I agree that the burden of proof should lay with the police: to prove that you were < 8' away, that you interfered with a police action, and that the action was a dangerous situation.
But the "I don't get to choose where I am" situation feels like nerd rules lawyering.
If I am sitting right next to someone on a bus, and the police run in and begin assaulting that person, my first action is going to be to get 8'+ away from what's happening. I'm not going to immediately pull out my cell phone while someone is getting beaten right next to me and start shoving it in the officer's face.
The constructed situation requires that (1) the only bystander is < 8' from the police, and (2a) there isn't an easy way to move away (in an environment that isn't specifically noted in the law as an exclusion) or (2b) the action is over before the bystander could move 8'+ away.
That doesn't describe a lot of police incidents I've seen or seen recordings of. Usually there's zero or 2+ bystanders. And usually the action escalates over at least 2 minutes, in an open environment.
My rationale for why there should be a separate standard for recording is that we should be encouraging more citizen to do it! Everyone record the cops!
But...! Recognize that adding stress to an already stressful situation is unlikely to produce positive results. Most people are idiots, especially when tempers are running hot on all sides.
If I were a cop, having a bunch of angry citizens < 8' from me, recording and yelling things at me, is unlikely to lead me to be a calmer officer and make deescalatory choices. It's going to increase tension; I'm going to make worse decisions; and that isn't going to end well for anyone. Myself, the supposed perpetrator, or the citizens around me.
And isn't that what we should be focused on? Maximizing the chance of good outcomes for everyone?
But the "I don't get to choose where I am" situation feels like nerd rules lawyering.
If I am sitting right next to someone on a bus, and the police run in and begin assaulting that person, my first action is going to be to get 8'+ away from what's happening. I'm not going to immediately pull out my cell phone while someone is getting beaten right next to me and start shoving it in the officer's face.
The constructed situation requires that (1) the only bystander is < 8' from the police, and (2a) there isn't an easy way to move away (in an environment that isn't specifically noted in the law as an exclusion) or (2b) the action is over before the bystander could move 8'+ away.
That doesn't describe a lot of police incidents I've seen or seen recordings of. Usually there's zero or 2+ bystanders. And usually the action escalates over at least 2 minutes, in an open environment.
My rationale for why there should be a separate standard for recording is that we should be encouraging more citizen to do it! Everyone record the cops!
But...! Recognize that adding stress to an already stressful situation is unlikely to produce positive results. Most people are idiots, especially when tempers are running hot on all sides.
If I were a cop, having a bunch of angry citizens < 8' from me, recording and yelling things at me, is unlikely to lead me to be a calmer officer and make deescalatory choices. It's going to increase tension; I'm going to make worse decisions; and that isn't going to end well for anyone. Myself, the supposed perpetrator, or the citizens around me.
And isn't that what we should be focused on? Maximizing the chance of good outcomes for everyone?