Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 34

Thread: Missouri bill would bar access to police camera footage

  1. #1
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    usa
    Posts
    159

    Missouri bill would bar access to police camera footage

    http://www.columbiamissourian.com/a/...amera-footage/

    If this passes, you'll need a court order for dash cam footage.

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    They are all idiots ... some want 100% exemption , others "for privacy".

    Idiots who know nothing of open records laws. Who is going to say it violates their privacy? An agency cannot say that a pic or video violates their privacy....so they gotta get names and addresses of everyone the camera sees?

    And the amount of redaction? Huge .... so huge that the redaction process would take years for a single request.

    No exemptions or exceptions....100% open.

  3. #3
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    E-mails to my rep and sen. will be sent this very day. E-mails to those two nitwits will be sent this very day.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    missouri
    Posts
    497
    If it can be used in a court of law for prosecution it should be available under the freedom of information act in regards to discovery in matters of legal litigation.

  5. #5
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    Quote Originally Posted by Ezek View Post
    If it can be used in a court of law for prosecution it should be available under the freedom of information act in regards to discovery in matters of legal litigation.
    What it should not be is the property of LE. They may be the custodians, but they must not be the owner. If the recorded event is done outside a private residence, or private business in some circumstances, then it must be readily available to any and all who make a claim to it.

    Personally identifiable data should not be released as apart of the recording if the request is not from a citizen who has legal (criminal/civil) standing to request evidence as a part of a defense or prosecution.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Location
    missouri
    Posts
    497
    true, but court proceedings, and data, becomes public domain after the case is seen before a jury and/or judge. if information is released prior it could be called a mistrial.

  7. #7
    Accomplished Advocate
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,924
    Quote Originally Posted by Mo View Post
    http://www.columbiamissourian.com/a/...amera-footage/

    If this passes, you'll need a court order for dash cam footage.
    More of a realistic answer:

    "We need a bit of time and notice in order to effectively lose the footage or develop a defect making it impossible to recover"
    John C. Eastman Associate Dean of Chapman University’s School of Law "the Second Amendment, like its sister amendments, does not confer a right but rather recognizes a natural right inherent in our humanity."

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    usa
    Posts
    159
    I hope my friends in Missouri haven't fallen asleep after the recent state legislature victories because it seems as if things suddenly got very quiet immediately afterwards.

  9. #9
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    No, though I am conflicted on whether or not we really achieved a victory. We have expanded privileges to be sure which some see as a victory, where I see it as a step closer to victory...but victory not yet achieved.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  10. #10
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    KC
    Posts
    1,012
    So, this is interesting. I'm not sure that all video should be available to all people. I'm sure i could be convinced to fall on either side. But, if I have an interaction with the police, I certainly think it should not require a court order to get the footage.

    Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,154
    Quote Originally Posted by kcgunfan View Post
    [ ... ] I'm not sure that all video should be available to all people.[ ... ]
    Which, what sort should not be available, and which people in particular should not have access?

    For instance, do those exclusions, of particular parties and particular media, include legal process of discovery?
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  12. #12
    Regular Member DeSchaine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Kalamazoo, MI
    Posts
    604
    I think, for litigation and discovery purposes, all vids should be available BUT, the general public does not need to know what I have in my house should I have to call the cops over a break in or other similar incident. John Q. Public shouldnt be able to just file a FOIA request and get whatever vid they please. I think the exemptions need to be spelled out in a much more clear and concise manner. Something like "Any footage taken inside a private residence, or inside an area with a solid, privacy type fence is exempt from FOIA, but NOT exempt from legal discovery process, and if used in criminal proceedings wherein the suspect is found guilty, then such footage becomes subject to FOIA, but only after investigation and initial trial have been completed."

  13. #13
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by DeSchaine View Post
    I think, for litigation and discovery purposes, all vids should be available BUT, the general public does not need to know what I have in my house should I have to call the cops over a break in or other similar incident. John Q. Public shouldnt be able to just file a FOIA request and get whatever vid they please. I think the exemptions need to be spelled out in a much more clear and concise manner. Something like "Any footage taken inside a private residence, or inside an area with a solid, privacy type fence is exempt from FOIA, but NOT exempt from legal discovery process, and if used in criminal proceedings wherein the suspect is found guilty, then such footage becomes subject to FOIA, but only after investigation and initial trial have been completed."
    Then any foul play by cops inside a bldg would be exempt .. so no, I don't think disclosure is proper.

