ABC Reporter Arrested in Denver Taking Pictures of Senators, Big Donors

[Newsjock]

Source: ABC News

Police in Denver arrested an ABC News producer today as he and a camera crew were attempting to take pictures on a public sidewalk of Democratic Senators and VIP donors leaving a private meeting at the Brown's Palace Hotel.

Police on the scene refused to tell ABC lawyers the charges against the producer, Asa Eslocker, who works with the ABC News investigative unit.

A police official later told lawyers for ABC News that Eslocker is being charged with trespass, interference, and failure to follow a lawful order. He also said the arrest followed a signed complaint from the Brown Palace Hotel.

Eslocker was put in handcuffs and loaded in the back of a police van which headed for a nearby police station.

... Eslocker and his ABC News colleagues are spending the week investigating the role of corporate lobbyists and wealthy donors at the convention for a series of Money Trail reports on ABC World News with Charles Gibson.

Read more: http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/Conventions/story?id=5668622&page=1

[Hekate]

1. Perhaps now "free speech zones" and harassment re First Amendment rights will garner more attention

... from the MSM, or at least from ABC News.

But I won't hold my breath.

Hekate

[bjobotts]

88. Denver police just "follow orders" even if they are unlawful.They can fix that later

[DURHAM D]

2. This is totally off subject but - I love the Brown Palace. eom

[Bluenorthwest]

17. I did too

Until today. Now, Brownshirt Palace. I'll take a pass on that thanks.

[loudsue]

101. Investigating ONLY Dem contributors, I'm sure.

The repugs will get a pass on this "documentary" or special report...whatever. SSDD.

[kestrel91316]

21. My g-g-g-grandfather, who owned the first dairy in Denver,

used to own the land where the Brown Palace now stands. Family story is this: the land records were lost in the great Cherry Creek flood in the 1800s, and when the dust settled, the BROWNS (unsinkable Molly and her man) snapped up the land. Something underhanded went on.

Sigh.

[laylah]

73. As happened with my

Mother's uncle who owned many acres in what is now Jefferson County. Makes one want to :puke: when thinking about what coulda been, huh? :hug:

[kestrel91316]

81. Well, given that my mom and sister and I (and sis's kids) are the

only living descendants of the old guy, yeah.........makes ya wonder how different life would have been if......

[arcadian]

3. People being arrested for photography is becomeing a really big issue.

Pisses me off. Police fucking state.

[Bozita]

8. Fellow DUer RaginginMiami posted his experiences with the Miami PD -- blog link

Police fucking state is right!

http://carlosmiller.com/

Photography is Not a Crime
It’s a First Amendment Right

[TomInTib]

14. While the average American is captured on surveillance cam 200+ times/day

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=5&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.losangelescctv.com%2F&ei=8r-1SMHnFomWsAP2xvTlBg&usg=AFQjCNH5ScVqhoWtrUveJkgdrcpdM0InQg&sig2=NdrKzGXd_MvIg4upGVppdw

Surveillance Cameras - You Are Being Watched According to a recent documentary, the average American is caught on camera 200 times every day. ...

[JonLP24]

24. Average... 200 times???

:wow: makes me wonder how many times I was snapped. Is this other then convenience stores like hidden cameras on the streets?

[TomInTib]

27. It depends on where you live.

Walk around the block in Manhattan, you can see cams everywhere.

Here in my town, we only have them in the banks and at some residential entrances (but then, we have no crime to speak of).

In London, the number (average) is well over one thousand.

[CottonBear]

51. If you go to Walmart (for instance), you are on video in the parking lot,

in the store at various locations and out the checkout line and then again in the parking lot.

Stop at a bank ATM. You'll be on video there.

Stop at the gas staion. You'll be on video at the gas pump and in the store at the checkout.

(I was on a grand jury and we had to review evidence based, in part, on a video record just like the above example.)

You are on more video than you think.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

23. Try this -

I got threatened for taking pictures in the produce and flower sections at a Whole Foods. Fuckers landed on me like I was tossing anthrax spores into the air.

"Company policy," they told me. "You might use the photos for your own purposes."

Well, what other purpose? I asked, to no avail. This dwarf woman with a reverse eating disorder was planted squarely in front of me. So, sure, I said, no more pictures.

No more shopping at Whole Foods, either.

[arcadian]

33. SOP for corporations

I got stopped on a public sidewalk outside a bank by the bank securty guard. I told her to fuck off.

[1monster]

37. Several years back, my then three-year-old darling (he's 16 now) went trick-or-treating

at the grocery store we had been patronizing since its opening and where we had lots of friends.

My husband took along a video camera to immortalize the event.

The store had a new manager who saw the camera and had a hissy fit. "NO CAMERAS ALLOWED!" he intoned threateningly. "COMPANY POLICY. LEAVE NOW."

His time of management at that store wasn't very long, but by the time he was replaced, we were no longer regular customers at that store.

I'm not sure why they are so paranoid. After all, those investigative television programs doing an expose on unsafe food practices almost always use hidden cameras... and don't usually take very small children in elaborate Halloween costumes along for cover. :eyes:

[bertman]

55. "This dwarf woman with a reverse eating disorder"

What a visual image that creates!!! Hilarious.

Nonetheless, I am obligated by my liberal ethos to call the PC Police on you for that gross violation of human rights.


That loud wailing sound you hear in the distance is the "authorities" coming to ensure that justice is served.

[Tangerine LaBamba]

59. Welcome to DU, Bertman

Stand over there ------------------>

Now smile for my camera.

Oh, and bite me. :toast:

[bertman]

86. Cheers. LMAO.

[KansDem]

60. "No more shopping at Whole Foods, either."

Where do you go now for natural/organic food? Since Whole Foods bought Wild Oats, there isn't a whole lot of choices left...

[Tangerine LaBamba]

My local supermarket

carries all the organic produce I could want, and the milk, too. The prices of beef and chicken and fish at Whole Foods had become so insane, I eschew organic and stay with regular, and so far, I'm still standing.

[intheflow]

83. Same thing happened in Home Depot a few years back.

My cousins from Germany came for a visit. Hans, who's a carpenter, was amazed by how big and comprehensive the store was, so he wanted to take some video to show the folks back home in his really, really small town in the middle of nowhere. Store security came over and took his tape, which also had footage from their trip to Cape Cod the day before. :grr:

[RagingInMiami]

96. If I were there

I would not have allowed him to hand over the tape. There would either have been a fight or the cops would have to be called, but your cousin would still have his tape.

[leveymg]

38. They were arrested for trespassing after they refused to leave. Wasn't for picture taking

They had snuck into a hotel and followed someone to a meeting room. The guy and his cameraman were trying to do some "gotcha" journalism. Hotel security showed up and asked them to leave - when they didn't, the cops were called, and he likely gave the arriving officers a hard time for good measure.

Handcuffs, just like anyone else, under these circumstances.

ABC's "investigative unit" is really part of Karl Rove's unit. The meme that ABC is trying to set up is that Obama is beholden to lobbyists, after all - Obama bad, etc., ad nauseum.

[RagingInMiami]

47. Where did you read all that?

And to say that this particular news crew is part of Karl Rove's unit is a stretch for even a conspiracy theory

[leveymg]

61. Between the lines. Why the hell else would they arrest an ABC News Producer for trespass?

If they were on a public sidewalk, no trespassing charges - disorderly conduct, etc. They may have been arrested later while on the sidewalk after poking around on hotel property. Read the article.

Do you have any familiarity with ABC's News "investigative unit"'s track record with regard to the White House Communications office (Justin Rood, the recent, notable exception)? Brian Ross has done exceptional work sitting on the Dusty Foggo-CIA-DC Madam's Big Book of Johns story. Why did that lady ever trust ABC, of all things? And, try this from Glenn Greewald's, "The Sleaziest White House Press Corps, Ever": http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/03/19/ross/index.html

Brian Ross spent many days in October, 2001 screeching on every ABC News show he could get on that government tests showed that the anthrax sent to U.S. political and media figures was linked to Saddam Hussein's biological weapons program. That was a lie from the start; no tests ever revealed any such thing. His sources told him that because they wanted him to do just what he did -- create the perception in the public's mind that Iraq was behind the anthrax attacks.

If the hotel meeting had anything to do with AT&T and Blue Dogs, I'll gladly eat my words.

Thanks for your concern.

[RagingInMiami]

67. You're not reading between the lines

You're pulling the lines out of your ass.

Not everything is a goddamn conspiracy.

I did read between the lines and what I deciphered was that some power shaker(s) inside the hotel did not want to be seen walking out of the hotel.

[leveymg]

69. You can't arrest a network camera crew for being on a sidewalk, period.

They must have crossed police lines or gone inside. If they didn't set foot on hotel property, why would the hotel swear out a complaint? It's not like they were caught spray-painting Anarchy AO's on the front door.

I was almost arrested for the same thing at the Willard Hotel in DC on January 20, 2001. I hopped over a police line, and tried to get inside. They refused me admission, even though I look like I belonged there. I didn't argue (too much), otherwise the guys in cheap suits would have taken me away.

Who's pulling things outa their ass?

[RagingInMiami]

72. OK, I get it

You're just a little naive judging by the following comment:

"You can't arrest a network camera crew for being on a sidewalk, period."

Police are not technically allowed to arrest reporters for being on a public sidewalk, but it happens all the time. It happened to me. It's happened to several other reporters since my arrest last year. And it happened today.

Take a look through my blog when you get the chance. It might open your eyes.

Why do you think police were unable to come up with charges after arresting him? Because there is no law in the books that says it is illegal to photograph from a public sidewalk.

So they had to take the time to make up the charges against him.

If the scenario took place like you said it did, then police would be all over the networks justifying their arrest.

You don't think NBC or CBS would love a story like the one you stated? Or are they controlled by Karl Rove as well?

[Tesha]

119. You can arrest anybody for anything.

Whether you can make the charges stick is another question,
but often, merely detaining someone is enough to accomplish
the underlying goal (such as quelling dissent).

Tesha

[Henny Penny]

97. Move along... nothing to see here...! Except for this video....

Here's the link to the video. He was on the public side walk...

And your post is fantasy right out of Disney.

http://abcnews.go.com/Video/playerIndex?id=5670682

[katty]

107. agree-these are Police State tactics--scary and sickening

[katty]

111. yes, it is-when they start hitting the MSM, too?!police state, baby!

[Nipper1959]

4. Will they be doing investigative

work in the twin cities???

I'm not holding my breath.

[Algorem]

5. ABC going to do this in Minneapolis too?

[mike_c]

7. doesn't really matter in the present instance, does it...?

Or do you mean to suggest that it's only not OK to harass journalists when they're investigating democrats? In the end, what difference does it make whether this sort of thing happens at the DNC or at the RNC? It's WRONG no matter what. It's anti-American no matter what. It's a fascist police state action, no matter what.

We should all condemn it, no matter what.

[Algorem]

9. yaddayaddayadda.

[mikelgb]

10. you should watch the glen beck video in the videos forum

[Algorem]

70. which one?

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Algorem]

64. what's that ?a make up artist?

[bean fidhleir]

106. Not much for fairness or the rule of law, are you.

Mike C. is right on the money. Anyone with an ounce of fairness in their body wouldn't give a damn whose ox is being gored.

[Algorem]

110. yadda.

get some reading comprehension.

[RufusTFirefly]

11. Actually, it DOES matter

There's a good chance that this police state stuff in Denver is a kind of pre-emptive strike that is designed to have a chilling effect on both demonstrations and reporting in Minneapolis.

Of course we should condemn what happened no matter what. And, as you said, it's WRONG no matter what.

