Police Chief Trying To Find Some Way To Charge Drone Operator Who Didn't Break Any Laws

from the I-AM-THE-[NONEXISTENT]-LAW dept

Wed, Jan 14th 2015 11:30am — Tim Cushing

Don't let the fact that no crime occurred stop you from attempting to prosecute someone, Sparky. (via PINAC)

Naperville Police Chief Robert Marshall said he is consulting the city's legal department after the three-minute video posted on YouTube by user JPDrone came to his attention. Shot at night, a drone camera flies over City Hall and several downtown streets, providing a unique view of seasonal decorations while cars and pedestrians move around city streets below.

Photography Is Not A Crime points out that there is no law in Illinois that addresses what happened here. The closest the state gets to private drone prohibition involves a very specific set of circumstances.

While Illinois has passed a law making it a crime to use a drone to interfere with hunting and fishing, there are no other state laws preventing the public from using “drones,” more appropriately called RC (remote-controlled) copters.

If the local lawyers can't figure out some way to nail John Pauley for his not-illegal act, Chief Marshall is willing to go over his own head.

"Obviously, if they're flying over a public area, you have to ask if there's any risk to public safety, who's the operator and if he's abiding by the regulations set in place by the FAA," Marshall said. "There was a request from an individual who wanted to fly a drone camera overhead at Ribfest last summer, and we did not allow that."

Ah, "public safety." The one-size-fits-all hammer for every annoying nail that refuses to fit neatly into existing legal confines. The thing is, John Pauley has been very careful about his drone usage ever since his run-in with the Geneva (IL) police department officers, who expressed concern about his flying camera. Since then, Pauley has made an effort to notify proper employees before taking to the air. This includes the Naperville Police Department.

He said he called Naperville police before doing the nighttime video, which he said was filmed from less than 200 feet above the city.

This statement remains unaddressed. Neither confirmed nor denied or even acknowledged. So, it's Pauley's word against the Naperville PD's, the latter of which hasn't offered any words contradicting his claim.

Maybe Chief Marshall is just suffering from drone envy. Illinois state laws do prohibit the use of drones by law enforcement.

Section 10. Prohibited use of drones. Except as provided in Section 15, a law enforcement agency may not use a drone to gather information.

The Section 15 exceptions (and there are a lot of them) are: preventing a terrorist attack, with a warrant, imminent harm to life, locating a missing person (but notably, not as part of a criminal investigation), and crime scene/crash photography. Flying over private land for the latter also requires the acquisition of a search warrant. "Freedom from drone surveillance," as the law is titled. That applies to law enforcement only. It says nothing about private use.

The FAA may choose to fine Pauley if Chief Marshall decides to rat him out (the FAA restricts private drone usage to daytime hours), but it appears there's little he can actually do about this from his end. Marshall appears to believe that if he thinks something's illegal, it must actually be, even if all evidence points in the other direction -- really not the sort of attitude you want in a law enforcement official.

As of yet, no charges have been filed, but never underestimate the creativity of law enforcement personnel whose common sense has been shouted down by their desire to prosecute.

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: drones, john pauley, laws, naperville, police, robert marshall

41 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it

Anonymous Coward, 14 Jan 2015 @ 11:38am

It's illegal for the public to fly drones at night.

You're a fucking idiot.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- ChurchHatesTucker (profile), 14 Jan 2015 @ 11:41am
  
  Re:
  Marshall does not work for the FAA.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 14 Jan 2015 @ 12:45pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Yes, maybe he should have called the airport police so they could take him to airport jail. uh huh.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 14 Jan 2015 @ 1:56pm
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      No, because the FAA is the regulator for UAVs. But that doesn't mean that the police officer can just make up a law to jail the guy with.
      
      Last time I checked, that was illegal.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 14 Jan 2015 @ 2:09pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Make up a law? You mean like the one that's already on the books saying it's illegal to fly drones at night?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        jupiterkansas (profile), 14 Jan 2015 @ 2:23pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        And apparently the punishment is a fine, not jail time.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        John Fenderson (profile), 14 Jan 2015 @ 2:32pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        "You mean like the one that's already on the books saying it's illegal to fly drones at night?"
        
        There is no such law. There is an FAA rule that says this. Which means that enforcing it is well outside of a cop's jurisdiction. The most the cop can (and should) do about this is to collect evidence and send it over to the FAA.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 14 Jan 2015 @ 3:43pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        "the guidance makes clear the agency’s authority to pursue legal enforcement action against persons who endanger the safety of the National Airspace System."
        
        http://www.faa.gov/news/updates/?newsId=81244
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 14 Jan 2015 @ 4:59pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Then I guess it should be the FAA police that issue the ticket - no?
        
        FAA is a federal agency and there maybe some issue about jurisdiction when a local Barney goes off making arrests for the fed.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        John Fenderson (profile), 15 Jan 2015 @ 8:08am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        That is correct, and supports what I just said.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 18 Jan 2015 @ 7:54pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        Laws are diaigned so the people don't take action for themselves. Get shot down then
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Anonymous Coward, 15 Jan 2015 @ 1:58pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        "Make up a law? You mean like the one that's already on the books saying it's illegal to fly drones at night?"
        
        Got a citation for that, or are you just full of cop shit?
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        John Fenderson (profile), 15 Jan 2015 @ 2:32pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
        There may be such a rule for drones (I don't know), but we're not talking about drones. We're talking about hobbyist R/C aircraft. If that's what he meant, then he's simply wrong. Here are the rules: https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/91-57.pdf
        
        The rule is that the operator must always be able to see the aircraft, not that night flying is disallowed. If your aircraft has lights, that would satisfy the "must see it" criterion.
        
        It is true that state and local laws can add additional restrictions to R/C aircraft operations on top of FAA rules -- but in the story at hand, that's clearly not the case or the police wouldn't have to hunt around for some law they could twist to apply to the guy.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 14 Jan 2015 @ 12:08pm
  
  Re:
  Please cite your sources as I have never heard that night flying or RC aircraft is illegal.
  
  Also: http://aviation.stackexchange.com/questions/2850/where-is-rc-aircraft-flying-allowed-in-the-us
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous RC Whacko, 14 Jan 2015 @ 12:35pm
  
  Re:
  Actually, it's not illegal to fly a rc plane/helicopter after sunset - accept in a few places/fields that don't permit it. Of course AMA regulations require proper conditions, lights, etc.
  
  And most the rc drones out there are so small, with puny little propellers they wouldn't hurt you if they hit you anyway. (As long as they don't poke your eyeballs out)
  
  A friend has flown his led lit airplane out at night, and it looks really cool.
  
  NOTE: I wouldn't fly my $10,000 jet after dark (if I had one).
  
  But Then....
  Some idiot is going to do something stupid, and then they'll pass a law to throw us all in jail for owning rc planes.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - John Fenderson (profile), 14 Jan 2015 @ 2:36pm
    
    Re: Re:
    "it's not illegal to fly a rc plane/helicopter after sunset"
    
    This is true. The actual rule is that the aircraft must always remain visible to the operator. If darkness prevents that, then the rule is being broken. If not, then it's not.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Padpaw (profile), 15 Jan 2015 @ 6:11am
    
    Re: Re:
    bit surprising none of those terrorists have tried packing rc planes with explosives and using them for terror attacks
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 15 Jan 2015 @ 7:35am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      -- bit surprising none of those terrorists have tried packing rc planes with explosives and using them for terror attacks
      
      R/C airplanes/copters have limited payload for the explosives making them unsuitable for causing terror.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Jan 2015 @ 12:00pm

what this points to is someone else who wants to have the power to change things as and when he feels like it, just to suit circumstances he does or doesn't like! the USA is so full of people like this that i'm surprised that there are any sensible laws out at all and that the prisons aren't chocker block full!!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- jupiterkansas (profile), 14 Jan 2015 @ 12:05pm
  
  Re:
  um... the prisons are chocker block full and they just keep building new ones.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 14 Jan 2015 @ 12:15pm
    
    Re: Re:
    Well since it is illegal to own slaves prisoners are the next best thing. Some official statement even mentioned that they cant release prisoners early because they need the cheap workers.
    And since prisons are privat and states give some "fun" guarantees like "90% filled" they cant even stop provide new inmates if they wanted to, breach of contract and all.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 14 Jan 2015 @ 5:03pm
  
  Re:
  Why yes - of course, the USA is the only place on earth where people act like that. It really is shameful.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Roger Strong (profile), 14 Jan 2015 @ 12:05pm

This is a guy who is already collecting his police pension while also collecting his police chief's salary.

(In case he's looking for something else that "oughta be illegal.")
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Jan 2015 @ 12:26pm

What? No link to the video?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 14 Jan 2015 @ 4:50pm
  
  Re:
  The first link on the page takes you to the video. I hope the chief gets a visit from the the Christmas ghosts next year.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
John Fenderson (profile), 14 Jan 2015 @ 12:45pm

Why?
I didn't see it in the article, but has the police chief explained exactly why he has his panties in such a twist over this? It's one thing to enforce a law obviously broken. It's another level of motivation entirely to dig around trying to find a law that can be used against someone who did something you dislike.

So clearly the police chief has an intense dislike of this action. But he never tells us why.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Geno0wl (profile), 14 Jan 2015 @ 1:17pm
  
  Re: Why?
  Want to know why Naperville PD Chief has his panties in a bunch over a drone taking a video?
  Well because this is Naperville Illinois, what the hell else do you have to do?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 14 Jan 2015 @ 7:29pm
    
    Re: Re: Why?
    Invite the guys from Peoria over for an all night coke party?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Jack, 14 Jan 2015 @ 1:57pm
  
  Re: Why?
  Because a lot of people complain about RC aircraft usage to the police. People complain about me flying my sub-micro electric heli and I know many people have had the police tell the to stop flying larger helis, planes, and drones. People also complain extra when it comes to FPV aircraft and anything equipped with photo/video equipment.
  
  The police are probably constantly dealing with calls about this guy (because people are selfish assholes) and they can't make him stop. Back when I was in NC, I had the police called on me about a BL nCPx heli (it's literally only a 7" rotor diameter), and near-silent because they thought I was going to damage their car. I can't imagine if I flew larger helis or drone...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - John Fenderson (profile), 14 Jan 2015 @ 2:39pm
    
    Re: Re: Why?
    "The police are probably constantly dealing with calls about this guy (because people are selfish assholes) and they can't make him stop."
    
    Police everywhere are constantly dealing with calls about things that they can't do anything about, but they don't get their panties in a twist over that stuff. There must be something more to it.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 14 Jan 2015 @ 3:07pm
      
      Re: Re: Re: Why?
      I'd say this is definitely part of a larger story.
      
      However, this guy is pretty obviously in violation of AMA regulations -- if I recall correctly, you aren't supposed to fly RCAVs over people. As long as it is adequately lit, flying after dark isn't an issue as long as it is always in line of sight with the operator. But the operator can't fly it into controlled airspace, nor can they fly it over populated areas. People get reported (and fined) for doing this all the time -- usually by people like this PD Chief and concerned citizens who don't think that it should be legal to have remote controlled surveillance equipment in the hands of the public at all.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - John Fenderson (profile), 15 Jan 2015 @ 8:18am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Why?
        AMA regulations don't have the force of law. What counts is FAA regulations. The FAA regulations are pretty short and sweet (they're here: https://www.faa.gov/documentLibrary/media/Advisory_Circular/91-57.pdf in the "model aircraft operating standards secion.) You can't fly higher than 400 feet, if you fly within 3 miles of an air control tower then you have to notify them, you can't fly in a manner that endangers other people, you can't fly near noise-sensitive places such as hospitals, and you can't fly near people-carrying aircraft. Local municipalities may have additional restrictions as well, but they usually don't.
        
        There is no actual rule about flying over other people specifically, although it is considered extremely bad form in the model aircraft community and most model aircraft associations (such as the AMA) prohibit it.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
KRA, 14 Jan 2015 @ 1:26pm

The chief sounds like a petty, ridiculous man who should never have been entrusted with any degree of power or discretion.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Jan 2015 @ 3:16pm

The good people of Naperville need to kick this clown to the curb. I guess their is no real time for this man to investigate so he is manufacturing it. Maybe stash a bag of marijuana in one of the drone operators hubcaps for starters. If he gets re-elected they will have only themselves to blame.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 14 Jan 2015 @ 5:06pm

Wow. I did not realize how strict the laws were covering the use of drones. I'm positive that local law enforcement will comply fully with the same regulations being applied to the rest of society.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
me, 15 Jan 2015 @ 3:35am

A cops job
Is to enforce the law as it is, not try to change it to suit their power trip. This chief is an insult to his job.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dhos, 15 Jan 2015 @ 3:43am

There's a lot of talk in here about the police officer not being able to arrest the guy... but that's never mentioned, in the original article or the Techdirt article. All I see is that the chief is "consulting the city's legal department" about the situation. Perhaps he's doing so to confirm that the acts weren't illegal?
This seems kinda knee-jerk-reaction-y, guys.

"Obviously, if they're flying over a public area, you have to ask if there's any risk to public safety, who's the operator and if he's abiding by the regulations set in place by the FAA," Marshall said.

Someone mentioned that they could be 'collecting evidence to send to the FAA.' Maybe that's all he's doing?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Padpaw (profile), 15 Jan 2015 @ 6:08am

They could always go the popular fascist thug route and charge him with resisting arrest, or even assaulting an officer hand with his fist when said officer punches him.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
VideoFinder, 15 Jan 2015 @ 9:46am

Naperville Overflight Video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTPNjH2idHE
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Uriel-238 (profile), 15 Jan 2015 @ 2:00pm

Why doesn't Marshall just shoot Pauley?
I mean it's not like he'd be indicted for murder or anything.

BLAM! Problem solved.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
PB, 19 Jan 2015 @ 6:54pm

Proof of conversation
Too bad he couldn't record the conversation notifying the police of his intended flight.

Oh, wait....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]