“Slashdot readers may recall the case of a Maryland motorcyclist (Anthony Graber) arrested and charged with wiretapping violations (a felony) when he recorded his interaction with a Maryland State Trooper. Today, Judge Emory A. Pitt threw out the wiretapping charges against Graber, leaving only his traffic violations to be decided on his October 12 trial date. ‘The judge ruled that Maryland’s wire tap law allows recording of both voice and sound in areas where privacy cannot be expected. He ruled that a police officer on a traffic stop has no expectation of privacy.’ A happy day for freedom-loving Marylanders and Americans in general.”

By Cory Doctorow on Photo

The new set of rules, under section 76 of the 2008 Act and section 58A of the 2000 Act, will target anyone who ‘elicits or attempts to elicit information about (members of armed forces) … which is of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism’.

A person found guilty of this offence could be liable to imprisonment for up to 10 years, and to a fine.

By Cory Doctorow on Photo

A photographer who spent his whole life photographing and painting around his home neighbourhood of Elephant and Castle in London was arrested under anti-terror laws and jailed, his DNA and fingerprints taken. He was released after five hours, once his Member of Parliament intervened. Under current policies, his DNA will remain on file forever — though the EU has ordered Britain to cease this practice.

Obviously, there is a lack of communication between Amtrak’s marketing department, which promotes the annual contest, called Picture Our Trains, and its police department, which has a history of harassing photographers for photographing these same trains.”

If the question is whether we can put an individual police officer’s life at risk for the sake of keeping the police the purveyors of justice, then absolutely the answer is yes.

Admittedly, the photos could have been conveyed privately to the people now conducting the investigation, but without the discussion created by the public blog posts and photos, there may never have been an investigation to begin with.

Emily, this is a very serious question, but the answer is totally obvious. The dillema seems to be between the public’s duty to keep the police in line, conflicting with possibly damaging the police’s ability to do its job. But it’s clear which is worse – a slightly less effective in specific circumstances and yet just police force, or one with slightly greater capability and yet corrupt, bullyish, unjust. Which state would you want to live in?

“Ottawa police Chief Vern White has ordered a review after a blogger alleged being ordered by an officer to stop taking photographs of an arrest in Centretown.

The blogger, who goes by the pseudonym Zoom, claims to have come across three officers arresting a woman near Hartman’s grocery store, on Bank Street near Somerset Street, on Monday afternoon.”

Is putting someone’s life to risk by circulating images of him/her on the internet worth the gratification of blog-world show and tell? It’s possible that this officer has been in extremely vulnerable circumstances (undercover in a gang, etc.) and this is the sort of thing that could put his life in danger.

I suppose the question is whether it’s worth putting a police officer’s (or anyone’s) life to risk to emphasize a point already made in the text of a blog post.