, and that respect should therefore be somehow restored.
Maybe I belong to a different culture...

[Choderboy]

If you take a picture of me, and I see it, and I don't like your attitude, maybe I'll need a lawyer, but you will need a doctor to search for your camera... :)

What has that got to do with this thread?
Quote from the OP : "and asked the parents if they would mind if..."

[tiziano]

What has that got to do with this thread?
Quote from the OP : "and asked the parents if they would mind if..."

You are right. this has nothing to do with the original subject. It came out because someone stated:

"...and if anyone laid a finger on me or my camera while photographing anything whatsoever in a public area, I'd make sure they'd need a skilled team of lawyers to keep a penny to their name!"

And it was a reply only to this.

[tlc]

has anyone even paid attention to teh fact that this happened months ago? its water under the bridge, the police officers in question, probably barely remember this incident. even if he chose to get a lawyer now, i highly doubt anything would ever come of it.

if i was in that restaurant and i saw some guy pull out a camera and start taking photos of kids, i would be a little alarmed. its not liek the guy was taking pictures of a pizza, he was taking pictures of children. someone else's children. i find that odd in itself.

[jfrancho]

It would only be odd if the parents were obviously unaware, or were visibly objecting to the photographer. Come on guys, you mean you've never seen someone take a picture in a resturaunt? I think the OP is out of his mind for thinking he has some legal recourse, but I also think some of the replies are reactionary. So I let a photographer take some shots of my son in a resturaunt, and I need you guys to protect my child? Gimme a break. I can make that decision myself, mind your own business.

[tlc]

It would only be odd if the parents were obviously unaware, or were visibly objecting to the photographer. Come on guys, you mean you've never seen someone take a picture in a resturaunt? I think the OP is out of his mind for thinking he has some legal recourse, but I also think some of the replies are reactionary. So I let a photographer take some shots of my son in a resturaunt, and I need you guys to protect my child? Gimme a break. I can make that decision myself, mind your own business.

mind your own business? this was a post asking for responses, we were ask by the OP NOT to mind our own business but to give a response. we did. you did.

[Wilt]

... since they had caught the ringleader of a large child pornography ring, operating as a pretend photog guy in a clandestine restaurant location in broad daylight with the parents express permission.

Lawyers call it 'Probable cause', I think. By your own admission you asked for parents permission, you presented yourself as a photo guy, you were in a restaurant. In other words, you fit the profile exactly! So police officer comes to investigate, well prepared with appropriate search warrants etc., and asks you a series of questions to try to 'qualify' you as legitimate or a possible offender. You are not cuffed and put into a squad card, thereby really embarrassing you. Standing on the street, you might just have been chatting with an old friend from college or the policeman who lives a few doors away! You don't even have to submit to a full body search, where they are looking for 35mm rolls of film secreted away ;) . No signs of harrassment, big man making trouble for little innocent. Add it to your repetoire of interesting stories to tell people at cocktail parties!

[Choderboy]

mind your own business? this was a post asking for responses, we were ask by the OP NOT to mind our own business but to give a response. we did. you did.

I understood the "mind your own business" to be referring to his response to people telling him if photos could be taken of his kids or not; ie he was putting himself in the OPs situation.
Get it?

[jfrancho]

mind your own business? this was a post asking for responses, we were ask by the OP NOT to mind our own business but to give a response. we did. you did.I was speaking hypothetically when I made this statement: So I let a photographer take some shots of my son in a resturaunt, and I need you guys ... I can make that decision myself, mind your own business.I wasn't telling you to mind your own business.

[jfrancho]

I understood the "mind your own business" to be referring to his response to people telling him if photos could be taken of his kids or not ie he was putting himself in the OPs situation.
Get it?Exactly. Well, actually, I was putting myself in the parents' position. Hopefully everyone gets the gist.

[hemuni]

Get over it ... IMO you should have just filed it as a learning experience on the day. If you hold onto this kind of stuff and let it fester then the only person that suffers is you.Thats good advice, sorry for your bad experience, but move on and for god's sake don't make it stop you shooting those pictures ;)

[Choderboy]

Exactly. Well, actually, I was putting myself in the parents' position. Hopefully everyone gets the gist.

LOL. I managed to add further confusion. I'm pretty sure most people understood your post anyway!

[ssim]

Today's society has become overly sensitized to photographers taking pictures of just about anything these days. I have been questioned by security personnel and police officers. In any of the instances, if you talk calmly and openly with them any misunderstandings can be cleared up in pretty short order. Was your character assassinated in this case, no I don't think so. Was your ego wounded, most definitely from the way you have put the post here. As others have said, get over it. Why is it that everyone is so damned quick to try and sue someone else when they feel that they have been even so slightly wronged. A day, a week, a month from now who will remember this except you. Virtually no one.

I find the whole situation really peculiar. What could be so interesting about a family eating in a restaurant. The bigger issue here is what did you plan on doing with them. If it was to practice I would think you could find something more interesting.

We used to take a couple of vacations a year in Hawaii. Our children were very young and little bleach blonde headed cuties. We would quite frequently get asked by people of Japanese ethnicity to have their picture taken with them. We understood the intent of this happening. If I were asked the same question today, I might ask a few more questions like what are you doing with them.

I'm pretty sure the OP is probably following this thread but has decided not to participate any further given the overwhelming lack of support for his decision. I'm guessing that he uses invisible mode as his profile doesn't show last activity. If you are watching your link to your images isn't working. I was interested to see what kind of stuff you were doing.

This is not as big a deal as you have made it sound. From what I can see you did what you thought was right by asking the parents permission and someone thought that they were doing the right thing by calling the law enforcement into it. They were most certainly doing their duty in talking to you. You have given the impression that this was an intense brow beating interrogation but in the end it really was just them following up on their job responsibilities. Everyone is more sensitive to these situations when there are children involved and rightly so.

Time to move on.

[dicky109]

heartily gave me permission to shoot my pictures. My sister, seated about 10feet away, overheard my question and their affirmative reply, so theres no question about their giving me permission. I'm sorry that you had this hassle, especially when you did everything right, asking for permission and not being obnoxious in the picture taking. Unfortunatley, I don't believe you'd have much of a case. Even though your sister heard them, in a court, she would not be the most credible witness, being a close relative. Since this was a very informal situation, I'm sure you did not get a signed release and have no idea who those people were and thus could not produce them as witnesses.

Next thing I know, a white male police officer comes up to my table Why would the officer's skin color have any bearing on this? Are you a minority and claiming that he was profiling? Who, in fact called the police in?
At last, they made my sister and I flee the restaurant. Did you pay your tab and leave a tip?:)

I have been debating for months about hiring an attorney to represent me against the restaurant at the least, and maybe name the police municipality in the action also. What did the restaurant do? Did they call the cop, or just not stop him from entering to perform an investigation? What did the police department do other than properly investigate a complaint?

I guess, the real question, as others have said, is what damage was caused to you. If they didn't cause you any economic harm, you can't successfully sue for damages. If they didn't infringe upon your civil rights, you have no case. Simply being asked some questions in a proper investigation due to a complaint is not an infringement of those rights. You voluntarily answered those questions and cooperated, at least at first. On the other hand, if you feel you were the victim of profiling due to you ethnicity, you may have a cause of action.

