By Carlos Miller
Rob Hurlbut was standing on the platform of the San Diego Trolley when he saw a group of armed security guards tackle a man for smoking a cigarette.
He began shooting video with his digital SLR, prompting a female guard to tell him he was not allowed to take photos.
Hurlbut continued shooting as three guards struggled to handcuff the man with one of them driving his knee into the man’s face.
The guards would tell the man to stop resisting but the man wasn’t resisting. He was, in fact, telling the guard that he was trying to cooperate, but they were hurting him.
As Hurlbut continued shooting, a couple of the guards positioned their bodies around the melee on the ground in an attempt to prevent him from filming it.
The guards finally handcuffed the man and walked him off. Hurlbut followed behind him with his camera.
One of the guards pointed at him and said, “Go over and get that guy right there.”
Another guard said, “Stop him from taking our picture.”
And another guard walked up to him and demanded to see his trolley ticket, which Hurlbut produced.
Here is the dialogue that took place between Hurlbut and the guard:
Guard: “All right, we’ve asked you not to take pictures, so no taking pictures.”
Hurlbut: “Am I in violation of the law?”
Guard: “Yeah, no pictures.
Hurlbut: “What about video?”
Guard: “No no video. Nothing.”
Hurlbut: “Is it against the law?”
Guard: “We don’t want it.”
Hurlbut: “But it’s not against the law.”
Guard: “It’s against our rights. Please stop.”
Hurlbut: “Should I go over there?”
Guard: “We don’t want pictures taken at all over here, sir.”
Hurlbut: “But it’s not illegal.”
Guard: “We don’t want you taking pictures.”
Hurlbut eventually stopped filming and that satisfied the guards for a few minutes. But then they got back on his case, as he explains on his website.
ANOTHER trolley cop approached me about three minutes later & asked for my trolley pass again. He actually took it from my hand because he wanted to “check the authenticity.”
He then said, “If you miss the next trolley…” and shrugged. Then added “Do you get what I mean?” I said I did and made damn sure I caught the next trolley.
The incident occurred September 5, 2009. By September 18, the head of Heritage Security Services, the company that employed the guards, issued a public apology.
The story was reported on the local NBC station, which you can see below. Here is the apology from Ken Moller, president of Heritage Security Services.
“We have no right to tell people they can’t shoot (video) down there. My officers were wrong in telling him that. And I put that word out as soon as I saw the video. It’s a public place and people can certainly shoot video down there if they want to.”
After seeing the video, it’s a little surprising that these security guards are not cops. In fact, they are known as “trolley cops.”
But according to a discussion on a police forum, they are not sworn officers and considered to be beneath cops. Or as one officer put it, “not of the highest caliber.”
That is probably the understatement of the year.
Popularity: 4% [?]
Fernandez, as I mentioned in a 
33 responses so far ↓
1 JR // Feb 5, 2010 at 1:27 AM
Whoa. I’m glad they handled the mastermind criminal smoker properly. I would feel so much safer from these smoking terrorist if they’d call in the predator drones and swat teams.
2 theBulldog // Feb 5, 2010 at 1:32 AM
kudos to the security boss for having the balls to admit they were wrong!
3 Tim Post // Feb 5, 2010 at 3:32 AM
I wish he could have set up sooner, I’d be really interested in knowing the details on these ‘new’ anti smoking laws. I’m a smoker, I’ve been chased away from building entrances, out of parking garages, etc. Never in a million years would I even contemplate being arrested for lighting up in the wrong place in what appears to be the outdoors.
This video clearly illustrates the problem with guards and photographers. The guard seemed to honestly think that he had a right to not be filmed or photographed in a public place. Given the fact that everyone has a camera these days, you’d think they would educate them more. Is it that terribly difficult to add a single piece of paper to the training materials?
The innuendo regarding what may or may not happen if the guy missed his trolly is inexcusable.
Tim Post´s last blog ..US National Archives Joins Flickr Commons
4 adam // Feb 5, 2010 at 4:14 AM
Another security agency/police department gets owned… nice to see!
5 lobster // Feb 5, 2010 at 6:07 AM
So if they are not LEO’s, what gives them the authority to arrest someone?
6 MacK // Feb 5, 2010 at 10:12 AM
Lobster what gives anyone the authority to arrest someone for smoking outdoors??? Even if it is not allowed at this location surely there is not selective law on the books that could cause an arrest. What legislator passed a law saying that on this bench there is no smoking?
Then it takes 5 cops to arrest a guy for smoking?
