Officials admit abuse of authority in releasing private information about photographer

[ilkka_nissila]

<p>Moderators changing titles is reasonably common and I don't see anything wrong with the current title in this case. When I was living in the US, I did feel intimidated by authorities on a few occasions so I'm not really surprised that this is happening, it's a cultural thing.</p>

[daverhaas]

<p>According to Virginia code:<br>

20. Upon written request of the compliance agent of a private security services business, as defined in § <a href="http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+9.1-138">9.1-138</a>, which is licensed by the Department of Criminal Justice Services, the Commissioner shall provide the name and address of the owner of the vehicle under procedures determined by the Commissioner.</p>

<p>The code also provides other instances where it is legal and permissible for the DMV / Law Enforcement to share information.</p>

<p>It is very possible that the county deputy ran your plate, it came back negative, then he provided the plate number of the security dept (or maybe they got it from the cameras) and then they (security dept) at the plant ran it themselves.</p>

<p>Although since the chief has admitted that information was shared - it is unlikely that that scenario happened.</p>

<p>As for the complaining drawing additional "heat" - my wife filed a complaint against the local PD 10 years ago - an officer pulled her over on a technicality and then proceeded to threaten her with evading a stop - She simply was driving to a less busy area to stop - The officer used a racial slur and asked how long she had been in the US. Needless to say there were a few prompt apologies and sensitivity training, plus remedial training on traffic stops for the officer - But we were never targeted or picked on by the police.</p>

<p>Dave</p>

 

[will_daniel1]

David, one of the legislators I contacted hinted at what you just wrote about the code. But he said it is only done under rare circumstances, and the process is very complicated. I'm not worried about the heat. I stop at red lights and all the stop signs, and I watch my speed when driving in the county.

[tholte]

<p>"When I was living in the US, I did feel intimidated by authorities on a few occasions so I'm not really surprised that this is happening, it's a cultural thing." It would be interesting if you gave a few examples on how you were intimidated while taking photos here in America and how that led to your belief that it is a "cultural thing". </p>

[james_poulos]

<p>As both a railfan and a photographer I am fed up with authorities who have taken it upon themselves to enforce nonexistent laws. Police should only enforce the law as written. Photography is not a crime therefore there is no reason to harass or interrogate photographers. Anyone who really believes there is a link between terrorism and photography should read http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2008/06/the_war_on_phot.html<br>

To put it plainly I am fed up with people using 9/11 as the justification to intimidate us into giving up our hobby. The police and other authorities are trying to accomplish through intimidation what they could not accomplish through legislation. Unfortunately they are succeeding - railfans who used to be prolific photographers have quit the hobby due to this harassment. Who knows how many historically significant photo opportunities have been lost?<br>

Fortunately a few of us fight back. Railfans in New York who were detained by police for questioning while taking pictures of the subway or Amtrak in Penn Station have won five figure settlements. The most expensive settlement was for a photographer who was awarded $31,000 because he was detained for 20 minutes ($1,500 per minute). If more photographers sued each and every time they were harassed by police eventually the harassment will stop</p>

 

[john_h.1]

<p>David, I don't have time right now to verify but I believe the statute in question is for private security firm licensing purposes for their own employees, not private companies getting access to third party's DMV records.</p>

[daverhaas]

<p>John -</p>

<p>I read it the same way also, but then I believe that I read a seperate item dealing with that situation (ie Background / Licensing check for employment) - This one seemed to be more of a - "if a private security firm" wants your DMV info - they can get it...</p>

<p>And of course - there's always the strong possibility that the security firm isn't really a part of the Power Co., but rather a 3rd party outsourced security firm. </p>

<p>and to the point of it being rare or cumbersome - my guess is that they (security firm) know how to navigate the red tape to get the information.</p>

<p>Dave</p>

 

[sasvata__shash__chatterjee]

<p>The policeman should/could have investigated on his own, but wasn't correct in passing on the info to the power company (as was later acknowledged by both the county police, as well as state officials).</p>

<p>I wonder though if the DMV information is, or should be considered, private information? I thought most government records, except classified information (i.e. FBI, CIA, military, etc.), was public information that is generally accessible. For instance, court and property record databases used to be available on microfiche, and now search-able on publicly accessible and free-of-charge government web sites. There are sites on the internet where you can pay a fee to do a background check on an individual, and these sites will collate information from public records about an individual including even their driving record. I am basing this on what I know in Texas, but I think this would be pretty universal across the US.</p>

[john_a5]

