My husband had a 2 hour delay on his way to work today. Not too far from here, there was a "jumper" on a highway over pass. My husband was riding his motorcycle, so was right up where the action was taking place. I don't know the details, but a young man thought he could end his troubles by ending his life. Thank goodness the officers stopped him before he jumped and possibly killed many others in a car crash.
My husband decided to pull out his camera and take pictures of the event. He took three pictures, but then an officer came up and confiscated his camera. He also confiscated an I=phone of a man who had taken pictures from his car. When my husband questioned him about why he took the camera, he said it was "evidence". Nearby was a young man who came to my husband and told him that a friend of his is interested in cases of police brutality, or other inappropriate behavior. He was very interested in how my husband was treated. When he heard that the officer said the camera was evidence, he went up to the officer and said, "Well, do you carry a camera to collect more evidence?" Of course the officer said no, because that wasn't why he took the camera.
My husband said, "Well, if you want the evidence, then take my SD card, and I'll keep the camera". But the officer wouldn't do that. In the end, my husband had to follow the officer to the police station in order to get his camera back. In fact, there was no reason for the officer to take it, and my husband told him that he was very unhappy, and that he wanted to file a complaint. In all honesty, when my husband told me about this, I felt like I was back in communist China! This is not something you expect in the U.S.
I understand wanting to respect the privacy of the man who was threatening to jump. And I won't be posting his close up picture here. But if that was the officer's concern, why didn't he say so? I think he was afraid my husband might catch an officer doing something he shouldn't be. I am going to post one that was taken farther away that doesn't reveal the identity of the jumper.
In the end, the officers were able to grab the man before he jumped. All is well that ends well in relation to the "jumper". But I do kind of wonder about the actions of that officer.