Charges Dropped In PA Video Taping Arrest

Cumberland County District Attorney David Freed has reversed himself completely over the charges against Brian Kelly, arrested for wiretapping after videotaping a police stop. Now let's see if they are good enough to compensate Kelly for the 26 hours he spent in jail and the anguish of the cloud over his future caused by a felony arrest. From the article: "... [DA] Freed said his decision will affect not only Brian Kelly, 18, but also will establish a policy for police departments countywide. 'When police are audio- and video-recording traffic stops with notice to the subjects, similar actions by citizens, even if done in secret, will not result in criminal charges,' Freed said yesterday. 'The law itself might need to be revised.'"

People in the USA are sometimes blessed...

[Anonymous Coward]

While no judicial and law systems on the planet are perfect, the reaction in the US over this charge, and the eventual reversal say only one thing; as far as direct action is involved the USA is *still* one of the best places on the planet to do it. I can't remember the quote exactly, but it goes something along the lines of us in the west having freedoms we simply don't take advantage of. We pussy foot about and don't act, and that is the problem. If Brian here had not received the support that he did, he might still be in jail. I feel safer in the USA than I do in any other country when it comes to expressing my rights, even though I know that in some backwater town that ability may be more suppressed than in other areas.

Nifong

[belmolis]

I wonder if the downfall of Mike Nifong has given prosecutors a dose of humility.

Re:People in the USA are sometimes blessed...

[Enlightenment]

I wonder if this man would have been freed if not for the media whirlwind and outcry over this. In this era, it's almost our duty to raise hell about wrongheaded actions like this, since media attention and publicity can often be more successful than bona fide legal arguments.

Still too much CYA

[adminstring]

While I am impressed that the DA admitted that a mistake had been made, he still went too far in covering the ass of the very unprofessional police officer who made this stupid arrest. From TFA:

[Freed] said the officer who charged Kelly acted in a "professional manner."

Avoiding accountability by throwing someone in jail for recording how you do your job is NOT professional. Rather, it is the act of a petty tyrant on a power trip who, if left unchecked, will most likely end up harming the public in other ways in the future. The citizens of Pennsylvania deserve better than this from their law enforcement agents.

Cloud over his future caused by a felony arrest

[Minstrel Boy]

This is one of my soapbox issues. More and more, investigations into your personal history (job applications, police investigations, security clearances, and the like) are questioning your *arrest* record. Being arrested (or even charged, but that's another discussion) denotes NOTHING about guilt, intent, or even behavior. You can be arrested for nothing more than being an out-of-state bystander who is witness to an (alleged) crime.

The *connotation*, however, is becoming increasingly negative, as is the inference when you refuse to reply, or respond that you have not been convicted of any crimes. (I started to type "have no convictions, but it got very confusing very fast!)

And no, I personally have neither convictions nor arrests.

KeS

Re:Still too much CYA

[ScrewMaster]

The cops are better off having us use the things right out in the open: at least they'll know where they stand. If arresting citizens for videotaping their police in action becomes an offense worthy of arrest, people will simply start using hidden cameras. Google for it ... it's astonishing how small CCD imager can be made these days. Hell, the one in my cameraphone is maybe a 32nd of an inch in diameter.

Negative effect from this

[whoever57]

Note this in the article:

"When police are audio- and video-recording traffic stops with notice to the subjects,

So this may result in police not recording traffic stops, which won't help to keep the police in line. In fact, it could lead to more abuses.

Re:What cloud of his future?

[NormalVisual]

Guess you haven't looked for a job lately. Most places where I've worked ask about one's *arrest* record in addition to convictions. If you have been arrested, you of course could lie about it, but if the company does any kind of background check on you it most definitely will show up unless you were a juvenile at the time, and even then, "sealed" doesn't always mean sealed.

