
February 15, 2018
the staff of the Ridgewood blog
Ridgewood NJ,once again the issue as arisen over photographs in the public domain , and we refer you to a posting by the Glen Rock Police department in October of last year .
Glen Rock Police Department – NJ
October 17, 2017 ·
We have heard that some people have been questioning the fact that photos of juveniles and others have been taken at police incidents in the past by members of the press or public.
The taking of photographs and/or videos by private citizens and media personnel is permitted within areas open to general public access and occupancy and is permitted under the US Constitution in the First, Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments. (Christopher Sharp v. Baltimore City Police Department, et. al.). No citizen has the expectation of privacy when they are in public regardless of their status as a victim, juvenile or offender.
A civilian may video record or photograph a police and public safety activities as long as they:
1. Remain at a reasonable distance;
2. Do not interfere with the duties and responsibilities of police and other public safety personnel;
3. Do not create a safety concern for the officer, a person detained, a victim, other persons or themselves.
A citizen’s right to record police activity is coextensive with that of the press. There should be no burden on an individual’s right to record police activity than they place on members of the press. A citizen does not need “press credentials” to record police officers engaged in the public discharge of their duties.
Personal use of images captured in public? That’s considered okay. Trying to profit off of unauthorized images taken of others, in public? Some have succeeded in stopping this. Personal publicity rights or something like that.
1:52. Uh oh the dead tree is gonna sue