Quote:
|
When the recording involves methods of a sensitive operation by say an EOD Tech. then the recording should be stopped, Siezed and destroyed by an authorized person other than the officer on site.
|
I disagree. IF the action, no matter how "sensitive" it is is performed in view of the public, there is no moral justification (not certain about legal) for siezing and/or destroying recorded images, just as there can be no justification for arresting/incarcerating any witness.
Now, I would consider allowing a reporter to follow and film your "sensitive" actions, and then realizing you have let him see something you do not wish to become public as a different situation.
However, the fact is that a witness could describe your actions, spreading the infomation you wish to suppress. It's usually not as effective (or have the same visual impact), but if someone witnesses it, the information can be diseminated.
Acts performed in plain public view should be, and must be protected from supression. Claims of "security needs" are so much BS. Stealing personal property to cover up some lapse by an officer is just that, theft. Even with a court order, it merely becomes offically sanctioned theft. And it is particularly irksome when the only real lapse by the officer is allowing themself to be video taped.
After all, don't we constantly hear from them "if you've done nothing wrong, what do you have to hide?"
There should be no double standard.