NH Man Arrested for Videotaping Police 1232
macinrack writes to mention a story about a New Hampshire man who was arrested for videotaping police on his doorstep, using a fairly standard security camera system. He was officially charged with 'two felony counts of violating state eavesdropping and wiretap law by using an electronic device.' From the article: "The security cameras record sound and audio directly to a videocassette recorder inside the house, and the Gannons posted warnings about the system, Janet Gannon said. On Tuesday night, Michael Gannon brought a videocassette to the police department, and asked to speak with someone in 'public relations,' his wife said and police reported. Gannon wanted to lodge a complaint against Karlis, who had come to the family's house while investigating their sons, Janet Gannon said. She said Karlis showed up late at night, was rude, and refused to leave when they asked him."
Re:Solution: A $5 Sign? (Score:5, Informative)
Unlawful to record your home? (Score:5, Informative)
"The laws of 13 states expressly prohibit the unauthorized installation or use of cameras in private places. In Alabama, Arkansas, California, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Kansas, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, New Hampshire , South Dakota, and Utah, installation or use of any device for photographing, observing or overhearing events or sounds in a private place without permission of the people photographed or observed is against the law. A private place is one where a person may reasonably expect to be safe from unauthorized surveillance. Alabama, Delaware, Georgia, Hawaii, Kansas, Maine, Michagin, Minnesota, South Dakota, and Utah also prohibit trespassing on private property to conduct surveillance of people there. In most of these states, unauthorized installation or use of hidden cameras is a felony, punishable by a 2000.00 fine and up to 2 years in prison."
Odd. bolding and italics are mine.New Hampshire Wiretap laws (Score:3, Informative)
Slow news day (Score:5, Informative)
As for the why, this article seems a little short on details. But one thing I've heard several times (though it's totally hearsay and it probably varies from state to state anyway) is that it is illegal to record both video and audio without prior consent. Most of the surveillance cameras you see in stores and the like only record video.
Similarly, it's illegal to record a telephone conversation without telling all parties on the line that it's being recorded. I think that's federal law.
In other words, yeah the cops probably had a right to arrest the guy. Did the cops it done as a form of harrassment? Yeah, probably. Well knock me over with a feather. Cops, harrassing people? Never!
Re:Ugh! (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Solution: A $5 Sign? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:This is absurd on so many levels (Score:3, Informative)
You're thinking of the FreeState Project [freestateproject.org]. It was initially supposed to be Vermont, but New Hampshire Won out in the end [freestateproject.org].
--Triv
Re:Unlawful to record your home? (Score:1, Informative)
Re:This is absurd on so many levels (Score:5, Informative)
Not only was this guy arrested, but the police tresspassed on his property and kicked his wife out for 5 hours while they tried to get a search warrant -- even though they were effectively already illegally searching the place!
Number one rule - never let the police in your house unless they have a search warrant. Never. No matter what. Step out on your porch to talk to them. Or on the driveway. Or sidewalk. And really, don't talk to them without a lawyer present unless YOU called them to report a crime.
This sounds paranoid, but the police are no longer the friends of the honest citizen - they view EVERYONE as a criminal these days.
flex your rights (Score:3, Informative)
In that vein, here's something [flexyourrights.org] a friend pointed me to just today.
Re:Solution: A $5 Sign? (Score:5, Informative)
No, no it wouldn't.
That's because, while it's legal to videotape people on your property where a sign is posted, or in any public place where they have no expectation of privacy (like out in front of your house) it's illegal to audiotape them without their express consent.
Nashua Police Contact Information (Score:5, Informative)
Conley, Donald, Deputy Chief Executive Officer
603-594-3500
Hefferan, Timothy, Chief of Police
603-594-3600
Re:Ask the President (Score:2, Informative)
Madison -- the father of the bill of rights argued against them on the grounds they weren't needed because the federal government didn't have the right to make laws breaking those things anyway. Our consitution explicitly denies the president all powers and then grants him specific ones.
It's not the other way around. Just because they feel like they can write a bill on whatever they want doesn't mean they have the right to.
Re:Ask the President (Score:1, Informative)
"Innocent until proven guilty" applies to people, not to laws.
duh! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:This is absurd on so many levels (Score:5, Informative)
Keep in mind:
Check out the grief we gave to the cops on a past case where they misbehaved here [google.com], or see our fight against the National ID here [google.com]
Re:Slow news day (Score:3, Informative)
It's not federal law. Wiretapping statutes vary on a state-by-state basis. If the taping occurs in Virginia, for example, only one party needs to know and consent. However if the taping occurs in Maryland, all parties must give consent.
Re:Solution: A $5 Sign? (Score:2, Informative)
Maybe where you live. Where I live (Florida) it's legal to record video without ANY warning whatsoever. Recording audio requires notification, but a notice posted on the door is sufficient.
Re:Ugh! (Score:3, Informative)
But this isn't the government, this is the police.
The police aren't accountable to you.
They're accountable to their boss.
In simplified terms:
Police --> Bosses --> Chief of Police (&/or Commissioner) --> Mayor
Some places elect the Chief of Police, in other places the Mayor or a commission appoints them. Either way, a problem with the police has to be escalated through several layers before you deal with anyone publicly accountable.
Well... (Score:3, Informative)
First, the definitions as listed in the law.
As early as the definitions section, it is quite apparent that 570-A is to be applied specifically to State, County, or City employees (i.e. Peace officers), or to persons involved in any business venture. The reasoning behind the law is so that the state, county, or local government cannot just start posting surveillence on their citizenry KGB-style. Same thing goes for business owners.
Given the definitions listed within this law, and considering the fact that not once does the law prohibit the citizenry from placing their own private property (non-business) under surveillence, the defendant has nothing to be afraid of. At this point, without reviewing pertinent case law, it would be quite obvious that the defendant has nothing to fear.
Of course, this could be slightly different when I finish checking all applicable court decisions. Updates will follow soon.
Re:Problem (Score:5, Informative)
http://cbs4.com/topstories/local_story_033170755.
Out of 38 police departments, he was able to obtain complaint forms from THREE departments. On officer ran him out the office and actually threatened him by putting his hand to his gun.
Nowadays, I wouldn't call the police to ever settle a dispute.
Re:sigh (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Ugh! (Score:2, Informative)
Re:This is absurd on so many levels (Score:5, Informative)
I signed up for the Free State Project too. You're leaving a few things out.
New Hampshire is a beautiful state, and parts of the state are within commuting distance of Boston, allowing a few decent opportunities. It's a lot better than Montana or Wyoming, two other states that were highly popular in the voting. I was optimistic about the FSP, but if we don't reach 20,000, we are never going to get anything done. And we aren't gonna reach 20,000 anytime soon.
Re:sigh (Score:3, Informative)
yeah, ok. now which way to canada?
We welcome you to the country where home doors are opened, police officers are polite, and we don't need cameras to check our private parking spot. Click here to sign in! [cic.gc.ca]
Re:Clarification (Score:3, Informative)
NH Statute 644:9 (Score:4, Informative)
NH is a two-party consent state, for recordings (Score:2, Informative)
WIRETAPPING AND EAVESDROPPING at http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/lviii/57
Not the First Time (Score:1, Informative)
article [dailyillini.com]
Re:This is absurd on so many levels (Score:4, Informative)
That's why in NH we don't have laws that require you to wear your seat belt, wear a motorcycle helmet, or wear your mittens. You want to be treated as an infant ward of the State? Go live somewhere else. You want to be treated like an adult, and take responsibility for your own choices? Come to New Hampshire. Simple.
I called the Nashua Police (Score:3, Informative)
I asked if they had been contacted by the ACLU yet, at which point the officer hung up on me.
They are a corrupt bunch of bastards. A guy installs a security camera on his property because of crime. A camera readily perchased from Walmart. Because he excersizes his rights to require a warrent and not just let them in, and has evidence that they were abusive to him, they loosely interpret a statute intended to protect the privacy of electronic communications to include home security.
Bastards!!! Fucking bastards. What happened to the constitution? Jesus fucking christ, will someone step up and stop this shit?
The Nazi's would have loved police like this.
Re:sigh (Score:3, Informative)
It's called a DWB - Driving While Black (or Brown).
Hell, many years ago I was pulled over for driving a POS car in a affluent suburb.
That being said there are a lot of fine people serving as police in many parts of the country. There are also a awful lot of corrupt, mean, racist assholes out there. Depends on where you are.
If you think either one doesn't exist. You are mistaken.
Re:sigh (Score:4, Informative)
Re:I called the Nashua Police (Score:1, Informative)
Links to the law (Score:1, Informative)
There is the law (NH RSA A:2) cited in the police report.
It is pretty broad, making any interception of "oral communications" without the consent of all parties illegal. There are a few exceptions, but mostly just for telco employees and police officers. Dashcams are excepted.
There are no exceptions for home security installations.
I do understand the need to prevent rampant recording of oral communications without consent, but there has to be exceptions allowing people to protect themselves in their own homes. Especially from police harassment. Otherwise what is to stop the development of a police state?
"Live free or die", eh? Well, looks like a lot of NH residents are probably on a collision course with death.
To add to that (Score:3, Informative)
The guy had signs posted. I wouldn't reasonably expect to be "safe" from surveillance in a place where there were actually signs stating surveillance was used...
Re:We should all be thanking W...... (Score:2, Informative)
Yes, it can get worse - "President Ann Coulter".
Re:sigh (Score:4, Informative)
Go re-read the 4th amendment. Then explain to me why an armed official should expect to be allowed to enter and remain in my home without a warrant and without my consent. If I invite that official in, that's one thing. If I do not, then that's quite another. And your right to expect cooperation in the pursuit of an investigation does not extend to violating the Constitution. If it did, then there would be no need for things like warrants. You could just demand any cooperation you want, and proceed to punish anyone who refused it.
Standing on my rights is not obstruction of justice. Furthermore if I do so and you disregard my rights, I would hope that the judge would come down on my side.
Yes it becomes a game. And of course the people who insist on those rights are usually people with something to hide whom you (and I) have every reason to dislike. But as a private citizen I absolutely want those rights to be maintained, because eroding them is the path that leads from democracy to fascism.
ObDisclaimer: The only crime I have never personally been charged with is a parking ticket. But I did serve on a jury that ruled a defendant not guilty. I'm sure that the police officers involved wound up cursing us. But when your only eyewitness (the victim) is severely drunk and has poor eyesight, make the guy you found 20 minutes later on a busy street be close to the physical description!
If police treat people like assholes ... (Score:3, Informative)
If police treat people like assholes, then you can expect people to return the favor. If cops behave incompetent, they deserve the verbal abuse they get.
About 20 years ago, a friend of mine was visiting a nearby town. Maybe he was in the wrong place at the wrong time, but he was pounced on in a convenience store by 3 local cops, causing him several small injuries. These 3 cops were abusive both verbally and physically. It wasn't quite a Rodney King level of beating, but it did require a visit to the hospital, which was denied him for several hours. His "crime"? He opened one of the soft drinks he was carrying while standing in a long line at the register. How do I know his story rings true? My friend IS a police officer. He was just off duty, out of jurisdiction, and not in uniform.
Police officers are (supposed to be) trained in dealing with abuse from the public, including physical abuse. Verbal abuse is something they are supposed to just shrug off as if it never happened. That I learned in a CJ class I took way back when I was in college. I wonder if it's still true.
I think it's pretty clear the tape showed an abusive officer. They saw it and they reacted to it on the spot. If the tape had shown a police officer doing exactly his duty and nothing more, why would there be such a reaction?
The police should have thanked Mr. Gannon for bringing it directly to them, and dealt with it as an internal matter. It was to their advantage that he went to them first instead of the local newspaper or TV station. Now, people will be watching the police and they will be taking their evidence not to the police department. The Nashua Police Department did all police officers throughout the country a major harm by this action. It's just plain disgusting.
Re:NH Statute 644:9 (Score:3, Informative)
"A person is guilty of a class A misdemeanor if such person unlawfully and without the consent of the persons entitled to privacy therein, installs or uses: ...
The police officer's are not entitled to privacy in this guy's front yard, since they (hopefully) wouldn't expose their genitalia there. So they don't have to give their consent, and it's not a misdemeanor.
Re:smoking kills everyone (Score:3, Informative)
From CNN [cnn.com]:
More than 126 million nonsmoking Americans are regularly exposed to someone else's tobacco smoke, and tens of thousands die each year as a result, concludes the 670-page study. It cites "overwhelming scientific evidence" that secondhand smoke causes heart disease, lung cancer and a list of other illnesses.
Of course, the US Surgeon General and overwealming scientific evidence are much less convincing about smoking dangers than joemawlma, so please listen to him.
Re:sigh (Score:3, Informative)
Re:sigh (Score:2, Informative)
So, even if you are EXTREMELY polite and VERY accommodating
Actually cops take classes in how to handle people, control the mood and environment, and abuse any accommodation offered. My buddy who was a cop suggesteded a minimum respect rule, don't go out of your way to be rude, but don't go out of your way to be polite either, and never ever offer anything - because they will abuse that and turn into permission to search your home/car/person/bags. He also said cops will strongly imply that they have powers and rights that they do not have. He told stories all the time about people who allowed themselves to be browbeat or tricked into letting cops search their property when they didn't have to.
Don't be a trash talking moron, but don't expect the cops to ever treat you as anything but an enemy.
Re:sigh (Score:3, Informative)
Also, the courts have ruled that citizens have a First Amendment right to record the activities and speech of public officials in the performance of public duties. While this right does not extend into city council closed sessions, for example, it certainly extends to police interrogations conducted on a citizen's front porch.
Mr. Gannon will not only escape these charges, he will get a large cash settlement from the police department.