I don't remember, where there cases where police confiscated (without warrant) cell phones and video cameras during OWS? Same sort of circumstances IMO. You may be merely a bystander with a camera.
I don't remember, where there cases where police confiscated (without warrant) cell phones and video cameras during OWS? Same sort of circumstances IMO. You may be merely a bystander with a camera.
When life throws you curves, aim for the apex
Current stable: 09 Thruxton \ 09 FZ6S2 Sold List: 97 Ninja500R, 03 SV650K3, 01 Ducati 750Sport, 73 CB350/4, 03 F650GSA, 08 Gixxer600, 03 Gixxer600, 91 VFR750F, 09 KLX250, 06 Thruxton 900, 02 VFR800, 08 Spyder RS, 12 Street TripleR, 09 KLX250S, 16 KTMRC390, 10 F650GS
my Facebook, SpeedShotsOriginally Posted by salsashark
Cell phones/cameras were confiscated at various rallies, protests, etc.
Again, whether you have a right to refuse or not doesn't input your camera won't get confiscated anyway.
Faster, faster, faster, until the thrill of speed overcomes the fear of death.
~Hunter S. Thompson
But refusing to hand it over and having it confiscated anyway is grounds that can be used to throw out any evidence contained on those devices.
Cops hate paper work more than anybody.
MRA Racer No.427
Some of this LEO over zealousness is driven by the large stunter groups that block off interstates in the DFW area to "perform" by blocking traffic with a large group of bikes and irritating the other drivers on the road. There have been a few cases where a driver got pissed off enough to drive through the line trying to block the entire width of the interstate. If a LEO in the DFW area sees a group of 100+ bikes running together, more than likely they are going to think they are up to no good. Not that it justifies the deputy's action, just a little background on something that is perceived as a big problem down there.
There is LEO on the forum. Lets get some professional opinions.
Its not how fast you go, its how little you slow down.
I'll be glad to help
An Officer can seize anything he considers to be evidence of a crime or criminal activity if it is in plain view, or he otherwise legally comes across it (During a consensual or otherwise legal search). This leaves flood gates wide open in a lot of cases, so we ask where is the line? The line is "reasonableness." Reasonableness cannot be defined, it is decided by a Jury or Judge on what a "Reasonable and Prudent" Officer would do in the same situation. In my professional opinion, there are very few traffic statutes in which I'd seize your GoPro as evidence for. DUI, Vehicular Assault/Homicide, and that's just about it. Every other statute, I've got enough evidence to get a conviction before I even light you up.
As for keeping it yourself for evidence to your innocence, that won't fly. Before any criminal proceedings against you, you can ask for what's called a "Discovery Hearing." At this hearing the prosecution (The Officer in most traffic cases), must present to you any and all evidence to be used in trial. Everything from the blood test results in a DUI to the Officer's "private" report (Since we actually write 2-3 reports for every incident). So if he seized your camera, you have a right to get it, or the video recordings from it, back before your trial, with enough time to analyze them yourself. In the case of a cell phone or a camera, we will authorize their release immediately after we process them (Less than a week). Unless it's a homicide, then you've donated it to the city's evidence section forever.
Lastly, rather than seizing the video, the Officer can just subpoena it at a later date (Best bet IMO). Say I get into a fight outside a bar, and I see someone filming it. I can legally identify that person, and inform them that that video will be used as evidence, and they cannot destroy it or otherwise make it unavailable.
To those who are still reading, either get a life or just follow the rules so you never have to worry about it!
I think the answer is no, but can a LEO legally confiscate a radar detector?
John
KTM Duke 690
To be honest, I don't even know if they are illegal or not lol. Shows how much I care about them. If they are illegal, then the Officer can (but doesn't have to). If not then no. I'll look this statute up when I go back to work.
Cops can do whatever they feel like so law or not I'm sure they will anyways... just like we are supposed to ride staggered but they ride side by side ALL THE TIME, run red lights cause they don't feel like waiting, texting and talking on the phone while driving. We are all guilty as charged including the law enforcers as they don't follow their own either (maybe there are clean, good and honest cops out there but just like squids make it bad for us fair riders, so do bad cops for you).
Actually the law states we can ride side by side.
Interesting, I wasn't aware of that. I know if I'm riding with a buddy we almost always stop at lights side-by-side, but rarely ride that way. Rather spread out or staggered, less crowded, and for higher visibility.
.
'08 Yamaha R1 (black), mostly stock. Past bikes: '98 VFR-800 (red), '01 CBR-929RR (white/red), '05 Yamaha R6 (white), '08 Yamaha R1 (blue).
'94 Supra Turbo 6spd. (black), BUILT motor/head, CompTurbo CT43-xx, '69 Dodge Coronet SuperBee tribute, 440/520 SixPack stroker, auto.
Then the law doesn't know the law, every cop I have ever asked to this day says it's 100% illegal to do so.
http://www.coloradodot.info/programs...ycle-laws.html
Just not recommendedTraffic Laws
Passing or Overtaking: Passing or overtaking a vehicle in the same lane is Illegal in Colorado; no lane sharing or splitting with cars. However, motorcycles can share a lane or "co-ride" with one other motorcycle.
