Winnipeg police confiscate documentary filmmaker's camera

Ahhh....some wear balaclavas.

One doesn't need a permit to take pictures or film in a public place. You need a permit if you are going to obstruct a street or sidewalk thoug...big difference btw.

It appears at this point in time, that the cops were way out of line and should be severely sanctioned for abusing their authority....something that should not be taken lightly.

Obstructing a street or sidewalk is open to interpretation. You don't need to completely close it off or anything for it to be considered obstruction. Normally unless you have a generator or wires or something (more than just a hand camera), it's not an issue.

I am willing to bet that there is no law protecting the police officers from being filmed, but then again, perhaps there is some law that allows the police to request "no filming"?
Does anyone know?
I would think that when police kill someone like Djiekanski, they prefer that there be no film so the lies that were given in their report wouldn't become obvious.
My opinion is that everything should be on tape , on the street, and in the Police buidings and squad cars. That protects officers from false claims- " he beat me up"! etc.

EXACTLY Rosie.. EXACTLY

cameras on cops and in their cars and in all their buildings would
a) put a stop to all the frivolous complaints against cops that eat up money in processing
b) show clear evidence when cops actually witness a crime, which should in turn reduce court costs since people will plead out more often
c) get rid of all cops that break the law and abuse rights of people.
long run a huge money saving.

For instance look at the case of the guy on Jubilee who shot cops his claim was that the cops never announced them selves properly and this led to a longer trial and actually almost got him off scott free ( thankfully the judge was not a moron ) ,, a simple 15 second clip from each officer or even one would have shown quite clearly that he was full of sh1t.

My understanding was the officers were uniformed.

There have been many examples of late where police tried to and succeeded in confiscating cameras and even stole a memory card.

In my opinion the police have no business confiscating anything without a warrant. And if they do confiscate a camera they have no business deleting the images without court approval.

For those arguing so strenuously about police rights be careful what you ask for. This is one hell of a slippery slope.

It's also a two way street. The police argue citizens have no expectation of privacy when videotaping the streets. The police also have no expectation of privacy.

And if officer's identities are at risk then they should cover their faces as they already do.

wow, seriously guys?

regarding that first story, the backhoe operator did not want to be filmed, what if that was you being filmed against your wishes? would that be ok?

freedom of expression, right to take pictures or film on public property, whatever. Why do these seem to supersede the operators right to privacy? to do his job unmolested by some jerk with a camera?

I think we've discussed the expectation of privacy issue to death. But I'll be your huckleberry.

Yes, I am serious. If you are out and about in the public you should have no expectation of privacy.

If the police believe they have a legal right to confiscate anyone's private property let them go and obtain a warrant from a judge.

But let's stick to the Calgary police story. Or the Winnipeg police story where a CBC cameraman had his camera confiscated.

What happens to their rights to do their jobs without being hassled by some jerk with a badge?

I have had my film taken because they did not want me to be able to file.....threats were uttered with regard to arresting me even though I was not near any cops.....this happens to many of us....it got very tiresome...John P. is a brilliant documentarian and a very gentle man with a serious speech impediment.....I wonder how the cops handled that!

AdamX- "filmed against his wishes". You better read that one out loud. and then ask yourself and please advise me, if there is a law protecting people from being filmed against their wishes!
I know there must be laws against getting together to protest inhumane treatment, or low wages, as I have seen news clips of local police pounding out bike protesters, or people complaining about low wages, being shot to death, if need be, by the police. That I can understand, but people outside, not wanting to be filmed, and the police taking action on that point? Give me a break! Ridiculous, I believe!
Undercover cops and a request for the film to protect their identity, of course! But, is there a law on the books that you know of to cover that situation?

not that i know of offhand, but i'm not a legal expert, i will look into it though as i'm curious now.

I beleive that if it were any of you (or me) out trying to work and some guy was filming you when you didnt want him to, you'd all be singing a different tune. But since its not you, its just some nameless guy on a backhoe, then its a great opportunity to rail against the big bad bully police.

(thats not a personal attack against anyone, just an observation)

Release forms are SOP.....

Personally I could care less. For that matter why would anyone want to videotape me? If it bothered me I'd a) ask them to stop; or 2) move.

But let's examine the backhoe operator scenario... WHY was someone videotaping HIM? Or were they videotaping what he was working on? Which was likely the case IMO. That begs this question: what was he doing that resulted in such a protest?

found this on the web page of the Office of the Privacy Commisioner of Canada
http://www.priv.gc.ca/fs-fi/02_05_d_39_prov_e.cfm#_ftn1
still checking on actual laws and where they are found

People in Public Places


A common misconception is that a company doesn’t need your permission to take your photograph in a public place.
In fact, one of your key protections under Canadian privacy law is that you should know when your picture is being taken for commercial reasons, and what your image will be used for. Your consent is also needed¹. There are exceptions to this rule but they are very limited and specific².

Pretty cvlear- "for commercial reasons", consent is also needed, but there is no law that would allow you to call the police and say he took my picture and I want it back. Those are civil complaints that "may" allow you to sue someone for publishing without your permission!
I bet that those very few over exuberant policemen did not have any legal reason to take away the camera or destroy the pictures.
AdamX , please do the research as it is a very interesting complaint.
I vaguely remember that in Winnipeg some CBC cameraman was charged with something and 6 months later it was dropped by the crown.
There are some interesting police doumentaries on TV , where the police car's camera, has shown how drunk a person was, or in one case , where a young female claimed she was sexually accosted by the lone policeman and the video tape showed "the truth"!
"The truth" is what we all must have, and if there are officers or the public doing damage, then proper recordings will make the truth be known!

you are right there are lots of shows that have police footage but the people on there also have their faces blanked out to protect their identity dont they? i imagine the ones who arent blanked out have given their permission to be shown.
i looked but couldnt find the actual laws on the subject, didnt have much time though as i'm at work right now.
bottom line is that the cameraman could have easily just shown the backhoe guy some respect and not taped him, and the police could be off doing something useful instead.

Watch COPS. Almost no-one has their faces blanked out. I can assure you they were not asked if they could be videotaped until AFTER all was said and done. Surprisingly it seems almost everyone agrees.

What if someone demanded the police confiscate the footage and erase it then and there? What do ya suppose the cops would do?

Switch scenarios a bit. Watch the local CBC or CTV news. Look at all the people that are in and walk through the frame. I can assure you no one was asked for their permission. If someone objected I'm sure the videographer would move the camera or tell the camera-shy to move. No one calls the police to demand the footage on the videographers camera be confiscated.

I wonder if the difference is between 'commercial' and 'regular' reasons for the film...'regular' being everything other than 'commercial'.

"consent is not required for journalistic, artistic" etc is pretty clear .
Where and when did this confrontation with the police take place?

Some police behaviour seems to be the bully type behaviour that brings them plenty of deserved criticism! In today's world, that behaviour is up on line, on the internet and is certainly a good thing for police to make sure that they are doing their job.
Wonder if there will be anything ever reported about why 4 police officers were sent? out or just happened to be patrolling? Wierd. Why would there be a report? Do you think the city worker was embarassed that he/she was caught on film, actually working, and would be berated by his co-workers if found out?
This is 4 months later and was there anything said ?

rosencrentz wrote: Do you think the city worker was embarassed that he/she was caught on film, actually working, and would be berated by his co-workers if found out?

rosencrentz wrote:Some police behaviour seems to be the bully type behaviour that brings them plenty of deserved criticism! In today's world, that behaviour is up on line, on the internet and is certainly a good thing for police to make sure that they are doing their job.
Wonder if there will be anything ever reported about why 4 police officers were sent? out or just happened to be patrolling? Wierd. Why would there be a report? Do you think the city worker was embarassed that he/she was caught on film, actually working, and would be berated by his co-workers if found out?
This is 4 months later and was there anything said ?

"Bully type behavour", I think that pretty well sums it up.

Don't get me started on COPS and other shows like them.

I would attribute a significant percentage of crime today is because of shows that glamourize and glorify criminals like that.

Sure...they are getting arrested...but they get their "15 seconds of fame" for it...which only goes to increase their "rep" on the streets, and encourages others to try and do the same.

umcrouc0 wrote: I know it's taken out of context but the guy sounds a bit like a self-rightous tool who feels he's entitled to do whatever he wants because he has a camera in his hand. Without being there it's tough to say.

This sounds very similiar to an incident in West Broadway 5 years ago.....