Slashdot Log In
Amtrak Photo Contestant Arrested By Amtrak Police
Posted by
kdawson
on Sun Jan 04, 2009 02:22 PM
from the what-we-have-here-is-a-failure-to-communicate dept.
from the what-we-have-here-is-a-failure-to-communicate dept.
Photographer Duane Kerzic was standing on the public platform in New York's Penn Station, taking pictures of trains in hopes of winning the annual photo contest that Amtrak had been running since 2003. Amtrak police arrested him for refusing to delete the photos when asked, though they later charged him with trespassing. "Obviously, there is a lack of communication between Amtrak's marketing department, which promotes the annual contest, called Picture Our Trains, and its police department, which has a history of harassing photographers for photographing these same trains. Not much different than the JetBlue incident from earlier this year where JetBlue flight attendants had a woman arrested for refusing to delete a video she filmed in flight while the JetBlue marketing department hosted a contest encouraging passengers to take photos in flight." Kerzic's blog has an account of the arrest on Dec. 21 and the aftermath.
Related Stories
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
sue Amtrak and JetBlue (Score:5, Insightful)
Those companies have no right to ask you to delete photos. They can ask you to leave their premises... once it's safe to do so, that's all.
Re:sue Amtrak and JetBlue (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:sue Amtrak and JetBlue (Score:5, Funny)
Or just comply and delete them. Then after the police release you and you're walking away, shout "But I have undeletion software on my computer at home that will recover them!"
Then run.
Parent
Re:sue Amtrak and JetBlue (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:sue Amtrak and JetBlue (Score:5, Funny)
"Is it illegal to take photos?" If they claim it is, then ask why they want you to delete evidence. If not ask them why they want you to delete lawfully taken photos.
And poof the police vanished in a puff of logic!
Parent
Re:sue Amtrak and JetBlue (Score:5, Interesting)
*We* appreciate the tongue in cheek humor, but the simplest solution is the best -- take out the card after you take the pictures, or pretend to delete them and move on, or delete - then immediately remove the card for undeletion hopes.
Getting in a pissing match with a police is always a bad idea. They are not the judges, and they are usually, in their own minds, doing the right thing and unlikely to be convinced by you. Thus, do your best to get out of the situation and appeal to higher authority, somebody with actual decision or policy making capacity.
I hope this guy gets an apology and a small amount of money. I don't think he should get rich off this incident, but Amtrak police should definitely pay a price for their aggression and misinformation.
Parent
Re:sue Amtrak and JetBlue (Score:5, Insightful)
Uneducated police officers do harm not just to those they arrest illegally but to the image of law enforcement in general.
Allowing the police to get away with these situations, no matter how small, just because you have the 'smarts' to get out of it is the wrong tack.
I would suggest confronting the situation legally but head-on as an intelligent person who should be able to defend themselves in these situations. The police forces of the world's democracies need to be kept in check, and we must keep our countries away from the slippery slope of random arrests, threats and other totalitarian scare tactics some police forces have a tendency toward.
Keep your country free -- fight improper police procedure openly and in public until it changes.
Parent
Re:sue Amtrak and JetBlue (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
That'll work... (Score:5, Funny)
"Have you ever been arrested?"
"Sure...once."
"And what was that for?"
"Molesting an officer, why?"
Parent
Re:sue Amtrak and JetBlue (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:sue Amtrak and JetBlue (Score:5, Insightful)
*We* appreciate the tongue in cheek humor, but the simplest solution is the best -- take out the card after you take the pictures, or pretend to delete them and move on, or delete - then immediately remove the card for undeletion hopes.
Getting in a pissing match with a police is always a bad idea. They are not the judges, and they are usually, in their own minds, doing the right thing and unlikely to be convinced by you. Thus, do your best to get out of the situation and appeal to higher authority, somebody with actual decision or policy making capacity.
I hope this guy gets an apology and a small amount of money. I don't think he should get rich off this incident, but Amtrak police should definitely pay a price for their aggression and misinformation.
I'm a former police office and I disagree with you on getting into a pissing match with the police. If you know that you're doing nothing wrong you should most definitely stand up for your right to do it. Those who would lay down their rights, simply to avoid confrontation, don't deserve to have those rights!
Parent
Re:sue Amtrak and JetBlue (Score:5, Insightful)
In principle that's a grand thing, but when the reality is that you will have to pay a price, even if you win, and the officer in question will likely suffer nothing, even if he loses, then it becomes a distinction without a difference. Either way, the civilian loses.
Parent
Re:sue Amtrak and JetBlue (Score:5, Insightful)
In principle that's a grand thing, but when the reality is that you will have to pay a price, even if you win, and the officer in question will likely suffer nothing, even if he loses, then it becomes a distinction without a difference. Either way, the civilian loses.
Freedom isn't free. Your forefathers put in a great deal more effort to attain their freedom. It's not too much to ask that you do something from time to time to retain your freedom.
Like all governments in the past this one will also fail and need to be refreshed. What will you be doing when that time comes?
"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
- Thomas Jefferson
Parent
Re:sue Amtrak and JetBlue (Score:5, Informative)
They can ask you to leave their premises
Even that is questionable. This is a publicly-funded organization (they provide mass transit, after all) and the photographer had a legally purchased ticket. They do NOT have the right to selectively ask people to leave without a just reason for same (eg. threatening others, intoxication, etc.) Civil rights laws passed in the 1960's protect everyone, not just the african americans who fought for them--if others have the right to stay on the train platform, so does he.
Parent
Re:sue Amtrak and JetBlue (Score:5, Insightful)
As much as I hate to use it as a excuse for them,
Then don't.
However, it isn't the law enforcements responsibility to call every other department after an arrest to find out if something legitimate was being done. They were merely doing their jobs based on what they knew of current affairs.
It's law enforcement's responsibility not to enforce laws that don't exist.
Parent
Re:sue Amtrak and JetBlue (Score:5, Insightful)
All right I'll bite.
"Your civil liberties don't always trump the good intentions of the well meaning"
As one of the well meaning with good intentions, yes they do. I want your civil liberties to trump my good intentions. My good intentions are based on my moral/ethical code, not yours. Just the same as I don't want other's moral/ethical good intentions infringing on my civil liberties.
Parent
Re:sue Amtrak and JetBlue (Score:5, Insightful)
if a law enforcement official asked someone to stop taking pictures, detained the person or asked them to delete the photos of public transportation I'd be happier than if they just sat idly by out of fear of stepping all over their precious dignity
We can't have people running around with liberty and dignity—that's just too dangerous to "the safety of the masses." I hope not, but am afraid that too many people are starting to think like you. You posture yourselves in fear and hope the government will protect you, rather than resolutely supporting the Rule of Law even when bad things happen.
Parent
Re:sue Amtrak and JetBlue (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:sue Amtrak and JetBlue (Score:5, Insightful)
There are times when people with the authority make the decision that civil liberties are less important than the safety of the masses and rightly so.
.... if a law enforcement official asked someone to ....
Law enforcement is NOT the "people with the authority" to make this decision. We have a group of people who make laws. Lay enforcement's job is to enforce existing laws, not to make up new ones.
Parent
Re:sue Amtrak and JetBlue (Score:5, Insightful)
Your civil liberties don't always trump the good intentions of the well meaning.
If the "good intentions" of those that are supposedly "well meaning" include my arrest for something that isn't illegal, why then yes, yes they do. Every time. EVERY time. Just because that makes you nervous, doesn't make it not so. Sorry (not really).
I always find it interesting when people have this Utopian view of things when in reality risks have to be taken to ensure the world runs smoothly.
Personally I find it interesting (disheartening actually) when something as innocuous as taking a picture of a train can seem so frightening to some people as to be enough reason to curtail civil liberties in order to prevent it from happening.
Personally, I think some people don't have what it takes to live in a free society, as that means someone will be able to kill you if they try hard enough. It's just a natural consequence of people being in charge of themselves. I'm sorry if that scares you (for real this time, I have empathy for that condition), but I promise that the alternatives are far worse and, unintuitively, more dangerous in the long run.
Twentieth century history is full of examples showing how well trading liberty for security works out. Please do not set the bar of expectation as low as taking pictures of trains or buildings, that is entirely too far gone down the proverbial slippery slope.
Parent
Re:sue Amtrak and JetBlue (Score:5, Informative)
You don't even have to show them the pictures you took, since photography when you aren't trespassing isn't a crime. (Secure areas of military installations and nuclear facilities aside.)
If you are allowed to be there, you aren't committing a crime until they ask you to leave and you don't. They can say "Stop taking pictures or leave" if you are on private property and that is said by a representative of the property you are on. In public, you can photograph pretty much anything, especially police and other security personnel.
IANAL, and laws might be different in your state, but here [krages.com] is a lawyer talking about this, and a nice little pamphlet [krages.com] he made about this.
Parent
Re:sue Amtrak and JetBlue (Score:5, Insightful)
Try taking pictures of cops and see how long you go without your camera being smashed or getting arrested on a trivial or obscure charge.
Parent
The point is (Score:5, Insightful)
Is that how you want things to be? With public authorities abusing that authority without legal basis?
Dissent *is* still an option, this side of another Revolution.
Parent
Re:sue Amtrak and JetBlue (Score:5, Interesting)
Reminds me of when I was in NYC. There was a big bronze/goldish building around 1 Wallstreet. There was this big bouncer guy standing there walking across the street asking people either to not take photos or to delete the ones they had.
If I had more time I would have pressed the issue. Every one was across the street on public property taking photos of a public building.
I can't seem to find the area on google earth now.
Parent
Re:sue Amtrak and JetBlue (Score:5, Funny)
I can't seem to find the area on google earth now.
Obviously it had been deleted...
Parent
Re:sue Amtrak and JetBlue (Score:5, Interesting)
The only thing cops hate more than you photographing some random building, is when you photograph them.
These photos were taken around 9 am on a Saturday morning in April. Bars open at 7 am so police are around to keep 'order'. I took a ton of photos to stitch together to make some good panoramas. [exstatic.org]
Since I was in drive mode I got off about 3 pictures before I even had my camera up to my eye, an which point they came over and asked me to move along. Next year I plan on not drinking *anything* (Anything over 0.00 can be arrested for Public Intox) and pushing the issue. They're standing on a public street in broad fucking daylight.
Picture 1 [exstatic.org]
Picture 2 [exstatic.org]
Picture 3 [exstatic.org]
Parent
Send Amtrak a comment... link on contest page (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=Amtrak/ContactUs [amtrak.com]
Parent
Re:sue Amtrak and JetBlue (Score:5, Interesting)
First it isn't their premises.
Second he had a ticket, so they can't evict him from the platform before he decides at his own time to do so (not dragging feet naturally but not need to force him to sprint out either).
Third it's public space.
It is unconstitutional to forbid photography in public spaces as photography has been confirmed by the Supreme Court as included in the 1st Amendment protections.
But I'm only dabbling things read elsewhere... like ITFA...
Parent
Re:sue Amtrak and JetBlue (Score:5, Interesting)
First it isn't their premises.
Amtrak owns New York Penn station.
The "No Photos" rule, I believe, is a NY/NJ Port Authority policy. I'm not quite sure what their Jurisdiction is over there, although there are definitely rules against taking photos on the PATH (which the Port Authority directly operates)
Whether or not these rules are constitutional or not is up to debate (they're almost certainly not). However, you can't fault the officers at the station for obeying their (fairly innocuous) orders. This sounds like something that the ACLU (or similar organization) should take up in court to have the official policy changed.
Parent
Better link to what happened (Score:5, Interesting)
Here is a better link to what happened:
http://www.duanek.name/Amtrak/index.htm [duanek.name]
Re:Better link to what happened (Score:5, Informative)
http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm [krages.com]
Parent
Re:Better link to what happened (Score:5, Insightful)
Photographers have it really bad in this country... more than ever.
It is very important to have something like this with you, or to at least read it and have a copy. There are other resources online about Photographer rights and how they pertain.
Cops dont like to be challenged. They especially do not like to be outsmarted. So before you spring one of these papers on a cop and say "gotcha!", you should be polite and as nonthreatening as you can possibly be.
Make the officer feel comfortable with you, even if the officer is being a complete dick. You can often diffuse their attitude with politeness because people respond to respect and politeness.
I've taking pictures on public places, doing outdoor photo shoots etc and I've had cops check us out to see what is going on. They usually just observe to make sure you're not causing trouble or destroying property. All they really want to know is if you're trouble or not.
If they ask you what you're doing, say its for school, and you're learning photography. If you have GEAR... real gear, they're probably going to figure out you're telling the truth. Who the hell is lugging around soft boxes and strobes to public places, intending to anything illegal or harmful? Permits are smart if you can get them. But lets be real... sometimes we dont shoot with permits in "low risk of being arrested" situations :)
I can understand how police may not want you taking pictures of trains or the station but there really isnt anything wrong with it. Especially since AMTRAK was holding a contest. People have historically taking photos of trains and family members boarding or arriving at stations. Its so common that I cant imagine not being able to shoot a photo in front of a train or of a train.
I would never delete a picture a cop told me to. Thats ridiculous. I grew up skateboarding, and we would record ourselves street skating all over and I had to deal with many cops, and in general they've been nice. Most just want you to leave, and then there are some who are just assholes. In general, most of the cops were good natured folks... stern and authoritative but... good folks.
Its the dumb assholes that ruin it. Unfortunately most people dont really care about their personal freedoms anymore, and police sometimes dont act with "civil rights" in mind. Theres a video somewhere online where a cop slams a female photographer on the street, she hits her face and is seriously hurt. She wasnt even doing anything wrong other than being witness to a civil protest. Things like that make me sad and make me wonder just what America is anymore.
Anyways... be nice, know your rights and CONVERSE with the officer if possible. Make them feel comfortable with you. Ultimately if they want you to leave... its best to leave because it will just cost you a lot of money to fight it in court... even if you're right. The time wasted, the headaches, the nonsense... its not worth it sometimes.
I've been saying America is dead for a long time. It just goes to show you that your rights dont mean shit and everyday you need to make sure you stand up for them.
George Carlin said it best... just google Carlin "You have no rights" on youtube.
Parent
He's partly wrong (Score:5, Interesting)
I am a somewhat serious photographer myself, and so I feel empathy for Duane (I have been questioned before about taking photography in some places, but never arrested nor asked to delete photos).
However although it is true in the list he makes of previous terrorist actions where no photos were used (as far as I know), something to consider is that the terrorists in the recent Mumbai attacks had extensive photo and video reconnaissance of places like the hotel they attacked, a restaurant they planned to attack and also the Jewish center they attacked. Honestly I have a hard time believing that no photography was used in any of the other actions, even as simple a thing as looking at photographs of the New York skyline on Flickr.
However, just because photography (like many other things) is a tool which can be used for ill as well as good, in no way does that make it right to arrest someone anywhere for taking photos. But you shouldn't put it forward as fact that real life terrorists never use photographs as reconnaissance material.
An interesting distinction is that he was not arrested for taking photos, but for refusing to delete them when asked. The practical reality of such a situation is that what I would do is delete the photos and simply un-delete them later (always carry more than one card)... but I do think it's wrong or at least silly to make deletion a condition of arrest as there's no way any officer is going to be technically proficient enough to ensure that the photos are actually deleted, and trying to ensure compliance through confiscation of equipment is frankly almost worse than arrest as it's way too easy to abuse as a form of theft of equipment whereas arrest has more real repercussions and officers are not as likely to go that far (not to mention I'll just palm my CF card while you are not looking and slip in a new one so I can keep my photos).
I'd be more comfortable with making it necessary on request to be photographed or videotaped (along with your ID) by the police officer if he suspects you of anything (not just photography, but taking odd notes or sketches of a floorplan). You don't get arrested, you get to leave with your photos - but the possibility of being "officially" recorded may be enough to deter some true reconnaissance work (just as much as the threat of being arrested for taking photographs today). Some people see that as police state kind of stuff but honestly the way things are we are recorded almost constantly in public anyway, so I do not see any issue with one more recording being made and I don't think of it as an invasion of privacy when I am out somewhere that is not private. It doesn't limit my freedom in any way and leaning on that more heavily than arrest gives me back freedom of photography that we are starting to lack.
Parent
good! (Score:5, Funny)
he should be arrested for abusing the LensBaby
he's not a photographer, he's a motion sickness inducing quack
Attorney who track this stuff (Score:5, Informative)
In her blog, there's more about NY City cops harassing anyone with a camera.
So much for living life normally. The terrorists have won.
PUNishment (Score:5, Funny)
Sounds like the police derailed his plans.
Maybe they need more training.
That's no way to conduct themselves.
The marketing department is on the right track here.
Someone should engineer a solution.
It's part of the contest! (Score:5, Funny)
Missing the forest for the trees (Score:5, Interesting)
Nowhere in his original account (http://www.duanek.name/Amtrak/index.htm [duanek.name]) does he state that he was taking the pictures for the contest. It seems to be that the journalist chose to heavily emphasize the contest angle, perhaps to go for a more compelling story. Unfortunately, the journalist's choice to spin it as a case of the left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing, he missed the bigger picture. Photographers are increasingly faced with arbitrary restrictions and demands that are not based upon the law, but based on fear. Forums at places like dpreview.com and flickr are often abuzz with stories of cops making unreasonable demands.
The only way to counteract this is with knowledge. If you happen to like taking pictures of subjects in public spaces, http://www.krages.com/phoright.htm [krages.com] is an enlightening read. This link (http://www.kantor.com/blog/Legal-Rights-of-Photographers.pdf [kantor.com]) says essentially the same thing, but lays it out with a real-world example.
Also, to the editors, perhaps having a link to the current version of the contest (http://www.amtrak.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=Amtrak/am2Copy/Hot_Deals_Page&c=am2Copy&cid=1093554057903&ssid=224 [amtrak.com]) would be good. I was skeptical that they actually had continued running the contest until I found that.
London Underground (Score:5, Interesting)
Just as a comparison with the London Underground, taking any photos on the Underground requires a permit which costs £300 for a two-hour permit (less for students), details are here [tfl.gov.uk]. I wonder what the penalty for taking photographs with out a permit is...
How many Camera Nerds (Score:5, Funny)
How many NYC transit cops does it take to push a camera nerd down the stairs?
None, he tripped.
Amtrak security even interrupts its official spoke (Score:5, Interesting)
Amtrak security was even filmed saying filming isn't allowed, when a news crew was interviewing Amtrak's spokesperson, who very clearly was saying there's no policy forbidding filming or taking photographs:
http://www.myfoxdc.com/myfox/pages/ContentDetail?contentId=6664418 [myfoxdc.com]
Unwarranted hysteria (Score:5, Insightful)
In the name of "National Security"... (Score:5, Informative)
As far as I've been able to ascertain from the article, Mr. Kerzic was standing in an area designated for use by the public. It does not appear to be a restricted area, and from what I can see from the photograph in the article, there are no signs warning against photography by the public.
However, as bad as we may think it is here in the United States (compared to the pre-9/11 world), things are much worse in the United Kingdom. The rights of the Individual in the UK are enshrined in Common Law (i.e., customary law passed down through the ages), and not explicitly delineated in any sort of constitutional document.
For example, in the US, we have a Constitutional Amendment guaranteeing the right against self-incrimination [wikipedia.org]. A recent court case [wikipedia.org] implies that this right includes encryption keys: If a law enforcement agency impounds your laptop for analysis, but can't get anything out of it because the contents have been encrypted, too bad for them. Handing over the encryption key would be a form of self-incrimination [cnet.com], so you don't have to do it.
On the other hand, laws, ordinances, and Police reactions regarding individual freedoms can and often do change at a whim, depending on what is expedient at the time (8th paragraph, about half-way down) [theregister.co.uk]. In addition, since the right against self-incrimination is based on Common Law, and not written as an explicit right, ordinances like the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act [wikipedia.org] can easily curtail and eliminate such rights [theregister.co.uk]. As usual, some groups say that even these powers do not go far enough [guardian.co.uk], invoking the familiar mantra of "National Security".
And these things are happening in two of the most "open and democratic" societies the world has ever seen...
And on a side-note, here's an interesting question: Who's standing in the "restricted" zone across the tracks taking the picture of the "public" train platform?
Hay amtrak policia (Score:5, Informative)
Many transit agencies have their own POLICE force, Check out what a BART police officer did this week [sfgate.com]. Amtrak maintains an official police force [wikipedia.org]
Parent
they appear to actually be police (Score:5, Informative)
For partly historical reasons, railroad police of the larger railroads in the US and Canada are actual police officers rather than merely private security forces, with full law-enforcement jurisdiction. See also Wikipedia on the Amtrak Police [wikipedia.org].
Parent
Re:Amtrak Police!?! (Score:5, Informative)
Has "the land of the free" gotten to the point of creating privatly owned police forces now? Or, at least, fixing them as such in the public mind?
Railroads have had their own police forces for as long as I can remember - and I'm 48. This isn't anything new or insidious.
I am bothered by the fact that photographers get hassled - quite often - by overzealous officials who don't seem to know what's legal and what's not. This happened up here in Seattle a bit after 9/11 when a photographer was photographing a railroad trestle. But if you're in a public space, you are allowed to photograph pretty much anything you can see (even people) without permission.
Parent
Re:Amtrak Police!?! (Score:5, Insightful)
I've developed the habit of whenever I am doing anything I know someone will object to strenuously but is fully within my legal rights of printing out the relevant statutes and carrying them with me. Hasn't failed me yet.
Parent
Re:Amtrak Police!?! (Score:5, Insightful)
In Amtrak's case of being a nation-wide system, you really can't expect anything other than Amtrak employ its own police forces. The FBI won't just create a Amtrak unit, and dealing with multiple police forces (crime occurs on a train moving between jurisdictions?) is just silly.
You're over reacting.
Parent
BTP guidelnes for Photographers (Score:5, Interesting)
http://www.btp.police.uk/passengers/advice_and_information/rail_enthusiasts.aspx [police.uk]
Perhaps Amtrak should adopt something similar?
Parent
Re:OMG (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent