We are told that the use of surveillance cameras enjoys widespread support among "the public." But this information is false: the opposition to surveillance cameras (among individuals, small groups, parents, unionized workers and other "ordinary citizens") is far deeper and more extensive than commonly thought. One only has to keep up with the news being reported from around the world, which is precisely what we plan to do here, on this page, in chronological order. (Click here for a listing of outright abuses of camera technology, and here for a listing of reports citing the ineffectiveness of video surveillance as a "crime-fighting" tool.)
5 March 2002, Hawaii USA: "'Talivan' Alert: Hawaii Drivers Aren't Smiling About Candid Cameras."
HONOLULU - Some Hawaii drivers mockingly call them the "talivans," and radio disc jockeys take wicked delight in announcing the location of the vehicles. The Hawaii Transportation Department has begun using van-mounted cameras to catch speeders in the act - a practice some motorists consider so underhanded they are trying to subvert the system. The cameras, introduced on Oahu two months ago and operated by a private company, are coupled with radar and automatically photograph a speeder's license plate. A ticket is then issued by mail to the car's owner. The devices are supposed to catch violators the way red-light cameras have been doing for years, without the danger of a police chase. Proponents say that the system will save lives and that it has already proved itself by slowing down traffic.
Drivers and civil liberties lawyers complain that the system unfairly assumes that the owner of the car was the person behind the wheel. They also say that the cameras are an invasion of privacy and that the state is more interested in speeding-ticket revenue than safety. "It's pretty crazy. Unless they can really identify you and everything, I think it's a pretty worthless situation," said 44-year-old John McGee, who beat his ticket on a technicality.
Even lawmakers who supported the project are having second thoughts. The Senate this week is expected to vote to repeal the program. House lawmakers on Friday voted to require clearer photographic evidence of who was driving. Republican state Rep. Charles Djou called the program "an unreasonable intrusion by government into individual lives. Many of my constituents have complained to me that this photo enforcement system is sort of a 'gotcha' law enforcement," he said. "It is a high-tech bounty hunter system that captures not only the lawbreakers but also law-abiding citizens."
Many states use cameras to catch people running through red lights. Only about a dozen communities - in Hawaii, Arizona, California, Colorado, Oregon and Washington, D.C. - are using the cameras to try to catch speeders, according to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. City officials in Denver last week suspended their program and dismissed all tickets after a judge ruled that the system illegally gave police powers to a private contractor. The judge also ruled that the program violated state law by appearing to compensate the contractor based on the volume of tickets issued.
Hawaii, which has only three short freeways, is the first state to pass a statewide law allowing photo-enforced radar along state roads. But about 200 tickets have been thrown out so far because of technical glitches and legal loopholes big enough to drive a truck through. Many were dismissed because the tickets did not specifically state that the person issuing the ticket - the camera operator - was certified to run the radar equipment. That problem was later fixed. Last week, a judge threw out dozens more tickets, ruling that drivers going less than 10 mph over the speed limit should not be ticketed because doing so would conflict with Honolulu Police Department practice.
Some radio stations and newspaper Web sites have been gleefully broadcasting the location of vans. State officials, stung by allegations that they were not interested in safety, eventually responded by issuing a list of where the four vans might be at any given time. KSSK morning disc jockeys Michael W. Perry and Larry Price on Thursday enlisted isteners and got the locations phoned in within a few minutes. "Four for four," announced Price, reviewing the location of each van for motorists.
Transportation Director Brian Minaai described the wrangling over the project as "all part of the learning experience. I think we all can admit that the pace of all the cars on the freeways are a lot slower, if not more in line with the speed limit," he said.
In Canada, deaths dropped 20 percent on roads where speed cameras were used, and in Britain, 28 percent fewer crashes involved injury, according to Russ Rader, a spokesman for the Insurance Institute. "The whole idea is to deter the offense" he said, "and that's what speed cameras do."
Brent White, legal director for the American Civil Liberties Union of Hawaii, said many people are worried about where this might lead. "If the government can put up these cameras to catch people going a couple miles per hour over the speed limit, what's to keep them from putting up similar cameras to catch people doing other things, like jaywalking?" he said.
10 April 2002, Hawaii USA: "Hawaii Halts Use of Traffic Cameras," by Bruce Dunford, Associated Press Writer.
HONOLULU - Gov. Ben Cayetano on Wednesday ordered a halt to the use of cameras to catch speeders, a safety measure many Hawaii motorists considered so underhanded they tried to subvert the system. Cayetano said the Legislature was about to repeal the program anyway. "The traffic van cam law is the creation of the Legislature, and if they want to now cancel the program it will be canceled," he said in a statement.
The van-mounted cameras, introduced on Oahu two months ago and operated by a private company, were coupled with radar and automatically photographed a speeder's license plate. A ticket was then issued by mail to the car's owner. Some drivers mockingly called them the "talivans."
The House late Tuesday tentatively decided to abandon the system, and Cayetano said he would allow the repeal bill to become law without his signature. He maintained, though, that the program's aims were good. "Driving at faster speeds has become a habit for many drivers and explains, at least in part, why there was so much opposition to the traffic van cam," he said.
The devices were supposed to catch violators the way red-light cameras have been doing for years, without the danger of a police chase. Proponents said the system would slow traffic and save lives. Drivers and civil liberties lawyers complained the system unfairly assumed the owner of the car was the person behind the wheel. They also said the cameras were an invasion of privacy.
Judges threw out the first batch of citations on a technicality that was later fixed. But lawyers then successfully argued that tickets issued to drivers going less than 10 mph over the speed limit should be dismissed because it conflicted with Honolulu Police Department practice.
While many states use cameras to catch people running red lights, Hawaii was the first state to pass a law allowing photo-enforced radar along state roads. State Rep. Charles Djou said Wednesday he was pleased "this very much hated system is finally going to get yanked."
13 May 2002, Luxembourg: Students say no to surveillance at Europe school in Luxembourg, by Honor Mahony.
A strike broke out at the European school in Luxembourg on Friday. Students held the spontaneous up-rising as a protest against plans to heighten the fence around the school and to erect surveillance cameras.
The director of the school, Jacques Descamps, said that discussions to raise the existing wall to a height of 1,80 meters had been going on for years. It was only after the September 11 terrorists attacks in New York that the go-ahead was given. The wall will be designed not only to protect the students but also to save the expensive school buildings from damage by outsiders.
The director, whom the strike took by surprise, insisted that although this had been discussed with the students it was very difficult to ensure that the information was filtered down to each pupil in a school where eleven languages are spoken. The students themselves fear that the raised wall and the possibility of surveillance cameras -- which have yet to be approved -- will give the school a prison atmosphere. They feel that pupils will not be protected from the outside world through isolation but rather through responsible education.
18 September 2002, Owen Sound, Canada: Protests and walkouts promised by students should "spy cameras" be used, by Bill Henry.
"Spy cameras" are not welcome at Meaford's high school. Walkouts and other protests are likely if the cameras go in as planned, two students told Bluewater trustees Tuesday.
On Monday, 255 Georgian Bay Secondary School students signed a petition against surveillance cameras there, Emmett Ferguson and Wes Wright told the board's policy committee. "It goes without saying that this type of practice is not permitted in a democratic society, being more the practice of authoritarian regimes," Ferguson said. The students said the cameras would violate privacy rights and threaten student security. "We will not permit ourselves to be constantly monitored by any person, whether it's for our own good or in the interest of school safety," Ferguson said.
The cameras will go in as planned as soon as the equipment arrives. They were supposed to be up already in hallways, the parking lot and near computer areas as part of the board's technology master plan pilot project at the school, finance superintendent Dean Currie said after the meeting. The plan is to make it easier for teachers to use technology, with consistent systems throughout the board. Cameras are going in at the same time as phone and computer systems and wiring as part of the overall pilot program.
Currie couldn't say how many cameras will be at GBSS, or exactly where they'll go. The intent is to protect property, not monitor student activities, he said. Cameras, cables, motion detectors and door locks for security will cost about $25,000 over 15 years, or $1,700 a year to protect the investment in computers and other property. "We received no direction from the board to stop the project, or to stop that part of it," Currie said in an interview.
Trustees told the students high schools in Hanover and Port Elgin already have some security cameras. Students accept and even like them because they feel safer, said trustee Carolyn Day, who chairs the policy committee. At Port Elgin's Saugeen District Secondary School, the idea came from student and parent councils, custodians and administrators wanting to curb theft and vandalism. "The reaction there has been overwhelmingly positive," Day said. No one looks at the tapes unless an incident is investigated, she added.
"I believe these surveillance cameras can help protect your individual rights and freedoms," said trustee Cindy Aitken. "It's not that you're not trusted or that you should feel threatened. It's we're trying to protect you." Trustees agreed the board needs a policy on security cameras, which are also in some school buses and have stopped bullying and other problems. Until then, Day said, it's up to principals, who are responsible for safety and security in their schools. Both Meaford's principal and parent council support the pilot project, she added.
The session was taped at the request of Peter Ferguson, Emmett Ferguson's father. Ferguson became angry when he asked for the tape and was told it would be processed and forwarded to him. He demanded it be sent by the end of the day. "I instructed them to prepare it. I want it," he said outside the meeting.
The students and Ferguson all said they will continue to fight the cameras, and they distrust board assurances surveillance is only for safety and security, and only in high-incident areas. "We want to just make sure that it's not abused," Emmett Ferguson said. "If they want to monitor their expensive computer equipment I don't have a problem with it. I just want to make sure that my movements about the school and my own personal privacy are of the utmost concern."
His father said he was not satisfied with what he heard. "What we are after here is a decision that no, spy cameras will not be placed in GBSS. We didn't hear that. What we heard was we're probably going to put them in, we're thinking about doing a policy and we may put them in before we have a policy. So these children are still under threat, my children are under threat and I don't like it," Ferguson said. He said he has not spoken to other parents about the issue. He asked that students address the board directly because time was short. If there are problems at the school, they should be solved some other way, he said. "We're standing firm on this. No cameras. it's a stupid idea. it's a hurtful idea. It's probably an illegal idea. So let's stop it now and then we can talk."
Wright said with schools underfunded, and not enough textbooks to go around, the money for cameras could be better used. He said he expects student will react if cameras are installed. "The talk at the school is people want to walk out for this issue because they feel very strongly about it. And there will be other protests. It's a very big topic at our school and it's talked a lot about."
23 September 2002, Nova Scotia, Canada: "Workers walk over plant spy-cams," by Broadcast News.
NEW GLASGOW A wildcat strike at TrentonWorks ended early yesterday after the company agreed to temporarily remove video cameras inside the rail-car plant. Most of the plants 500 unionized employees walked off the job Monday to protest the presence of the surveillance equipment. The cameras are there to spy on the men, said one worker. Give the men back some dignity. Ninety-nine per cent of the men are responsible men. Donnie Murphy, president of Local 1231 of the United Steelworkers of America, said the cameras were installed in the plants main production area without the unions knowledge.
Murphy said management told him they had forgotten to inform the union about the cameras, and that they were installed because of vandalism to equipment during the past month. The company agreed to remove the cameras for 10 days while management and the union discuss the issue. Company spokesman Sandy Stephenson declined comment.
1 October 2002, Colorado, USA: Don't smile for these cameras: Opposition to highway devices urged by Greg Masse.
Jerry Begly says government video cameras installed along Highway 82 are violating motorists' right to privacy. The problem is becoming so widespread, said Begly, a Snowmass Village resident, that he is holding public meetings up and down the valley to inform people of what he calls a violation of the Fourth Amendment right barring unreasonable search and seizure. He hosted a meeting last Thursday evening at the Carbondale Public Library.
"Eight years ago, [the Colorado Department of Transportation] put up a camera at Highway 82 and Cemetery Lane. It was supposed to be for the public to look at traffic," he said. Since then, he's counted 36 cameras along highways in the Roaring Fork Valley and the West Glenwood area. In an attempt to have the cameras removed, Begly is collecting signatures for a "redress of grievance." The redress is a way for people to peacefully petition the government for change, as spelled out in the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
"What do we do, just sit here and wring our hands?" he asked. "I'm proposing we do a redress of grievance." CDOT officials have said the cameras are used only for traffic control as part of their Smart Highway System and deny they're used for surveillance. But Begly said he's concerned that with the advent of facial-recognition technology -- which the Colorado Division of Motor Vehicles started using in September -- the government will start to use the cameras to spy on its citizens.
