Looney Backs Citizen Cop-Photogs

As Luis Luna tries to clear his name after being arrested while videotaping police, a New Haven lawmaker is working to give people like him another tool to defend their rights.

Luna and his lawyer appeared in Connecticut Superior Court on Elm Street Friday in an attempt to clear his name of charges that he interfered with police while videotaping them with his cell phone.

New Haven police’s practice of defining photographing them in public as ​“interfering” has become a hot topic.

Luna (pictured), a 27-year-old from Wallingford, fell into his legal bind after a brush with former Asst. Chief Ariel Melendez on Sept. 25, 2010. Luna was using his iPhone to videotape police on College Street when Melendez arrested him. It was one of several recent incidents, two involving Melendez, in which cops took action against citizens for using cameras in public. The high-ranking cop has since retired.

Luna, who maintains his innocence, is trying to strike a guilty plea he made in the case on Oct. 8. He said the prosecutor offered him a deal to cop to a lesser plea and walk out free. Luna accepted the deal, with some confusion, and against his better judgment, he said.

He made a first attempt Friday to get a judge to vacate his guilty plea. If Luna succeeds, it would pave the way for him to sue Melendez.

Meanwhile, a state lawmaker is lending support for his cause at the Capitol.

State Sen. Martin Looney has introduced Senate Bill 788, which would amend statutes to explicitly allow civil action against police who interfere with a person’s right to photograph or videotape.

Although Luna already has the right to do so under current laws, the bill would open a new avenue for legal action. In addition to being able to sue for false arrest and make a federal claim under the First Amendment, the new law would create another basis for suing cops.

Sen. Looney said he put forward the bill in January in response to recent incidents in New Haven and East Haven, where several people have been arrested while videotaping police.

Camera Controversy

Luna is one of those people. Here’s what he said happened on Sept. 25, 2010:

It was the first night of Operation Nightlife, a crackdown on rowdy behavior in the downtown club district prompted by a shootout on Crown Street. After midnight, Luna was on his bike near the corner of Crown and College streets when he saw cops arresting three people. He pulled out his iPhone and started filming the action.

Luna, who’s from Ecuador, is part of a group called CopWatch New Haven, which organizes activism against police brutality.

When he started filming on Sept. 25, Melendez approached him, grabbed his phone, and ordered him arrested. Luna said when he got his cell phone back the next day, his video had been erased. A new picture (left) had been added, showing what appears to be police feet on a cement floor.

In response to an Independent article about the incident, the police department’s internal affairs opened an investigation. It’s ongoing.

Luna’s case is one part of a larger cops-and-cameras controversy that unfolded at the end of last year. In several incidents, police ordered people in public places to stop filming them, or even snatched cameras out of people’s hands.

Video of one of these incidents, on Sept. 10 on Crown Street, shows an officer saying, ​“You don’t take pictures of us,” before knocking a camera out of the hands of a man who was recording footage of an arrest and beating in progress. Click the play arrow to watch that clip.

Looney’s Legislation

Looney said the cops-and-cameras incidents prompted him to propose his legislation, which is now in front of the Joint Committee on Judiciary.

Looney said he was inspired not only by events in New Haven, but also by the experience of New Haven’s Father James Manship who was arrested two years ago in East Haven while filming police there.

The bill would help to guarantee the right of people to film police, as long as they don’t interfere, Looney said. The bill would protect people’s right to sue for damages if they are arrested while videotaping.

Although police say that filming is currently allowed, ​“we’ve heard of a number of incidents of people being arrested for doing just that,” he said.

“It’s important to highlight that this is not something that police should be objecting to,” Looney said. New Haven Police Chief Frank Limon, meanwhile, is finishing up a new policy specifically directing cops to respect citizens’ rights to use cameras.

Courtroom A

Luna walked into Courtroom A Friday morning with his attorney, Max Simmons.

Simmons was set to argue that the guilty plea should be vacated, partly on the grounds that the judge never advised Luna of all the ramifications of his plea. But the opposing lawyer couldn’t make it Friday, so the case was continued for one week.

As he waited in the gallery, Luna recounted what landed him in his current position. He said the last time he showed up in court, he had asked state prosecutors about securing legal representation to answer the charge of interfering with police.

“They said to look in the Yellow Pages,” Luna said. ​“I think they just wanted to move things along.”

The state offered to reduce the charge to creating a public disturbance, which is punishable by a $50 fine and does not appear on a criminal record. Luna accepted, in order to put the incident behind him, according to the motion to vacate prepared by his lawyer. Read the motion here.

According to the motion, Luna was still uncertain about what was happening when he stepped in front of the judge on Oct. 8. He first said he was ​“not guilty,” then changed his plea after another explanation of the new charge.

The judge did not advise Luna that he was giving up his right to plead not guilty, his right to remain silent, his right to a trial, and the right to confront witnesses, according to the motion. Nor did the judge inquire if Luna’s plea was the result of coercion of any kind or ask the state about the basis of the plea. Those statements and inquiries are required by the Connecticut Practice Book, according to Attorney Simmons.

Simmons said he confirmed the omissions by looking at the court transcript from that day.

If the motion to vacate is successful, ​“it’s essentially a do-over,” Simmons said. The interfering charge against Luna would be re-docketed as a pending case and the state could decide to pursue it as such, drop it to creating a public disturbance again, or nolle it. Simmons said he can’t predict what prosecutors would choose to do.

If Luna does succeed in having the case dismissed or nolled, Simmons said, he will be ​“taking a really hard look” at pursuing a civil case against Melendez or the New Haven police department. Luna could sue for false arrest and could also make a federal claim based on the First Amendment, Simmons said.

If the Looney bill were passed, and if it were made retroactive, that would create another cause of action for Luna, Simmons said.