Audit the Audit: Right to Film Police Interactions

Overview

• Episode focuses on the right to film police under the First Amendment and issues of obstruction.
• Presented by Dr. Shawn Barry.

Incident Summary

• Date: July 24, 2021
• Location: Dunellen, Florida
• Involved Parties:
  • Deputy Neil Rachi (Maran County Sheriff's Office)
  • Officer DEA (Dunellen Police Department)
  • George Nathanson (59, disabled, filming the police)

Background

• Deputy Rachi was responding to a motor vehicle accident when Nathanson began filming the officers.
• Body camera footage captured the encounter between Deputy Rachi and Nathanson.

Key Points from Encounter

• Deputy Rachi asked Nathanson to leave the scene, claiming he was interfering with the investigation.
• Rachi threatened to handcuff Nathanson if he did not comply.
• Despite being on a public sidewalk and filming from a distance, Nathanson was placed in handcuffs.

Legal Context

• First Amendment Rights:

  • The 11th Circuit recognizes a right to film police in public under the First Amendment.
  • Case Reference: Smith v. City of Fort Lauderdale established the right to gather information about public officials.
  • Filming can be subject to reasonable restrictions but must not obstruct police duties from a safe distance.

• Relevant Case Law:

  • Glick v. Cunniffe (2011): Peaceful recording of police does not interfere with their duties.
  • Baxter v. Roberts (2022): Failure to comply with an unlawful order does not constitute obstruction.

Deputy Rachi's Claims vs Body Camera Footage

• Rachi claimed Nathanson crossed a line and engaged with officers, but footage showed otherwise.
• Nathanson was filming from a distance and did not impede the investigation.
• Rachi misrepresented Nathanson's actions to justify the arrest.

Arrest and Legal Outcome

• Nathanson was charged with obstruction, but charges were dropped after the review of body camera footage.
• Lawsuit Filed: June 14, 2024, against Deputy Rachi for unlawful arrest and injury.

Analysis and Conclusions

• Deputy Rachi's Conduct:

  • Rated an F for aggressive demeanor and disrespect for Nathanson's rights.
  • Ignored clear evidence supporting Nathanson's First and Fourth Amendment rights.

• George Nathanson's Actions:

  • Rated an A for maintaining composure and a commitment to his rights.
  • Despite being arrested, he took appropriate legal action following the incident.

Final Thoughts

• Nathanson's case illustrates the importance of documenting police interactions and holding officers accountable.
• Viewers encouraged to suggest topics for future discussions.