Videotaping Cops is not Felony, says Judge

We’ve had a few articles on the divide between security officers, cops and photographers of differing kinds, and now the situation has taken a turn for the better – at least in part of the US.

From ITWorld.com: Police, mostly on their own authority or by departmental policy, often reject those traditional views in favor of one in which any recording other than their own is considered intrusive, antagonistic and likely to product not truth and justice, but unwarranted accusations of brutality or abuse.

The Illinois Eavesdropping Statute and some other recent laws passed in other states are designed to prevent that by making an artificial connection between private or confidential conversations that participants treat as private, and events that happen in public, where any camera-phone, close-circuit security camera or satellite can record them.

So what does this have to do with anything, you ask? Well, let’s tak a look at another little snippet from that article:

The Illinois Eavesdropping Statute stretches the boundaries of what is appropriate to overhear by making it illegal for anyone to audio- or videotape an event or conversation without the knowledge and approval of everyone involved.

It would never be prosecuted, but the law would technically make it illegal to video-record a snippet of a football or basketball game – especially recording the cheering crowd rather than the players – without getting the permission of everyone in the crowd beforehand.

That kicks it up a notch, wouldn’t you say? That means that if you’re videotaping your kid’s soccer game, and happen to get a neighboring conversation on tape, then you’ve just committed a felony, buddy. Not a misdemeanor – a felony. The really crazy part is that this isn’t just your run of the mill felony either – it’s a Class 1 felony. That’s up to 15 years behind bars for you if you’re prosecuted. Yikes indeed.

But hey, that would never happen, right? You couldn’t be charged with something like that as long as you’re a participant in the conversation? Well… that’s actually what happened when Christopher Drew recorded a conversation between himself and a police officer approaching him to give him a ticket (remember, that’s public record…):

A photographer and screen printer from Rogers Park, Drew, 61, was selling art patches for $1 at 103 N. State St. when he was arrested for not having a peddler’s license.

Police found a tape recorder in his poncho that recorded the conversation between Drew and the arresting officer on the street.

He was charged with a Class 1 felony, which carries a penalty of up to 15 years in prison.

“It was impossible for me to imagine a law based on privacy would make it illegal for me to tape a public conversation by a public officer on the public way who was arresting me,” Drew said after the hearing in the Criminal Courts building in Chicago. “I should have the right to bring evidence into court of what that officer says to me in public.”

Anyway, the judge says the statute is too broad, and unconstitutional. Bad news for Chicago PD, who had some plans…

It may interrupt the plans of Chicago police, who have warned they will arrest anyone videotaping or audio-recording their efforts at crowd control, arrests and confrontations with protesters during the G-8 Economic Summit in Chicago May 15-22. (Protesters are gearing up to make an event of it.)

SnallaBolaget.com has advocated for a more relaxed relationship between photographers and security/police/other LE for a long time, and while the eavsdropping statute was a step back, the new law about recording police is a step in the right direction. Police and security needs to understand that as long as they are doing their jobs according to the law and the regulations that they need to follow, then anyone who takes a picture or records that action is actually helping them.

But that might be a ways away still…