I really want to see more on this guy. I know the harassment of the photographer is the main point of this site, but thugs assaulting us for tobacco C’mon!!
I used to joke about things becoming Nazi like here, but I do not believe anyone is still laughing.
7 Roger // Feb 5, 2010 at 11:57 AM
As a former cop (30 years ago) I saw several points that I could , and would have, arrested the guards for. They were acting like thugs and should be brought up short. The fact that there boss had to apologize is a sign that they were disciplined, bosses hate to apologize and it does flow down hill.
I would like to know further details on the supposed arrest for smoking. There are a number of un-answered questions here.
8 pod // Feb 5, 2010 at 12:22 PM
Armed security guards are usually just wanna-be cops or Academy drop-outs. They get off on looking and acting like a cop without actually being one. I did some light reading on the laws that govern them, and just from that, I’ve seen so many violations, from behavior, to appearance, to presentation.
- I saw a black Dodge Charger the other day that looked like a new cruiser except that the lights were yellow and not white. Laptop, spotlight, the whole bit, you could easily think the guy was a cop if you didn’t know any better.
9 johnl // Feb 5, 2010 at 12:24 PM
There are signs posted at transit terminals that the boarding area is non-smoking. In North County, there is no penalty for smoking. The security people will just ask you to stop, point at the sign, and you will stop. In San Diego, MTS Ordinance No. 13.10 makes smoking a citable infraction, with a $75 fine. Maybe the guy was refusing to provide ID for the citation, or something, but an arrest is very strange.
10 pod // Feb 5, 2010 at 12:32 PM
Security guards are private citizens. If you’re in a public area they have zero authority to ask for identification. I’ve noticed a lot of the armed guys get off on people’s ignorance and really push the bounds of the laws regulating them. Here in Florida at least, the armed guards have even more restrictions on firearms use than your average citizen. The gun is mostly there for show.
I wish we had real transit cops like other major cities. It wouldn’t cost too much to break off a part of MDPD to watch the Metrorail and Metromover.
11 The Straw Buyer // Feb 5, 2010 at 12:51 PM
Great news people. Our first amendment battle may have just gotten a bit easier! The Department of Justice is looking for mentally retarded lawyers!
http://thestrawbuyer.blogspot.com/2010/02/what-are-you-retarded-if-so-you-may-be.html
12 Rob // Feb 5, 2010 at 3:58 PM
Hi guys,
I’m the author of the video, so I thought I’d respond to some of the questions about the smoker’s arrest, and security guards authority to arrest people.
The man was walking through the station with a lit cigarette in his mouth. He was headed toward an area, just outside the station where the smokers congregate, but his path was cut off by a trolley coming through the station. He was waiting for the trolley to move, and that’s when the guards (two of them at first) approached him and told him to put the cigarette out. He explained where he was heading and that the trolley was in his way, but the guards said to put it out anyway, right now. He asked them to wait for ten seconds and he’d be on his way, at which point one of the guards told him to turn around, but the man refused.
The guard them physically spun the smoker around which made the smoker turn BACK towards the guard, saying something to the effect of, “Don’t put your hands on me!” That’s when the two original guards started to take him down, and were quickly joined a couple other guards, and that’s when I started filming. the total time from the guards first contact with the smoker to the start of the arrest was about 60 seconds.
Since filming this, I have learned that private security guards DO NOT have the authority to arrest anyone. What they do is perform a CITIZENS ARREST, which is something that any private citizen can do. That means that I have just as much right to arrest a private security guard as the do to arrest me. I suppose I should try that out the next time I see a San Diego trolley cop misbehaving.
Rob´s last blog ..Nikon D5000 & 6400 ISO
13 Rail Car Fan // Feb 5, 2010 at 6:42 PM
Let’s see how “Johnny Law” spins this one!
Rail Car Fan
14 Carlos Miller // Feb 5, 2010 at 7:49 PM
Johnny Law wouldn’t have to spin this one because they are not cops.
Carlos Miller´s last blog ..Photographer receives apology after armed guards harass him for taking photos
15 Tim Post // Feb 5, 2010 at 8:37 PM
Its a question of domain and the employing authority (which in this case happens to be the city).
Guards in a hospital can detain someone until the local PD arrives if they witness the person committing a crime. Loss prevention at Macy’s can detain someone until the local PD arrives if they see you walking through the door after shoplifting. If you walk into a bar and start punching people randomly, the bouncer is going to restrain and detain you until the local PD arrives.
You, an ordinary citizen can tackle someone who just robbed a 7-11 until the local PD arrives.
