Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 68,654   Posts: 1,481,323   Online: 1075
      
Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456789 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 85
  1. #71
    MenacingTourist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    New Jersey
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    895
    Images
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by Tanya
    you would not believe that this happens all the time in the US (esp. Utah and other states).
    Please explain why Utah is especially prone to this. I'd like to know what i'm in for as I start shooting more and more LF.

  2. #72
    Aggie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    So. Utah
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,925
    Images
    6
    First off to have this kind of knowledge you profess of the case, and such, I would say you are the lady in question. As to me not knowing it is well known here on apug of my troubles with shooting a large format camera in California and a small town duo of police arresting me thinking it was a cannon. I do know of what I speak.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tanya
    What could not ring true? The arrest, by police, happened last Nov.4, 2004, The papers had already been filed by the time she was interrogated by the 6 FBI & DHS agents.
    If papers had already been filed against the police in as case, it would be common practice for an investigation by said police force which would also involve other agencies investigating not only the policeman but the case at hand. Given our fear of terrorism, it is not out of the rhelm to have both the FBI and the DHS involved tomake sure that it is not terror related.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tanya
    The same attorney doesn't and can't often take on the same cases.
    BULL! It is easier and more profitable to go at a company for wrongful termination than to go at a policeman. BTW the state of Utah has limits as to what a policeman can be sued over. It is minimal.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tanya
    Plus, they got her fired, yes, by calling and SHOWING UP at the main East Coast offices.
    How else would an investigation occur? It wasn't the agencies investigation that got you fired it was the over reaction of your company to said investigation. Again it is the company not the agencies. If this was during the course of work, and you not cooporated with a policeman askin g for ID when you were shooting what in his mind was a questionable building, he can and will construe it as resisting cooperating with the police. I was not at the incident. I don't know how the asking for the ID was turned down. I do not know the language used. I don't know why it simply wasn't avoided in the first place by handing over a DL so that all would have blown over. Was the picture being taken work related? If so a company would and could be angry about this matter turning into such a fiasco. Was the companies policies about this ones that would have been grounds for termination? There is much more to this than is being said. ESPECIALLY since the easiest way to win would be to go at the company for wrongful termination.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tanya
    But, though slander and lies are obvious on their part, there is no legal........let's say, "recorded" evidence that can be presented in court.
    If these assertions of slander are verifiable through what was said by others than the FBI and DHS it is just that verifiable. Were there witnesses to the initial incident? What was said by the company when they terminated you? What was verifiable by the company that the FBI and DHS said to them? This would all be evidence. Obvious is only obvious if others heard and can testify to it. Was this all done in secret and it is a matter of your word alone against all of them?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tanya
    Bottom line, yes the papers only tell less than half the story- if you knew what REALLY happened in ,both cases, you would be really pissed.
    Not until I know the full story. What I am hearing now is not making me pissed, it is making me more skeptical.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tanya
    Unless, of course you just like to ACT and that's why you would not believe that this happens all the time in the US (esp. Utah and other states).
    Taking this personal against me is the main reason why I question. It is not adding up and from this last statement, I wonder if that is what started the whole thing? Was it a disregard and lashing back at a policeman asking what was going on and then for ID that prompted this whole mess?

    I have lived in Utah at various times in my life, totally over 18 years. Recently I moved back from San Francisco area. I've lived in many different states, (12) from east to west. I've had worse treatment in Paris France when i was 16 and doing nothing more than waiting on a street for my cousin in the shop behind me. Stupidity knows no bounds. It crosses every state, and every country line. It goes male to female. What is interesting and would be good to follow in this case is the full facts. We are not getting those. I will be up in the SLC area in the next month or two, and I just might have to go look up some public records pertaining to this case. Or one of the guys in SLC can do this. I for one now am very very curious as to what is being reported and what is being recorded in legal documents.
    Non Digital Diva

  3. #73
    Aggie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    So. Utah
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,925
    Images
    6
    I did a quick google on Tanya Ortega de Chamberlain. on this website: http://robm.me.uk/2005/08/29/woman-s...cation-demand/

    This is what I found (it has more to the story than has been reported) The things not mentioned is she was photographing a federal building. The Security guard first came out and told her not to photograph the doors and security cameras. The rest was her right to photograph. Was it ignored and a policeman called in at that point? Since the next thing that happend was the police and an 80 minute interview that ensued before she was arrested. Like I said there is more here than is being reported in this thread:

    Tanya Ortega de Chamberlin set her large, black box of a camera on a tripod outside of the Wallace F. Bennett Federal Building in Salt Lake City and posed for her picture in City Weekly. She hadn’t been there 30 seconds when she was approached by a security guard from the Federal Protective Service arm of the Department of Homeland Security.
    Don’t take pictures of the building’s security cameras, he said, helpfully pointing out cameras perched on top of a corner light post. Don’t take photos of the doors, either, or the guards. “The rest, you have the right by law to [photograph],” he told her.
    That is technically true. It’s also true that Ortega de Chamberlin, or anyone else for that matter, has a right to photograph any building, as long` as they snap their shots from public property.
    No law, not even the post Sept. 11, 2001, USA Patriot Act, changes the ability of photographers to walk down the street unmolested. At least in theory.
    In fact, since Sept. 11, 2001, tourists and professional photographers have been detained or harassed throughout the country while taking snapshots of bridges, bus tunnels and government buildings.
    In the past eight months, Ortega de Chamberlin, who shows art photography and works as a commercial real estate photographer, has been arrested by police and called in for lengthy questioning by a phalanx of agents from Homeland Security, FBI and others on a terrorism task force.
    She worries about winding up on a government list as well as national security encroaching on artistic freedom. “If police officers or anybody in authority don’t know what people’s rights are to take photos, to be artists or reporters, the individuals end up suffering,” she said.
    She filed a civil-rights lawsuit last week challenging her November arrest by the South Salt Lake Police Department on Main Street. During an 80-minute interview, she gave her name, Social Security number, birth date and driver-license information to police alerted by a suspicious neighbor. However, she balked at demands for other personal details. Police handcuffed her, held her in a police car for 20 minutes and cited her for interfering with an officer by giving false information and refusing to answer questions.
    Those charges were dropped before trial, but Ortega de Chamberlin wants a court declaration that police were in the wrong. Brian Barnard, her lawyer, said police can’t randomly stop people and demand identification unless there is reason to suspect a person is connected to a crime. The police department won’t comment on the incident due to the lawsuit.
    Ortega de Chamberlin aroused suspicion a second time three weeks ago while taking photographs across the street from an oil refinery. A week later, a Homeland Security agent phoned requesting she bring herself and her company’s black van over for an interview.
    Six agents, including at least one each from the FBI and Homeland Security, she said, piled into the van, took down her passport information, looked through cupboards, photographed the van and questioned her for nearly two hours with repeated questions sure to flush out evildoers. “Are you a terrorist?” “Are you supplying photos to terrorists?”
    To add insult to injury, Ortega de Chamberlin was fired Monday from her day job taking building photos for CoStar Group, a Maryland company that supplies information and photographs on commercial buildings. Days before, a CoStar senior director told City Weekly an FBI agent had telephoned the company about the upcoming story. The director said that CoStar bars employees from talking to the press.
    CoStar spokesman Mark Klionsky would not say why Ortega de Chamberlin was fired. He said it was unusual for the company’s “clearly marked” vans to arouse suspicion.
    Speaking prior to the firing, Brent Robbins, FBI spokesman, said the incident shows the local terrorism task force working. Operators of potential targets have been asked to keep an eye out for suspicious customers, and the van Ortega de Chamberlin drove certainly qualified. “Everything that comes to us, no matter how innocent it may seem, will be checked out.”
    Portland, Ore., lawyer Bert Krages, author of a widely used briefing on photographer rights, thinks fear of photography is overblown. He puts it down to, “people watching Mission Impossible in the ’60s, where every episode started out with Peter Graves looking at 8 x 10 glossies.”
    story search

    Salt Lake City Weekly and slweekly.com ©1996-2005 Copperfield Publishing, Inc.. All rights reserved.
    offices: 248 S. Main Street
    Salt Lake City, Utah 84101
    801-575-7003
    • editorial internship program
    • invitation to freelance writers
    • media kit
    • about Salt Lake City Weekly
    Non Digital Diva

  4. #74
    bjorke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    SF & Surrounding Planet
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,032
    Images
    20
    Aggie, you did not read too carefully. The incident at the federal building was what happened when the photographer from the Weekly attempted to photograph Tanya to cover her story. She was posing with her camera in the photograph for that incident (and there were no arrests).

    More generally, just because something is "common practice" does not make it right. Abuse of public authority is very typical and sure sounds like what has occured here.