<p>Actually, I was also pretty sure folks could access DMV records pretty easily. There was a lot of discussion about it some years back when the whole identity theft issue was first becoming prevalent. Some information, like social security numbers and such, is being filed in legal proceedings in protected documents while the pertinent legal documents remain accessible to the public.</p>

<p>But I don't think Will is going to be subject to any retaliation from the police department, he didn't attack them, they were just caught in their own lie! Now, if he were to call the newspaper or something of that sort, maybe there would be an issue because it would then escalate beyond the closed loop the police created by their own deceit. Probably, which he has done, a follow up to the legislator with a cc of the new admission is all that is warranted--the message has been delivered!</p>

<p>I have photographed the railroad all over the country and, yes, I was authorized to do so, but no one ever approached me to ask--except once. That was when I was deep into the East Coast transit corridor and even then, there were no signs that I was trespassing. I have also shot in Penn station, unauthorized, the subways and pretty much all over the country. Never stopped or questioned. In all cases I was shooting either medium or large format or a professional dSLR--not very unnoticeable!</p>

<p>One of the points of my earlier post is that we need to not shy away from photographing but to clearly inform those that do approach us that we have a right to do what we are doing. Get the person's name, company and supervisor's name. Let them know that you know you have a right to do what you are doing and that you will clarify it with their supervisors, or better, top level management. Be extremely polite and if your self assured process to get things clarified and the name of the person questioning you doesn't make them back down, just leave. Come back another time when you have followed through with the powers to be. In most cases, even the professional photo organizations, like ASMP and APA, will help non-members solve issues--it is in all of our interests to keep our rights intact. Every time you don't make an issue,, politely but with self assurance, you empower the idiots!</p>

<p>PS I want to be very clear here that my own approach is always one of smiling and being kind to their concerns. I try to joke around with them as much as seems appropriate and I even have started carrying around a little portfolio to bore them with. I also have a story of why I am there. The story is true, but may be more general to more specific depending on what I am doing. I have no issue with people checking me out, it is good practice, but I don't try to make enemies or be a know it all photographer asserting my rights--that never works. Most of those approaching you are in their "warrior" phase of life, they need a graceful way out!</p>

[kelly_flanigan1]

<p>An old buddy of mine is a *TOTAL* railroad nut.<br /> <br /> To him Will's Alco S3 is NOT a " railroad engine that is rusting on the tracks" or even a "stupid rusting railway engine. "<br /> <br /> Buddy looks at the vintage Alco more like a Leica collector looks at a 1930's Leica kit with vertical RF attachments; instructions; original boxes; ie with complete *WOW*!<br /> <br /> Thus this buddy would actually climb into running sitting idle diesel locomotives and never get caught. If in an almost about being caught position he would be polite and not make waves. He sometimes got odd temp jobs to just be around railroad stuff.</p>

<p>Will; Dominion Power is Virgina Powers rebranded name. This happened about 10 years ago. The old Virigina Power name goes back 90 years before that rebranding. </p>

[ilkka_nissila]

<p>Tim,<br /><br />Not just while photographing. There seemed to be a profound lack of respect by some individuals in the police, homeland security etc. towards the public. Of course, I was a foreigner but so were all non-native Americans once.<br>

<br />Examples: entering US at Miami International. Filled the visa waiver card in the plane, gave it to the official, who complained about the dots on top of the "ä" in my name (on photo.net this letter isn't shown either). I was told to go to the back of the room and fill a second copy of the form using letters that he could understand. It had never been a problem before.<br>

<br />Stopped to photograph some power lines in landscape in upstate New York. Police came by and asked what I was doing and I politely said I wanted to photograph the landscape with those power lines. He was very suspicious about this and ultimately he let me do it as long as I did it quickly while he was waiting. I think this is totally unnecessary.<br>

<br />When I went to see Niagara Falls from the Canadian side, I came back to the US through the bridge and when the customs guy gave back my passport, he held it right next to their little camera which had a rotating cap on it. When I picked up the passport the document touched the cap which fell on the table. He claimed that I had broken the camera and had to pay them 600 USD or else I could not enter the US. After some debate about it other officials started to pay attention to us and he put the cap on. He said "now it's fixed". He let me go.</p>

<p>Another event is when I had just moved to Cambridge, I was taking a bike from Charlestown to Cambridge after work and I mistakenly took the wrong road which would have led to a bridge not allowed for bikes. A police car came by, stopped me and while he did eventually guide me to where I was going, he used his sirens and horn as instructions, he treated me in such a way that he could have carried me from the collar and I would have felt better about the ordeal.</p>