"CDOT says they're only there for maintenance," he said. CDOT officials also have told him the cameras do not have high-resolution capabilities. But he feels the cameras -- which cost about $5,000 apiece -- do have high resolution and could easily be used to watch motorists. "At $5,000 per camera, you'd think they have some pretty good resolution," he said [...].
Begly plans at least two more meetings in Glenwood Springs and Grand Junction, but the dates and times of these meetings are not yet scheduled.
7 October 2002, Perth Amboy, Australia: Watched workers stage walk-out.
A Perth building company has installed spy cameras and microphones to monitor union activity. About 20 construction workers at a West Perth building site have walked off the job after being told they may be under surveillance at work. Sizer Builders says the move has been made to deter theft and union officials from disrupting work. The company failed to get a court injunction last month to keep union officials off work sites. The Construction, Forestry, Mining, and Energy Union says Sizer is compromising workers' rights to access their union officials by threatening their civil liberities.
Sizer Builders general manager Daren Deen says the union-related work disruption has cost the company thousands of dollars. Mr Deen says the use of surveillance equipment is not a breach of civil liberties.
"It's no different to walking into a shopping centre," Mr Deen said. "There's cameras in banks, shopping centres, bottle shops even nowadays. The cameras aren't on all the time . . . tape recordings [sic] certainlty aren't on all the time. It's purely just when union officials arrive on the site, and if they're doing everything by the book, then they should have nothing to hide."
9 October 2002, Trenton, Nova Scotia, Canada: Steelworkers win battle of the spy cameras.
TRENTON, NS, Oct. 9 /CNW/ - The 500 members of the United Steelworkers' Local 1231 have won the right not to be spied on by their employer with the agreement by Trenton Works Ltd. to remove all security cameras from the rail car plant. The cameras sparked a walkout late last month when the company used the excuse that the cameras were intended to prevent incidents of vandalism.
"We have agreed to a letter that states both the union and company will not tolerate vandalism on the property," said Local 1231 President Don Murphy. "Agreeing to such a statement is a small price to pay for protecting our rights. The level of vandalism that is alleged to have occurred is minor compared to the violation of our members' right to dignity on the job.
"Spy cameras in workplaces are the kind of thing that appalls Canadians when they hear about it in third-world sweatshops. The only reason the sweatshop bosses get away with it is that those workers don't have a union to protect their rights." Murphy said surveillance is an issue of fundamental human rights and could not be tolerated by the union. "We are pleased that the company came to its senses," he said.
9 October 2002, Sydney, Australia: Bus crews strike over videotape sacking.
Bus services in Sydney's west were disrupted today after drivers walked off the job in solidarity with a co-worker who was sacked after he was videotaped allegedly stealing from a fare box.
About 130 Busways drivers servicing routes in Blacktown and Mt Druitt went on a 24-hour strike claiming management misused onboard surveillance cameras as a disciplinary tool. The NSW Transport Workers' Union (TWU) said the cameras, meant to protect drivers and passengers from attacks or robberies, were being used to monitor driver work performance. But Busways management has rejected the allegations.
TWU state secretary Tony Sheldon said the drivers only agreed to the cameras being installed to act as a deterrent to violent crimes and to assist police or the department with prosecutions.
"Under no circumstance were the cameras to be used as a management tool to monitor drivers," Mr Sheldon said. The TWU has called an urgent meeting of bus industry delegates next week to discuss the use of video cameras on buses. Mr Sheldon said the misuse of the tapes was in direct breach of NSW Department of Transport requirements and privacy agreements.
"This is a flagrant abuse of trust by the company that has left our members with no choice but to take industrial action to force the company and NSW Department of Transport to immediately ensure the rights and privacy of drivers and passengers are protected," he said. The revelations and subsequent strike came after proceedings in the NSW Industrial Relations Commission yesterday.
Busways operations manager Brett Thomson said in a statement today that the cameras were not used to monitor driver performance. Mr Thomson said the company had agreed yesterday to allow the driver in question to resign rather than face dismissal over the allegations of stealing. But he said the company had yet to decide whether to refer the matter to police for investigation. He said the commission had found the video should be used as a first step to further discussions. Busways said today's strike had impacted on services in the Blacktown area, but management was attempting to service some routes.
Drivers are set to return to work tomorrow.
10 October 2002, Perth, Australia: Builder removes spy cameras after walkouts, by Liza Kappelle.
A Perth construction firm has temporarily stopped covertly recording workers' conversations after the surveillance sparked industrial and legal action. The Construction Forestry Mining and Energy Union (CFMEU) has claimed a victory after Sizer Builders ordered the removal of the cameras following a series of walk-offs by about 20 unionists at a building site in West Perth. But Sizer managing director Darren Dean said the spy cameras and recorders would go up again at the first sign of further industrial unrest at the luxury apartment project.
"We're at a standoff at the moment," Mr Dean said. The CFMEU ordered members to walk off the job on Monday after it discovered Sizer had installed the surveillance equipment. Sizer set the equipment up in a bid to collect evidence of unlawful union conduct at the project site following a series of disputes over Sizer's employment of non-union labour, Mr Dean said
The company did not want to ask workers and subcontractors to speak out against the union because they risked blacklisting over such behaviour. Mr Dean said the cameras had come down and the 20 CFMEU members were back at work. Negotiations were continuing for a CFMEU pledge to maintain industrial peace at the site.
"There's no deals being done. If there's no industrial action, there'll be no cameras," Mr Dean said. "Any industrial action and the cameras are back." The CFMEU has lodged four applications in the Industrial Magistrates Court over the matter. It claims Sizer's actions breached right of entry provisions and freedom of association provisions under the Industrial Relations Act. Sizer will discuss its next step regarding legal action this weekend. "But with the cameras down it's a bit of a moot point at the moment," Mr Dean said.
18 October 2002, Owen Sound, Canada: Video cameras in school on hold; Delay not the result of protest, board director says, by Bill Henry.
Controversial surveillance cameras likely wont be installed at Meaford's high school until theres a new board-wide policy. But the unexpected delay is a happy coincidence not related to complaints from a parent and two students last month, David Armstrong, the Bluewater school board's education director, said Thursday. The students' criticism and petition at a board policy committee meeting in September changed nothing about the pilot project, Armstrong said.
"The video cameras, which were to go in this month, just aren't available yet. They are meant to protect computer equipment, not to monitor students as they feared. The cameras will be installed when they arrive, although that likely won't be until after the policy is widely discussed in school communities," Armstrong said. But the students' concerns did prompt a new draft policy on surveillance equipment in schools which is expected to be ready for Novembers committee meeting. The policy would then be circulated to school and student councils, staff and the public for comment before final board approval, Armstrong said.
"We have certainly reflected a great deal on this and it's clear there needs to be a clear and comprehensive dialogue with all of our communities," Armstrong said. "We will be able to have that dialogue before the cameras go in. That's a happy coincidence in my mind." Peter Ferguson, whose son Emmett along with Wes Wright, asked the board to reconsider what they called spy cameras at their school, said Thursday he welcomed the new policy. He's also pleased it will be debated before the cameras go in. But he wondered why the board doesn't meet with students as promised and use that discussion as a basis to help develop the policy.
"They should be going out to the people who are concerned and who will be affected by this thing and asking for input and developing their policy out of that," Ferguson said. In September, Emmett Ferguson and Wright gave trustees a petition with 255 signatures of Georgian Bay Secondary School students. They said the spy cameras violate their rights and threaten their security. They also hinted at student walkouts if the cameras go in. Armstrong said once the policy goes to schools, he's hoping students will debate the issue.
"It's not just watching over the students, which is what they perceive," he said. "It's also about the kids who want to feel safe at their school."
28 October 2002, Pennsylvania, USA: Students protest surveillance cameras, by Michael Lorber, The Daily Collegian
Protesters of the installation of surveillance cameras on Beaver Avenue, which would be partially funded by Penn State, rallied outside the Allen Street Gates Friday afternoon. The protesters included students from the Penn State chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), the College Democrats and Young Americans for Freedom (YAF). They collected signatures for a petition that includes a list of grievances, which will be presented to the State College Borough Council, State College Mayor Bill Welch, State College Police Chief Tom King and Penn State's administration. The petition says Penn State has no reasonable explanation for assisting with the funding of video surveillance equipment off campus.
"The university can raise tuition 13.5 percent, and they have money to fund cameras?" Jason Waeltz (junior-information sciences and technology) asked. ACLU member Daniel Leathers (junior-history) said the cost for the surveillance cameras is no more than $20,000. The university would fund $10,000 of that, he said. The use of surveillance cameras was proposed after riots in the area led to pressure from community groups. In previous interviews with The Daily Collegian, Police Chief King said he would recommend the instillation of cameras if the cost is reasonable. He said he believes the cameras will protect students and create a safer living environment. A vote on the use of cameras could take place as early as December.
Some protesters said the cameras might record areas of private property. "This is a serious violation of the Fourth Amendment," said Jim Reardon (senior-management), a YAF member. College Democrats President Alicia Turner said the university administration could be overstepping its boundaries. "It is so broad to what they say they can do; when does it go too far?" she said.
8 November 2002, Fiji: Customs officers want Nadi airport cameras removed.
Over 30 Customs officers based at the Nadi International Airport walked off their jobs yesterday afternoon and have threatened not to return unless security cameras are removed from the baggage hall. Airports Fiji Limited has again come into the limelight, igniting unrest at the Nadi International Airport and implementing changes without proper consultation from other organisations within the airport premises. Talks are under way to lobby for support from officers in Suva to join in the protest. The officers say the security cameras are a breach of the Customs Act and cameras must be removed immediately.
With high traffic movement yesterday, passengers had to endure long queues because there were no Customs officers to clear them. Flights scheduled at Nadi Airport yesterday were FJ910 from Sydney, NZ50 from New Zealand, Air Vanuatu from Vila, KE8-22 Korean Airline flight from Auckland and FJ920 from Brisbane.
A Customs source said the installation of the cameras did not comply with the Customs Act 124 section B which states that Customs officers cannot be placed under surveillance by other organisations. "The camera was being installed by AFL to spy on us but they fail to understand that we have our own surveillance cameras in place which is being monitored by Customs management," the source claimed. "Nobody has the powers to monitor our movements inside the baggage hall and we are protesting because we know that someone at AFL is trying to act a bit smart and here is the consequences of his smart acts." He said, "Airports Fiji Limited fails to understand that we are part of the disciplined forces and double-checking our movements and our line of operations is something that we will not stand for." The source said the idea to switch on the cameras was a direct result of the Customs Department charging duty on excessive clothes brought into the country by AFL chief security officer Samuela Matakibau. "We had to charge him extra $200 duty on the clothes he brought and he had warned us that our movements will be monitored and here he has done what he had meant." Mr Matakibau would not comment.
Fiji Islands and Revenue and Customs Authority chief executive Tony OConnor said he was aware of the grievances of the officers and would discuss the concerns with Airports Fiji Limited. The officers had not returned to work when this edition went to press last night.
2 April 2003, Barbados: Customs officers returning to work today by Dawne Bennett.
Staff at the Customs and Excise Department will be back on the job this morning as the National Union of Public Workers (NUPW) prepares to enter discussions with the Ministry of the Civil Service. This recent development, according to sources close to the union, has averted planned strike action by health officers at Barbados' ports.
News of the workers' return to work, a week after they stayed off the job protesting the surveillance cameras focusing on them in the operation areas, came yesterday from NUPW General Secretary, Joseph Goddard who indicated that after receiving correspondence from the Ministry, the union agreed to an 11 a.m. meeting tomorrow and instructed all Customs and Excise staff to return to their duties. According to a statement from the NUPW, boarding officers at the Bridgetown Port and Port St. Charles and employees at the Bridgetown Port, Grantley Adams International Airport and Customs and Excise Headquarters are expected to heed the NUPW's call to return to work.