    "What Would Zeus Do?"
    KBPhotoRantPhotoPermitAPUG flickr Robot

  5. #75
    Aggie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    So. Utah
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,925
    Images
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by bjorke
    Aggie, you did not read too carefully. The incident at the federal building was what happened when the photographer from the Weekly attempted to photograph Tanya to cover her story. She was posing with her camera in the photograph for that incident (and there were no arrests).

    More generally, just because something is "common practice" does not make it right. Abuse of public authority is very typical and sure sounds like what has occured here.
    Sorry Kevin I don't see that at any point in the above summation. Where does it say the weekly was photographing her? They only say she set up her camera and was posing. Nothing about a third party to this. That and the time lines do not sync up. Was she phoned at the same time she was photographing the oil refinery? or later? Also there seems to be two incidents not just one. That and it did point out she gave false information.

    All I'm saying is this doesn't add up. I like to know all the facts not just one persons version of it. Once all facts are heard it is easier to say yes she was harrassed or no she was not. I'm not defending what the police did. I just have only one very self serving point of view.
    Non Digital Diva

  6. #76

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    29
    Hello, always nice to chat with a local photographer.
    Why does this happen more often in Utah? Well, first off, I have not been everywhere, of course, but I have done much photography in Nicaragua, Cent. America, England and many parts of Europe and many parts of the U.S..Only in Utah have I been hassled AT ALL.
    Utah.... ? I am not sure why, curiously enough I read another incident that happened here. The Ogden paper printed a story about "Albert Wang", he was photographing graffitti from TRAX and the UTA police confiscated his card etc.

    Anyway, after asking retailers, police, and just people I meet here there are 2 things:
    1) when the olympics were here a few years ago there were (apperantly) conferences done by all sorts of corporations, govt. entities and companies. These conferences "taught" people how to spot a suspicious person and encouraged contacting some official if you thought ANYTHING looked out of the ordinary.
    Here, there is rampant "ordinary" so much looked suspicious.
    2) Convenience and compliance ????? It seems that people who grew up here (the ones I know anyway) are much more willing to trust anyone in authority and not to pursue asking questions about such things. I do not know why, maybe something taught in the school system here. What do you think?
    Oh yeah, FYI , tripods need permiting to be on public ground here.
    tanya

    Thanks,
    Tanya

  7. #77
    Aggie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    So. Utah
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,925
    Images
    6
    Quote Originally Posted by Tanya
    Hello, always nice to chat with a local photographer.
    Why does this happen more often in Utah? Well, first off, I have not been everywhere, of course, but I have done much photography in Nicaragua, Cent. America, England and many parts of Europe and many parts of the U.S..Only in Utah have I been hassled AT ALL.
    Utah.... ? I am not sure why, curiously enough I read another incident that happened here. The Ogden paper printed a story about "Albert Wang", he was photographing graffitti from TRAX and the UTA police confiscated his card etc.

    Anyway, after asking retailers, police, and just people I meet here there are 2 things:
    1) when the olympics were here a few years ago there were (apperantly) conferences done by all sorts of corporations, govt. entities and companies. These conferences "taught" people how to spot a suspicious person and encouraged contacting some official if you thought ANYTHING looked out of the ordinary.
    Here, there is rampant "ordinary" so much looked suspicious.
    2) Convenience and compliance ????? It seems that people who grew up here (the ones I know anyway) are much more willing to trust anyone in authority and not to pursue asking questions about such things. I do not know why, maybe something taught in the school system here. What do you think?
    Oh yeah, FYI , tripods need permiting to be on public ground here.
    tanya

    Thanks,
    Tanya
    Can't comment on the olympics. I moved out of Park City a few years ahead of that chaos. As to the tripods, that is not true. If you are a movie company or such, then yes you need to have a permit. The general public, ie one person is not required to have a permit unless they are going to interfer with the flow of traffic.

    As to the genralization about it possibly being taught in the shcools here that is way off base. It is no more taught in the wchools here than any where else. If it is a remarked veiled about the Mormon church again you are off base. Yeah the Mormon church does teach to respect the laws of the land. Is that wrong to respect them? If you don't like the laws there are ways to go about it to change the laws. being combative and refusing to show id is silly. this whole thing might have been avoided if you had just given them your id.

