Taking a picture of street art is not a crime.
April 5, 2013 9:20 AM   Subscribe

This post was deleted for the following reason: I feel like this is maybe something for a post when and if there's actually anything more concrete about it than cops vs. student he-said-she-said. Right now there's not much to do other than speculate and grouse based thereon. -- cortex



 
Moronic.
posted by MartinWisse at 9:25 AM on April 5, 2013


Well, if she gave him reason to fear for his safety, I guess she should just count herself lucky he didn't shoot her in self defense.
posted by Joakim Ziegler at 9:26 AM on April 5, 2013


Filed under "pour encourager les autres", like other detain--screw_up_someone's_day--release arrests.
posted by MuffinMan at 9:28 AM on April 5, 2013 [1 favorite]


But Ani Lemieux, spokeswoman for the Montreal police, said the arrest wasn’t based on just one photo posted on the Internet.

“Investigators got some information about a photo, asked for an arrest warrant, took her in and questioned her,” she said Thursday. “Other elements were gathered that led investigators to charge her with harassment."
There's a pretty good chance that this (from the first link) is BS--Montreal cops are pretty crappy at the best of times--but it is at least worth noting that the cops are specifically claiming that the charges are not based simply on Instagramming a photo of grafitti. It will be interesting to see what comes out at the trial if it ever gets that far.

In general, it does seem reasonable to at least investigate a case where someone posts a photograph of grafitti naming a specific real person with a bullet hole in their forehead. If you assumed blanket immunity from prosecution for "photographs of grafitti" you would simply be providing a free pass to anyone who wants to publicly intimidate someone--paint your threats on the wall first and you're home free.
posted by yoink at 9:30 AM on April 5, 2013 [1 favorite]


So he was afraid that his safety was off?
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 9:30 AM on April 5, 2013 [1 favorite]


Montreal police will arrest anybody.
posted by metaman livingblog at 9:32 AM on April 5, 2013


This kind of story is very frightening. I am always super paranoid whenever I am around a police-officer. The abuse of power is terrifying. Ugh.
posted by Fizz at 9:34 AM on April 5, 2013


This is scandalous, but it's a little too easy on the Montreal Police to just dismiss it as one dumb decision. Their actions ever since the student protests a year ago have been far beyond what should be acceptable from a Canadian police force. Two weeks ago a spokesperson for the Montreal Police asserted that "there is no right to protest"; they've been enforcing an anti-protesting by-law that has been roundly condemned; and they've been handing out substantial fines to protesters. The CCLA was up in arms even before this story came out, and it's hard to see this as anything but yet another act to squash freedom of expression.
posted by ZaphodB at 9:36 AM on April 5, 2013 [1 favorite]


Montreal police continue to overreact against people who aren't armed and are largely demonstrating peacefully. Hearts and minds this ain't.
posted by arcticseal at 9:36 AM on April 5, 2013 [1 favorite]


I never know how to feel about Montreal cops. Personally I've never had (or seen) a bad experience, and they're normally pretty reasonable. While marijuana is illegal, you'll never get in trouble for smoking in a park or possession (unless they're clearly bagged to sell). They also allow drinking in the park (as long as you have a food, because then it's a picnic).

On the other hand they were fairly ruthless with student protestors, from mass arrests to pepper spray. To be fair, the protests over tuition almost verged on riots for a while, so there was justification. I'd blame more on the government, which tried to make all protests illegal.
posted by Strass at 9:38 AM on April 5, 2013


I'm not totally familiar with the status of Montreal cops and protestors, but based on similar instances in the US, I wouldn't be surprised if there was a bit more to this story than what she is saying and/or what the police are officially releasing.

Not to say she is some terror-minded activist, but there are likely extenuating circumstances, up to and including her comments during questioning and proper dissemination of intel as to the threat level she actually represented.

This reminds me of the story of the gentleman idiot who posted a facebook status about killing the President, and when the Secret Service showed up, instead of explaining it as a joke, he reiterated his comments and was summarily arrested.
posted by Debaser626 at 9:39 AM on April 5, 2013


When I lived in Montreal, the police pulled a shoplifter out of a car, and shot him in the back of the head while he knelt, waiting to be handcuffed.

True story. She's lucky she's not dead.
posted by fatbird at 9:42 AM on April 5, 2013


Debaser626, I can see being reminded of that facebook status scenario, but that doesn't mean they are comparable in any legal (or rational) sense.
posted by staccato signals of constant information at 9:43 AM on April 5, 2013


It does seem reasonable to at least investigate a case where someone posts a photograph of grafitti naming a specific real person with a bullet hole in their forehead. If you assumed blanket immunity from prosecution for "photographs of grafitti" you would simply be providing a free pass to anyone who wants to publicly intimidate someone--paint your threats on the wall first and you're home free.

First: So you're saying it's okay to be ARRESTED for posting a photo of graffiti? If the Montreal Gazette publishes a photo of the graffiti, who do we arrest at the paper? The photographer? The editor? You don't have to arrest someone to ask them to come in for questioning.

And no one's asking for blanket immunity on photographs of graffiti. If the same person who painted the graffiti posts a picture of it, then sure, bring that person in. If we're going to assume that anyone who posts an image of a graffiti threat is implicitly or explicitly making that threat themselves, then oh boy are we going down a dark road.
posted by chrominance at 9:45 AM on April 5, 2013


America has the New Orleans PD. We have Montreal.
posted by fatbird at 9:46 AM on April 5, 2013 [2 favorites]


So you're saying it's okay to be ARRESTED for posting a photo of graffiti?

Hmmm, you might want to check out whatever the weird glitch is in your computer that is making the word "investigate" appear to you as "ARREST." Although I guess this post won't make much sense to you, will it?
posted by yoink at 9:49 AM on April 5, 2013 [3 favorites]


worth noting that the cops are specifically claiming that the charges are not based simply on Instagramming a photo

They will always claim this. If it is true they will claim it, and if it is false they will claim it, so no, actually, it's not especially worth noting.
posted by tyllwin at 9:53 AM on April 5, 2013


And no one's asking for blanket immunity on photographs of graffiti. If the same person who painted the graffiti posts a picture of it, then sure, bring that person in.

Might I inquire how you determine whether or not the person who posted the photo was also the person who painted the grafitti without, you know, investigating? Do you wait for little birds to descend from the heavens and tell you, or does a genie appear on a flaming pie with the news?
posted by yoink at 9:54 AM on April 5, 2013


But Ani Lemieux, spokeswoman for the Montreal police, said the arrest wasn’t based on just one photo posted on the Internet.

“Investigators got some information about a photo, asked for an arrest warrant, took her in and questioned her,” she said Thursday. “Other elements were gathered that led investigators to charge her with harassment.”


Harassment? Does that mean they hauled her in for questioning, she told them to go fuck themselves, and they arrested her for that?
posted by Sys Rq at 9:57 AM on April 5, 2013


yoink: "Hmmm, you might want to check out whatever the weird glitch is in your computer that is making the word "investigate" appear to you as "ARREST." Although I guess this post won't make much sense to you, will it?"

From the article:
"Last night, La Presse newspaper reported that a police spokesperson made the following statement: “What I can say is that a person has been arrested this morning in connection with threats on the internet. This person was met by investigators.”
That doesn't seem like a glitch in anybody's computer.
posted by boo_radley at 10:00 AM on April 5, 2013


« Older If only I had a tiger mom or started a fake...   |   The Year in Hate and Extremism. Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments