Connect with us

Louisiana

New Louisiana Law Serves as a Warning to Bystanders Who Film Police: Stay Away or Face Arrest

Published

on

New Louisiana Law Serves as a Warning to Bystanders Who Film Police: Stay Away or Face Arrest


This article was produced for ProPublica’s Local Reporting Network in partnership with Verite News. Sign up for Dispatches to get stories like this one as soon as they are published.

Advertisement

Four years before a Minneapolis police officer murdered George Floyd, prompting nationwide demonstrations, hundreds of people marched in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, to protest officers’ killing of Alton Sterling in front of a convenience store. Law enforcement responded in force: Officers armed with rifles, body armor and gas masks pushed protesters back and forcibly arrested about 200 people. Some were injured.

A group of 13 protesters and two journalists filed suit, alleging their constitutional rights were violated when they were arrested. Eventually, the city agreed to pay them $1.17 million. Photographs and videos taken by protesters, witnesses and journalists were critical in contradicting officers’ claims that protesters were the aggressors, said William Most, an attorney for the plaintiffs.

On Thursday, a Louisiana law will go into effect that will make it a misdemeanor for anyone, including journalists, to be within 25 feet of a law enforcement officer if the officer orders them back. The two independent journalists who sued, whose photos were used to support allegations against the police, said they wouldn’t have been able to capture those images if the law had been on the books during the protests.

Karen Savage was working for a news site focused on juvenile justice issues on the second day of the demonstrations in July 2016 when she photographed officers putting a Black man in a chokehold as they detained him. Cherri Foytlin, who was working for a small newspaper and a community media project, said she was within 4 feet when she photographed officers violently dragging a Black man off private property and arresting him.

Foytlin and Savage said they are hesitant to cover protests in Louisiana now that they could face criminal charges if they’re too close to an officer. “I was thinking about how far exactly 25 feet is, and, at the end of the day, it doesn’t matter. It’s going to be whatever the officer wants it to be,” Savage said. “And if it doesn’t get to court, it won’t matter because they will have accomplished what they wanted, which was to get the cameras away.”

Advertisement

On Wednesday, a coalition of media companies representing a couple dozen Louisiana news outlets, including Verite News, filed suit against Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill, State Police Superintendent Robert Hodges and East Baton Rouge District Attorney Hillar Moore III, alleging the law violates the First Amendment.

Police buffer laws, as they are commonly known, are relatively new; Louisiana is the fourth state to enact one. Although those states already prohibit interfering with police officers, supporters say buffer laws are necessary to protect police from distrustful, aggressive bystanders. And with advances in cellphone cameras, including zoom lenses, supporters say there’s no need to get close to officers in order to record their activities.

“There’s really nothing within a 25-feet span that someone couldn’t pick up on video,” Rep. Bryan Fontenot, R-Thibodaux, the sponsor of Louisiana’s bill and a former law enforcement officer, said during a legislative hearing this year. At the same time, he said, “that person can’t spit in my face when I’m making an arrest.” (He did not respond to a request for comment.)

Foytlin disagreed. “You can’t even get an officer’s badge number at 25 feet. So there’s no way to hold anyone accountable.”

She and Savage said police targeted them during the Baton Rouge protests because they were taking photos of protesters being slammed to the ground, dragged across the pavement, choked and zip-tied by law enforcement officers. Both journalists were charged with obstructing public rights of way and resisting arrest. Prosecutors did not pursue those charges.

Advertisement

The journalists and protesters sued the city of Baton Rouge, the East Baton Rouge Parish Sheriff’s Office and the Louisiana State Police, claiming law enforcement officers had used excessive force when arresting them. The Sheriff’s Office was dismissed as a defendant because a judge concluded its deputies weren’t involved with those arrests. The State Police settled for an undisclosed amount in 2021. The suit against Baton Rouge went to trial in 2023; the city agreed to the million-dollar settlement the day before closing arguments.

Neither the Sheriff’s Office nor the Baton Rouge Police Department responded to requests for comment. The Louisiana State Police declined to comment on the lawsuit or protests.

