PDA

View Full Version : Was asked to DELETE a photo today!



Pages : 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9

David Goldstein
09-04-2011, 12:33 AM
Technically there is no arrest for something which is not illegal. You can be arrested for something you didn't do but were suspected of doing but not arrested for something which you cannot be arrested for!

When you are arrested you must be told the reason why and if that reason is not valid, it is not an arrest (or it's a wrongful arrest).


Steve. Actually, anytime a police officer stops you to talk to you in his official capacity you are "under arrest", including being talked to about things such as being a witness to a crime. If he takes you into custody that's a different story.

Roger Cole
09-04-2011, 12:44 AM
Actually, anytime a police officer stops you to talk to you in his official capacity you are "under arrest", including being talked to about things such as being a witness to a crime. If he takes you into custody that's a different story.

Not true, at least not in the US. He can make a "stop" but not an arrest on "reasonsble suspicion." They generally can't delay you more than 30 minutes or so (varies with jurisdiction) after which you can tell him to arrest you or pound sand, and an arrest requires probable cause. Provable cause legally requires two things: 1) KNOWLEDGE not hunch or suspicion, that a crime has definitely been committed and 2) some reason to connect you with the crime. Absent either if those you can tell him to go away and leave you alone and he has to do so. It's just sense to be polite about it though.

lxdude
09-04-2011, 01:44 AM
Actually, anytime a police officer stops you to talk to you in his official capacity you are "under arrest", including being talked to about things such as being a witness to a crime.

Actually, you are being "detained".

lxdude
09-04-2011, 01:51 AM
There is a "Michelle's" donuts here in L.A. It is hilarious. The silhouette of the sign is a take off on the classic Winchell's shape, and the font is almost identical. It is somewhere on the eastern part of Santa Monica Blvd, on the south side of the street. My initial thought was the it was a modified Winchell's sign, but looking at pix on the Internet, I am not so sure.

http://www.santabarbara.com/dining/after_hours/originals/dsc01046.jpg

http://laist.com/attachments/tony/michellesdonuthouse.jpg
Michelle's is an old Winchell's. Winchell's signs used to be that shape.
I figure it was called Michelle's to save money by reusing letters in the sign. Years ago there was a Texaco truck stop near here on I-10. On the freeway sign the letters, all capitals, were mounted individually on internally illuminated frames. The new owners renamed the place EXACTO, so all they had to do was move five of the six letters on each side of the sign.

Steve Smith
09-04-2011, 03:56 AM
Actually, you are being "detained".

In the UK you can ask an officer if you are being detained. If the answer is no, you can walk away.


Steve.

lxdude
09-04-2011, 06:58 AM
In the UK you can ask an officer if you are being detained. If the answer is no, you can walk away.


Steve.
Same here.

michaelbsc
09-04-2011, 07:12 AM
Same here.

But a lot of it has to do with attitude. If you are being a real jerk they can find something even if it is dropped.

JohnMeadows
09-04-2011, 07:24 AM
But a lot of it has to do with attitude. If you are being a real jerk they can find something even if it is dropped.

And the problem is that with a lot of cops, anything less that immediate, unquestioning obedience, or even the slightest hint of knowing your rights, makes you a "real jerk." :(

jcayer
09-04-2011, 11:40 AM
Somebody argued with you in NYC? That's hard to believe.

+1 :)

Unless she was a tourist :D

David Goldstein
09-07-2011, 08:42 PM
Actually, you are being "detained". As I recall from my police days, it was legally classified as an arrest. A police officer is not required, (in the U.S., anyway), to inform people they are talking to in an official capacity that they are under arrest. Police officers can also allow people to go on their way once they are satisfied.

Keep in mind, I am talking about when an officer is officially conducting police business, such as an investigation.

lxdude
09-07-2011, 11:08 PM
As I recall from my police days, it was legally classified as an arrest. A police officer is not required, (in the U.S., anyway), to inform people they are talking to in an official capacity that they are under arrest. Police officers can also allow people to go on their way once they are satisfied.

Keep in mind, I am talking about when an officer is officially conducting police business, such as an investigation.
Yes, you're right. The word arrest can be applied to detainment, that is, a person can be arrested and detained.
But there's a distinction between that and the more commonly used and understood meaning of the word, and even more so with the term "under arrest", which was used in the post to which I replied.

David Goldstein
09-10-2011, 10:24 PM
Yes, you're right. The word arrest can be applied to detainment, that is, a person can be arrested and detained.
But there's a distinction between that and the more commonly used and understood meaning of the word, and even more so with the term "under arrest", which was used in the post to which I replied.

Legally, arrest means exactly what I outlined earlier. Custody is the action a police officer actually performs when he takes a person to the police station and books them, ie, "the officer took the suspect into custody" - which means the officer has now taken responsibility for the person and their possessions and is required to keep an accounting of all such matters to satisfy the court.

Unfortunately, for the average person, arrest is confused with custody due to too many cop shows. :-)

Ric Trexell
09-11-2011, 12:35 AM
There are two things that our lawmakers and police don't understand about photography that make their actions dumb. First, to be told you can't photograph a building assumes that the person taking the picture is using a standard lense and is close to the building. With a telephoto lens you can get a picture from so far away that no one would even think you are taking a picture of that building. Second, just because a guy has a camera, that should not be any more suspect than the million people walking past that building with a camera equiped cell phone. If the police wish to confiscate your camera, then ask them to confiscate all the cell phones on this street as those are potential picture takers. If they are worried about terriorists taking pictures, I doubt that the camera of choice would be a medium format mounted on a tripod. To harrass people with a camera makes the police look like idiots. Why then do they insist on doing it?

David Goldstein
09-11-2011, 10:39 PM
In the UK you can ask an officer if you are being detained. If the answer is no, you can walk away.


Steve.

I believe that is true in the U.S. as well - as I said in my other posts, it is when a cop is acting within his legal authority and his holding a person in "arrest" is to aid in an investigation the officer might be pursuing.

moose10101
09-13-2011, 12:18 PM
As I recall from my police days, it was legally classified as an arrest. A police officer is not required, (in the U.S., anyway), to inform people they are talking to in an official capacity that they are under arrest. Police officers can also allow people to go on their way once they are satisfied.

Keep in mind, I am talking about when an officer is officially conducting police business, such as an investigation.

That may have been the terminology in your police days, but today, "detention" is quite different than "arrest". Detaining someone only requires an officer to have "reasonable suspicion", while arresting someone requires "probable cause". Making an arrest without probable cause can be a quick way to the unemployment line.

An arrest also gives an officer the authority to conduct a complete search of the individual, as well as the person's vehicle, and it gives the officer the authority to remove the person from the scene. Detention simply allows the officer to keep the individual from leaving, for a short period of time, while they investigate and question the individual.

Bottom line, if a currently employed officer believes that "arrest" and "detain" are legally classified as the same thing, he/she is in the wrong line of work.

Steve Smith
09-13-2011, 01:27 PM
Copyright is a civil, not criminal, matter so the police should never be involved unless they are alleging a criminal act (such as trespass).

This is a reply to quite an old post in this thread but I want to point out that in England it is different. Trespass is a civil rather than criminal offence and police cannot remove you from property which you are trespassing on.


Steve.

lensworker
10-16-2011, 04:11 PM
If the police wish to confiscate your camera... Tell them "not without a court order signed by a judge."

As I understand it, in the United States police can only confiscate cameras/film/memory cards if -
(1.) they have a court order
(2.) they arrest you and your camera/film/memory cards are taken into evidence

Also -police may (or may not) be able to confiscate your film/memory cards if a crime has been committed and you have photographs that may be used as evidence. To the best of my knowledge, this would require a court order; they can't confiscate your property just because they are "the police."

Take a look at the following pages for clarification: http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm
and http://asmp.org/tutorials/frequently-asked-questions-about-privacy-and-libel.html

Steve Smith
10-17-2011, 12:38 AM
As I understand it, in the United States police can only confiscate cameras/film/memory cards if -
(1.) they have a court order
(2.) they arrest you and your camera/film/memory cards are taken into evidence
.....
can't confiscate your property just because they are "the police."


Same in the UK.


Steve.

Fotophreek
10-17-2011, 02:05 AM
You sir, are my hero.

lensworker
10-17-2011, 09:31 PM
By coincidence, I was asked to delete a photo two days ago. I was photographing a woman at the farmer's market dressed in a sarong with a scarf. I got a bit too ambitious (and a bit careless) and she "caught" me.

She asked if I took her picture. I replied that I had. She wanted me to delete it and I replied "I can't delete it - this is a film camera." She was nice enough about it; she said "we don't like to be photographed" then told (not asked, but told) me not to print the photo, which I did not agree to. That was about it, no big deal.

Lesson learned: Don't get overly ambitious (or careless) when photographing women in middle eastern garb.

And use a film camera. :p

Yes, I will print the negative - it is my image and it is my right to do so. And if it's an image I like, I will exhibit it at some point.