Police on the scene refused to tell ABC lawyers the charges against the producer, Asa Eslocker, who works with the ABC News investigative unit.

So what the guy doesn't have right to legal representation now?

-The Dave- wrote:
I smell a lawsuit…

Let's hope so. Someone has to stop the insanity!

studio36uk wrote:
The sheriff's officer is seen telling Eslocker the sidewalk is owned by the hotel. Later he is seen pushing Eslocker off the sidewalk into oncoming traffic, forcing him to the other side of the street....

I've been told the same thing here in Mpls, that sometimes the city will sell or lease the sidewalk to the private business.

I have no reason to not believe them.

mplsFASHION wrote:
I've been told the same thing here in Mpls, that sometimes the city will sell or lease the sidewalk to the private business.

I have no reason to not believe them.

I would say if that's the case it needs to be posted.

Karl Blessing wrote:
I would say if that's the case it needs to be posted.

Why?

Reporters need to be professional and know the rules before they go and try something. (or in this case they need to do their homework and know the rules.)

mplsFASHION wrote:
Why?

Reporters need to be professional and know the rules before they go and try something. (or in this case they need to do their homework and know the rules.)

Eh... know the rules... its not a rule its basically land boundary, how he to know that the sidewalk like any other there wasn't public property? Is a journalist going to dig thru land deeds and city records for every place he's going to visit just to see if it might be a private sidewalk?

Seriously...

PS: How do we even know the cop was telling the truth and that the sidewalk right there is private property?

Hermesz Fine Art wrote:
I don' tknow how many here remember the problems reporters had in Communist Europe during the 60's and 70's. This brings back memories of that day and time. Is this the direction our country is now taking??

If so, I gotta leave!!!

John

It's a democracy... but as such the majority of the average folks are letting shit like this happen... (if you think about it the last 30 years in a way was all our fault... well not too much mine as I was born in the 80s, but everything from say 6 years ago and on would be my fault too as a voter).

SouthFLpix wrote:
Up until this point it's been extremely difficult to get a court to rule against the press due to Constitutional protections.

I think the PD and hotel are going to have a very difficult time defending this behavior in the courts.

Well considering its not just another local news station or freelance photojournalist.

On a side note, was there any mentions of hotel management asking them to leave prior to having the police presence? Not that it would have made a big difference or anything but just curious.

Karl Blessing wrote:

It's a democracy... but as such the majority of the average folks are letting shit like this happen... (if you think about it the last 30 years in a way was all our fault... well not too much mine as I was born in the 80s, but everything from say 6 years ago and on would be my fault too as a voter).

Karl,

This is the crux of the problem. Today's society had become so complacent that we, as a whole, have given away our power. This has happend slowly and systematically, by design, at the will of a very small minority.

My wife, Betty, grew up under communism and has only been her for almost 4 years. Like many, she arrived here thinking this is a much better place to live only to find life, in many circumstances, is even more restrictive than the time she lived under the communist oppression.

It has taken this country 40+ years to give its self away. I fear it will take several times that to take it back.

This, of course, is an election year. Unfortunately, the trend over the years has leaned more to not voting for the canidate one thinks will be the best for the country, but voting against the one they do not like. Until we can get back to the point of voting "for" instead of voting 'against" I fear the trend will continue.

John

parkus photography wrote:
sadly there would be more outrage if it happened at the RNC....politics as usual.

They're already talking bout upping security and restrictions at the DNC.

Karl Blessing wrote:
The only places I've heard of owning the publically accessible sidewalks and what not are casinos and hotels in Las Vegas and such.

Roomer has it all of the medical district in Houston is private property, including the streets but I don't know if its true. I can tell you that lots of people have been harassed taking pictures of METRO facilities including the light rail its self around Houston.

Lumigraphics wrote:
Lawsuit! And the city is making a big mistake by tangling with a deep-pocketed, experienced organization that has the means to tell its side of the story.

I suspect that we will see a settlement which includes a "re-education" of the police force in Denver and possibly some firings.

Most cops do not know that there are back up crews doing taping even if they are fighting with the main ones. With the size of camcorders now they are just plain dumb

Rick Athearn wrote:
This guy is lucky the cops didn't shoot him on the spot. The Denver cops are well-known to shoot first and ask questions later. This attitude has cost the city millions of dollars in lawsuits. Glad I don't live there!

lol bullshit. Shooting a journalist on the spot would pretty much be instant lawsuit on top of criminal proceedings that one could not win.

Jim Ball wrote:
I seem to remember people with opposing views being kept out of, or removed from some very public Bush events 4 years ago & 8 years ago.  Seems the pendulum swings both ways.

Politicians in general, both sides are pretty much against our freedoms if it suits them.

Both sides are pretty much twisted and to a degree ignorant as a large group.

A very good example is how many senators actually read the report on Iraq before approving or denying actions there after from both parties. That's why I worry that things like net neutrality and orphaned works bills, while most may not intend for the worst to happen, may happen anyways just due to lack of attention to the finer details.

Kinda like the basic bans on photography at various locations... ok sure some of the finer points may look like a plus, but did anyone think about the negative impact?

I wonder if anyone would be talking if 90% of the photographers at the next RNC or DNC wore "Photography is not a Crime" shirts

Dave Burgie and Friends wrote:
Think Cops and the DNC in 1968

You're going to have to refresh my memory as not only was I not born until 13 years later, but my history is a bit rusty.

Dylan A wrote:
That is crap.  I mean I know some reporters can become extremely obnoxious and I can think of more than one I would like to hit, but forcing him around on public right of ways is never a good thing.  It's also particularly scary for all of us photographers who participate in street photography, event work, and other public venues.  I don't know if it is just me or what, but it seems like photographers, journalists an others interested in documenting, protecting, and observing the social health and events of our community are getting pushed harder and harder, resulting in some of the more unhinged members of the press and photo communities to push back in more and more unsettling ways.  There are two sides to every story, and seldom is one side not at least partly responsible for the choices of the day.

This reminds me of something I have been seeing more and more recently that I would like to pass on to those who do street photography and other public work where private security is likely to hassle you.  I am sure that everyone is aware that here in the US at least, if you are on public property or private property with public access (airports, building lobbies, malls), you can shoot anything.  Because of this, there are a couple of security groups going around and teaching guards to tell you that you can get in trouble for impeding traffic or causing a disturbance if you photograph on the sidewalk.  They are teaching the guards to do this when they see a police officer in the area.  The idea is to attempt to incite you to do something stupid, or accept them at face value and step off into the street.  The idea is if they can get you worked up, they can flag the officer and get disturbing the peace citations.  If they can get you to step off the sidewalk, they flag the police to get you for jaywalking, reckless endangerment and/or impeding traffic!  Who's the person who told me about this latest anti-photographer effort?  A Phoenix PD officer at an event where a guard was trying to get me to step off the public sidewalk!  Never listen to private security if you are on public property and never rise to take a fight they might try and start.

You make an excellent point. I have the personal policy never to let a ticket go without a full court fight.  Period. Don't care how much it costs them, don't care if they have to get overtime or if they are in the least bit inconvenienced.

The best bet, going in is don't say one damn word. Let them do all the talking, take the ticket or arrest and then start fighting and keep your mouth shut til you get in front of your lawyer. If representing yourself, wait til you get in front of the judge.

Don't give them an opening of any kind.

Patrickth wrote:
The best bet, going in is don't say one damn word. Let them do all the talking, take the ticket or arrest and then start fighting and keep your mouth shut til you get in front of your lawyer. If representing yourself, wait til you get in front of the judge.

Don't give them an opening of any kind.

Rather good policy, since once the pen hits the pad, anything you say could only hurt you, best to say nothing and wait til your magistrate hearing and such, since that's the only place where it matters. (not to mention when you're fighting the ticket, the cop is there on the court's behalf lol, so you don't want to give him or her any ammo).

Karl Blessing wrote:

Rather good policy, since once the pen hits the pad, anything you say could only hurt you, best to say nothing and wait til your magistrate hearing and such, since that's the only place where it matters. (not to mention when you're fighting the ticket, the cop is there on the court's behalf lol, so you don't want to give him or her any ammo).

Not to mention the fact that I have seldom if ever heard a cop tell the truth about such things. I just want to make sure they don't do it with impunity.