Foytlin said she didn’t think the settlement would cause law enforcement agencies to change their tactics; now, she believes they’ll be emboldened by the buffer law to crack down more harshly on anyone trying to document officers’ actions.

“From what I saw in Baton Rouge, and what they were able to get away with, I have no doubt that in the future, the consequences of trying to use your free speech or to protest are going to be much harsher,” she said.

“You Can’t Tase a Child.” “Watch me.”

Given the inconsistent use of police body-worn cameras, said Nora Ahmed, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Louisiana, often the only way people can guard against false charges and prove that officers used excessive force is to film them in close proximity. “In the absence of video or audio evidence,” she said, “it’s very difficult to convince anyone that the story occurred in any way different other than what the police report.”

Advertisement

Such video was critical in a lawsuit Ahmed handled in which a woman sued two sheriff’s deputies over her arrest in St. Tammany Parish, across Lake Pontchartrain from New Orleans.

As De’Shaun Johnson filmed deputies who were arresting his mother in St. Tammany Parish, Louisiana, in 2020, Deputy Ryan Moring told him to “get back” several times and pointed a Taser at him. Johnson, then 14 years old, refused. A new state law allows officers to arrest people if they remain within 25 feet after an officer orders them back.


Credit:
Courtesy of Teliah Perkins

The May 2020 incident started with an anonymous complaint about someone riding a motorcycle without a helmet in a Slidell neighborhood, according to the lawsuit. Deputies Ryan Moring and Kyle Hart showed up at Teliah Perkins’ home, writing in an incident report that they saw Perkins ride a motorcycle without a helmet. In Perkins’ lawsuit, she denied doing so.

Advertisement

The conversation quickly became heated. Perkins accused the deputies of harassing her because she is Black; the deputies wrote in the incident report that she was “irate” and verbally attacked them.

Perkins called for her son De’Shaun Johnson, then 14, and her nephew, then 15, to come outside and record what was happening, according to the deputies’ incident report and the videos. When they did, at least one of the deputies ordered them to go back on the porch, which was more than 25 feet away.

The boys ignored the deputies and continued to film from about 6 feet away. As Hart forced Perkins to the ground, Moring approached Johnson, shoving him and telling him to move back, according to Perkins’ lawsuit and her son’s video. When Perkins screamed that she was being choked, Moring stood in front of Johnson to block his view, he later admitted in his deposition. Moring then pointed his Taser at the boy.

“You can’t tase a child,” Johnson said, according to the lawsuit and the son’s video.

“Watch me,” Moring responded.

Advertisement

Perkins was arrested for resisting a police officer with force or violence, battery of a police officer, having no proof of insurance and failing to wear a helmet. She was found guilty only on the resisting charge; the others were dropped. She sued the deputies in federal court, claiming they had violated her and her son’s rights. An appeals court dismissed Perkins’ claims against the deputies, but her son’s claim against Moring went to trial. In May, a jury found that Moring had intentionally inflicted emotional distress on Johnson and awarded him $185,000, to be paid by the St. Tammany Parish Sheriff’s Office.

Ahmed said she believes the jury was swayed by videos of the incident, which showed “with clear granularity exactly what was transpiring.”

Moring denied in court that he intentionally harmed Johnson and has filed a notice of appeal. The deputies’ lawyer didn’t comment for this story.

Teliah Perkins and her son De’Shaun Johnson outside their home in Slidell, Louisiana


Credit:
Kathleen Flynn, special to ProPublica

Advertisement

In an interview with Verite News and ProPublica, Perkins said she fears what could have happened had the new law been in effect. The boys could have been arrested when they refused to move back to the porch. And from there, she said, neither would have been able to see or hear what was happening to her.

Johnson, who is about to start his first year at Alabama State University, said the videos he and his cousin took that day are the only evidence of what actually happened. Without them, he said, no one would have believed a 14-year-old boy’s claim that a deputy had threatened to shock him with a Taser simply because he was recording with a cellphone.

