By Carlos Miller
A Nevada man was illegally detained by casino security guards after taking photos of a mural inside the casino Wednesday night.
Robert Woolley said several security guards whisked him into a back room of the The Cannery in North Las Vegas because he refused to show them the images from his cell phone.
He was released 90 minutes later when police arrived and told the security guards that he had not broken any laws.
Nevertheless, the casino permanently banned him from ever entering the casino again.
“They own two casinos in town,” he said in a phone interview with Photography is Not a Crime Thursday night. “I’ve been banned from both of them. They will arrest me for trespassing if I return.”
Woolley, who operates the blog Poker Grump, said he was going to use the images for a regular feature on his blog called “Guess the Casino” where he challenges readers to guess in which casino was the photo taken.
“Most casinos don’t have a problem with this,” he said. “I’ve been told by a few casinos not to take pictures, so I stop.”
But this was the first time a security guard not only demanded to see his images, but then followed him around the casino, calling for backup when he refused to show them.
They stopped him just as he was about to walk out the door into the parking lot, as he explained in his blog post of the incident:
They finally announced clearly that I was being detained and I was not free to go. Two of them were openly armed. I asked the grounds for my detention. They said it was because I was taking pictures. I asked whether they had reason to think that I had committed a felony, which is the only suspicion that triggers their authority to detain. Yes, I was told–taking pictures. I asked, incredulously, “You think that’s a felony?” The guy said, “Yes, it’s a violation of our policy”
According to Nevada law, casino security guards only have the authority to detain a person if that person has committed a felony.
“They should put up a sign if they don’t want people taking pictures,” he said.
-30-
I am a multimedia journalist who has been fighting a lengthy legal battle after having photographed Miami police against their wishes in Feb. 2007. Please help the fight by donating to my Legal Defense Fund in the top left sidebar. And join my Facebook blog network to keep updated on the latest articles.
Popularity: 3% [?]
Fernandez, as I mentioned in a 
18 responses so far ↓
1 genewitch // Feb 20, 2009 at 2:15 AM
I dunno. casinos are run a little differently than other private organizations. I’ve been told to put away various electronic devices, and several other seemingly innocent things will get a security guard on your ass.
I’m not going to say that casinos are run illegally, or whatever… but i’m glad he was released safely.
The key? spend lots of money at the casinos.
Stratosphere:
http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/sDPAd3VRx7Uq4aqoNq0OHA?feat=directlink
Luxor:
http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/0rccHjadHFRcCjWGlp70lA?feat=directlink
Excalibur:
http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/crJO8od1bOofB_vX5GPceA?feat=directlink
OMG He took pictures of cops in MGM Grand:
http://picasaweb.google.com/lh/photo/FC9E23wJXuSP-Z0Jd0837A?feat=directlink
They didn’t harass me. and i look like a joker! Although, they do shut down tables or switch to the most Italian dealer they can find after a couple of hours. “Put your bet on hard 8″ – “no thanks” – “i’m tellin you, i’m feeling hard 8!” – “fine, $2 on hard 8″
The camera those pictures were taken with was really bad in low light, so apologies for my crap photography!
2 bj // Feb 20, 2009 at 8:12 AM
Jackpot! I wonder how much he is going to get?
3 Joel Lawson // Feb 20, 2009 at 9:21 AM
While the detention was clearly improper, I’m surprised the casino doesn’t have well-placed signs indicating that photography is prohibited. I’ve always assumed that casinos don’t want people taking photos–while most snappers would be harmless, some could be doing recon on the placement of cameras and other security measures. Maybe they don’t ban photography, and if they don’t, they sure didn’t have a reason to do anything more than ask a few questions…politely.
4 The Gambler // Feb 20, 2009 at 11:29 AM
He should have showed them his pictures as soon as they asked.
If he is on their property, he should abide by their requests.
5 CHRIS // Feb 20, 2009 at 11:59 AM
not @ all “The Gambler”, once he takes a picture its his and any attempt to delete it is destruction of private property.
6 bj // Feb 20, 2009 at 11:59 AM
The Gambler,
“If he is on their property, he should abide by their requests.”
You have got to be kidding. They have no rights to force you to delete a picture or even view it. Once that picture is taken – its yours.
No law was broken by taking the photograph – sure he has a no trespass on him now, but that is the buildings owners right. They do not have the right to view or delete it.
