Man With Asperger's Arrested for Using Tape Recorder

Post Reply New Topic

Stereotyping in any direction is wrong. This discussion isn't about good cop/bad cop. It is about the fact that people have the right to say no to being filmed or recorded. This is because we have no control over the use the recorder will put to the information accumulated about us. We all know that once someone has documented our actions and words, that information can be altered and used in many different ways without our knowledge or permission.

There many ways to say no. For instance there are areas of a town near me that I do not go to because they are monitored by surveillance cameras. I enter some shops with the knowledge that i am being filmed. If I did not agree to that, I would shop elsewhere. I know that here, in a police interview you can refuse to be filmed. The interview must still be witnessed and recorded by a stenographer but I think that process is far more likely to be abused than filmed documentation. If that guy had wanted a record of the conversation, he could have requested the police record as part of freedom of information.

As a teacher I sometimes have parents ask if they can tape meetings. I am happy to have someone keep a written record of the meeting which the parent must approve, reject or modify. I do not allow taping. Words can be taken out of context and used to manipulate truth. While I think very few people would do this, I am not prepared to risk my professional reputation on the hope that other people are always going to behave ethically. Similarly I would not ask a parent if I could tape record a meeting even though in the case of very angry, abusive individuals, that could be used to show that they behave inappropriately. To me, that works both ways.

I understand what this guy is trying to do. When I was working on developing an expressive voice I used a tape recorder a lot and it was a very effective tool. I did have to accept that there are times when people do not want to be taped just as there are times when I would not want to be taped. Mostly I taped myself and my children at home as this was a safer option but they were always free to decide that they did not want the tape running. I never taped interactions when their friends were present. Sometimes upholding other people's rights mean that we just cannot do what we want.

This discussion is about human rights. It is not about guilt, right, wrong or character.

Thank you, auntyjack! Very good words.

Cops also have a nasty habit of using their power to intimidate and go too far. They also have a habit of not understanding anyone not in the neurological "mainstream" and such "criminalization" has been increasing lately. As the mother of an Aspie, this really frightens me. And when they're speaking in their official capacity to the public they serve and who also pays their salaries, they do not have a right to privacy. Screw that and screw any cop who uses their authority in such an overbearing way against those who may not fit their definition of "normal" or who are different in any way.

If they're working and speaking in their official capacity as officers, then, no, they don't have an expectation of privacy and they had no right to complain. If they're off-duty and relaxing at, say, a backyard barbeque or something, then that's a different story; they would have far more of a right to their privacy. But this guy was on-duty, so no privacy rights.

Based on both knowledge and experience, however, I have the feeling that there wouldn't have been much of a problem had the man been hard-of-hearing and needed to record, or something like that, instead of "neuro-different." For some reason, people seem to be much more accomodating of things like the former rather than the latter.

Excuse me, but just because someone has bad experiences with cops does NOT NOT NOT NOT mean that they've automatically "done something wrong." Period. Many who are not NT, or who is mentally ill, or who is otherwise not considered in the "mainstream", or who are of a different race than the cop, can tell some real horror stories about interactions with cops. Many become cops because they get off on the power. And they can often get away with their s**t because too many people such as yourself refuse to ever believe anything bad about any cop, no matter how egregious their actions. And this includes being able to fire 41 shots into an unarmed, unresisting black man, as happened in NYC, among many, many other such examples.

Cops are not trained to handle differences in the way people think and react and perceive things. This means they are often not tolerant of any non-mainstream individuals, including AS/ASD and the mentally ill. And too many of such individuals have suffered for it.

Cops have to work with everybody, mainstream or not. You think they have the luxury of not knowing how to deal with certain kinds of people? As public servants, they obviously do not. Have you ever heard of Community Relations Officers?

It's funny because if these said police officers were prosecuting a bully of your Aspie kids, you'd be singing their praises. Why not educate our AS kids on how to avoid bad experiences with police before they happen? Nothing is quite as satisfying as whining about injustice, but some things are better for you.

So the cops shot an *unresisting* black man 41 times? I'd believe that if it didn't sound like complete nonsense. How many times would these uniforms have had to reload their guns to put that much hot lead into one body? No need to account for all those expended rounds?

And for the record it's not that I refuse to believe anything bad about cops; it's that I refuse to agree with a totally one-sided view of them. You've got only bad things to say about cops. If you re-read my earlier posts you can see how I've stated this.

oh my. i think part of the problem may be that you live in Canada. do you even know any black people? i can't believe some of the things you have said, especially about people having bad attitudes about police because "they must have done something wrong."

yes, i do suppose i have done many things that are wrong. for example, i have seen a cop beat the crap out of someone who had their back turned, which is exactly what i would call "unresisting" but i just stood around with all the other glassy-eyed spectators and did nothing because i didn't feel like "resisting arrest" myself.

this has turned into good cop/bad cop BECAUSE your argument seems to be that cops should have MORE rights than the average person because they are the good guys. gosh, no one should dare to record them because they are above question.

of course in reality they DO have more rights and power. you are clapping about this injustice and i wish it did not exist.

As far as rights and freedoms go, police need just enuff to do be able to do their jobs, but their liberties really should stop short of turning them into the Gestapo. That is a very difficult balance to achieve nowadays what with personsal injury lawyers everywhere. Too many lawyers is not good for justice, I say.

Yes, we have black people up in Canada. I have seen many black people in my native land. The ancestors of these people were either of island descent or northward-fleeing refugees aboard Harriet Tubman's secret railroad. And they've come since then, as well. Canada is a very differse population. And I'll be damned if our lower homicide-rate isn't because of our more sensible gun-laws.

What are your country's more sensible gun laws?

Less access to guns. No one really needs a assault rifle or a whole collection of pistols, rifles, or shotguns. The US is as violent as it is today because of firearms as consumer candy.

That really depends on state and city law here.

Parakeet, which cities/states have the fewest homicides? I'd be interested in finding out.

I'm guessing the Midwest.

I don't know all cities' demographics, but the one I live in has had zero murders. Jordan allows people to own guns, but projectiles are outlawed within city limits. Of course, Jordan has only been around for 150 years or so.

slowmutant,
I don't know what gives you the idea that anyone has the right to force someone to turn off a recording device. If you call a support hotline for your computer, you don't have the right to force them to stop recording the conversation for quality purposes, but you do have the right to hang up. Likewise, if someone informs you they're recording something, you have the right to walk away but you don't have the right to force the person to stop recording.

As more citizens are able to afford video recording equipment, so many cops have been recorded abusing authority and taking part in beatings of innocent civilians.

The best thing to do is avoid interacting with police unless absolutely necessary and always have a lawyer present if they're questioning you.

My dad is a defense attorney and he'd be out of a job if cops stopped arresting innocent people and stopped violating guilty peoples' rights.

cops are not your friends

That isn't always possible. Sometimes I might call on police instead of police calling on me. What about every other public servant who may be recorded saying something unfortunate? I dunno. I don't lik ite. I'm not suggesting people who tape-record police are asking for a beating. I think the incident must have escalated from an argument over a tape-recorder. Maybe the guy resisted and pi$$ed off the cop.

WP is hell-bent on turning Peter Ballance into Rodney King, which I think is a preposterous comparison. I ask you what would it be like if every one of our civil servants had to submit to being audio recorded at any time? By anyone with a tape recorder? Since no one's intentions can be known absolutely, I think this would undermine a lot of jobs. A great way for malcontents to stir up trouble (not to suggest Ballance is a malcontent).

If police have no right to privacy, what about the person with the tape-recorder? Do their privacy rights get a boost?

Please tell me what law gives people the right not to be videotaped. I'll give you a hint: there is no law that gives people the right not to be videotaped.