It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

policeman fights for his right to photograph naked women posing as vampires, nymphs and mermaids

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 06:47 PM
link   


In most jobs, an employee having a photography pastime outside work would not be an issue.

But it seems problems arise if you're a policeman with a penchant for photographing naked women posing provocatively as mermaids and witches.

A San Francisco policeman has filed a federal civil rights lawsuit arguing he was wrongly suspended after his sideline in passionate photography was revealed.

For full effect, the models' bare bodies are often painted otherworldly colours and any costumes are minimal.

Hansen's photographs would undoubtedly raise eyebrows – even a few heartbeats – if passed round the police station.

But Hansen argues that moonlighting as a photographer has no connection with his job as a serving officer.

Earlier this month, the amateur photographer filed the federal civil rights suit against the city, saying he was wrongfully suspended twice because of his hobby.

In January, Hansen served a 10-day suspension following an internal investigation which was launched when the officer was caught trespassing in March 2010.

Specifically, he was found by officers in an abandoned hotel taking photos of two models, who were posing as ghosts.

An investigation was launched as to whether Hansen’s sideline work violated the mission of the SFPD.

The suit, filed in U.S. District Court in Oakland on August 9, said the police department suspended Hansen twice, in 2009 and 2010.

The officer was suspended from his duties for five days in 2009 after an investigation was sparked by his artwork, the suit claims.

Hansen says that he was then given ‘punishment assignments’ at work, such as transporting inmates to jail.

According to the suit Hansen, a police officer of seven years who is now working as a patrol officer, has been a photographer for 20 years.

He practices genres known as creative photography and figure study, the suit says.

Hansen argues that his work is art not porn and believes it brings no discredit to the SFPD.

‘I believe that the work I make is beautiful and interesting […] It seems like creating art is a benefit to the department,' he told Slate.

One site maintained by Hansen and his wife, warns viewers to proceed with caution.

‘This site contains nudity presented in artistic form. If you are offended by this or are in a location where viewing this is not allowed then please do not continue. Otherwise welcome and enjoy,' reads the homepage.

Hansen’s suit is seeking an unspecified amount of damages and he is refraining from his controversial hobby while the case continues.



click

This seems a bit over the top to me. I mean on one hand its a bit funny that a officer is having his freedoms abused but on the same token I want to applaud the guy for sticking to his guns on this. I dont believe it is right to impede on the freedoms of anyone. Even if it is the oppressor. On top of that I like his "ART"...

Im going to have to bolt for a couple hours after posting this sorry.




posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 07:04 PM
link   
reply to post by lobotomizemecapin
 


Was he on duty? Nuff said.......



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 08:48 PM
link   
If he was on duty I could see the problem. But if he's off duty there should be no problem. The Supreme Court ahs ruled that when in public there is no right to privacy.

I think they're concerned about potential lawsuits regarding potential violations of privacy and the negative comments he would receive.

As for me I have no problem with It. I like that kind of art and have done some sketches of my own.



posted on Aug, 26 2012 @ 09:32 PM
link   
reply to post by EvilSadamClone
 


well the start of this all was that he was caught in an abandoned hotel doing a photo shoot and was trespassing technically but from what I understand he is still being punished for continuing his hobby.



posted on Aug, 27 2012 @ 04:34 AM
link   
reply to post by lobotomizemecapin
 


In that case if he was trespassing then I'd say hold him responsible for his actions.



posted on Aug, 27 2012 @ 06:21 PM
link   
reply to post by EvilSadamClone
 


That was the first incident in which they found out he had this hobby. To this day though he is still being harassed over his hobby.



posted on Aug, 27 2012 @ 07:35 PM
link   
This is the kind of thing that makes it so difficult for the U.S. to grow up as regards human sexuality. Our institutions are still mired in Victorian attitudes.



posted on Aug, 28 2012 @ 03:46 AM
link   
reply to post by lobotomizemecapin
 


I dont know abuot the u.s but in u.k law you are not tresspasing until you have been asked to leave.



posted on Aug, 28 2012 @ 04:00 AM
link   
reply to post by lobotomizemecapin
 


I expected to see graphic images of vaginas with vampire teeth (or bite marks), and stuff like that. This isn't the case, however. The images on that link are so mild as to be considered UN-arousing. The cop shouldn't be harassed because of these pics, but he should get a new hobby because the pictures he takes are not only UN-titilating, they aren't even Art-worthy.




top topics



 
5

log in

join