6 ms·

I think recording of police officers in public is absolutely allowed, but standing around the lobby of a precinct recording, that feels like a step too far. The

I think recording of police officers in public is absolutely allowed, but standing around the lobby of a precinct recording, that feels like a step too far. The article described the person doing the filming as an agitator, and I get why they are doing it, but the confrontational nature of the filming just seems like the wrong way to go. As the article discusses, I agree that a victim reporting a crime may feel very uncomfortable standing in the lobby of a police precinct while being recorded by someone.

jawns 3y ago
It describes him as an agitator, but if you watch his videos, you'll see that he is not obnoxious or confrontational in his approach. He attempts to film in the least disruptive, respectful way possible. Yes, when police officers attempt to illegally restrict his right to record, he sometimes becomes indignant and calls them tyrants, but apart from that, he does not conduct himself in a way that would be characterized as provocative or goading.
- JohnFen 3y ago
  I think "agitator" is a reasonably accurate and polite way of describing him. > he does not conduct himself in a way that would be characterized as provocative or goading. Recording in a police lobby where there are citizens that are already in a vulnerable position and don't want their private business recorded and probably put up on YouTube or something is, in itself, provocative and goading. It doesn't matter how polite the person doing the recording is. That person is invading others in a way that is extremely objectionable. This isn't about the cops. It's about the other regular people who are there.
  - jawns 3y ago
    I have sympathy for vulnerable people who might find themselves in a police precinct to either report a crime or seek other assistance. But preventing a person like Reyes from recording does nothing to resolve the privacy issue. Anyone who is willing to go through the trouble can request security camera footage. I think we also need to recognize that in a public place like a police precinct lobby, there are going to be some people who desire not to be recorded as a way of protecting their privacy, but other people who desire to record as a way of protecting themselves from police misconduct. Both have legitimate but competing interests. But the law explicitly protects the latter.
    - JohnFen 3y ago
      > But preventing a person like Reyes from recording does nothing to resolve the privacy issue. I'm not arguing that he should be prevented from recording, really. The problem here is that there are opposing needs and rights, and some sort of balance needs to be had (and it would be better if that balance leaned more toward vulnerable people than those who are making some sort of political point.) I'm arguing that Reyes, and other "auditors", are unmitigated assholes for engaging this sort of activity. That said, preventing the recording may not resolve the privacy issue, but it would at least avoid making it worse.
dghlsakjg 3y ago
There is a simple solution: allow people to report a crime in an area that is not open to the public. It’s pretty clear that the right to record does not extend into the “restricted” area of the station. There is no law that says a report must be made in public, the NYPD could easily make any number of avenues available. Phone reporting, web reporting, sending an officer to collect a report, and offering a private area in the station are all options that cost them nothing.
- tareqak 3y ago
  Except New York State law allows for that with no exceptions. From the article: > But there’s something far more local and specific that says the NYPD can’t do this: state law. >> The Right to Record Acts allow for the recording of “law enforcement activity” and “police activities.” Defendant does not dispute that officers interacting with civilians in a police precinct are performing law enforcement or police activities. The Right to Record Acts do not carve out police precinct lobbies as places where individuals are not allowed to record and the Court declines to read that limitation into the Right to Record Acts. Citing to both Right toRecord Acts, the NYPD Legal Bureau Bulletin acknowledges that the right to record police activity “is codified in New York State and local law and extends to those individuals in both public places, such as streets, sidewalks, and parks, as well as private property such as a building, lobby, workplace, or an individual’s own property.” NYPD Legal Bureau Bulletin at 3 (emphasis in original).
  - dghlsakjg 3y ago
    Yes. It allows individuals to film police activity at all times. But there is also the restriction that he doesn’t have a right to be in restricted areas. So the solution is still the same, and still very simple. Allow people to make police reports in restricted areas, away from people filming, if they wish.
    - pc86 3y ago
      The whole point is you can't do that because then de facto that police activity cannot be recorded in direct violation of state law. The solution is to clarify in state law that police activities in public can be recorded, and to specifically enumerate what police activities are allowed to occur outside of public eye, which should probably be limited to victim statements at the express request of the victim.
tareqak 3y ago
Relevant quote from the article: > In other words, auditors act like cops while talking to cops. No wonder cops hate them. Cops would rather engage in harassment than be subjected to it.
- ExoticPearTree 3y ago
  Well, yeah, of course bullies hate being bullied.
cool_dude85 3y ago
I don't think anyone is under the impression that filming in that lobby is a pleasant or nice thing to do. The fact remains that he does have a right to do so, and the department has a policy forbidding it, so the only way to challenge this policy is to film.

jawns 3y ago

It describes him as an agitator, but if you watch his videos, you'll see that he is not obnoxious or confrontational in his approach. He attempts to film in the least disruptive, respectful way possible. Yes, when police officers attempt to illegally restrict his right to record, he sometimes becomes indignant and calls them tyrants, but apart from that, he does not conduct himself in a way that would be characterized as provocative or goading.