After George Floyd’s Murder, a New Tool to Keep the Public at Bay

There were no police buffer laws when Floyd was murdered on a Minneapolis street in 2020. Seventeen-year-old Darnella Frazier stood several feet away and recorded a video that showed Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin pressing his knee into Floyd’s neck and back for more than nine minutes, causing Floyd to lose consciousness and die. The video was critical in securing Chauvin’s conviction for second-degree unintentional murder, third-degree murder and second-degree manslaughter. He was sentenced to more than 22 years in prison.

In this image from a police body camera, Darnella Frazier, third from right, records on her cellphone a video of then-Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin pressing his knee on George Floyd’s neck and back for several minutes in 2020.


Credit:
Minneapolis Police Department via AP

Advertisement

Floyd’s murder fueled protests across the country and efforts to rein in the police. New York City ended qualified immunity, a legal defense used to shield officers from civil liability. Many states restricted the types of force officers can use, according to the Brennan Center for Justice.

The video of Chauvin “really drew people’s attention to how powerful these recordings can be in inspiring protests and legislative action,” said Grayson Clary, a staff attorney at the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press. “I think some legislators are now trying to claw back ground that they feel they lost.”

Arizona state Sen. John Kavanagh, a Republican from outside Phoenix who authored the first of these bills in 2022, wrote in an op-ed that police officers asked him to introduce it because “there are groups hostile to the police that follow them around to videotape police incidents, and they get dangerously close to potentially violent encounters.”

Kavanagh’s bill, which was signed into law by then-Gov. Doug Ducey, prohibited people from filming police within 8 feet. But federal courts across the country have affirmed the right to film the police, and a federal judge struck down the law after a coalition of media outlets and associations sued the state.

Indiana was the next state to pass a similar law. It, like the two others enacted since, doesn’t mention filming and requires people to stay at least 25 feet from police. That’s based on a controversial theory, often cited to justify police shootings, that someone armed with a knife can cover 21 feet running toward an officer before the officer can fire their weapon.

Advertisement

Shortly after the law was enacted in April 2023, an independent journalist sued the city of South Bend after an officer pushed him 25 feet from a crime scene and another officer ordered him to move back another 25 feet. The journalist claimed in the lawsuit that it was impossible to observe the crime scene from that distance. The state denied in court that the journalist’s rights were violated.

In January, a federal judge dismissed the journalist’s suit, stating that officers have a right to perform their jobs “unimpeded.” The judge said 25 feet is a “modest distance … particularly in this day and age of sophisticated technology” and that “any effect on speech is minimal and incidental.” That case is under appeal.

A second lawsuit in Indiana, filed in December by a group of news organizations and the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, is pending. They are suing the state attorney general and the prosecutor and sheriff of Marion County, where Indianapolis is located, arguing that it is “essential for reporters to be within 25 feet of law enforcement in order to record them.” In a court filing, the defendants have argued that the law doesn’t infringe on reporters’ ability to record police activities.

Florida’s law went into effect in April. An early version of that bill specified that it did not apply to the act of peacefully recording, photographing or witnessing a first responder, which it called a “legitimate purpose.” That language was taken out of the bill before it was passed.

Rep. Angela Nixon, D-Jacksonville, proposed changing the bill’s name to “The I Don’t Want the World to See the Police Kill an Unarmed Innocent Man Like George Floyd Again, So I Want To Protect Bad Cops and Violate Free Speech Act.” Her amendment failed.

Advertisement

If these laws stand up to constitutional challenges, “we’re going to see more states go down this road,” said Clary of the Reporters Committee.

The effect of Louisiana’s law may be limited in New Orleans, where the police department has been under federal oversight since 2013 due to widespread abuses, including excessive use of force and racial discrimination. New Orleans Independent Police Monitor Stella Cziment said the law may violate a court-approved list of reforms, which states that police must allow people to “witness, observe, record, and/or comment” on officers’ actions, including arrests and uses of force. Another provision says officers cannot arrest anyone for being nearby or recording them except under certain conditions, including risks to the safety of officers or others.

In response to questions from Verite News and ProPublica, the New Orleans Police Department said it is revising its policies to account for the new law, and those policies could “restrict officers’ actions” more than the law does. The NOPD said the Department of Justice and a team of court-appointed monitors will review any changes; neither responded to requests for comment.

However, the Louisiana State Police, which recently sent a contingent of troopers to New Orleans under a directive from Gov. Jeff Landry, does not have to abide by the terms of the consent decree, according to a federal judge. As such, troopers are free to invoke the new law.

The State Police is being investigated by the Department of Justice following a 2021 Associated Press investigation that uncovered more than a dozen incidents over the past 10 years in which troopers beat Black men and sought to cover up their actions. The State Police didn’t respond to a request for comment on those incidents.

Advertisement

When asked how troopers are being trained to use the new law, State Police spokesperson Capt. Nick Manale said only that they undergo regular training on how to engage with the public. The State Police, Manale said, “strives to ensure a safe environment for the public and our public safety professionals during all interactions.”



Source link

Louisiana

Questions remain about new election laws that take effect this week • Louisiana Illuminator

Published

on

Questions remain about new election laws that take effect this week • Louisiana Illuminator


A slate of new Louisiana election laws set to take effect Thursday could disenfranchise voters and be used to levy unfounded allegations of fraud, voter advocacy groups say.

Earlier this year the state’s GOP-dominated Legislature passed several laws at the behest of new Louisiana Secretary of State Nancy Landry, who is also a Republican. Bill authorities invoked the Republican catch phrase “strengthening election integrity,” though authorities have never found evidence of widespread voter fraud in Louisiana or elsewhere in the United States.

The laws have opened the door for state officials to enact stricter guidelines for third-party groups to hold voter registration drives and stricter requirements for voters to prove citizenship. They also could make it easier for authorities to criminalize certain acts as voter fraud. But there are also some unknowns about the new laws that have advocates anxious with only about three months left before the November elections.

This November, Louisiana voters will get to decide on the presidential election, six congressional seats, a state Supreme Court judgeship, and a constitutional amendment related to the use of energy revenues. 

Advertisement

Among the new election laws taking effect is House Bill 506, sponsored by Rep. Polly Thomas, R-Metairie. It will require any non-governmental groups to first sign up with the Louisiana Secretary of State before holding any voter registration drives. 

Former mayor of New Orleans and current Urban League President Marc Morial said he thinks most of Landry’s legislative agenda will only make it harder to vote or decrease voter turnout.

“I think you should have penalties for people who commit fraud … [but] it shouldn’t be hard to register people to vote,” Morial said in a phone interview. “ … It sounds like some kind of Soviet-era control.”

While many voter advocacy groups have criticized Thomas’ bill as a voter suppression tactic, Landry cited an incident of lost registration forms as the impetus for the legislation while testifying at a March 21 House and Governmental Affairs Committee hearing.

During last year’s election, an organization failed to turn in several dozen voter registration forms that high school students had filled out. The students later showed up to vote and were told they had never been registered. Landry’s office investigated the issue and learned what happened. A volunteer from the group that held the registration drive had left the forms in the trunk of someone’s car and forgot to turn them in, she said.

Advertisement

Landry said Thomas’ bill will allow election officials to keep track of voter registration drives and contact volunteers to make sure they fill out forms correctly and turn them in. 

However, several unanswered questions remain about what all will be required of the groups: What information will be required from them? Will they be required to sign up with the Secretary of State in person? How long will their registration be valid? Does every member of a group need to register? 

“That’s actually the biggest problem,” Peter Robins-Brown, executive director of Louisiana Progress, said. “It’s that a lot of those laws were very vague … They should have had those answers laid out before they introduced the bill.”

Landry’s spokesman Joel Watson said the office will be releasing guidance that should answer many of those questions before the law takes effect Thursday. 

Louisiana legislation targets mail-in absentee voting as it gains in popularity

Advertisement

“This law is not about individuals or groups receiving clearance from our office or the [registrars of voters] but registering their drive so that they can be contacted when needed,” Watson said.

The Urban League held its national conference in New Orleans last week and included courses on voter registration training. The organization publishes state-specific guides on voter registration laws and could have to make changes to Louisiana’s guide after Thursday. 

Robins-Brown said he is also concerned about what the penalties might be for those who violate the law by failing to register. He said he is most concerned for small neighborhood associations and individuals involved in loosely organized civic engagement activities that include helping their neighbors get registered to vote. 

“You just can’t expect the average person to know all of these rules or at least know them in detail,” Robins-Brown said. “At what point does my attempt to register my neighbors go from an act of civic engagement to a violation or a crime of voter fraud?”

Thomas’ bill did not establish criminal penalties, though lawmakers passed a separate measure that does criminalize other acts. 

Advertisement

Senate Bill 420, sponsored by Sen. Valarie Hodges, R-Denham Springs, expands the state crime of election fraud with several new provisions to encompass a wider variety of acts. The crime carries a penalty of up to two years in prison.

Most of the new provisions align with typical voter fraud crimes such as forging a ballot or attempting to vote more than once. Others, however, are more vague, including a provision that apparently makes it a crime to forge, alter, take or destroy “election supplies.”  

Another provision makes it a crime to possess an official ballot in violation of any provision of the Louisiana Election Code. 

House Bill 476, sponsored by Rep. Josh Carlson, R-Lafayette, prohibits a person from mailing more than one absentee ballot for a voter who isn’t an immediate family member. Similarly, Senate Bill 218, sponsored by Sen. Caleb Kleinpeter, R-Port Allen, prohibits the same act with regard to mailing the application form for an absentee ballot for more than one voter who isn’t an immediate family member. It also makes it a crime to give an absentee ballot application form to two or more people who are not immediate family members. 

Landry, while testifying in support of Kleinpeter’s bill in March, said allowing unknown individuals to collect unlimited numbers of ballot applications would give them access to the voter’s name and address and therefore allow them to “harass and intimidate voters” into voting a certain way. 

Advertisement

The secretary of state’s office has cited three incidents as evidence of election fraud, though none revealed evidence of widespread wrongdoing among voters. Two of the incidents involved a vote-buying scheme by politicians from the same small town — Amite City. 

The third occurred in a 2018 local election in Acadia Parish, where a woman assisting two elderly voters allegedly failed to mark their absentee ballots as directed. The Crowley woman was convicted on a single misdemeanor charge and received two years probation. Authorities never disclosed how she marked the ballots.

None of the incidents affected the outcome of the respective elections.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Louisiana

Town of Ball takes initiative to make the town healthier

Published

on

Town of Ball takes initiative to make the town healthier


BALL, La. (KALB) – The Town of Ball became the 35th Louisiana municipality to adopt a comprehensive smoke-free indoor ordinance.

The town council voted unanimously to pass the ordinance during the June 18 town council meeting, making them the ninth municipality in Rapides Parish to do so. The ordinance went into effect on July 18.

Mayor Gail Wilking of Ball said she wants to protect the longevity and the future of Ball.

“It’s very important to me as well as my counsel that we provide a healthy surrounding for our residents and the visitors here,” said Mayor Wilking.

Advertisement

With vaping on the rise amongst today’s youth, Mayor Wilking hopes the new ordinance will impact her younger constituents.

“I think they don’t realize there’s no difference in my opinion between vaping and smoking cigarettes or cigars,” said Mayor Wilking.

The Louisiana Campaign for Tobacco-Free Living collaborated with the Ball community on this ordinance. They provided extensive information, which led the counsel to make an informed decision. Their goal is to create a healthy Louisiana, including the state’s youngsters.

“We can educate our youngsters on the harmful effects of using tobacco of any form, including vaping, and have them not even initiate the use. That’s a win for us,” said Misty LaSalle, CENLA Regional Manager for The Louisiana Campaign for Tobacco-Free Living.

According to TFL, there are 7,000 chemicals associated with secondhand smoke. About 27 percent of Louisiana adults use tobacco products.