"The union's decision is as a result of two items of correspondence from the Ministry of the Civil Service which indicated that the Ministry stood ready to return to the negotiating table as soon as possible," stated the release which also extended the NUPW's and Customs staff's gratitude to the public for its understanding and the support and solidarity expressed during the impasse. It continued that the confirmation of the meeting came at the insistence by the union that the time, date and meeting venue must be in writing. The Barbados Advocate was reliably informed that the union met with health officers from the island's ports yesterday at the NUPW headquarters. According to sources, the officers pledged their support to the customs workers and the union had planned to call the workers out if no progress had been made in efforts to negotiate with government.
10 April 2003, Louisiana, USA: Police camera creates uproar: Citizens say $24K surveillance gadget invades privacy, violates civil liberties by Kerry Benefield.
Plans to use a remote surveillance camera in areas considered havens of high crime are running into an emotional hurdle as some Shreveporters express concern that the camera would invade their privacy. Residents of Shreveport's Mooretown neighborhood say they fear the camera will be used to record the moves of the innocent as well as those suspected of wrongdoing.
"I feel like my right to privacy and my civil liberties are being invaded by the camera. I don't feel I need to be monitored," Waters Place resident Urina Holt said. The $24,000 camera - which would have a range of about one block - has been ordered and is expected to arrive by months' end. There is no schedule for when or where it will first be installed, but tips from neighbors looking for relief from the activities of "drug houses" will likely be monitored first, said Police Chief Jim Roberts.
"It's hard for people to understand what it's like to live in a neighborhood where there are gunshots going on, where there's loud music and people coming in and out of their neighborhood. That's what we're looking for, to gather as much evidence on people like that," he said. "It's not to look over anyone's shoulder or to catch anyone doing anything wrong other than the crooks." But Holt and fellow Waters Place resident Stephanie Lynch have collected 159 signatures on a petition they say represent those opposed to the plan. Lynch stressed that before a camera is employed, she wants answers regarding how it will be used, whom it will target and if its installation will actually lead to a reduction in regular police patrols.
"When (District F Councilman James Green) said he was going to fight crime, (residents) didn't envision a surveillance camera, they weren't expecting to be spied on," Lynch, who is also president of the Mooretown Neighborhood Strategy Council, said. "I don't think that's how you build relationships." Green, who sponsored the legislation in December 2002 to pay for the camera, took umbrage at allegations the camera would be used to monitor neighborhoods rather than provide evidence against potential wrongdoers.
"If you are a crook breaking into someone's house or you are doing dope, this camera is for you," he said. "This is not James Green's camera, it's not specifically for District F. I will not be operating it."
District G Councilman Theron Jackson said a recent spate of high profile incidents involving police officers, including a police shooting in which a Cherokee Park man was killed and the arrest of a former patrolman for allegedly raping one woman and allegedly attempting to sexually assault a 14-year-old girl, have made residents uneasy. The camera will only heighten feelings of distrust between the police and the community, he said.
"We are going to erode the modicum of trust we have now," he said. "(Residents) are going to move on the emotion of 'They're putting up a camera in our neighborhood, they are watching us.'" Roberts said the camera will be hidden in most cases, but in certain instances, signs will be posted announcing its presence. High-frequency burglary areas where the camera can be posted in a commercial parking lot would be a prime location for the camera, he said. Taping areas that citizens expect to be private - such as homes and backyards - is illegal, Roberts said, and will not be done.
"It will be monitored out of our narcotics unit. They are familiar with all of the laws and requirements," he said. "A select few people will have access to it in that unit." Only footage that contains evidence of a crime will be kept, he said.
Joe Cook, executive director of the Louisiana chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union said Shreveport's newest proposal differs from the video cameras that are currently mounted in all Shreveport patrol cars because those cameras capture images of someone who has been stopped with probable cause, not random activities.
"We oppose video surveillance by law enforcement unless there (is) probable cause that an individual has committed a crime and there is legitimate reason and authority to do it. Otherwise, it's invasion of privacy," he said. "It's contrary to an image the police should want to promote and that's the only way they can have success is to build trust."
Former longtime District F Councilman Joe Shyne attended Tuesday's council meeting and on Wednesday expressed concern for crime levels, but also about what kind of message cameras send to both residents and potential investors.
"You do that in communist countries," he said of surveillance. "It's kind of a reflection on the community. How are you going to get business and people to a place where you have outwardly called it a disaster zone?"
District C Councilman Thomas Carmody, the lone dissenting vote in the December vote to set aside money for the camera, said his vote was based on fiscal responsibility, not in pointed opposition to the camera. If residents are informed about the intent of the program, the cameras could be a positive move, he said.
"I understand both sides of it. I don't think any of us want our privacy invaded," he said. But he added that for some, the camera could send the message that police are watching out for law- abiding residents just as much as for potential criminals.
15 April 2003, Pennsylvania, USA: Student leaders speak on downtown cameras by William Berry and Rory Hassler.
Student leaders spoke out against the installation of surveillance cameras on Beaver Avenue at the State College Borough Council work session last night. Of about 15 citizens who addressed council, all of them expressed various levels of discontent with the proposal, and several, including USG President Ian Rosenberger, requested the issue be tabled until the fall semester. For the most part, council members remained silent during the testimony.
Council President Richard McCarl said he doesn't believe council will vote on the protocol at its April 21 meeting. However, he did not know if council would conduct a final vote on May 5. A vote will not take place over the summer, McCarl said. Rosenberger asked that council not vote during finals week. He is attempting to get more than 2,000 signatures against the proposal to present to council by next week. The petition is in the USG office, 223 HUB-Robeson Center, and will be distributed to student organizations.
"Penn State students are by a majority against placing surveillance cameras downtown," he said. "I want to encourage students to crowd the council meeting on April 21. In this case students make up almost 100 percent of the constituents effected by the security camera issue. This is an awesome opportunity for students to have a voice." A referendum asking if Penn State should partially fund the installation of the cameras was voted down by a 4:1 ratio, Rosenberger said.
Jason Covener, a non-degree conditional undergraduate student, suggested council let the community decide. "You say you want the community involved in the decision," he said. "Put it on the ballot as a referendum at the next election. Put your money where your mouth is."
Dan Leathers, president of the College Libertarians and co-coordinator of the Penn State chapter of the ACLU, already has presented council with a petition with about 700 signatures against the cameras. "Penn State, in its hopes to mend any bad blood between the university and the local community hopes to buy its way out of past problems with a $10,000 check towards the project," Leathers said. "Penn State's Bill Asbury, who met with the local chapter of the ACLU, said he would recommend not funding the cameras if they were to be used in any circumstance other than riots."
State College Police Chief Tom King said he will attempt to incorporate the comments and views aired throughout the night as he makes revisions to the protocol over the next week. Rosenberger will meet with King today to further discuss the issue.
Earlier in last night's meeting, the debate started with a presentation by King on his proposal. "We have tried a lot of things since 1998," he said. "We still have problems, it's time we try something else."
The cameras, which would only record images and not sound, would be focused on the sidewalks and streets, King said. Cameras would be programmed to automatically pan, tilt and zoom in order to cover the widest area, he said. A special feature would create a tint over any glass, inhibiting viewing into apartments and private areas. "The cameras shouldn't see anything you can't see from the street," he said. "What they will be viewing is what occurs on public property."
Recorded images will be stored digitally on a computer and will be kept for 30 to 45 days before being erased, King said. If the image is being used for an investigation, it can be stored for a longer period of time, he said. While the images are stored on the computer, only certain personnel will have access to them, he said. "This isn't an instance of having a tape that we could take home and watch with popcorn," King said.
The plan also calls for the establishment of a police chief's advisory committee to ensure implementation would take place in a public and a professional manner. The committee, made up of local officials, would periodically review procedures and make recommendations to King. Council would have to approve all changes in procedure.
Council members as well as citizens raised questions about who should be on the advisory committee. Janet Knauer said she did not see a need for the inclusion of the chair of the Pedestrian Traffic Safety Committee. Others expressed concern that there wasn't a spot for a community member.
Council members Tom Daubert and Goreham are unwaveringly opposed to cameras, while Cathy Dauler and James Meyer are in favor of the plan. McManis appears to be leaning toward voting for the plan. "The gauntlet is being thrown down and there has to be a way for us to address the problem," McManis said. McCarl expressed similar views. "I'm probably coming down on the side of saying it's a good idea right now," McCarl said. Knauer said she is leaning against the proposal.
21 April 2003, Pennsylvania, USA: Students plan against surveillance cameras: Campus leaders are trying to increase attendance at tonight's borough council meeting in an outcry against adding downtown cameras, by William Berry.
Fliers, e-mails and petitions will be circulating campus today, as student body leaders attempt to raise awareness about tonight's State College Borough Council preliminary vote on placing surveillance cameras downtown. The campaign to spark student interest is planned to start at 6:30 a.m., when members of various student organizations will begin posting fliers in classrooms and public spaces on campus, encouraging student to attend the council meeting.
During the recent USG elections, there was an overwhelming majority of people who voted on a referendum against the installation of cameras on Beaver Avenue, campaign organizer Dan Henning (junior-biology) said. The referendum asked students whether Penn State should partially fund the installation of the cameras.
"It infringes on personal freedom as well as personal privacy," Penn State College Republicans Chairman Brian Battaglia said.
Student leaders decided to organize following last Monday's borough council work session, Henning said. During the work session, many leaders were present and spoke to council regarding cameras but the messages were scattered, he said. "We knew to get something done, we had to be together," Henning said. Various student leaders met Thursday night to discuss ways to rally students against the installation of cameras. Ideas included following around council members with video cameras and contacting state legislatures about the issue. During the informal meeting, they decided to present council with a letter of opposition to the cameras and to recruit as many people to come to the meeting as possible.
Student and borough residents need to work together to prevent problems downtown, Henning said. Student leaders are working on other options to reduce the number of incidents in Beaver Canyon without surveillance, he added. "Cameras are not a positive way to improve that relationship," Henning said.
Large buildings on campus such as Willard, Thomas and the Forum will be the first to get the fliers, Paul Cronin Undergraduate Student Government (USG) director of town affairs and president of the off-campus student union said. In addition, they would like to put up signs about the vote on overhead projectors in some of the larger classes, he said. "We want to paint most of the big classrooms," Cronin said.
E-mails will be sent to club presidents and listservs to be distributed among the members, said Henning. Petitions will also be circulating the campus. The physical presence of students is critical at tonight's meeting, Henning said. "Any way you can show a unified student voice is great," he said. The most effective way of getting the message across that cameras are not wanted will be to pack borough council's meeting chambers, he said. "There's 90 seats in there. We want at least 100 people," Cronin said. "The more the merrier, of course."
An overwhelming show of student support against the cameras will impact the way the council votes, Battaglia said. When leaders present petitions to members of borough council, there is a gap in the communication, Henning said. With a petition and a large student presence it makes a difference, he said. "You can imagine them as a group, and that's more effective," Henning said.
1 May 2003, Pennsylvania, USA: Old Main rally protests cameras by Colleen Freyvogel.
Signs on Old Main's columns read "No Big Brother" and "Stop the Cameras" at yesterday's rally for civil liberties hosted by The Streets Project. About 50 students and faculty members and a State College Borough Council member spoke out against the proposed installation of surveillance cameras on East Beaver Avenue. Roger Stahl, a member of The Streets Project, said they were hoping for at least a hundred people to be at the rally, but relied on word of mouth to attract students to the gathering.
"[The speakers] made a point about the cameras and that they're not welcome with the students," Stahl said. "They are an invasion of privacy and most people got the message that it's not right to treat people like criminals and dehumanize them by presuming guilt." Stahl said The Streets Project has two main issues. One is the dehumanization that accompanies the cameras. The other is that it is an intrusion for all who walk by.
