Category: Photography is Not a Crime

Well this is just horrible. NBC10.com is reporting that a Philadelphia man, Neftaly Cruz, was arrested for allegedly taking a photo of police when they were arresting a drug dealer neighbor of his.

From NBC10:

“I was humiliated. I was embarrassed, you know,” Cruz said.

Cruz, 21, told the NBC 10 Investigators that police arrested him last Wednesday for taking a picture of police activity with his cell phone.

Cruz said police told him that he broke a new law that prohibits people from taking pictures of police with cell phones.

“They threatened to charge me with conspiracy, impeding an investigation, obstruction of a investigation. … They said, ‘You were impeding this investigation.’ (I asked,) “By doing what?’ (The officer said,) ‘By taking a picture of the police officers with a camera phone,'” Cruz said.

Cruz’s parents, who got him out of jail, said police told them the same thing.”

I am unaware of any *new law* which prohibits you from taking photographs of the police. It is activity like this that is an abuse of police power and the officers responsible for Cruz’s arrest should be discliplined over this matter.

Police Officers hold a special kind of authority. Police abuse has been documented in the past and having the public with their cameras as a check and balance against police abuse should be something that as a society we protect. Would Rodney King ever have seen justice were it not for the camera of a witness? If people are fearful that they will be retaliated against when they photograph the police then we are that much worse off as a society. Those entrusted with safeguarding our society through force should have the highest ethics when it comes to dealing with the public. To arrest someone for taking a photo of an arrest is wrong.

Thanks, ~Chels~

In response to my run in with an unidentified individual who identified himself as a police officer, assaulted me and refused to show me identification as a police officer, I received this letter from Bechtel Corporation yesterday.

I have again asked for the name of the individual who identified himself as a police officer and requested Bechtel tell me what if any disciplinary action was taken against this individual.

While Bechtel still refuses to confirm whether or not the individual who harrassed and assaulted me is an employee of theirs, it is probably fair to assume that they would not be sending an apology letter were he not. I will continue to pursue this though and am confident that I will be able to get more information with regards to this case.

Update: I sent the following email to Michael Fletcher at Bechtel today: “Hi Michael, just writing to see if any update is available regarding my run in with your employee.

Also, one other thing with regards to your apology letter, you state in it that I have no objection with checking in with the building owner prior to shooting photos of the building from public space. I do actually have an objection to this and do not feel that I need to check in with the building in order to photograph it from public space. Just a clarification for the record with regards to your statement. Irrespective of this though it is none of Bechtel’s business what buildings I shot and which I do not and whether I receive permission to shoot them or not. And it is certainly not Bechtel’s role to be policing me as you yourself have already admitted.
“

So I know that I write a lot about being harassed for my photography on the streets of San Francisco and for some this story may be getting old. I shoot every day though and at least once or twice a month have a run in with a security guard or authority figure of some sort somewhere. Typically I can resolve these episodes on my own amicably with the individual involved, but sometimes things go over the line. In the past year I’ve blogged about three of these incidents that crossed the line. One was when a security guard at One Bush was following me around the sidewalk trying to put his hand in front of my camera and not allowing me to shoot the building. Another was when the Sheriff’s Department detained me and ran what I consider an illegal background check on me merely for shooting near the train tracks in Oakland. Another was when a particular nasty altercation took place between me and a security guard who came out of 45 Fremont middle finger a’blazin’ to insist that I not shoot that building.

But today’s episode was the worst I’ve encountered so far. Ironically enough, it occurred once again outside of 45 Fremont Street. This was even after I spoke with a PR person from the Shorenstein owned property who apologized to me for my treatment and assured me that I would find a more tolerant atmosphere at that property in the future.

Today, aqui-ali (another local Flickr photographer), helveticaneue (in from out of town) and I went out to do a bit of shooting. Since Aqui had a meeting down on 2nd Street later this afternoon we decided to head that way and shoot the Transbay Terminal. 45 Fremont was in our path and we were shooting some photos of it as we were walking by. It was then that the security guard there told us that we could not shoot the building. When I explained that we were in a public area and had a right to shoot the building he insisted and called another security guard over on his radio who also tried to get us to stop taking pictures of the building. I still refused as it is my right to shoot buildings in San Francisco from a public area.

45 Fremont Security Guard and “Police Officer” who refused to provide identification after physically asaulting me.

It was at this point that things went from bad to worse. At this point an individual came over who identified himself as a police officer and told us to get out of the plaza, off the sidewalk and to physically stand on the asphalt in the street where the cars were driving by. When I tried to object this individual (who was significantly larger than me) assaulted me and forcibly grabbed my arm quite hard and pulled me towards the street. When I freed myself from his grip I told him that I was going to take his photograph. He told me that I could not take his photograph and that if I did that I could “watch what would happen to my camera.”

I took his photograph anyways and that is him up there at the top of the story. Once he had us physically on the asphalt in the traffic off the sidewalk I once again asked him for his identification and asked to see his badge. He refused to provide me his identification and refused to show me his badge. It is my understanding that when someone identifies themselves as a police officer that I have a right to see their identification proving this fact. This prevents anyone from falsely impersonating police officers and abusing a false authority. I asked him at least five times to see his badge and he refused. He continued to confer with the security guards at the building though.

I believe that this individual either committed an illegal act by illegally impersonating a police officer or by acting in the capacity of a police officer while refusing to provide me proof or his badge when asked. Worse, he physically assaulted me and threatened me. I’ve even got a bruise and a pretty sore arm where he grabbed me.

This should not happen just because a hobbyist decides to take photographs of a building from a public area on the streets of San Francisco. This was abuse. I do not know in what capacity this individual was working with security at 45 Fremont but they were complicit and also forced us to stand off the sidewalk on the street asphalt. helveticaneue and aqui-ali were both present and witnessed this happening as well.

Update: I just received an email back from my contact from my previous run in with 45 Fremont with The Shorenstein Company who told me that while his security guards witnessed the incident that it was actually the security guards at 50 Beale Street and *not* the Shorenstein guards that I had this problem with today. He also told me that he thinks this “policeman” is a security officer working for a tenant in that building. If anyone knows which tenant that this might be at 50 Beale I’d appreciate that information. I am also going to try and contact management of 50 Beale to hopefully work this situation out.

Update #2: Today I:

1. Filed a police report. The case has been assigned to an Officer O’Reily. I have his phone number and will be checking in with him on the progress. I also confirmed with the desk officer at the Tenderloin Police Station (the closest to my work) that if a citizen requests ID from a police officer that an officer is required to provide it. This officer also told me that it is department policy not to touch someone without first showing your badge. He told me that he did not think that this individual was a police officer and that he did not recognize him.

2. I stopped by the building and spoke with Brad Meyers, the property manager. According to Brad, the individual in the photograph as well as the security guard assisting the individual in the photograph do not work for the building. Brad told me that he believed that the individual who assaulted me worked for Bechtel but did not know his name. Brad also appologized to me for the incident and told me that photography in fact is allowed in the public park area next to 50 Beale St. He said that occasionally protocol will be to have a photographer sign a waiver to release the building from any liability should they injure themselves but that it was not protocol to force photographers into the street as had been done to me. He has put a call in with Bechtel’s security and is going to follow up with me later.

Brad also told me that Bechtel does not own the building but is a tenant.

3. I spoke today with Mike Meehan who is Vice President and Assistant General Council for Allied Barton Security Services, the company that employed the gentleman who originally requested that I not take photographs. Mike is on the East Coast and has put a call in to his West Coast office to try and determine what happened from their perspective. He is going to be in contact with me and will follow up with me on this. I asked him if he would provide me the name of the individual for my police report if he is an employee of their company and he said that he would need to take that under adviseme
nt.

Will continue to update with details as available.

Update #3:

In response to my run in with an unidentified individual who identified himself as a police officer, assaulted me and refused to show me identification as a police officer, I received this letter from Bechtel Corporation yesterday.

I have again asked for the name of the individual who identified himself as a police officer and requested Bechtel tell me what if any disciplinary action was taken against this individual.

While Bechtel still refuses to confirm whether or not the individual who harrassed and assaulted me is an employee of theirs, it is probably fair to assume that they would not be sending an apology letter were he not. I will continue to pursue this though and am confident that I will be able to get more information with regards to this case.

Ok, so instead of being known as the blogger that shuts down sleazy camera stores in New York, I’m quickly becoming known as the blogger that picks fights with building security guards and then blogs about them. I’ve had a few, well a lot more than a few, run ins with security guards over the past year and when the situation becomes especially egregious I’ve tended to shoot it, blog it, and then promote it on the internet where I feel it might get the most attention.

The reason why I do/have done this is because I feel that it’s important that security guards receive the message that public photography is not a crime. I also think it’s important that the general public be educated about the rights of photographers. I shoot every single day. Generally 100 to 200 photos. I’ve got a fairly popular photostream at Flickr and I’ve sold work professionally (you can check out a shot of mine in the current issue of San Francisco Magazine).

One of the problems I have with overbearing security guards is that 99% of people just comply when asked not to shoot a building. They comply for a lot of reasons. Because they don’t know that they have a right to shoot the building. Because they just don’t like conflict in general. Because security guards can be intimidating. Etc. I’d like to see more people not comply. I think forcing the issue will make security guards less likely to harass photographers in the future.

The ability to photograph in public is important. Without this right we would never have had the Rodney King video. Recently a flickr member posted a photo of a guy who was publicly exposing himself on the subway to her on Flickr and the guy ended up turning himself in. Photography can be journalism, photography can be art. I consider most of my work in this vein. I document my world as a citizen journalist and I shoot mostly urban photography to create art.

Shooting a building posses little threat to either the building or the occupants. It is super easy to get any shot you want covertly if you are only trying to get details and not structured art shots and most of the work that I do provides no relevant information that could be of use for terrorism. Yes, a building has windows. Yes, it has doors, Guess what? It even has elevators. Seeing photos of a building like this in no way gives terrorists an advantage.

But as much as I’ve been hassled I think that there is a right way and a wrong way to go about it. I get hassled at the vast majority of buildings that I shoot when I am noticed by security guards. I typically don’t blog it unless it’s especially egregious (as in the recent post I did on 45 Fremont or one I did last year on One Bush St.).

Last night, for instance, I was harassed again. This time at the JP Morgan Building on Mission Street. But it wasn’t as big of a deal as 45 Fremont St. because the guard was less of a prick. At 45 Fremont the guard came out middle finger blazin’ before we even said two words. I’m sure he probably regrets this decision now because a media relations representative for the Shorenstein Group agreed with me yesterday on the phone that his actions were inappropriate. I’m sure he’s been talked to, reprimanded, disciplined, etc. And the story has changed things for 45 Fremont. In addition to shooting the JP Morgan Building last night, I also stopped back by 45 Fremont to take some more night shots of it. Security saw me, and you know what? They left me alone. I appreciate that and I appreciate that the Shorenstein Group has obviously had a conversation with their security guards about how better to handle photographers.

But back the JP Morgan Building. The first thing that happened as I was shooting the building is that a female security guard came out and told me that I couldn’t shoot the building. I said I was going to continue to shoot it. She went back inside and then got a male security guard. He also told me that I couldn’t shoot the building and seemed to be the superior of the two. I explained to him that I was a professional (I kind of consider myself professional in a sense as I’ve sold several photos and have been published in major magazines and on TV) and that I was going to keep shooting the building.

His response to me was that I wasn’t going to shoot the building while he was on watch and that if I wanted to come back after he got off at 11:00 pm he could be sure to deal with me. This sounded like a veiled threat to me. Like he was suggesting that he would “deal with me” with violence. I asked him if he was threatening me. He said no, that he wouldn’t be that stupid but that I wasn’t taking photos on his watch and that we could come back after he got off at 11:00 pm to settle it.

He then asked me if I wanted him to call the cops. I said yes, of course. He said I’ll dial 911 right now. I said, great, go for it. The female guard then came back out and said, do you want me to call the supervisor? To which he answered no and which I answered, no don’t call the supervisor call 911. Let’s call the cops right now.

This first line of “let’s call the cops defense” wasn’t working. So he abandoned that. They never call the cops by the way. And even if they did you’re not doing anything wrong. A cop should know this.

Then I said well then how are you going to stop me from taking pictures (and I was kind of shooting as I was talking) and he said I’m going to get in all the photos you’re taking. So I took a few shots of him. I’ve actually got a pretty good one that I might post later. He was posing and all. It looks great close up with a wide angled lens and he’s doing some great hand motions. I told him that two days ago the security guard over at 45 Fremont flipped me the bird and I took pictures of him and his response was “Oh, I’d never be that stupid.”

He then went into questioning me about being a “professional” photographer. If you’re a professional then let me see your license. I explained that professional photographers didn’t need licenses, that it wasn’t like being a truck driver or something. We argued about this for a while with him trying to convince me that I needed a license.

He then tried to argue with me that the little plaques on the ground were proof that I couldn’t shoot the building from the public space around the building. I explained to him that the California code on the matter actually dealt with ownership issues and that the code specifically said that owners could not detain the public in this public space. To which (surprisingly) he said, “you know what, he’s right,” to the female guard.

So after about 10 minutes of this he turned to me and said, “you know what?” “I’m going to let you shoot the building.” “Do you know why?” “Why,” I said. “Because you’re a nice guy, he said. You’re being a nice guy about it.”

With that he went back inside and I continued to shoot the building.

This was one of the shots I was able to get at the JP Morgan building after the security guard left me alone.

Now stuff like this happens to me all the time and I never blog it. It’s inconvenient, it’s unfortunate, but it’s not the end
of the world. I’m blogging it now mostly to show how the situation contrasted with my experience at 45 Fremont.

Personally, I don’t mind talking to security guards. A little banter back and forth even is a little fun. But rights are rights and they need to in the end let me do my thing and it’s nice if they are polite about it. The guy at the JP Morgan Building on Mission Street was polite about it. He was doing his job but in the end I was still able to shoot the building trouble free. And he could always say if ever questioned that he tried to stop me but that I wouldn’t comply.

I hope that these issues with photographers vs. security guards will get easier in the years ahead. I hope that as more and more people get digital cameras that there is more peace between photographers and the public and security. And I hope that more photographers feel comfortable shooting buildings and knowing that they can stand their ground. I know I would appreciate it if more of them did because I think when we take time to educate guards that it’s better for all of us.

So today there I was minding my own business shooting 45 Fremont in downtown San Francisco when all of a sudden a Shorenstein Company employee security guard decides to give me the finger in my photographs of the building. Next thing you know I get the typical hassle. Except normally when the guards come out all polite like and all this guy instead comes out middle finger a blazing and telling me that I’m not allowed to photograph the building from the public space.

He goes on to tell me how he doesn’t like to have his photograph taken, etc. (hint, if you don’t like your photograph taken, probably best not to come swaggering out of a public building middle finger a blazin’, remember any old asshole can have a blog these days). And insists on telling me how if I want to photograph the building I’m going to need to get approval from building management. blah, blah, blah.

Well, this guy got off on the wrong foot with me in the first place so I politely inform him that despite his objections that I’m on public property and as such have every right to photograph whatever I want and if he’d like he can feel free to call the police and the three of us can have a conversation. Of course he asks me why I need to be such an asshole and I remind him that he was the one giving me the bird, etc. etc. All I am is a lowly photography hobbyist but that since he was being so nice and all that he could look forward to his photo being on the internet.

He asks me if I *really* want him to call the police. Again, I answer nicely, yes. At this point he goes back inside. I go around to shoot the other side of the building and his boss comes out and he’s pissed. You’re not allowed to photograph this building he says. “Says who,” I say. “Says me, I’m the owner,” he says, you’re on my property.”

Now I’ve seen Walter Shorenstein, San Francisco’s real estate mogul, before and this guy definitely ain’t Shorenstein. So I object. I remind Mr. fake Shorenstein that I’m on public property and that I have every right ot shoot the building. He asks me why I’m shooting the building and (only because I’m pissed at this point) I tell him that this is none of his business. Now with this he flips it. Some third party seems it’s his business to chime in and sides with the security guard and tells me, you know he’s right, your not allowed to take photos of this building (um. ok Chet).

The security guard then seems fit to chime in, post 9/11 you know. They don’t want photos of the building.

So I politely tell this 2nd security guy, the fake Walter Shorenstein, that I’m actually allowed to take photos of the building and suggest that he call the SFPD if he’d like and he gives me one of these straight on looks and asks me if that’s *really* what I want him to do because I’ll be arrested and all that and I say yes, please. He then asks me if I’m going to be there when they arrive and I say, certainly of course, and with that he pouts off and heads back into his building.

I then finish my shots and when I’m done go about my way.

Now. First off, this happens to me all the time. I’m not sure why I feel so inclined to post about it today. Perhaps it’s because my blog traffic’s down. But probably the fact that the first security guard decided that his initial approach to me was the finger thing and that the second one was such a prick that I figure what the hell, may as well blog it. Can’t hurt after all and I did tell the finger security guard guy that I would post his photo to the internet so a deal’s a deal and all.

But. What the hell? Post 9/11? What’s that supposed to mean? Let’s see, ok, so I’ve got photos of a building. Yep, there’s the door, yep, guess what, it’s got glass windows. Wouldn’t want those top secret photos of the building’s revolving doors to get out there now. Just imagine the strategic advantage that that door shot would give a terrorist! He could, well, he’d know how to get into the building for pete’s sake.

It’s just stupid. I’m tired of dealing with security at almost every single building that I shoot. News Flash! Photographing architecture is NOT a crime. It’s not illegal! And while 98% of photographers probably just let these fake Walter Shorenstein type cops push them around it shouldn’t happen. And I think that from now on I’m going to start a collection of these mugs and hopefully, at least in San Francisco, after a while the harrasment stops.

In the meantime, I got my shots today which you can see in this Flickr set and do plan actually on going back in the next few days and especially at night to try and get more shots of this building. Oh and the other good thing that came out of this is that about two weeks ago lovely figment on Flickr invited me to the flickr group GFY. You might be able to figure out what it stands for but it’s basically a flickr group devoted to people flipping the bird. Since I haven’t got a shot of myself flipping the bird yet I guess I finally got myself an official submission today. Thanks dude.

Oh, and by the way, I’d definitely recommend the latest issue of JPG Magazine, #5, Photography is Not a Crime. Not only is it a great collection of issues (disclaimer, I’ve got a shot in there of another of my run ins with building security at One Bush St.) but it’s got a great photographer’s rights pull out card by Portland attorney Bert Krages which does a great job of spelling out what your rights are as a photography enthusiast.

Update: I just spoke with Andrew Neilly who handles media relations for The Shorenstein Group with Gallen.Neilly & Associates. According to Neilly, the individual photographed here is not a Shorenstein employee and he advised me that Shorenstein outsources their security guards — while admiting that the action on behalf of the security guard was inappropriate. He said that hopefully my experiences with Shorenstein properties would be better in the future and said that while he could not guarantee that I would not be approached by guards in the future that by explaining who I am and showing them a card that he felt I should not have this type of problem shooting their buildings in the future.

He also referenced an advisory by the Department of Homeland Security sent to real estate firms regarding photographers shooting buildings but was unable to site or reference the specific advisory.

JPG Magazine – Issue 5: Photography is Not a Crime JPG Magazine is out with issue number 5 entitled, “Photography is Not a Crime.”

This is a subject near and dear to my heart having had more than my fair share of run ins over the years with cops, security guards, and many other authority figures out there while documenting the world.

One of my photos appears in the magazine and I wrote up a brief essay on my experience when harrased for trying to shoot One Bush St. in San Francisco.

From JPGs website: “There’s another example every day. An overactive security guard harassing a photographer on a public sidewalk. Cops intimidating people with cameras. Photography bans in subways. In a post 9/11 age of paranoia and suspicion, public photography is increasingly seen as threatening, or mistaken as criminal. And we here at JPG are sick of it.”

Too many times I see photographers intimidated by authority figures when it comes to their work. Included in the book is the excellent primer put together by Bert Krages, an attorney, on photographers rights. Typically speaking these days when harrassed by security guards I remind them of my rights to shoot from public spaces and when they threaten to call the police encourage them to do so. I never stop shooting and not once has a police officer ever actually shown up.

Cops are another deal entirely. Although I’ve only been detained by the cops once and subjected to an unwarranted background check. This does happen and it is important for the cops to know that our hobby is not grounds for illegal search and seizure. As JPG reminds us, “we are not a threat.”

The cost of the issue is $19.99. For a sneak peak of what the magazine looks like click here. I will say that the JPG printing quality is high and the magazine is well worth the bucks.

Thanks again to Derek and Heather for putting this publication together.

7Online.com: New York City and Tri-State News from WABC-TV: In yet another case of police abuse of authority, photographer Ben Hilder was held for two hours by Weschester Court police for taking photos of a flag in front of the court house.

Ben Hider, Photographer: “Emptied my pockets, searched me, frisked me, started telling me about the recent terrorist threats in America over the past five years and ‘haven’t I been watching the news?

Although David Bookstaver, from the Office of Court Administration apologized to the photographer this is simply unacceptable. Since when is photography a crime? I had my own run in with the Alameda County Sheriffs last year while shooting in Oakland. Although I was only detained for about a half an hour, I was still subjected to a background check and required to show identification to Alameda Sherifs for nothing more than taking photographs.

This is simply unacceptable.

JPG Magazine – Issue 5: Photography is Not a Crime JPG Issue 5 is now taking submissions for Issue #5 with a theme “Photography is Not a Crime.”

I’ve already submitted a photo to the issue and am no stranger to run ins with security guards and cops with my photography. Great to see Derek and Heather put out this important reminder issue about our world and the fact that most of us as photographers are not the threat that we are made out to be.

Tonight Flickr pals Ropeboy, Aqui-Ali, Ranjit and I all went down to Oakland’s warehouse district to shoot. No sooner had we begun than we were stopped and confronted by Sheriffs. They required each of us to turn over our IDs and then proceeded to detain us for about 20 minutes. Admitedly there is a small power plant and trains down in the district but ask yourself this, should carrying a camera result in this kind of harrasment? Should the police be able to randomly stop you and run your ID for warrants or a background check merely for being in the wrong place with a camera? There is a chill in the air in this country right now but I’m not sure that taking it out on the rights of photographers is the correct answer. We were committing no crime and peacefully assembling for the purpose of our passion, photography and it’s pursuit in a group that we call Flickr.

This particular cop asked that I not take his photograph. I took this shot anyway when he wasn’t paying attention. As I understand it, freedom of the press involves the ability to photograph law enforcement and what some might view as an abuse of power.

Well it seems that someone must have received the memo today because shooting One Bush Street was a complete piece of cake. The only time I was bothered at all was by a bunch of teens who wanted to sell me a used video camera “cheap.” It was kind of nice being able to photograph the building in significantly more detail than the last time I was there. I missed the first wave of photographers who had stopped by at noon but stuck around for about an hour myself shooting photos. I got some really great shots. Hopefully I’ll have the definitive One Bush Street collection up on Flickr later tonight.

In the meantime I’m sitting here in Union Square in San Francisco blogging through the City’s free wi-fi sponsored by Google. Kind of cool to be able to shoot some shots, upload them to my laptop and publish them all from the under the shade of a tree outside in Union Square. I seriously hope Gavin is able to get the whole City connected.

There is supposed to be a zombie flash mob at Powell and Market St. in about 10 minutes that I’m hoping to get some photos of as well.

Update: Ok, so I distilled the photos of One Bush that I took this afternoon down to my 35 favorite. You can find them here. Also, I waited around until 3:30 p.m. for the zombie flash mob and never saw it. I had to run to go to a barbecue so if anyone got photos of it drop a line.

I did run into someone at the supposed area for the zombie flash mob who had been down at One Market at noon and was told that CBS News covered the photo shoot.