splathrop
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
|
Similar story here (Massachusetts).
I'm often up to shoot pre-sunrise. A month ago, while walking with my camera on a stony beach near home, I happened on a corpse. Realized I had probably already photographed it from a distance in shots taken with a 24mm. (At a hundred and fifty yards, a body supine on the beach doesn't leap to view in the wide-angle viewfinder.)
Returned to my vehicle and phoned police, who turned out to be already nearby looking for the guy--he had been reported missing during the night.
I'm carrying my camera and getting out of my vehicle when a police officer confronts me. "No cameras," he said.
I'm not sure what I intended, but it probably included taking pictures of the investigation. After time spent as a photojournalist (not now), I learned you always take the pictures; you can decide what to do with them later.
So I asked, "Would you be saying that if I were a press photographer?"
"This is a crime scene. Get back in your car or I'll lock you up for disobeying the orders of a police officer," he said.
This sort of thing shouldn't go unchallenged, but it can be hard not to feel trepidation. "You've got no right to say that to me," I said, "Is your supervisor here?"
"He's right there, and he'll back me up," the officer said.
The supervisor was just arriving. I approached him as he got out of his car. As it happened, he was reasonable. He had some concerns for the feelings of the dead guy's family, who were also just arriving on the scene. He said I could take pictures, "but try to show some respect."
I don't know how to do that exactly, with a camera. I don't think a camera has anything to do with respect, one way or the other, but experience tells me a lot of people see it otherwise. I took a few shots of the police from a distance, clustered around the body, and put it away.
My point is that I think there should always be push-back when police threaten rights. In the USA we've got more legal protections than people elsewhere. I see that as good for us and good for the rest of the world. Formerly, as a journalist and editor, I made it my business to know in some detail what those protections are.
However, the practicalities of the moment can be different than the abstractions. What those practicalities will become for photographers will depend in large measure on how we as a group respond when challenged. If you just put the camera away without protest, everybody's real rights get smaller. Push back.
I walked away feeling I really hadn't done enough, but glad that I had done something. Later I confronted the question of whether to make the officer's conduct an issue with his superiors, or with town government. The officer needed training, but it's a small town. I decided not to pursue the matter.
I think I would choose to be more persistent, and more publicly insistent, if the photography being threatened was more directly linked to notable free-expression issues. This incident turned out to be a purely personal tragedy for the people directly involved. Trying to make a major public case built on facts that aren't really publicly important may not be the best way to go.
That's not to say I would behave much differently on the scene, however. Just keep in mind you can only push so far before you get your head whacked. That's why we all need to push together. The aim should be to make responsible resistance to intimidation so routine that the offending police officers come to seem peculiar--completely irresponsible and acting outside accepted norms. Which is what they are.
|
)