"They say that we've been unruly and deserve to be watched," said Ian Rosenberger, Undergraduate Student Government (USG) president. "I challenge you as students to take initiative to show the Borough Council that we don't need, much less want, the cameras on Beaver Avenue." Rosenberger said 70 percent of students voted against cameras in Beaver Canyon during the recent student government elections.
Takkeem Morgan, USG vice president, mirrored Rosenberger's sentiments. "We are talking about cameras, surveillance, fear; it all sounds like imprisonment," Morgan said. "This is ridiculous, this is reactionary and this does not speak to the issue." Morgan encouraged students to do more than listen to the speakers at the rally. He told students to prepare to take action and to attend the council meeting at 7:30 p.m. on May 5 at the Municipal Building, 243 S. Allen St., to voice their opinions. "You do have the power, and we can do this if we work together. Our voice can be heard," Morgan said. "The second we start to speak, our voices will start to be heard."
Topics such as civil rights, human rights and the Patriot Act of 2001 were also discussed during the rally.
"The struggle for civil rights and civil liberties are at the heart of our country's history," Dan Letwin, associate professor of history, said. "Come help write the page of our history." Tom Daubert, one of the three council members opposed to the cameras, said he believes alternate ways to deter crime should be attempted. "Beaver Avenue is not the only avenue of troubles," Daubert said. "More lighting and emergency call boxes, like those on campus, should be available downtown."
25 May 2003, Phoenix, Arizona, USA: Schilling smashes QuesTec machine, calls system "a joke" by Bob Baum, Associated Press.
Umpires who don't like the new electronic system that evaluates their calls on balls and strikes have gained an outspoken ally in Curt Schilling. The Arizona ace got so fed up with the system Saturday night during his loss to the San Diego Padres that he smashed one of its cameras near the Diamondbacks' dugout. "I said something to one of the umpires about it," Schilling said, "and he said 'Do us a favor and break the other one.'"
The QuesTec Umpire Evaluation System is installed at 13 ballparks, including Bank One Ballpark in Arizona. The umpire's union has filed a grievance against major league teams contending the system is inaccurate and varies greatly depending on the person operating it. An arbitrator is to hear the grievance in early July. "The QuesTec system in this ballpark is a joke," Schilling said. "The umpires have admitted it. They hate it. In the last three starts I've made here, multiple times umpires have said to the catcher, 'It's a pitch I want to call a strike but the machine won't let me.'"
[...] Schilling is a perfectionist. He has every pitch he's ever thrown to a batter on video and he studies them for hours and hours before each start. He also has a book on every call he's seen an umpire make. "As someone who relies on command and preparation and doing the things that I do to get ready for a ballgame, consistency is the most important thing in the world for me from an umpire," he said.
In a Feb. 14 letter to the World Umpires Association, baseball said umpires whose calls do not match Questec at least 90 percent of the time will be judged as not meeting standards. In March, 47 of 68 umpires signed a statement expressing no confidence in the QuesTec system.
Umpire Mike Winters, part of the crew working the Arizona-San Diego series, acknowledged after Saturday night's game that the evaluation system is affecting games. "Major league baseball wants to have everyone conform to the strike zone as this machine says it is," Winters said. "Everybody's working to try to do that. Borderline pitches, this machine says they're balls. If I call them a strike and the machine doesn't, I'm getting downgraded. I've got to worry about my own livelihood." Pitches on the corners might not get the benefit of the doubt they once did. "In the old days, we were taught 'Go get them. Call those pitches strikes,'" Winters said. "Today it's the exact opposite: 'Hey, if it's off the plate it's a ball. I don't care if it's a quarter-inch or an eighth-inch, it's a ball.' It goes against what we used to be taught, but major league baseball pays my salary, and they're the boss."
In ballparks that don't have the system, umpires are apt to revert to calling balls and strikes the way they have for years. "If I go to a park and I know it's not there, I'm certainly a little more relaxed," Winters said.
[...] Catcher Rod Barajas said umpires often refer to the QuesTec monitoring. "It's completely unfair to the umpires," Barajas said. "It puts so much more pressure on them to call pitches the way the machine wants them to call pitches. They can't be themselves back there, so now they're scared to pull the trigger." [...]
6 June 2003, Mooretown, Louisiana: Police plan video surveillance in high-crime area.
Police plan to put up a video camera to keep an eye out for street-corner drug deals and residential break-ins in high-crime areas. Some area residents and the American Civil Liberties Union are fighting plans for such video surveillance, saying it is an invasion of privacy.
"People whose homes are getting broken into, or stuff is being stolen from their yards, they want the camera," said Stephanie Lynch, president of the Mooretown Neighborhood Strategy Council. "People who feel it's an invasion of privacy, it's 'Big Brother,' they don't want it. Then there are others who just don't understand the scope of the situation. It's a mixed reaction, house to house."
Police began posting signs Thursday in Mooretown to alert residents that their neighborhood is under video surveillance. "Save a life. Someone is watching," they read, above a drug hot line number. And then, "This area protected by video patrol." However, police don't yet have the $25,500 camera and monitors, Chief Jim Roberts said. "We're expecting it any day now," Roberts said. "We've picked out several areas we want to use it. We get direct complaints and the people tell us to do whatever we have to do to solve the problem." He said the camera is similar to "sky cams" used for television news.
[...] Barbershop owner Jerry Bowman welcomed both the move toward video surveillance and the sign posted in front of Jerry's Barber Shop. "I think even the signs will help a whole lot," Bowman said. "People pay attention to signs. It tells you exactly what's going on." Another sign is a few feet from the home of Mercedez Harring, a teacher at Atkins Elementary School. "It's wonderful for the neighborhood," she said. She said it does infringe slightly on people's rights, "but so have many other things. I see no problem with it."
Others disagree. "If they're thinking of putting cameras in a heavy crime area, they should put more officers there instead," said Urina Holt, who collected more than 300 signatures on a petition against video surveillance. "If I go into a home of someone I'm unaware is a drug dealer, you automatically suspect me as being a part of it," she said. "If they want to prevent a crime, the camera won't stop it. If they're going to put a camera there, put a policeman there instead. The camera infringes on a lot of innocent people." Lynch said she didn't feel that the issues had been explained fully enough for people to make an informed decision. "My personal opinion is a camera should be the last resort."
Joe Cook, executive director of the Louisiana chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, said "people have a right to be left alone by the government unless there is good reason for them to be the target of an investigation." Such programs have not helped cut crime in other areas, he said. "In New York, police zoomed in on people that had nothing to do with crime - women dressed in certain manners, people who were curiosity items to the police but had nothing to do with criminal activity." [...]
16 June 2003, London, England: Tube strike threat over 'Big Brother' camera.
Railway maintenance workers are threatening a strike unless a 'Big Brother style' surveillance camera was removed from a booking-on area. Union leaders claim the miniature camera is disguised as part of a wiring circuit at a station on London Underground. The Rail Maritime and Transport union are calling on their new private sector employers Metronet to remove the camera or face a ballot for industrial action. Metronet say the booking-on area, at Baker Street station, is accessable by a public bridge and there have been two attempted break-ins in recent months which had caused 1,000 Pounds' worth of damage.
"The camera is designed to catch vandals," said a Metronet spokesman. "We don't even have access to the images. They go back to London Transport or the police." But Bobby Law, the union's London regional organiser, said: "We are happy to discuss the installation of video cameras to protect our members and the travelling public and to deter vandalism, but this sort of Big Brother surveillance is simply not on. We have written to the company seeking an assurance that this and any other covert surveillance devices are removed. If they do not we shall be left with no alternative but to ballot our members for strike action."
16 June 2003, London, England: Strike threat over Tube camera.
Tube maintenance workers are threatening to strike in a row over a tiny hidden camera at Baker Street station. Metronet, which has responsibility for three lines under the part-privatisation of the Tube, says it installed the surveillance camera to help catch vandals. But the Rail, Maritime and Transport union (RMT) has accused the company of Big Brother-style surveillance at the central London station.
The camera covers an area where there have been two attempted break-ins recently causing 1,000 Pounds of damage, said a Metronet spokesman. "The camera is designed to catch vandals," he added. "We don't even have access to the images. They go back to London Transport or the police." But the RMT has asked Metronet to remove it, or face a ballot for industrial action.
The union's London organiser Bobby Law said: "We are happy to discuss the installation of video cameras to protect our members and the travelling public and to deter vandalism, but this sort of Big Brother surveillance is simply not on. We have written to the company seeking an assurance that this and any other covert surveillance devices are removed."
22 June 2003, Gainesville, Florida: Traffic cameras raise Big Brotheresque fears by Bob Arndorfer.
Strapped 30 feet high onto a traffic signal mast and overlooking the intersection of W. University Avenue and 13th Street, the white-domed cyclops is fairly inconspicuous. So are two other domed traffic-monitoring cameras mounted at SW 13th Street corners - SW 2nd Avenue and Museum Road. In another time, Beth Scrivener and others say, they might not have given a second thought to the cameras. But since enactment of the USA Patriot Act in the month after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, Scrivener said, the government's use of any device to keep an eye on people is cause for concern.
"There probably would not have been the concern over the cameras before that there is with the Patriot Act in place," Scrivener said. "That's because the USA Patriot Act has provisions in direct contradiction of the Constitution. And those of us over 40 lived through a time when the government abused information they obtained," she said. Scrivener is a member of a newly formed committee of the Community Coalition Against War and Terrorism to study how the traffic cameras will be used. Members of C-CAWT, as it is called, routinely gather in anti-war and other protest demonstrations on the corners of W. University Avenue and 13th Street, and they say the presence of a camera at that intersection is especially alarming.
"There's a lot of concern about cameras at 'protest corner,'" said Miriam Welly Elliott, whose anti-war activism dates to the Vietnam War. "A lot of people's anxieties are tied into the Patriot Act . . . and its eroding of civil liberties." Critics say the broad powers of the anti-terrorism USA Patriot Act infringe on the Bill of Rights. Among its provisions is an expansion of the government's surveillance authority, including monitoring individuals' telephone calls and Internet activity, and searching homes without warrants. Its definition of a terrorist group, Elliott said, could include nonviolent anti-war activists. "Some people worry about their job security when they participate in demonstrations," she said. "When you add the potential of filming, when someone could prove you were out there, what kind of effect will that have on people's willingness to participate?" [...]
Scrivener said her committee plans to meet in a couple of weeks with traffic and law enforcement officials about the cameras. Although she feels comfortable that no "negative use" is intended for the cameras locally, she said, it's the levels of law enforcement higher up that concern her. "I don't think the local municipality can assure us that the cameras won't be used for surveillance of activists," she said. "I personally don't feel municipalities have control over what their ultimate use will be." Elliott said that in her years of activism, she's gotten used to being scrutinized at demonstrations. "I'm quite accustomed to being photographed at events and having authorities take down my tag number," she said. "But I think the Patriot Act adds a whole new dimension to that."
6 July 2003, Plymouth, Pennsylvania: Monitoring local law enforcement, by Keith Phucas.
[...] About two years ago, Plymouth Township installed a few of global positioning system (GPS) receivers in police vehicles, enabling police supervisors to locate any GPS-equipped police vehicle on patrol in real-time. Once [Police Chief] Pettine launches the @Road software, which utilizes the satellite-based GPS, he's just a few mouse clicks away from pulling up a log of overnight police activity. Plymouth was the first Montgomery County police department to install GPS. More recently, West Conshohocken and Pottstown's police departments have begun using the technology.
As more police vehicles and stations have gotten wired with the latest electronic technology, police officers have gotten spooked by the specter of "Big Brother" watching, and wonder if a fundamental trust has been lost. "At first it was a little unnerving," said Lt. Michael Haig, a 14-year veteran of the Plymouth Township Police Department. "Why aren't we trusted?" he recalled asking himself when GPS was first introduced. "We felt like we were guinea pigs" [...]
[Officer Tom Momme, president of Fraternal Order of Police's Lodge No. 14] is all for police accountability, but he worries about the potential for misuse of GPS information. "My main concern is that we don't have (police administrators) going after individuals," he said. After FOP met with local police officials, the GPS issue was resolved, and police officers have grudgingly accepted the way the technology is being used. "(GPS) does say 'we don't trust you,' but we can live with it," Momme said. "The chiefs and I have been working together on it" [...]