Re:Nifong

[JohnnyGTO]

God, I hope so. To which I add this when will we see some justice doled out on the "victim". I had a friend live through this when he got back together with an ex-girlfriend. She set him up and he only stayed out of prison when it was learn she had a HISTORY of false accusations and was several bananas short of a full bunch.

Re:People in the USA are sometimes blessed...

[db32]

Funny how that freedom of the press thing works when it operates correctly. I think that was exactly the purpose of that even in the world before mass communication. I think our legal system was meant to be a last resort thing not first resort in this sense. More convoluted laws only hurts this, and it seemed clear to me the idea was to have more of a light and lean and modifiable legal system to try and cope with strange issues like this. Only when things absolutely cannot be worked out should the court system get involved.

Re:Still too much CYA

[Harmonious Botch]

Ok, technically P is right and GP is wrong. But P seems a tad idealistically naive here. Anyone who has ever had a brush with the wrong end of the law enforcement business knows that this is not about an officer enforcing the law because he has a noble goal of enforcing the law; rather it is - as GP says - a power trip.

P ought to get out of civics class and into the real world.

Re:Mod This Up

[PaulBu]

If you get IndyMedia (I take your word that it was covered there) and Reason magazine (that was where I read about it first) to pay attention to the same story and be on the same side of it -- maybe, just maybe, it counts as "stuff as matters", not to mention that geeks are more likely to have camcoders in their pockets than non-geeks, huh? :)

Paul B.

Re:Still too much CYA

[adminstring]

As you suggest, the law in question is stupid, as are thousands of other laws. [dumblaws.com] But if the officer were acting professionally, he wouldn't make an arrest for any of these laws. Part of being a professional police officer is exercising proper discretion as to when to make an arrest.

Contrary to your statement, officers are generally not obligated to enforce any particular law. If they were obligated to enforce every infraction of every law they ever witnessed, their entire day would consist of arresting everyone violating the speed limit directly in front of the police station, they'd never make it three blocks down the street, and many more important laws would be broken on streets with no police station.

Police officers are expected to use intelligent discretion to enforce the laws which will have the greatest impact in improving the quality of life of the community. That means some prioritization is necessary. Arresting murderers and rapists is an excellent use of police resources, and is quite easy to justify. Arresting jaywalkers and people who litter on the sidewalk is a poor use of police resources, and is harder to justify. Each arrest takes time, effort, and money which could be better used elsewhere in the community. Police officers' time is particularly valuable because just by walking or driving down a street, they can deter crime! A key question for police priorities could be, "is what I'm doing more or less productive than simply cruising down the street?" As a taxpayer and a citizen, I have an interest in police using their time wisely. An officer arresting someone for videotaping a publicly-accessible event was clearly not using his publicly-funded time wisely, just as setting up a strict speed trap in front of the police station is also not a wise use of resources.

Furthermore, I speculate that this officer was probably not aware that the wiretapping law could be used in this case. I wouldn't expect a traffic cop to be well-versed in wiretapping laws. He arrested the guy with the camera, then, according to the original article, "The wiretap charge was filed after consultation with a deputy district attorney." Chances are he was embarrassed about having lost his temper ("He said he held the camera in plain view and turned it on when the officer yelled at his pal") so he arrested the guy, probably for "disorderly conduct" or some other catch-all, then went to the DA's office to see if there was anything better to charge him with. Maybe the guy's pal was being a jerk and deserved to be yelled at. But if it was justified, the cop had nothing to hide, and in either case he had no legitimate reason to go after the guy with the camera.

For the record, I got an A in civics class... I'm a nerd, after all!

Re:Cloud over his future caused by a felony arrest

[karmatic]

Would you trade your five hours in a police station for a lifetime living in a place where IDs are not checked

I certainly would. I would gladly spend a month in Jail to live in a nation where "The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated" was more than just words on paper.

ID is about verifying who you are. Laws concern behavior, not identity. Police should act when they see illegal or behavior likely to be illegal, or when they have reasonable suspicion, supported by oath or affirmation and signed by a judge.