    I have traveled quite extensively to the same regions if not the same countries. I was nearly strip searched in Venezuela (given what I look like the probably thought it better to avoid the strip search). I have been arrested and later released in California for being on a public backroad using a LF camera. I have been harrassed and my children beaten up in New Mexico because they and I both had blonde hair and blue eyes. I was arrested in Paris for waiting for my cousin in a shop behind me to come out. I have been harrassed in TN. because I was not a true southerner. To assume it is only in Utah and that if you were someplace else this kind of thing wouldn't happen is absurd. It is an over genralization made by you because now it seems you want to vent against the state. I'm not defending the state, there are a lot of things I rile against here. Yet I do not go around refusing to give ID. Common sense would say it is a simple thing to do and would avoid the whole mess.
    Non Digital Diva

  8. #78

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    29
    Aggie-
    It's a shame you didn't see this second article in the first place. Better late than never, though.Yes, you do have the incidents combined and mixed up. 1)The arrest was Nov.4,2004, name and company and intent was given within the first 30 seconds. Social sec.# and other personal info. was given, THEN she was arrested2) FBI interrogation was on or around Aug. 4, 2004, over a week after she had given a security guard her business card and showed him all equipment (this is who called DHS/FBI)- she was on public property in both instances.3) the photo shoot for the weekly was in front of a Fed. Bldg., no serious incident occured there.
    Good luck finding more info, the police tapes have all been transcribed. Strangely enough, the first policeman wasn't running his tape, or it got lost or something.
    If you need help you know where to find me.
    Tanya
    PS- would you mind sending me the APUG link to your Cali. incident?? I would like to see what you went through, sounds bad. I also had an incident in Paris- a policeman said " Americans!" then gestured slicing his throat and spit on my shoe!

  9. #79
    MenacingTourist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    New Jersey
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    895
    Images
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by Tanya
    Hello, always nice to chat with a local photographer.
    Why does this happen more often in Utah? Well, first off, I have not been everywhere, of course, but I have done much photography in Nicaragua, Cent. America, England and many parts of Europe and many parts of the U.S..Only in Utah have I been hassled AT ALL.
    Tanya,

    Sounds like you've been unlucky in Utah and lucky everywhere else

    I've lived in Utah for a long time (transplanted from No Cal) and see some of the overt "normalness" you mentioned. I think people here tend to think for themselves but a lot of the state is very conservative and can sometimes be guilty of a negative judgmental attitude. I think this attitude is oftentimes unintentional, they just don't have any other reference.

    Exposure to us not-normals as well as education and patience should go a long ways towards diffusing confrontations. I'm not saying you didn't do any of these things. I wasn't there and don't know the whole story. Just sorry it happened.

    Good luck with everything.

  10. #80

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    29
    Aggie,
    No veiling here, quite the contrary. I was answering "tourist" at top of pg. 8. Yes, these things can happen anywhere, as I have stated before. These incidents have happened here, so this is what I'm commenting on and APUG is about photography so, I do try to keep it focused. (I also have had things not having to do with photo happen elsewhere)
    As far as it being "silly" identification was given, yet there was still no authority for the initial stop, much less arrest, please refer to Utah laws.
    Quote:
    77-7-15. Authority of peace officer to stop and question suspect -- Grounds.
    A peace officer may stop any person in a public place when he has a reasonable suspicion to believe he has committed or is in the act of committing or is attempting to commit a public offense and may demand his name, address and an explanation of his actions.

    As a consequence of Hiibel vs. Sixth Judicial District last year, this law presumably does not violate the Fourth Amendment. However, both that decision and the Utah law require that a reasonable suspicion exist, and unless Ms. Ortega de Chamberlin was doing something we haven't been told, it would seem difficult to make that case. Note also that the law does not require the person to show a driver's license; however, it would be necessary to examine Utah court decisions to confirm this interpretation.

    The outcome of this lawsuit could establish some legal precedent on whether taking a photograph is grounds for a Terry stop, although I'm sure the the police will try to dismiss the incident as trivial and not even worthy of the court's attention. If the case does go to trial, hopefully someone will remind the jurors of Chief Justice Warren's words from Terry v. Ohio:
    Quote:
    Moreover, it is simply fantastic to urge that such a procedure performed in public by a policeman while the citizen stands helpless, perhaps facing a wall with his hands raised, is a "petty indignity." It is a serious intrusion upon the sanctity of the person, which may inflict great indignity and arouse strong resentment, and it is not to be undertaken lightly.

    It is never pleasant to hear how anyone or their family have been mistreated, sounds by your tone that you probably stood your ground, and that is admirable.

    I must go do a shoot now-
    Adios,
    Tanya

    .

Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456789 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin