| Turn off that camera right now! |
 |
| Written by Mark Nichols |
|
According to a recent story by CBS, several people in Maryland are facing felony charges for recording their arrests on camera. Others say they have been intimidated to shut their cameras off. As a result something of a legal controversy has sprung up. As is usually the case with electronic recording and law enforcement issues, the main issue is whether a given incident occurred in a one-party state or a two-party state.
For the uninitiated a "one party" state is one where an individual can make video tapes or audio tapes surreptitiously without informing the second party that they're being recorded. A "two-party" state requires that both parties are aware of any recording in order for those recordings to be lawful. Maryland, like Massachusetts, is a two party state. That means that if someone in Maryland wants to videotape someone, or even him or herself, getting arrested they would need the explicit permission of the law enforcement officers involved. "We are enforcing the law, and we don't make any apologies for that," Greg Shipley, with the Maryland State Police, told local news station WJZ. In a YouTube video from an arrest at the Preakness involving a woman that allegedly assaulted a police officer, viewers can actually hear one officer explaining the law to the boyfriend of the woman who was arrested. "Do me a favor and turn that off. It's illegal to videotape anybody's voice or anything else. It's against the law in the state of Maryland," the officer can be heard saying. But regardless of whether you work in a one party state or a two party state, the rules are open to interpretation and may get an officer or his or her agency in hot water. "For the government to be saying it has the power to prevent citizens from doing that is profoundly shocking, troubling, and particularly in the case of Maryland, simply flat-out wrong," David Roach, an attorney with the ACLU told WJZ reporters. But under Maryland law, conversations in private cannot be recorded without the consent of both people involved. Isn't that a contradiction? The devil, as is usually the case, is in the details. One party state laws indicate that citizens may not "secretly or surreptitiously" record a second party without their knowledge. "When you tell me to turn it off because it's against the law, you've proven to me that I'm not secretly taping you," law professor Byron Warnken told reporters in a recent interview. "He doesn't have the right to say, if you don't stop recording me, I'm going to arrest you." The last "official" decision regarding Maryland's one party law ironically came from the previous attorney general in a case where the AG decided it was legal for officers to record video on dashcams. Now state delegate Sandy Rosenberg is pushing the new attorney general for his opinion on whether citizens can record police as well. "If he finds that there are circumstances when it's illegal, under existing law, to tape public actions by police or other public officials, then it's appropriate for me to introduce a bill to change that statute," said Rosenberg, (D) District 41, Baltimore City. Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites          Comments (1)
  written by jon west, September 04, 2010
that is a bullshit law to protect police . there are cameras all over the place in stores ECT. if they want to use them to combat wrong doing they will and it will be permitted and should be weather it is cops wrong doing or peoples.. there is a law that states ,here in mich.state and fed.county transportation is exemped from the law ...(THAT MITE GIVE YOU A CLUE) of the dubbel standerds we are held to in the court of( LAW?)HERE IN THE[ WEE THE PEOPLE COUNTRY ]!!!you might as well through the const.out the ******* window... thank you and have a nice day.
Write comment
|
Subscribe to this comment's feed
