NH videographer broadcasts own arrest live

Videographer arrested 3/3/09 for trying to film arraignment of Gandhi-emulating marijuana activist. Here's the back story, in the form of an LTE I sent to the local paper:

On Nov. 14, authorities at Keene District Court ordered documentary videographer Tom Caruso to shut off his camera - and keep it off. They were just four minutes into a trial he drove four *hours* to film. No acceptable explanation was provided.

I know some of the court operatives and personally like them. But like them or not, they should not be able to draw a veil of secrecy around their public proceedings. You have a right to know what they're doing with your money. You have a right to know how it looks.

In protest of their partial censorship, I've informed KDC authorities I will respectfully attempt to enter the courtroom around 8:00 a.m. on March 3. I'll have a video camera, and I will *not* shut it off. Not without an acceptable reason. I'll film the arraignment of Gandhi-emulating marijuana activist Andrew Carroll in an appropriate, comprehensive manner, or be arrested.

I'm willing to accept a stiff penalty. But if seized, I will suggest a taxpayer-friendly sentence of community service: Highway litter pickup to be performed in or near Keene.

Yours,


Dave Ridley
(Former Keene resident)
Manchester

police keene new hampshire ron paul free state project cameras in the courtroom

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• police
• keene
• new
• hampshire
• ron
• paul
• free
• state
• project
• cameras
• in
• the
• courtroom

[dozer762]

wow he has balls

would any of us do that

we need to now more than ever

mad repect for you dave

[genie0390]

courts bar recordings because they fear exposure of inept, outrageous, proceedings! if you keep people in the dark, you preserve power over them

[gusto1978]

ok everyone watches this video Now my question is HOW can we get ridd of these laws! better yet Get ridd of those people!

[jjjooommm222]

good for that guy. There should be no barring of camera's in court absent the most unusual of circumstances in which prior restraint is called for. Even in these instances, recording should be allowed to be made and the media kept by the court untill the need for prior restraint has passed, i.e. injunction proves uneeded, even no longer a national security risk, privacy concerns no longer relevant/party consents to video, et cet.

Thanks for doing this the right way too, not yelling, fighting

[robertmike57]

We have only your word that there was no acceptable explanation why cameras were not allowed. On the other hand, I have never seen a reason why court proceedings in general can not be recorded, barring legitimate concerns such as security, ect.

[slickeronstate]

Loser.

[kungfuwookie]

yeah, comparing trying to legalize marijuana with Gandhi's work?

only a libertarian.

[msgfilms]

Yeah thats some bullshit. Ef those a-holes

[mmongo55]

i love the ghouls black outfit.. thinking he some sort of Gangsta.. joke

[CoolHandLuke1970]

we need more people with that courage!