Article in TRAINS Newswire of this date: By Hayley Enoch | October 7, 2016
This is a subject touched on in this Forum on more than one occasion and Thread topics. It has had the effect to raise blood pressure in some and caused others to 'rant'.
It generally encompasses "ROW Trespass' and encroching on privacy of operating employees, who may or may not suspect ulterior motives in the individual with the camera(?).
So it seems unusual for the photographer,in this case Mr. Avi Adelman, to seek redress for the Courts on a violation of his First Amendment Constitutional Rights.
Here is some of the infgormation from the article:
FTA: "...DALLAS, Texas — A photographer arrested on Dallas Area Rapid Transit property last February is taking his First Amendment case to the Federal level. Avi Adelmen, a freelance photographer working in the Dallas area, arrived at Rosa Parks Plaza station after hearing reports of a person overdosed on synthetic marijuana. When DART police officer Stephanie Branch instructed Adelmen to stop photographing the scene, he noted that he had a constitutional right to take photographs in public so long as it did not interfere with the first responders’ activities. Branch arrested Adelmen anyway, even though paramedics and other officers at the scene stated they believed her actions were wrong. DART contested that Adelman was arrested because he did not comply with the officers’ requests to leave the property, but announced that it was dropping the charges a few days later when testimony and video evidence showed he was maintaining an appropriate distance from the medical activity taking place at the scene..." [snipped]
FTA:[snip]"...In the months since his arrest, Adelmen has contended that DART’s policy on trespassers is in conflict with the First Amendment, and that members of its police force are not familiar enough with U.S. law and DART’s own guidelines regarding photographers' rights..."[snipped]
Certainly, Mr. Adelman seems to be taking a tact that is different, and pushing a point that could possibly effect anyone who takes pictures around railroads. Since his transfgression was, apparently on a publicly accessible passenger platform? Should be worth following, if it does not take years to proceed through the Courts.
At worst he could be charged with obstruction of some sort, or trespass. I doubt he'll be found guilty of failure to compy with the demands of a peace officer. Neither is the case prima facie. We'll just have to mark time until a decision is rendered.
A linked story about this is below.
http://reason.com/blog/2016/09/23/dallas-photographer-busted-for-taking-pi
The arresting officer was caught in lies, according to the story. My guess is DART will try to extricated itself from this mess as soon as possible, but the photographer likely will stick to his guns, sort of speaking.
I hate corrupt cops with a passion! If reports are true, it sounds like that arresting officer should be put on a rocket and shipped to the moon where she can arrest all the rocks she wants …
What I wonder though …
… did the news photographer violate a DART policy like the Los Angeles Metro posted policy pictured above? In such a case, where does one draw the line? Can someone with a Press pass ignore the sign?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- K.P.’s absolute “theorem” from early, early childhood that he has seen over and over and over again: Those that CAUSE a problem in the first place will act the most violently if questioned or exposed.
It's my belief that when a law enforcement officer insists that a witness making a recording must cease and move along, that that officer is tampering with evidence and should be so charged.
Ed
I wouldn't necessarily call the officer corrupt in the usual sense of the term.
More likely the officer doesn't understand the law, which cause has been suggested a number of times over the years. I just had to deal with that on a totally different topic, which I won't get into here. Suffice to say that "folk knowledge" and legends sometimes take the place of facts.
How many times have we heard "but what about the terrorists?" or something of that ilk?
Something not mentioned here, but very real in the world of EMS is patient privacy. More than a few folks have gotten into trouble because they circulated a picture of an accident victim trapped in the wreckage.
We had a problem here for a bit with first responders taking pictures of traffic collisions - sans patients, just the vehicles. They would then submit them to a local news aggregator who would often publish them immediately. The issue was that the images were sometimes published before next of kin had been notified. We have a military installation here with frequent deployments. Imagine checking in to see what's going on at home and finding an image of your loved one's vehicle all busted to bumpkus...
So - I fully support one's right to take images pretty much anywhere - subject to trespassing and bona fide security concerns among others. But sometimes a picture can include more than you might think it does.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
tree68I wouldn't necessarily call the officer corrupt in the usual sense of the term.
