INIT915

I'm not sure we can make any educated assumptions based on the very limited information available to us here. At least I know I cannot.

If he is just making observations in plain view, it is legal.

Does Connecticut have such a shortage of Critical Care Transport units, that they opted to wait for AtlanticCare for a transport?

Is CT so short of capable SCT/CCT units that waiting for Atlantic was worth it?

Field providers don't specify which Medevac unit is dispatched. The fact that "Stat Flight" is requested by name is purely out-of-habit and it is really only semantics. In the Westchester/Rockland/Surrounding region, you could get either of the LifeNet's or NYSP. A solution would be a broad-based dispatch protocol that assures closet unit responses independent of State Lines. LifeNet already coordinates appropriate unit response as it is with the rotating call schedule between LifeNet and NYSP. Interstate mutual aid is addressed in part by Title 10 Part 800.14. As with almost anything in EMS, there is usually a better way forward, and one can only hopes that brighter minds prevail.

If the new airship is at Greenwood Lake, it would make sense that it might be first due to lower Orange County, like the Florida/Warwick/Monroe/Chester/Tuxedo area, no? Greenwood Lake is closer than Stewart I would suspect, without mapping it out.

Yes.

NYSP uses them.

I agree. I don't know anyone having trouble finding employment. A quick internet search reveals a number of places recruiting.

What is your source on that? As far as working at some locations solely based on your NY card? Although I've been out of the game for a few years, when I was with a MICU in NJ, I couldn't just work off my NY Certifications? EMT - http://www.nj.gov/health/ems/documents/recipro.pdf

I don't find this particularly shocking. I have a ton of Latino friends who don't speak Spanish. I don't speak Gaelic, does that mean I'm any less Irish? My father was born and raised in Ireland and speaks very little Gaelic with proficiency. It's interesting to me that some naturally assumed he was Spanish speaking.

Perfect advice. Simple, straight to the point, and easy for even the most dim-witted of our brethren to comprehend.

Someone from that agency is opening up some significant liability for their agency. All agencies should educate their fire police, and members in general, on the law to avoid conflicts which could prove costly for the agency.

Is this the norm in your part of the country? Does the press have such free access normally? Maybe in New York. Down south, things are often very different then what we're accustomed to. The profile says "Asst Chief". That may mean management-confidential serving at the pleasure of the chief executive and consequently having little job protection and little say in the matter. So, you didn't object at the time? Depending on the laws of your State, that could be interpreted as consenting to the presence of a third party, in this case, a reporter. Again, could be very different in that part of the country. Rude, yes. But, sue for what?

If I'm thinking of the case your discussing, his memory card wasn't exactly 'confiscated'. He provided it under consent, so the photos could be printed, and was promptly returned to him. He retained all his pictures, he just in essence provided copies.

Wow. That was fast. Next time I'm missing something, I'm going straight to you.

If someone did in fact tell you this, either they were woefully inept or just breaking your chops, as there is is no legal recourse for the situation you describe. Additionally, there is no such crime as the one they seemed to imply. In fact, I would go so far to say that if your pictures have monetary value or you have an ownership interest in them, THEY may have actually been the ones committing a crime here. Additionally, they could potentially be held liable for civil damages. Again, this is premised on us accepting in full your version of events related to this encounter.

They would entail establishing reasonable cause to believe that the phone/camera had evidentiary value and that the probative value meet the legal standards for a Search Warrant. This cannot be met simply because your offended that some onlookers are being overly critical. You need tougher skin than that.

The short answer is, no. There could be very limited exceptions, all of which would involve consent or Search Warrants. These "experienced officers" you're working with are committing larceny. And, if they're actually taking it from a person, they're committing a felony larceny. To go one step further, if they are using force or threats to take them, they are committing a robbery, which is classified as a violent felony here in New York. You can always ask a witness for their video if you think it could aid in your investigation, but you can't force them to turn it over without a judicial decree. And, taking the phone just because you don't like what a bystander is saying/doing will never give rise to the probable cause required to obtain a Search Warrant. As a backdoor way to get it, you could Subpoena the recordings with a Subpoena Duces Tecum, however in that case, they only need to provide you with a copy of what they recorded, not the actual phone. Additionally, taking all phones from all witnesses or bystanders just because they "might" have seen something is impermissible and violates the Forth Amendment. There is a ton of caselaw on that. Feel free to LexisNexis it and you can spend days reading the cases.

There would be no legal grounds for confiscating those cells phones. If you did, you would open yourself up to both criminal and civil liability.

http://nycfire.net/fdny/hazmat/cpc

In short, often the disciplinary options available are laid out in a CBA. As for this ever becoming public, I'm not so sure. Open Records Law, or more appropriately in New York the Freedom of Information Law does not always apply to law enforcement and firefighters in matters of personnel investigations. See NYS Civil Rights Law Section 50 which reads in relevant part that records related to employment and promotion are generally not public records, and accordingly, are not releasable. Visit this link to read the full text.

Dr. John A. McGurty, Jr. He had a City of Peekskill issued response vehicle. He now devotes most of his time to his military commitments, however, he still does a few shifts at Hudson Valley ER. A true supporter of EMS, Police, and Fire.

That's not really a new concept. There are a number of these programs in existence, and some have been around for years.

They have no affiliation with NYSP in any regard. The only thing that have in common is they both have statewide jurisdiction. Campus Police authority doesn't stop at the edge of the University property. They are in the same Union as State Park Police and EnCon Police, again, all of whom are unrelated to the NYSP. They do not attend the NYSP Academy nor do they have their own Academy. They are all affiliated with the local academy for their respective regions. I.e. Westchester County Police Academy They have little in terms of a centralizes state-wide command (although I would argue they should.) Instead, each SUNY PD is, in a sense, a completely separate entity. So the SUNY Purchase PD Chief has nothing to do with SUNY New Paltz PD and vice versa. I have long argued that all the SUNY PD's should be one agency, and each campus basically a branch of that central agency. NYS Civil Service gives an exam with the Title - "University Police Officer" which is a completely separate and distinct list from the State Police hiring list. A story in either the Daily News of the Post within the last few years basically called for the same set-up that I had advocated. EDIT: Here is one such story that I mentioned: My link