Advertisement

LaSalle said secondhand smoke comes with massive health risks

“So you have a higher risk of high blood pressure or diabetes and, of course, you have a higher risk of cancer, and all forms of cancer can be linked back to tobacco use,” said Misty.

The Louisiana Campaign for Tobacco-Free Living encourages other Louisiana municipalities to become smoke-free. For more information on how you can do that click here.

Click here to report a typo. Please provide the title of the article in your email.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Louisiana

US Senate passes bill by Louisiana’s Bill Cassidy restricting how social media targets youth

Published

on

US Senate passes bill by Louisiana’s Bill Cassidy restricting how social media targets youth


WASHINGTON — A bipartisan U.S. Senate on Tuesday overwhelmingly approved a historic package of restrictions — co-sponsored by a Louisiana senator — that cracks down on how social media companies interact with children and teenagers.

A pair of bills were merged and passed on a 91-3 vote that would require social media platforms to take steps to prevent online exploitation, such as cyberbullying, body shaming and sexual recruiting. The legislation also would expand existing privacy protections to forbid the collection of personal data from children under the age of 16.

The legislation still must clear the U.S. House before heading to the president’s desk.

Speaker Mike Johnson, R-Benton, said Tuesday he generally backs the legislation. President Joe Biden has indicated he would sign it into law.

Advertisement

“The internet is an integral part of children’s lives today. It is time our laws reflect this new reality,” said Sen. Bill Cassidy, R-Baton Rouge. “These bills provide parents the tools to safeguard their kids online.”

He was one of the two main sponsors for the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, called COPPA 2.0. Along with expanding existing parental consents on data collection, COPPA 2.0 bans advertising targeted at youth.

The bill builds on a law passed in the 1990s primarily sponsored by then-Rep. Billy Tauzin, R-Chackbay, and Sen. Edward Markey, D-Massachusetts.

Cassidy also was a co-sponsor of Kids Online Safety Act, or KOSA, which would require online platforms to take reasonable steps to prevent harm to users.

The bills arose as parents began questioning the connection between online usage and increased suicide and other anti-social behavior among their children.

Advertisement

The American Academy of Pediatrics has declared children’s mental health has become a national emergency. The federal Centers for Disease Control & Prevention found that in 2021, one in three high school girls contemplated suicide.

Cassidy blamed digital platforms which collect data from users and then compile algorithms that target advertising and content at specific individuals. He pointed to studies that linked online usage to increased dangerous behavior by children. He also noted that a Harvard University study in 2022 calculated that the major platforms earned about $11 billion from selling data-driven advertising and content that targeted U.S. users under the age of 17.

The effort to pass online restrictions for children bogged down as Big Tech argued the provisions violated First Amendment rights.

Cassidy countered that accepted law has long allowed for marketing carve-outs for the First Amendment, such as a ban on advertising cigarettes to youth.

Markey, who cosponsored COPPA 2.0 with Cassidy, said the bill updated 1990s legislation addressing children’s television programming that essentially was just advertising goods to kids. Markey said he and Tauzin added parameters as the digital sphere expanded. The new bills would provide updates to reflect the way social media does business now.

Advertisement

“The United States Senate will finally send a message to Big Tech that the days of indiscriminately tracking and targeting children and teens are over in our country. That their privacy-invasive business models must change,” Markey said.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-New York, said “this moment is when the Senate said, ‘There have been horrible abuses. We must end them, and we will.’”

Schumer lauded the bipartisan effort to overcome opposition and get the long-stalled package moving again.

“The House should pass these bills as soon as they can,” he said.

Johnson said in a statement shortly after the Senate vote that he’s committed to finding consensus in the House.

Advertisement

“I am looking forward to reviewing the details of the legislation that comes out of the Senate,” he said. “Parents should have greater control and the necessary tools to protect their kids online.”

Louisiana’s junior senator, John N. Kennedy, R-Madisonville, was among the 91 senators backing the legislation. The three “no” votes were Sens Rand Paul, R-Kentucky, Mike Lee, R-Utah, and Ron Wyden, D-Oregon.



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending