Artist Facing 15 Years In Jail For The Crime Of Videotaping His Own Arrest
from the this-is-a-problem dept
Yesterday, we wrote about a woman who was facing 15 years in jail for using her cameraphone to videotape part of her effort to get Internal Affairs of the Chicago Police Department to investigate an officer, whom she claims sexually assaulted her. Apparently, this sort of situation is not unique in Illinois. Another story this week tells about an artist who set out to do a reasonable bit of civil disobedience: to protest a Chicago ordinance concerning where and when he could sell artwork on the street. He intended to get arrested for that misdemeanor by selling his art. As part of this, he had a First Amendment lawyer with him... and a video crew. Well, he did get arrested, but not for the misdemeanor of selling artwork in the wrong spot, but for the same felony of eavesdropping and is facing the same 15 years in prison as the woman we spoke about yesterday. Apparently, a big part of the problem is Illinois' Eavesdropping Act, which seems to create this ridiculous situation. Of course, the fact that prosecutors are actually moving forward with charges on such things is equally ridiculous. It's a good reminder of a reason to stay away from Chicago.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: arrested, chicago, eavesdropping, illinois
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
You didn't think Mark Kirk actually got legitimately, elected, do you?
Illinois motto has always been "vote early, vote often". You don't hear of people going back to validate vote challenges out here for a reason.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Interestingly, one can look towards the election of JFK for evidence of that. Old man Daley really pulled a doozy in essentially getting him elected President....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Eavesdropping
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Eavesdropping
Under stupid IL law it sure can. They're twisting this to suggest that any LEO that doesn't expressly grant permission to be taped has an expectation of privacy. Of a public enforcement officer. In public.
This state sucks. Our governors are crazy corrupt and our lead mayoral candidate isn't allowed on the ballot....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Eavesdropping
One of them, MA I think, actually had it in the law and took it out.
So, rest assured, your state isn't alone in sucking... and yours, at least, has better pizza.
This is a good place to start if you want to know more.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Eavesdropping
�Let me just say that as a matter of policy I think it�s ludicrous that people would be arrested for recording a police officer,� adds Volokh.
Pretty much sums it up.
The only encouraging thing about all this is that at least some of these situations are getting a little bit of national attention. Maybe a positive trend is possible.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Eavesdropping
I ask Pasco if he believes someone like Michael Allison should go to prison, potentially for the rest of his life. "I don't know anything about that case," Pasco replies, "but generally it sounds like a sensible law and a sensible punishment. Police officers don�t check their civil rights at the station house door."
"That just doesn�t sound right," Allison says. "My civil rights are supposed to protect me from the government. When a police officer is on the job, he�s part of the government. So [Pasco] is trying to say the government has civil rights to protect it from the people? That doesn�t make any sense to me."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Eavesdropping
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Eavesdropping
And a lot of folks are going to hear about this artist and not care because (in their opinion) he's just a crazy old hippie.
Tiawanda Moore is more sympathetic being an alleged victim of sexual harassment, but she is a former stripper and she sounds black (so a number of people will think she's lying - not saying that's justified. I think it's what some people will think.)
15 years is ridiculous though especially considering that in both of these cases there is no victim.
Whether or not these people are technically guilty under this law if I were on the jury I would exercise jury nullification.
I predict acquittal for Moore (I believe the NYT mentioned an exception if you had "reasonable suspicion" that a crime was about to be committed by the cops) and that the artist will be found guilty but receive no time.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Eavesdropping
I am ashamed to admit that I wouldn't have the courage to do so myself.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Eavesdropping
Don't you think it might have something to do with him not actually being a citizen? Or are you suggesting the law be broken for him?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Eavesdropping
I'm suggesting that it's insane to tell a person who has been paying Chicago/IL taxes for the last two years, who HAS a home in Chicago, and who only was out of town so much because the freakin' PotUSA asked him to perform a public service that he can't run for elected office in his home city.
BTW, only 1 court out of 3 so far has said he can't be on the ballot. Other courts agreed with me, and the fight isn't yet over.
Christ. And I wouldn't even VOTE for the guy....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Eavesdropping
He moved to DC with his family for 2 years and rented out his home. His private home became a rental home. For tax or any other purposes, he would not be considered a resident and neither would you.
So no, I am not a fan of breaking the law for him or anyone else.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Eavesdropping
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Eavesdropping
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Eavesdropping
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Eavesdropping
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Eavesdropping
Well, he may not have a commission but the only reason he was in DC was because he was serving the Executive branch of the govt. And it's interesting you should use the word strawman so quickly after comparing being called upon by the highest office in the land....to being called upon by his mother.
Who you crappin'?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Eavesdropping
But hey, maybe you don't like for the Government to go by the law. I guess you are in the right place for that then.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Eavesdropping
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Eavesdropping
Wow, the straw is flying.
So now everyone here that reads Techdirt agrees that the Government doesn't need to follow the law? Or does that mean that since DH is from Illinois, he is in the right place to believe that the Government doesn't need to follow the law?
If it is the former...I'd like to see your evidence, since there are a lot of us here and I doubt you'll be able to prove that all of us believe the same thing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Eavesdropping
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Eavesdropping
A police officer is a public servant. Public servants have no expectation of privacy, no automatic protection from the public. The bottom line is that, just as was the case for me in the military, once you put on the uniform of a public servant, you are subject to such scrutiny. This is why newspapers will print "Officer Such and Such" rather than "an unnamed officer." The police officer has no standing.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Eavesdropping
Here are a couple of links about the case:
http://www.alternet.org/rights/149706/75-year_prison_sentence_for_taping_the_police_the_abs urd_laws_that_criminalize_audio_and_video_recording_in_america
http://reason.com/archives/2010/12 /07/the-war-on-cameras
If interested or anyone you know that might be, please post a quick reply back. Thanks
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I think the windy city is blowing it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
We don't want a permanent record of what he was (or wasn't) wearing to exist.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sweet Home Chicago
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"The Chicago Police, he said, have been expanding their recordings of ordinary civilians, with blue-light cameras, cameras in patrol cars, and the like. The justification for these recordings is that what happens in public is public, and there should be no expectation of privacy."
If that's true, there's a massive double standard going on here. That just really pisses me off.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Whatever lawyer he gets to defend him better break out that quote at the arraignment (and hope the judge isn't as dumb as that law, or paid off.. ha!)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Who watches the watchmen?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Wow, infinite recursion. Awesome.
print "We're arresting you for evesdropping!";
while (1) {
print "We're arresting you for evesdropping during our arresting you for evesdropping!";
}
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Grain of salt.
The article implies that these actions were taken the first and second attempt at getting arrested, but both times he was let off with a warning. This was his third attempt. I know I read it somewhere that he had a small recording device in his jacket-- not a film crew on hand-- and that's what got him in trouble. Of course, I can't for the life of me find where I read that, so take it with a grain of salt.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
appropriate response
This demands a call to action. All owners of video-capable cameras in Chicago should take every opportunity to get in the face of police and public officials, cameras visible and running, and demand to be arrested and charged under the same laws. The courts will be clogged, juries will have to be empaneled, and this stupid, corrosive and corrupt law will have to be stricken, either by act of legislature or by precedent of jurisprudence.
I am calling for direct illegal action on the part of all citizens subject to laws which prohibit video or audio recording of police or other public officials in the performance of their duties in public or publicly-owned places. If the enforcers of the law cannot be subject to the same laws as we who pay them, then it is our duty to effect change by whatever means are available to us.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
15?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: 15?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Disclaimer notices
"By arresting me, you give up any expectation of privacy and agree to allow recording of both voice and video by myself, designated agent."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
So i will not say that.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The Problem:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Eavesdropping
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Don't fight the power
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Don't fight the power
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Don't fight the power
Chuck D.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The pigs don't want a record of murder & mayhem!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Eavesdropping
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
(aka police state)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hmm...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Weird confluence of issues in this thread...
That's the funny part. We were surrounded by men with expensive tv or video cameras. They were in plain clothes and showed no visible credentials, yet they taped me w/o my permission. I should have whipped out the iPad and pulled up this article....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not surprising..
If Rodney King had been beaten in Chicago there never would have been any prosecution of the cops since the people videotaping the action would have been themselves prosecuted and the DA would have been required to toss the evidence out since it was obtained illegally.
It just goes to show that state governments are far more concerned with their image than actually protecting citizens.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not surprising..
There is going to keep being serious push back against restrictions on guns as long as the US allows police and the military to be so powerful and aggressive.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Not surprising..
Yes, but to add further fire to this argument, Chicago is very much anti-gun (as is California, Washington DC, and Massachusetts.) Not that there is a correlation between corrupt politicians and gun control, but it seems a little suspicious.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No due process possible
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: No due process possible
Also, I wonder if you had the cameras on but was not actually recording and they arrested you. How could they do so reasonably? Having the camera out cocked and ready is not illegal and would be done for efficiency's sake as well as a deterrent to crime. To arrest on suspicion of filming officers undermines that entire reasonable defensive scenario (to a stupid law).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: No due process possible
And the police still wonder why we don't trust them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]