Episode Summary:

In this episode of the Guardian Mindset Podcast, Attorney Eric Daigle discusses the intersection of freedom of speech and video recording in law enforcement. Attorney Daigle focuses on the First Amendment rights of citizens to record and live stream interactions with the police. He mentions a recent decision by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals that established the extent of First Amendment protections for recording and live-streaming officer interactions.

Attorney Eric Daigle provides historical background on the issue, starting with the landmark Glik decision in 2010, which recognized the citizen's right to record police. He explains that First Amendment auditors, individuals who film law enforcement in public spaces, have become more common in recent years, often challenging police and seeking media exposure. Daigle discusses the challenges these encounters pose for law enforcement and offers recommendations for handling them.

He emphasizes that citizens have the constitutional right to record law enforcement officers as long as they are not interfering with their duties. However, he also highlights that there are limitations to this right, such as considerations of public safety and reasonable time, place, and manner restrictions.

Attorney Eric Daigle stresses the importance of maintaining courtesy, respect, and tact when interacting with First Amendment auditors or individuals recording police. He advises officers to be mindful of their own safety and the safety of others while ensuring compliance with constitutional guidelines. He also encourages agencies to have clear policies in place and provide training to officers on handling these situations.

Overall, the episode aims to provide insights and strategies for law enforcement professionals to navigate the complex landscape of freedom of speech and video recording in relation to policing.

The main topics discussed in this episode of the Guardian Mindset Podcast by attorney Eric Daigle are:

• 
  

  Navigating the intersection of freedom of speech and video recording in law enforcement.

  
  


• 
  

  Reviewing laws regarding recording police and the issues related to recording police interactions.

  
  


• 
  

  The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals' decision on the First Amendment right to live stream officer interactions.

  
  


• 
  

  The rights of First Amendment auditors and their challenges to law enforcement.

  
  


• 
  

  The First Amendment rights of citizens to record law enforcement officers in public spaces.

  
  


• 
  

  The Glik v. Cunniffe case and its significance in establishing the right to record police.

  
  


• 
  

  Recommendations for law enforcement agencies in dealing with First Amendment auditors and civilians who have the right to film.

  
  


• 
  

  Time, place, and manner restrictions on the right to film police.

  
  


• 
  

  Balancing public safety considerations with First Amendment rights.

  
  


• 
  

  Strategies for officers in maintaining courtesy, respect, and tactfulness during encounters with auditors.

  
  


• 
  

  Officers' duty to ensure officer safety and respond to illegal activity.

  
  

Resources: 

• Follow DLG on LinkedIn


• Follow Attorney Eric Daigle on LinkedIn


• DLG First Amendment Legal Updates


• Training Built for Supervisors & Command

About the Host:

Attorney Eric P. Daigle

Attorney Eric Daigle specializes in Civil Rights litigation and law enforcement operations consulting. Attorney Daigle also conducts training on use of force standards, including electronic control weapons and responses to force/deadly force incidents. Attorney Daigle acts in his capacity as a Law Enforcement Consultant providing guidance and oversight to department command staff on operations, force response, and risk management. He has served as an expert witness in use of force cases and has reviewed use of force incidents around the Attorney Daigle serves as a member of independent monitoring teams and acts as an auditor in reviewing police department organizational compliance with procedural revisions directed or overseen by the Federal court system.