Alex Reid

The issue of whether the police have the right to seize your camera is an increasing concern. Canadians were reminded of this last week when a camera belonging to a photographer for The Province was confiscated by Vancouver police.

Jason Payne said that police kept his camera for more than an hour before returning it.

“The gist of it is they were going to seize my camera as evidence in this situation, and that if I didn’t give it up I would be arrested and charged with obstructing justice,” Payne told CBC News.

Mack Pettigrew, a sergeant with the Ontario Provincial Police Department, runs a blog called “A Cop’s View”. In this recent post, he says that the police do not have the right to take your camera equipment or film.

In most cases if you ask someone for their help and request the camera or memory card they will hand it over but it does have to be returned. If the person refuses and does not give their name and starts taking off down the street then it is thought that this is evidence and can be legally taken before a judge with the explanation that there was no time to get a search warrant.

The rationale is simply if the police officers know who you are and where to find you, they can get the necessary paperwork (and approval) from the courts to seize the film (or data). Vancouver police spokeswoman Jana McGuinness echoed this viewpoint, that they do not make it a practice of taking reporters’ cameras because they know where to find them later.

The B.C. Civil Liberties Association’s executive director David Eby said his group will file a complaint against the department following the incident in Vancouver.

“In our opinion, there are only three circumstances where police can seize a camera: One is if a person consents to the seizure; one is if they have an order from a judge; and one is if they are taking the camera in a search incidental to an arrest — if they are arresting someone with a camera, and they are taking that camera from a person during the arrest process.”

Pettigrew agrees, and puts it quite reasonably and I encourage you to check out his blog.

Officers must be sure of their powers, you can not just go and take a camera from someone because they are going to put the video on youtube or sell it to the media.

I was listening to the so called experts on the radio show and found it interesting how they talked about how officers are uncomfortable with the knowledge that their actions are being video taped or pictures taken of them. I for one have no problem with this as it works both ways. We use video tape evidence all the time and as long as you doing your job professionally out on the streets then officers have nothing to fear.

Unfortunately we are human and have lapses in judgement at times and these seem to get caught on video and plastered all over the internet and media. One bad action can paint a bad picture for all of us. So be aware be professional and as a police officer know your powers when it comes to photos and video.

Both sides need to understand their respective powers. There are people – in all professions, on all sides – who go about dealing with situations like this in a very heavy handed way which only creates a greater division in the relationship of co-operation and trust.

I have many friends who work in media and unfortunately because enough police officers have tried to deal with them in a heavy handed way, often with a vague explanation that “it’s against the law” (it isn’t) that many of these people in the media don’t trust the police and that bias is obvious in their reporting, which in turn affects the image of the police to the public at large.

It’s not just a worrisome trend, it’s a cycle that can be prevented if photographers respect a crime scene just as police officers know the limitations of their duty.

Co-operation is a two way street.

An interesting posting about European Internet use and the claim that people will be spending more time online than watching TV by June 2010.

Information Architects released its annual Web Trend Map.

The map illustrates the connections between the 333 most influential Web domains and the 111 most influential power players onto the Tokyo Metro map, based on revenue, traffic, popularity and other key metrics.

Two years ago, Facebook introduced “virtual gifts” which you could post icons to friends’ walls. Nearly to the day, two years later, Facebook introduced “likes” where you can give a positive thumbs up to other friends’ comments (or status updates). Now, another two months later, Facebook is playing with an idea that merges the two concepts into “credits” where you can buy 100 credits for one dollar and spend your credits as a form of a comment “like”.

Let’s say a friend writes a status update that says “I loved the NIN concert” or it’s their birthday. You can award them 10 credits, which they in turn can buy virtual gifts with or pass on the credits to someone else.

Facebook Credit System

This is a good venture for Facebook as it needs to prove to its investors that it can make money beyond the standard web advertising model. But also, as VentureBeat points out, Facebook can further mine what information people are supporting.

Credits can also show Facebook much deeper information about what people think of each other. If you’re constantly crediting back and forth with a few friends, for example, Facebook would learn that you all care a lot about what each other have to say.

This will be the next step in social media; supporting comments by putting your money where your mouth is.

I love the photos (especially this week’s front cover), the articles and the new web site looks sharp!

Check out this great article about dumpster diving.