But what's also troubling is the potential psychological warfare that's being waged in Denver to insure that what goes on in Minneapolis is neither scrutinized nor criticized. Law enforcement is almost certainly using the Mile High City as a laboratory for perfecting tactics it will use in the Twin Cities.

[merwin]

77. *sirens* Grammar police!

"...warfare that's being waged in Denver to insure that what goes on..."

insure should be ensure :)

Now I'm going to arrest you for trespassing!

:evilgrin:

[RufusTFirefly]

78. False arrest

You'd be right at home in Denver. ;-)

According to the The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language: Fourth Edition. 2000., insure is acceptable in this context.

USAGE NOTE: Assure, ensure, and insure all mean “to make secure or certain.” Only assure is used with reference to a person in the sense of “to set the mind at rest”: assured the leader of his loyalty. Although ensure and insure are generally interchangeable, only insure is now widely used in American English in the commercial sense of “to guarantee persons or property against risk.”

[merwin]

80. I must be turning British... either that or I've been reading too much AP

http://grammar.about.com/od/alightersideofwriting/a/assurenesureglo.htm

"Our most recent evidence shows that the distinction between ensure and insure is made more often in British written English than in American written English, and a few commentators hold that insure is more common than ensure in American English."
("ensure, insure, assure," Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of English Usage, 1994)

"Use ensure to mean guarantee: Steps were taken to ensure accuracy. Use insure for references to insurance: The policy insures his life." (Norm Goldstein, "ensure, insure," The Associated Press Stylebook, 2006)

I also spell grey with an E, which is another oddity.

I'm usually pretty Nazi-ish about grammar and spelling... Thanks for correcting me!

Either way, it turns out I'm just as bad as those cops :evilgrin:

[RufusTFirefly]

87. Thanks. I'm a former copy chief

So you hit me where it hurt. ;-)

[Nipper1959]

12. Yes it does matter

If the whole investigative series is aimed at the corrupt Dems, DUH!
Let's be realistic, the MSM is and will be influencing this election. So it matters greatly!

[HEyHEY]

35. Ah yes, so the police who DUers constantly refer to as the bad guys

Are now working to shut down the corrupt media because it's being biased towards the dems by showing their corruption.

Dude, you guys are the specualtion and bullshit kings... whatever as long as it's for your side, right?

[bjobotts]

89. Bad guys???Generalization ment to minimize by a condescending comment

[bjobotts]

90. Trying to make it seem like police are victims. Perhaps if we called them a paramilitary group.

[bjobotts]

91. It's the situation and their rights being ignored.Had to wait til later to think up a charge

[bjobotts]

92. It's the lobbyists stupid.Don't want pictures with their senators.Might get wrong idea.

[bjobotts]

93. Ah, you DUrs...don't like lobbyists do ya'. See, it's not the police exactly.

[Obamanaut]

52. If (and when) a corrupt Dem is found, you can bet your last 63 cents

there will be a corrupt Rep close by. And come Nov., they will mostly be reelected.

[The Stranger]

40. It most certainly matters -- the GOP is the corporatist party.

They are the ones that should be exposed.

[mike_c]

44. don't you think the democratic party is just as corporatist?

I certainly do. The dem party leadership is utterly beholden to corporate money and dances whatever jig big business tells them to dance. The real political leadership in America is the MIC, and most congressional dems seem just as eager to bend over for them as republicans.

[RufusTFirefly]

56. What mike_c said

The notion that the GOP is the country's only corporatist party is sadly delusional.

Don't take my word for it. Take it from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.

"The Republicans are 95 percent corrupt and the Democrats are 75 percent corrupt. They are accepting money from the same corporations. And of course, that is going to corrupt you."

Granted, we can still take lemons and make lemonade, but it's sad and even dangerous to exist in such a state of denial about the overall corruption of our electoral system.