7 Greg // Feb 20, 2009 at 3:56 PM
I don’t know who is interpreting the law as only allowing casino personnel from detaining people for a possible felony. The most certainly can detain you for a misdemeanor, too. If you piss on the center bar (not on a person, that would be assault) it would be public urination, a misdemeanor for which they likely would detain you.
Security was wrong. The cops were right… yes? He was released without charges. They could have been quicker about releasing him, but when you live in Las Vegas and you know that casinos prohibit photography on the gaming floor, you should also realize you are asking for trouble when you start taking pictures on the gaming floor.
This does not in any case resemble the arrests in Chicago, San Francisco or New York of photographing public buildings/structures from public places.
No, security can’t demand to see his photographs. No, they can’t demand the photographs be deleted. At the same time, does it hurt anyone to show security the photographs? You have no constitutional rights to photograph on private property, so it’s not like you are ruining it for everyone else.
Just my $0.02…
8 John // Feb 20, 2009 at 4:09 PM
One way to guarantee that I will take pictures is to put up a sign telling me not to.
Perhaps they could put up a sign that tells me I am not free to talk about peanuts. It is equally arbitrary and equally irrelevant because NO ONE HAS THE ABILITY TO TAKE AWAY MY RIGHTS WITH A SIGN.
9 John // Feb 20, 2009 at 4:18 PM
BTW, I once had a friend clerking at the Supreme Court in D.C. and got to walk back behind the judges chairs and into the law library of the court (WAY before 9/11). Was told not to take pictures…. yeah…. I did. Perhaps I should post them. What’s the statute of limitations on photography crime?
10 jocko // Feb 21, 2009 at 2:49 AM
got kicked out to and banned for calling pit boss a cocksucker
11 genewitch // Feb 21, 2009 at 4:59 AM
greg: uh, in my post i proved that you most certainly can take pictures on the floor.
They just don’t want some random rubbernecker taking pictures. i never even got a dirty look for taking the pictures i did. And that was in multiple casinos under different management.
So, no. Then again, i’ve never been harassed for taking pictures – which is what this blog is about.
12 JMc // Feb 23, 2009 at 3:16 PM
Vegas has changed over the years. When there 8-odd years ago, they made it clear no photography in the casino area. But when I was there 2 years ago, everyone had cell cameras, regular cameras, and even a few video cameras filming everywhere. I saw this in several casinos, and no floor people seemed to take any heed of this. (althoguh no one was filming table type games, it was all touristy-stuff).
But agreed, unless they say no cameras/recording devices, the people have done nothing wrong. (and unless you’re going to confiscate all cell phones, you can’t really stop it…)
13 Kurt // Feb 23, 2009 at 5:41 PM
“You have no constitutional rights to photograph on private property, so it’s not like you are ruining it for everyone else.”
Maybe not, but the photographs are still yours even if you took them while committing a crime.
About the most the security guards can do in this case is to ask someone to leave.
In many cases the security guards may be committing the crime. I’m not familiar with NV law, but in most states security guards would be making a ‘citizens arrest’ if they were to detain someone. In most states this can only be done for a felony *actually witnessed by the arrestor*. Even in this case strict liability is usually applied to any arrestor. In addition, the guards could be charged with false imprisonment/arrest or even kidnapping depending on the state. In most places physical resistance (and in many places including deadly force) are legal to use in preventing false arrest (for example, where I live it’s even legal to use physical force against a police officer committing false arrest/detainment). I can imagine situations in casinos of security guards/patrons getting shot or other violent actions. Very, very, very risky. The casinos really need to calm down.
14 Rgf // Feb 24, 2009 at 10:43 PM
I think that there are two sides to every story. I think in this story, there was a misunderstanding by the security guards of what the picture was going to be used for. I believe that if a public visitor is allowed to go inside a private place, the casino, then there is an inferred or implied permission to access the casino. From this viewpoint it would be easy to infer or imply that permission was granted to that person to take pictures. There were no signs to prohibit it. So if someone, off the street, was allowed to enter a private place by inferance because the door is open and it says welcome, and the person walks inside for the legitimate purpose i.e.; to visit, to enjoy or entertain themselves, or have a meal, etc. inside, it would be very easy believe that taking picture would be perfectly fine. Granted, the security guards, might have developed a suspicion of what this visitor was doing with the camera, but they did not know if it was a felony or misdemeanor. They would have had to ascertain with more information about what this visitor was doing, why they were doing it, and for what purpose. but it didn’t entitle them to detain the person for a certain period of time inside the casino. They might have wanted to determine if there was any probable cause for a specific felony with what information they had obtained. and exercise proper legal choices for action. They might have been thinking that if, the photograph from the camera would have fallen into the wrong hands, perhaps a conspiracy plot , that it could be suspicious as a felony. Or the camera might have been used to shine a bad light on the place or people, which would just be a misdemeanor. This in turn could have been shared with other people, to produce bad publicity, and perhaps give a competitor a favorable advantage.
It is interesting to note, that all casinos have surveilance cameras posted every where 24/7 inside their businesses, and I am sure we all know that pictures are taking of us all the time. But is it really legal? Do casinos really have the right to take pictures of us, if no felonies have been committed, not even probable cause or suspicion. Do they really have a legal right to do this inside a casino. Is there any difference between a visitor taking a picture of people or things versus the casino management , inside a casino. This raises alot of questions about whose civil rights are really violated. Are the federal, state, county and laws that are on the books now, favor big businesses, or the small guys. What do you think? handed with the general public.
It appears that there are more than one standard being used measure the right to take pictures. Who is right? Big business, or the small guy?, From the view of the small guy, the visitor, he might only be thinking about taking a picture as a momento, of a good memory. But, in the eyes of corporate america he is considered a crook and a criminal. By whose laws? Corporate america?
I believe the visitors intentions were legitimate. There were no signs conspicuously posted that prohibited taking pictures inside the casino. Is it right for the casino surveilance cameras also to take a picture of the same wall murial? Also, is it legal for the casino to take unauthorized pictures of every patron in the casino, without their expressed written permission first?
Security guards probably thought that they were doing the right thing. But were they? Does this person look suspicious? Do I trust this person? By thinking this way all the time, innocent people can be considered suspects and real criminals, can actually get away, and go unnoticed. It has happened. Is it possible that some security guards can possibly live on the thrill of the rush, getting into a situation, wearing their uniform, badge, and gun, to do things that they normally wouldn’t do. There was probably a combination of many different factors, which led the visitor and the security guard to meet on that fatefull day, and react the way they did. Both people believed they were right in their own mind. But what really did happen? Ultimately, I feel it is a combination of strong egos, and a breakdown in communication that led to the showdown. Sometimes there isn’t much time to think, since it can happen so quickly.
15 Steve M // Mar 10, 2009 at 9:42 AM
Most people understand Casinos prohibit Photography for three reasons. A, to protect their layout and camera placements from being studied, To protect against cheating and C, to protect their patrons from being exposed while in their establishment. I mean what if Mr X was out with Ms. B while X is Maried to C. Get what I mean?
But if you do get off any shots, they are yours and cannot be confiscated or demanded to be deleted. The Photographer however can be asked to leave and banned for life from said establishment.
16 Pctahlequah // Nov 10, 2009 at 1:43 PM
Photography policies in casinos are designed for two things; to protect the casino from someone who is “casing” the establishment for a possible robbery or cheating and to protect the privacy of our guests. My casino’s policy on taking photos:
Guests cannot take pictures of live table games or an electronic game that is opened for repairs.
No pictures of cashier areas, to include employees on the gaming floor providing change for guests.
No pictures of Back of House access points.
No pictures of Surveillance camera placement.
No pictures of other guests without that guest’s permission.
For the most part, we have no issues with guests violating this policy. We display works of art on our gaming floor, and guest are welcome to take pictures of it, as long as none of the above rules are violated. If a guest is suspected of having done so, we will advise them of our policy and ask to see the photos. If they decline, that is their right, but they will be banned from the property and escorted out. We try to do this as quickly and courteously as possible, but sometimes we have someone like the man who wrote this article that just blows everything out of proportion and refuses to listen to reason. This draws the process out.
17 Robin L. // Jan 5, 2010 at 5:33 PM
@Pctahlequah You know what also draws out the process of escorting someone off the property? Preventing them from leaving and calling the police to come explain to you that they didn’t break any law. Seems to me it was the security guards in this story blowing things out of proportion and escalating a situation that was about to resolve itself.
18 Bergman // Mar 12, 2010 at 5:25 AM
The fact he is standing on their private property grants them no rights to interfere with his private property. It would be equally reasonable to claim that because he owns (and is standing on) the soles of his shoes, then he cannot ever trespass.
Leave a Comment