Agree. I think in many cases it's more a problem with ego. ("Because I said so!") I keep reminding myself that there are few things more delicate than a policeman's ego.
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
Just because you can; doesn't mean you should.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Regarding the red sign saying, “Proof of validated fare required.” Required for what? Is proof of validated fare required to be on the platform, or is it required to board the train?
Euclid Regarding the red sign saying, “Proof of validated fare required.” Required for what? Is proof of validated fare required to be on the platform, or is it required to board the train?
Good point. A vaguely worded sign is a meaningless sign.
In most of my working life, I worked with the general public. I always accepted the fact that there would be times that the job would be difficult. But I always tried to make sure I wasn't making the job any harder than it had to be, and I always tried to give the general public a bit of leeway --- breathing space, if you will. Maybe I don't know enough about the situation, but it seems like a stupid dog fight for territory and dominance: the kind of thing that our four footed friends resolve by peeing on a tree or a fence.
Tom
Euclid (10-7):
In the lower of my two photos, ticketing machines are present (lower left). Actually on site, the insinuation is that unless one has a valid fare the red sign must not be passed.
Best,
K.P.
Vague signs? One of my favorite gags is to go to the mall, over the mall map, tape a little sign that says "You Are Here".
7j43k It's my belief that when a law enforcement officer insists that a witness making a recording must cease and move along, that that officer is tampering with evidence and should be so charged.
Thats a little harsh for me. Officers are responsible for several items at once. Your safety, Integrity of the Crime Scene (if this was a crime scene) which you might be walking all over, the Patient....who I think does deserve some privacy, the first responders.......who need to operate unobstructed.
BTW, I have had the extreme pain of dealing with reporters from the New York Times, Time Magazine, Newsweek, etc. They will lie their arse off to your face to get what they want or pose as someone else. Beware of that if you ever have to deal with the press. They are just concerned with getting what they want for a story or news item. Being honest or hurting your feelings is not a priority if they have been told NO once already.
Here in Charlotte the fare required signs are accompanied by a yellow perimiter line on the pavement. The platform provides an area where police and fare inspectors can check for fare evaders without delaying a crowded train and provides a safe area where passengers can be protected from pan handlers and small time criminals. The ticket machines are outside the lines.
Dave
Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow
1. Perhaps a Dallas area user of DART would know if access to platforms is controlled with a fare gate. In any case, the police objected to his taking pictures, not that he was a fare evader.
2. The heavy-handed police is reminiscent of care with a camera while traveling in Eastern Europe in the old days.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
DART, TRE, and T do not have fare gates. Moreover, I have never seen a sign on any platform re: don't go beyond here without a fare ticket.
I travel to Dallas and Fort Worth several times a year for business and medical services. I frequently use DART, TRE and T while in the Metroplex.
Rio Grande Valley, CFI,CFII
I travel to Dallas and Fort Worth several times a year for business, medical services and to attend the Dallas Symphony. I frequently use DART, TRE and T while in the Metroplex.
K. P. Harrier Euclid (10-7): Euclid Regarding the red sign saying, “Proof of validated fare required.” Required for what? Is proof of validated fare required to be on the platform, or is it required to board the train? In the lower of my two photos, ticketing machines are present (lower left). Actually on site, the insinuation is that unless one has a valid fare the red sign must not be passed. Best, K.P.
Now that you mention it, I can see that as a third interpretation of the sign whereby the position of the sign is telling you where not to be. If that is what it means; or, if it means that you can't be anywhere on the platform without a fare, the point is not about evading the fare. Instead it is about not being on the platform without a certain purpose.
If that is the meaning, then does a person have a right to be there to take photos if they don't have a fare? It doesn't seem like they would have that right. I suppose one could say that because this is a public sector operation, as opposed to a private railroad company, it cannot be private property. But public operations do have the right to prevent access to certain areas.
If the red sign has nothing to do with the access to the platform, then I don't think it has anything to do with being on the platform to take photos.
One seldom sees such convoluted thinking outside of the political environment.
What is so hard to understand? Only ticketed passengers are allowed past that sign. It is even stated in two languages.