It certainly can be intimidating to be questioned by the police. It is certainly embarrassing to be escorted outside of a restaurant by a police officer and have everyone looking at you. The same thing would happen if you were pulled over to the side of the road by a cop & given a speeding ticket. All the other drivers would be slowing down & rubbernecking to see what's going on. Embarrassing yes, cause of action, no.

As others have said, you'd be best to just let it go and use it as a learning experience. Because of all the wackos in the world, the rest of us normal:rolleyes: folks have to suffer! In my experience, most police are pretty professional, but occassionally you may get one on his/her own ego trip who tries intimidation, simply because he/she can. They were probably the ones who were the bullies in high school. Aggravating yes, but actionable, no.

Try to take up landscape photography instead of people, but just watch out for no trespassing signs!:)

Good luck

[JCR]

'...and if anyone laid a finger on me or my camera while photographing anything whatsoever in a public area, I'd make sure they'd need a skilled team of lawyers to keep a penny to their name! :]

If you don't want your kids to be photographed, maybe you should just pull a Michael Jackson and get them a veil. I mean who knows what sick perverts might even want to look at your kids faces! God forbid!'

Don't worry I would get my moneys worth :D

[Jon, The Elder]

The OP is just jerking you guys/gals around - and it worked.

[dicky109]

The OP is just jerking you guys/gals around - and it worked.
If that's the case, then he belongs on dpreview:evil:, not POTN!:cool:

[Master-9]

And to people saying "Sounds like you have a problem with authority"...have you ever actually been detained or searched in a public place? Its not exactly the most pleasant thing in the world, especially if it happens right in front of a family establishment.

I agree

[Master-9]

Why would the officer's skin color have any bearing on this? Are you a minority and claiming that he was profiling?

What is an minority?

[Eagle]

The first thing that bothers me about this whole story is the fact that the OP plays the race card (white male policeman). Why does this need brought up at all. Like a million other times I hear it, it has no bearing on anything except certain people want to make it an issue.
Second, why have you waited months to even bring it up?
Third, the police were only doing their job. They may have been walking by are parked outside and noticed through a window someone taking candid occasion shots of children every few minutes. No think how suspicious that would actually look. They had every right to question you.
I assume by the way I read the story and pick up on the attitude that after some time you may even have made it worse on yourself by getting an attitude and arguing with the police.
They did not handcuff you, arrest you, or harras you in any way that you have said. All they did was investigated a suspicious person/activity that they were either called to or possibly just stumbled upon. I don't believe you have any reason or right to sue anyone, especially the restaurant(which by the way would be private property).

[Titus213]

Sounds like the local police don't have much to do. Sounds like you were put on their to-do list by someone. Sounds like it got a bit over-done. But best forget it and move on. Don't complain to anyone as that may really make them upset and you should never question authority. Especially in the US when we are engaged in a war on terror.

But above all, do NOT call a lawyer. They will only make your life more miserable than it already is.

Problem solved! Next?

[Plan9]

So we should be allowed to photograph whatever and whoever we like? No restrictions?

Way to put words in my mouth. Did I ever say that? I said 'in a public area', in which case, YES we should be allowed to photograph whatever and whoever we like, whenever we like, with no restrictions (well, with very fwe exceptions - for example, a situation where getting the photograph would mean hurting somebody else, in the case of some overzealous paparazzi). That's why we have a little thing called the '1st amendment' and 'freedom of speech'.

Maybe as a photojournalism student I feel more strongly about this than others, but it is indeed my right to take your photo whenever I please and for whatever reason. Granted, If somebody asks me POLITELY to stop, 99% of the time I will. In public, you cannot have an expectation of privacy. And, if you don't like somebody taking your picture, you certainly don't have the right to lay a finger on them. What you DO have is the right to leave, if it makes you feel that uncomfortable.

[Plan9]

If you take a picture of me, and I see it, and I don't like your attitude, maybe I'll need a lawyer, but you will need a doctor to search for your camera... :)

Won't even touch that one.

[dicky109]

What is an minority?

A Nikon shooter:rolleyes:

[Steve Parr]

And taken photographs of a family whose permission you had obtained is irregular in...what way exactly?

Not being in the cop's shoes, I can't say for sure, but I'd be willing to bet that, since he questioned th photographer, the cop felt he was looking at something irregular...

You can bet I'd be furious if a cop even attempted to stop or search me for taking photographs, as its infringing on my first amendment rights.

No, it's not...

Its slightly different in a private establishment, but in this case, his intentions were made clear to the manager of that establishment. Shall we just start letting police detain photographers for unspecified amounts of times, at their discretion, if they feel their actions are "suspicious"?

Yes, we should, provided the cop thinks there's something unusual about it. Neither you or I were standing in the cop's shoes, and there was no way for the cop to know that the photographer had everyone's permission, unless his name was Officer Kreskin...

And to people saying "Sounds like you have a problem with authority"...have you ever actually been detained or searched in a public place? Its not exactly the most pleasant thing in the world, especially if it happens right in front of a family establishment.

Yeah, because you're the only guy it's ever happened to.

Please, save it.

It sounds like you have a problem with authority.

:lol:

And, yes, I have been detained by the police...

[Steve Parr]

...and if anyone laid a finger on me or my camera while photographing anything whatsoever in a public area, I'd make sure they'd need a skilled team of lawyers to keep a penny to their name!

Suing a police force? I'm pretty sure they're well represented...

[Steve Parr]

Granted, If somebody asks me POLITELY to stop, 99% of the time I will.

I'd be real interested to know what's included in the last 1%...

In public, you cannot have an expectation of privacy. And, if you don't like somebody taking your picture, you certainly don't have the right to lay a finger on them. What you DO have is the right to leave, if it makes you feel that uncomfortable.

I also have a right to ask you to stop. If you say no, then we've got a problem and, in the short term, it would end badly for you.

And I've got a kick-ass lawyer...

[Titus213]

I'd be real interested to know what's included in the last 1%...



I also have a right to ask you to stop. If you say no, then we've got a problem and, in the short term, it would end badly for you.

And I've got a kick-ass lawyer...

And bottom line, in the US, if justice were done, you would be liable for assault and battery. There is still a set of laws we operate by in this country and unless something has changed in those laws recently the idea of a 'reasonable expectation of privacy' still rules.

[MackRoe]

O.K. I think I need to clarify some things in my telling of this story. First of all, I was a customer in this restaurant, having driven 30 miles to take my sister who was in from out of town there for a "buffet" style meal, and it should have been a pleasant, relaxing evening. I had been given permission by both parents to do what I was doing, and I did it very inconspiciously as well. One might question my cheek in asking in the 1st place to take photos of children in today's climate of suspiscion, but wouldn't common sense on somebody's part clarify that perverts don't do their dirty deeds in broad daylight in a crowded restaurant.

I'm surprised at some of the comments here. For those of you who are looking at this as silly and frivolous, put yourself in my place if you can, you might be in it one day yourself as a photographer. I am suddenly escorted out of a crowded restaurant "by" said police officer, who was most likely was called there by the restaurant. SInce I'm a customer also, couldn't the management of the Fire Mountain restaurant in Newnan, Ga., come to "me" and express their's or the parent's concerns, rather than bringing in the Newnan, Ga. police department, especially after they had said it was "no issue."

I can promise you, it isn't pleasant seeing the looks in others faces when the police ask you outside and "hold you" like you're a criminal. I was made to stand outside for at least 45-50 mins while these officers questioned the parents, the management, most everybody but me. Anyone of you that thinks "you're innocent until proven guilty" is living in a fairyland when it comes to stuff like this. I was a potential child molester out on the prowl. My God ! The police report was full of lies and did not even include "my side" of the incident. I later went back to the police dept. and insisted an amended report be typed up. I was humilated in front of many people, treated as a criminal when I'd done nothing wrong, held outside and detained by police officers who did nothing to explain what my offense was...one of which kept giving me the evil eye while muttering just loud enough for me to hear it "somethings just not right with this guy." Do you think you would dust yourself off, and in your mind say "Oh good, these fellows were just doing their jobs, I'm happy we have a police department that protects us. I sincerely doubt it. Would you like to be "detained" and "held" for 45-60 mins of your time when you had done nothing wrong ?? Being a paying customer of this place of business, I was owed a duty by them of polite and courteous treatment at the least, and in the outcome I was "asked to get my stuff and leave."

I fully understand that we do live in a day where people are full of fear and uncertainty, but we are granted rights under the constitution of this country, and they are vanishing more every day while we sleep. I guess I do have a problem with authority, at least authority not exercised with common sense and respect. I for one do not want to live in a police state, where we are told what things we can take pictures of and what we can't, again using common sense and respect on our part, or where we trade our rights and priviledges in a "free society" for a security and peace that will be temporal at best. I probably will drop it, but I deserve an apology from all involved here !!

[Plan9]

I'd be real interested to know what's included in the last 1%...



I also have a right to ask you to stop. If you say no, then we've got a problem and, in the short term, it would end badly for you.

And I've got a kick-ass lawyer...

You're right, you have a right to ASK somebody to stop. What you don't have the right to do is threaten someone or resort to physical violence if they don't oblige you, which from what you've wrote, you seem perfectly willing to do. I really find it quite disturbing how quick some of you seem to be to resort to violence as a solution to something like this, ESPECIALLY considering the fact that you are photographers yourself. If a situation like this with a photographer made you uncomfortable, did you ever consider the option of simply walking away??

And as for that 1%: if I was in a newsworthy situation taking pictures and was asked to stop, I'd definitely continue shooting.

Also, I'm no lawyer, but it seems to me that being stopped by the police for taking pictures would indeed be a violation of ones rights. Ever heard of freedom of the press? How about the 4th amendment? or maybe we SHOULD allow police to detain photographers if they look 'suspicious'.

But, really, I'm glad you have a real lawyer and seem to feel that somehow shields you from consequences.

[ssim]

MackRoe....I am still curious as to the bigger question. Why, in a restaurant, would you decide to take shots of someone else's family and what did you intend to do with them.

Life is full of experiences, some good, some bad. I'd chalk this one up to a learning experience and move on. I really don't think that you have grounds to file a lawsuit but that is a personal choice. What you were doing may not have been illegal but by many could definitely be viewed as unethical. I enjoy taking candids of people. I would never in my wildest imagination consider doing it in a restaurant, but that is just me.

The link in your profile to your images won't load. I thought that maybe if I saw some of the other things that you shot in similar settings that perhaps I would understand.

[Master-9]

O.K. I think I need to clarify some things in my telling of this story. First of all, I was a customer in this restaurant, having driven 30 miles to take my sister who was in from out of town there for a "buffet" style meal, and it should have been a pleasant, relaxing evening. I had been given permission by both parents to do what I was doing, and I did it very inconspiciously as well. One might question my cheek in asking in the 1st place to take photos of children in today's climate of suspiscion, but wouldn't common sense on somebody's part clarify that perverts don't do their dirty deeds in broad daylight in a crowded restaurant.

I'm surprised at some of the comments here. For those of you who are looking at this as silly and frivolous, put yourself in my place if you can, you might be in it one day yourself as a photographer. I am suddenly escorted out of a crowded restaurant "by" said police officer, who was most likely was called there by the restaurant. SInce I'm a customer also, couldn't the management of the Fire Mountain restaurant in Newnan, Ga., come to "me" and express their's or the parent's concerns, rather than bringing in the Newnan, Ga. police department, especially after they had said it was "no issue."

I can promise you, it isn't pleasant seeing the looks in others faces when the police ask you outside and "hold you" like you're a criminal. I was made to stand outside for at least 45-50 mins while these officers questioned the parents, the management, most everybody but me. Anyone of you that thinks "you're innocent until proven guilty" is living in a fairyland when it comes to stuff like this. I was a potential child molester out on the prowl. My God ! The police report was full of lies and did not even include "my side" of the incident. I later went back to the police dept. and insisted an amended report be typed up. I was humilated in front of many people, treated as a criminal when I'd done nothing wrong, held outside and detained by police officers who did nothing to explain what my offense was...one of which kept giving me the evil eye while muttering just loud enough for me to hear it "somethings just not right with this guy." Do you think you would dust yourself off, and in your mind say "Oh good, these fellows were just doing their jobs, I'm happy we have a police department that protects us. I sincerely doubt it. Would you like to be "detained" and "held" for 45-60 mins of your time when you had done nothing wrong ?? Being a paying customer of this place of business, I was owed a duty by them of polite and courteous treatment at the least, and in the outcome I was "asked to get my stuff and leave."

I fully understand that we do live in a day where people are full of fear and uncertainty, but we are granted rights under the constitution of this country, and they are vanishing more every day while we sleep. I guess I do have a problem with authority, at least authority not exercised with common sense and respect. I for one do not want to live in a police state, where we are told what things we can take pictures of and what we can't, again using common sense and respect on our part, or where we trade our rights and priviledges in a "free society" for a security and peace that will be temporal at best. I probably will drop it, but I deserve an apology from all involved here !!

I live in Georgia and my friends, family, nor myself will be eating at that resturant....
Thanks for the Heads up >:(

[tiziano]

You're right, you have a right to ASK somebody to stop. What you don't have the right to do is threaten someone or resort to physical violence if they don't oblige you, which from what you've wrote, you seem perfectly willing to do. I really find it quite disturbing how quick some of you seem to be to resort to violence as a solution to something like this, ESPECIALLY considering the fact that you are photographers yourself. If a situation like this with a photographer made you uncomfortable, did you ever consider the option of simply walking away??

And as for that 1%: if I was in a newsworthy situation taking pictures and was asked to stop, I'd definitely continue shooting.

Also, I'm no lawyer, but it seems to me that being stopped by the police for taking pictures would indeed be a violation of ones rights. Ever heard of freedom of the press? How about the 4th amendment? or maybe we SHOULD allow police to detain photographers if they look 'suspicious'.

But, really, I'm glad you have a real lawyer and seem to feel that somehow shields you from consequences.

Image this situation:

You are in a park with your camera. A family nearby has had a bad accident. One of their kids, while riding his bicycle, has been run over by a passing car. the child is seriously harmed. Everybody shouts, runs and calls for help.
You start taking shots, because a kid run over in a park is a newsworthy situation. The father of the child shouts you to stop.

What would you do? Keep shooting, because the situation is newsworthy, and it's your legal right to do so?

Let me friendly tell you one thing: laws and civil rights are an attempt to make our life easier, but they don't cover the entire set of situations in life, nor everybody always obliges to the rules.
There are times in which you have to use your brain.

This above was an extreme situation. But, I have been travelling a bit, and seen a lot of interesting folks that deserved a shot, mostly in the street. I always ask permission, and, if I don't get it, that's it.
In most of the world, a good attitude, and respect for other people, will defend you much better then laws.

[tommykjensen]

Image this situation:

You are in a park with your camera. A family nearby has had a bad accident. One of their kids, while riding his bicycle, has been run over by a passing car. the child is seriously harmed. Everybody shouts, runs and calls for help.
You start taking shots, because a kid run over in a park is a newsworthy situation. The father of the child shouts you to stop.

What would you do? Keep shooting, because the situation is newsworthy, and it's your legal right to do so?

Let me friendly tell you one thing: laws and civil rights are an attempt to make our life easier, but they don't cover the entire set of situations in life, nor everybody always obliges to the rules.
There are times in which you have to use your brain.

This above was an extreme situation. But, I have been travelling a bit, and seen a lot of interesting folks that deserved a shot, mostly in the street. I always ask permission, and, if I don't get it, that's it.
In most of the world, a good attitude, and respect for other people, will defend you much better then laws.


I don't think the situation you describe is extreme. In Denmark the police and fire departments are now forced to put up shields between the accident and the crowd that gather around to take photos with their cell phones.


A reminder to all. Lets keep the politics out of this thread.

[dewmuw]

I don't think the situation you describe is extreme. In Denmark the police and fire departments are now forced to put up shields between the accident and the crowd that gather around to take photos with their cell phones.


It is surprising during accidents that so many people choose to record the aftermath on their camera phones rather than stop to help.

[Plan9]

Image this situation:

You are in a park with your camera. A family nearby has had a bad accident. One of their kids, while riding his bicycle, has been run over by a passing car. the child is seriously harmed. Everybody shouts, runs and calls for help.
You start taking shots, because a kid run over in a park is a newsworthy situation. The father of the child shouts you to stop.

What would you do? Keep shooting, because the situation is newsworthy, and it's your legal right to do so?

Let me friendly tell you one thing: laws and civil rights are an attempt to make our life easier, but they don't cover the entire set of situations in life, nor everybody always obliges to the rules.
There are times in which you have to use your brain.

This above was an extreme situation. But, I have been travelling a bit, and seen a lot of interesting folks that deserved a shot, mostly in the street. I always ask permission, and, if I don't get it, that's it.
In most of the world, a good attitude, and respect for other people, will defend you much better then laws.


Personally I wouldn't shoot that situation, more likely I would be helping in whatever way possible. But this whole things reminds me of a famous quote by Voltaire, "I don't agree with a word you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.".

Just because you personally don't like or agree with something, doesn't mean you shouldn't still recognize and respect that they have the right to do it. If you want to enjoy your own freedom, you can't impugn on that of others.

[tiziano]

I have been thinking about this thread, and another one in which I was replying in a way that I normally don't use. Usually I am not aggressive or animated at all. The other thread in which my replies were harsh is this one:
http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=210595 (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=210595)
I have been thinking what was bothering me so much in both discussions.
Oh, well, maybe yesterday I just had a bad day...
But, now seriously, I have lately started noticing that a lot of people use their camera like a sheriff would use his star. Some people think that, because they have to take the shot, it's their right to shot in the face of someone else, to blind them with their flash, to trespass private propriety, to step in front of others, and so on...
A few weeks ago, I was in in a very old Italian little town, where a priest was trying to celebrate his Sunday morning office.
Unfortunately, this town was a touristic attraction as well, and, in the church, there were more people with cameras that people listing to the priest.
The tourists were going around half naked, speaking loud to each other, and taking shots of everything with their flash, even if there was the sign that flashes were forbidden and that tourists should at least have been quite while the celebration was going on.
I was among the tourists, but I was disgusted by the people behavior, and stepped out of the church with a strong desire to break some cameras.
I think that the wrong attitude of a lot of people with a camera in their hands is not only making everybody with a camera looking suspicious or annoying, but it is spoiling a lot of beautiful places and situations.
Therefore, I repeat my point: yes, there is the law, but there are respect and education as well.

[tlc]

i think there are a lot of people taking this thread wayyyyyyy too seriously. lets move on. paaaaaaaaaaaaaaaalease.

[Belmondo]

Just a couple random thoughts:

1. I am invariably annoyed by people taking pictures in restaurants. Many people with cameras tend to be inconsiderate I don't want to be in their photos....not even in the background. I don't like their flashes going of in my face, and I don't hesitate to tell them so. That's just me, and I might not be typical.

2. It seems to me the family whose picture you were taking could have cleared the whole thing up by explaining they had invited you to take the photos.

3. There is something more to this story. Either there was something in your demeanor, or perhaps a similar previous bad experience with another patron that caused the restaurant to seemingly overreact.

4. Based on the story you've told, you probably don't have recourse against the restaurant. They have the obligation to protect their patrons from harrassment or unreasonable invasion of their privacy by other customers. Perhaps they overreacted, but many would argue they did the right thing.

5. There is another side to the story. I'm sure they have their own story to tell, and it would probably be considerably different from your version. That's not to say you're not being truthful. It's just the reality that perspectives in a situation like this can be very different when related by the different sides.

[Eagle]

I had been given permission by both parents to do what I was doing, and I did it very inconspiciously as well.

This is the part that actually made the whole thing look suspicious to somebody, the fact that you were not near the family out in the open. You were more than likely in your booth or table randomly picking up your camera and taking pictures of children across the restaurant. You have to admit that just doesn't look right.

Why are you and others here so against the restaurant when you have said that you don't know how the police were summoned, or by who.

And like Belmondo said this is only one side of the story. There are always at least two.

After many months you still don't have a clear idea of how long they "detained" you outside the restaurant. Youir first post said 30 minutes and your last has it up to 60 minutes.

[Steve Parr]

And bottom line, in the US, if justice were done, you would be liable for assault and battery. There is still a set of laws we operate by in this country and unless something has changed in those laws recently the idea of a 'reasonable expectation of privacy' still rules.

And we should also operate with a sense of decency. A lot of photographers seem to think tey don't have to do that.

If someone is taking pictures of me or my child, and they don't stop when I ask, I have to assume that there may be some less-than-honorable reason the person wants the pictures. Assuming that, there is no question that I'll stop him.

If I think the photos will be used for some unsavory purposes, I have no problem, at all, standing up to any assault charges that may arise...

[Steve Parr]

You're right, you have a right to ASK somebody to stop. What you don't have the right to do is threaten someone or resort to physical violence if they don't oblige you, which from what you've wrote, you seem perfectly willing to do.

I am willing, and I would do it, whether I have that "right" or not. I do, on the other hand, have a "right" to safeguard my family...

I really find it quite disturbing how quick some of you seem to be to resort to violence as a solution to something like this, ESPECIALLY considering the fact that you are photographers yourself.

Sorry, but that's a load of crap.

I don't go along with the "feel-good brotherhood of photographers" thing that so many do. Yeah, I'm a photographer. In no way, though, does that mean I'm about to forego doing what I think is right when it comes to my family.

By nature, I'm not a violent guy, howver, I would resort to physical assault if the photographer, after being asked to stop, continued. And here's a little tidbit I'm sure you'll all have fun wih: I've done it before...

If a situation like this with a photographer made you uncomfortable, did you ever consider the option of simply walking away??

In my instance of violence, we were in a park. We moved to a different area of the park and, before too long, the offending photographer was there, too...

Also, I'm no lawyer, but it seems to me that being stopped by the police for taking pictures would indeed be a violation of ones rights. Ever heard of freedom of the press? How about the 4th amendment?

How, exactly, would it be a violation of your 1st and 4th amendment rights? And "freedom of the press" would come into play so seldom in the type of situation being discussed that it would almost be a non-factor.

What I see is a lot of people gettin' all pissy about being offended that a cop would stop them to talk to them. Well, I'm sorry, but none of the Constitutional Amendments you've trotted out thus far guarantee you the right to not be offended...

or maybe we SHOULD allow police to detain photographers if they look 'suspicious'

I don't have a problem with that at all...

But, really, I'm glad you have a real lawyer and seem to feel that somehow shields you from consequences.

I never suggested it should shield me. Someone else brought it up, and said I would need a good lawyer. Fine. I've got one...

[MackRoe]

This, I think, will be my last post here regarding this issue, but I want to clarify some perceptions. Its amusing in some respects in a medium like this to see how people's thoughts work, and how quick we are as humans to "jump to conclusions." One response said something about my playing the race card. The only reason that was mentioned is because the officer who escorted me outside was white, the one who held me next to my vehicle for 45-50 mins and kept muttering to his partner "that something didn't look right about me, or this" was a black police officer, and another appeared to possibly of hispanic origin, and the ranking officer was a white female, who btw, was the nicest and most reasonable of the bunch. And just in case you think I'm overly paranoid, I was in Newnan the other day, taking photos from the sidewalk of some of the city's older and most beautiful homes, and guess who pulled his cruiser into nearby driveways and "glared" at me in a most unfriendly way....the black police officer who had treated me the worst. And please don't anybody accuse me of being a racist here, if anything, this black police officer exibited a racist attitude toward me, and why not, its been done to their race a million times without cause. But it still isn't right.

Oh, also, this particular restaurant isn't located on a streetfront. Its in a large strip-mall parking lot, 200-300 yards off the nearest highway. Also, how many patrons do you think are going to call the police because they see a guy taking photos from a booth ? There were numerous managers on-duty at this place, but the one who came to my booth and said it was o.k. to do what I had been given permission to do, lied to the police (obviously to cover his skinny behind) and told them that I had said these children were "my grandchildren," which is a flat-out lie. Most of the nearby folks probably saw me go up to the parents in the 1st place to ask their permission to photo their children. And to address the question of why I would even want to photo somebody's children in a restaurant, they had lovely children, expecially a young curly headed daughter seated in a "sassy-seat" type chair at the end of a table, and she was playing with her food. I've raised and educated three daughters myself, and this little one reminded me of one of my own daughters years ago. I do not even shoot people much, because of the very issues we're discusssing here, but if you want to see some of my work, I'll link you to a place where you can see the type of stuff I do. I've done a wedding, some senior portrait work, and I sell my work at arts/craft shows, and have obtained some rather precocious or candid shots of children in playful pursuit. Had the restaurant folks just come up to me outside where I was detained and held, and just said they were uncomfortable with this, but their employee had mistakenly allowed it, the whole issue would have gone away.

I thought I behaved myself rather straighforwardly in this situation, but I can promise I've learned my lesson here. Never photo people in a restaurant, even if you have permission. But I say again, and for the final time, that for either the parents or the restaurant to call the police as if I was breaking local laws or state codes or whatever, was "freakin overkill." All either of these parties had to do was ask me to "desist" and I would have most happily complied. And I'll bow out with this comment, I handled claims for large insurance companies for years, and have been made by my superiors to pay money out for what were truly frivolous claim matters, and if I wanted to hammer this restaurant, you can bet I'd be compensated, And thats something that I'm sure about. Yes, hell yes, I was offended and still am. But I'll either get over it or get on with it.

http://pg.photos.yahoo.com/ph/shnewday/my_photos

To see some "mess-around" photos I took in Newnan,Ga. go to the bottom right album.
But in all the albums I've placed here, see how many people photos there are.

[Steve Parr]

What I find funny, and sad, is that so many photographers will instantly feel so grossly offended whenever a police officer stops them. They have the right to do that, and your "rights" under whatever Amendment you want to toss up do not necessarily trump that. It's the world in which we live, whether you like it or not. If you don't like it, there are plenty of places one can go where the lines are very clearly drawn.

I have no problem with police officers stopping me when I'm takinig pictures. It's happened in the past, and it will likely happen in the future. I simply answer their questions. I don't cop an attitude, and I don't cry out abut my "rights". Without exception, each encounter has ended in a handshake and a "Have a nice day" from the policeman. I'm sure if I got all pissy with them, things would've ended differently.

As it were, though, I honestly was not worried about what anyone passing by may have thought. In all cases, I'm sure they thought they saw a citizen talking to a policeman.

Which is all it was...

[Titus213]

And we should also operate with a sense of decency. A lot of photographers seem to think tey don't have to do that.

If someone is taking pictures of me or my child, and they don't stop when I ask, I have to assume that there may be some less-than-honorable reason the person wants the pictures. Assuming that, there is no question that I'll stop him.

If I think the photos will be used for some unsavory purposes, I have no problem, at all, standing up to any assault charges that may arise...

Yes, but your being offended by someone doing something perfectly legal is part of why the law is there. Everyone has rights, everyone has responsibilities, no one has the right to resort to physical violence unless they are physically threatened.

And it doesn't matter to the law what you THINK.

[ssim]

I'll be glad to see this thread die a slow death now but I am still perplexed how you persist on feeling like you were grossly mistreated.

I really do hope that have taken the time to learn something out of this experience. One thing that I take from your last post is that you seem to harbor a grudge against the police, particularly one black officer. Get over it man.

I went through some of your galleries and it would seem that this event was out of the norm for you as I couldn't find anything similar but I didn't go through all of them.

Whatever you decide to do with this, and I hope you just take it as a learning experience, good luck and above all just enjoy your photography.

[Steve Parr]

Yes, but your being offended by someone doing something perfectly legal is part of why the law is there. Everyone has rights, everyone has responsibilities, no one has the right to resort to physical violence unless they are physically threatened.

I may not have that right, but I'll do it anyway...

And it doesn't matter to the law what you THINK.

I'm well aware of that.

I'm also aware of the possible ramifications of resorting to a physical altercation.

I just don't care...

[Plan9]

I may not have that right, but I'll do it anyway...



I'm well aware of that.

I'm also aware of the possible ramifications of resorting to a physical altercation.

I just don't care...

Well, glad you cleared that up so I can put the rest the notion of any actual constructive input on the subject from you!

I guess some people will always feel that resorting to physical violence is a better solution than walking away.

[IndyJeff]

Plan9 you have some serious misunderstanding issues with the 1st Amendment and Freedom of the Press. In the example brought on by this thread, he is in no way covered under "Freedom of the Press" in any way shape or form. Just because you have a camera and can create a photograph doesn't by any means mean your a member of the press. Stating that you are, when in fact you aren't would consititue fraud, which could land you in front of a judge.
If you are on the street and see something of a newsworthy event taking place and are asked to stop taking photos, you would best be advised to do so. If your with the working press, you would know that you still have to obey commands of authorities. You can identify yourself and present credentials which should be considered by the authorities as your ok to do your job. You can hash it out later but, right or wrong if you don't stop it is you who will be taken to jail.
Secondly, and I don't remember if it was you or someone else who said, "You have no right to expectation of privacy when in public", while that statement is true, there is a trump card which says I, or anyone else, has the right to protect their own privacy.
If your just walking around and shooting and someone asks you not to take their picture, you better not because they have just as much right NOT to be photographed as you do to photograph them. In the end, they will win.

Now on the original topic, it caught my eye right away when the OP said a "white cop". Nothing like throwing out the race card is there? So what, the cops wanted to ask you a few questions. Your first response should have been to say in a polite and respectful manner, "Excuse me officer may I first ask why I am being asked outside and who called you? Have I committed a crime?"
Of course the best thing to do is to co-operate but, still you can't let them walk all over you either. They do have a right and duty to question you if someone has called to complain. If your not committing a crime then it should be no big deal. Holding you for that long was a bit over the top. Just who asked you to leave the restaraunt? If it was the cop then I would file a complaint

I was pulled over for coming to a rolling stop in my neighborhood two weeks ago. The 'trainee' approached my van like I was Osama Bin Laden himself. I had my license and registration in hand when she got there. I handed it to her and asked why I was pulled over. Just as I had suspected she saw me roll thru the stop sign. Ok, no biggie. She comes back and hands me my stuff back and informs me she is giving me a verbal warning to which I thanked her. Then the trainer asked where I was going. I asked him if that was pertinent to an investigation which involved me. He looked kind of surprised and said no but he would just like to know. I very politley told him that was non of his business. He started to get a little huffy and I asked if he could call a supervisor here as I was not comfortable being questioned for an unwarranted reason. He then said he can still give me a ticket for the rolling stop. I replied that is your option but, I can also file a complaint against you for invading my privacy without due cause and threatening me if I don't answer your question with a ticket which I had just been verbally warned about. He asked to see my license again. I handed it to him and he looked at it. Then asked me again where I was going and what I was doing in this neighborhood with my van. I kind of laughed and just asked him if he read the address. He looked again at my license and handed it back to me and suggested that I come to a full stop. I was 1 1/2 blocks from my house.
See the thing is I was pulled over for rolling thru a stop sign. He had no just cause to find out where I was going or where I had been at that point. He had no probable cause and I was under no obligation to answer him. He was pissed I am sure because he couldn't intimidate me but, I know my rights and so does he.

You have to cooperate but, you don't have to roll over and play suspect just because they ask you a question.

[Steve Parr]

I guess some people will always feel that resorting to physical violence is a better solution than walking away.

Congratulations on performing such a fine mischaracterization of my position.

I stated, pretty clearly, that I would first ask the person to stop. If he didn't, I would be forced to wonder why he was so intent on having pictures of my child. Perhaps you would be comfortable with walking away not knowing. Not me.

Now, at what point does it become impossible for the photographer to walk away? Why should it be only the subject he's shooting? Decency is a two-way street, and it doesn't hinge on what anyone's "rights" are. If the photographer isn't interested in being "decent", I'll feel little initiative to do so, as well.

In the situation discussed, if someone pushes their "rights" in my face, I will push them down his throat, and deal with the consequences. Either way, I can guarantee that he would think twice about ever doing it again...

[Master-9]

Wait till they issue Natgional ID Cards and take way the rest of our rights...The same thing happen in Germany or did we forget

[Titus213]

I may not have that right, but I'll do it anyway...



I'm well aware of that.

I'm also aware of the possible ramifications of resorting to a physical altercation.

I just don't care...


And this makes you the very individual the law was written for...:lol: You see, the law isn't for the lawabiding individual. It's for the law breaker.

[condyk]

Don't forget your 'constitoootshinal rights to carry a weapon' big lads :lol: :lol: That always gets a laugh and then pretty soon gets a thread closed down :p

[Plan9]

Since when does someone have the right "not to be photographed" in a public place? If that was the case, do you think there would be such a problem with paparazzi? There are certain extents to which taking a picture in public could be considered a violation of persons privacy, or put them in a situation that makes them feel threatened, in which case appropriate action might be taking - but you are completely wrong in stating that they have a right not to have their picture taken.

We had a situation arise that was brought up in class where a student shot some pictures of a jogger who became extremely irate, and shouted at the student and told her to delete the pictures or he would sue. The teacher, who has been a working photojournalist for the last 16 years, explicitly told us that we have every right to photograph anyone on public property, and that while many times it is a good idea to simply drop it, we are not obligated to.

[Pekka]

I'd be real interested to know what's included in the last 1%...



I also have a right to ask you to stop. If you say no, then we've got a problem and, in the short term, it would end badly for you.

And I've got a kick-ass lawyer...

What's this I sue you you sue me obsession you guys have there in US? I though it was a TV series thing but apparently it is reality.

In Finland law says you can photograph ANYONE and ANYTHING on a public place. Definition of public place is a location which is accessible by public and without admission. So malls and restaurants are ok, too (although owners often make their own rules). But a publicly taken photo of person must not be used commercially without permission, and never used in malicious or false content (like subtitled: drug addicts on street). In practice, if I point a camera and I see reluctance I put the camera down. That is standard courtesy all photographers should practice.

What does US law say?

The situation OP explained was not a common one, as police was seeking people who fit in a criminal act profile.

[Steve Parr]

The teacher, who has been a working photojournalist for the last 16 years, explicitly told us that we have every right to photograph anyone on public property, and that while many times it is a good idea to simply drop it, we are not obligated to.

You're avoiding my point about being "decent". Too many photographers are willing to forego any sense of decency simply because they want a photograph. With every right comes an equally important responsibility. Too many photographers dismiss that...

[Steve Parr]

What's this I sue you you sue me obsession you guys have there in US? I though it was a TV series thing but apparently it is reality.

Hell, I dunno. Someone said I'd better have a good lawyer. I do.

I don't intend to sue anyone...

[rklepper]

Just because you can, does not always mean that you should. Use some sense people.

[Becca]

What's this I sue you you sue me obsession you guys have there in US? I though it was a TV series thing but apparently it is reality.


Believe me, it is not everyone in the US who feels this way. Unfortunately, the ones who do are the ones who make the most noise and give the rest of the world the impression that we are all litigious money-grabbers.

[BillMarks]

Something tells me there is more to this story than we have been told.

And if you are so worried about your right, why did you llet the police trample all over them?

[Steve Parr]

And if you are so worried about your right, why did you llet the police trample all over them?

I'm still trying to see where the OP's rights were "trampled" on. Frankly, I think characterizing it that way is silly...

[Belmondo]

What's this I sue you, you sue me obsession you guys have there in US?

The simple fact is, law as practiced in the US is a very profitable industry. Lawyers have a very powerful lobby here, and any attempts to implement meaningful tort reform are usually unsuccessful. Truth be known, the Trial Lawyers Association is one of the most powerful lobbying organizations in the country. The other problem is that a large number of our career politicians are lawyers. It's pretty much a case of the foxes guarding the henhouse.

[teekay]

.... I sell my work at arts/craft shows, and have obtained some rather precocious or candid shots of children in playful pursuit....

Thanks for starting an interesting discussion which has exposed, not surprisingly, very different views on the right to privacy and what people consider is acceptable behaviour from photographers and police in different countries.

