Alleged speeder charged with recording trooper

Police file charges after video of traffic stop appears on Internet

May 08, 2010|By Peter Hermann, The Baltimore Sun

Cops don't seem to like getting caught on camera.

Anthony John Graber III of Harford County is finding that out the hard way. His rapid and possibly reckless motorcycle trip up Interstate 95 has landed the systems engineer in more trouble than a speeding ticket.

The 24-year-old Graber is facing criminal charges after the Internet posting of a video he recorded on his helmet-mounted camera during a March 5 traffic stop.

When a state trooper saw the 23-second clip on YouTube 10 days after the stop, police got a warrant, searched Graber's parents' house in Abingdon, seized his equipment and charged him with violating the state's unusually restrictive wiretapping law. It's illegal in Maryland to capture audio without the other person's consent, and Trooper J.D. Uhler said he didn't know he was being recorded.

Graber's supporters have taken to the Internet themselves, complaining that Uhler's actions resembled a carjacking more than a legitimate police stop. They note that the trooper was driving an unmarked car and was in plainclothes, brandishing a gun and taking about five seconds before he identified himself as a cop.

But a state police spokesman said a marked cruiser driven by a uniformed trooper also participated in the stop, which occurred after authorities said Graber was speeding in excess of 100 mph, riding on one wheel, weaving through traffic and cutting off a passenger bus. Spokesman Gregory M. Shipley denied that Ulher is seeking revenge by pursuing charges related to the video.

"This is not some capricious retribution," said Shipley, calling Graber the type of reckless driver troopers "are peeling … off the backs of tractor-trailers and off the curbs." He said the audio recording of the traffic stop "is a violation of the law. Period. That's what our job is. We're not going to apologize for doing our job."

Graber's case has become a minor sensation among civil libertarians and posters to blogs and message boards, who accuse police of trying to punish someone because they've been embarrassed by publicity over the aggressive traffic stop.

It also illustrates how the ubiquitous presence of cameras clashes with state laws written for a very different set of circumstances, to prevent prevent intentionally intercepting the conversation of another person or secretly taping a telephone conversation.

Capturing the ugly side of policing

Recording people in places where there is no expectation of privacy, such as a public street, doesn't seem to fit the traditional understanding of a wiretap, which conjures up images of hidden microphones and FBI agents huddled in vans listening to mobsters plot murders.

Cameras have become a part of daily life. Many mobile devices can record video, and police in cities around the country, including Baltimore, blanket streets with hundreds of cameras. Police officers in many departments around the state have cameras mounted on their dashboards to record traffic stops. Detectives in Baltimore County record homicide interrogations, for which there is an exemption under the Maryland's wiretapping law.

Video has been used to help show jurors that suspects do confess without being beaten and to quickly put down false allegations made by citizens. In fact, many police chiefs say video more often than not clears officers of wrongdoing, ending "he-said, she-said" complaints.

But cameras have also shown the uglier side of policing — a fierce berating by a Baltimore officer of a teenage skateboarder at the Inner Harbor, Prince George's County tactical officers beating a College Park student during an out-of-control street celebration and a D.C. cop pulling his gun while charging a playful snowball fight.

"I tell guys that we're always on camera now," said Shipley, the spokesman for Maryland troopers. "Someone somewhere has a camera, and you are to remember that and are to act professionally at all times. This is part of everyday life in our society now, and it's a part of policing."

Still, despite the prevalence of recording devices, charges for violating the state law are relatively rare.

I asked Baltimore criminal defense attorney Steven D. Silverman whether he's ever seen Maryland wiretap law used the way it's being used against Graber. "Never, never, never," he said. And while he said prosecutors appear to be applying the law correctly, he noted, "I guess it's more of the 'contempt of cop' than the violation of the wiretapping law."

Baltimore police spokesman Anthony Guglielmi said his officers have little time to worry about legions of videographers. "We're focused on going after bad guys with guns," he told me. "We're not focused on going after citizens with video cameras."

Baltimore Sun Articles
Please note the green-lined linked article text has been applied commercially without any involvement from our newsroom editors, reporters or any other editorial staff.