PDF 
by Mike Gray
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? (Who watches the watchers?) — Attributed to Juvenal, Satire 6 (writing in an entirely different context)
Phil Elmore, on WorldNet Daily, reports on a disturbing trend, a move on the part of authorities to outlaw videographers when the latter catch the former abusing their Constitutional powers:
Just what are the consequences for filming someone in public – specifically, for filming a police officer in public?
As the technology to record video becomes ever more accessible and less expensive, the prevalence of handheld video cameras (often in the form of wireless phones) has increased dramatically. Public surveillance by our government has increased, too, and we as Americans must contend with the shadow of Big Brother looming larger over us with each passing day. The good thing about video, however, is that it makes no judgments, provided it is not edited in bad faith or filmed from a compromising angle. A video of an incident tells the truth about what happened more accurately than any eyewitness can relate. So why are more and more law enforcement and government officials trying to make criminals of citizens who record encounters with police?
In some states the move to suppress video evidence has been codified in law:
… Chicago has one of the largest networks of surveillance cameras in the country. In Illinois, however, it’s illegal to record the police – even if you’re trying to gather evidence of police wrongdoing. If you try it, you could be arrested and charged with a felony. This is because in Illinois both parties must consent to the recording of a conversation … unless one of those parties is a police officer.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Phil Elmore’s WND article.
Phil Elmore’s WND article archive.
Recent Comments