Hey, there! Log in / Register

Two bodies found in Brighton a day apart; editor nearly detained by police for taking photo

Boston Police are investigating a body found outside 1960 Comm. Ave., a day after they found a body at 1820 Comm. Ave., just on the other side of Chestnut Hill Avenue.

David Harris says police officers investigating today's body gave him two choices when they noticed him with a camera today: He could delete the photo he had taken of the sheet-covered body as they watched or he could produce identification proving he really is a journalist.

Fortunately for Harris, editor of the Cambridge Chronicle, he could. But first, he says, he tried to convince the cops they had no right to either make him delete the photo or detain him because he was standing in a public space. Only when that didn't work, he says, did he show he was accredited.

Neighborhoods: 


Ad:


Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

I hope he got the cop's name or badge number and files a complaint. One does not need press credentials to take photos from a public space from which the police are not otherwise blocking access.

up
Voting closed 0

Massachusetts also has no test for what constitutes "press" so anything which is intended for anything remotely resembling publication, like say, a blog, is protected under a pretty iron clad journalism shield law.

up
Voting closed 0

that law enforcement officers think the press has special constitutional rights that every person does not also have.

up
Voting closed 0

anything remotely resembling publication, like say, a blog, is protected under a pretty iron clad journalism shield law.

There is no federal shield law and MA is one of 10 remaining states that hasn't gotten its act together and implemented a journalism shield law either. You are dead wrong.

This is one of many issues that our State House has refused to address like adults. Instead, the only thing we hear out of them lately is corruption or casinos.

up
Voting closed 0

Gov. Walker and the Koch Brothers want to thank him for helping with the cause by making people hate public employee unions and public employees even more.

up
Voting closed 0

You forgot to blame it on Bush. You know you are not supposed to miss any opportunity to blame Bush.

The Unions in Wisconsin don't need any help in disgracing themselves.

up
Voting closed 0

some press guys that some detective supervisors trusted. They would let this guys into any crime scene and show them around.

up
Voting closed 0

You clearly have no idea of what you are talking about. In homicide investigations your camera can be seized for evidence and held until Grand Jury where you can be compelled to testify. I've seen a cellphone seized because some ghoul had to photograph a dead person. It's obvious the crime scene was blocked off, ever watch CSI?

up
Voting closed 0

What's stopping camera software from being designed to immediately upload any snapped picture to a remote server?

Might not want it on all the time, but it could be handy.

up
Voting closed 0

Check out http://www.eye.fi/ - that does for your camera what your phone already can.

up
Voting closed 0

many camera phones already do this.

Or you can use an eye-fi memory card to do an auto-upload from any compatible digital camera.

up
Voting closed 0

I also know a guy who got told by the cops to delete a picture which he did, but his camera had an "undelete last" feature.

up
Voting closed 0

Is it really too much to ask that they know what the laws are before they attempt to enforce them?

up
Voting closed 0

Yeah, that's way too much to ask. I mean, even if you go to law school for years and pass the bar, you probably still don't know all the laws. We hardly have the money to send all our cops to law school. On the other hand, a "quit hassling the public" or "read the Bill of Rights" refresher course would probably do some of these guys some good.

up
Voting closed 0

The last time I looked, we live in a country that doesn't require the press to *register* themselves.

up
Voting closed 0

Last time I checked, we also live in a country that "doesn't torture", "doesn't make people disappear", "doesn't start wars without congressional approval", "doesn't spy on its own citizens", "doesn't suppress freedom of speech, (peaceable) gatherings, or religion", "doesn't deny the right to a timely trial by jury", "doesn't deploy military force on its own citizens in normal times".

Unfortunately, that country "doesn't exist".

up
Voting closed 0

These two deaths are close to my house. After they got done harassing the press, did the cops get any closer to figuring out what the he'll is going on in Brighton right now?

up
Voting closed 0

Ditto! These aren't close at this point, I live FEET away from 1820 Comm ave. Wtf?! Should I be worried?

up
Voting closed 0

Can all be found here: http://www.cityofboston.gov/Images_Documents/rule3...

Here's the key part:
Newspersons may photograph or report anything they observe when at an emergency scene. When publication or broadcast of such coverage may interfere with an investigation or place a victim, suspect, witness or other person in jeopardy, withholding publication is dependent upon the willingness of the press.
Under such circumstances, officers shall immediately advise their supervisors to notify the OMR. Officers shall not, however, interfere with or obstruct news media personnel as long as their activities remain within the confines of the law. News photographers and their equipment have the right to protection from assaults and unnecessary interference or obstruction while engaged in the performance of their duties at the scene of a crime or other major events.

up
Voting closed 0

. . . that I won't ever need to know the rules for taking photos of dead bodies under police investigation- but thanks.

up
Voting closed 0

Being...."news photographer", "reporter" , etc. And last I checked, mass had an absurd system that required press to register with police departments. How that ever survived a constitutional challenge, I would love to know.

The policy should be changed to reflect the fact that ANYONE can take photos of anything from public view.

The threat of arrest is serious, and should be reported to IA, as well as the FBI, because it is an incident of Color Of Law. Calling the ACLU would be a good idea, too.

up
Voting closed 0

Yea I'm sure they will get right on that one.

And I don't understand what the press has to do with anything. Anyone can take pictures of crime scenes once they are processed. Insurance companies, families, it doesn't matter. But Terry stops have been upheld by courts by anyone around crime scenes so I wouldn't think this case would go that far. I would love to hear a conversation between Brett and the FBI though.

But sometimes it is hard to "close" off a crime scene so that people cannot take pictures. I can't think of a time where a picture would have effected anything anyway.

Also 90% of the time when police find bodies, they are either homless or drug overdoses. Ususally not murder victims.

up
Voting closed 0

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/civilright...

The issue became serious the second one of the cops tried to seize property, and more serious when he threatened the guy with arrest.

up
Voting closed 0

If I had to rank this one, with 1 being the most serious, and 10,000 being the least serious, I would say this would be a 950.

Either way, the FBI wouldntt care about it.

up
Voting closed 0

I think you're right Brett. The BPD or any law enforcement group won't change it's policy until it is required to change its policy by a court of law.

Look how long BPD incorrectly arrested people for wiretapping without a warrant when citizens videotaped officers on the scene in a public place. That policy is clearly a misreading of the law, an therefore an abuse of authority - an abuse that enables police to avoid scrutiny in the act of duty.

They won't give up their self-protecting policies, even the unconstitutional policies, until they are force to by court order.

In fact, the ACLU is representing the lawyer who the BPD pinched for illegal wiretapping. The criminal case is over and the lawyer one.

Now the ACLU is suing PBD for violation of the lawyers 4th and 5th amendment rights in court, in order to get the policy foudn unconstitutional.

up
Voting closed 0

that courts have let law enfrocement have lee way when it comes to crime scenes on public property. So each time this happens you have to look at it on a case to case basis. If it were that easy, everyone would know it. Or you could at least look into some manual and find the answer.

up
Voting closed 0

Who cares about photographer rights? Maybe I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure the dead bodies are the bigger issue here.

Like Kaz, I live in this area & actually ran past Chiswick Ave today. Adam, any more detail on that portion of this posting?

up
Voting closed 0

The dead body was covered with a sheet and was therefore unidentifiable. This renders moot any concerns that one might have that this photo might end up someplace where the victim's family will see it and come to grief.

But you are right that it may be the decent thing to do to not publish photographs of dead bodies out of respect for the feelings of the victims loved ones. However, the police have a very easy remedy for this: ASK the photographer to not take pictures, or at least not publish said pictures, out of respect for the family members. The policy have no authority to demand that someone on public property stop taking pictures of activities going on in public

up
Voting closed 0

I *suspect* that because police did not release any information beyond yesterday's initial tweet that we are not talking murders (BPD is usually very good about announcing those). But beyond that?

up
Voting closed 0

How is it that for 130 years, the police and news photographers worked quite well together? Only the occassional dustup made the news while in cities across the nation, cops and shutterbugs forged legendary friendships. Many careers (on both sides) were advanced because of a great news photo. Enter the cell phone camera with amateurs of every variety clicking away at scenes and somehow we're supposed to believe that the cops have forgotten the law or suddenly turned on photographers? Or is it possible that the new generation of lensmen lack the tact and decorum of their predeccors? Or are those anticipating a problem with the police making every effort to find one?

up
Voting closed 0

Back in the day, I dealt with police officers on a daily basis. Some were good guys who would help you when they could and some hated reporters with the blinding fury of 10,000 suns and would go out of their way to make your life difficult - such as withholding the police log until it was too late for you to make deadline (the oddest was the sergeant in one of our towns whose son wound up as a reporter at the paper).

I suspect that's been going on for 130 years as well, and I suspect what happened today was an example of that, not some conniving reporter aiming for a gotcha.

up
Voting closed 0

Adam,

My intention was to capture what seemed to be a crime scene that happened to have a sheet-covered body in public view (it's not everyday that this happens). I took a photo with my BlackBerry and another photo with a still camera that I had handy. And then I tweeted immediately that cops were investigating a body found behind a building.

When I asked one of the cops what the cause of death was, he looked at me and said, "It's too early to tell." It was at that point that he asked me if I had taken any photos. I said yes. And then the rest is history. It seems like the officer and his immediate supervisor were either a.) not aware of BPD's own rules or b.) didn't care. But what I think is the most disturbing is that the photos were taken on a public sidewalk about 20-30 feet behind the police tape. I was not interfering with the investigation in any way. In fact, I was walking away from the scene when I was accosted by the officer. The officer and his supervisor gave some reasons that they wanted my information/credentials or photo deleted: 1.) officer told me "the only press credentials "we recognize are from the state police" 2.) supervisor told me that they hadn't notified the family of victim yet (victim was covered with a sheet).

I hope these officers are made aware of the rights of the public when it comes to photographing very public crime scenes. That's my only goal really.

David

up
Voting closed 0

David, did you happen to get the name or badge number of the cop or his supervisor? Did you ask either of them if you were free to go or if they were detaining you (as a Terry stop)?

up
Voting closed 0

I could be wrong here, so maybe someone can correct me. But I'm not sure the State Police issue reporter IDs anymore. I seem to recall a while back, when an editor wanted them for the newsroom, that we were told they no longer did that.

If I'm right, another example of the officers being off-base

up
Voting closed 0

(Love the username!)

We now return you to your regularly scheduled thread...

up
Voting closed 0

Last Monday night around 1 AM I thought I heard maybe three gunshots outside. Shortly after there were at least six or seven cop cars outside. This is right in the Chiswick/Sutherland Road area. They seemed to sweep the neighborhood for a half hour or so before leaving. Anyone know anything about this?

up
Voting closed 0

I can tell you what probably happened. Random shooting. Cops show up, look for a victim, look for a perp, look for evidence. Check with local hospitals for victim. If none are found, they move on. Happens A LOT more than you realize. Listen to a Boston police scanner for a week to see what I mean.

up
Voting closed 0

Looking at the posted comments it seems that the only restrictions to photographing crime scenes and police activity in public areas apply to reporters who are allowed INSIDE crime scene tape by the police to report on goings on. Members of the public who are outside the cordoned off area seem to have unlimited rights to photograph things in public view.

up
Voting closed 0

There are several applications for Mac OS and Windows that will undelete images from a SD memory card.

Delete the image, show the cop that the image is gone and walk away.

Change out the memory card with the spare card you always carry (what? you DON'T have a spare card? You can tuck one in the coin pouch of a wallet.)

Get home, run the undelete software on the card.

Presto! Your picture(s) are restored.

up
Voting closed 0

I knew a guy who did that. While he was completely legally in the right he was morally more skeevy in that he was taking pictures of hot women at some event. Two of them complained to a cop who made him delete it but he undeleted the picture later

up
Voting closed 0

If a police officer ever asked you to delete a picture, ask him why he is trying to destroy evidence.

And get his badge numbers and report him.

up
Voting closed 0

2 dead bodies across the street a day apart and no press at all?

no you prob. have to be somebody important..

up
Voting closed 0

upthread Adam speculates that the deaths were not the result of any criminal activity and so the police are not commenting any further. While two dead bodies cropping up so close to each other is bothersome it could just be a coincidence. If they had died of non criminal or non negligent causes such as heart attack or drug overdose or something, then the public doesn't have much of a public interest need to know and the families might appreciate some privacy over their loss.

up
Voting closed 0

did they ever figure out what happened and who the dead body was?

up
Voting closed 0

There's a civil suit going on now for Harry Casper, the deceased. He was very much loved by his family and the two 'men' who disposed of his body like trash deserve to go to jail. The man began to die at Reservoir Towers and needed HELP. The man in a wheelchair who many people know from panhandling outside Reservoir Liquors ordered his junkie friend to get him out of the building so that he wouldnt end up w/ a dead body in his apartment. The waited until he was beyond help, let him struggle and suffer. wheeled him across the street and let him die of an accidental overdose. So unfortunate that there will be no jail time for these two murderous neighbors of ours.

up
Voting closed 0

Who cares about the freaking photographer? This is my neighborhood and I'm more interested on what the deal with the dead people is.

up
Voting closed 0

I certainly do.

up
Voting closed 0

Could anyone tell me what happened? I live next door, and saw the body. I called the police but can't get info from them. Thank you.

up
Voting closed 0

You desperately want to know what happened, but don't care about the rights of the journalist who was there trying to gather information?

up
Voting closed 0

why is the discovery of two bodies not in the local news? I see nothing about it in the Globe or the TAB...wth?

up
Voting closed 0

Just spoke to Officer James Kenneally at BPD, who says the deaths remain under investigation but that there were no signs of foul play.

So what does that mean? Could mean suicide, drug overdose or accident.

up
Voting closed 0

I live at 1960 Comm. and actually witnessed the sheet being put over the deceased's body. I had been walking my dog for 45 minutes and when I got back to my building, there were police and 2 EMTs at this point. I was told it was an overdose by folks in my building (they had heard from an offical). What was disturbing was when one of the detectives asked my husband if he had seen any homeless folks in a wheel chair recently. He basically let on that this body may have been dumped here (at 2 pm in broad daylight in front of dozens of open windows on a gorgeous day)by someone. The odd thing is, when I started out on my walk with my dog, I had heard what I thought was a dog chain clinking behind me as my Boston Terrier dragged me up the sidewalk. As I am always concerned about a bigger dog coming up behind my 12 lb pup, I stopped in a grassy area on Comm. Ave and turned to see "the dog." It was a man walking VERY quickly and pushing an empty wheelchair. I brought police to where I saw all this, but dont know if this info was really helpful, although the man did disappear down Comm Ave. So weird. What else was strang was that the body was almost lined up perpendicular to the building - with the victims head almost touching the bricks. Perfectly straight. So even if someone did dump him there, he would have had to take the time to straighten out his body perfectly, and for what reason I am not sure.

I am an Addictions Social Worker, so overdose is not exactly uncommon in my field, but when you see someone who has ended his struggle with drugs in this way, it is very sad and feels quite lonely.

Any thoughts?

up
Voting closed 0

Thanks for asking BPD. Somehow it will feel more like closure to know who this poor young man was, and what happenned.

up
Voting closed 0

If these people are being hit by cars on Comm. Ave., I'd want to know that and so would anyone living near there.

up
Voting closed 0

Why is there nothing else about this in the paper anywhere?

I understand the concerns with rights (etc), and I agree, but I think the bigger story here is the 2 bodies...?

up
Voting closed 0

A lot of people die in Boston every day. Most of them are elderly and die in nursing homes or hospitals of course, but quite a few are younger and are using some sort of legal or illegal drug(s).

In the police world these calls are named "sudden deaths". Homeless people are usually very sick, and will more often than not die in their sleep from alcohol posining.

up
Voting closed 0

This isn't exactly downtown over here in Brighton. There's an Addiction Treatment Center on Warren St (part of St. E's?) that does methadone treatments and I started to wonder with the second body if it was related to that place. I've been on the B Line before where meth heads were talking obnoxiously about who they were gonna beat down for holding out on their doses that they were supposed to be pocketing and trading later and stuff.

But homicide has never been called out to about 10 blocks of Comm Ave 3 times in about 4 days for "sudden deaths". At least, not in the last 10+ years. I can't just chalk this up to "lots of people die"...because they don't...not around here out in the open behind apartment buildings so freakily frequently within the same neighborhood. It's just plain weird.

up
Voting closed 0

Which is going to be random, and the other two sound like homeless. But they could be related to the clinic.

Anyway anytime someone dies a supervisor has to show up. If that person is under the age of 50, a detective will usually show up. If there is anything esle out of the ordinary, homicide will show up.

And sometime medical calls that end up as sudden deaths will fall through the media cracks because they start out as medicals and the media wouldn't think twice.

I don't mean the give the impression that it is an everyday occurance in Brighton, but it isn't that wierd.

up
Voting closed 0