[agrona]

>Unless it's against some kind of law for someone to observe police, you should know better than that.

What isn't against the law?

This probably doesn't apply exactly, but there are plenty of laws about "disobeying lawful orders of a peace officer".

Here's an example (it may not apply in these case, I dunno, IANAL):

> It is unlawful to willfully fail or refuse to comply with a lawful order, signal, or direction of a peace officer[...] in uniform [...] or to refuse to submit to a lawful inspection pursuant to this code.

CAL. VEH. CODE § 2800

http://codes.lp.findlaw.com/cacode/VEH/1/d2/4/1/s2800

[wlesieutre]

While I'm not a lawyer, I would assume that "lawful order" has a specific legal definition and that "pursuant to this code" means that it's restricted to orders for enforcing the laws.

There are certainly laws against interfering with police, but the right to observe them if you're not in the way is pretty well established.

[syntheticnature]

I've posted this else-thread, but, basically: your assumption is incorrect.

http://bradhicks.livejournal.com/316176.html

[wlesieutre]

That's some random guy's Livejournal with no sources and amounts to "If the police tell you to hand over $20 because they want to order a pizza, the safest thing to do is comply and file a complaint later." Which is probably true, but I was talking about the legality of ignoring orders that the police don't have the authority to give. And I don't think I'm wrong.

Here's what the MD ACLU has to say [1]:

> The safest course of action is to obey the officer's directives. Not every order by a police officer is lawful, and police may not lawfully arrest you in Maryland for failing to obey an order unless the order is lawful, and aimed at averting some imminent illegal conduct. It is difficult to know at the scene whether the order is proper, and failing to obey may result in an arrest, even though the arrest may not be proper. You have the right to photograph and record police officers performing their job in public. Police may not order you to delete photographs or recordings on your camera or cell phone.

Assuming the system works properly, you could not be found guilty of refusing to give a police officer pizza money (to reuse my earlier example). It's not illegal. Photographing the police and observing a scene without interfering is in the same boat.

[1] http://www.aclu-md.org/your_rights/know_your_rights

[syntheticnature]

The ACLU just agreed with the link, in your quotation no less: The safest course of action is to obey the officer's directives.

It is difficult to know at the scene whether the order is proper, and failing to obey may result in an arrest, even though the arrest may not be proper.

You can't be found guilty of refusing to give a police officer pizza money, but that's not what the question is: can you can be found guilty of refusing a lawful order? Worse yet, as the link points out, the dead do not make reports to Internal Affairs.

Of course, the ACLU link you give says much more. Here's a choice extract to remember: Remember: police misconduct cannot be challenged on the street.

[wlesieutre]

The point I was making is that "Give me money for pizza" is not a lawful order and you're within your rights to refuse it. You can not be found guilty of refusing a lawful order if you did not give him the money.

The same is true for things like photography. It's been established that on duty officers have no expectation of privacy, and you have the right to watch and record them. If a police officer demands that you erase photos from your camera, you are under absolutely no obligation to comply with that order.

https://www.aclu.org/free-speech/know-your-rights-photograph...