Chelan County juror unlawfully removed from court house

[Stretch_8]

Cite for recording a public official: 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glik_v._Cunniffe
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthony_Graber
http://www.aclu-il.org/aclu-v-alvarez22/

[Dan-o]

XDSub,

Thanks for posting your side.

I lot of guys on here jumping to conclusion, as usual.

I appreciate you standing up.

[6.8mmARHunter]

Following...

[XDsubcompact]

XDSub,

Thanks for posting your side.

I lot of guys on here jumping to conclusion, as usual.

I appreciate you standing up.

I appreciate the support from you and others, kinda sad that some people hold the government to a lower standard when it should be the exact opposite.

[ghosthunter]

XD
Don't let it lay until you get satisfaction.

Lots of good info on the open carry thread about your encounter.
 

[Jeff Hayes]

I've only watched 35 seconds of it and had to pause it to comment here.  So far, he's already completely WRONG!  The officer is absolutely correct about video/voice recordings. I am a photographer and I pride myself on educating myself, very well, on the laws and rights pertaining to both still photography and videography.  Still photos fall under a completely different law, and are allowed anywhere that is public, except for a few exceptions.  HOWEVER, video and/or voice recordings are completely different and permission is indeed required!  Back to the video...

Public officials have no expectations of privacy while performing their duties.  Too tired to link to all of the various rulings in WA alone.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk

Laws relating to Still Photography hinge on an "reasonable expectation of privacy," whether Public Official or Not.  "Reasonable Expectation of Privacy" has absolutely nothing to do with the laws relating to Videography or Audio Recording. Most laws relating to Audio Recording actually fall under Wiretapping rules.

Please read Flora v State, you are completely wrong on recording in public.   

Anyone can record anyone else in a public place as long as the person being recorder does not have a reasonable expectation of privacy if this were not true every soccer mom recording a soccer game would be breaking the law every time they fired up a video camera. Now if someone seeks privacy that is another matter such as takes someone off to the side and lowers their voice that would then be a private conversation and off limits to recording without announcing recording was in process.  Also I do not believe that one has to get permission all one has to do is inform every one resent that the conversation is being recorded, read the RCW, At that point that person can decide to stop talking or leave

As far as public officials go cops included while in the performance of their official duties they do not have an expectation of privacy the Flora case spells it out clearly. 

[Jeff Hayes]

XDSub,

Thanks for posting your side.

I lot of guys on here jumping to conclusion, as usual.

I appreciate you standing up.

 

I appreciate the support from you and others, kinda sad that some people hold the government to a lower standard when it should be the exact opposite.

Over at open carry we give the brass balls award to people like you that stand their ground like you did the other day.  I would like to send you your set.  This puts you in a very small group of about 10 people that have been given this award over the last 3 years.  PM sent for the info to send you your set.  Thanks for standing up for all of us.

[pianoman9701]

Hey everyone, stumbled upon this and figured I'd jump in to address a couple wrong things I've read.  I was the guy that made the video.


First of all, I didn't "walk in with a camera in hand", this was my 3rd time up to the security point after being blown off by the security officer.  Before I ever started recording I had spent about half an hour walking around asking different county employees including some Sheriff's Deputies about lock boxes and where they could be found to no avail.  You'll notice in the very beginning of the video the officer immediately says "Now there are lots of people here to talk to" because he had apparently grabbed backup after I left the second time.  When I showed up for jury duty, this wasn't even a thought in the back of my mind.  I used to work as a corrections officer and as a clerical staff employee at Yakima County so I knew full well that lock boxes should be available, and I fully expected them to be there.  I never wanted a confrontation or planned for one.  It wasn't until after I was met with resistance and attitude that I decided to record, both to protect myself legally from lies they could tell, and to record their legal position regarding lock boxes.  If I wasn't recording, we all know they could easily make stuff up and have me charged with disorderly conduct or worse.

Second, this is pretty easy to understand.  I didn't want to leave my pistol locked in my truck all day long because someone could break in and steal it, and even use it in a crime.  Not something I want to happen.  I've had my car broken into in much nicer areas than this before.  That was absolutely not an option.


Someone said they might have thought of a solution if I was nicer.  Nope, sorry.  Like I said, I spent half an hour trying to figure out a solution and nobody was willing to help.  And for the record, BEFORE I posted this video I spoke with the County Jail supervisors, the Sheriff's office and the lead deputy that's in charge of campus security for the entire courthouse.  Every time I was talked down to, ignored and they denied their responsibility to follow state law.  I was getting nowhere whiteout this being made public.

The subject of their paid lockers was brought up.  Yes, they have lockers that you can pay for but those don't even remotely meet the requirements of the law.  First of all, they're not very secure.  They could be picked up and carried off if someone really wanted them.  Second, they must be "provided" according to the law, and you don't pay for something that's provided.  Not only that, but I had no access to them because I had no change at all.  I'm sure I'm not the only person that din't have 2 quarters in their pocket when they went into the courthouse.  This is clearly a violation of the INTENT of the law.  Third, I specifically asked the lead Deputy (Deputy Elgin Shaw) if the county assumes any responsibility for or liability for theft or negligent damage to weapons placed in the pay lockers and he told me that the county absolutely does not take ANY responsibility whatsoever, and he even proceeded to tell me that I could be held accountable if a weapon was stolen from those lockers because it states on my concealed pistol license that I am responsible for securing it.  So not only did he say the county was not responsible, he went a step further and placed any blame for theft or negligent damage on me, despite the fact that state law says the opposite.  So clearly in 3 separate ways those lockers don't qualify as lockboxes that the state mandates.

I think I hit most of the areas I was wanting to respond to.

Thanks for coming in to clear this up. Much as I suspected. You're a good citizen.

[Heredoggydoggy]

It always amazed me that people who came here from another country and became citizens had more knowledge about their Constitutional rights than people who were born here...

I guess that is the kind of crap they came here to get away from! 

[chukarguy]

There are lockers just inside the main entrance next to the jail.  Those are the ones I use.

[floatinghat]

I agree with the principle however, your approach is lacking IMO.  Sounds like a TMZ video trying to set someone up.  Know you did say you asked well prior to starting to record.  Perhaps an approach might have been to say "as I understand the law..."   Telling someone they are wrong/don't know etc. from the start makes it an uphill battle.

Especially if you were only trying to serve jury duty (good on you).


If there are lockers as CG says, sounds like some simple education is needed.

[ballpark]

One of your attempts to enter might have included the RCW you mention.  It is your right to record a grievance but numerous attempts without trying to defuse or help the situation was painful to watch.  Point was made the 1st time, 2nd time could have included the RCW.  Their ignorance was is no excuse, you and all of us can see when it got personal, at that point you could have been speaking alien.  You were never going to get your point across, missed the opportunity to educate without humiliating a public servant.  I'm glad all my mistakes and acts of wrong have not been recorded and posted on the www.

I wonder if your jury duty counted