<p>And so on. I have a few other similar experiences but you get the idea. The authorities in the US permit inappropriate behaviour among their personnel which I have never seen in another country. I've only traveled in Europe and North America, could be worse elsewhere but nonetheless my experiences have led me to believe that Americans talk about freedom so much because they don't have it as a matter of course. I never quite felt comfortable there.</p>

[mikael_karlsson]

<p>Ikkla:<br /><br />Sorry to hear about your issues. The ICE (Immigrations & Customs) people at the various points of entry to the US are notorious for being grumpy and not very welcoming. I've never understood why this is or why it keeps going on. The huge amounts of money the US economy rakes in on tourists should be a force for change one would think.<br /><br />What you've come across sounds very much like what we call badge-bullying. Happens when someone who shouldn't have a badge gets one. These folks seem to love the power that comes with the badge but somehow don't see all the responsibilities. I intensely dislike these people because they give all law enforcement a bad name and it makes it that much harder for the rest of us. I do less and less LE work these days but I look at every interaction with the public as an opportunity to let the public know that not all cops are basterds. Anyway, I urge you to let the people higher up in the chain of command know if you ever have a similar experience. Most of those in charge see these things as being very serious and will act - partly because badge-bullying opens up a huge can of potential lawsuits. <br /><br />From your name I'm guessing you're Finnish? It's for sure that the US is hugely different from any of the Scandinavian countries when it comes to many things - law enforcement included!</p>

[dr._karl_hoppe]

<p>I occasionally do a little bit of railroad photography, but post 9/11, I prefer to have a friend f mine with me, a retired major of the NJ State Police. On several trips we've been approached by NJ Transit Police or Amtrak Police. My friend whips out his badge and tells them he's a major in the NJ State Police, never mentioning he's retired. The encounter is defused and there is endless chit-chat between my buddy and the transit cops. But if I was alone, I have no doubt that I would be hassled by the gendarmes, even when on public property or in public areas of NJ Transit stations. NJT has an 'open platform' policy, so supposedly photography is permitted on all the platforms in NJT-owned stations (e.g. Newark's Penn Station). There is a written policy from the head of NJT, but the underlings often are uninformed.</p>

[KenPapai]

<p>Two HUGE KEYS to top photography:</p>

<p>1. Access <br>

2. A badge </p>

<p>

<p >Prerequisites of course are technical capability as well as "not looking so obvious." To me, shooting from a parked car at the side of the road is obvious. Blend in--be stealthy yet confident. It's always worked for me.</p>

</p>

<p>;-)</p>

[warren_wilson]

<p>Thanks, guys.</p>

<p>This entire conversation makes me s-o-o-o-o glad I do not live in the USA. You've always been the best of neighbours, and I hope you can move beyond the fear-based public policies that you are suffering under. </p>

<p>I am very fortunate in being able to travel the world extensively. And the report from abroad is this: you guys have lost a lot of your civil liberties since 9/11: last month I returned from an extensive tour of SE Asia: including communist Vietnam, the Kingdom of Cambodia with its landmines, all across Indonesia with its "Muslim extremists." In every country I felt more welcome, free and comfortable than when visiting my next-door neighbour the US of A.</p>

<p>Hang in there. Don't let the fear-mongers beat you up any more. You're a great bunch.</p>

<p>Warren</p>

[KenPapai]

<p>Warren = no photos/portfolio, no website, no bio, freeloader on PN... sums up to total nonsense.</p>

 

[john_h.1]

<p> Well done Dave. </p>

<p>The DMV records statute § 46.2-208 would seem to suggest giving the vehicle data to a private security compliance officer is for the purpose of the compliance officer's job but it doesn't say so. Maybe case law or the referenced regulations can tell us more. You also make a good point about the admission that the police accessed the info which is different from a private request made to the Commissioner under the statute. <br /></p>

<p>Something that caught my attention was subsection 7... "<strong>The Commissioner shall provide vehicle information to any business organization or agent on such business' or agent's written request</strong>" Powerful stuff. Unless there's a quirky definition in the code for business organization that excludes security companies, why would subsection 20 even be needed? </p>

<p>What do you make of all this?<br /><br>

<br /></p>

[Barry Thomas]

<p><strong>Ken:</strong> You said <em>"Warren = no photos/portfolio, no website, no bio, freeloader on PN... sums up to total nonsense.</em>" Well I've got photos a (brief) bio, a website and I pay subs to PN. I also agree with what Warren said. OK, I haven't been to SE Asia, but I have been to Cuba, Peru and a lot of Europe and the same message stands. Special mention though of the immigration desks at any point of entry to the US, they are the first people you meet on US soil and if I hadn't just had an 8 hr flight to get there I'd generally turn round and go somewhere else. And that predates 9/11 by a dozen years plus in my experience.</p>

