B.C. teen arrested for photographing mall takedown

page: 1
23
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 06:43 PM
link   

B.C. teen arrested for photographing mall takedown


www.cbc.ca

A B.C. teen who aspires to be a journalist says his rights were violated when he was set upon by security guards and then arrested by police after photographing an incident at Metrotown shopping mall in Burnaby, B.C.
(visit the link for the full news article)


Related News Links:
www.infowars.com
www.pakalertpress.com
www.dailypaul.com




posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 06:43 PM
link   
I am actually a little bit disturbed by this story basicy what happened to a teenager in British Colombia is that he was trying to photograph an arrest the kid who also aspires to become a journalist was taken to the ground and had his phone taken away

What do you make of this story were the police officers in the right?

www.cbc.ca
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 06:49 PM
link   
I don't know what rights the Canadian constitution guarantees him but in the United states his constitutional rights would have been violated. However, that hasn't stopped American authorities from doing the same thing; especially if it is to cover their butts.



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 06:50 PM
link   
This is really concerning and scary. This is not the first case of police in BC going after bystanders for taping. I'm going to be looking more into this story. Hopefully there will be a public outcry against them.


+10 more 
posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 06:55 PM
link   
I've had the same thing happen to me while taking photos in a public space.

I was riding around my neighborhood looking for a good photo of whatever and noticed the police, I didn't even take any pictures, I was just using my telephoto to see if I could figure out what was going on. One noticed me and started running over, I hadn't done anything wrong so I just stood there figuring he was coming to ask if I had seen something. But no, he runs over, rips me off my bike and throws me to the ground before even asking who I was then demanded that I delete my photos (even though I hadn't taken any).

It's instances like that why I despise most police officers, you give me a chance to cooperate and not act like a pretentious douchebag to me and I will more than likely cooperate peacefully. You run up, slam me to the ground and cuff me for absolutely no reason and you just perpetuate the "asshole-cop" image...

I hope things work out for the kid, no reason he should get that kind of attention from anyone for simply taking a photo.



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 06:56 PM
link   
Well now...I'd say it's pretty obvious he wasn't the ONLY one recording events. These days, what are the odds it's ever just one person they can see?

Notice to Bully boys, thugs and children in grown up police uniforms. We're watching... all the time and everywhere. They took the kid, but we see the photo to show, there were others. There always WILL be others. Everyone with a cell phone is a potential reporter in today's world, they need only choose to be.

So...they can keep violating people's rights, molesting the citizens of free nations and generally doing what thugs do. Making others suffer to feel better about their own pathetic existence...and we'll keep recording. We, being every one of us. The MILLIONS of us...who are completely and totally fed up. I hope they never forget, there is ALWAYS...SOMEONE...watching.
edit on 30-10-2012 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 07:01 PM
link   


Metrotown mall backs the actions of its security guards. “He didn't comply with the request of the security nor the RCMP, so they took appropriate action they deemed necessary to defuse the situation,” said Doug MacDougall, of Metrotown Properties. MacDougall said that Markiewicz was told that he couldn't take pictures inside the mall.


This is utterly ridiculous. I see camera phones all the time at Metrotown, I don't see those people being tackled.

Congratulations RCMP on making a future enemy. The kid wants to be a journalist and you've given him enough ammunition to dedicate the rest of his life to exposing your misdeeds, law breaking and overreactions.



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 07:01 PM
link   
Cops just got testy because any footage showing them using excessive force "looks bad for the department".
Whether they had the right to confiscate anything/ or arrest I'm not positive. There was talk of enforcing such a thing.
Pffft... give us the tools and toys to use for social media but take away our rights to use them.



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 07:06 PM
link   
reply to post by AccessDenied
 


I'm glad that one pig who pushed a disabled women down in East Vancouver is going to face the Human Rights Tribunal for his actions. It is sad but we need an independent commission to investigate our own police when they screw up. Even when they are caught 3 or 4 times breaking the same law they get lenient treatment.



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 07:29 PM
link   
Yeah this was happening in the US too and a couple of states tried to pass laws that you could not photograph the police but the courts finally ruled that you can photograph the police as long as you are not interfering with them in any way... So we have not heard of another incident since then that I am aware of... some one correct me if I am wrong?



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 07:32 PM
link   
The first rule of gonzo journalism is to always fly under the radar and never be obvious with video or photo recording.

Don't give the thugs a clue that you are recording them.

Stay out of harms way and use your zoom or hide your gear somehow to avoid being assaulted.

Great HD video cameras....

gopro.com...

and some phones shoot in HDasia.cnet.com...




edit on 30-10-2012 by olaru12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 07:48 PM
link   
I don't think its legal unless he was obstructing justice or interfering in some way. And they had better be conducting an investigation. He probably should look into suing.



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 08:26 PM
link   
reply to post by ninjas4321
 


As bad as it may seem, and while I feel it is BS that there are no photography rules, its not my property... Its private property. not a public place. I don't believe it was a violation.
I was just at my local mall on Sunday doing trick or treat with my kids(as Sandy canceled it in our neighborhood)
as I was waiting for the event to start, I was looking at the posted rules near the enterance.
One of the rules was that there be no photography without prior consent of the management.

Ignorance is not an excuse. If there are rules posted and you fail to read the rules, it does not change the fact that they are to be enforced.

ETA: just as I suspected...


I would like to film in the mall, how do I go about doing this?

News crews can gain access and approval to be on site by calling 604.438.4700. At no time can a camera crew film inside any stores or restaurants without prior consent from the store or restaurant manager. Requests by students/special projects will be evaluated on an individual basis. Please submit a written request: info@metropolisatmetrotown.com

www.metropolisatmetrotown.com...
edit on 30-10-2012 by kalisdad because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 08:34 PM
link   
blog.privacylawyer.ca...

interesting read if anyone is interested.

The police can not tell you to delete any photographic or video of them performing their duties in a public space.



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 08:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hijinx
blog.privacylawyer.ca...

interesting read if anyone is interested.

The police can not tell you to delete any photographic or video of them performing their duties in a public space.


1) its not public space, its private property
2) security guards are not police
3) the kid broke the rules about no photography that are posted on the official Metrotown website and most likely posted at the enterance to the building

again, not saying the kid should have been accosted or arrested, just saying he should have paid more attention to the rules.

this would be thrown out of court quite quickly IMO
edit on 30-10-2012 by kalisdad because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 11:29 PM
link   
The security guards are probably not allowed to use physical force to detain someone, which is why they got upset over the initial photo and overreacted. I see the two guards in uniform, but who is the dude in the jeans and tee shirt? What did the guy do that warranted him prone like that? I sure hope it wasn't petty shoplifting!



posted on Oct, 30 2012 @ 11:35 PM
link   
O.k. here ya go.

Instant upload of photos to prevent this type of thing. You can have the pic sharing website set up so the last pic you take gets uploaded as soon as you take it. This is easy to do. Instead of having to search for the pic you want, instruct the website to upload the last pic. The software would have to work with your camera to know what was the last pic.



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 04:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by kalisdad

Originally posted by Hijinx
blog.privacylawyer.ca...

interesting read if anyone is interested.

The police can not tell you to delete any photographic or video of them performing their duties in a public space.


1) its not public space, its private property
2) security guards are not police
3) the kid broke the rules about no photography that are posted on the official Metrotown website and most likely posted at the enterance to the building

again, not saying the kid should have been accosted or arrested, just saying he should have paid more attention to the rules.

this would be thrown out of court quite quickly IMO
edit on 30-10-2012 by kalisdad because: (no reason given)


A fuzzy grey area. A private property where public traffic flows freely and their own cameras are set up everywhere observing what we do. If it's a simple case of inadvertently being negligent of a posted "rule" the punishment seems overkill. IMHO



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 05:17 AM
link   
I would think that it is possible that the no picture rule would fail if it goes against constitutional or common law. It could be something like the warning in a skating rink that they are not liable for injuries. But if the rink operators are at fault either directly or by lack of action to prevent or correct a situation where an injury could occur they most certainly could be held responsible for an injury.

Just posting a sign does not make something true if it violates constitutional rights or existing law.



posted on Oct, 31 2012 @ 07:12 AM
link   
You see-

They dont want you to be able to back up your defense with evidence, but they sure as hell make sure they are willing to back up theirs.

If I see a cop getting beat up in the future- I wont take a picture or video.


You are wrong and they are right. Doesnt matter what you do....Then reality hits with a lawsuit filed.
(they have that covered too though- because they set aside money for corrupt police officers getting caught)-from what I read/was told.

They dont want you to think you have any power.






top topics



 
23
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join