Man charged after videotaping police

Nashua Telegraph ^ | Thursday, Jun. 29, 2006 | ANDREW WOLFE

[prisoner6]

Article published Jun 29, 2006

Man charged after videotaping police

By Andrew Wolfe
Telegraph Staff

NASHUA – A city man is charged with violating state wiretap laws by recording a detective on his home security camera, while the detective was investigating the man’s sons.

Michael Gannon, 49, of 26 Morgan St., was arrested Tuesday night, after he brought a video to the police station to try to file a complaint against Detective Andrew Karlis, according to Gannon’s wife, Janet Gannon, and police reports filed in Nashua District Court.

Police instead arrested Gannon, charging him with two felony counts of violating state eavesdropping and wiretap law by using an electronic device to record Karlis without the detective’s consent.

The Gannons’ son, Shawn Gannon, 18, is charged with resisting detention and disorderly conduct, and his wife also was cited for disorderly conduct, she said.

Janet Gannon said the family plans to hire a lawyer, and expects to sue the police department.

< SNIP...sigh >

[prisoner6]

Dang, I can't stand this "excerpt" thing!

Be that as it may...What's up with this story? I kinda figure the cops are jumping on the Gannons because they're >possibly< troublemakers in the community.

Still, Why can't somebody videotape someone on their property?

Does this mean security videocams are illegal and can't be sued in court?

Sounds like a "fun" family though....

prisoner6

[eastforker]

The charges against this guy is nothing but a scare tactic. Cops do this all t hime time to intimidate citizens. How much you wanna bet they confiscated the video and it becomes lost and the charges are dropped.

[driftdiver]

I aint no lawyer, but I would think this city has a problem. The legality of security cams on private property have been well established. The legality of state controlled security cams on public property has been forced down our throats. I can't see where they have a shred of a case. The police might also be trying to use this as leverage to get their son to plead guilty thereby increasing their percentages. Either way its and offensive act by the police force. Sounds like some detective got their feelins hurt and decided to get payback.

[tiger-one]

click on the link and read the whole article

[libertylover]

It's hard to stretch my imagination far enough to understand how it could be illegal for the guy to videotape someone in his own home. Unless maybe this is just liberal NH and they want to help criminals and terrorists as much as the New York Treasons.

[jaime1959]

Wow, sounds like something that would happen in the old Soviet Union or a Kafka novel.

[YOUGOTIT]

"Cops do this all the time to intimidate citizens. How much you wanna bet they confiscated the video and it becomes lost and the charges are dropped."

Agree 100%. If taping is not legal then all of the video cameras around the US are not legal and cannot be used to prove a crime has been committed. A security camera in your home in legal I do not care what some idiot says.

[Lloyd227]

"Cops do this all t hime time to intimidate citizens" Cops suck, especially in New England.

I've lived all over this country, but since moving to CT, I have seen a new level of arrogance and a delusional belief in being above the very law they're hired to support.

It's time someone reminds them that they are hired help and nothing more.

[driftdiver]

Read the whole article. Sounds like their son is a criminal and the police are a bunch of thugs.

[Jaysun]

God I hate those damned pop-ups!

Well, I'm sure the 15-year-old is just an innocent little darling that can do no wrong. But judging from the article (which isn't always the whole story) what the cops are doing is BS.

[happinesswithoutpeace]

For later.

[tiger-one]

First, there is a NH Statue which covers this arrest. Second, you are reading a newspaper story, not the arrest report. Third, NH law is provided to protect all from being unknowingly video or audio taped, unless you are notified, or you give your permission.
Or you are in a public place, example a ballgame, where one could expect to be taped as part of the audience Etc.
There two sides to every story and you nor I have viewed the tapes.

[prisoner6]

Yuppers, that's why i said it sounded like a "funn" family. Probably not the kind of people you'd want for neighbors.

prisoner6

[rvoitier]

I think the police have a problem, too, especially with the notices on the property saying he had a surveillance system and that it was installed 2 years ago.

Gotta say, though, the guy was a dumbass prancing into the police station with the tape before seeing a lawyer. Naive.

[gridlock]

Police reported that Gannon “has a history of being verbally abusive” toward police, and that after his arrest, he remarked that the officers “were a bunch of corrupt (expletives).”

It sounds like Gannon might have a point.

It is no way illegal to videotape the police on the street, much less standing in your own front yard or in your doorway.

This is about the time you would want to ping ol' Harpseal...

[Tribune7]

If that's a violation of the state wiretaping law then every survellience camera is illegal in Ct.

[Lloyd227]

...you are reading a newspaper story, not the arrest report...

And we're supposed to believe one would be more credible than the other?

[FreedomPoster]

Get Firefox, drop IE. I just opened that page, got zero pop-ups.

[tiger-one]

I moved from CT to NH, 10 years ago..you made a bad choice, but we all make bad choices in life at onetime or another.

Others who have posted are taking this arrest, video taping and applying, their state laws to this situation..wrong!

[tiger-one]

When were the signs put up??? Before or after the arrest? Do you know?