I can do whatever I feel like within limits. Luckily the law and my agency understand how important it is for us to bend certain rules in order to get our job done.
As for red lights, I'll tell you right now I run probably 20 a night. I can also tell you I have never once ran one just because I could. When I'm not doing anything, I drive 10 under and sit through every red light. But yes, when someone's life is at stake, or someone feels like every second counts when they're asking for my help, I run red lights. As for talking on the phone while driving, let's just say I couldn't do my job without talking on my phone and driving. And I never text.
I think Virgina is only state with a radar detector ban in place and I think their enforcement options includes confiscation. I think there might be some cities (mostly back east) with a ban but I have never heard of confiscation in those cases.
I completely understand the red light run in a real emergency, I'm not an idiot by any means but jeffco runs them ALL THE TIME just to get to 7eleven faster.
I think it falls under Criminal Procedure's Plain View a Doctrine and whether the suspect has a right to privacy. As Terri mentioned, a suspect has no right to privacy if pulled over and IF the police sees some sort of evidence in the car that could lead to a different crime or be evidence of the committed offense. I think those cases fall under the "Plain View Doctrine" where an officer can confiscate without a warrant because contraband or evidence is in plain sight, and there is no expectation of privacy if mounted on your bike or helmet, etc.... I think it would withstand a constitutional challenge.
Just my 2 cents.
Also, you do have rights when it comes to your car. First, the police needs to have a reasonable suspicion to pull you over. And when they pull you over they do not have a right to search your car, unless, again, there is reasonable suspicion that an offense was committed, something is in plain sight, or the vehicle is confiscated (i.e. after a DUI). But the police cannot just pull you over for speeding and then search your car.
Last edited by Ninja2; Sat Jun 23rd, 2012 at 10:01 AM.
Unless the k9 barks. Of course that has never happened to me.
I have no idea what you're talking about.
And this is why I have so much contempt for LEO. The laws are written to protect them, not us. They can do whatever they want under the guise of "reasonable" and "probable" cause. It's complete bullshit. They are paid to know the law and use to their advantage, not the publics advantage, not to protect and serve. The only way for us to level the playing field is to hire an attorney and have him/her follow you around 24hrs a day, just in case. They have put themselves in an adversarial role, them against the public. This and many other reasons is why I have an absolute distrust of LEO.
Having said this I want to thank Aaron for helping to educate us and give us a LEO prospective. You are a stand up guy.
Its not how fast you go, its how little you slow down.
Seems legit to me for them to inspect the video. Though they should ask and then find legal means not be a dick about it as yall mentioned... but it does piss me off about this whole fuss with that texas cop.
If I was the cop being harassed by that one idiot biker I would have not braked and wrecked his ass. Frickin idiots that that need to be shot or sent over to afganistan and then castrated so they can't spread their idiotic genes. Get's annoying hearing one sided stories and citizens who think the government owes them everything and they have rights to break laws. My 2cent soap box.
2008 SV650N
Damn, well that's shitty. Sounds like in the case of a GoPro that's obviously visible (helmet mount), they will figure out a way legally and it will stand up in court. Gay.
.
'08 Yamaha R1 (black), mostly stock. Past bikes: '98 VFR-800 (red), '01 CBR-929RR (white/red), '05 Yamaha R6 (white), '08 Yamaha R1 (blue).
'94 Supra Turbo 6spd. (black), BUILT motor/head, CompTurbo CT43-xx, '69 Dodge Coronet SuperBee tribute, 440/520 SixPack stroker, auto.
And that's why I never ride with one...Damn, well that's shitty. Sounds like in the case of a GoPro that's obviously visible (helmet mount), they will figure out a way legally and it will stand up in court. Gay.
Faster, faster, faster, until the thrill of speed overcomes the fear of death.
~Hunter S. Thompson
So for the LEOs in our midst.
From the original news article should this have been approached in the manner I am about to describe.
Since it seems the LEO had no reason to pull over the biker for an offense, he should have pulled the biker and told him that he was not being pulled for a crime however he was informing the person that his camera would be sought by police for the footage it contained. Then take all of the rider's pertinent information for records to ID him and issue the subpoena.
At this point if the rider/camera owner deleted footage or never responded to the court order then they could issue an arrest warrant for obstruction of justice (or similar).
From what I can tell in the news article the officer had no legal reason to pull the rider except to get the footage; especially since he went back to his car for a few minutes before coming back with the obscured plate charge (which i though was mainly a "fix it" ticket).
When life throws you curves, aim for the apex
Current stable: 09 Thruxton \ 09 FZ6S2 Sold List: 97 Ninja500R, 03 SV650K3, 01 Ducati 750Sport, 73 CB350/4, 03 F650GSA, 08 Gixxer600, 03 Gixxer600, 91 VFR750F, 09 KLX250, 06 Thruxton 900, 02 VFR800, 08 Spyder RS, 12 Street TripleR, 09 KLX250S, 16 KTMRC390, 10 F650GS
my Facebook, SpeedShots
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
