Calzone
Gear Whore #1
Pretty easy to take the side of the photographer if you have been hassled and abused by New York City cops first hand several times.
Cal
Murchu
Well-known
Or being struck in the face by the officer, as per the photographers, as per the link in the initial post. Would agree, a lot of 'he say, she says', until the facts are corroborated.
MartinP
Mentor
That rather minimal announcement was directly the result of a legal action which was lost by the police force involved. There was no voluntary recognition of the law by the police force, no large scale awareness training of officers etc.etc. I am much too cynical and would watch what is done, not what is said - except, of course, I don't live there so I won't be watching anything.
According to the OP's linked article, the guy in New York wasn't a NYT employee. Will they take any expensive action on his behalf? By the time of his court-case in November most people will have forgotten the incident.
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
With professionalism and composure, I'd hope -- the minimal standard for an officer of the law.
loquax ludens
Well-known
Has video evidence turned up, or have eyewitnesses given reports? Until then, it is only the cops word that he was struck in the face with the camera. It might have been accidental, or the result of the cops own actions, or it might not have happened at all. Cops have been found to lie on reports before. It probably happens far more often than you imagine. So why would you believe the cops report without evidence to back it up?
or anyone elses for that matter then...
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
Indeed.
While this is out of context with respect to its original intent, the following statement is more salient today than probably ever before:
"...When it comes to this I should prefer emigrating to some country where they make no pretence of loving liberty -- to Russia, for instance, where despotism can be taken pure, and without the base alloy of hypocracy [sic]." Abraham Lincoln. 1855.
Phil Forrest
loquax ludens
Well-known
Griffin
Grampa's cameras user
Yup, that's my point!
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
Here's something on the Dept. of Justice's position on the matter:
http://www.pdnonline.com/news/Department-of-Justic-5735.shtml
http://www.pdnonline.com/news/Department-of-Justic-5735.shtml
dave lackey
Mentor
Whew! For a moment there, I though Helen got arrested this time!
Then, I realized it is King Bloomberg's troops doing something goofy again. Leave it to the King to ban large soft drinks and banning baby forumla because he wants more breast-feeding.
And I suspect he is not having photogs arrested because he is openly promoting a private human act, breast-feeding. He probably doesn't want anyone recording more arrests of photogs who are photographing the action of troops in the street.
NYC... Interesting, but keep Bloomberg up there.
loquax ludens
Well-known
You don't support your point by presuming that the cop's position is true, which was the basis of your comment.
Griffin
Grampa's cameras user
Sorry for the misunderstanding here. I don't presume the cop is right, nor do I presume the photog was unjustly treated. I just wanted to point out how everyone seems to automatically pick the side of the photog based on a short news article.
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
It seems to me that the NYPD should, of all police departments, be setting a positive example for all the rest--not a negative one!
Rogier
Rogier Willems
We need to send photographers with witnesses (video camera's with long lensed / hidden mikes etc) to bring evidence to this police misconduct.
Set traps to put these bullies straight.
Set traps to put these bullies straight.
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
Yes, yes, a thousand times yes.
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
-NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg
BlackXList
Well-known
I'm certainly more inclined to believe the photographer than the cop, based on my own experiences with the police in the UK whilst carrying a camera (and sometimes taking photos). I know for one thing that I've never been struck in the face by a photographer, but I can't say the same for the police, so my immediate response is to take the photographer's side. (Plus the Police in the UK don't exactly have the best safety record, or a record of being remotely accountable for their actions)
As far as journalists having more rights, on paper they don't and shouldn't, having been through the police complaints procedure here in the UK it's very obvious that it's easy for the police to say "no action will be taken" to an individual, but much more difficult to say that to a publication like the NY times who can force the issue onto a much larger scale.
It's not an issue of "more rights", it's simply the fact that the NYT can make a public issue of it if they feel like, and therefore it's harder to palm them off with an unsatisfactory response.
It does say that there was a video taken of the event, by a reporter who was with the photographer, hopefully this will make it harder for the police to brush the issue off. Although sadly that's not always the case
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
Like I said I based my opinion on first hand experience with the NYC police. This is why I kind of believe the photographer.
Cal
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
I say the NYPD is likely the best police force in the world and because of that I likely live in the safest major city in the world, but this does not discount some abuse of power and bullying that exists.
There was some video of a group of passive protestors that were coraled behind orange plastic snow netting. The protestors were seated on the street and practicing passive resistance, and one cop proceeds to pepper spray them. I wonder how this was resolved or justified.
Cal