[ronnie624]

95. What RufusTFirefly said. Thanks for the link. n/t

[The Stranger]

103. Which proves the point that the Republicans should be exposed for being

corporatist-corrupted and -- if you insist -- even for being 20% more corporatist and corrupt than the Democrats.

[leftchick]

57. The GOP??? LOL!

omfg, what about the Coporatist Democrats/DLCers. Do they not count because they have a D after their name?

:puke:

[The Stranger]

100. I had assumed that you could discern matters of degree.

If you think the Democratic Party is as corporately dominated as the GOP, then you have another thing coming.

[leftchick]

109. okay I will say 75% are bought off by corporate bucks

but you go ahead and stay in happyville. :eyes:

[Maine-ah]

6. I'm betting he had been told to leave by the hotel in the first place

He also said the arrest followed a signed complaint from the Brown Palace Hotel.

[HEyHEY]

29. So? He was on public property

[onenote]

43. self delete

[HEyHEY]

45. Read the first sentence.... says he was on a public sidewalk

[onenote]

46. my bad. deleted earlier post

[Wizard777]

13. We cannot tollerate this attack upon the freedom of the press!

Gaining his release needs to be the top priority of the DNC. This is not the change we are fighting for there. It's more of the same. It can sow seeds of suspicion that will begin to undue all the good we've done at the Convention. This needs to be more than ABC's problem. We need to defend the First Amendment and make it our problem too!

[Hugabear]

15. Hey, the DPB is just doing their job

:sarcasm:

That sarcasm is just mine. Apparently, there are some who think that these Gestapo tactics are warranted.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x3864642#3865195

[RufusTFirefly]

18. Actually, the cops ARE doing their job

We're just a little naive about whom they are serving and protecting.

[bvar22]

16. Cameras are getting smaller and smaller and better and better.

Just use a stealthier camera when in this situation.
Most camera phones take remarkable photos and video clips.
Let the Police State try to confiscate ALL the camera phones/mini cams in a crowd.
ALL peaceful protesters should carry a camera phone/stealth camera.

[valerief]

19. Wow. How does one defend an ABC reporter? Sure seems like

an illegal arrest.

[truedelphi]

20. Sieg Heil!! n/t

[Joey Liberal]

22. I miss the good old days

I miss the good old days when the country was doing great while Bill Clinton was the President. I don't care if he was getting some nooky on the side. I miss him and so does my 401k.

[llmart]

50. Good one....

and so do I.

[Orrex]

25. Maybe Asa refused to show his receipt?

:shrug:

[HEyHEY]

28. Should not matter on public property

[Robb]

31. ...Which a hotel ain't

Waaaaaay too much Godwin's Law on DU lately for me to be willing to make a snap judgment. Just as likely as not the guy was being a jackass.

I'll wait to see, although the interesting part, that the hotel already gave him a written notice he needed to leave, seems to be glossed over. Doesn't matter what you're investigating if you're breaking laws doing it. :shrug:

[HEyHEY]

32. Dude, says in the first sentence he was on a public sidewalk

Now, what it doesn't say is if he was inside first. We'll see.

[Robb]

36. What, I gotta *read* the articles now too?!?

:rofl:

My bad. Point remains, tho'. :D

[HEyHEY]

39. This is good though, it means you won't be moved to the copy desk soon!

;-)

[HEyHEY]

26. What is the DNC trying to hide?

How do they have the DPD in their pockets? It's public property.... where I live you can take photos of whatever the fuck you want on public property. Get the lawyers, ABC, and show no mercy.

[Name removed]

108. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[wishlist]

30. ABC's Brian Ross has been on every night this week about lobbyists

He did the exact same coverage 4 years ago at the Dem convention. I don't recall if he did any coverage of lobby activity at Repub convention though.

[tanyev]

65. That's what I wondered when I caught the end of his report yesterday.

Fine--investigate the private parties lobbyists are throwing for the Dems. But make sure you do the same thing next week in St. Paul.

[MetaTrope]

41. "Politics As Usual; Democrats Just Like the Republicans"

http://mediamatters.org/items/200704270010

Ross is part of the Rove noise machine. I would wager this "arrest" was orchestrated in the first place to "prove" his theses.

[backscatter712]

42. Fascists getting a taste of their own medicine...

I wonder if this will get some of the jackasses on ABC to start talking about respecting constitutional rights instead of being good Germans, now that their own have gotten hit with the fascist hammer...

[HEyHEY]

49. HAAHAHAHAHAH

First off, nice slag at the good people of germany, did you know racial intolerance is a trademark of facism? Secondly the media the MAINSTREAM media is the only reason you have the freedom you do now. Even today's media, while not as good as previous time's still does investigate corrpution on BOTH sides of the political spectrum. Carte Blanche media haters just love to ignore it when they do.

[backscatter712]

54. I'm not saying ABC was in the wrong in this incident.

Of course they should not have been arrested - the DPD again overstepped their bounds.

That said, ABC isn't exactly what I'd call a good, objective member of the press. Remember their "debate" between Clinton and Obama, which was a pretty obvious setup to trap Obama? Or their fine movies like The Path To 9/11?

Point is that ABC got a little taste of what they've been preaching. Maybe it'll be a case of two wrongs making a right, but I don't think either ABC or the DPD will learn their lessons from this.

[diamidue]

102. Just what I was thinking.

ABC like most of the MSM has been a longtime lapdog for Bush and the Corporatists. Where was ABC when thousands of others were being denied their freedom of assembly; freedom of speech during this administration? Only when it comes back to bite them do they cry foul. And how convenient that it should it should involve corrupt Democrats. Let me know when an ABC reporter is accosted investigating the GOP.

[bertman]

48. What would ever lead an American to think they can just up and take a picture of somebody in public?

That is some seriously subversive shit and should be nipped in the bud. Thank goodness the Gestapo, I mean Denver Police Department is all over this heinous criminal activity.

BIG BROTHER.


BIG BROTHER.


This is the trial run. If the ELITES (Yes, DNC, Senators, and Representatives, I'm referring to YOU) and the Fascist Police can do WHATEVER THEY WANT in the name of crowd control or "protecting the privacy of someone" or preventing the little people from seeing WHO IS BANKROLLING THIS THROWDOWN, then they will be totally secure in knowing that we sheep will do NOTHING to stop them.


Yes, BIG BROTHER IS BI-PARTISAN, folks. Remember FISA?

[Phred42]

53. Obviously Public Sidewalks have been Privatized

and now belong to the Corporation that they are next to.

interesting

[Michigan Soldier]

58. The Freedom of the Press Keeps US Free!

[PATRICK]

62. Having it both ways

Well, this what you get when you don't confront the media for what they are then try to strongarm using the tactics of the corporatists they represent. No surprise it is apparent defense of their own "better" relationship with lobbyists and corporations.

In Argentina the "mob" went after the suddenly courageous muckraking corporate media and they howled in indignation. Always such corporate propagandists feel less fear, less public responsibility, less fear of the people challenging their falseness and enmity toward the public good. I saw the same in France(along time ago) when a public demonstration humiliated and disrupted media coverage owned by the Gaullists. It happened also in the streets of Denver against Fox.

Our pols somewhat challenge the media on a case by case basis. So this is a sign of the sad dismal state of affairs that will change only in focus as the Dems attain power. They WON'T be able to bully them the way the GOP does without more sever consequences. They WON'T get away with any bad stuff like the GOP do(ask Chavez about getting taken to the cleaners on some of his agenda with media opposition). They will look kind of bad in doing the stuff that made the hypocritical irony of this corporate muckraking media what they are today.

Nor will the Dems in the shadows of this story get to the main problem that this story exemplifies. "New" Democrats, corporately naive, march on into the gauntlet where truly bad guys don't seem to go.

[fascisthunter]

63. WTF?!?!?!?! What Asshole Gave That Order!?

[FiveGoodMen]

68. That's what I want to know!

Are the cops just arresting anyone with cameras, or did someone alert the police to this "problem"?

Worst case: are the Dems having people hauled away for taking their pictures?

[fascisthunter]

71. Exactly.... and you Know That is How This Will Be Painted by the Pukes

that's why I want to know who made that order?

[lob1]

66. I'll wait to hear more before I decide if the arrest was legal, but

does anyone really believe ABC does investigative reporting anymore? Guaranteed it was a hit piece against the Dems. They won't be investigating the Pubs for the same thing.

[RagingInMiami]

74. Would you suggest they turn their heads and ignore the VIP donors

meeting with the democratic senators?

[lob1]

84. Please don't get me wrong. I'm not defending the police. They can't resist

going all gunsil. And I'm a photographer myself, a nature photographer, but I'll fight for the right of anyone to take a picture. I'm just saying that ABC news doesn't do investigative reporting, they do hit pieces. They weren't there for the people's right to know, they're there to get McCain elected. They have the right to stand on a sidewalk, but just don't mistake them for heroes. Just my 2 cents.

[RagingInMiami]

99. I'm not mistaken them for heroes

But neither am I going to fall into the trap that they were personally dispatched to the hotel by Karl Rove.

Or into the trap that democrats can do no wrong.

Call it a hit piece if you want, but if they're reporting the truth, then there is no room for dispute.

[Bozita]

75. Watching ABC World News now. No mention yet of this story.

[Truth2Tell]

76. It's not a contradiction to believe

that the ABC News "investigative" team are a bunch of jackass right-wing propagandists,

AND

that it's wrong and fascist to arrest people taking pictures on a public sidewalk.

[tannybogus]

79. I don't like it!

However, I wish it had been Charlie Gibson with those
glasses perched on the end of his snooty nose!:yoiks:

[truthisfreedom]

82. Looks like news crews are going to have to start mounting tiny HD cameras in their hats.

Obviously something is amiss.

[derby378]

85. Shortly after 9/11, I took part in a church/state separation protest in Palestine, TX

The protest was outside a church where our Governor advocated knocking a few holes in the wall of separation between church and state. We stayed on the sidewalk all the time. A church employee tried to bully us into standing in the street, saying that the church was responsible for laying the sidewalk in the first place. My fellow protesters informed him that it was a public sidewalk regardless of who commissioned it (which was true). And then I bullied the church employee back. He looked down at the ground, shifted his feet, and retreated back into the church.

There were Palestine police officers on hand during the entire protest. They made sure we kept to the sidewalk, but they also made sure that the churchgoers didn't try anything cute with us.

So yes, a public sidewalk is a public right-of-way. Stay on the sidewalk during the protest and don't do anything stupid, and legally the cops cannot touch you.

[autorank]

94. It's a "national security" thing, we wouldn't understand. n/t

[rhett o rick]

98. The most important thing here is that this reporter was investigating corporatists.

Corporatism knows no party, they own both parties. My guess is this reporter/producer will be fired by the corporatist shill ABC.

[Algorem]

104. ABC should find out where the Denver cops are getting their steroids.

And where'd that cigar-chomping sergeant get his cigar? Were the Democrats' big money people passing free stuff out to the cops too?

[Prisoner_Number_Six]

105. This thread is useless without pic.... Oh, wait a sec...

:evilgrin:

[npk]

112. The reporter should have been arrested

First of all just because you are on a public sidewalk doesn't mean that you can video tape things that are going on in private, i.e inside the hotel. Inside the hotel is private, outside the hotel is public. If the meeting was being held in the streets, i.e. a bunch of guys standing around talking on a street corner, then the reporter would have had every right to photograph it.

It's just like somebody can't photograph you inside your private home, just because they are standing outside on the sidewalk. It is illegal. It is called trespassing. This reporter should have known that, and I know without a shadow of a doubt ABC lawyers knew the law, and if they didn't they are poor lawyers.

[Solon]

113. Where the fuck did you come up with that shit?

Seriously, I'm trying to figure it out, if something is in plain view of the public, regardless of where it is, then there is no expectation of privacy. It is perfectly legal to stand on a street corner and photograph homes, many of which will have windows that aren't concealed by blinds or drapes, there is no violation of privacy because there is no expectation of it in this situation.

Hell, given what you just said, it would be illegal to take photographs damn near anywhere there is private property around, because the lens of the camera may just "violate" the privacy of someone.

[npk]

115. It is not legal to video tape or photograph someone inside their home

Regardless of where you are standing in public. Just because people have done it, does not mean it is legal. Go outside in your neighborhood with a camera and start photographing your neighbors inside their home. Let me know what your experience was like with the police while they are hauling you off to jail. I'm not saying I agree with how the police treated the reporter. That is another issue entirely. They had no right to push him into the street where traffic was whizzing by, and he would have had every right to be upset over that. But if you start recording or photographing somebody inside a private dwelling you better damn sure have their permission or you could be arrested for trespassing. A person does have a "reasonable expectation of privacy" inside their home, or a privately owned business. It's no different than a store like Wal Mart telling you to leave if you start photographing inside their store.

[Solon]

116. If you aren't on their property, then it isn't trespassing...

hell, that's red letter law, Google Maps(with streetview) should have been made illegal ages ago in that case. The fact of the matter is that you are equating being on PUBLIC property and photographing INTO private property as being the same as actually entering the private property itself. One is not the same as the other!

Let's reverse the situation, to expressions of public lewdness. Let's say some neighbors you have a habit of fucking in front of their unobstructed window in the living room, that faces the street, and this is in the middle of the day as well. Those neighbors are in violation of the law, several statutes would apply, but the key factor isn't that the neighbors are fucking in their own home, but that it was easily viewable to the public.

Oh, and by the way, I have photographed neighborhoods and businesses on my own, I didn't need to obtain permission from anyone, the most I did was approach a police officer in his cruiser and asked if he had any problem with it. He said no, it was perfectly legal, and frankly, most people were very cooperative, the ones I met, anyways. It was for an updated local history book, and I stayed on public property the entire time.

[npk]

117. Read this.

The right of privacy is restricted to individuals who are in a place that a person would reasonably expect to be private (e.g., home, hotel room, telephone booth). There is no protection for information that either is a matter of public record or the victim voluntarily disclosed in a public place. People should be protected by privacy when they "believe that the conversation is private and can not be heard by others who are acting in an lawful manner." Am.Jur.2d Telecommunications § 209 (1974).

That law pertains to telecommunications, i.e. a video camera with audio device. Like the one the photographer arrested was using.

The senators inside the hotel, had a reasonable expectation that their conversation was private. A photographer tried to record that conversation, unlawfully, and after he was told several times that he was violating law and trespassing. It is unlawful and he went to jail.



I have to go to bed.

[RagingInMiami]

120. The reporters were waiting to get footage of who walks out the hotel

Maybe even interviews.

There is no evidence that they were using their cameras to record what was going on inside the hotel.

Without having a microphone inside the room, this would be virtually impossible anyway.

[RagingInMiami]

114. It wasn't as if they were hiding in a closet or anything

Anything they hear while standing on the public sidewalk is fair game.

You have no clue of the law.

[rhett o rick]

118. Their arrest was the best thing that could have happened to ABC and their neocon masters.

ABC is investigating corporate influence on politicians. Just so happens during the Democratic Convention. The examples they gave were Democrats. And with their producer getting arrested they can look like they are the good guys fighting for free speech, when in fact they are slanting the news in favor of the neocon-fascists. Also, with the producer fighting for his (and ABC's, lol) they get lots of extra coverage. The proof will be when they "forget" to investigate the corporate influence during the repuke's convention.

[No Elephants]

121. Being a peeping Tom is illegal. Don't contribute to that website. I think it's a fraud.

If he was doing nothing wrong, ABC will pay his legal fees.