By Carlos Miller
An Oakland Tribune photographer who was handcuffed and forced to sit on the side of the road after attempting to photograph an accident on the freeway has filed a federal lawsuit against the city of Oakland.
Photojournalist Ray Chavez is seeking unspecified monetary damages as well as a court injunction that would force police to train its officers in allowing the media “reasonable access to accident and crime scenes and behind police lines.”
Judging by the incident that took place in May 2007, Oakland police are in dire need of training.
Oakland police Officer Kevin Reynolds told Chavez that he should leave, the suit said. When Chavez replied that he had a right to be there as a member of the press. Reynolds angrily told him that he “didn’t have any business here (and) that it was a crime scene,” the suit said.
When Chavez took photos of an arriving ambulance, Reynolds blocked his camera and told him, “You don’t need to take these kind of photos,” according to the suit.
Reynolds asked for Chavez’s identification and began writing him a citation, the suit said. As a California Highway Patrol cruiser arrived, Chavez again took pictures. That prompted Reynolds to say, “That’s it. You’re under arrest,” the suit said.
The officer made Chavez sit next to the overturned car with his hands behind his back for a half-hour, the suit said. Passing motorists mistakenly believed Chavez had caused the crash and “cursed and made derogatory references to and signs at plaintiff while he sat on the ground handcuffed,” the suit said.
While he was handcuffed, the officers told Chavez that he would be cited for impeding traffic and failing to obey a lawful order – which sounds extremely familiar to me. They eventually released him but warned him “don’t ever come here again to take these kinds of photos,” according to the lawsuit.
“It has been very stressful since I was humiliated by the OPD officers,” Chavez said in an interview. “They should do their jobs and not interfere with ours as media members. These cops need to be re-educated. I don’t think they know what the First Amendment and freedom of the press means.”
Popularity: 4% [?]
9 responses so far ↓
1 genewitch // Aug 23, 2008 at 5:44 PM
a lot of people think that lawsuits are motivated by greed alone. However, nothing hurts a business (and policing is a business) more than losing money because your employees did something stupid.
If this happens enough times to enough police stations, we’ll see a change.
2 Ms Calabaza // Aug 24, 2008 at 11:29 PM
This issue is becoming epidemic. I can see support groups starting up . . . “My name is Sam and I’m a recovering beat-up photographer” …
I’m in Anger Management … sheesh!
I feel pretty, oh so pretty …
3 Tenthletter // Sep 4, 2008 at 3:23 PM
They (cops, any Gonv’t agency) can take pics of you, but you can’t take pics of them.. Is History repeating itself only here now in the U.S.??? You know what I mean…
4 stmfreak // Sep 4, 2008 at 10:21 PM
I think you are naive if you expect to see a change just because people resist, get arrested and sue. There has obviously been a directive issued from a high level in the law-enforcement-apparatus to block photography of public buildings, officers and activities. This harassment has been occurring across the nation fairly uniformly. Until we find the source of that directive and change their position, this progressive educating of Amerika will continue.
We’ve seen propaganda like this before. It is ongoing. This is the was the SSN became a de-facto ID number. This is how people get trained to fill out forms regardless of questions asked. This is how the right to move about freely got converted to “driving is a privilege.” No amount of resistance by we chattel slaves will change it.
5 Kevin // Sep 5, 2008 at 3:09 AM
@stmfreak:
You’re painting a picture where, on the Whitehouse lawn, a giant flag with the letters “U.S.S.A.” boldly embroidered on it, stands fluttering in a post-apocalyptic wind.
The truth of the matter is, people can be quite brutish and uneducated. Often times, inadequate help is hired for positions of power. “Power trips” occur. Remember the 60′s? Remember what civil rights were like _before_ the 60′s? Remember when women couldn’t vote; when blacks counted as a fraction of a human being; when slavery was acceptable?
And you’re saying that America is a land of oppression? I see no slaves. All my women friends can vote. So can my black friends.
We are a nation of people. As such, we will always have problems: that’s human nature. But to say that we are a nation drifting into decay without looking back on where we’ve come from is ignorant.
If what you were saying was true, do you really think that your comment would have shown up? Would this website even exist?
6 Carlos Miller // Sep 5, 2008 at 3:15 AM
If what you were saying was true, do you really think that your comment would have shown up? Would this website even exist?
Good point, Kevin.
Although there are many people who would love to see this site shut down, we still have our rights in this country.
However, sometimes those in authority like to abuse these rights, which is why we need to utilize these rights to speak out against these abuses.
7 Kevin // Sep 5, 2008 at 3:29 AM
@Carlos:
I agree wholeheartedly. If we neglect exercising our rights as American citizens, then we really have nobody else to blame for such happenings but ourselves. I applaud your struggle and support you, and all those whose First Amendment rights have been violated. If we don’t defend ourselves, then who can? That’s why I love America so much: we have the ability to defend ourselves against such oppression.
But I firmly believe that if we lived in a rapidly decaying Police State, as stmfreak seems to suggest, that we wouldn’t hear of these violations. They’d simply be discarded, thrown in the circular file, and the media and internet would pretty much go on reporting business as usual: “Sunny skies, apple pies, and Big Brother loves you: and he’s watching!”
Keep fighting the good fight.
8 Really Simple // Apr 24, 2009 at 12:17 AM
I am a photographer myself and I feel there are some good points made. I really believe there is a simpler explanation for the “officers” objective. I know I would not want to be browsing the web or flipping the pages of the newspaper and see a picture of someone I knew, or better yet a loved one, after an accident in a way I would not like to have seen them. The other point is you need to keep in mind they have a “crime scene” they need to keep in tact and I know when I am taking pictures I have lost “my focus” as to where I am walking.
9 Pete // Jul 2, 2009 at 6:29 PM
What do you all expect, this is police brutality at its best. They could care less, and they think they can do whatever they want, to whom they want, whenever they want.
Leave a Comment