JohnFen 3y ago
I think "agitator" is a reasonably accurate and polite way of describing him. > he does not conduct himself in a way that would be characterized as provocative or goading. Recording in a police lobby where there are citizens that are already in a vulnerable position and don't want their private business recorded and probably put up on YouTube or something is, in itself, provocative and goading. It doesn't matter how polite the person doing the recording is. That person is invading others in a way that is extremely objectionable. This isn't about the cops. It's about the other regular people who are there.
- jawns 3y ago
  I have sympathy for vulnerable people who might find themselves in a police precinct to either report a crime or seek other assistance. But preventing a person like Reyes from recording does nothing to resolve the privacy issue. Anyone who is willing to go through the trouble can request security camera footage. I think we also need to recognize that in a public place like a police precinct lobby, there are going to be some people who desire not to be recorded as a way of protecting their privacy, but other people who desire to record as a way of protecting themselves from police misconduct. Both have legitimate but competing interests. But the law explicitly protects the latter.
  - JohnFen 3y ago
    > But preventing a person like Reyes from recording does nothing to resolve the privacy issue. I'm not arguing that he should be prevented from recording, really. The problem here is that there are opposing needs and rights, and some sort of balance needs to be had (and it would be better if that balance leaned more toward vulnerable people than those who are making some sort of political point.) I'm arguing that Reyes, and other "auditors", are unmitigated assholes for engaging this sort of activity. That said, preventing the recording may not resolve the privacy issue, but it would at least avoid making it worse.

dghlsakjg 3y ago

There is a simple solution: allow people to report a crime in an area that is not open to the public. It’s pretty clear that the right to record does not extend into the “restricted” area of the station. There is no law that says a report must be made in public, the NYPD could easily make any number of avenues available. Phone reporting, web reporting, sending an officer to collect a report, and offering a private area in the station are all options that cost them nothing.

tareqak 3y ago
Except New York State law allows for that with no exceptions. From the article: > But there’s something far more local and specific that says the NYPD can’t do this: state law. >> The Right to Record Acts allow for the recording of “law enforcement activity” and “police activities.” Defendant does not dispute that officers interacting with civilians in a police precinct are performing law enforcement or police activities. The Right to Record Acts do not carve out police precinct lobbies as places where individuals are not allowed to record and the Court declines to read that limitation into the Right to Record Acts. Citing to both Right toRecord Acts, the NYPD Legal Bureau Bulletin acknowledges that the right to record police activity “is codified in New York State and local law and extends to those individuals in both public places, such as streets, sidewalks, and parks, as well as private property such as a building, lobby, workplace, or an individual’s own property.” NYPD Legal Bureau Bulletin at 3 (emphasis in original).
- dghlsakjg 3y ago
  Yes. It allows individuals to film police activity at all times. But there is also the restriction that he doesn’t have a right to be in restricted areas. So the solution is still the same, and still very simple. Allow people to make police reports in restricted areas, away from people filming, if they wish.
  - pc86 3y ago
    The whole point is you can't do that because then de facto that police activity cannot be recorded in direct violation of state law. The solution is to clarify in state law that police activities in public can be recorded, and to specifically enumerate what police activities are allowed to occur outside of public eye, which should probably be limited to victim statements at the express request of the victim.

tareqak 3y ago

Relevant quote from the article: > In other words, auditors act like cops while talking to cops. No wonder cops hate them. Cops would rather engage in harassment than be subjected to it.

ExoticPearTree 3y ago
Well, yeah, of course bullies hate being bullied.

cool_dude85 3y ago

I don't think anyone is under the impression that filming in that lobby is a pleasant or nice thing to do. The fact remains that he does have a right to do so, and the department has a policy forbidding it, so the only way to challenge this policy is to film.