# Am I permitted to videotape myself if I am pulled over by a police officer?
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-permitted-to-videotape-myself-if-i-am-pulled-over-by-a-police-officer/340863
**Category:** Factual Questions
**Created:** [January 20, 2006, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-permitted-to-videotape-myself-if-i-am-pulled-over-by-a-police-officer/340863 "2006-01-20T19:15:44Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@Cartooniverse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cartooniverse)
#### Post date: [January 20, 2006, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-permitted-to-videotape-myself-if-i-am-pulled-over-by-a-police-officer/340863/1 "2006-01-20T19:15:44Z")
Title says it. I mount a small video camera on the dashboard, or into the face of the dash. It is aimed at me, AND at the driver’s side window.
I am allowed to videotape myself, both in my residence and not in my residence, as near as I can tell. Whether or not someone else stands in the frame is beyond my control.
Additionally, many police departments now have their officers wearing microphones, and have lightbar-mounted cameras running when they are doing traffic stops. However, those tapes are A) the property of the law enforcement agency, and B) show zero in terms of face to face contact and activity. They only show a locked-off shot of the back of my vehicle.
Am I permitted to videotape myself in my car? Am I legally required to tell an officer that they are on camera, because they chose to stand near my car? Is such a videotape admissable in court? Heck, the Rodney King videos, tons of other “on the street, happenstance documentary” video of law enforcement officers has both been used in court and aired all over the world. Surely there is precedent.
What is the law in this regard? Do I surrender certain rights even though I am inside of my vehicle, when I am pulled over by an officer?
Cartooniverse
---
### Author:  [@Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_T-Bonham.net)
#### Post date: [January 20, 2006, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-permitted-to-videotape-myself-if-i-am-pulled-over-by-a-police-officer/340863/2 "2006-01-20T22:49:37Z")
I can’t think of any reason why you couldn’t.
I’m not even sure you would have to tell the officer that he’s being recorded. The dash-mounted camera is probably in full view, not concealed, and easily observable. And the officer is in a public space, with no reasonable expectation of privacy.
---
### Author:  [@Cartooniverse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cartooniverse)
#### Post date: [January 21, 2006, 1:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-permitted-to-videotape-myself-if-i-am-pulled-over-by-a-police-officer/340863/3 "2006-01-21T13:51:47Z")
That’s what I am thinking. Of course, it might mightily anger an officer and that’s never a good thing. ( And, I’m not interested in **baiting one** either. However, my OP addresses the legality of such a thing.
One does read about traffic stops that turn into something else, usually because the driver of the car is a person already wanted, or there are illegal substances in the vehicle, or on their person. Still and all- it’s kind of a nifty thing to be _able_ to do. I just wondered if it was illegal to do in any states.
---
### Author:  [@Bearflag70](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bearflag70)
#### Post date: [January 21, 2006, 2:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-permitted-to-videotape-myself-if-i-am-pulled-over-by-a-police-officer/340863/4 "2006-01-21T14:34:43Z")
According to local news:
There is a black guy in Davis, CA who was pissed at the cops because they apparently picked on him and nobody else. He put cameras on his house to show the frequency of cops slowly driving by.
He kept a video camera in his car. A cop approached him, so he whipped out the camera and started grilling the cop on tape…
“Why are you approaching me?”
“What have I done wrong, specifically?”
etc.
The cop backed down and went away.
Now, he has sued the Davis cops for discrimination.
---
### Author:  [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)
#### Post date: [January 21, 2006, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-permitted-to-videotape-myself-if-i-am-pulled-over-by-a-police-officer/340863/5 "2006-01-21T16:23:00Z")
Under CA and federal law, you are probably ok.
States vary on eavesdropping law, and some anti-voyeur laws might even apply if they are worded too broadly. Keeping in mind that I am not a CA lawyer, and not offering specific legal advice:
CA law
> [@](#):
>
> requires the consent of all parties when recording “confidential” communications, whether they are face-to-face or over a telephone or other device (except a radio). This law applies to both audio and video recording.
> “Confidential” communications are those in which it appears that any of the speakers desire it to be confined to the parties involved in the conversation. A conversation will not be considered confidential, however, if the participants “may reasonably expect that the communication may be overheard or recorded.”
> **[RTDNA - Radio Television Digital News Association](https://www.rtdna.org/)**
>
> Visibility, advocacy, training, resources, networking and awards for electronic journalists.
[statute](http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/waisgate?WAISdocID=85751326885+10+0+0&WAISaction=retrieve)
As I read [this](http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/californiastatecases/s085594.pdf) (pdf) California Supreme Court opinion, you’d pretty much have to paint a sign, verbally tell the officer, or otherwise make sure that the officer knew that the conversation was being recorded, to be completely safe. Of course, if the officer has a mike on or a camera on the car, it will be more difficult for them to claim to claim that they were unaware that the conversation was being recorded. YMMV.
[Other state’s laws are different.](http://www.rtnda.org/resources/hiddencamera/allstates.html)
A more complicated scenario would be presented if the officer told you to turn off the camera and you refused. Similarly more complicated would be the case where the officer turns off or dismantles the camera. Or simply covers the lens. Also, the officer could ask you to get out of the vehicle, which would thward your efforts, depending on where you were taken, etc.
---
### Author:  [@Thalion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Thalion)
#### Post date: [January 21, 2006, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-permitted-to-videotape-myself-if-i-am-pulled-over-by-a-police-officer/340863/6 "2006-01-21T16:36:37Z")
As with just about everything, it depends on the laws in your state.
In Washington state, it would be legal.
Turning on the camera’s microphone is more likely to be illegal than just the video. Washington state does not allow **audio** recording of any private conversation without the full knowledge and consent of every person being recorded. However, the courts have ruled that contact with a law enforcement officer is exempt from this, as it is not a “private” conversation.
---
### Author:  [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)
#### Post date: [January 21, 2006, 4:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-permitted-to-videotape-myself-if-i-am-pulled-over-by-a-police-officer/340863/7 "2006-01-21T16:41:32Z")
[http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=630-637.9](http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=630-637.9) \<–working cite to CA invasion of privacy statute (see section 623)
---
### Author:  [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)
#### Post date: [January 21, 2006, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-permitted-to-videotape-myself-if-i-am-pulled-over-by-a-police-officer/340863/8 "2006-01-21T16:42:33Z")
> [@Gfactor](#):
>
> (see section 623)
Should be 632.
---
### Author:  [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)
#### Post date: [January 21, 2006, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-permitted-to-videotape-myself-if-i-am-pulled-over-by-a-police-officer/340863/9 "2006-01-21T17:33:57Z")
So if a state law requires you to tell the police officer that you are recording a traffic stop, do the police need to inform you if _they_ are recording the stop?
---
### Author:  [@Cartooniverse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cartooniverse)
#### Post date: [January 21, 2006, 7:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-permitted-to-videotape-myself-if-i-am-pulled-over-by-a-police-officer/340863/10 "2006-01-21T19:02:07Z")
> [@SaintCad](#):
>
> So if a state law requires you to tell the police officer that you are recording a traffic stop, do the police need to inform you if _they_ are recording the stop?
No. At least not in New Jersey. I was pulled over a few years ago by a very very green State Trooper. ( Young. Nervous. Supervised by a clearly older Trooper standing a few feet away, witnessing how he handled my traffic stop, etc. ).
He started to ask me for my ID and insurance and then as though smacked upside da head, stopped cold. He raised his voice just slightly and very clearly said, " My Name Is Trooper Smith. Please hand me your driver’s license and insurance card. " He had a script, he’d deviated right out of the gate and caught himself.
NJ State Troopers run audiotape and videotape of traffic stops. I suspect that if I’d had the camera running on that stop, and had told him, he’d have wet his pants. His behavior, enounciation and speech pattern overall made it clear it was a scripted event.
I was, needless to say, compliant and did as I was told. As for removing a traffic-stop from their car, unless you run into the rare bad seed who is gonna screw with you just ‘cause, it’s very unwise to take a driver out of their car unless you are going to search them, their car, or perform roadside sobriety tests. Its’ just unsafe to do it unless you have to. ( **Badge**? Other officer Dopers? ).
