Maryland State P.O.'s Misconduct Raises Important question

[puma guy]

A Harford County Circuit Court judge Monday dismissed wiretapping charges against Anthony Graber, a motorcyclist who was jailed briefly after he taped a Maryland state trooper who stopped him for speeding on I-95. Graber used a camera mounted on his helmet, then posted the video on YouTube.

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/story-la ... ed_ag.html

Dangit! Does this mean I have to root for the ACLU?

To me, and ACLU and the NRA are similar, in that, While I do not support every single thing they do, and I actually vehemently oppose somethings on rare occasion, I support them and their existence overall.
For example, I disagree with their view on Capital punishment and some of their actions regarding 'Racial Justice', but completely back their views on Free Speech, Religous Freedom, National Security, and Technology and Liberty.

IMO, Without them, we would have some much more serious problems than we do now.

Actually I agree with you. They have provided representation for a lot of issues I agree with.

[The Annoyed Man]

"Those of us who are public officials and are entrusted with the power of the state are ultimately accountable to the public. When we exercise that power in public fora, we should not expect our actions to be shielded from public observation. 'Sed quis custodiet ipsos cutodes' ("Who watches the watchmen?”)."

Can we send this judge a gift basket or something?

This Statement is just pure excellence. I'm glad that there are still some Judges out there that understand this!

On page on of this thread, I wrote:

Why on earth should there be a law against recording the actions of people on my payroll, doing what I pay them to do? That's just wrong.

Apparently, the judge agrees with me.

I understand that there may be some LEOs that don't like it, but then those that don't probably don't like dash-cams either. The way I see it, a citizen recording of a police action can have exactly the same effect as a dash-cam in that it can be either supportive or damning, depending on the legitimacy of the LEO's actions in question. If a cop is doing a good job, and doing everything right, then the camera will protect him/her when the person being investigated starts shouting accusations of racism, or police brutality, or whatever. OTH, if a cop has something to hide, then the camera will help to make sure that he/she finds employment in some other venue more congenial to their lack of integrity. Cops are as human as the rest of us, but their job requires a high standard of integrity, and the consequences of its lack - both to themselves, other officers, and citizens - can be potentially devastating. Cameras help ensure accountability.

[philip964]

Thank goodness a judge has ruled the videotaping of the police in a public place is not illegal. Especially in this instance since the motorcyclist wasn't specifically videotaping the police, he was just videotaping everything.

Why did the police arrest him for this in the first place and why did a DA even try to bring it to court. Seems they think this is a different county.

The right to photograph things seems to be increasingly restricted by overly zealous people in authority.

Always bothers me when I am on the side of the ACLU. Seems to be a lot of that at the moment.

[dicion]

The right to photograph things seems to be increasingly restricted by overly zealous people in authority.

Amazing, isn't it? They don't want to be recorded or watched themselves, but in the same breath, they'll say that they need to be able to snoop on everyone else's Telephone calls, internet access, GPS Track their cars, etc without a warrant for 'National Security'