“…if you have footage you just shot, you are a material witness…there aren’t too many blind cameramen out there so if you have footage, you witnessed what went down also…”

This reckless supposition is nonsense, easily demolished by any good attorney.

In fact, anything captured by the camera is excellent evidence that you DIDN’T witness what “went down.” What you saw instead was a low resolution, limited field-of-view viewfinder reproduction of what “went down” — at even less than the higher resolution image captured by the camera.

Prosecutors as overreaching as “Officer Brad” could argue that you weren’t looking through the viewfinder while shooting.

Good luck proving THAT to a jury without eliciting laughter…

But I give you lots of respect, if that counts for anything :].

Everyone should record police encounters and be willing to go to jail for doing so.

a) Police Believers: Those who believe that, despite their faults, no police officer would ever destroy evidence that was damaging to the other officers. Officer Brad states that no right thinking officer would ever risk helping a dirty cop but the real question is: would any officer bend the law to protect the reputation of ‘policing’ as whole? Or to help a ‘good cop’ who had one poor moment of judgement?

This side honestly believes that obeying the police is both the best choice and the only real choice.

b) Police Skeptics: These people believe that police organizations have a documented record on hiding damaging information on themselves – like every other organization. They believe that 8 million copies of an image distributed around the world is a safer guarantee than a sole copy in the perpetrator’s hands.

This side believe that trickery, disobedience and arrest are preferable than allowing the police to police themselves and allowing a criminal (cop) to escape justice.

Final thoughts: In North America disobeying any cop (no matter what the law says) is a physically risky, financially draining, uphill struggle. As the posts illustrate, the best that can be done is to get (peacefully) arrested and hope for good luck in the civil suit as money is the only thing that speaks louder than ideology and Tazers.

The question for both sides is: How much do you really, really want justice?

http://nppa.org/news_and_events/news/2009/05/arrest.html

Also be prepared to sign an affidavit saying that you had possession of the camera from the moment the pics were taken until the moment you gave them to the DA.

20 minutes later I was released after agreeing to delete the images.”

You are a victim of extortion.

Do these signs cite a law? The law is what counts, not the sign.

Are you sure about this? The exclusion of illegally obtained evidence is not specifically about anyone’s rights, instead it is “public policy” designed not to reward police for their illegal acts.

“Next time nobody hangs around for the police to show up.”

Exactly the reason for the public policy and the exclusion of illegally obtained evidence.

Yes, you should always obey an extortionist who is threatening to kill you.

But then when you get away to safety, you should file a criminal complaint against the extortionist.