So, he did manage to recover the whole video but I admit to some skepticism as to his narration of it. From the video it looks to me like he just got a little too bold with his camera. There really didnt seem to be any protestors around, but the couple other photographers who were there were all basically being ignored as long as they stayed a few yards away from the line. The cops looked like they were staging a drill more than carrying out a dispersal order on a group of people, as there was no longer a group of people. So they pushed up a block. stopped, met with another group of cops, then formed a queue and started to walk back down the block. The photographer then immediately started back down with them. He was ignored as he started, then about 15 yards in, that officer stopped him, and you can hear the muffled, 'oh i was just going back to my car.' but he wasnt, he was just continuing to film the cops.
I'm of two minds about this. on the one hand, he was kindof obviously tempting fate. the cops had just 'cleared' the block, and he immediately tried to walk back up it. if he was really 'just heading back to his car to leave because everything was over,' it certainly didnt look like it. On the other hand, all of the other cops were ignoring him. at a couple points, he seemed to be in the midst of the line without any of them telling him to clear off. Going from totally ignoring him to arresting him and saying he'd been warned seems like bullshit. even if his claim that he was walking back to his car was bullshit, and i think it was rather a poor justification, zero to arrest seems over the top. 'Oh, your car is back there? well, you'll have to wait here until we've cleared the area' seems like a more rational first response than 'you're under arrest.'
As to the above discussion of whether one can or should refuse to do what the police tell you, well, even the ACLU will tell you that police misconduct cannot be challenged on the street. So, if, in the course of enforcing an eviction the police issue a dispersal order, yes you have to obey them. I think this discussion went off the rails a bit with hypotheticals, so try to keep in mind what was actually happening here. The police were evicting an Occupy camp. whatever you think about this, it was a court order. Unlike evicting a single family from a home, they cant just show up and change the locks. They really do have to cause everyone to physically leave the area. It would be rather silly if the occupy folk all just went across the street and got a cup of coffee and waited till the cops left. watch the video. its not like he was arrested because he was filming the cops breaking someone's rights. The police had to clear the area, and he was walking right back into it not 5 seconds after they cleared it. which was pretty stupid.
I, too, am concerned that they erased the video of the arrest. Because while the arrest itself seems valid as for cause (taking all the given context and video at face value) the manner in which it was conducted was less than above board. While the off-camera voice instructing the photographer to let go can probably be forgiven - as there was quite a clutch of officers surrounding him, and wearing the cameras might have easily appeared to be holding on to the camera - the first cop, smiling creepily and saying 'we dont want to have to hurt you' while the photographer seems to be standing perfectly still in the middle of a scrum of cops, cannot. That is wildly inappropriate behavior, outside what was necessary to accomplish the arrest, and, when it comes down to it, assault. If a cop menacing you while you are peacefully accepting arrest by saying 'we dont want to hurt you' in response to no provocation whatsoever doenst put one in fear of immanent bodily harm, i dont know what would. And the video would be evidence of this. That the police would take advantage of their custody of his equipment to erase possible evidence that might be used against them is, if not shocking, then at least offensive.