Meeting With UC Irvine Campus PD: Videotaping is Allowed

On May 8, 2014, I sent a letter to UC Irvine Dean of Students Rameen Talesh complaining about my not being allowed to videotape an event at UCI on May 1. Here are the contents of that letter:

Rameen Talesh, Ed.D. 
Dean of Students and Assistant Vice Chancellor, Student Life & Leadership 
University of California, Irvine 
Irvine, CA 92697-5125 
 
RE:   Incident on May 1, 2014 at UCI Social Sciences Lab Building Room 270 
 
Dear Dean Talesh: 
 
On the evening of May 1, 2014, I attended an event at the above location, which 
featured speaker Loubna Qutami. The event, which involved political speech of 
wide public interest, was sponsored by the UCI Muslim Student Union (MSU) as 
part of their “Anti-Zionism Week”. While I am an adjunct teacher at UCI 
Extension, I did not attend in that capacity, but rather in my role as a 
blogger. [In addition, you might find it helpful to know that I served three 
years in the US Army Military Police in Germany, was a Criminal Investigator 
with US Customs, and retired after serving as a Criminal Investigator with the 
US  Drug Enforcement Administration.]   My intention was to listen to the 
presentation, videotape it, and post it on my blog with commentary,  for 
purposes of informing the wider public and engaging in discussion of an issue of 
public interest.  Unfortunately, the UCI Campus Police prevented both me and a 
second videographer (who was there on assignment for an international 
organization,  independent of myself)  from filming, upon the direct request of 
the MSU.  I am concerned that these actions by the Campus Police may have 
infringed my Constitutional rights to free expression.  Moreover, I believe that 
these actions demonstrate a blatant disregard of the policy adopted in 2007 by 
UCI, which you yourself have previously acknowledged, under which UCI will not 
enforce requests by campus groups to prohibit videotaping of events such as the 
one described above. 
 
Here is what happened. 
 
Shortly before the event started, the issue of videotaping came up.  The other 
journalist had set up a video camera on a small tripod in an unobtrusive 
location in the room. I was  nearby and was prepared to videotape from my seat 
with my own hand-held recorder. An MSU student approached us and told us  that 
videotaping would not be allowed. At that point, I gave my now-standard 
response, namely,  that this was a public event at a public university, that the 
issue had been  previously resolved,  and that people had the right to 
videotape. I added that if a campus police officer or university official 
instructed me to stop, I would comply .  A few minutes later, I walked outside 
and continued the discussion with the MSU gentleman  in an attempt to resolve 
the matter quietly and civilly. He requested that I not videotape the film 
(titled Duma), which was to be shown at the outset of the program, because of 
copyright issues. I naturally agreed to comply with this request and added that 
I also would not videotape any students,  as is my policy. A few minutes later, 
a  female MSU member approached   our seats and repeated the request not to 
videotape the speaker. I repeated my contention that we had a right to do so, 
but that I myself would not tape the film or videotape students. She then asked 
if I would comply if the speaker, Ms. Qutami, were to ask that I not  videotape 
her talk.  My response, again, was that I would comply with such a request  only 
if a campus police officer or university official directed me not to tape.  I 
also voiced the opinion to her that they might be inviting legal problems if 
they prevented people from recording. I repeated my promise that I would not 
tape the film or the students. 
 
The event began and the film  started; as I had promised, I did not record the 
film. A few minutes later, three Campus Police officers (Sgt Chon, Officer Sloan 
and Officer Patton) entered the room and asked to speak to me and the other 
videographer outside.  The Campus Police stated their position that if the event 
organizers did not want any videotaping, we should comply with that wish. I 
repeated my contention that we had the right to record  at a public event held 
at a public university, open to students and the community. 
 
I also told them that just one year prior, at a talk given by MSU guest speaker 
Mr. Miko Peled,   the MSU had similarly tried to prevent me from taping.  In 
that instance,  you agreed with my ability to record. You also advised me that 
you had informed the MSU of my right to do so. In addition, last year I had 
consulted with Campus Police officers regarding the issue and was told that I 
indeed had the right to film.  Officer Chon claimed that my information was 
erroneous. He asked for the name of the police officer involved last year, and 
although I had forgotten his name,  I described his physical appearance and 
noted that I thought he was a senior officer in the UCIPD. 
 
It was clear from the outset that the Campus Police intended to  support the 
MSU's position, so I told them that I was going to follow their orders.  The 
other journalist stated his case, but we both agreed to abide by the Campus 
Police directives (although I stated that the legal question raised by this 
prohibition on recording needed to be resolved). The two aforementioned MSU 
members, who were both present, agreed that there was no problem with us 
returning to the room as long as we didn't record.  I should underline that the 
officers were courteous and professional, and the discussion was civil at all 
times. I mentioned to the officers that there were important legal 
considerations at stake.   We then returned to the room. 
 
As you are surely aware and as a reminder, the question of whether members of 
the public can videotape public events on public university campuses had 
previously been an issue of contention  at UCI.  In 2007, former State 
Assemblyman Charles S.“Chuck” DeVore successfully asserted his and others’ right 
to videotape an MSU event. I am enclosing a copy of a 2007 Orange County 
Register article  regarding this issue, which contains the text of Mr. DeVore’s 
letter to Chancellor Michael Drake. This article can be found at 
http://www.ocregister.com/articles/speech-484746-hate-msu.html 
 
In addition, The Daily Pilot confirmed in 2007 that UCI had changed its policy 
so as  to allow audience members to videotape public events on campus.  I am 
enclosing a copy of that article for your convenience.  This  article can be 
found at 
http://articles.dailypilot.com/2007-10-19/news/dpt-hillel19_1_uc-irvines-campus-
uci-officials 
 
As I have already stated, the Campus Police officers were courteous and 
professional. The conversation was civil on all sides. However, I believe that 
the Campus Police acted in error in not allowing me to videotape. ( I should 
mention that the Campus Police dealt with me and the other journalist 
identically, as one unit.)  This was a public event on a public campus, not a 
private discussion , and neither the MSU nor its speakers can legitimately claim 
any expectation of privacy.  Moreover, this particular speaker has addressed 
numerous conferences all over the world, and many of her presentations are 
available for wide viewing over the Internet, so she clearly has no concern 
about being recorded.. 
 
Therefore, I respectfully ask that you advise me as follows: 
1. If  UCI’s policy in this matter has changed since 2007, please provide me 
with a copy of UCI’s new written policy, as well as the legal basis under 
federal and state law supporting such new policy. 
2. If UCI’s policy, in fact, has not changed, then please so confirm and please 
advise me as to why the Campus Police forbade videotaping. 
 
Please send your response to me at gfouse@cox.net. 
 
As you well know, the issue of the Israel-Palestinian conflict is a major issue 
of contention on college campuses, not just at UCI or in California, but 
throughout the country. I have been writing my blog, which covers this issue as 
well as many other topical political matters, on a daily basis for over 
sevenyears.  My national and international readership is very interested in 
foreign policy and the discourse on college campuses surrounding Middle East 
affairs, and I have already received many messages questioning the UCI Campus 
Police’s right to prohibit recording at last week’s event.  This is arguably an 
unnecessary area of additional controversy that we should all wish to avoid. 
 
 Please note that I am consulting with legal experts on this matter, since I 
strongly believe that rights to free expression are central to our liberties. 
 
 I would respectfully request that you respond to the questions I have posed in 
this letter within seven days, so that I may keep my advisors informed of your 
official position.  Again, please direct your responses to (deleted). 
 
 
Sincerely, 
 
 
Gary C Fouse 
Adjunct teacher 
UC Irvine Extension 
(English Language Programs for Internationals) 
 
 
cc:  Foundation for Individual Rights 
 

On May 12, Dean Talesh responded via e-mail and told me he had referred the matter to UCIPD Chief Paul Henisey. The same date, I also received an email from UCIPD Lt. Joseph Riess, and we arranged to meet that same afternoon in his office.

In that meeting, which was very cordial, Lt Riess told me that the UCI policy regarding videotaping of public events had not changed since 2007 when they announced that such taping of public events was permitted. On behalf of the department, he apologized for the incident and said that his officers had erred in enforcing the Muslim Student Union's prohibition on videotaping. I reiterated what I said in my letter that the officers were courteous and professional at all times, I just believed that they were in error.

Lt Riess also said that a training bulletin was being sent out to the entire department reminding them of the public's right to videotape. I requested a copy of that, and he said he would have to clear it with the chief. He also was not sure whether there was such a policy on file with the UCIPD, but offered to check. I requested a copy of that as well if it exists since I wanted to avoid future problems. I suggested that they also notify the Muslim Student Union of their policy as well.

Finally, I mentioned that beyond UCI, this has been a problem on many university campuses across the nation including UCSD and that I thought the issue should be brought into a federal court since the First Amendment was national in scope and should not depend on each university's policy.

Here is a copy of an e-mail I sent to Lt Riess on May 13.

Dear Lt Riess, 
 
I want to thank you for taking the time to meet with me yesterday in regards to 
the videotaping incident on May 1. I also want to thank you for the 
acknowledgement that UCI policy does, in fact, permit videotaping of public 
events and your apology on behalf of the UCIPD. I also appreciate the fact that 
UCIPD is issuing a training bulletin to that effect and would appreciate a copy 
of it if possible. 
 
As we discussed, it is important that all parties concerned be aware of what is 
permitted at such events so as to avoid misunderstandings and unpleasant 
incidents in the future. In particular, sponsoring organizations and speakers 
must understand that videotaping of public events on campus is permitted and 
cannot be infringed upon. I hope you might be amenable to any future suggestions 
as to how future UCI students and UCIPD officers can be kept abreast of the 
policy. 
 
Finally, as I stated, this issue goes far beyond UC Irvine as it is a recurring 
problem on other US campuses, including UCSD, where the administration is 
enforcing the MSA ban on videotaping. This is a First Amendment issue that, in 
my view, should be settled universally in a court rather than be dictated by 
individual campus policy. 
 
Again, thank you for taking the time to discuss this issue. 
 
 
Sincerely, 
 
 
Gary Fouse 
Adj teacher 
UCI Ext 

----------------------------------------------------------------------

The issue now as I see it is to pursue this issue with other universities. While we have 

prevailed in the case of UC Irvine, other universities, like UCSD, are enforcing the mandatesof the MSAs and Students for Justice in Palestine to prohibit audience members from 

videotaping their speakers. This is a violation of the First Amendment and should be 

addressed in the courts.