It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
VALLEJO (CBS 5) — The Vallejo Police Department is under scrutiny after a man was handcuffed and cited for recording four people being arrested near his home. [...]
While Duchine was recording, Officer Scott Yates approached and asked for his cell phone, saying it was evidence. After Duchine refused, he was handcuffed and issued a ticket for obstructing justice. Video of the incident was then posted on YouTube.
Originally posted by logicalthinking
They would need a warrant to take your cell phone.
The next time you're in California, you might not want to bring your cell phone with you. The California Supreme Court ruled Monday that police can search the cell phone of a person who's been arrested -- including text messages -- without obtaining a warrant, and use that data as evidence.
The ruling opens up disturbing possibilities, such as broad, warrantless searches of e-mails, documents and contacts on smart phones, tablet computers, and perhaps even laptop computers, according to legal expert Mark Rasch.
Duchine turned his cell phone camera toward several police officers who were ordering four young people out of a white car. Suddenly, from the right of the frame on the video shot by Duchine, a Vallejo police officer is seen demanding his phone. "I'm going to take this phone because it's going to be evidence."
"The officer drove up and basically said he was taking my phone for evidence and I was like, well why?" said Duchine.
Rather than give it to the officer, he handed the phone to the friend who took it into the house. The officer then put Duchine in handcuffs.
"I don't think that he had probable cause to arrest me, but he did," he said.
Duchine was cited for interfering with a police officer in the performance of his duties and released. He never did give police his phone, but he did post the video on YouTube.
Originally posted by LargeFries
reply to post by Wildbob77
hi Wildbob77. i'm afraid i have to disagree with your statement:
"Legally speaking, the general rule for photographing police is this: it is perfectly legal to photograph on-duty police so long as the photographer doesn't interfere with police business."
I've read exceptions to this in news posted online. The reasoning used was there was undercover detectives inspecting a crime scene, and they did not want pictures posted which may compromise the undercovers identity. In that same article they also mentioned something about having respect for the victim and her family, which to me weakened their first claim.
Wildbob77 it seems to me the United States are only united by taxes and a flag. In most all other respects TPTB try to keep the States divided and conquered, making things much more difficult for the common man. We are all upheld to keeping the law; ignorance of the law is no excuse, but there is no handy guidebook telling us what is illegal!