Archives for

Portable Surveillance Towers Now Popping Up in Ohio

The Ohio Department of Public Safety has just purchased two portable video surveillance towers for use at large events such as the Ohio State Fair and concerts.  According to The Columbus Dispatch, the towers are equipped with five surveillance cameras, spotlights, loudspeakers and a radar system.  Flir Systems Inc., the manufacturer of the surveillance towers, say they offer a “completely customized surveillance platform suitable for high-level, temporary security ventures, providing a bird’s-eye view of the surrounding area.”

Surveillance systems such as these, with high-end audio and video camera systems, are popping up all over the country at state fairs, concerts, beach parties, community events, campaign rallies, and sports events, to name just a few. Our own employee spotted one here in Los Angeles at a business complex near the Santa Monica ocean recently.



Read More

Lawmakers Demanding More Surveillance Across the Country

Following the tragic and deadly terrorist bombings in Boston, lawmakers across the country are demanding more surveillance in our major cities.  In an article posted by Keith Proctor on CNN Money, he talks about how citizens and lawmakers alike value their own personal safety over privacy, but, “…when  you see someone maimed by bomb shrapnel, privacy concerns sound coldly abstract.”

Homeland Security, on the other hand, have drastically been cutting down on state grants that would enable more surveillance equipment to go up.  Due to this, companies like Lockheed Martin are doing more with less by drastically improving surveillance technology, creating the “video analytic” system, which analyzes surveillance footage entirely by using artifical intelligence.



Read More

Missing Evidence

Video evidence is one of the most useful tools in court. You can’t make a case much stronger if there is clear video camera footage of an individual committing, or not committing, a crime. But, as we have learned from our experiences at NCAVF, video evidence is rarely such a cut and dry case. Often evidence is mishandled before it makes it to court.

Last October in Vermont, a man refused to pay for his cab ride and pulled a gun on the driver. James Franqueira was charged with second-degree criminal possession of a weapon, and two counts of menacing.

On the day of the trial, after it had been declared there was no video evidence, DA Richard McNally went over to collect files from the police department, where he found a recording of Franqueira taken by a nearby Valvoline. The video footage clearly showed Franqueira committing a crime, however he was awarded a mistrial.

The mistrial means that the trial process will have to start again, which will be costly for everyone involved.



Read More

NYPD Suddenly Doesn’t Love Surveillance So Much

In New York City, the public is demanding that the NYPD be put under the same surveillance that the majority of citizens are subject to.  But Mayor Michael Bloomberg and police commissioner Raymond Kelly are leading an on-going campaign to prevent surveillance of the police, claiming that putting police officers under surveillance could actually endanger citizens.

Salon.com’s David Sirota claims that if anything, having police under surveillance will keep them honest and ensure that they are protecting individuals’ civil liberties, seeing as police brutality cases are becoming more and more common.

As this on-going fight rages on, check back with the NCAVF for updates on the newest in audio and video surveillance policy and high definition video technology.


Read More

Little Canada Man Video Confiscated by Police

Twincities.com just published an article about Andrew Henderson, a Little Canada, MN. resident who recorded two Ramsey County police deputies as they were assisting a bloody-faced man outside of his apartment. Henderson states that he was thirty feet away, not causing any harm when deputy Jacqueline Muellner snatched the camera out of his hands and closed the video portion of the recording (the audio was left on).

The audio footage recorded Henderson calmly stating that he was not doing anything illegal, and that it’s completely legal to record video in public space. In fact, he says it was illegal for the policewoman to take his camera from him.

Nevertheless, Henderson is being charged with obstruction of legal process and disorderly conduct. It should be an interesting case to follow, and may have implications on the larger conversation about video recording police in public spaces.


Read More

Ilinois Eavesdropping Law

In Illinois it is no longer a felony to record audio footage of on duty police officers. It had previously been illegal, until the supreme court voted to not revive the law.

The law prohibiting audio recording was initially challenged by the American Civil Liberties Union of Illinois (ACLU). They were fighting for a “police accountability program” that required audio and video recordings.

Laws vary from state to state when it comes to recording police officers – whether audio or video. It should, however, be uniform across the nation. The truth is that police officers are recorded daily, on surveillance cameras, on their cop car cams, on the digital audio recording devices. It is legal record people in public, why should it be illegal to record police officers?

The interesting case is Alvarez v. Connell et al, U.S. Supreme Court, No. 12-318.


Read More

Big Brother is (usually) Listening

Homeland security is installing high definition video cameras equipped with audio on busses and transit lines in a few major cities across the United States: San Francisco, Eugene, Hartford, Columbus, Baltimore, and Traverse City, MI.

We’re also seeing devices in subways and trains. I don’t know about you, but I thought my private conversations — even in public places — was protected by our constitution?

Advances in audio technology has made it a viable addition to traditional video surveillance. But is it legal?

U.S. Federal Law states that it is illegal to record audio of another person’s conversation in private if they have not consented to the recording. However, in recent years, courts have often dismissed Fourth Amendment privacy rights and accepted audio evidence collected “illegally.”

By outfitting buses with audio / video devices, Homeland is saying that anywhere you are, outside of your home, is public. And therefore, anything you say, to yourself or another, may be used in court against you.



Read More