Photography is Not a Crime, It's a First Amendment Right

On 2009-04-01 08:04:06 -0700, tony cooper said:

On Wed, 1 Apr 2009 07:32:35 -0700, C J Campbell
wrote:


My thoughts as well. You do not enforce the law by destroying evidence.
Further, any lawyer representing the photographer is going to point out
that the cop was obviously attempting to destroy evidence that he was
committing a crime.

If his actions were not police brutality, then he should have welcomed
the photos, not destroyed them.

You say "his actions". I understand that you don't have the complete
story (because I don't have it to relate), but what indication do you
have that he was involved in the arrest action at all?

After all, you are the person who pointed out that he would *not* be
part of the arrest team. He, according you, would be restricted to
being an observer of the arrest.

No, actually, I am not that person.


His reaction was allegedly based on not wanting the undercover drug
task force team's photographs available for distribution in the drug
community. Photographs would capture the faces of the observers as
well as the officers directly involved in the arrest actions.

A photograph someone 'observing' the arrest would be no different than
any other bystander. You are really grasping at straws here.


Your statement is akin to "If you were not beating your wife, you've
done nothing wrong". It plants the idea that the person is considered
one who would be violent.

? I don't get this at all. You are raving here.


The kangaroo is the elephant in the room.

And now you have crossed over into madness.

--
Waddling Eagle
World Famous Flight Instructor