4 ms·

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

by 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.

Pigalowda 3y ago
What if they put a toilet and a sink in the room? Maybe they can report in that room without cameras
Zak 3y ago
The text of the law[0] is definitely a bit vague with regard to whether inviting the victim of a crime into a private interview room and denying access to others would qualify as "interfering" with recording. I'm inclined to think that a judge considering the totality of the circumstances would conclude that it does not. [0] http://web.archive.org/web/20231012035050/https://legislation.nysenate.gov/pdf/bills/2019/S3253A http://web.archive.org/web/20231012035050/https://legislatio...
JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> point is you can't do that because then de facto that police activity cannot be recorded in direct violation of state law This is an obviously absurd reading of the law. Police executing a search warrant doesn’t mean any rando can now enter that home and start recording. It means the people with access to that area have the right to record. In public, that’s anyone. In a restricted area that’s not.
dghlsakjg 3y ago
You’re making this harder than it needs to be. If you are in an area not open to the public, you can be told to leave regardless of whether you are filming. If you fail to leave, then you are trespassing. The fact of trespassing will override other rights. For example: you have the right of free speech. You don’t have the right to hold a protest inside of a Walmart. They can have the police remove you despite the fact that it infringes on your speech. They can’t stop you from filming, but they can stop you from going to private places where they don’t want you to film.

by pc86 3y ago

Pigalowda 3y ago

What if they put a toilet and a sink in the room? Maybe they can report in that room without cameras

Zak 3y ago

The text of the law[0] is definitely a bit vague with regard to whether inviting the victim of a crime into a private interview room and denying access to others would qualify as "interfering" with recording. I'm inclined to think that a judge considering the totality of the circumstances would conclude that it does not. [0] http://web.archive.org/web/20231012035050/https://legislation.nysenate.gov/pdf/bills/2019/S3253A http://web.archive.org/web/20231012035050/https://legislatio...

JumpCrisscross 3y ago

> point is you can't do that because then de facto that police activity cannot be recorded in direct violation of state law This is an obviously absurd reading of the law. Police executing a search warrant doesn’t mean any rando can now enter that home and start recording. It means the people with access to that area have the right to record. In public, that’s anyone. In a restricted area that’s not.

dghlsakjg 3y ago

You’re making this harder than it needs to be. If you are in an area not open to the public, you can be told to leave regardless of whether you are filming. If you fail to leave, then you are trespassing. The fact of trespassing will override other rights. For example: you have the right of free speech. You don’t have the right to hold a protest inside of a Walmart. They can have the police remove you despite the fact that it infringes on your speech. They can’t stop you from filming, but they can stop you from going to private places where they don’t want you to film.