DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Palus Politicus Ohio Legislature.. videoing police and obstructing LEO's

linkacious

Black leaders worry Ohio police bill would discourage the recording of arrests
Anna Staver
The Columbus Dispatch


Rev. Pamela M. Pinkney Butts, left, of Cleveland, disagrees with State Rep. Phil Plummer (R-Dayton), right, who listed current means of addressing police abuse during a committee hearing at the Ohio Statehouse on Thursday, April 22, 2021.
Person after person who testified against a bill to expand Ohio's criminal definition of obstructing justice repeated the same concern: Police would use this to demand someone stop filming an arrest.

"It leaves it up to the interpretation, by being so vague, to the interpretation of the law enforcement officer ...," Cleveland City Councilman Kevin Conwell said Thursday. "That is bad. Just think about what happened with George Floyd. The officer could have said turn that recording off. Turn that recording off, and we wouldn't have seen any injustice whatsoever."

The language in House Bill 22 that troubles Conwell and others is a section that says obstruction of justice could be charged when individuals "interfere with or obstruct a law enforcement officer."


The bill's supporters say interference doesn't mean recording a video.

"I certainly don’t read the bill that way," Ohio Prosecuting Attorneys Association Director Lou Tobin said. "I think what the bill prohibits is some sort of physical interference."

But former Columbus Police Chief Thomas Quinlan gave a different interpretation when he testified in support of the bill in March.


Quinlan repeatedly talked about "mentally interfering with an officer." And when asked directly whether the words bystanders shouted at former Minneapolis Police Officer Derek Chauvin during George Floyd's murder would be mental interference, Quinlan didn't say no.

"If an officer does not have that person yelling at him, maybe they have the actual time to look at what's in front of them – the individual on the ground – and realize the actual mistake, the tragic fatal mistake they were making," Quinlan said.

That upset Rep. David Leland, D-Columbus, because "this is a guy, this is the type of guy who is actually going to be enforcing legislation."

Tobin insisted that interpretation wasn't correct. And the bill's sponsor, Rep. Jeff LaRe, R-Violet Township, said "there is nothing in the legislation that prohibits recordings."

But opponents weren't satisfied by that. They weren't concerned with how prosecutors and lawmakers might interpret it. They worried about how officers would use it in the heat of the moment.

"Your intent may not come to what actually happens out on the street when things are fluid and taking place. They may interpret to say, 'Hey, this guy over here distracted me, and I looked away,'" Cincinnati NAACP President Joe Mallory said. "That's broad discretion, and police already have many powers."

Both Mallory and Conwell said they'd like to see language added to the bill that made it clear recording an arrest was not obstruction.

"My thought is that I don't think it's necessary, but I've asked (the Legislative Service Commission) to draft language for an amendment," LaRe said.

He doesn't know what the wording will be yet, but he is open to making it clear that pulling out your phone to record an officer isn't a crime.

"I get it. I get the concern," LaRe said. "If finding a way to add that eases their concerns, I'm all for it."

I can see both sides, but in the end I don't think a prosecutor would view the simple recording of a situation as obstruction unless you are right up in the face.. The yelling and harassment I could see as interference.

Kinda sounds like an attempt to temper citizen reporting of things they see.

Unless they are, in any way, obstructing the police efforts, then I just don't see a case.

I agree,and I am not sure this bill even reflects the Chauvin situation.

However, those people watching Chauvin were yelling at him. Any measures that restrict the ability of holding the police accountable for their actions I strictly oppose.

not sure how that will play out in other cases, but in this one, it made the point that Chauvin was absolutely in the wrong here. The witnesses yelling at him to get up and at the other cops for not stepping in will end up being their downfall.... As it should be