Images taken By police

[battletone]

I am still confused at what "receipt" this cop gave you for deleting your images.

 

[ANDS!]

They wouldn't have been able to charge you with trespassing either. Especially as you were on your way out of the facility. Also the private property certainly can dictate what you can and can not do on their premise. If you choose to do what you can not do, all they can do is call the police to have you removed - taking the photos isn't illegal. I know that may not make sense, but it's not the taking of the photographs that would get you tossed in jail - it would be refusing to leave after you violate their rules that would. You could take a **** load of photographs and be hunky dory as far as that is concerned.

Also, as someone already said - unless you wrote zeroes to this card, your images are still there. Just use some cheap data recovery software to get them back.

 

[djacobox372]

If this happened to me I would just format the card, then go home and restore it via a file rescue utility.

 

[skieur]

As for me deleting the images, it appears I did it of my own free will as I did not refuse to do so. My refusal would have possibly led to a course of action by the arena officials and/or the policeman that may have violated laws against illegal search and seizure . My bad there, too.

Bummer.

Sorry, but you obviously don't understand the law. Legally you did not delete the images of your own free will, given the obvious fact that a policeman, as an authority figure was intimidating and threatening you to make that decision. That is how good attorneys would present it and many judges would view it. So, illegal search and seizure is relevant whether you deleted them or not. The legal question is: Under what circumstances did you delete them? and Did any actions or words of the police or security agents force or intimidate you to delete them?

Remember the law is based on exact and precisie definitions. "Free will" means without any intimidation pyschological or physical, restraint, or persuasion to make any particular choice or decision. Put another way: "Would you have deleted the images without being given the limited choice by the policeman? If not, then free will was not involved.

skieur

 

[Hobbes]

hmm you can easily sue someone for copyright infringement in the States so can't you sue those fascists for sorta forced you deleting your work? If I were you I would refuse and if they do anything to me and my equipment I would sue their asses

 

[patrickt]

I've always recommended that people go to a photography forum to get legal advice. I get my computer advice from political forums. Of course, it does give an opportunity for those who have no idea what they're talking about to expound at length.

Go talk to an attorney. The first meeting, where he will explain you have no grounds for a lawsuit, will be free.

 

[Plato]

I've always recommended that people go to a photography forum to get legal advice. I get my computer advice from political forums. Of course, it does give an opportunity for those who have no idea what they're talking about to expound at length.

Go talk to an attorney. The first meeting, where he will explain you have no grounds for a lawsuit, will be free.

:lmao:

 

[Joves]

As for me deleting the images, it appears I did it of my own free will as I did not refuse to do so. My refusal would have possibly led to a course of action by the arena officials and/or the policeman that may have violated laws against illegal search and seizure . My bad there, too.

Bummer.

Sorry, but you obviously don't understand the law. Legally you did not delete the images of your own free will, given the obvious fact that a policeman, as an authority figure was intimidating and threatening you to make that decision. That is how good attorneys would present it and many judges would view it. So, illegal search and seizure is relevant whether you deleted them or not. The legal question is: Under what circumstances did you delete them? and Did any actions or words of the police or security agents force or intimidate you to delete them?

Remember the law is based on exact and precisie definitions. "Free will" means without any intimidation pyschological or physical, restraint, or persuasion to make any particular choice or decision. Put another way: "Would you have deleted the images without being given the limited choice by the policeman? If not, then free will was not involved.

skieur

Exactly! You were coerced into deleting them with threats. No different than if a private individual threatens you.

 

[Gabriel]

I finally got a response from these guys:

"Mr. Diaz,
Thanks for the email regarding a referenced incident from Wells Fargo Arena. We are currently reviewing information from Saturday night with our staff, as we do after each event. I appreciate your comments and the time you took to contact us. Many events have different photography policies, and we work to enforce and support those policies. These can range from absolutely no video, audio, or still photography allowed, to no professional cameras.

Thanks again,

Adam Flack
Director of Marketing
Iowa Events Center"

I'll hold off on responding for the moment. It seems he's saying the photo policies are dictated by the people holding the event, not the arena (which is how it usually goes). I'm curious to see if he actually comes back with any kind of report from that night.

 

[ANDS!]

Exactly! You were coerced into deleting them with threats.

I didn't see anything in the OP's description that said he was threatened with jail time or arrest if he didn't delete the card. Perceived Threat != Legitimate Threat. One could certainly argue that the presence of the police officer made the OP feel like his freedom was being threatened, but the cop (and anyone demanding he delete the material) could simply say he was asked to delete the photos of his own regard. Also, the OP himself ASKED for a cop, no cops were summoned (I assume) by event staff in regards to them noticing the camera.

 

[farmerj]

After a log discussion with three officials and a cop. I destroyed the images.

WHAT was discussed was never told.

I hope he has taken the advice and decided to shut up and lawyer up until he can figure this out.

 

[skieur]

Sorry man, that sucks. However, restore the images if you can, they are yours.

You were coerced into destroying images that were your property. Regardless of whether or not photography is allowed on the premises of a private venue, once you have taken images, they are yours, by law. Short of a court order, private parties or law enforcement have no right to force you to destroy images, nor can they confiscate your film/memory cards (unless you're being arrested). Since it's private property, they can ask you to leave, but that's it.

Next time, take a few printouts of this so you know your rights:
The Photographer's Right

This view is legally accurate. :thumbup:

skieur

 

[Joves]

Exactly! You were coerced into deleting them with threats.

I didn't see anything in the OP's description that said he was threatened with jail time or arrest if he didn't delete the card. Perceived Threat != Legitimate Threat. One could certainly argue that the presence of the police officer made the OP feel like his freedom was being threatened, but the cop (and anyone demanding he delete the material) could simply say he was asked to delete the photos of his own regard. Also, the OP himself ASKED for a cop, no cops were summoned (I assume) by event staff in regards to them noticing the camera.

Confinscation of ones property is a threat as well and, if he had stood his ground it no doubt would have led to threat of arrest. I have been there and, done that and, won.

 

[epp_b]

Next time, just format the card in-camera. This only deletes the partition table, which effectively flags the files as "hide me". You can later restore them using any old freeware data recovery software.

Even better, keep an empty folder on the card. When asked to delete your pictures, just switch to the empty folder.

 

[ssnxp]

I'm very interested in seeing how this turns out.. I'm still new to the legal side of photography.