Yesterday, Federal Judge Charles Haight decided that the NYPD has the power to videotape political demonstrations, reversing a decision he made in February. His February ruling was held that the NYPD could not routinely videotape demonstrations, finding that the NYPD was overstepping its authority (Haight essentially said that just because it's a demonstration doesn't mean there's illegal activity going on to warrant surveillance). In another flashback, in 2003, Haight was asked to ease surveillance guidelines, it being post-September 11 and everything. more ›

Federal Judge Charles S. Haight Jr. banned the police's ability to routinely videotape demonstrations yesterday. Haight found the NYPD violated Handschu v. Special Services Division, a 1971 decision that established "consent decree"; Haight wrote in his decision, "Solely politically based investigations are flatly prohibited by the guidelines. In other words, there must always be a legitimate law enforcement purpose - having a purpose of investigating political activity exclusively for its own sake is never allowed." In other words, just because it's a demonstration doesn't mean it has to be videotaped. more ›

The NYCLU is trying to stop the NYPD from videotaping political protests, saying that the surveillance would prevent people from demonstrating anonymously. On September 10, 2004, after the Republican National Convention, the police adopted Police Interim Order 47 which allowed them to tape political activity in order to fight terrorism; Handschu v. Special Services Division is the 1971 decision that established "consent decree" when the Black Panthers sued the police for surveiling their political activity. Of course, it was during the RNC where protestors noticed the police videotaping them, probably as they were being handcuffed and sent to the grungy holding cell. How much do you want to bet the police will use blogs and other independent media for photographic evidence? more ›