What remains is accountability. If no crime was actually committed, the hospital guard, LP guy at Macy’s, bouncer or good samaritan who just tackled a 7-11 customer is in deep trouble. Additionally, you are just as accountable, if not more than the local PD for what happens while you have someone in custody.
I hope the smoker files suit.
Tim Post´s last blog ..US National Archives Joins Flickr Commons
16 Jody // Feb 6, 2010 at 1:44 AM
It seems that a world wide notice went out to everyone in a uniform, it seems nobody in a uniform likes being filmed/have their picture taken in the past two years. I have never seen people in uniforms so sensitive about this issue, do they know something we do not? I have been an avid wannabe phtographer for more than a decade now but recently it seems I get questioned wherever I go. I am at the point now where I just carry cards with me that says:
“I am a photographer and am on public property, I will photograph anything/one on public property. I am not interfering with anything/one on public property, have a nice day.”
Most of the time it works, of course you always get the jerkoffs who want to argue but I never say anything, I just keep taking pictures. At one time I had a line about if you continue to harass me I will take you to court but that just egged them on. I used to be an asshole and play into it, that got me nowhere. Some of them want an arguement, they think it gives them the right to beat, taze or perhaps kill you, bloody Nazis.
17 LoTek // Feb 6, 2010 at 1:59 AM
I find this quite facinating. Appoligies for moving away from the photography aspect, but I think that’s pretty clear cut in this cas3e.
Clearly these security guards don’t have powers of arrest. Can anyone comment on powers of detention/citizen’s arrest in the US ? Here in Canadia, you have to have ‘resonable belief’ that the person poses a danger to themselves or the community in order to legally detain while awaiting an LEO. Failure to demonstate this in court could easily lead to an unlawful confinement charge.
I love calling rent-a-cops on this, because they are simply used to compliance. Some back down pretty quick when it becomes clear that you know your arse from a hole in the ground; others, well … your call.
18 Mre11 // Feb 6, 2010 at 7:31 AM
I don’t know what the laws in San Diego are; however, in many states security guards do have the authority to arrest. In the state of Virginia, there are three classes of guards that have been granted the power of arrest: Armed Security, Unarmed Conservator of the Peace and Armed Conservator of the Peace. The training for these guards is pitiful. Depending on the title they are given, they only need between 24 hours to 40 hours of training. In Virginia, the COP has the same power and authority as a local police officer, “appointed” by a judge, and are sworn in at the local District Court.
19 Rob // Feb 6, 2010 at 12:51 PM
Wow! I hope what Mre11 describes in Virginia is not a sign of things to come for the rest of us.
A judge can appoint someone and that person will have the same authority as a real cop in less than two days?!? WTF?Why wold a judge have to appoint cop authority to some one when there are already cops available?
Rob´s last blog ..Custom Camera Strap For Sale On eBay
20 jwvaughn // Feb 6, 2010 at 2:49 PM
In the U.S. the powers of a security guard are controlled by the state. Here is an excerpt from California’s penal code:
“A private person may arrest another: 1. For a public offense committed or attempted in his presence. 2. When the person arrested has committed a felony, although not in his presence. 3. When a felony has been in fact committed, and he has reasonable cause for believing the person arrested to have committed it. (C.P.C. 837).”
Simply put, you can arrest only for a felony.
There is an exception made for detaining shoplifters. but the arrest can only be made by a sworn peace officer.
What I don’t know if if the City of San Diego as somehow “excepted” the trolley guards in someway.
Jerry
21 MrMe11 // Feb 6, 2010 at 7:10 PM
The main use for the COP is to act as law enforcement for gated communities.
22 CA Sec Guard // Feb 25, 2010 at 3:37 AM
I’ve been a security guard in CA for the last ten years and I’ve arrested a total of about 70 people or so. All my arrests were well received by the cops and CJ system and I’ve never been counter-arrested or been sued for arresting anyone. Why not? In CA as a guard I know I am a Private Person and I make Private Person’s Arrests, based on CA Penal Code 837, which says that any private person (even a foreign national like a tourist) can arrest another person if (1) the person to be arrested commits a misdemeanor in the presence of the guard/priv person, or (2) if the guard/priv person has “Reasonable Cause” -a set of facts leading a reasonable person to believe that a crime had been committed- indicating that the person to be arrested committed a felony (either in the presence of the guard, or not).
Most security guards arrest people for committing a misdemeanor in their presence, namely, Trespassing (CA Penal Code 602). The way it works: if the property owner doesn’t want YOU taking pictures or doing whatever else (smoking, loitering, whatever) on his/her property, the security guard, who is the agent of the property owner, tells you what the property owner wants (i.e., put out the smoke, stop taking pics, leave, whatever). If you refuse to comply and remain on the property, you get arrested by the guard for violating CA PC 602: Trespassing. If you fight back you can be met with reasonable superior force by the guard and then also charged with assault and battery by the police, who must be notified as soon as possible by the guard after he/she has you in custody. If you pull a knife or a gun or other deadly weapon in resisting a legal priv person’s arrest you can legally be subject to deadly force by a guard acting in self defense, so long as the level of force by the guard is reasonable given the totality of the circumstances .
Guards can also legally arrest people for any other misdemeanor or felony violations of the CA Penal Code, Health and Safety Code, Business and Professions Code, etc., though for obvious legal reasons it’s always best to be conservative and confine your private person’s arrests to common or obvious violations after you have “Reasonable Cause” (a set of facts leading a reasonable person to believe that a crime had been committed). Unlike peace officers, security guards don’t serve warrants and usually they don’t write tickets for infractions or misdemeanors, although Trolley Security has apparently been given this authority by the city of San Diego
In the case of Trolley Security, IF the city/county of San Diego (or the state of CA) has a law indicating you can’t smoke by the tracks (maybe so, by law you can’t smoke in or close to CA public buildings) then the guards were justified in asking the guy to put out the cig or leave the area. IF he didn’t put it out and stayed, they could arrest him for trespassing. Same goes for the guy taking pics…IF there was a law saying you can’t take pics at the train station (or you can’t take pic of security… not sure if there is; might be for anti-terrorism reasons; ask the San Diego PD).
As for the CEO who “apologized” …who knows; perhaps just to avoid a lawsuit?
I work as a contract guard for the federal government and I can tell you this with absolute certainty: it’s illegal to take pics on federal property without proper authorization, and you can be held for this if the guard has reasonable cause. Again, anti-terrorism measures!
It’s amazing how ignorant people are of priv security laws in CA – how many people have I heard screaming “what are you doing, you aren’t allowed to touch me…” as I slipped the cuffs on them during a good solid priv person’s arrest? Once a guy punched me in the mouth and even though all I got was a fat lip, he was sentenced to 4 years “Wants and Warrants,” which, if I remember correctly, the D.A.’s office explained the guy’s apartment could be searched day or night without warrants, he couldn’t get in any more trouble, had to surrender any guns, and couldn’t contact me, all for 4 years. Jellin’ like a felon, for 4 years, for punching a guard in the mouth.
Private security is the new cost-effective wave in the CJ system. Budget-stressed cities everywhere are hiring private security companies to augment their police departments, since it often costs around the same to run four armed security guards as it does to run one police officer for any given 8 hour shift.
Hey, it’s your taxes.
23 A san diegan who does not approve of a police state // Mar 2, 2010 at 11:44 AM
take your kudos and shove em up your mufukin asz
24 A san diegan who does not approve of a police state // Mar 2, 2010 at 11:51 AM
People, wake up! this is only the beginning.
Dont anyone attempt to justify or rationalize this incident. Every American who reads this should be outraged. If you are not angered by this type of goings on, you are not only next on the “to be abused” list, you shall deserve it.
This behavior is the norm for officered people,
not only the norm but encouraged. DO NOT DOUBT MY WORDS.
25 Cam // Mar 2, 2010 at 12:04 PM
“I can tell you this with absolute certainty: it’s illegal to take pics on federal property without proper authorization, and you can be held for this if the guard has reasonable cause. Again, anti-terrorism measures!”
I can tell you this with absolute certainty – you are wrong. You’re the epitome of a “rent-a-cop” – a little bit of power and no knowledge.
26 A san diegan who does not approve of a police state // Mar 2, 2010 at 1:23 PM
He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from opposition; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach himself. ~ Thomas Paine
27 CA Sec Guard // Mar 30, 2010 at 11:16 PM
See http://www.gsa.gov/portal/gsa/
GSA PROPERTY REGULATIONS
SUBCHAPTER C—REAL PROPERTY
Part 102-74—Facility Management
Photographs for News, Advertising or Commercial Purposes
§102-74.420—What is the policy concerning photographs for news, advertising or commercial purposes?
Except where security regulations, rules, orders, or directives apply or a Federal court order or rule prohibits it, persons entering in or on Federal property may take photographs of—
(a) Space occupied by a tenant agency for non-commercial purposes only with the permission of the occupying agency concerned;
(b) Space occupied by a tenant agency for commercial purposes only with written permission of an authorized official of the occupying agency concerned; and
(c) Building entrances, lobbies, foyers, corridors, or auditoriums for news purposes.