---
### Author:  [@Cartooniverse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cartooniverse)
#### Post date: [January 21, 2006, 7:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-permitted-to-videotape-myself-if-i-am-pulled-over-by-a-police-officer/340863/11 "2006-01-21T19:05:32Z")
Oh, and then last summer, I was pulled over. In Wildwood, NJ of all places. Last week of the summer. NY plates on my car, and ahhhhh the local cop was MAD.
I’d driven slowly through a stop sign. I was watching out for the copious pedestrian traffic, but I really did not see the sign- though it was unobscured and clear as day to see. He was steamed, and I understood why. He saw me run a stop with tons of tourists around. Had I not been watching anyone around me, it might have been bad.
I could tell that he too was being at least audio recorded. I keep my wallet in a hip pouch, and it was on the floor. ( A bad place to have to reach down when a cop is standing at your window… ). I said VERY LOUDLY and very clearly, " My wallet is at my feet inside a leather hip pouch. May I please bend over and lift it up so you can watch me take it out?" No mistaking what I said. He literally stood in closer, leaned in to look at the floor and said, “Yes go ahead”.
So, I paid the ticket. :dubious:
---
### Author:  [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)
#### Post date: [January 21, 2006, 7:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-permitted-to-videotape-myself-if-i-am-pulled-over-by-a-police-officer/340863/12 "2006-01-21T19:11:21Z")
But notice the question was a conditional
> [@SaintCad](#):
>
> So **if** a state law requires you to tell the police officer that you are recording a traffic stop, do the police need to inform you if _they_ are recording the stop?
My question was would state laws requiring notification before taping traffic stops have to work both ways?
---
### Author:  [@crowmanyclouds](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/crowmanyclouds)
#### Post date: [January 21, 2006, 7:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-permitted-to-videotape-myself-if-i-am-pulled-over-by-a-police-officer/340863/13 "2006-01-21T19:52:50Z")
> [@Bearflag70](#):
>
> …There is a black guy in Davis, CA …
If it’s the same guy I’m thinking of, he’s retired law enforcement himself!
---
### Author:  [@astorian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astorian)
#### Post date: [January 21, 2006, 7:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-permitted-to-videotape-myself-if-i-am-pulled-over-by-a-police-officer/340863/14 "2006-01-21T19:56:27Z")
Interestingly, here in Austin, the police are REQUIRED to videotape all their encounters. Mini-scandals have ensured when cops have conveniently “forgotten” or “neglected” to turn the cameras on before controversial incidents.
So, here in Austin, at least, a cop couldn’t very well object to your videotaping an encounter, because the cop is SUPPOSED to be doing that himself.
---
### Author:  [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)
#### Post date: [January 21, 2006, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-permitted-to-videotape-myself-if-i-am-pulled-over-by-a-police-officer/340863/15 "2006-01-21T20:04:16Z")
> [@Gfactor](#):
>
> As I read [this](http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/californiastatecases/s085594.pdf) (pdf) California Supreme Court opinion, you’d pretty much have to paint a sign, verbally tell the officer, or otherwise make sure that the officer knew that the conversation was being recorded, to be completely safe. Of course, if the officer has a mike on or a camera on the car, it will be more difficult for them to claim to claim that they were unaware that the conversation was being recorded. YMMV.
But, as far as i can tell, the cases you cite don’t deal with the confidentiality of communication between a member of the public and a public servant going about his or her assigned duties.
Do the same expectations of confidentiality attach to a police officer in the performance of his or her duties? The person is, after all, a public servant carrying out duties in public, and in constant contact with members of the public. The actions they undertake, and the conversations they have in the course of doing this, seem to me to be qualitatively different from two people engaged in a private conversation.
I have a copy of a little book called [You and the Police](http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1888766018/sr=1-1/qid=1137873473/ref=pd_bbs_1/002-0871923-1598458?%5Fencoding=UTF8), written under the cute pseudonym of Boston T. Party. The author deals with a whole bunch of issues that can arise when citizens and the police come into contact, and in many cases makes reference to the applicable Supreme Court decisions (Terry, Miranda, Manuel, etc.).
