Police Officer Took My Picture on His Personal Cell Phone

My question involves civil rights in the State of: wisconsin

During a traffic stop a police officer forced me to allow him to take my picture on his personal cell phone while I was sitting in my private vehicle (My drivers license has no picure on it). I told him I did not consent to it on account of it being his personal cell phone (creeps me out just thinking about it) but he did it anyway. I even offered to show him my retired military ID or to stand in front of his official cop camera mounted on the car but he refused. I feel my rights and privacy were violated. What says the law? If it was illegal or improper what is my recourse?

Quote:

---

Quoting jasonblu

---

My question involves civil rights in the State of: wisconsin

During a traffic stop a police officer forced me to allow him to take my picture on his personal cell phone while I was sitting in my private vehicle (My drivers license has no picure on it). I told him I did not consent to it on account of it being his personal cell phone (creeps me out just thinking about it) but he did it anyway. I even offered to show him my retired military ID or to stand in front of his official cop camera mounted on the car but he refused. I feel my rights and privacy were violated. What says the law? If it was illegal or improper what is my recourse?

---

How do you have a driver's license with NO picture on it?

Arizona issued via mail while deployed

There is nothing inherently unlawful about the officer taking an identifying image with his phone. And how do you KNOW the phone was not issued by the department? Even if it was not, taking the picture on a personal device might be - at best - outside of policy, but not inherently illegal. In fact, many officers do this. The officer can download a single image from his phone easier than he can from a dashcam system in many instances. I have personally used my personal device for many years for suspect images as well as crime scenes - it was simply more convenient than using the cameras provided to us, and more reliable.

If you feel it was inappropriate you can contact the officer's agency and ask to make a complaint. That's about it.

Quote:

---

Quoting jasonblu

---

I feel my rights and privacy were violated.

---

They weren't.

Quote:

---

Quoting jasonblu

---

What says the law?

---

There's no law against photographing somebody in a public place.

Quote:

---

Quoting jasonblu

---

If it was illegal or improper what is my recourse?

---

Avoid committing traffic violations such that it's not an issue.

Quote:

---

Quoting Ohiogal

---

How do you have a driver's license with NO picture on it?

---

Quote:

---

Quoting Wisconsin Admin. Code, Trans, Sec. 102.03(2)

---

(2) A license may be issued without a photograph or with a prior photograph on file with the department to any of the following:

(a) A Wisconsin resident who is out of state and is not able to return to Wisconsin for a renewal or duplicate license. Note: See s. 343.14 (3), Stats., and sub. (3).

(b) A Wisconsin resident who has seriously held religious convictions that do not allow the resident to be photographed. To qualify for this exemption, the person shall complete, sign and date a statement, on a form provided by the department, certifying that the person objects to being photographed due to a seriously held religious conviction.

(c) A Wisconsin resident who requests a photograph exemption on the grounds that a photograph would not accurately reflect the person's appearance because of the person's temporary disfigurement, and the department finds that an exemption should be granted. In cases where an exemption is granted, the person shall apply for a duplicate operator's license with photograph when the reason for the exemption no longer exists.

---

@ MrKnowitall.

1) Since when has the inside of privately owned vehicle been a "public place"?

2) I am innocent before proven guilty (or do you not believe that should be the case for people who are not law enforcement) but way to be a troll on here looking for people to chide, lecture or preach to. Do you feel better about yourself now? Glad I could help, I guess.

Back to point 1. Being inside my private vehicle and not in a public place I wonder if it's not such an open and shut case that my right to privacy was not violated. If I had snapped his picture with my phone during our traffic stop session judging by his overall churlish demeanor I feel like he would have been pissed and felt violated and looked for a reason to make the stop more painful in retribution or try to make me delete the pic or try to confiscate my phone. So What's the difference? Assume he would have had a problem with it, Why does have more rights than me in this regard? Again, I'm in a private place and am innocent before proven guilty. And again, I offered other forms of photo ID. Tell me why a federal ID card isn't good enough for a state cop to determine identity that he has to put my picture on his private phone?

3) to another's point. I asked him if it was his personal cell phone and he said it was.

Thank you to those who had objective, non judgemental input this far. Would love to hear more input to my discourse here.

Quote:

---

Quoting jasonblu

---

1) Since when has the inside of privately owned vehicle been a "public place"?

---

Since you operated it on a public road. Being in the car as such is "IN PUBLIC."

Quote:

---

Back to point 1. Being inside my private vehicle and not in a public place I wonder if it's not such an open and shut case that my right to privacy was not violated.

---

You neither have a right nor even a reasonable expectation of privacy there (just like the officer doesn't have any such expectation if you were to take his picture or video him).
Police are allowed to investigate crimes. We call that good police work.

Quote:

---

3) to another's point. I asked him if it was his personal cell phone and he said it was.

---

Irrelevant really. It might be a violation of department policy for reasons immaterial to your violations (feel free to complain to his department), but it won't really mean anything. He probably touched your car when he approached with his personal fingers, so what?

What discourse are you after? What avenue are you attempting to pursue. His attempting to positively ID someone who has a photoless license (regardless of the valid reasons such was issued) is not unreasonable. Besides even if he did something that specifically invaded your privacy, what do you think you are entitled to?

Quote:

---

Quoting jasonblu

---

1) Since when has the inside of privately owned vehicle been a "public place"?

---

Your vehicle was parked in a public place. Any person who was standing outside your car could have taken a picture of you sitting in your car through your car window and it would have been perfectly legal to do; no consent from you would have been required. The officer certainly may take your photo to the same extent that anyone else in the public could do. As a result, there was no violation of your rights here.

Quote:

---

Quoting jasonblu

---

If I had snapped his picture with my phone during our traffic stop session judging by his overall churlish demeanor I feel like he would have been pissed and felt violated and looked for a reason to make the stop more painful in retribution or try to make me delete the pic or try to confiscate my phone. So What's the difference?

---

No difference, and that works against your argument on this. You would have not violated any privacy right of the officer in that circumstance either. Indeed, the courts have expressly held that photographing officers while doing their job does not implicate any privacy rights of the officer. Sure the cop might have gotten angry at you for doing it just like you got angry at the cop for doing it. But the other guy getting angry is not the test of whether something is legal. (Recording audio conversations may be a different matter; the law on that is different and bit more complex.)

Note that whether it was the officer’s personal camera or one owned by the department makes no difference in the outcome here. I fail to see why that makes such a big difference to you. The officer could do all the same things with your photo either way, after all.

Quote:

---

Quoting jasonblu

---

@ MrKnowitall.

1) Since when has the inside of privately owned vehicle been a "public place"?

---

If the inside of your vehicle can be observed by the officer who is standing in a place where he has a lawful right to be, then what he can - and, what the camera can see - is perfectly fair game.

Quote:

---

2) I am innocent before proven guilty

---

Having your photo taken is hardly a pronouncement of guilt. It merely affirmation of who the officer contacted.

Quote:

---

Back to point 1. Being inside my private vehicle and not in a public place I wonder if it's not such an open and shut case that my right to privacy was not violated.

---

Nope. Still no violation of any law.

Quote:

---

If I had snapped his picture with my phone during our traffic stop session judging by his overall churlish demeanor I feel like he would have been pissed and felt violated and looked for a reason to make the stop more painful in retribution or try to make me delete the pic or try to confiscate my phone. So What's the difference?

---

The officer would have had every right to control the stop and that could include telling you to put down any object in your hand. But, taking the officer's picture would not, by itself, be inherently unlawful in CA even if the officer did not like it.

Quote:

---

Again, I'm in a private place and am innocent before proven guilty. And again, I offered other forms of photo ID. Tell me why a federal ID card isn't good enough for a state cop to determine identity that he has to put my picture on his private phone?

---

What kind of federal ID?

Keep in mind that should the officer likely cannot pull up a federal ID photo if he needed some reference to ID you in court. This way he can ook at the image before court and remind himself who you are and what you look like. It is actually a good practice for the officer to engage in, and can go a long way to prevent false identification.

Quote:

---

3) to another's point. I asked him if it was his personal cell phone and he said it was.

---

Cool. He can probably now write off some or all of the costs of that phone!

Ultimately, nothing improper was done here. AT MOST the officer may have violated agency policy ... if they have one that prohibits the use of personal devices. This is a non-issue with regards to your citation or anything else. If you feel there was some violation of agency policy, your recourse is to speak to the agency.

Quote:

---

Quoting cdwjava

---

Cool. He can probably now write off some or all of the costs of that phone!

---

Probably, if he keeps the records necessary to show the business versus personal use of the phone. That’s kind of pain to do for the amount of tax savings involved, but some people do it. :D