Videotape of Police Encounter Could Bring 16 Years in Prison

Does anyone else find it a little ironic/hypocritical that the gov cries about wanting its "privacy" in cases such as this but is constantly pressing for more warrantless wiretapping? Correct me if I’m wrong, but I was under the assumption that without a warrant, the government isn’t restricted to charging you with only the specific crimes it was looking for in the scope of the warrant. So basically, by Obama doing things such as expanding the executive branch’s rights to wiretap without warrants, he’s taking a giant dump on civil rights/our right to privacy. Do you notice all of those “CIA is hiring!” commercials on the radio now? Don’t you think it’s a little odd that the CIA would be trying to recruit with cheesy radio commercials in the first place? Those are because they’re hiring masses of workers to sift through all the information from their increased scope of wiretapping. This reminds me of the NKVD (the Soviet Secret Police) back in the 50s. They’d give rewards to ppl for spying on their neighbors and turning them in, and it rapidly snowballed into a frenzy of paranoid witch hunts and people getting their whole lives ruined because they were “told on” and suspected or mistaken for doing something that was deemed a threat to the Soviet Union. They used fear to turn the country against itself – much in the same way that the Patriot Act is. On a side note, I've been noticing that these home security companies have been using fear to peddle their home video camera systems, too (which can be easily monitored by the government, giving them a direct feed into your own house… just look at the pictures on the adt website). The whole scenario that happened in Russia seems especially plausible, considering the leftist authoritarianism (a la Soviet Union) that Obama is steering this country towards. Now I’m not trying to fear monger here, I’m just saying that we have all the right ingredients here to make a huge mistake that Russia made half a century ago, and all the people on here defending it because it in the name of homeland security should be aware that they’re going down this same route.

http://investigativevoice.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&...

TROOPER ACCOSTED MOTORCYCLIST
DURING ROUTINE TRAFFIC STOP

A Maryland judge has tossed out the case against a motorcyclist who was charged with wiretapping after posting a video on YouTube of a plainclothes Maryland State Trooper accosting him with a gun during a traffic stop.

The controversial case made national headlines after the video showing the state trooper drawing his weapon without identifying himself drew tens of thousands of views.

But today Harford County Circuit Judge Emory A. Plitt Jr. threw out the wiretapping charges after ruling in favor of a motion filed by the Maryland branch of the American Civil Liberties Union.

“Those of us who are public officials and are entrusted with the power of the state are ultimately accountable to the public. When we exercise that power in public fora, we should not expect our actions to be shielded from public observation. Sed quis custodiet ipsos cutodes” (“Who watches the watchmen?”).

The decision was lauded bv the ACLU, the organization that took the case after state police raided the home Anthony Graber, a former national guardsman.

“Today is a banner day for our First Amendment rights,” said David Rocah, staff attorney for the ACLU of Maryland. “The ACLU has long been concerned about improper police threats that Maryland’s wiretap law prevents citizens from recording their encounters with law enforcement. This ruling upholds the fundamental right to hold police accountable to the public and constitutional principles they serve.”

Last month the Maryland Attorney General's office issued an opinion based on decisions in other jurisdictions regarding similar charges against citizens who tape police. The AG concluded that it was “most likely” that a court would find recording an officer during a public encounter or arrest was not “private” conversation and therefore not subject to Maryland‘s wiretapping law.

Graber was wearing a helmet-mounted camera when a state trooper in an unmarked car pulled in front of his motorcycle on March 5, jumped out with his gun drawn and began yelling before identifying himself as a police officer. After Graber posted the video of his encounter on YouTube, the video received widespread media attention for what appeared to be the officer’s hostile demeanor during a routine traffic stop.

But the Maryland State Police struck back, charging Graber with recording the incident without the officer’s consent, a move that has put police at odds with the First Amendment, the ACLU said.

State police also executed a search warrant on Graber’s home several weeks ago, taking all his personal computers and audiovisual equipment.

Among the charges laid out in the grand jury indictment handed down in July was that Graber’s Gyro helmet camera was an illegal device “primarily useful for the purpose of surreptitious interception of oral communications.”

— I.V. Staff report

Yeah right!
I'm surprised this didnt happen in Texas

Okay folks, now do you understand why administrative policing types need laws to keep them from carrying out whatever they want to do? This applies to any executive branch of any governmental agency - school districts especially. Its in our nature to abuse power and abuse others who are perceived to be lesser.

So the cops have such an objection to being videotaped (even though procedure requires them to do it to us) that they're willing to press some bogus charges??

Total crap, that cop pulls a gun out and tells him to get off the motorcycle and all he ever says is "state police".. no badge.. I can SAY state police.

Is it legal to have a helmet cam? If so, then why is riding a motorcycle considered wiretapping?

That cop looks almost as scary as the DPD lady I met. But not quite!