In one incident, he describes being rousted by a cop who wanted to search his car. When it became clear that his refusal to allow his car to be searched was not going to work, and that the cops were going to call in the drug sniffing dogs, he told the cop that he was going to get his camcorder to film the incident.
> [@](#):
>
> **Cop:** (Going absolutely ballistic) _“You will not film this, you will not record this! I’m in control of this scene!”_
>
> ```
> As I didn't then know my legal grounds on this point, I acquiesced. What I've since learned is that as long as you don't interfere with their duties, you've got a perfect right to video The Scene.
>
> ```
Unfortunately, he doesn’t say where he found this information, or whether it is something that has been decided by a particular court case, or by particular state law/s.
---
### Author:  [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)
#### Post date: [January 21, 2006, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-permitted-to-videotape-myself-if-i-am-pulled-over-by-a-police-officer/340863/16 "2006-01-21T20:07:11Z")
I should also point out that the book i referenced in my previous post is now rather out of date. It is from 1996, and some important court decisions and new laws have come into effect since then.
As only one example, he says in the book that you are under no obligation to provide a police officer with identification, but a ruling in the last year or so (can’t remember the case name) determined that you do have to provide ID.
---
### Author:  [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)
#### Post date: [January 21, 2006, 8:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-permitted-to-videotape-myself-if-i-am-pulled-over-by-a-police-officer/340863/17 "2006-01-21T20:23:02Z")
> [@mhendo](#):
>
> But, as far as i can tell, the cases you cite don’t deal with the confidentiality of communication between a member of the public and a public servant going about his or her assigned duties.
>
> Do the same expectations of confidentiality attach to a police officer in the performance of his or her duties? The person is, after all, a public servant carrying out duties in public, and in constant contact with members of the public. The actions they undertake, and the conversations they have in the course of doing this, seem to me to be qualitatively different from two people engaged in a private conversation.
According to the California Supreme Court, the test is:
> [@case I cited before](#):
>
> “under section 632‘confidentiality’ appears to require nothing more than the existence of a reasonable expectation by one of the parties that no one is ‘listening in’ or overhearing the conversation.
It doesn’t say anything about a different test applying to public servants, and the logic of the statute does not suggest one. It is a criminal statute.
Here is the text:
> [@](#):
>
> 1. (a) Every person who, intentionally and without the consent of
> all parties to a confidential communication, by means of any
> electronic amplifying or recording device, eavesdrops upon or records
> the confidential communication, whether the communication is carried
> on among the parties in the presence of one another or by means of a
> telegraph, telephone, or other device, except a radio, shall be
> punished by a fine not exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars
> ($2,500), or imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding one year,
> or in the state prison, or by both that fine and imprisonment. If
> the person has previously been convicted of a violation of this
> section or Section 631, 632.5, 632.6, 632.7, or 636, the person shall
> be punished by a fine not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000),
> by imprisonment in the county jail not exceeding one year, or in the
> state prison, or by both that fine and imprisonment.
> (b) The term “person” includes an individual, business
> association, partnership, corporation, limited liability company, or
> other legal entity, and an individual acting or purporting to act for
> or on behalf of any government or subdivision thereof, whether
> federal, state, or local, but excludes an individual known by all
> parties to a confidential communication to be overhearing or
> recording the communication.
> (c) The term “confidential communication” includes any
> communication carried on in circumstances as may reasonably indicate
> that any party to the communication desires it to be confined to the
> parties thereto, but excludes a communication made in a public
> gathering or in any legislative, judicial, executive or
> administrative proceeding open to the public, or in any other
> circumstance in which the parties to the communication may reasonably
> expect that the communication may be overheard or recorded.
> (d) Except as proof in an action or prosecution for violation of
> this section, no evidence obtained as a result of eavesdropping upon
> or recording a confidential communication in violation of this
> section shall be admissible in any judicial, administrative,
> legislative, or other proceeding.
> (e) This section does not apply (1) to any public utility engaged
> in the business of providing communications services and facilities,
> or to the officers, employees or agents thereof, where the acts
> otherwise prohibited by this section are for the purpose of
> construction, maintenance, conduct or operation of the services and
> facilities of the public utility, or (2) to the use of any
> instrument, equipment, facility, or service furnished and used
> pursuant to the tariffs of a public utility, or (3) to any telephonic
> communication system used for communication exclusively within a
> state, county, city and county, or city correctional facility.
> (f) This section does not apply to the use of hearing aids and
> similar devices, by persons afflicted with impaired hearing, for the
> purpose of overcoming the impairment to permit the hearing of sounds
> ordinarily audible to the human ear.
> [@SaintCad](#):
>
> So if a state law requires you to tell the police officer that you are recording a traffic stop, do the police need to inform you if they are recording the stop?
Under the CA statute, no:
> [@](#):
>
> The Legislature recognizes that law enforcement agencies have a
> legitimate need to employ modern listening devices and techniques in
> the investigation of criminal conduct and the apprehension of
> lawbreakers. Therefore, it is not the intent of the Legislature to
> place greater restraints on the use of listening devices and
> techniques by law enforcement agencies than existed prior to the
> effective date of this chapter.
[http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=630-637.9](http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/cgi-bin/displaycode?section=pen&group=00001-01000&file=630-637.9)
And of course, this is further evidence that the legislature knew how to carve out situations involving the police when it so intended.
---
### Author:  [@mhendo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mhendo)
#### Post date: [January 21, 2006, 8:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-permitted-to-videotape-myself-if-i-am-pulled-over-by-a-police-officer/340863/18 "2006-01-21T20:31:04Z")
> [@Gfactor](#):
>
> It doesn’t say anything about a different test applying to public servants, and the logic of the statute does not suggest one. It is a criminal statute.
Sure, but the next question i would ask, then, is whether a police officer, in the performance of his or her duties, can be said to have a “reasonable expectation…that no one is ‘listening in’ or overhearing the conversation.”
While there may be nothing in the legislation specifically referring to public servants, the very use of the language “reasonable expectation” suggests that the legislature was aware that expectations regarding privacy differ depending on the situation and the participants.
Maybe i’m just projecting my own belief that law enforcement should be open and accountable, but i can see no justification for denying members of the public the right to record their encounters with law enforcement.
---
### Author:  [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)
#### Post date: [January 21, 2006, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-permitted-to-videotape-myself-if-i-am-pulled-over-by-a-police-officer/340863/19 "2006-01-21T21:01:48Z")
> [@mhendo](#):
>
> Sure, but the next question i would ask, then, is whether a police officer, in the performance of his or her duties, can be said to have a “reasonable expectation…that no one is ‘listening in’ or overhearing the conversation.”
Right, you would. Which is why I said you’d need to tell the officer to be completely safe. I never said it was a sure thing. In some cases, it’s a no brainer. You are stopped at a busy intersection with a lot of pedestrian traffic, for instance. In the middle of a lonely country road, not so easy.
> [@](#):
>
> While there may be nothing in the legislation specifically referring to public servants, the very use of the language “reasonable expectation” suggests that the legislature was aware that expectations regarding privacy differ depending on the situation and the participants.
And the court spelled out the test.
> [@](#):
>
> Maybe i’m just projecting my own belief that law enforcement should be open and accountable, but i can see no justification for denying members of the public the right to record their encounters with law enforcement.
And there may be Constitutional protections for them doing so.
---
### Author:  [@Gfactor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gfactor)
#### Post date: [January 21, 2006, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-permitted-to-videotape-myself-if-i-am-pulled-over-by-a-police-officer/340863/20 "2006-01-21T21:14:19Z")
> [@Gfactor](#):
>
> And there may be Constitutional protections for them doing so.
[WILSON V. LAYNE](http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/98-83.ZS.html) (Fourth Amendment prohibits media ride-along camera to follow police into home while executing an arrest warrant.) [Hanlon v. Berger](http://supct.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/97-1927.ZPC.html) (ditto search warrant).
[Legal to take out ads listing porn-store customers, to embarrass/drive away business?](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=354276) (wherein we discuss some constitutional limitations on prohibiting videotaping, sort of).
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/am-i-permitted-to-videotape-myself-if-i-am-pulled-over-by-a-police-officer/340863.md?page=2)