Marijuana.com

Cody

Hey, newbie here, so go easy on me. Heh. Anyway, I'm going to be filming a documentary on the neighborhood I live in and one of the things I'm going to do is interview people who smoke pot, as well as capture some footage of people "in the act" as well. Are there any legal issues reguarding the video taping of someone smoking marijuana, or talking about it on camera? Should I just censor their eyes? I'm planning on showing this video to a film festival eventually, and I'd like to know about certain issues such as statue of limitations, or what kind of legal trouble I might be in for displaying such footage.

 

Niteshift

Statute of limitations will vary depending on the actions or the state. Consult your local laws.

The short answer to the whole thing...........and I'm not talking from a legal standpoint here, I'm talking from a decent guy standpoint.......

Make sure people know they are being filmed. Never do it without their permission. That film can end up being used as evidence against them, so give them the option of saying no.

It's probably not illegal for you to film it, but if you have plans to withhold the film or info if the police end up asking for it, make sure you have a lot of money for the court battle that will follow and be prepared to lose, because it will be tough to use the journalist shield laws as an independant.

What would be illegal is if you set up the illegal act so it could be filmed. Have nothing to do with it. Don't supply or encourage anyone.

__________________
A burning desire for social justice is never a substitute for knowing what you're talking about. -Thomas Sowell

Sometimes the light at the end of the tunnel is muzzle flash.

Buzzby

I don't see where you would get in any trouble, except being sued by the people you interview if you don't get all the proper releases signed.

I wouldn't allow you to tape me unless you pixelated out my whole face and used sophisticated software to make my voice unrecognizable by voice-printing technology.

Since the documentary is limited to one neighborhood, I doubt I'd allow you to tape me even then. It's too easy to deduce who someone is. Nobody wants to be publicly identified as being a user of illegal drugs, even if there isn't enough evidence to justify a warrant.

__________________

WNB

Pixilating or blocking people's faces would not help if the cops really took interest -- they would subpoena the pre-edit version of the tape if you did that. Also, as niteshift sort of pointed out, journalist shield laws vary alot from state to state, and don't even exist in some states at all. Here's a quick overview of the basic standard that would allow the cops to subpoena you, and win a court battle later on.

1) A crime has to have been committed
2) You have to be the only source of information
3) The information they want from you has to be critical to the case

Obviously, based on those three, if someone in law enforcement saw the tape and cared, you could be successfully subpoened.

However, I seriously doubt the cops would do anything if people were just talking about possession and use. They might care if you talk to the neighborhood hook-up, though.

__________________
War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength

Buzzby

Even if you trashed the pre-edit version of the tape, you could be subpoenaed to reveal the subjects. Refusal to testify would be contempt of court (the Fifth Amendment doesn't cover incriminating others), landing you in jail until you testify or the judge decides to let you out.

 

Revolution420

That is incorrect. Pot-TV is full of people who are proud to smoke the herb on camera, both Canadians and Americans.

WNB

Not to mention celebrities, magazines like High Times, groups like NORML and SSDP, people involved in the fight to legalize, etc.

The cops probably will not care. If they do, though, the poster is pretty much screwed.

Niteshift

I'd rather see a poster warned of the possibilities and make an informed decision, rather than rely on what will "probably" happen and be in for a rude surprise if it doesn't work out that way.

The idea of "tons of people do it" is flawed. Tons of people speed and all of them don't get caught. But when you are the one who is, it sucks. Likewise, tons of people do a lot of things, then every once in a while the powers that be decide to make an example of someone.

Better to be fully informed than not.

WNB

He should be given all relevant information. The penalties he could face, or others could face, are definitely relevant, but so is the likelihood of him getting subpoened.

I don't support abstinance-only education on any topic

Revolution420

I would agree. That is why I corrected the only misinformation I saw, which was "Nobody wants to be publicly identified as being a user of illegal drugs, even if there isn't enough evidence to justify a warrant."

I don't know if Buzzby was speaking literally or figuratively there, but it simply is not the case. There are several people who choose not to live in the fear of the law, and are not ashamed or embarassed to be known cannabis users. Some of them are punished and some are not.

Fully informed includes all of the relevant information, right? Not just the part where people are encouraged to submit to the fear of punishment.