Yes, it is easy to understand the intent of the sign, but let a lawyer get a fee and the sign will suddenly become too vague to be of any value in limiting access to the platform. It does not state why a validated fare is required nor where some assumed limitation of position is.
It is unfortunately a requirement that all signs must contain absolute perfection as to intent and purpose or somebody will misinterpret it (unintentionally or in order to get around it for their own purposes).
It also begs the question as to whether I could purchase a ticket to get on the platform in compliance with the sign and take photos to my heart's content, yet never get on a train, eventually requesting a refund of the purchase price because I didn't actually ride on a train. (I have heard of people buying a 1st class airline ticket to get access to freebee's in the VIP lounge, then intentionally miss the flight and demand a full refund.)
Semper Vaporo
Pkgs.
Am I seeing this right? The picture of a platform and sign posted by KP Harrier above is from the Los Anheles Metro, not from the DART line that is the topic of this discussion?
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
With the red sign, the key to judging its clarity is to separate the actual meaning of the sign message from what you already believe it means. A sign should stand on its words, and not have to rely on a sort of “body language” of where the sign is located.
I thought the DART sign was red - Metro was the big one standing sideways. Now I am confused.
She who has no signature! cinscocom-tmw
Real DART sign
CMStPnP 7j43k It's my belief that when a law enforcement officer insists that a witness making a recording must cease and move along, that that officer is tampering with evidence and should be so charged. ... They will lie their arse off to your face to get what they want or pose as someone else. Beware of that if you ever have to deal with the press. They are just concerned with getting what they want for a story or news item...
... They will lie their arse off to your face to get what they want or pose as someone else. Beware of that if you ever have to deal with the press. They are just concerned with getting what they want for a story or news item...
Very true. Had that lesson rubbed very deeply into me in my very first encounter with the press in Calgary, AB 40 years ago. It was the local news paper.
Balt - now there's a dart sign I am familiar with! DART, BART, METRO, whatever - just not something we have here - or Omaha, either. But we have a lot of SD70's, Dash 9's, GP's and even a caboose. Plus all the new locomotives running thru here.
selectorVery true. Had that lesson rubbed very deeply into me in my very first encounter with the press in Calgary, AB 40 years ago. It was the local news paper.
I guess I've been lucky - only been "stabbed" by the press once....
I've gotten to know a lot of the media types in the area and get along well with them. Heck - they've been known to call me for another angle on a story.
That said, not a few fire chiefs want nothing to do with the media, which is unfortunate, as they are more often our friends than our foes. If we want to get a message out (check your smoke detectors, etc), they'll do it.
JPS1 DART, TRE, and T do not have fare gates. Moreover, I have never seen a sign on any platform re: don't go beyond here without a fare ticket. I travel to Dallas and Fort Worth several times a year for business, medical services and to attend the Dallas Symphony. I frequently use DART, TRE and T while in the Metroplex.
Thanks for the clarification. So at least with DART, some transit cop's desire for censorship is overturned by the 1st Amendment. The photographer was not violating a legitimate law.
Mookie I thought the DART sign was red - Metro was the big one standing sideways. Now I am confused.
samfp1943FTA:[snip]"...In the months since his arrest, Adelmen has contended that DART’s policy on trespassers is in conflict with the First Amendment, and that members of its police force are not familiar enough with U.S. law and DART’s own guidelines regarding photographers' rights..."[snipped]
In what way, according to Adelmen, is DART's policy on trespassers in conflict with the First Amendment?
What does DART's policy on trespassers have to do with Adelmen being arrested for not complying with Officer Branch's order to leave the property?
schlimm 1. Perhaps a Dallas area user of DART would know if access to platforms is controlled with a fare gate. In any case, the police objected to his taking pictures, not that he was a fare evader. 2. The heavy-handed police is reminiscent of care with a camera while traveling in Eastern Europe in the old days.
It is exactly like Germany, platforms all open to public including at Union Station they have a ticket machine that validates tickets as they are issued. They have a seperate Validator I think if you buy a book of tickets in advance. Ticket has to be validated before you board the DART train or you get fined.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.