by webrisorPolice Can’t Erase Your Phone’s Pictures
A recent Quebec Court decision has stated that police officers cannot ask citizens to erase photos on their phones which capture the officers on duty. This adds to the notion that, fundamentally speaking, filming police officers on duty is completely legal. I wrote about this in a previous post.
The officers may, under certain conditions, request that you put away your cell phone, but they simply cannot take your cell phone, without warrant, to verify its content and delete certain images.
In fact, the Commissaire à la déontologie policière has recently released a statement confirming this policy.
by webrisorThe Textalyzer: a 21st century Breathalyzer
It’s no real secret, texting and driving has become almost as (if not even more) prevalent than drinking and driving. While similar in nature, they both seem to stand on opposite ends of a spectrum. Socially speaking, texting and driving is generally considered to be harmless and somewhat acceptable while drinking and driving is now almost unanimously stigmatized. And legally speaking, texting and driving has much less weight than drinking and driving does. In fact, it isn’t even a criminal infraction.
So while a standard DUI can land you up to 5 years in jail, here in Quebec texting and driving will only result in a fine of $80-$100 (lowest among all provinces), and 4 demerit points. Peanuts, right? No wonder this phenomenon is so prevalent. But it shouldn’t be. Distracted driving is as dangerous, if not even more dangerous than drunk driving. This has already been backed by numerous studies. (Edit: Due to a new U.K law enacted in march 2017, a single text could now cost young drivers their license)
Recent technological breakthroughs may help to curb the rate of accidents caused by texting on the road. The textalyzer is, for texting and driving, exactly what the breathalyzer is to drinking and driving. Simply put, this device is designed to help police figure if someone involved in a car accident was unlawfully distracted while driving. It is being developed by Cellebrite, an Israeli firm made famous for assisting the FBI in cracking the San Bernardino attacker’s iPhone.
It hasn’t been approved for use in the United States yet, and we probably won’t be seeing it in Canada for some time. Nonetheless, the textalyzer is a great illustration of how technological innovation and law can intersect in order to adapt to our tech-obsessed digital generation. For now though, we’ll just have to stick with what we have: section 439.1 of the Highway Safety Code:
No person may, while driving a road vehicle, use a hand-held device that includes a telephone function.For the purposes of this section, a driver who is holding a hand-held device that includes a telephone function is presumed to be using the device.
Check out the reactions of these young Belgians taking their “driving exam”. They were fooled into thinking that in order to pass, they had to prove they could successfully text and drive. The results, while hilarious, still prove a very serious point.
by webrisorNot Illegal to Film Police with Phone
In this digital age where cell phones are ubiquitous and everything is one snap away from being Youtube fodder, it’s only normal to wonder whether it’s legal to film police officers in action. The short answer is yes, you have the right to film or photograph police proceedings. As long as there’s no obvious safety concern, and you’re not tangibly obstructing the officers from doing their job, you can snap away.
As noted by Canadian Privacy Law Blog, an Ontario judge shed some light on this reality in a recent decision. Here are some pertinent passages from the ruling:
In the absence of an overarching and tangible safety concern, such as telling a photographer at a fire scene to back away if there is a danger that the building will collapse on him, telling people not to record these interactions, whether they be a bystander or the person the police are dealing with, is not a lawful exercise of police power. An officer who conducts himself reasonably has nothing to fear from an audio, video or photographic record of his interaction with the public.
The officer’s powers exist to allow him to protect the public and himself and to enforce the law; they do not extend to controlling the public record of what happened.
Section 129 of the Criminal Code prohibits one from “resisting or willfully obstructing” police officers in the execution of their duty, but this is a far cry from not being allowed to peacefully film from the sidelines!