[Imc-uk-features] 'censorship' and insensitive handling of footage

[freethepeeps at aktivix.org]

Quoting jagmad at riseup.net:

 
> As for incriminating material, what could be more incriminating that two
> police videographers present before, during, and after I was filming? Not
> only did they get the two demonstrators but they also got me, not that
> anyone seems to care about the safety and concerns of contributers on this
> particular IMC.
> 
> Doug.
> 

You think ben is "getting on his high horse, and you aint? Your multi-storey
horse has been the sticking point throughout.

Richard Parry, a solicitor represented 2 defendants in the Womble 7 trial - at
the nick he told them that they might as well give a full comment interview as
the incident was bound to be caught on camera.

When it came to trial it turns out that the CCTV had been turned away, and
Richard's clients were the only ones convicted - on the strength of their own
solicitor suggested statements. He aint done a lot of protest trials
since.....

As someone who was there when you shot that video, I am pretty sure the other
FIT camera did NOT capture what you put up.

Quoting ben:

>I do feel that it is the responsibility of videographers and of indymedia  
>admin to respect the concerns of those doing actions and being caught  
>on video."

Yes, this is the reason I agreed to being filmed "for Indymedia" when you asked.
The biggest benefit of your threat not to post videos to our wire, appears to
be that it will save other activists from thinking that they are being filmed
by an imcista who is sensitive to how their footage is used.

The fact that you (Doug) still don't have an inkling of why that footage was
taken down pending a discussion in legal is of great concern to me.

ftp