What are my rights not to be photographed

culturejam wrote in post #10238460
Too true. The cops are very selective.

Not some much the LEO's at the scene, it usually department policy. Which are made by politicians.

Mark

yea, areas taped off by the police are completely different. you as a general member of the public dont have access to it and im fine with that.

however, if im in a hotel using my 120-300, is it legal for me to photograph the scene taped off from above?

kauffman v36 wrote in post #10240080
yea, areas taped off by the police are completely different. you as a general member of the public dont have access to it and im fine with that.

however, if im in a hotel using my 120-300, is it legal for me to photograph the scene taped off from above?

Where I was an LEO, no. If we thought you had crime scene photos we would get a warrant, and hold them as evidence. We would detain you first and then get a warrant with in 24 hours.

Mark

Markk9 wrote in post #10240094

kauffman v36 wrote in post #10240080
if im in a hotel using my 120-300, is it legal for me to photograph the scene taped off from above?

Where I was an LEO, no. If we thought you had crime scene photos we would get a warrant, and hold them as evidence. We would detain you first and then get a warrant with in 24 hours.

Mark

This I find hard to believe.. not that I don't believe you, but that you or your department were acting properly. What was the rational for this policy?

Being somewhat of a cynic, I would guess that the DA (or someone in a position of authority) wanted to control all available evidence. If there was going to be a prosecution and If there was something that contributed to reasonable doubt.. it never existed; and thus no picture from outside would be allowed to exists. It seems illegal to me; but I am no expert. But I would guess that the policy existed and went unchallenged..

Are not the police allowed to arrest and hold you for 24-48 hours without filing charges...at least that's what they say on "Law and Order", the extent of my knowledge on the subject.

chauncey wrote in post #10242021
Are not the police allowed to arrest and hold you for 24-48 hours without filing charges...at least that's what they say on "Law and Order", the extent of my knowledge on the subject.

I don't know what kind of reason they need to hold you.. but even if they are allowed to hold you, what gives them the right to confiscate your pictures? He said they would get a warrant, but I don't understand why a judge would grant it.

hairy_moth wrote in post #10241942
This I find hard to believe.. not that I don't believe you, but that you or your department were acting properly. What was the rational for this policy?

Being somewhat of a cynic, I would guess that the DA (or someone in a position of authority) wanted to control all available evidence. If there was going to be a prosecution and If there was something that contributed to reasonable doubt.. it never existed; and thus no picture from outside would be allowed to exists. It seems illegal to me; but I am no expert. But I would guess that the policy existed and went unchallenged..

You hit the nail on the head, in most places in the US, the DA is who sets the policy for police department for the treatment of evidence.

We have all watched the TV shows about how they use information to weed out the wackos from a real guy. Most DA offices want control of what crime scene evidence is used in the press.

Mark

hairy_moth wrote in post #10242053
I don't know what kind of reason they need to hold you.. but even if they are allowed to hold you, what gives them the right to confiscate your pictures? He said they would get a warrant, but I don't understand why a judge would grant it.

To get all the evidence of the crime...............Lo​ok, this was the policy we had for a very long time. I didn't make it up, that was done by a bunch of attorneys. Did we let "special" people in, yes, but we told them what photo could and couldn't be published.

Do some get a away with it, yes. You would have to see them taking the photos. Just having a camera would not get you stopped, but holding the camera in shooting position will. You still retain all the right to the photos, and will be given them back when the case is closed.

Mark

Markk9 wrote in post #10242066
Most DA offices want control of what crime scene evidence is used in the press.

Mark

Thanks.. I would guess that under the guise "not tainting the potential jury pool" some liberties are taken.

chauncey wrote in post #10230896
Assuming all that is true, where can that image be used and shown and what recourse do I have, would they be published, with or without the photographer being compensated?

Ask a lawyer. Anyone posting on here is going to offer assumptions and personal opinions on what is right, wrong, or is legal/illegal.

Its interesting reading about the laws in the US, enjoy your freedom! here in Portugal it is a breach of a persons constitutional rights to privacy to take a picture of them in a public or private place without permission. Street photography when people are in shot is basically illegal, but of course it still happens quite a lot, at beaches especially where the subject is legally being shot but of course there are lots of other sun worshippers around and in the frame. If someone complains to the police you are in the stinky stuff. When i came here (from UK) I had no idea of this and only found out when i stumbled on a flickr group from portugal discussing the problems they face. This all comes from the past, when the communist dictators basically wrote decrees to say what you are allowed to do, so instead of laws saying what your not allowed to do, most of the system here works on decrees saying what you can do and if one doesnt exist you cant do it legally... They go easy on tourists thank heavens, but you do spot dirty looks from the Portuguese when they spot you taking their pic.

HappySnapper90 wrote in post #10242382
Ask a lawyer. Anyone posting on here is going to offer assumptions and personal opinions on what is right, wrong, or is legal/illegal.

Exactly. The last place I'll go for advice on constitutional law, or any legal issue for that matter, is a photography forum...

argyle wrote in post #10245166
Exactly. The last place I'll go for advice on constitutional law, or any legal issue for that matter, is a photography forum...

Exactly...

(BTW, I've had this sharp pain in my right shoulder for a couple weeks. Anyone here know what it might be?)

oRGie wrote in post #10244953
Its interesting reading about the laws in the US, enjoy your freedom! here in Portugal it is a breach of a persons constitutional rights to privacy to take a picture of them in a public or private place without permission. Street photography when people are in shot is basically illegal, but of course it still happens quite a lot, at beaches especially where the subject is legally being shot but of course there are lots of other sun worshippers around and in the frame. If someone complains to the police you are in the stinky stuff. When i came here (from UK) I had no idea of this and only found out when i stumbled on a flickr group from portugal discussing the problems they face. This all comes from the past, when the communist dictators basically wrote decrees to say what you are allowed to do, so instead of laws saying what your not allowed to do, most of the system here works on decrees saying what you can do and if one doesnt exist you cant do it legally... They go easy on tourists thank heavens, but you do spot dirty looks from the Portuguese when they spot you taking their pic.

have you ever heard a portugese say that anything not forbidden is required? just wondered, some friends in my dark deep past went there for a time and came back with stories of exactly what you are talking about, as it appiled to building practices and materials and hiring locals and such. I just remember them saying that if it wasn't forbidden, it was required. the right way, the wrong way, and the portugese way.
they also said it was BEEYOOtiful, and the club scene in the eighties was definitely major league.

FlyingPhotog wrote in post #10245210
(BTW, I've had this sharp pain in my right shoulder for a couple weeks. Anyone here know what it might be?)

Pissed off the wife lately?

That's usually the root cause of any sudden onset of pain in my experience.