California Anti-Paparazzi Law Fails First Court Challenge

Damaso

Photojournalist
Local time
7:57 PM
Joined
Jun 20, 2007
Messages
2,379
An interesting case...

http://pdnpulse.com/2012/11/california-anti-paparazzi-law-fails-first-court-challenge.html

A California law meant to impose special penalties on the paparazzi for reckless driving has been declared unconstitutional by a Los Angeles County superior court judge, according to several news reports.


Judge Thomas Rubinson said the law was too broad when prosecutors invoked it against photographer Paul Raef. The paparazzo was charged with reckless driving last July after a high-speed chase of pop star Justin Bieber’s car.
The law, which was enacted in 2010, imposes extra penalties on anyone who drives dangerously to take photos for commercial gain. It was intended to target the paparazzi, although it could be used to prosecute photojournalists rushing to breaking news events.


The extra penalties include jail terms up to six months and fines up to $2,500. It was signed by former governor (and actor) Arnold Schwarzenegger, and it was supported by several celebrities who have lobbied state lawmakers to pass laws restricting the activities of the paparazzi.
 
If someone breaks a law (i.e. by reckless driving) the intention to do so doesn't make a difference for the others being endangered. The reckless driver should be punished no matter what. There is absolutely no new law needed (as so often) but strict enforcement of the existing law.

Here in the US is just amazing anyway what people are doing behind the stirring wheel of their cars :
Reading news paper, books, eating, drinking, cell phone use, SMS texting, all sorts of grooming incl. doing eyebrows and electric shaving - all of this I have seen myself....
 
If someone breaks a law (i.e. by reckless driving) the intention to do so doesn't make a difference for the others being endangered.

In the US this isn't true or there would not be hate crime laws. Many people disagree with the idea of an additional punishment for intent. It's an interesting debate...
 
Back
Top Bottom