posted on Feb, 6 2012 @ 05:08 PM
Really, where is the violation of law? "Clearly breaks some laws?" Why do you think that?
The source talks about New York Code Section 700.15. I assume they mean Criminal Procedure Law 700.15, as there is no NY Code section 700.15.
True, 700.15 requires warrants for video surveillance. But the author of the source article is misleading you (I think intentionally) because just a
few lines above 700.15 is this:
9. "Video surveillance" means the intentional visual observation by law enforcement of a person by means of a television camera or other electronic
device that is part of a television transmitting apparatus, whether or not such observation is recorded on film or video tape, without the consent of
that person or another person thereat and under circumstances in which such observation in the absence of a video surveillance warrant infringes
upon such person`s reasonable expectation of privacy under the constitution of this state or of the United States.
What this means is, that if the person has no reasonable expectation of privacy (say they're walking outdoors), then filming them is not "video
surveillance" under the law and doesn't need a warrant. You can argue that it's not a good use of the city's money, But there's been no reason
presented to declare it illegal. Nor is it
breathtaking in its blatant disregard for privacy rights.
what right does wall street have
to monitor people not on their property?
What right do protester's have to film police who aren't on the protester's property? Of course
Wall Street, and anyone else, has the right to film people wandering about outside.
A lot of shock value to the source article, but not much new or helpful.