    There are already exemptions for privacy.

    No need for any further exemptions.

    Read your Act and understand it and you'll see that further exemptions or exceptions are not needed.

  14. #14
    Accomplished Advocate BB62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,887
    Missouri needs what a number of other states have - REAL open records laws. Laws which allow municipalities to charge for research and the cost of duplication beyond actual photocopying/media cost are detrimental to open government.

  15. #15
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by BB62 View Post
    Missouri needs what a number of other states have - REAL open records laws. Laws which allow municipalities to charge for research and the cost of duplication beyond actual photocopying/media cost are detrimental to open government.
    Before 1975, records were available under common law (and still are available under common law)...so the lack of statues is really not a barrier for most record requests. Failure to produce the records result in a mandamus action if it was a common law request.

    As far as costs go ... agencies do not have to do research at all. They have to search for records. Search time should never be recoverable [otherwise they would store records in a manner that would require large $$ to search]. But this depends on your state laws for state records.

    Never say research in a records request ... because you can only get access to records that exist, you cannot require them to produce a new record. Research = produce new stuff.

    And FOIA laws are all about access ... should cost nothing just to gain access to records. I never ask for copies of records, only access to inspect. I have a crapload of records I have not paid a dime for.
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 02-08-2015 at 11:38 AM.

  16. #16
    Accomplished Advocate
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,924
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    And FOIA laws are all about access ... should cost nothing just to gain access to records. I never ask for copies of records, only access to inspect. I have a crapload of records I have not paid a dime for.
    Your not in MO.

    They make it pretty expensive and real hard to do.

    Some of the localities have even resisted sharing the ordinance book when not published on line.

    There was actually a video online a few years ago where the cops came out and were threatening to beat the requester in the parking lot. His offense? He requested a complaint form but would not discuss the issue with the desk duty cop.

    Corruption among municipal governing bodies is horrible here, it is what fostered the riots in Ferguson. Opinions may well vary on the Mike Brown situation, but rest assured the core problem is the fuel, Brown was only a spark.
    John C. Eastman Associate Dean of Chapman University’s School of Law "the Second Amendment, like its sister amendments, does not confer a right but rather recognizes a natural right inherent in our humanity."

  17. #17
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    I too have witnessed a reluctance by local government to follow the law in all situations.
    "I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it." - Thomas Jefferson.

    "Better that ten guilty persons escape, than that one innocent suffer" - English jurist William Blackstone.
    It is AFAIK original to me. Compromise is failure on the installment plan, particularly when dealing with so intractable an opponent as ignorance. - Nightmare

  18. #18
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by LMTD View Post
    Your not in MO.

    They make it pretty expensive and real hard to do.

    Some of the localities have even resisted sharing the ordinance book when not published on line.

    There was actually a video online a few years ago where the cops came out and were threatening to beat the requester in the parking lot. His offense? He requested a complaint form but would not discuss the issue with the desk duty cop.

    Corruption among municipal governing bodies is horrible here, it is what fostered the riots in Ferguson. Opinions may well vary on the Mike Brown situation, but rest assured the core problem is the fuel, Brown was only a spark.
    How so? Your state sunshine laws 610.011 seq are similar to other state's.

    http://www.moga.mo.gov/mostatutes/Ch...tIndex610.html

    You can inspect records w/o costs.

    And you can get $1000 for a violation...sweet.

    Here's a clue: no one anywhere complies with the open records/open meetings law.
    Occasionally I get a real gem that does comply.

    I would be a millionaire in MO....
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 02-09-2015 at 12:13 PM.

  19. #19
    Accomplished Advocate
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,924
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    How so? Your state sunshine laws 610.011 seq are similar to other state's.

    http://www.moga.mo.gov/mostatutes/Ch...tIndex610.html


    I would be a millionaire in MO....
    Might want to re-evaluate how rich you are going to get since they are going to charge you around 25 an hour to find the records for you.

    (2) Fees for providing access to public records maintained on computer facilities, recording tapes or disks, videotapes or films, pictures, maps, slides, graphics, illustrations or similar audio or visual items or devices, and for paper copies larger than nine by fourteen inches shall include only the cost of copies, staff time, which shall not exceed the average hourly rate of pay for staff of the public governmental body required for making copies and programming, if necessary, and the cost of the disk, tape, or other medium used for the duplication. Fees for maps, blueprints, or plats that require special expertise to duplicate may include the actual rate of compensation for the trained personnel required to duplicate such maps, blueprints, or plats. If programming is required beyond the customary and usual level to comply with a request for records or information, the fees for compliance may include the actual costs of such programming.

    Come on down and show us how its done Dave, this is the show me state after all.
    John C. Eastman Associate Dean of Chapman University’s School of Law "the Second Amendment, like its sister amendments, does not confer a right but rather recognizes a natural right inherent in our humanity."

  20. #20
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by LMTD View Post
    Might want to re-evaluate how rich you are going to get since they are going to charge you around 25 an hour to find the records for you.

    610.026. 1. Except as otherwise provided by law, each public governmental body shall provide access to and, upon request, furnish copies of public records subject to the following: (added by me-noting MO section below)

    (2) Fees for providing access to public records maintained on computer facilities, recording tapes or disks, videotapes or films, pictures, maps, slides, graphics, illustrations or similar audio or visual items or devices, and for paper copies larger than nine by fourteen inches shall include only the cost of copies, staff time, which shall not exceed the average hourly rate of pay for staff of the public governmental body required for making copies and programming, if necessary, and the cost of the disk, tape, or other medium used for the duplication. Fees for maps, blueprints, or plats that require special expertise to duplicate may include the actual rate of compensation for the trained personnel required to duplicate such maps, blueprints, or plats. If programming is required beyond the customary and usual level to comply with a request for records or information, the fees for compliance may include the actual costs of such programming.

    Come on down and show us how its done Dave, this is the show me state after all.
    Those are copying costs ... all states have this ... and this section is for fees for electronic records

    **********************************************
    in my state, for comparison:

    Sec. 1-211. (Formerly Sec. 1-19a). Disclosure of computer-stored public records. Contracts. Acquisition of system, equipment, software to store or retrieve nonexempt public records. (a) Any public agency which maintains public records in a computer storage system shall provide, to any person making a request pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act, a copy of any nonexempt data contained in such records, properly identified, on paper, disk, tape or any other electronic storage device or medium requested by the person, including an electronic copy sent to the electronic mail address of the person making such request, if the agency can reasonably make any such copy or have any such copy made. Except as otherwise provided by state statute, the cost for providing a copy of such data shall be in accordance with the provisions of section 1-212, as amended by Public Act 11-150.

    and

    Sec. 1-212. (Formerly Sec. 1-15). Copies and scanning of public records. Fees.
    ...
    The fee for any copy provided in accordance with the Freedom of Information Act:


    No fees for just access in CT. Link to our foia act's provisions: http://www.ct.gov/foi/cwp/view.asp?a...88540&foiNav=|

    ******************


    But getting back to MO .... seems clear that these charges are copying charges and not charges to inspect records. Of course, some idiot judge could have always ruled that they are applicable to inspection too.
    Last edited by davidmcbeth; 02-09-2015 at 02:57 PM.

  21. #21
    Accomplished Advocate
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    , ,
    Posts
    1,924
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    Those are copying costs ... all states have this ... and this section is for fees for electronic records


    But getting back to MO .... seems clear that these charges are copying charges and not charges to inspect records. Of course, some idiot judge could have always ruled that they are applicable to inspection too.
    25 bucks an hour to research the 911 call, record it on to a cd in .wav form plus postage was the response to a 911 mwg call.

    No estimate on number of hours it would take.

    I am not saying it is legal at all, I am saying it is reality for a citizen.

    If you do not have the time to take off work and go down to the office only between 9 and 4 then you pretty much are at their mercy or have a lawyer do it.
    John C. Eastman Associate Dean of Chapman University’s School of Law "the Second Amendment, like its sister amendments, does not confer a right but rather recognizes a natural right inherent in our humanity."

  22. #22
    Accomplished Advocate BB62's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    3,887
    Here's a good open records resource for individuals who show up and "contribute" on every thread imaginable: https://ohioauditor.gov/publications...hineManual.pdf

    Chapter 2 (A), (pages 22-31 of the pdf) is particularly valuable for potential mimicking by those who claim to have influence in MO politics.

  23. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by LMTD View Post
    25 bucks an hour to research the 911 call, record it on to a cd in .wav form plus postage was the response to a 911 mwg call.

    No estimate on number of hours it would take.

    I am not saying it is legal at all, I am saying it is reality for a citizen.

    If you do not have the time to take off work and go down to the office only between 9 and 4 then you pretty much are at their mercy or have a lawyer do it.
    There's no doubt, record requesting can be a undertaking if one is desiring to examine more than one record.

    Normally, agencies can decide how a record is produced, especially electronic records.


    610.029 notes:
    For purposes of this section, a usable electronic format shall allow, at a minimum, viewing and printing of records. However, if the public governmental body keeps a record on a system capable of allowing the copying of electronic documents into other electronic documents, the public governmental body shall provide data to the public in such electronic format, if requested.


    I would think that just listening to a 911 recording is a "viewing" .. but it maybe that no court has ruled that way. Its clear the intent of the legislature; that e-records SHALL (ie mandatory) be available for inspection.

    This is better than my state's FOIA although I've only run into this issue a few times .. where they ask for like 200 bucks to make a DAT e-file into a hardcopy pdf version. Yet I asked for the actual DAT file (not a hardcopy of it) and they claimed that it MAY contain exempt information ~ of course, the law requires them to more than guess about it...some of those cases are pending appeals as we speak.

  24. #24
    Regular Member Redbaron007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    SW MO
    Posts
    1,637
    Sparsely populated counties have issues at the courthouse,too.

    I was doing some background research on a case and went to the local courthouse to review civil/criminal cases......I asked the clerks to point me to the card catalog and/or computer....they stated the judge had to approve it. I requested them to ask the judge if I could review them (none were sealed cases). The judge came out asked who I was and why I needed to see the material....explained I was doing some research....he wanted to know the individual, told him, he said they had nothing in cases on this person and walked backed to his chambers. Requested once more to view the material; the judge came out, requested the bailiff to escort me out of the courthouse or be placed under arrest for contempt. The bailiff came out, said I could handle this the easy way or the hard way......I chose the easier way.

    I got in my vehicle, called a couple of attorneys I was working with...they were flabbergasted. They asked me to leave and they would make some phone calls. I got a call the next morning from one of my attorneys and they stated to go back.....if it happened again, stand and be in contempt.

    i went back....the judge came out again and stated the same...who then made some comment about some people can't learn....called the bailiff....the bailiff came out, started to handcuff me, I gave the business card for my attorney and requested they contact them immediately. After sitting in the holding cell off the court-room for about 90 minutes; the bailiff came to get me and I got to see the records and copy the info I needed.

    The judge did not seek re-election, rumors were he received a phone call and internal written warning from the MOAG (Jay Nixon). I had never had to deal with him again. Since then, I have been back and the clerks have been fabulous to deal with. this was about 10 years ago.
    "I can live for two weeks on a good compliment."
    ~Mark Twain

  25. #25
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Lees Summit
    Posts
    183
    There needs to be some safe guard as to the information on the Cop Cam that people can access. Example your wife or girlfriend is raped by sick0 Sam and before you can handle it legally or not said wife or GF is is interviewed at the scene and all is caught on copper cam. Sick0 Sams best friend Perv Petey makes a request for this video information.
    No i do not think public access to ALL copper cop footage should be allowed. With that said I am not sure how this all should be handled. I am in the IT business for a living so I completely understand the hundreds of thousands of terabytes of data that will be accumulated. This is a huge problem and before the government slaps copper cams on every cop alot of thought should go into this it is not simple. Where will the data be stored? Who has access? How long will it be kept? How will it be used ( will they scan it later and find other things to charge you with? ) Are the police even capable of keeping all this data safe and secure? The list goes on and on. So before anyone rushes in to grant access to anyone or denied it someone needs to address the fundamental rules of engagement for how all this data will be handled.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •