Says ACLU of Massachusetts Legal Director John Reinstein, “There’s still an issue of freedom of the press whether the ultimate consumer is some media outlet or whether he publishes it himself. It shouldn’t make a difference.” Especially these days, with the profusion of Web reporting and the ease with which regular folk can utilize recording equipment. “The media is open again, to some extent, the same way it was to hand-billers and pamphleteers 250 years ago.”
As far as the ACLU is concerned, Reinstein says, “there ought to be a distinction between recording a private citizen or recording a public official in his private affairs, or recording a public official in the process of exercising his official duties or responsibilities. That’s exactly why we have a First Amendment: it’s to make sure that government is accountable to the people. And from our perspective, there are serious First Amendment concerns about saying ‘you can’t record that.’
“The concern to other reporters like Jeff is that if the statute is used in a way like this, at what point, when the police don’t like the reporter because they don’t like what he’s taking pictures of, or what questions he’s asking, it becomes a Big Brother censoring of free reporting,” Russman says.
Jeff Manzelli has been in touch with various local and state politicians about his plight. He says City Councilors Chuck Turner, Charles Yancey, and Felix Arroyo have all expressed support. And he’s talked to state representative-elect Will Brownsberger (D-Belmont) about possible emendation of the wiretap statute.
“I don’t want to pose as an expert because I’m not,” Brownsberger says. “It’s a complicated area. And one in which there are a lot of considerations involved.” That said, “I think sometimes the wiretap law is used as a threat to prevent people from recording legitimately the activities of public officials. That’s something that shouldn’t happen.”
Brownsberger allows that some public officials have legitimate security concerns about, say, the reproduction of their image. But he thinks the law, which was originally passed in 1920 and has been amended five times since (the last time in 1998), might merit another look.
“I’m not sure what the changes should be,” Brownsberger says, but “if you think about it, when was the last time someone stopped Channel 5 from recording a public event? Citizen journalists who don’t have the same clout sometimes do get shut down. So there’s some level-playing-field issues there that we need to look at.”
If only
For his part, Manzelli, while clearly relishing that his voice has been heard, wishes this never happened. If he had his druthers, he says, he would have told officer Harer a long time ago, “I think what you’re doing is criminal, but I’m not looking for a fight.’ That’s where it should have gone. It’s so stupid. He didn’t say, ‘Please don’t take my photograph.’ He didn’t say, ‘I prefer you didn’t because I’m a special-operations cop.’” If he had, Manzelli says, things might have ended differently.
But they didn’t. Now that his case has been set in motion, Manzelli has embraced the cause and hopes he can overturn his conviction, making it safe for others to report what they see without fear of arrest. “I’m a stubborn, self-righteous guy,” he says.