The bottom line, though, is that you screwed up. You say you sell photographs and so should know to always first present a business card and get a signed release from subjects and *particularly* from parents of any children involved.

If you had done this in the first place, as well as get prior permission from the restaurant, I doubt that you would have had any trouble.

But I'm just glad I wasn't there since I go to restaurants (which are *not* public places, by the way) to eat and converse in peace, not to be part of a photo shoot or be distracted by flashes around me.

[Steve Parr]

Well, glad you cleared that up so I can put the rest the notion of any actual constructive input on the subject from you!

You don't consider it constructive because I don't agree with you.

Tough...

[Titus213]

I've realized that lawyers serve only two purposes - 1 - to confuse, 2 - to clarify.

[20DNewbie]

What's this I sue you you sue me obsession you guys have there in US?
Oh now Pekka, it's not all of us. :lol:

Mainly for overly sensitive types or those that want something for nothing because they deserve it don't you kow.:rolleyes:

To the OP, I think your intial problem as said before was you were being inconspicuous. When you should have been out in the open about it.

I don't know, maybe put on a clown outfit and jump around, set your head on fire or something. That way at least everyone in the place would have seen you and not a person sneaking pics of children in their view. Plenty of those freaky freakies out there already and it seems it's getting easier and easier to be confused with them.

Or you could have told the cops to take off, you have the choice. Although you may have not enjoyed the results, but you still had the chioce regardless.

On a side note, it's funny to see how some people have the "it's my right to take a photo in public" mentality. That is until the cameras turned onto them, then it's a different story.

[tiziano]

Anyway, I was detained outside for 30-45 mins, while customers went inside and came outside, embarrasing me extremely, as these officers searched through my camera bad, with my permission at 1st, until I asked what I was being charged with and did they have a warrant to search my vehicle.

Back to the original topic, I have one more thing to add, MackRoe.
You didn't let the police search your car. You asked if they had a warrant and so on.
I understand that you are very sensitive to your costitutional rights (I have seen too many US movies probably...:lol: ), but, please image yourself to be in the shoes of one of these policemen.
You have being called because a suspicious guy has been reported to be taking pictures of children that do not belong to his family or friends, in a restaurant.
Once there, you find a very nervous guy, with a big, professional looking camera, that doesn't seem to have a good reason for taking these shots, and that will not let the police search his belongings and car.
You see, the situation looks different this way. I know you know you are innocent, but that's something that you only know. Maybe the things would have been different if you had been more cooperative.
Therefore, I wouldn't make a big problem out of this. There are much biggers issues out there!

[tlc]

I'll be glad to see this thread die a slow death now.


dont think so..... IT LIVES... on and on and on and on.......:shock:

[tlc]

Believe me, it is not everyone in the US who feels this way. Unfortunately, the ones who do are the ones who make the most noise and give the rest of the world the impression that we are all litigious money-grabbers.

no, its just all the people who got fat from eating micky dees all the time, then decided to sue them.... that's how everyone got that feeling.....:rolleyes:

believe me, i see it now from the other side, i hear all the stories of all the frivolous lawsuits going on and it does, to some extent, embarrass me (being an american in another country)...... :o

[dewmuw]

no, its just all the people who got fat from eating micky dees all the time, then decided to sue them.... that's how everyone got that feeling.....:rolleyes:

believe me, i see it now from the other side, i hear all the stories of all the frivolous lawsuits going on and it does, to some extent, embarrass me (being an american in another country)...... :o

Don't worry it's arriving here too! :(

[tiziano]

Don't worry it's arriving here too! :(

Here it was born..... :D

[dewmuw]

Here it was born..... :D

I was the chair of governors of a school for 10 years - we got sued by parents of a child they said he suffered head injuries while playing football in the yard of the school. They were suing us for neglect - on checking we discovered that the kid was suspended from school for a wekk when the accident was meant to have happened. They were suing for £90,000. :( We called the police! :D

[tiziano]

I was the chair of governors of a school for 10 years - we got sued by parents of a child they said he suffered head injuries while playing football in the yard of the school. They were suing us for neglect - on checking we discovered that the kid was suspended from school for a wekk when the accident was meant to have happened. They were suing for £90,000. :( We called the police! :D

It seems that not only the kid, but the parents as well, suffered head injuries. :lol:

[dewmuw]

It seems that not only the kid, but the parents as well, suffered head injuries. :lol:

And the lawyers!

[SuzyView]

Enough lawyer bashing. Not all US lawyers are looking for a fast buck! I think the OP is posing the question of whether he should do something about an incident that occurred a few months ago that keeps haunting him. Was he wrongly accused? Did the police have the right to treat him badly? Should he do something about it? Being embarrassed and harrassed is a deeply personal assault. If the OP feels he has to deal with the "hurt," suing someone isn't always the right answer. I don't know if everyone in the restaurant thought you were a criminal, but lots of people are being looked at more closely now that the security levels are near the highest. If someone in a restaurant I was eating at had that treatment, I don't think I would think they were criminals. Innocent until proven guilty. It's okay to let things like this slide down your back, but if you can't, a nice letter to the editor of the local paper may do it.

[dewmuw]

Enough lawyer bashing.

Awww but its fun! ;)

[SuzyView]

I think I know more lawyer jokes than most. My husband is a lawyer. :) It's great. I haven't sued anybody yet.

[dewmuw]

I think I know more lawyer jokes than most. My husband is a lawyer. :) It's great. I haven't sued anybody yet.

Lawyers pay my wages! :) (well a % of my wages)

[Titus213]

Don't forget your 'constitoootshinal rights to carry a weapon' big lads :lol: :lol: That always gets a laugh and then pretty soon gets a thread closed down :p

Well, it solved most of our problems with England....:lol:

[Master-9]

and that will not let the police search his belongings and car.


If a police men stops my car, I only let the window down far enough to give him my DL and Registration. If he ask me to get out the car I lock my doors. They have no reason to search your personal belongings. Remember they work for the people, not the other way arround....

[tiziano]

If a police men stops my car, I only let the window down far enough to give him my DL and Registration. If he ask me to get out the car I lock my doors. They have no reason to search your personal belongings. Remember they work for the people, not the other way arround....

I don't share this view. I know they work for everyone security, including mine, and I don't see why I should make their work harder. The sooner they make sure I'm a good guy, they sooner the can look for the bad ones.
It seems to me that some people are more scared by the police then by the bad guys. I don't understand this. Or, at least I don't understand it in US. (In some other countries... yes...)

[Becca]

I don't share this view. I know they work for everyone security, including mine, and I don't see why I should make their work harder. The sooner they make sure I'm a good guy, they sooner the can look for the bad ones.
It seems to me that some people are more scared by the police then by the bad guys. I don't understand this. Or, at least I don't understand it in US. (In some other countries... yes...)

I have to agree with you. I figure if you don't have anything to hide, don't act like you do! I've never had a problem with police officers (other than a couple that were lacking in a sense of humor!) and I've been pulled over more times than I care to admit (darn heavy foot!). I've always been respectful and have recieved the same treatment in return.

[Mullet]

Maybe as a photojournalism student I feel more strongly about this than others, but it is indeed my right to take your photo whenever I please and for whatever reason. Granted, If somebody asks me POLITELY to stop, 99% of the time I will. In public, you cannot have an expectation of privacy. And, if you don't like somebody taking your picture, you certainly don't have the right to lay a finger on them. What you DO have is the right to leave, if it makes you feel that uncomfortable.

