NYPD Arrest Photographer On Assignment For NY Times In The Bronx

http://gothamist.com …otographer_on_a​ssignm.php

http://www.nytimes.com …nx.html?_r=1&re​f=nyregion

Thugs. Worthless pieces of human debris. Out of control trash. I hope the lawsuit settlement will be so big (and there will be one), that the NYPD is forced to cut its budget and the thugs involved in this are the first to be let go. I have true sympathy for good police officers out there because thugs like this make them all look bad and tarnish their good works and reputations.

my hope is he lawyers up and nail them for a large sum of money

I cannot see the video, but judging by the story as printed in the times, it seems like there were no witnesses either way that can say if he was indeed resisting or if he had tried to push forward as the officers claimed. Seems that this guy may have a history of run ins. Wonder how hard he tries to get the best shot.

Thats our boys in blue. Nothing new and will continue to be the same. Cops will have their side of the story and it will end at that.

Here is a not photographer story that happened in my neighborhood and invovled cops from my local precinct. Some neighbors had a property dispute and one side would always call cops and they did that particular day. The other neighbor and his wife were not home at the time and when they drove into their driveway there were cops waiting for them. Cops arrested both of them and claimed that the husband tried to run them over and one of the cops had to jump out of the way. Husband was facing 7 years in jail for attacking the cop. Few days after he was released from jail on bail he produced web cam video from his house that shows him slowly pulling into the driveway, cop not even moving out of the way. Case was dropped. Cop intentionally lied and was going to send an innocent man to jail for 7 years all because of a property line dispute.

Thats NYPD for you!

mikeinctown wrote in post #14825233
I cannot see the video, but judging by the story as printed in the times, it seems like there were no witnesses either way that can say if he was indeed resisting or if he had tried to push forward as the officers claimed. Seems that this guy may have a history of run ins. Wonder how hard he tries to get the best shot.

I wonder that, too. Not defending NYPD, here, but the guy sure has a history of run-ins. Would like to know what really happened.

Well, I watched the video, and quite frankly, I think the tog is a jackass. With all the thousands of professional photojournalists out there that take millions of photos without incident, how does this guy end up in trouble 3 times? Because he pushes the limits just a bit too far. He obviously has an attitude that doesn't go over well with the police, and he feels he is above the law.

If this latest incident is anything like the videod (sic) one, then it doesn't surprise me he got arrested, especially if his camera 'inadvertently struck an officer'. This guy I'm sure is known to cops as a PITA, and they treat him as such.

Bash away....

See, this is why I feel very strongly that all law enforcement personnel should be wearing audio and video recording gear at all times.

For starters, the video does not support the written description of the incident.

In any case, this entire episode of political theater was intended to provoke something, which is part of the reason the actor in the spotlight immediately screamed "Police brutality!" for the cameras. But Stolarik, the supposed photojournalist, also forced his way into the act, thereby making himself part of the story. That's a no-no ... or used to be.

Also, the title of the article at the first link is subtly propagandistic. "NYPD Arrest Photographer On Assignment For NY Times In The Bronx"

That Stolarik is a photographer is irrelevant. Contrary to the implication in the article, the officers did not arrest the man because he "refused to stop shooting." That's bunkum. The fact that he's a photographer gave him no special privileges over any other bystander there who wished to push his way into the action. And that Stolarik has done freelance work for the newspaper of Walter Duranty and Jayson Blair gives him no special privileges either. In that situation, everyone—including the average Joe with his cell-phone camera—has equal access with the likes of Stolarik.

______________

—Tedder

I think some people are too quick to assume the police were at fault.

Reminds me of the quote attributed to Mark Twain, "Never pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel."

The police will lose even if they were in the right.

It does sound like this guys has a track record of provoking confrontations. That's enough for me to assume (lacking other information) that he was at fault here, not the police.

Maybe they just dont like Nikon?

RTPVid wrote in post #14825714
I think some people are too quick to assume the police were at fault.

I agree. So many times on the internet when you read law enforcemnt and a photographer the majority of people jump all over the latter assuming that the photographer is just an innocent in the whole thing. Much like other forums the first few posts is all about suing the cops without really knowing the facts. I guess that is the greatness (not) of being able to post on forum boards under anonymity. Could this have been handled better, most certainly and that applies to both the photographer and the police. There is no doubt that this guy was a working press agent and had his credentials showing. I think that his reputation precedes him and quite honestly if someone kept pushing my buttons I might be inclined to push back as the police did.

My guess is that this will end in the police apologizing with the offending officers being sent to sensitivity training. No one is going to get rich off of this, nor should they.

Ok just watched the gothamist video . First that organization does have a slant and an agenda. I'm a New Yorker and know this first hand . The tog in this video and in this incident is out of line . The person getting arrested is resisting , (look at the 1:33 mark ). If he just puts his hand behind his back the force used subsides . The more he resist the more the force is used> . He can make his points when he is released and the ciaos is over with his lawyers. We don't see what started the incident, so we can not judge.
Now in these situations tensions are high , if the tog just follows instructions and does his thing(that lens seemed strong enough ) there are no more problems . As much as the tog has the right to shot away (at a reasonable distance) the cop has a right to stand where he wants regardless if he blocks the tog .
Now in this day in age in an aggressive situation I would not let anyone put any item that close to my face like the tog did to the cop . Think about it , it could be mace , a taser , or any other type instrument to cause harm .
As for the original point being made here , there is more to this story , to come

Check Chase Jarvis' blog...

Pretty sure he shot what happened.

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #14826325
Check Chase Jarvis' blog...
Pretty sure he shot what happened.

Good traffic generator for his blog for sure.

I wonder if a lawsuit is coming. As a New Yorker, I really enjoy paying for these lawsuits so that other people can get rich. Maybe I should try to get my rights violated too. Seems like better odds than winning the Powerball.