well, I’ll get flamed for this, but if recording devices are seized at the scene, properly logged into evidence and the images copied and stored, and the recording devices returned to their owners I don’t see any violation of the 4th and 5th amendemnts
the evidence is “reasonably seized” - remember that the fourth amendment precludes unreasonable searches and seizures. creating a proper chain of custody from the scene to the courtroom is not unreasonable. allowing the recording device to leave the scene, where the recording can be tampered with, opens up all sorts of foundational objections at trial, requiring a lot of expert testimony to show that the images haven’t been tampered with
if the recording device is returned, complete with the images in the case of a reporter or professional photographer, there is no property to be compensated (fifth amendment)
just saying, if you assume the cops are on the up and up, an immediate seizure, recordation and return of the original isn’t a violation of anyone’s rights and creates a better evidentiary chain for prosecution or administrative action (in the case of officer misconduct)
I sort of disagree with the “first amendment” attorney, since we are talking about criminal investigations and sometimes different rules apply
flame away
The first sentence of the article states:
“Seconds after BART police officer Johannes Mehserle shot and killed Oscar Grant, police immediately began confiscating cell phones containing videos that have yet to see the light of day.”
Kind of makes a shambles of your entire argument doesn't it? We don't know if any of the confiscated phones have been returned to their owners, but it seems unlikely. I mean if you give your phone to the police, how do you prove it? They can toss them in the trash and claim to have never heard of you. Still think police confiscating your phone is a good idea?
What if you lost all your contact information along with your phone, or you missed a really important phone call because the police stole your phone?
Face it, they were not collecting evidence of a crime for trial, they were collecting evidence of a crime to cover up that crime. The evidence they collected in the form of those cell phone images has been destroyed.