oregon man arrested for filming police raid

Discussion in 'Legal & Political Archive' started by Mbeef61, Sep 8, 2014.

  1. Mbeef61

    Mbeef61
    SW PDX
    Active Member

    Messages:
    120
    Likes Received:
    77
    forefathersrback likes this.
  2. IronMonster

    IronMonster
    Free Idaho!
    Opinionated Member Lifetime Supporter

    Messages:
    4,844
    Likes Received:
    8,911
    I just saw that on another site, Going to jail for operating a camera on your private property? Seems like something I would expect out of North Korea....
     
  3. Joe13

    Joe13
    NW of Vancouver
    Opinionated & Blunt Silver Supporter Bronze Supporter 2015 Volunteer 2016 Volunteer

    Messages:
    8,195
    Likes Received:
    15,822
    There are apps that will let you record straight onto a remote server (like the cloud).

    I would highly recommend everyone look into it if you ever plan on being the filmer. Your phone won't make it to trial the way you left it.
     
    U201491, chemist, tiggers97 and 4 others like this.
  4. 44mag2ndamend

    44mag2ndamend
    Round the ole tree stump, Down by the crick
    Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    790
    Likes Received:
    456
    No doubt this guy has a possible case against the police. Cant they be taught to handle things like this better, obviously not. This is why the Federal Guberment had to over see changes in Portland PD dept.
     
    Redcap likes this.
  5. Fast Eddie

    Fast Eddie
    Vancouver
    Bronze Supporter Bronze Supporter

    Messages:
    707
    Likes Received:
    714
    In Oregon, you may not film an officer without their consent. Because of Oregon's ban on eavesdropping, it's technically illegal to film police if the video would pick up a conversation without the officer's permission. It is a violation of Oregon's wiretapping laws.

    http://www.oregonlaws.org/ors/165.540

    If you don't think that's all that kosher, several bills aimed at changing this law have been defeated.
     
  6. Redcap

    Redcap
    Lewis County, WA
    Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    3,989
    Likes Received:
    2,736
    Whoa...I had no idea Oregon sucked that bad. Glad I turned down that offer to work for PGE.
     
  7. Mbeef61

    Mbeef61
    SW PDX
    Active Member

    Messages:
    120
    Likes Received:
    77
    So they can film and record us, but we cannot film/record them?

    I still record officers if I am pulled over or confronted in any way. I don't care. I will still cover my bases, just like I will carry concealed in business that say I cannot.
     
  8. Stomper

    Stomper
    Ungovernable!
    Become Ungovernable! Gold Supporter

    Messages:
    14,546
    Likes Received:
    26,287
    He wasn't arrested for the act of recording the raid, was was arrested "interfering" with a police operation. Which was probably a slimy cop trick to end his recording of the operation.

    The above ORS does not apply to a person who is NOT surreptitiously recording the police, i.e. you're standing there with your camera, smart phone, or iPad right there out in the open recording an incident.

    Also, it is established case law that no one, not even the police have an expectation to privacy in a place open to the general public.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Sep 8, 2014
    RBid, Barefoot African and Redcap like this.
  9. Doc In UPlace

    Doc In UPlace
    Tacoma-ish
    Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,688
    Likes Received:
    2,145
    That's how we see it up here. Public places and no reasonable expectation of privacy with loud conversations and a group of people negate so-called two party consent and electronic interception of private conversations.

    As they say YMMV. I have no problem submitting surveillance video with an audio track as evidence IF the recording was made in a public place.
     
  10. Nick Burkhardt

    Nick Burkhardt
    NE Oregon
    Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    2,022
    Likes Received:
    2,701
    The way I read ORS 165.540, and apparently darn near every open carry Oregon video posted on YouTube, is that all parties have to be informed of audio recording NOT that they have to consent to it. You have no expectation of privacy in a public place.

    Now if the officers would have lead with the go inside for your own safety instead of that interfering BS it may have gone better.
     
    Barefoot African likes this.
  11. BDA.45

    BDA.45
    oregon
    Well-Known Member 2016 Volunteer

    Messages:
    816
    Likes Received:
    1,387
    Filming police in public is absolutely legal...you do not need consent in Oregon when in public....and you don't need to inform them
     
    Barefoot African, JRuby and Redcap like this.
  12. Martini_Up

    Martini_Up
    NW USA
    Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,723
    Likes Received:
    2,022
    Wrong.

    Did you even read the link? :s0037:
     
  13. Jamie6.5

    Jamie6.5
    Western OR
    Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,832
    Likes Received:
    6,893
    That's like having Col. Sanders guard the chicken coop isn't it?
    Al Capone enforcing prohibition? IRS tax law?
    Ray Rice writing domestic abuse policies?


    I could go on, but I'm sure some of us get the gist.
     
  14. solv3nt

    solv3nt
    Portland
    Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,913
    Likes Received:
    1,305
    This is partially correct, if you have a hidden camera, and you do not inform the other party that the conversation is being recorded, then you are violating ORS 165.540(1)(C)

    1) Except as otherwise provided in ORS 133.724 (Order for interception of communications) or 133.726 (Interception of oral communication without order) or subsections (2) to (7) of this section, a person may not:

    C) Obtain or attempt to obtain the whole or any part of a conversation by means of any device, contrivance, machine or apparatus, whether electrical, mechanical, manual or otherwise, if not all participants in the conversation are specifically informed that their conversation is being obtained.

    However, if the individual was standing on his porch, and the police specifically told him to stop recording, then it would be assumed that the police were aware that they were being recorded, in which case, satisfying the notification of all parties involved. The individual will win against the Gresham Police Department and will cost the taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars. It's a shame that the police are unaware of the laws that they are supposed to be upholding.
     
    Last edited: Sep 9, 2014
  15. 44mag2ndamend

    44mag2ndamend
    Round the ole tree stump, Down by the crick
    Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    790
    Likes Received:
    456
    Not sure if I do, but we do have buttons that tell other buttons what to do! That is of course if the other buttons do not perform their own buttoning function in according with BUTTON LAW!

    I just think its ridiculous that a non-targeted, maybe by stander was ASSUALTED for using a picture phone, come on there is members here of the law enforcement community? Lets here from you uninvolved LE members and tell us what you think.
     
  16. python287

    python287
    Neskowin,OR
    Active Member

    Messages:
    237
    Likes Received:
    55
    This applies to audio recordings - If you want to record a conversation you must advise the other party that the conversation is being recorded - it has nothing to do with video recording a police officer - that is not illegal in Oregon and you cannot be prosecuted for it. It is only if you want to audio record anyone -including a police officer-
     
  17. Gunguy45

    Gunguy45 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    284
    Likes Received:
    360
    My response is SEVERAL federal court rulings which say ANYTHING a public official does is subject to recording.

    They have ZERO right to privacy.

    That any lower court at this point would enforce such blatantly unconstitutional measures says rather a lot about the court. Sure as Hell, you'll find the liberals siding with the cops, every time.
     
    U201491 likes this.
  18. 1337BaldEagle

    1337BaldEagle
    Earth
    Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    398
    Likes Received:
    254

    No, if you actually read the law all it effectively says is that both parties need to be aware that a person is recording a telecom "Conversation."

    It says nothing of recording actions that are not a "conversation." So, he is good up unto the point at which he is recording a "conversation."

    Further, you need not consent, they just need to "be specifically informed that their conversation is being obtained."


    Further he wasn't arrested for Obtaining contents of communications.

    He was arrested for "interfering with a public official."

    This is not to say that I think that filming an officers actions is actually "Interfering with a public official."



    Special thanks to Salv3nt for beating me to the punch and actually reading the law instead of just pulling it out of your bubblegum.



    Eagle
     
  19. solv3nt

    solv3nt
    Portland
    Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    1,913
    Likes Received:
    1,305
    The law specifically states that you may not record audio. If your video camera records audio, you are breaking the law if you do notify all parties involved. The laws are archaic, and need to be updated, but the lawmakers like Burdick and Greenlich would prefer to wage a war with gun owners.

    Arresting him for interfering with a police officer is on par with arresting a guy open carrying for disturbance of the peace.
     
  20. The Heretic

    The Heretic
    Oregon
    Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    6,172
    Likes Received:
    9,775
    In such situations, don't go outside.

    A LEO can hardly arrest you for interfering if you stay inside.

    Better yet, don't be seen.

    Then call the local TV news stations and ask them if they want a vid of the cop doing something wrong (assuming that is what you are recording).
     
    Mbeef61 likes this.

Share This Page