Motorcyclist Charged for Recording

[Sean]

This kind of asinine behavior is just going to make more people run. Pulling a gun on someone from an unmarked car, out of uniform, pulling them off the bike, charging them with recording...they're insane. This is absolutely inexcusable behavior and people are going to vote against it with their right wrists.

[Avatard]

Actually, without the audio, this appears to be a carjacking...er, bike-jacking.

It's actually more damning, if you then know it's a cop.

[Avatard]

I love how the cops insisted he saw the marked unit behind him.

I don't think ANYONE'S gaze would have been on anything but the guy with the gun YELLING.

[sherri_chickie]

And since when do cops come hollering up to a vehicle screaming at them to get out ( off) with a gun in their hand?

What was this officers ( term used loosely) problem?

[Papa_Complex]

I just checked the Maryland statute that he's charged under. It specifies "The wilful interception, use, or disclosure of a protected communication..." Under that specification he might have to worry about the disclosure aspect, as he posted it publicly. Here's an interesting little document that was issued in 2000 though:

http://www.oag.state.md.us/Opinions/2000/85oag225.pdf

[pauldun170]

Originally Posted by Papa_Complex

I just checked the Maryland statute that he's charged under. It specifies "The wilful interception, use, or disclosure of a protected communication..." Under that specification he might have to worry about the disclosure aspect, as he posted it publicly. Here's an interesting little document that was issued in 2000 though:

http://www.oag.state.md.us/Opinions/2000/85oag225.pdf

I cannot consider his interaction with the police officer in the video as protected communication.

[Papa_Complex]

Originally Posted by pauldun170

I cannot consider his interaction with the police officer in the video as protected communication.

Despite what you may or may not feel, the courts might find differently. This is especially the case when a police officer is involved.

[pauldun170]

Originally Posted by Papa_Complex

Despite what you may or may not feel, the courts might find differently. This is especially the case when a police officer is involved.

Screw that touchy feely crap,
Legally I can't find any indication that the interaction qualifies, either through Maryland code or precedent.

At the very least, if cruiser behind them (the one that allegedly pulled up behind them) captured the same events and that is not considered protected communication then why would the individual recording the same event be threatened with man rape?

Protected or priveledged communications usually fall under areas where a person may reasonably expect to be safe from unauthorized surveillance.

Malpas v. Maryland, 695 A.2d 588
Benford v. American Broadcasting Co., 649 F. Supp. 9



What these asshole are doing is trying to scare the guy by throwing wiretapping laws around.
Typical of stupid entitlement driven authority figures who get caught being assholes.

[OneSickPsycho]

This is a great 'abuse of power' news story... I wonder why nobody has picked it up...

[Kaneman]

Originally Posted by OneSickPsycho

This is a great 'abuse of power' news story... I wonder why nobody has picked it up...

Getting out of the car with his weapon drawn while issuing commands is one thing...that's just a bad cop...hell, those are a dime a dozen.

But getting a judge to sign a search warrant and raiding this guy's parent's home? I mean, physically entering their home under threat of jail or death and rummaging through your things....then seizing (see: stealing) the computers...

That just blows my mind.