Police are Law Enforcement Officers, and there is no higher law (in the US) than the Constitution. As such, when police check ID in a manner inconsistent with the fourth amendment, they are in fact violating the law, and not doing their jobs.

You imply that Somalia is like it is solely because IDs aren't checked. Such argument is intellectually dishonest, and neglects differences in culture, and corruption in government. The United States, if less IDs were checked, would have fewer people in jail. It would, on the other hand, be more free - reading the writings of some of the founding fathers will quickly show that this is by design. The government's job in obtaining convictions and performing surveillance is difficult by design.

Re:cloud over his future?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd say we need to fight every aspect of tyranny no matter how large or small....

Re:Cloud over his future caused by a felony arrest

[Anonymous Coward]

"your schools refuse to teach the crusades or holocaust for fear of offending Muslims."

False, wrong, incorrect, rubbish!

http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/holocaust. asp [snopes.com]

"Teaching of the Holocaust is already compulsory in schools at Key Stage 3 (ages 11 to 14), and it will remain so in the new KS3 curriculum from September 2008."

Why Stop with cops?

[rednip]

No cops should be allowed to go unchecked.

Why Stop there? I started keeping my digital camera in my car and ready for the crazy drivers I see every day. I've tried everything to get people to stop tailgating me, but it's almost surprising what happens when people realize that their bad driving is being recorded. Three times already I've had tailgaters back off when they saw a flash pointed at them; One trucker and 2 SUVs. People just act better when they know they are being recorded.

The solution...

[theoriginalturtle]

...and we're getting close to it already, is to simply arrest everyone at birth. Increasingly, the only people "running for office" in this country are people who've never done anything. Not just "good things" or "bad things," but ANYTHING. A race of innocuous milquetoasts are slowly taking over the political operation of America simply by convincing "voters" that anyone who's ever done anything distinctive or at all out of the perceived mainstream is unfit to lead.

Lest we forget... Harry Truman went bankrupt. JFK fooled around on his wife. Richard Nixon had a serious affinity for alcohol. Ronald Reagan was (horrors!) a Democrat. Comedian Tim Allen was arrested for drugz. Martha Stewart was convicted of securities fraud. G. Gordon Libby was in prison after Watergate. Rush Limbaugh admitted illegal use of prescription drugz. W. was... well, farkit, go look it up.

When everyone has a black mark against "their permanent record," as my sixth-grade teacher called it, then we're all equals again and we can forget this pseudo-puritanical horse dung.

When mere accusations are enough to blight your life, we're already in 1984. Oh, wait... what?

Re:cloud over his future?

[Lemmy Caution]

I'd say that sitting on your hands when the victims are largely non-white or foreign and the injustices are huge, while taking action when the victim is middle-class, white, and the system quickly rectifies itself, is a bigger problem. What happened in PA was not tyranny.

Re:Cloud over his future caused by a felony arrest

[crucini]

... police state. There, fixed that for ya.

Are you saying that the UK is a police state? In that case, which countries are not police states?

Last time I checked, traffic lights don't hold you against your will for 5 hours.

On the other hand, being detained by the police is not an every day occurence for most people. My point is that in the big picture of life, it's nothing. It's down among the dental visits, fender benders and sprained ankles. Not in the same league as divorce, bankruptcy and cancer. Or the sorts of things that happen in actual police states.

Orwell does not have a monopoly on paradox. In particular, the paradox of freedom requiring boundaries is an ancient one. Every man would like to walk the street in absolute freedom, knowing that nobody can mess with him. This isn't possible for most of us on this earth. With too weak a police presence, we're plagued with bullies, drunks and muggers. With too strong a police presence, we are constantly watched; we get stopped for trivial things. Most civilized communities have achieved a reasonable balance, and yes, this reasonable balance means that sometimes an innocent person is detained by the police.