Cops Shot Far Rockaway Teen 11 Times
Video: New School Students, Comrades Toss Trash Pre-Arrest
Prosecutor: D Train Murderer Was Unprovoked
Schumer: "Real Momentum" For Health Care Reform Now
NYC Wants Death Penalty In Terror Trials, Germany Doesn't
Just when it looked like The Man was standing up for photographer's rights, or at least understanding the law, things have gone sour again. Carlos Miller reports that 43-year-old professional photographer Randall Thomas "was jailed for six hours—and had his camera and memory card confiscated by a judge—after filming an FBI building from across the street in New York City Monday."
He was standing at the corner of Duane Street and Broadway and was doing a pan of the building with his video camera when he was accosted by security. When Homeland Security was called in and asked what he was filming, he said, "That’s none of your business." Probably the magic words that landed him behind bars for six hours. They brought him up to the 10th floor of the building he was filming, and placed him in a holding cell, charging him with disorderly conduct, failure to comply and impeding duties of a federal officer. They also got a judge to sign a search warrant, which allowed them to confiscate his camera and memory card, neither of which were returned.
Previously Thomas had been arrested for taking a photograph of the same building, but he never heard back about the case after pleading not guilty.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
"There's an old saying in Tennessee — I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee — that says, fool me once, shame on — shame on you. Fool me — you can't get fooled again."
Dude, what kinda f*cked up saying is that? You even put the quotation marks in the wrong place? LOL
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eKgPY1adc0A
LOL indeed.
"That’s none of your business."
this genius is a real smooth operator. while i don't agree with his property being confiscated, he is a major jackass for speaking to homeland security like that.
Yes, the photographer comments in the Carlos Miller link, essentially admitting to repeatedly dropping the f-bomb to the DHS police. Taking the photos wasn't wrong but it does seem that Thomas got the drama he was looking for.
I read that page and didn't see any mention of anything like that. Did I miss it? Is it actually one of the other links?
it was buried in the comments section here:
S. Randall Thomas // Aug 20, 2009 at 11:53 PM
"He asked again and my response was more like: None of your f—ing business, leave me the f–k alone."
OK thanks. I hadn't read the comments; I generally get my fill of them here.
Word on the street is this photographer at one time worked with the puppy kicking band surefire....SHOCKING!
I thought that photographer was female... Though, on a second look, that is questionable!
another rerun. now you're just boring.
are you in the band hotstepper? are you in surefire hotstepper? you're actin like it. go back to ohio and stay there
I am not sure what goes through the mind of the arresting officers. Do they really think they are stopping terrorism?
Are they bored?
What goes through their mind is: "we have authority, you do not"
They're like grown up Cartman with actual badges and real guns.
haha you hit the nail on the head sir.
It means there are laws prohibiting photographing such buildings and the officer is just doing his job. How many drama queen photographers should security guards tolerate? I say zero.
Please name the law(s) that prohibit photography of buildings.
The dude is taking a full pan of an FBI building. The FBI wouldn't be doing their job if they didn't ask him why.
Or, I guess, if someone blew it up, you wouldn't wonder HOW DID THEY NOT PREVENT THIS!!!!!!????
"if someone blew it up, you wouldn't wonder HOW DID THEY NOT PREVENT THIS"
Right, how could they have been sure until executing that search warrant, that he didn't actually have some kind of explosive ray gun disguised as a video camera?
Right -- because things like Oklahoma City aren't planned. Someone just wakes up one morning and decides it's time to blow some shit up.
What possible benefit would a video of the exterior of building from across the street be to any plan to blow it up? Especially since the exact same view is easily available on Google Earth.
Maybe because you can't see where the guards and police are positioned and when they change shifts from Google Earth?
The fact they were able to get a federal judge to sign off on a warrant should tell you something. But I guess judges are all assholes looking to give people a hard time, too?
"The fact they were able to get a federal judge to sign off on a warrant should tell you something."
It does: That most judges lean towards cooperating with law enforcement's requests for search warrants.
Smells like a martyr on a crusade.
Does Miller have a lawsuit case? He didn't do anything wrong?
He does, but not a sympathetic one. Pretty similar to the Gates incident.
"Previously Thomas had been arrested for taking a photograph of the same building, but he never heard back about the case after pleading not guilty."
why did he go back to the same building? was he casing the joint? he deserved to get arrested.
He deserves to get arrested as much as you do for making that comment.
i deserve to be arrested if i make the same comment again after i was already arrested once.
that's 26 federal plaza, plenty of tourists take pictures of the place. those brown shirts are bored, yes they wear brown shirts and you should see their guard station. there's a sign that says not to disturb them.
the security industry is making lots of people rich.
"the security industry is making lots of people rich."
Yea, with your money. Congrats!
One of the few bright spots in the New York City job sector!
But I guess only goons need apply.
"But I guess only goons need apply."
Or if you worked for TSA, samething.
Isn't 26 the same building they used to film The Siege where the terrorists drive a van through and blow it up?
Out of curiosity, why is everybody calling it 26 Federal Plaza? Yes, I know that's the street address, but I just think of it as the Federal Building or even the Javits Federal Building at most.
This is not good.
Thanks FBI, You make me feel so safe. So glad you and your Law Enforcement colleagues simply "keep an eye" on people carrying loaded assault rifles to public events. Just like when the Secret Service stopped a person from throwing two shoes at the president in Iraq of all places. How much time did it take for the venerable Secret Service to stop the journalist from throwing more things? And how much time does it take to spray a crowd with 20 rounds from an AR-15?
what a vag this photographer is.
Don't be so quick to judge him. Those really are a bunch of power-drunk turds there (with what little power they actually have). If you have the gall to step up onto a couple steps in Federal Plaza to take a couple of pictures, the guard in the booth will stop talking with his visiting civilian buds to scream at you, "Hey, get outta there!"
26 Federal Plaza has been around for a long time before 9/11.
The only evil people security will catch taking photos now will be the ones too dumb to go to one of the many office buildings around and go to the windows, or drive by in a car, or look it up on the internet, or pay some of the tens of thousands who worked/work there, or buy a cheap hidden camera at nearby J&R, or wait for a bad weather day so security won't bother, etc.
If yo usee something, say something.
it is none of their business since he didn't do anything illegal which is why they charge him with disorderly conduct. lame
You have the right to photograph federal buildings. You do not have the right to be a dickbag when an officer asks what you are doing.
It sounds like this guy enjoys troublemaking. There is no good reason to shoot that building in such detail unless you a.) want to blow it up or b.) want to pick fights with the cops. It's no architectural marvel.
You actually do have the right to be a "dickbag" when asked what you are doing (swearing to law enforcement is not against the law). You're just rolling the dice because the officer has the power and authority to arrest you for doing it, let you sit in a cell for a while, and have a prosecutor or someone else sign a DNP; it's just a way to inconvenience you.
Not saying you should be an asshole to anyone, just saying that it's not illegal.
"(swearing to law enforcement is not against the law)"
sure about that?
Section 240.20 Disorderly conduct
A person is guilty of disorderly conduct when, with intent to cause public inconvenience, annoyance or alarm, or recklessly creating a risk thereof:
...
3. In a public place, he uses abusive or obscene language, or makes an obscene gesture;
If people were uniformly arrested and prosecuted for that violation, there wouldn't be more than a handful of people in the city over the age of 5 without a police record. Don't you think the courts are overloaded enough?
Cohen v. California
There's a little something called the Bill of Rights. Specifically, the Fifth Amendment about self-incrimination, as well as the the Fourth about illegal search and seizure. Why is it that somebody who's arrested and Mirandized has the right to remain silent but somebody taking pictures on a sidewalk wouldn't?
Some guards are pricks, no doubt about it. I've taken pictures of the entrance on Broadway and nobody batted an eye. Elsewhere in Federal Plaza, I run into the occasional jerk with a stick where the sun doesn't shine. "Disorderly conduct" is basically police code for "I don't like your attitude."
to view a partial list of crimes committed by FBI agents over 1500 pages long see
http://www.forums.signonsandiego.com/showthread.php?t=59139
to view a partial list of FBI agents arrested for pedophilia see
http://www.dallasnews.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=3574
Shame there are no liberties in NYC. Taking pictures of a FBI is not only legal but poses no DANGER to anyone. FBI can illegally search people and wiretapped them yet we can take pictures of their building. And the man was not guilty of anything and didn't have to answer the prick's questions. It is shame that standing up for your rights is consider "troublemaking". We need more like him instead of the shallow ignorant masses.
You can go to google maps and find all the info you want. It really wasn't any of there business. Sounds like we are getting closer to London everyday
I will take pictures this weekend of this building and post on the web.
fuck these assholes. seriously. it's not illegal to take pictures of buildings--that's nothing but a fucking fact. come on...
It is time for photographers, both professional and amateur, to organize formal protests over this abuse. This thuggery must come to an end.
I will be taking pictures of that building this weekend.
I agree. I'd like to see photographers surround the building. After I'm cleared on all charges I'd love to participate in such a demonstration.
If I'm ever downtown, I'll take pictures also... and of the policemen...
As a photographer (well before digital) I think Mr. Thomas was looking for a fight, and got one, in which he lost the first round.
He's already been ticketed/arrested for photographing the same building. Warning #1. Its not illegal, but when Homeland Security asked, he replied stupidly (Gates anyone?). Stupidity is not against the law, but it got him a 6 hr. delay in his life.
Check his website. See any "architectural photography"? No. The guy takes shots of fat chicks clubbing. Whatever. Its his prerogative. But it smells like he went looking for a conflict.
Look @ his picture on his homepage too. If he was dressed like that when taking photos, I would feel comfortable in detaining him for questioning. Its not against the law, but given his response to questioning, its just asking for trouble when photographing a Federal building. Or just plain dumb and looking for a fight.
Good luck dude.
Many of you people have no respect for your own rights. You have a right to photograph a public building, and you have a right to say what you want to the police or anyone else. There is nothing in the Constitution to say your rights disappear because someone shows up in a uniform and orders you around, or because someone blew up a building several years ago. But if enough of you don't care or don't want your rights, believe me, you'll lose them. There are plenty of places where you can't take pictures unless the police say you can, and can't say anything to them but "Yes, sir" without doing jail time. Is that what you want? Maybe it is.
Rfive. I recognize you as a true photographer because you are very, very perceptive. However, I do photograph architecture and have for some time. The content of my site is another subject for another space. But I do appreciate your comments. Having said that, I will say this to those who would suggest that I'm some sort of terrorist or bad guy:
I'm a 43 yr old "African American". My Mom was born in Mississippi and my father in South Carolina. They fled the south and met in NYC. I'm clear on a few things. Three of them being that 1)I have the same Constitutional Rights as any other U.S. Citizen. 2) That Constitution protects my right to photograph what ever I can see with the naked eye while in public, and 3) That Constitution also protects my right to tell any law officer acting under color of law in violation of 18 usc 242 to FUCK OFF. Additionally, I don't feel compelled in any way to curtail my speech in anyway because because of who I am. Also, it's simply not in my blood to not do something because someone said that I can't. Whether that be where I can or can not sit or what I can and can not photograph.
Stupidity? Maybe....Maybe Not.
Hey, can I buy one of your computers?
When did cameras suddenly become dangerous to buildings? I mean really? I'd make an emperor's new clothes reference... BUT IT'S MADE OF CONCRETE AND STEEL AND IT'S FREAKING ENORMOUS. How the hell does a "no pictures" policy help anyone? I mean what genius thought this crap up and why isn't he working the fry vats at nathans?