Comments on: Seattle Cops James Pitts and David Toner Pwned After Trying to Take Photographer’s Camera

By: Ahhh, sweet sanity.

Ahhh, sweet sanity. — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 17:44:32 +0000

[...] now. Instead, we have police departments freaking out about glowing signs and harassing people and confiscating cameras for the simple act of taking a few pictures. Sheesh. Posted in Family, Idiocy, Life, [...]

By: Thomas Hawk

Thomas Hawk — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 17:18:53 +0000

David, can you shoot me an email at tom(at)thomashawk.com. I want to confirm that the person writing that last comment is actually you, but if it is I’d be happy to add your comment as a response to the main body of this article.

Tom

By: Toner

Toner — Fri, 06 Nov 2009 16:33:18 +0000

Hello, I just came across this web site while looking for something else and read the comments about Mahora’s incident. I am the officer that arrested Mahora. I have seen a lot of negative comments concerning this arrest and wanted to give you my perspective. First of all I would like to say that not one single person has contacted me about my side of this arrest. Not the press, not the ACLU, and not one single individual. All of the results of this have been based on Mahora’s less that honest and rather self serving retelling of the arrest. First off, Mahaora has every right to photograph police officers while doing their everday work. Some exceptions apply but not in this case. There were outside circumstances that caused this arrest to become more dangerous to both the officers and the two men being contacted. The fact that Mahora was taking pictures of the event was not in and of itself an issue. I get photographed doing my job more often than you’d think and have no problem with it. The problem arose when Mahora got too close to us to take his pictures. I had asked him to move back and he did. Eventually he got close in again and was again instructed to step back a short distance. Again he complied. The third time became a serious officer safety situation when my partner was handcuffing a compliant suspect and I was seated in my car several feet away. I looked back to make sure my partner was under control with his suspect and there was Mahaora standing right next to me blocking my exit out if needed, taking a close up of my face. At this time I saw that my partner was fine and then placed Mahora under arrest for hindering. Many other parts of Mahora’s story were inaccurate and sometimes out and out lies but they do not address this particular topic so I won’t go into them. Suffice is to say that this was not an issue about trying to suppress anyones constitutional rights but one of keeping two police officers safe while trying to do their job. As for the $8000, Mahora was given the money as a settlement out of court as there was no court case about this. He won nothing but was simply paid off to “go away”. This is common practice for governments to do since handling a case in court will cost many times that amount. And yes, it makes me mad as well since that was yours and my tax money paying off a guy who was in the wrong. That’s politics for ya. I know that this will not mean anything to some of you who are quick to blame us dirty stinking cops for everything you can but I know that most of you know that we are all in this together and some might have wanted to hear the other side. Thanks

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 13 Feb 2008 09:54:00 +0000

“Do you think that $8,000 magically appeared out of thin air? That money came out of the pockets of the taxpayers.”

Granted, but the police are employed by the state, hence the state is responsible for their misdeeds. Would t be more acceptable if the police had to pay the $8,000 out of their own pockets?

By: khan

khan — Tue, 12 Feb 2008 13:15:00 +0000

“I’m glad that Mohara is $8,000 richer”

Do you think that $8,000 magically appeared out of thin air? That money came out of the pockets of the taxpayers.

By: jemmans

jemmans — Tue, 12 Feb 2008 11:55:00 +0000

There is another side to the story and that is anyone is entiled not to be photographer when asked. The Police especially as they are putting their lives on the line. A criminal may be have a issue with a police office and photographs and location will not help. I would blur the officers faces and leave the other two alone.

By: jasmine

jasmine — Tue, 29 Jan 2008 01:31:00 +0000

hey your blog is erally good one thanx for sharing it

jasmine
tech-chek.blogspot.com

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 27 Jan 2008 06:39:00 +0000

unfortunately in New York you’d have to push this all the way to the Supreme Court, because New York city has passed a local ordinance prohibiting the use of cameras, except for brief tourist-style shots, without a permit.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sun, 27 Jan 2008 00:01:00 +0000

this is great for skateboarding actually…thank you!

By: dglenn

dglenn — Sat, 26 Jan 2008 16:33:00 +0000

Re: right to privacy saying, "Is it really lawful to photograph people going about their business on the streets? I'd feel harassed and intimidated, wouldn't you? Wouldn't Mohora if he was honest?"

Personally, I wind up in front of strangers' lenses more often than strangers wind up i n front of mine (all the more so if you count cameraphones ... and I am not counting security cameras!).

Despite the fact that a significant percentage of the people shooting me are jerks about it at the time, and/or take my picture because they want to mock me later, I still support the current state of the law, under which photographing people is legal as long as you're not breaking some other law (such as trespassing) to do so.

And I'm still friendly and gracious towards those who act civilly while photographing me. (I mostly try to ignore the rude ones; I never tell them to stop, but I do occasionally point my own camera at them. Oddly enough, they tend to freak out when I do so despite having been taking my picture seconds earlier. Huh.)