Last year, about the time West Conshohocken put GPS units in its SUVs, surveillance cameras were being installed at the police station as it was undergoing major renovations. In the station, dark hemispherical domes hide lenses that peer down from the ceiling of nearly every room in the building, including the three jail cells. While many police departments have had cameras in their stations for years, particularly in areas where police handle individuals in custody, their introduction in West Conshohocken was new and made officers uneasy.
But police were really rattled last fall after learning the cameras were connected to a monitor in West Conshohocken Mayor Joseph Pignoli's private residence. In response, the officers drafted a letter of protest in December that was eventually signed by eight borough officers and a detective, about half the borough's police force. In the letter, the men complained about being under the watchful eye of the cameras, and claimed that the surveillance raised liability, civil rights and privacy issues, not only for police, but also for suspects held in custody. "These cameras appear to have been installed in locations to 'watch' the officers while they are inside the station," the letter said. "The fact that there is a camera located in the lunch/break room pointed directly at the lunch table where officers take their breaks is proof of this" [...]
Soon after the controversy last fall, Mayor Pignoli pulled the plug on the camera system at his home. The mayor, who had undergone heart bypass surgery last year, recently resigned, citing health reasons. Repeated attempts were made by The Times Herald to reach the mayor, but voice messages were not returned. Also, West Conshohocken police officers declined to be interviewed for this story.
17 July 2003, Thurmont, Maryland: Thurmont officers file lawsuit with new allegations by Chris Patterson.
A lawsuit against the Town of Thurmont, promised by six Thurmont police officers last fall, was filed in the Circuit Court of Frederick County last week with one new allegation. The officers claim their radios were monitored without their knowledge, something that was not previously made public. The other allegation is that the officers were videotaped and audiotaped in the office of the chief of police without their knowledge and consent.
In June 2002, Chief Neil Bechtol retired before allegations of wiretapping became public. An investigation by the Maryland State Prosecutor's Office subsequently found no violation of the Maryland Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Act. Despite that finding, the officers sent a letter to Frederick County, the Town of Thurmont and then-acting Chief Terry Frushour at the end of 2002 stating their intent to sue. On July 3, the lawsuit was filed [...] Defendants include the Thurmont Police Department, Frushour, Bechtol, Sgt. Troy A. Angell, the Mayor and Town Commission of Thurmont and Frederick County.
Town attorney Clifford Bridgford said Tuesday that he expects to represent all defendants, except for Frederick County. He said he would talk to town officials about whether other attorneys should be hired to defend some of the defendants because there could be complications with him defending all of them. County attorney John Mathias was not available to respond to inquiries about the county's position in the case. Officers are requesting at least $5.88 million in damages. Some of the counts indicate the damages are to be paid collectively by the defendants, while others do not specify. If damages on some counts are being requested from the parties as individuals, total damages would far exceed $6 million. Bridgford said the complaint was vaguely worded and he could not determine the total amount being requested. Calls to the plaintiffs' attorney were not returned by press time.
The suit contains eight counts or reasons for the civil suit. The first four counts deal with the original wiretapping allegations. It is in counts five through eight that allegations are made about devices allegedly installed into the police officers' radio equipment by Sgt. Troy A. Angell. The equipment, they allege, was used to record verbal communication during traffic stops in which the police cruiser cameras are used. The suit claims the devices intercepted the verbal communications and transmitted them to Angell, a fact that was not disclosed to the officers, they claim. A jury trial has been requested.
On Tuesday, Frushour said he had already been served with papers. The town of Thurmont was not served until Wednesday morning. Because Frushour was served before the town, a response is due from him to the court before the town's response, Bridgford said. Responses to legal complaints are due to the court within 30 days of being served.
4 August 2003, London, England: Surveillance Opens Up a New Industrial Minefield by Matthew Lynn.
For British Airways Plc it was a spectacular own-goal. Ejected from the FTSE-100 index, facing lethal competition from no-frills rivals, and about to unveil a first quarter of losses, Europe's biggest airline chose to introduce a new electronic swipe-card system to monitor when its check-in staff start and stop work. The result? A lightning strike, and the U.K. carrier's Heathrow Airport operations plunged into chaos during the peak summer holiday season. British Airways eventually settled with its check-in staff: The swipe cards will still be introduced, but there will be restrictions on the way they can be used. The strike was still interesting. Not for what it said about the airline's management or the state of the industry, but for what it told us about the state of relations between workers and companies. For that reason, it would have struck chords with workers around the world. Think about what was at stake in the strike [...]
That is a very 21st-century struggle between labor and management -- and one that may well be repeated many times over in the years ahead. Surveillance is fast emerging as one of the key battlegrounds between workers and companies. British Airways' staff are far from alone in finding the intrusiveness of the modern corporation disturbing. Even many of their business-class passengers would have listened to their complaint, and thought, "Hmm, that's the kind of thing that bothers me as well."
One of the unintended consequences of the explosion of information technology is that just about everything workers do in an office or a factory is now stored in digital form. And, very often, it is used against them [...] Closed-circuit television cameras monitor buildings, keeping an eye out for intruders. But they also keep tabs on what employees are doing. It isn't surprising that many workers feel as if they are being watched all the time. They are. The results can be absurd [...]
What the British Airways workers are saying is, "That's enough." We don't like being watched all the time. It's hard not to sympathize. Even Lavrenti Beria, Stalin's notorious police chief, might have thought it was all getting a bit out of hand.
It would be wrong to come down too hard on the companies. They introduced e-mail, taped phone calls, CCTV cameras and other surveillance equipment of the modern workplace because it made their organizations more efficient and productive. They didn't do it to snoop. But having installed the technical gadgetry, they found that they could snoop -- and since the first instinct of the corporate manager is to control, they found it impossible to resist [...] Yet companies should also remember that their staff members are people, not just cogs in a machine. They need dignity and trust. And they would like to be treated like grown-ups -- not like worker ants whose every move needs to be controlled.
8 September 2003, England: UK saboteurs target speed cameras.
BLACK KNIGHTS: A secretive group is dedicated to ripping down, blowing up and even shooting apart the tools that are supposed to help keep roads safe .
They are the black knights of the road; balaclava-wearing highway hitmen out to burn, bomb, decapitate and dismember. But drivers need not fear, for it is speed cameras that this growing band of rebels are after. Up and down the UK, the tools used to keep roads safe are being ripped down, blown up and even shot apart as part of a campaign orchestrated by a gang of Web-surfing outlaws. They threaten to become the most popular gang of criminals since Robin Hood and his Merry Men stalked the countryside. More than 700 cameras across the nation have already been taken out and insiders warn that operations are about to be stepped up. Communicating through internet chat rooms, the activists move under cover of darkness, targeting devices they claim have taken a particularly heavy toll on drivers' licences and wallets.
From the south coast of England to the Highlands of Scotland no camera is safe. Known as Gatsometers, or Gatsos, they are being destroyed at a rate that has alarmed police forces. Particularly destructive cells are known to be operating in north London, Essex and Wales -- where they rage against machines deployed by the renowned anti-speeding police chief Richard Brunstrom. Last week Brunstrom, who is also head of the technology committee of the Association of Chief Police Officers, raised the possibility of introducing impairment meters to test the reaction times of elderly motorists, but the violent backlash against his camera crusade is growing.
With each unit costing 24,000-pounds Sterling (US$38,000) to replace, a huge bill is being run up. But the rebels are unrepentant, claiming the cost is more than met by speeding drivers' fines. Speed cameras, they argue, are not about keeping roads safe, but about raising revenue. Often the charred remains of their victims are adorned with stickers or graffiti that declare cameras to be stealth tax inspectors. Recent months have seen new operations in Norfolk and central Scotland. A representative of the shadowy Motorists Against Detection (MAD) has claimed responsibility and said hundreds of members were ready to risk thousands of pounds in fines and up to six months in jail.
The secretive figure who would give his name only as Captain Gatso warned that the campaign was being stepped up. "We are moving into a new phase which will see increased operations across the country. This is a struggle against an unjust form of taxation. The cameras have nothing to do with road safety and everything to do with raising revenue," he said. "Our operatives are responsible people. Many are professionals with families who lead normal lives. Yet they feel aggrieved and will not just sit back and accept this. Direct action is our only form of defense. These cameras are there to make money."
Welsh IT consultant John Lockett runs a Web site used by speed camera saboteurs. He denied encouraging attacks and said direct action was "perhaps going a bit far," but he echoed Captain Gatso's anger. "You shouldn't be caught for speeding if you have got to overtake a bus, let through an ambulance or swerve to avoid a kid. I think it's wrong. To place a trap behind a tree, on a very fast corner or down a hill is unfair." Web sites such as Lockett's allow users to alert each other to new cameras and attacks that have eliminated existing ones. They promote radar speed trap detectors and warn of the menace of what they call the Talivan -- mobile police speed detection units.
Even the camera widely touted as Britain's most successful has been unable to escape their wrath. On the southbound carriageway of the M11 at Woodford, Essex, tyre tacks were found leading away from the toppled device which had been nabbing 2,000 motorists a day. Police believe a lorry driver deliberately reversed into it. An Essex police officer said: "Perhaps if the person who did this could see some of the effects of speeding that we see, they would think differently about what they have done."
Northamptonshire police offered a 2,000-pounds (US$3,165) reward for help in finding people who used a bomb to take out a Gatso on the A605 at Thrapston. The blast sent shards of metal flying more than 15m.
A counter-attack against the saboteurs is being launched by Susan Beck of the All Safety Camera Partnership, a publicly funded body that works with the police to decide where Gatsos should be placed. "Cameras reduce death and injuries on the road. These units are designed to slow drivers down at casualty hotspots," she said.
The Department for Transport last year dramatically increased speed camera installations after research showed wider surveillance reduced the number of deaths and serious injuries in pilot areas by 47 percent.
9 September 2003, Portland, Oregon Protester gets a picture -- of police rules.
A month after police confiscated his camera, James Dreiling says he is waiting to get it back. The camera, a disposable model, isn't worth much. But that's not really the point, he says. "Why can't I take a picture?" the North Portland man asks. "They can take pictures of me, but I can't take pictures of them."
Them? I'll explain: He is talking about the surveillance cameras stationed outside the Bureau of Emergency Communications building in East Portland, which has become what police call "a highly sensitive area" since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Its address is no longer published. Every sign has been removed from outside. To most people, it's just a brick building. On the afternoon of Aug. 10, Dreiling was spotted taking pictures of the 9-1-1 center and all the cameras taking pictures of him. He says he was trying to make a statement about his dissatisfaction with a world increasingly monitored by video cameras.
The dispatchers inside didn't see the irony. They just got spooked. One of them tried to get Dreiling to go away. The call to police went like this: "BOEC employee at front entrance with 1234," 9-1-1 vernacular for someone acting strange. "Kinda scary white male." Within a minute, the first of three squad cars pulled up. Dreiling says he tried to explain to the police officers what he was doing. "But they said I might be a terrorist and a bunch of stuff about 9/11," he says. "Then they took my camera." He says he wants to get the roll of film back to develop pictures of his friends. Police can keep the rest of the shots, he says.
Authorities say police have the right to temporarily seize property if they suspect someone is conspiring with terrorists. Dreiling will get his camera back, they say, if investigators don't find a reason to hold on to it.
10 September 2003, Victoria, Australia: Anger over coffee-machine camera.
About 60 Victorian public servants are refusing to move into their refurbished offices until surveillance cameras are removed. The staff of Vicnet, based in the State Library of Victoria, believe the cameras breach the state's privacy laws. The Community and Public Sector Union (CPSU) today called on state Attorney-General Rob Hulls to set out the Government's position on surveillance in the workplace. CPSU Victorian secretary Karen Batt said the cameras set an alarming precedent for workplaces, both in the public and private sectors.