So, if you are a News, Advertising or Commercial Photographer [not an amateur], you must first have written or at least verbal permission from the occupying agency and/or the authorized official of the occupying agency concerned (normally you would politely contact the GSA Property Manager and ask him or her), unless you are a News Photographer (with Press I.D.) shooting pics of building entrances, lobbies, foyers, corridors, or auditoriums for news purposes (i.e., general back-rounds for stories).
If they say no, it is what it is.
Permission may be automatically denied if security regulations, rules, orders or directives or Federal Court Orders apply: obviously, a place like Area 51 or Top Gun in Tonopah might have pre-eminent and over-riding security regulations that are not negotiable, vs. the local SSA Field Office.
The bottom line is ask the official property authority first, or you will find yourself detained, maybe sitting in handcuffs, waiting for the Federal Police or other LEO’s to show up and decide what to do with you…
If you don’t like the federal law, then change it – I’m just doing my job; if the law is amended or deleted then it’s not a problem with me.
28 CA Sec Guard // Mar 30, 2010 at 11:36 PM
If he was in violation of the Metro Ordinance you described and refused to stop smoking, then they could arrest him for for trespassing, or as you said, for failure to provide i.d. to one of the unarmed Heritage Citation Officers (they actually have unarmed officers who are authorized by the City of San Diego to write citations). If he physically resisted he’s in even worse shape (assault Ca Penal Code 240 and/or battery Ca Penal Code 242 might apply).
The more interesting question is “is it against the law to photograph or video the Trolley, it’s infrastructure, or the Trolley Security Officers themselves?” (probably no, in which case the S/O’s were wrong in the secondary incident of the photographer).
29 CA Sec Guard // Mar 30, 2010 at 11:46 PM
Wrong. A private person can arrest for a felony or MISDEMEANOR, if either offense is committed in their presence (a public offense is either a misdemeanor or a felony committed in your presence…the private person can also arrest someone for a felony not committed in their presence.
In general, Trespassing (Penal Code 602) is the most common misdemeanor a CA security guard (who is a private person) will end up arresting soemone for.
30 CA Sec Guard // Mar 30, 2010 at 11:51 PM
In CA any private person has the power to arrest another for a misdemeanor or felony commited in their presence, or for a felony not in their presence, providing probable cause exists (CA PC 837)
31 Michaelk42 // Mar 31, 2010 at 7:06 AM
Jeremy Clarkson on Security Guards
Nice essay:
Of course, we know why he’s really there. He’s really there so that if the bridge is destroyed by terrorists, the authorities can appear on the television news and say they had taken all possible precautions. Plus, if you employ a security guard, then I should imagine that your insurance premiums are going to be significantly lower.
This is probably why so many companies use security guards these days. It must be, because when it comes to preventing a crime, they are pretty much useless. No, really. If you are planning a heist, job one on the list of things to do is “take out the guard”. He is therefore not an impenetrable wall of steel; he’s just a nuisance.
And he’s not just a nuisance to the people planning to hit him on the head. He’s also a nuisance to the thousands of people who legitimately wish to enter or leave the building he’s supposed to be guarding.
At the office where I work, everyone is issued with laminated photo-ID cards that open all the barriers and doors. It is quite impossible to make any sort of progress unless you have such a thing about your person. But even so, every barrier and door is also guarded by a chap who, in a fight, would struggle to beat Christopher Robin. One looks like his heart would give out if you said “boo.” Another has a face that’s so grey that, in some lights, he appears to be slightly lilac. I cannot for the life of me work out what these people are supposed to achieve, apart from making the lives of normal people a little bit more difficult.
http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2010/03/jeremy_clarkson.html
Michaelk42´s last blog ..Better a Bike Pirate
32 ken pearce // Apr 25, 2010 at 12:34 PM
I have an ongoing trial, wherein I have pleaded NOT guilty to a MTS ticket from an incident on 04/03/2010, on the trolley platform in the El Cajon Station, in the late afternoon, between 5:00 an 6:00 pm . If anyone reading these messages witnessed the incident wherein a group of trolley officers surrounded an aged man with a write hat and grey beard and rendered him unconscious, necessitating the need for an EMT to transport him to a local hospital. Please contact me at kennpear@live.com if you have any information or would like to pursue a class action suit.
33 Rusty Carr // Apr 25, 2010 at 1:42 PM
Somebody help me out here. Is it required by law in CA that one show ID to an LEO or security guard? It was my understanding that no such law existed in this state.
Leave a Comment