[daverhaas]

<p>Thanks John -</p>

<p>I'm not 100% certain why that distinction would need to be made - it does seem interesting why someone would have thought it important enough to make in a law.</p>

<p>Dave</p>

 

[gordonjb]

<p>I've only been a paying member for 3 years, I don't have a website or a bio but I do have photos, so I am not sure if this entitles me to an opinion or not.</p>

<p>I have a ton of American friends, I love your country but these days I will go out of my way to avoid entering your country in my travels for the reasons given by Ikkla, Warren and Barry. <br /> When planning a recent trip to Honduras I booked a flight which involved switching planes in Houston. OMG what a nightmare. I had been warned by others that things had gotten bad at the border but I was not prepared for the level of discourtesy and plan out rudeness with which both my wife and myself were treated. I understand the need to search through my luggage several times and make me take off my socks and shoes etc. however the attitude of the employees at the US border was beyond belief. The arrogant and out and out belligerent attitude of the women taking passports, left my wife steaming under the collar for several hours afterward. By the time homeland security were finished screwing up my dive computer by pushing all the buttons ( apparently it looked like a bomb ) and pulling apart my camera gear, we barely made our connecting flight despite a more than 2 hour layover.</p>

<p>If US customs are designed to convince foreigners to never return to the states then they are doing a great job. We am returning to Honduras in May and will pay for a more expensive direct flight to avoid landing on US soil.</p>

<p>In case it is relevant I've travelled Europe, parts of the Middle East, the Caribbean, and Central America without every being treated in such an ill mannered and arrogant fashion.</p>

[john_a5]

<p>Gordon, I know it shouldn't matter, but I looked at your profile picture--think there might be a correlation there?</p>

<p>Funny thing was it was just the opposite for me back in 1998. I had been in Hong Kong and came back to the states. I had hair to my waist, mustache and soul patch, and was wearing old jeans, t-shirt and clunky boots. My buddy was clean cut, in nice slacks and shirt and was following me as I passed through the check point--he got stopped. I was several yards in front of him and when he got asked if he was with anyone, he pointed to me( well beyond security) and was then let right through. Maybe I am just lucky, I rarely ever get hassled!</p>

<p>An English friend of mine always got stopped at the Canadian Border while everyone around him was waived through. He has a very formal demeaner but took notice of the others. Next time, he wore only a T-shirt and jeans, was slurping on a 7-11 32 oz. slurpy with his arm hanging out the window as he drove up--he was waived through.</p>

[gordonjb]

<p>So what is it you are getting at John, I look like a terrorist? Your are right , it should not matter. In this instance I got hassled considerably less than my wife, who is a doctor and looks the part. My intervention was actually what diffused the situation and prevented my wife from going off the rails and getting us banned from the flight. I am rarely singled out to be hassled because of my outwardly appearance. Whenever this does happen, I remain polite and respectful as I did on the occasion I mentioned in Houston. My wife expects, dare I say demands, a certain level of civility and professionalism from those around her. Myself, I don't much care what people think so I am less easily riled. The women at customs was argumentative and insulting for no good reason and with no previous provocation. I am not trying to paint every border guard in the US with the same brush. I was however pointing out that I can see where the sentiments some of us have regarding crossing the US border are coming from.</p>

[tonmestrom]

<blockquote>

<p>Warren = no photos/portfolio, no website, no bio, freeloader on PN... sums up to total nonsense.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>comments like these invariably tell more about the person who writes them than about the person who is adressed. Apart from which Warren is right.</p>

[john_a5]

<p>Gordon, maybe that is why I don't get hassled, I don't expect anything from others--learned that a long time ago, so they can't offend me! </p>

<p>I think the border/customs people in the US are so burdened with the extra scrutiny and pressure on not screwing up that they don't put up with too much. Maybe finding someone who they can mess with gives them the relief they need, at least if they are harassing someone when there is a lapse of some sort, they have an excuse not to get fired!--probably also a little comic relief to the day.</p>

<p>Where is Lex anyway, I mean this is way off topic!</p>

[KenPapai]

<p><em>comments like these invariably tell more about the person who writes them than about the person who is adressed. Apart from which Warren is right.</em></p>

<p>I hear ya Ton, luckily we have to agree to disagree on everything we write. You can politely email me and tell me what you think, no problems. Warren in completely wrong, as are you. I can hardly really care though. We all have our informed opinions, luckily we are intelligent. We just view the world from completely different viewpoints. <em>I know how insane I can sound, c'et la vie! Tempest in a teapot.</em></p>