"These cameras are actually trained on where staff work and on their amenities, such as coffee machines," Ms Batt said. "Management talks about having them there for security but they're not security high-risk areas because there's no public access and no money being handed over." Ms Batt said the library management had not consulted staff or the union about the cameras before installing them as part of a $500,000 refurbishment. The CPSU is considering lodging a complaint with the Privacy Commissioner. Comment is being sought from the State Library of Victoria.
30 September 2003, Cumberland, Rhode Island: Firefighters OK no-confidence vote against chief.
Firefighters from the Cumberland Fire District unanimously approved a no-confidence vote against Chief Robert Garon Sept. 19 and want his resignation because of a video surveillance camera he allegedly installed in the fire station. Garon calls their allegations all wrong, however, because he says the computerized video camera system he was trying out for possible purchase was in his private office hooked to his work computer, and was not illegal.
The allegations were revealed to The Woonsocket Call anonymously in a letter written by Jeffrey McCabe, president of the Cumberland Professional Firefighters Association, to Cumberland Fire District Chairman Marcel Bacon regarding the no-confidence vote on Monday. Several attempts to contact McCabe were unsuccessful. Several telephone calls to Bacon, a Woonsocket firefighter, also were not immediately returned.
In the three-page letter, McCabe also accuses Garon of a management style of "retribution and vendetta prosecution," and a disregard of employees' privacy, asking for a forensic audit of all department property to determine if there are any other cameras on Fire Department property. In the correspondence, McCabe alleges that firefighters discovered the video camera "positioned in a covert manner." McCabe also claims that firefighters found video files showing the camera was activated hundreds of times. McCabe does not identify how the firefighters found the camera, how they came into possession of the video files of the surveillance images on Garon's computer, or the content of those images.
Garon said he wanted to test the hardware and software of the system and borrowed the unit Sept. 16. He said he and Commissioner Paul Dimodica tested the camera, videotaping Dimodica sitting at Garon's desk. On Sept. 19 at 11 p.m., Garon said, he decided he had problems with the computerized system and made a decision not to purchase the system. The chief said the only way firefighters could have gotten possession of the video files was to hack into his work computer. In fact, he said, he found some of the files on the firefighters' computer workstation located in a common area.
"What justification does anyone have to look into someone's computer? The whole deal is I did nothing illegal," Garon said. Cumberland Police Chief Anthony Silva agreed with Garon that having a video surveillance camera in his office was not against the law and Garon had of right of expectation of privacy. Garon said he plans to present a response to the no-confidence vote in writing to Commissioner Bacon, explaining why he was evaluating the equipment. He also intends to request that Bacon conduct an investigation into how someone could access his computer and look into possible criminal charges. He said before the no confidence vote, Bacon asked him not to pursue the issue of how the video files were obtained from the chief's computer.
The firefighters' union has also asked for Dimodica's resignation, but the commissioner said the allegations against he and the chief were unfounded and retribution related to stalled contract negotiations [...]
10 October 2003, England: Smile, you're being watched, by Jane Black, Businessweek Online.
On Oct. 9, a pipe bomb exploded under a traffic-monitoring camera in North Belfast. An act of terrorism? More than likely, it was just another average British citizen furious about the ubiquitous surveillance that has sprung up in Britain over the last decade. It wasn't the first time a "speed cam" has come under attack. The destruction of these surveillance cameras -- which cost between 30,000 to 50,000 British pounds each (between $50,000 and $80,000) -- has become a near-weekly occurrence in the British Isles. Farmers in Somerset have been charged with using speed cams and closed-circuit TV cameras (CCTV) for target practice. In Cambridgeshire, vandals set one afire. Earlier this month, one creative hooligan knocked down a speed cam by attaching a rope from the back of his car to the camera's pole and driving away -- a mini reenactment of the toppling of Saddam's statue in Baghdad last spring.
A cynic might argue the vandals are motivated more by anger over receiving speeding tickets than by any invasion of privacy. But when the characteristically reserved Brits start acting like rowdy Texans, you know a backlash is building. Britain has 4,500 speed cams. The country's more than 2.5 million CCTV cameras catch each British resident as many as 300 times each day.
[...] The violence in Britain stems from widespread outrage that surveillance cameras don't do the job they purport to. Drivers complain that speed cameras are never placed where they should be -- outside schools, near athletic stadiums, in city centers -- but on straight stretches of road where the cops are most likely to catch someone for speeding. "Speed cameras are just another way of demonizing car drivers," British driver Chris Davies told the BBC. "We need less of them, (and they should be) in the right areas, based on facts."
Indeed, according to the nonprofit Association of British Drivers (ABD), penalties and prosecutions from speed cams raise 66 million pounds ($110 million) annually. Meanwhile, road deaths continue to climb: From 1995 to 2001 (the latest figure available), the number of speed-cam tickets and prosecutions in Britain soared from around 207,000 to more than 1 million, while road deaths increased 4.5 percent, from 2,995 to 3,127. It's clear proof, says ABD Chairman Brian Gregory, that the switch from human traffic patrols, which can spot drunk or reckless drivers, to video surveillance has failed to make roads safer. This year, the ABD launched a campaign against speed cams, calling them "Weapons of Mass Persecution." [...]
3 November 2003, France: Roadside Radars Rolled Out in France by AFP.
An unprecedented offensive in France against the extremely high number of road deaths has moved into top gear with the introduction of devices already common in many other countries: permanent radars fitted with cameras that automatically fine speeding drivers. [...] But the belated attempt to change the infamously lead-footed driving habits of the French will not be easy, authorities know -- that's why the new digital cameras are protected in metal casings said to be tamper-proof, paint-proof and rigged up with alarms to protect them from irate motorists.
That didn't stop the very first radar camera inaugurated being vandalized hours after its inauguration last Monday by someone who cracked its armored-glass plating with a sledgehammer. Equally determined police had the 90,000 dollar unit repaired for the next day, and its images were being examined for clues as to the likely culprit, who faces up to three years in prison and a 52,000-euro fine if caught. Two unprotected surveillance cameras -- used to manage traffic, not identify speeding cars -- were destroyed by gunshot last month in eastern France, probably by somebody who mistook them for radar devices, police said.
[...] In other countries which have been using such cameras for several years, units have been vandalized by angry motorists. In Britain, for instance, several "anti-radar" groups have sprung up, most notably the "Motorists Against Detection", who have claimed responsibility for putting several cameras out of service. One unit in Northern Ireland was even blown up.
13 November 2003, Greece: Camera damage.
A Thessaloniki municipal councilor was yesterday charged with criminal damage for severing the cable of one of the 42 surveillance cameras set up around the northern city over the course of the European summit in Halkidiki last June. Agapios Sahinis had criticized the installation of the cameras in Thessaloniki as a violation of privacy. He claims that although the cameras were ostensibly set up for the EU summit, they continue to operate.
25 November 2003, Annapolis, Maryland: Supporters of Annapolis Principal Speak at Meeting by Vikki Ortiz.
Several African American religious and community leaders testified before the Annapolis City Council last night in support of embattled Annapolis High School Principal Deborah Hall Williams, saying that complaints about her leadership style obscure efforts she is making to improve the achievement of minority students [...]
To help keep weapons out of school, Williams ordered that students use only see-through backpacks. To prevent students from skipping class, she called for the removal of trees that blocked surveillance cameras. She demanded that students stay on campus for lunch and take their hats off indoors. Her critics argued that the policies were overly harsh. In September, dozens of students dressed in all orange as a form of protest to the "jail-like" atmosphere. By October, www.saveannapolishigh.com was launched to post comments and complaints [...]
10 January 2004, Boca Raton, Florida: In-class camera plan billed as teacher aid raises privacy fears by Lois K. Solomon.
Will Big Brother take a seat in the classroom of a new middle school?
Administrators say two cameras in each of the school's classrooms will record the instructional techniques of Palm Beach County's best teachers. Teaching professionals from across the country are expected to visit the district's nearby Safe Schools Institute to watch the highly experienced instructors in the first classroom-cameras project of its kind in the nation. But parents and civil liberties experts say they aren't sure what else the cameras will record and where the tapes will end up. They say the classroom is a sacred space that should be devoted solely to student-teacher interaction, not public observation."I do not believe children perform under a microscope," said Roberta Deutsch, a Boca Raton parent whose daughter may be assigned to the school. "Teachers are going to couch their behavior accordingly when the cameras are on. I think the purpose here is overall surveillance of everyone, including teachers."
A group of parents has protested their children's proposed assignment to the school, which will open in August at Spanish River Boulevard and Military Trail [...]
Some parents and civil liberties experts say their use in classrooms opens a new era of privacy invasion. "Who's watching the watchers? What's going to happen to the tapes?" asked Jill Farrell, spokeswoman for the Free Congress Foundation, a Washington, D.C.-based think tank that lobbies against encroachments on individual rights. Farrell said she worries not only about control of the tapes, but children's conduct in front of the cameras. "Cameras change behavior," she said. "Will a shy child not ask a question for fear of seeming stupid on camera?" [...]
22 January 2004, Athens, Greece: Angry at Security Plans, Protesters March Against Athens Olympics by Derek Gatopoulos.
Several hundred demonstrators marched through central Athens in freezing weather Thursday against the Olympics and massive security measures planned for the Aug. 13-29 Games. Led by a black banner reading "Destroy Olympics" in English, about 400 people from anti-globalization and anarchist groups marched to near Greece's parliament building before dispersing peacefully. Police and riot squads maintained a low profile during the first such demonstration of its kind.
"We are facing Olympic terrorism," Nikos Yiannopoulos, a protest organizer, told The Associated Press. "Our fundamental rights are being trampled on in the name of security," said Yiannopoulos, speaking during a rare snow shower. "We won't stop our action, not even in August."
The demonstrators chanted "not one spectator, not one volunteer at the repression Olympics," and unfurled colorful banners. One displayed the cartoon-like 2004 mascots, Phevos and Athena, wearing riot police gear and with the logos of the U.S. companies Coca Cola and McDonald's on their shields.
Greece, rattled by terrorist attacks in neighboring Turkey last December, has budgeted more than US$750 million for Olympic security and will deploy 10,000 soldiers and 40,000 police for the games. Athens is receiving assistance on security planning from seven countries, including the United States and Israel, and is working with the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency to gather information on potential threats around the world. Police insist the measures are vital stop to Athens becoming a target for international terrorist groups like al-Qaida and have launched a publicity campaign to win the support of ordinary Greeks who are traditionally wary of the security services.
Increasingly vocal critics of the measures say surveillance cameras currently being installed around Athens are unlikely to come down after the Olympics, and are angry at restrictions planned on street protests during the games.
"We will be living in a police-run city. The military is being given a new role ... Athens will look like a war zone, with exclusion areas, helicopters. We don't want this," said Panos Totsikas, another organizer. "We want to express our opinions freely. . . . We won't let our rights be taken away under the pretext of our protection."
29 January 2004, Athens, Greece: No Smiling for These Cameras.
The mayor of the city hosting Olympic weightlifting ordered crews to vandalize street security cameras after residents complained they violated their privacy. It was the first direct act of defiance against the thousands of cameras being installed around Athens to bolster security for the Olympics. Mayor Stelios Benetatos ordered municipal workers to disable three surveillance cameras with spray paint in the Athens suburb of Nikea because residents don't want everything they do being recorded without their permission. At least two other suburban mayors have expressed concern about the cameras. Critics are concerned the surveillance cameras might not come down after the Olympics.
"These cameras were placed without permission . . . and we are worried about the privacy of our citizens," Benetatos said. Benetatos said the actions did not violate any laws because the police and public works ministry had not sought the town's approval to install the cameras.
During the Olympics, stationary cameras around Athens will operate from hundreds of locations around the city, in addition to surveillance equipment on helicopters and a blimp.
6 March 2004, New Jersey, USA: The New York Times, "Hidden Cameras Upset Riders and Crew" by Vincent M. Mallozzi.
The train doors opened in Hazlet, N.J., on a recent evening, and David Rodriguez stepped inside and found himself a seat. The train resumed its rumble north, and Mr. Rodriguez, a 46-year-old perfume maker on his way home to Belleville, N.J., handed his ticket to a conductor as if it contained winning lottery numbers. "Smile," Mr. Rodriguez playfully shouted to the conductor. "You're on transit camera!" In early January, New Jersey Transit began installing hidden cameras aboard its trains as a safeguard against theft. Transit officials said the decision was brought on by the disappearance of or damage to about 50 bullhorns worth an estimated $10,000. A spokeswoman for the agency said that the cameras were not being used to glimpse at its employees' daily routines.
The cameras' presence, however, has created an atmosphere of anger and distrust among the agency's 1,100 crew members. Transit workers became alarmed after two conductors were pulled off a train and taken for questioning in February, after they were spotted on video using bullhorns on an empty train. "I've worked for this company for 18 years, and I've never seen anything like this," said Xavier D. Williams, the general chairman of Local 60 of the United Transportation Union, which represents the conductors. "It's an invasion of privacy." Mr. Williams said he was angry at New Jersey Transit management for what he called a double failure in communication: "Our office was never notified about these cameras," Mr. Williams said. "And furthermore, the riding public was never notified that they are suddenly under surveillance."
Penny Bassett Hackett, a spokeswoman for New Jersey Transit, said that "as a matter of practice, we do not use cameras to supervise our train crews." However, she said that "the cameras are being used as part of a police investigation into on-board theft of equipment." Ms. Bassett Hackett said that New Jersey Transit had been using cameras for security purposes on certain platforms in Hoboken, Pennsylvania Station in Newark and on the platforms in some Newark subway lines. "All of these are public cameras that benefit employees and riders by helping to deter crime," she said.
Mr. Williams said he understands that increased video surveillance has become a way of life since the Sept. 11 terror attacks, but he also maintained that a company monitoring the movements of its own people and an unsuspecting public is bad for morale and bad for business. Another commuter, Wayne Larsen, 46, who travels from Matawan, N.J., to his job as a printer in Manhattan, said: "I don't like my privacy being invaded. What if you're talking about things you don't want people to know?" He said he wondered whether New Jersey Transit had installed hidden microphones as well. (They have not, according to Ms. Bassett Hackett and union officials.)
Deborah Jacobs, the executive director of the American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey, said that her office received numerous calls from people complaining about being filmed in public places. "It's understandable that they would be upset," Ms. Jacobs said. "But our rights to privacy in this context are not clear." Ms. Jacobs said that "while technology has moved at the speed of light, laws protecting privacy are in the Stone Age."
Mr. Williams said he did not learn of the hidden cameras until Feb. 18, when two conductors were removed from a train at Newark by detectives investigating the disappearance of the bullhorns, which are used in emergencies. According to union officials, the conductors were taken to the Newark Broad Street station house and were questioned separately. Both conductors -- the union has requested that they not be identified while their cases are being reviewed -- were surprised when they were shown videotape of themselves using the bullhorns a month earlier on a deadhead train, a train that transports equipment without passengers aboard, union officials said. The conductors were questioned by investigators about why they had taken the bullhorns out of a storage box and why they appeared to be "horsing around" with the equipment, a union official said. Both were told that they could face charges of criminal mischief and that they would be notified by New Jersey Transit if the agency decides to take disciplinary measures.
"The whole thing was done as a scare tactic," said Dave Rasmussen, the Transit Union's vice chairman. "Our conductors were using that equipment to test it, and there's no better time to test it than on a deadhead train." Just before he walked off the train at Newark, Mr. Rodriguez shook his head and said with a sigh: "First cameras, and then what's next? Fingerprints? Metal detectors? Bag searches? "My seat used to be my sanctuary," he said. "And now I share it with an eye in the sky." The doors opened wide. Mr. Rodriguez looked up high and waved good night to no one in particular.
30 June 2004, Lincolnshire, England: Why Masked Gang are Trying to Destroy Speed Cameras on our Roads.
A Gang of masked men intent on destroying speed cameras across Britain have admitted trying to smash a camera in Lincolnshire. Footage filmed by a hidden police camera caught activists from the Motorists Against Detection (Mad) group at the base of a camera on the A15 at Snitterby, near Kirton in Lindsey. They were wearing combat clothing and balaclavas and were armed with tools and a petrol can -- but the pictures were not being transmitted back to a police station while they were being recorded. The group spent 23 minutes milling around the camera without causing any damage before leaving after seeing what they thought was an unmarked police car. Police had installed surveillance equipment after a previous attack on the A15 camera.
Mad spokesman Captain Gatso - who is named after a make of speed camera unit - refused to be drawn on whether the camera would be targeted again. "All I can tell you is that the crusade will continue and we just want to keep drawing the public's attention to what we stand for," he said. "These guys are not out to get a criminal record -- they're responsible people with regular jobs and families. "They're not 20-year-old boy racers - most of them are middle aged."
Lincolnshire Road Safety Partnership spokesman Steve Bachelor said: "We take any attempt to damage cameras very seriously. The reality of what we are trying to do is to improve safety and reduce the number of deaths and serious injuries." He said criminals had caused 170,000 Pounds damage to county speed cameras since the late 1990s. Speed cameras cost about 30,000 Pounds Sterling each to install. There are 48 fixed speed cameras and 14 mobile cameras in Lincolnshire. So far this year, 39 people have been killed on the county's roads.
Captain Gatso said he believes speed cameras should only be installed to target "serious and serial speeders", not motorists driving just over the speed limit. "What we would like to see is cameras situated in accident blackspots or near schools," he said. "What we have a problem with is what we believe to be areas targeted for revenue and not safety. Last year 20 million Pounds Sterling went to the Exchequer from these cameras." To date, Mad has destroyed 800 of Britain's 5,000 cameras -- but Captain Gatso said he felt the majority of motorists backed the group's actions. "Passing motorists hoot and cheer because they know what's going on. When people are running around with cans of petrol no-one's ringing the police to say this is going on."
Lincolnshire Police spokesman Inspector Dick Holmes said people were spotted at the camera at Snitterby in the early hours of Wednesday, June 9. "This is the third such camera to have been targeted on the A15 recently -- the others being at the Lincolnshire Showground and on the A15 near the county boundary." He said police had video footage of the offenders surveying the scene at 2.18am. "They were not put off by the passing cars and were on site for some time," he said. "An alarm and warning sounded but the offenders returned at 2.51 am."
3 July 2004, New Delhi, India: Delhi cops ensure surveillance cameras are monkey-proof." IANS.
When Delhi Police decided to install cameras to keep a tab on frequent political protests held in the heart of the city, they came up against a unique problem -- the devices had to be monkey-proof! The stretch where the 10 hi-tech closed circuit cameras were installed -- the high-security area between Jantar Mantar near Connaught Palace and Vijay Chowk -- is a favourite haunt of a large number of monkeys. The simians plague VVIP areas in the centre of the national capital, including the Rashtrapati Bhavan, South and North Blocks that house the external affairs, finance and defence ministries and India Gate. Senior police officers said the hi-tech cameras would be of great help in keeping a tab on traffic and demonstrations in the high security zone.
But while planning the ambitious project a year ago, officers had to incorporate special safeguards to ensure that monkeys did not damage the cameras. A police officer said: "It had come to our notice in tests that ordinary cameras were damaged by monkeys. So, we decided to get a model that the monkeys couldn't grip with their hands." While selecting the cameras, Delhi Police roped in experts from central intelligence agencies and dozens of models were scrutinised. The experts rejected cameras that were large as monkeys could easily grab and damage them. "The experts provided details of about how monkeys can grip objects. The camera that was finally selected was one that was designed in a way that no monkey could grip it from any angle," the officer said. The new cameras were installed at 10 different locations on Parliament Street, the busy thoroughfare in front of the parliament building. The police officer said seven of the cameras were static and three were capable of rotating 360 degrees for capturing images from all round. Each camera has a storage capacity of 120GB.
"It is a well known fact that Jantar Mantar is a hub for all kinds of demonstrations, protests and political gatherings, which sometimes become difficult for us to handle. The new cameras will help police officers monitor each and every movement of people participating in protests and gatherings," the officer said. Explaining the system for monitoring the gatherings, the officer said: "Images provided by the cameras will be watched on television screens kept in the office of the deputy commissioner police for New Delhi district. This will help the officer to take stock of the situation instantly."
7 July 2004, Ireland: "SIPTU threatens further strike action at NCT centres," by Sean McCarthaigh and Peter Gleeson, The Irish Examiner.
SIPTU has warned of a series of further one-day stoppages at National Car Test (NCT) centres unless a dispute about recent dismissals and the use of hidden cameras is resolved. More than half of NCT centres were closed yesterday as SIPTU members staged industrial action in protest at a series of sackings. Union members have also been angered by the use of surveillance equipment and the hiring of private detectives by National Car Testing Services (NCTS). In particular, SIPTU, which represents over 250 employees at the company, is angered by the recent dismissal of a worker at the centre in Naas, Co Kildare, which it believes is symptomatic of the use of an arbitrary disciplinary policy by NCTS. Twenty-four of the 43 NCT centres were closed yesterday with more operating at reduced capacity [...]
The NCTS spokesperson said hidden cameras had been installed as a safety and security measure. In rarer instances, she claimed such equipment had been used to provide proof of gross misconduct among employees. She also said the company was surprised by yesterday's industrial action as SIPTU representatives had indicated their approval of the use of cameras in a draft agreement drawn up last March. SIPTU maintains the use of such equipment runs contrary to building a constructive industrial relations environment in NCTS.
"The union will continue to engage in one-day strikes at various test centres around the country in order to impress on management that our members will not accept such arbitrary unfair treatment at their hands," said union official, Frank Jones. SIPTU has now called on the Department of Transport to mediate in a bid to avoid further disruption [...]
14 July 2004, Ireland: Secret cameras spark strikes in NCT centres.
Ballina and Westport car test centres were both hit with one day strikes last week after staff members became aware that they were being surveyed by secret cameras and private investigators. A total of 72 car tests were cancelled in Mayo on Tuesday last when three testers in Ballina and four in Westport went on strike, over these extra supervision techniques and the sacking of 10 union activists.
The NCT Service Ltd, which operates the car testing service on behalf of the Government, is responsible for the implementation and operation of the car testing service in Ireland. The Swiss company says it was surprised at the announcement of the one day strike with provisional agreement on the cameras made in March.
"It was totally out of the blue; we were happy to go through normal industrial relations procedures." NCT Service Ltd says the cameras were introduced for "safety and security reasons" and "staff agreed to have concealed cameras installed in rare cases of gross serious misconduct".
Union official, Christy Cullen, said staff only became aware of this extra surveillance during negotiations over staff dismissal in March of this year. "Staff are closely supervised at present and secret cameras are an invasion of privacy and a breach of civil liberties," he said. With the Right's Commissioner deeming nine out of ten dismissals as unfair, Mr Cullen is adamant that staff were sacked because they were visually inspecting some cars on their second testing which incurs no cost. "The company said a pattern was building up which wasn't true," said the Union official.
NCT Service Ltd argue that secret cameras are only installed if a "full documented report is submitted about an incident at the centre" to allow the company to investigate complaints and insurance claims. NCT Service's Sinead Green pointed out that staff who were dismissed in 2000 did not lose their jobs because they were union members. "A number of staff were dismissed for various reasons, including not having the qualifications they had previously claimed." A 10-week strike hit the company in 2001 and since then industrial relations have been deteriorating; this latest action highlights the need to improve staff morale [...]
19 July 2004, Athens, Greece: Athens readies airship for Olympic terror patrol by The Associated Press.
[...] Last month, the government announced it will not dismantle closed circuit television cameras after the Olympics, spurring a protest campaign that has included street rallies and indignation from privacy advocates. Those angry at the high cost of security have begun hanging "electronic informer" posters under surveillance cameras [...]
22 July 2004, Athens, Greece: Athens faces protests, ambulance strikes CBC Sports Online.
Ambulance drivers and paramedics in Athens sparked violence Thursday when they threatened to strike during next month's Summer Games. Anti-Olympic demonstrators hurled a gasoline bomb outside Greece's interior ministry and spray painted the cement bases of new surveillance cameras in the city centre. No arrests or damage was reported as the estimated 500 protesters later dispersed peacefully. Ambulance drivers and paramedics declared a 24-hour nationwide strike on Aug. 5 and 24-hour strikes for every day during the Games from Aug. 13 through Aug. 27. Thursday's incident was the latest sign of trouble in Athens, as protest groups have vowed to continue street rallies through the Games and labour unions threatened protests to demand Olympic bonuses [...]
30 July 2004, Athens, Greece: Security airship guards Athens by Harry de Quetteville.
[...] Athenians have begun to hit back. A demonstration last week in a central square drew 500 protesters. A petrol bomb was thrown at the interior ministry, and red crosses were painted on the 18ft high concrete bases of some observation cameras. Other campaigners have plastered "Warning: Camera" stickers across the city to alert passers-by to the presence of the monitors. "While 30 years have passed since the junta's overthrow, democratic rights and civil freedoms are shrunk and the streets are full of cameras supervising and following up on the citizens," the Anti-2004 campaign group said in a statement.
Newspapers have taken up the debate. "The government should take the necessary measures to safeguard the Olympics, but it is hard to comprehend the excesses we have witnessed in security measures," the daily Ta Nea commented. Greek police maintain that security measures have been implemented with "complete respect for human rights." Protesters have vowed to spray-paint street cameras, but appear impotent to obstruct the spy in the sky. It is to patrol with nine police helicopters, and can "hang around" for much of the day without the need to refuel.
23 April 2005, Hellikon, Greece: CAR BLAST: Hellenikon arsonists had probably vandalized road cameras, police say.
Arsonists who targeted a car belonging to a Public Works Ministry employee in the Athenian suburb of Hellenikon early yesterday morning had probably been involved in previous attacks on road surveillance cameras, police said. The car was severely damaged after vandals threw a stick of dynamite at the vehicle. The owner of the car, an official from the ministry's traffic monitoring unit, had defended the use of surveillance cameras during a TV interview earlier this week.
15 June 2005, Brantley, Alabama: Security Camera Protest.
Some Crenshaw County residents say their privacy is being violated and are asking the city council to do something about it. Protestors marched in downtown Brantley Tuesday saying some recently installed residential security cameras are violating their Fourth Amendment.
The city council says the cameras are used for security purposes for the housing authority apartments. However, some homes were also included in the surveillance. Protestors say the city has no reason to put cameras in the area.
The city council voted unanimously to shield the cameras so they only focus on the housing authority apartments. Protestors say they are satisfied with the vote, but will eventually try to persuade the city to get rid of all the cameras.
22 June 2005, Naples, Italy: Naples commissary remains open despite strike by Italian workers, by Sandra Jontz, Stars and Stripes, European edition.
Italian commissary workers at the Gricignano Support Site base conducted a daylong strike Tuesday. But despite the walkout, the store remained open. Employees sought to draw public attention to two labor complaints: one that centers on the termination of two specific employees; the other on the installation of surveillance cameras, which labor union representatives say violate Italian law.
While the strike and protest in front of the main gates to the military base caught some officials by surprise, union representatives Thursday had filed a "state of agitation" letter, which served as the official five-day notice for a possible strike, said base spokeswoman Lt. Cmdr. Jacky Fisher, and Robert Cloella, the commissary director. Regional representatives for the two unions that represent all Italian employees on U.S. military installations throughout Italy said the Defense Commissary Agency local national employees voted in favor of the strike during a Tuesday morning assembly because they felt ignored by base leadership. But when representatives secured a meeting with the new commanding officer, Capt. Floyd Hehe, for next Wednesday, they called off the public protest but kept the daylong strike in place. Shortly after 2 p.m., employees left the support site and went home. Business was expected to return to normal Wednesday.
The workers are protesting DECA's plans to terminate two Italian employees who no longer can perform heavy-duty work such as lifting, said union representative Ernesto Festa. For three years, the unions have been asking for the employees to be transferred to light-duty work, such as cashiers, but the request has been denied, said representative Gennaro Di Micco.
The brand-new commissary, which opened to the public May 7, has surveillance cameras that watch both customers and employees in their work environment -- a violation of an Italian law, Di Micco said. Those issues will be discussed with Hehe during next week's meeting, base officials said [...]
12 August 2005, Loves Park, Illinois: Vandals Damage Local War Memorial by Rebecca Burlette, WIFR.
Loves Park Police couldn't believe their eyes when they saw the video. Three teens vandalizing the Field of Honor war memorial and it's all caught on tape.
"It's a shock that something like that would happen there because it's a beautiful memorial. It was built to honor the veterans who've died fighting for our country" says Chief Deputy Jim Puckett of the Loves Park Police Department.
Loves park police hoped surveillance cameras would prevent vandalism instead it was the camera that was targeted. At first the two girls and boy appear to be checking the memorial out. Then the boy runs over to the camera and begins beating it with his skateboard. Arthur Anderson who helped make the war memorial a reality says this isn't the first time vandals have tried to destroy the field of honor.
"Three boys stole 10 musical instruments. Got pictures went through whole school system couldn't find them." Says Anderson In the past vandals have also broken guns and arms off some of the statues. "As a vet myself it hurts you feel it that people would damage markers like that." says Puckett.
The vandalism occurred on Wednesday, August 3rd at 10 p.m. Loves Park Police are looking for a white boy and two white girls in their teens. If you have any information you're asked to call Crimestoppers. Your anonymous tip could lead to an arrest and a cash reward of up to a thousand dollars.
30 August 2005, Winnipeg, Canada: "Vandals attack traffic cams," Winnipeg Free Press.
Four Canadian red light cameras vandalized and one UK speed camera destroyed in recent attacks. Several red light and speed cameras in both Canada and the UK have been destroyed or vandalized in the past week. Around 3 a.m. on Monday in Lancashire, UK a burning tire completely destroyed a speed camera. This is the second time the camera located on Riversway in Preston has been burned. Dozens of cameras in the area have suffered a similar fate over the past two years.
In Winnipeg, Canada a pickaxe smashed three of the city's thirty red light cameras between last Thursday and this Monday. According to the police, the cameras' internal workings survived the attacks. Spraypaint was used to disable a fourth camera located at Portage Avenue and Dominion Street. In 2004, five of the city's cameras were knocked down, run over, and assaulted with a pickaxe. In March 2003 a man used a shotgun on a camera located at Marion Street. Winnipeg officials want to double the number of red light cameras in the city having collected $35,501,529.55 in revenue since the devices were activated in January 2003. ACS takes its own share of the profits with a $30.8 million contract.
5 September 2005, Colchester, England: "Camera arson attack," Evening Gazette.
A burning tire inflicted severe damage upon a speed camera in Colchester, UK on Saturday. Colchester is one of Britain's oldest towns located 54 miles north of London.
21 September 2005, New York, New York: Protest Over Metal Detectors Gains Legs as Students Walk Out Fernanda Santos, The New York Times.
The first rumors started swirling last spring, in hushed talks in the classroom, amid hallway banter, in lunchtime chats at pizza parlors along Jerome Avenue. Metal detectors were coming to DeWitt Clinton High School in the Bronx. By the time the summer school term began, students were noticing the newly installed surveillance cameras along DeWitt Clinton's stairwells and the shell of a metal detector perched beyond a side door.
"The school is on lockdown," one student wrote on an Internet message board, Sconex.com. Soon, instead of their usual postings about classmates turned couples, prom king contenders and unbearably hot days of boredom at home, students were complaining about the changes that awaited them - and, eventually, organizing a protest. Two days ago, all the planning became a reality. For the first time in recent memory, 1,500 New York City high school students skipped classes, marched for two miles and got what they wanted: a sit-down meeting with school administrators, who have agreed to meet with students again and listen to their demands.
How they got to this point is a lesson in modern-day democracy that blends teenage angst and the Internet; a show of force borne out of disagreement and frustration among the students of one of the city's most traditional and toughest high schools. The Education Department installed the metal detectors because of DeWitt Clinton's high crime rate, one that is 60 percent higher than the citywide average for schools of the same size. But the protest was not violent, said Edward Jackson, 17, a senior and a tight end on the high school's football team.
"It was a good protest, the way protests should be," he said. "We got a chance to show that we care about what goes on in our school. We were able to express our point of view" [...]
The protest started to gather steam on Sept. 14, six days after the school year began. That morning, at each of the 10 periods of gym class, school safety officers explained to the students how the process would work: Line up, remove metal from your pockets, take off your belt and walk through the metal detector. Book bags would be searched, too, scanned by X-ray machines like those at airports, and, starting Monday, no one would be allowed to leave the building at lunchtime. The safety officers said it would be too hard to screen all the returning students.
It did not sit well with Jose David, 17, a senior. Last Thursday, he circulated a petition against the lunchtime confinement and the metal detectors.
"In 46 minutes, I got 266 signatures," he said. On Friday, Mr. David posted a message on the Sconex.com site and invited students to join him in a protest on Monday. The plan was to gather south of the school and stand there, silently, until the end of the first period of classes [...]
At 7 a.m., Mr. David said, he found himself standing alone on the lawn outside the high school while other students queued up around the block, waiting for the security clearance to get in. [...] But as the time passed and the line into the school grew, clusters of frustrated students decided to join Mr. David. By 11:30 a.m., they numbered 1,500, said Mr. David and other students outside the school yesterday [...]Three hours later, the protesters arrived at the Department of Education's office at Fordham Plaza, two miles away, carrying banners and demanding to be heard. Four students were eventually invited in. They asked that the metal detectors and security cameras be removed, that they be allowed to have lunch outside the school, and that an earlier ban on cellphones be lifted. None of the new rules were eliminated, but officials agreed to keep listening. Guidance counselors are to meet today to select a team of student representatives who will present the student demands and negotiate with the administration [...]
"This is just the beginning," said Anthony Stafford, a student. "The protest was just to get the word out that we're serious about being heard."
22 September 2005, Masteron, New Zealand: Camera vandal snapped in the act.
A young Masterton man who attacked one of the town's street surveillance cameras with his skateboard late on Tuesday night apparently overlooked one possibility -- that it might take his picture. Yesterday the man appeared in Masterton District Court facing charges of intentional damage and disorderly behaviour. He was remanded until October 25 with conditions imposed on his bail. The man is not to consume alcohol or go into Queen Street and is to live where directed until such time as his next court appearance. Police apprehended the man after staff monitoring the surveillance cameras alert a police patrol to an attack on a camera in Queen Street.
4 October 2005, Birmingham, England: "Anger as vandals hit speed camera," Birmingham Sunday Mercury.
A Birmingham, UK speed camera has been beheaded. The Truvelo photo ticket machine, located on the A452 between Chelmsley Wood and Castle Bromwich, had been installed earlier this year. This week, vigilantes knocked over the camera's mounting pole and removed the camera head. The West Midlands Casualty Reduction Partnership which operates the device did not comment on the situation.
5 October 2005, Norwich, England: "Speed camera arson was waste of time," Norwich Evening News.
Daniel Wardall, 18, plead guilty to charges of arson after he set fire to a speed camera in Norwich, UK on September 12. Wardall poured metholated spirits into the camera housing and ignited the mixture, burning the camera located A146 road at Thurton. His actions were unecessary, as the device had already been knocked out of commission by an attack earlier that same day that came on top of an attack earlier in the same week. As a result, prosecutors estimated Wardall caused only 200 pounds in damages. He was sentenced to 250 hours of community service, a 45 pounds fine and a year-long driver's license suspension.
16 October 2005, Sydney, Australia: "Camera vandals," Daily Telegraph.
With three-quarters of New South Wales, Australia speed cameras coming under attack, the government wants more cameras to watch over the speed cameras. Violence against speed cameras in New South Wales, Australia has become so prevalent that Roads Minister Joe Tripodi announced yesterday that additional cameras will be installed at thirty-seven speed camera sites to watch over the state's photo radar machines.
"I have a message for would-be vandals -- there is now a greater chance of you being caught and prosecuted," Tripodi said. Over the past t