As long as the sentence flows and makes sense, it doesn’t matter.

The one thing they taught us in J-school was to forget everything you learned in English class.

J-school is journalism school.

Yes, the guy deserved it and it may have been an emotionally charged incident, but it should not be allowed or encouraged.

We have checks and balances in this country for a reason, to prevent any one entity from becoming too powerful.

If we allow police to become the judges and dole out punishment, then we’ll be headed for a police state.

That’s one incident that got caught on tape and Rodney King also got caught on tape, but how many don’t get caught on tape?

Even in my own arrest, police went over the line by bashing my head against the sidewalk when there was no need to because I wasn’t fighting.

I had two very expensive cameras on me, so the last thing I wanted to do was throw it down with five officers because not only would I get my ass kicked, I would destroy my cameras.

But they were so mad because I would not leave the area when they told me to, that they made sure I paid the price.

So they kicked my ass and destroyed my camera gear anyway.

Let’s face it, some cops are just too aggressive. I know they have to deal with the scum of society but they also have to deal with regular citizens who are no physical threat to them.

I always find it’s the younger cops who have this aggressive attitude that they can’t even talk to you, they have to yell at you, even if you’re just asking them a simple question.

When I worked in the Southwest, I did numerous ride-alongs and I’ve always discovered that there are many more similarities than differences between myself and the officers.

We’re both working class people who are trying to make a difference.

Sometimes, we clash in our attempts to do this, so there obviously needs to be better communication and understanding between police and the media because neither one is going away.

Sure, abuses happen on all sides. But (i started a sentence with but since you started one with and), the photographs weren’t the problem, were they? It was interpretation of those pictures that caused problems, because the pictures themselves were completely and totally honest. What was abused there would have been abused absent the pictures, but would have been much worse for the speculation: “I saw him go get another gun,” is no worse than a photo accurately showing him getting the gun.

Your suggestion is a good one, but one I think the LEOs are unlikely to follow. If a photographer is turned away, and he waits a few minutes and returns, he’s likely to be treated as someone “who has already been told!”

Cops are like anyone else, and no one really likes to have their picture taken while doing their job…but the bad cops think they can stop it, while good ones know better.

Your last post gets right to the heart of the matter. It’s the scrutiny, and the possibility that actions will be misconstrued in the heat of the moment.

Sure, you have those moments such as one about a year ago where a car chase ended with the suspect attempting to flee and he was emphatically greeted by two Clowns in Brown (Miami-Dade PD in case Jorge is unfamiliar — and it’s written with the utmost respect for MDPD) who unfortunately had their personnel files stained forever because a WFOR chopper happened to catch the incident. I say unfortunate because, really, the lesson that those PO’s administered is exactly what that suspect deserved.

Then you have the other side of the spectrum with the very true and very sensationalized incident that Jorge described where a DEA Special Agent was unfairly tarred and feathered when he was defamed by the media (and there, if it wasn’t everybody, the members of the media who knew better suddenly decided to hide under a rock because this poor guy really was reamed for no reason) as “reloading” after he had already been involved in a shooting. Jorge’s post explains the incident accurately.

Neither of the aforementioned examples are isolated incidents, but they should help you understand why POs are weary of being recorded.

In the first incident, it was a human reaction in the middle of an emotionally charged incident. In the second example it was negligent reporting by the media. And in other instances it’s utter misconduct (you grammarians are going to love the fact that I started a sentence with “and”, but WTF. — No explanation needed for that acronym, right?)

Regardless, it’s never putting LEOs in a positive light.

What’s the solution? Discretion, common sense and, just like with kids: step away from the situation, count to ten, and reapproach when the anger subsides (ON BOTH SIDES OF THE LINE).

I can’t wait to hear the reactions to this one, also from both sides of the line.

It’s approaches like Bagelman’s with the rookie PO that are more effective. When you encounter a PO who you feel is exceeding his or her authority, then simply ask to speak to a supervisor on the scene and explain the situation calmly and coolly. Remember, we’re all human beings in this and nobody appreciates being called an idiot, so a little diplomacy can go a long way.

Police can control a scene and restrict access, as bagelman said, by closing the entire scene. Where it gets difficult is in an instance such as this one. The police likely had good intentions in limiting access to scene and the inadvertent dissemination of sensitive information. However, the problem arises when others are able to access the scene, like Carlos wrote, via helicopter or by climbing on someone’s roof and using a telephoto lens. There you’re setting up a discriminatory situation because ultimately the police will be unable to control those other folks while the ones who show up at the perimeter and follow the PO’s instructions are being harmed because they are getting scooped by someone else.

That’s why there are windscreens, tarps, tents and other devices to effectively cover elements of a scene and that’s what needs to be used if the police don’t want something to be accessible to the media and still pass constitutional muster.

so what if the actions of the police ARE the story? Shouldn’t they be unafraid of public scrutiny? I guess that’s the bottom line, why are the police in general (and you also) so scared of having their actions recorded? That which is done under scrutiny, or knowing that it could be subject to public view is much more predictable and best for society. That’s why we have rules that guarantee that governance isn’t done in secret.

that video from new mexico was scary man…what was that cop thinking?

They are great for soundbites, but nothing beats an action shot.

I agree with you bagelman about the young cops who don’t have a clue. I guess they just don’t train them because it is usually always the younger cops who bully photographers.

Just take a look at that cop in New Mexico. He was nine months on the job when he arrested that reporter.