Of all the comments here I found this one the most crazy. Just because you can doesn't mean you should. The lack of courtesy to another person is mind boggling to me. So if I have my family somewhere and ask you to stop and you don't we should be the one to leave? Why would you want to ruin someone else's good time so you can snap pictures of strangers. That is simply moronic. Imagine if it was you being photographed and someone else wouldn't stop. I can't wait to go downtown one night and maybe share a romantic night with my wife and run into you trying to snap my picture:rolleyes:

[ssim]

If he ask me to get out the car I lock my doors. They have no reason to search your personal belongings.

Well if there never was probable cause.....you just created it.:D

[Steve Parr]

If he ask me to get out the car I lock my doors. They have no reason to search your personal belongings.

Question: How does you getting out of your vehicle constitute your consent to a search of your vehicle?

Answer: It doesn't.

If a cop tells you to exit your vehicle, and you lock the doors instead, your day will likely take a dramatic turn for the worse...

[Master-9]

Question: How does you getting out of your vehicle constitute your consent to a search of your vehicle?

Answer: It doesn't.

If a cop tells you to exit your vehicle, and you lock the doors instead, your day will likely take a dramatic turn for the worse...

Let me clarify, I will lock my doors after I exist my car....

[Skip Souza]

Let me clarify, I will lock my doors after I exist my car....
Good call :lol:

[Plan9]

Of all the comments here I found this one the most crazy. Just because you can doesn't mean you should. The lack of courtesy to another person is mind boggling to me. So if I have my family somewhere and ask you to stop and you don't we should be the one to leave? Why would you want to ruin someone else's good time so you can snap pictures of strangers. That is simply moronic. Imagine if it was you being photographed and someone else wouldn't stop. I can't wait to go downtown one night and maybe share a romantic night with my wife and run into you trying to snap my picture:rolleyes:

Notice how I said if asked politely, 99% of the time I will stop? And later clarified that that last 1% would be reserved for something I felt was a newsworthy situation. You make it sound like Im some jerk standing on a familys picnic blanket in the middle of the park while they're begging me to stop. Of all the hundreds of people I've photographed over the last few months, only a handful have asked me to stop (most of which were actually street performers that were sick of having cameras shoved in their faces).

In addition to that, per school regulations we are required to have full names for everybody we shoot, and I'd say at least 85% of the people I ask are fine with that. Some people decline for various reasons, but I've only had 1 or 2 people actually be angry with me - and that's just the price you pay for photographing people. You can't please everyone all the time.

[steved110]

This is an amazing thread, and one that has confirmed a couple of things for me - firstly that my reluctance to take candids of strangers in the street is most likely wise - and secondly to take pains to ensure that no children that i am not related to ever appear as a direct subject in my pictures. If I take a picture of the beach in Brighton I do take pains to exclude children from a shot.

Why? well, this is a country where an entire neighbourhood ran a pediatrician out on a rail - because they thought he was advertising himself as a pedophile. i kid you not. It makes you ashamed, sometimes, but that's modern times.

There's another reason as well - I'm really not that fond of other people's kids anyway....;)

as for the security stuff, I have no problem avoiding taking sensitive pictures, or doing what I am asked by the cops. I sometimes look after police dogs, I know some of the guys/ gals and they have enough hassles without people getting huffy about their rights. thank the Lord however, they hardly ever carry guns here.

As a final thought, carrying anger around for so long is unhealthy. Best to let it go.

[gjl711]

I have been reading this thread for a bit and got to wondering just what are my legal rights as a photographer. If I choose to take a picture of someone in a restaurant, do I need to get their permission? Well I dug into the web and there is a plethora of info. This one site pretty much sums up the others.
www.kantor.com/useful/Legal-Rights-of-Photographers.pdf
There are some great examples toward the end of the doc including your predicament. Bottom line is that you are within your rights to take a picture of anyone you want with or without permission baring a few situations

[Skip Souza]

Good link.

[Eagle]

Just remember legal or not if it looks suspicious the police can and will investigate.

[Steve Parr]

Just remember legal or not if it looks suspicious the police can and will investigate.

Yep.

And they should...

[tiziano]

The discussion above has become a discussion on whether is legal to take a shot of someone, who doesn't want it, in a public place.
My point was, and remains, that, even if something is legal, sometimes you better think twice, and consider the consequences, before you do it. Consequences that may not be a sue in a court.

One example:
You are in a disco bar at night. You have to go to the bathroom, but there is a long cue .
You want to step ahead of the cue, without asking permission.
Do you think:
"they'll sue me, and because it's legal, no problem"
Or do you think:
"they'll break my head, better to wait"

This stupid example, just to show that the law books are not the only criteria for deciding how to behave.

[Titus213]

Yes Tiziano, you are correct, it's a stupid example. But I for one can't go around fearing I'll accidently take a picture of Steve's family because he might try to pound on me....

[Steve Parr]

Yes Tiziano, you are correct, it's a stupid example. But I for one can't go around fearing I'll accidently take a picture of Steve's family because he might try to pound on me....

Not at all.

I'll ask you to stop.

I'll only pound you if you don't...

:lol:

[tiziano]

Not at all.

I'll ask you to stop.

I'll only pound you if you don't...

:lol:

That would be my behavior too.

[Skip Souza]

In this country you would both be incarcerated and get sued ;-)
and rightfully so.

[Steve Parr]

In this country you would both be incarcerated and get sued ;-)
and rightfully so.

And I'd be completely cool with that...

[tiziano]

In this country you would both be incarcerated and get sued ;-)
and rightfully so.

And, the next time the photographer would think twice before harassing people in the street... ;)

[ssim]

And here I thought this thread was going to die back on page 5. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

[jfrancho]

This thread has really gotten weird and disturbing.

[breal101]

This thread is disturbing on sooo many levels. Setting aside the pro-ported pugilistic skills of some posters, ( I don't want to go there.) First of all I can't understand why one would want to take pictures of someone else's children in a restaurant. Having decided to do this, the OP's biggest mistake in my opinion was to appear sneaky about it. Then we get to the race issue, the idea that somehow racism is dead couldn't be further from the truth. Cases of people being pulled over by police for the crime of DWB (driving while black) abound. That fact can not be lost to a black person. I had some experience with profiling in the 60's and 70's, I was stopped on a number of occasions for driving without a haircut. Also I am not blind to the fact that racism is not a one way street, no one race has that market cornered. A lawyer who handled police abuse cases once told me to never argue the fine points of the law with a policeman on the side of the road. He has the power, leave the legal stuff for later. Then comes my personal experience regarding the public, I have on a number of occasions been tasked by clients to recruit members of the public as impromptu models both in closed venues and on the street. It actually amazes me how many people will agree to be photographed for little compensation, they often sign model releases without reading them. To be honest, I wouldn't sign most of those releases, they stop just short of claiming your first-born. Rarely do they ask for ID or confirmation from a representative of the client. One thing for sure, I will no longer do this a long way from home with no client representative with me. I might meet Mr. Brown's policeman. To those who are so eager to give up their rights I will leave a quote from a very wise man.





They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

Benjamin Franklin

[Master-9]

And here I thought this thread was going to die back on page 5. :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

LOL :D