CO threatens news crew with arrest for filming

[Chris0nllyn]

A NewsChannel 13 crew was threatened with arrest on Thursday. It happened as they were working on a story about the historic Grant Cottage in Wilton where President Ulysses S. Grant spent his final days.

The cottage is located on Mount McGregor near the correctional facility that's scheduled to close this weekend.

Corrections employees who are still working at the empty prison made every attempt to stop Mark Mulholland from doing his job.

As they were doing a piece on-camera, in the shadows of the empty Mount McGregor prison, a man who identified himself as a corrections lieutenant came speeding towards the crew in a car.

Mulholland and photographer Matt Soriano spoke with the lieutenant.

“No filming,” said the officer, who identified himself as Lt. Dorn.

“We’re doing a story on Grant’s Cottage,” Mulholland tried to explain.

“It doesn’t matter,” the officer continued. After a few more exchanges he then said ,“You’re going to leave the mountain now.”

“You’re telling us we can’t visit a historic site?” Mulholland asked.

“No, you’re going to have to run that through Albany,” the officer replied, saying the news crew was on state ground.

“Look, I’m not going to go around with you on this. You’re going to leave the property,” the officer insisted.

So our crew proceeded to make its way closer to Grant's Cottage.

However, another corrections employee parked his car across the road, denying and blocking the crew’s access to the historic site.

After several minutes, he moves his car to allow other visitors to get to and from Grant's Cottage and slowly inches his car along in front of our crew. Ironically, once there, Mulholland and Soriano noticed a film crew, apparently shooting a movie on the grounds of the prison.

On their way back down the mountain, as the news crew attempted to leave, Dorn had called the state police and ask them to detain the journalists and demanded their video.

"We regret that this situation escalated, however the WNYT news crew blatantly disregarded a state officer who informed them they were trespassing. Department regulations state that photographs taken while on Prison property require prior permission. This policy is for the safety of all staff, visitors and prisoners."

http://wnyt.com/article/stories/s3513901.shtml

 

[itsrequired]

"We regret that this situation escalated, however the WNYT news crew blatantly disregarded a state officer who informed them they were trespassing. Department regulations state that photographs taken while on Prison property require prior permission. This policy is for the safety of all staff, visitors and prisoners."

Much ado about nothing.

 

[dontknowwhy]

Much ado about nothing.

just like the corrections Lt. coming out of an empty prison all in a huff when the film crew didn't care about the prison
maybe you should read the article
the prison is currently closed so there are no visitors or prisoners, only staff doing nothing but sucking up taxpayers' dollars...

 

[Midnightrider]

just like the corrections Lt. coming out of an empty prison all in a huff when the film crew didn't care about the prison
maybe you should read the article
the prison is currently closed so there are no visitors or prisoners, only staff doing nothing but sucking up taxpayers' dollars...

does that mean that the rules no longer apply?

How do you know what the staff is doing there?

 

[itsrequired]

just like the corrections Lt. coming out of an empty prison all in a huff when the film crew didn't care about the prison
maybe you should read the article
the prison is currently closed so there are no visitors or prisoners, only staff doing nothing but sucking up taxpayers' dollars...

I did read the article. There is no filming on the property without prior approval. I also saw the video from the other thread. As I said, much ado about nothing.

 

[LibertyBeacon]

Typically the language which allegedly demands permission for photography or filming on public property or land actually only require permission for commercial usage of the work. The only cases I'm aware of where general proscriptions on filming and photography have been upheld in courts are for nuclear facilities and military facilities, though the latter clearly has exceptions, as this gentlemen brings to our attention:



Since most of these goons that work for these places are functional illiterates (otherwise they'd be out creating wealth instead of sucking off the public teat), I'm guessing the language of the regulations was in fact only for commercial usage.

With the two exceptions listed above, there is only one single rule you have know for public photography: if you can see it with your eyes from public space, you can film or photograph it. End of rules.