Of course!

Yes, and the citizenry will pay the bill, not the cop.

Maybe so if they just wanted pictures, but they also interrogated the guy for an hour or so.

$$$$$$"Please. do"$$$$$
(To the camera)
$$$$$"He's going to arrest me."$$$$$
smirk smirk smirking in handcuffs
$$$$$$$$$down the road$$$$$$$$
She's thinking "See you saps in court."

You have no expectation that someone won't take a photograph in public. That doesn't mean you have to move to make way for someone to take his picture.

Zen, that was in the _second_ moment. In the previous moment, she failed to comply with the command to step aside. By speaking the command, the police arrested her. By failing to comply, she resisted.

You need to be perfectly clear on the fact that when a police officer says, "Step over here" (or "Stand there" etc.) you are under arrest. Anytime that you do not have absolute liberty of action, you are under arrest. They do not have to touch you. Just giving you an order is arresting you. When Jami Tillotson refused to do what they wanted, she was resisting arrest.

Sorry, Zen, I was trying to say too much in too few words. The public defender held her ground and was not threatened by the arrest because she knew that she would be released, i.e., knowing the magic. Jami Tillotson was able to remain calm because she held the same social status as the police. Her concern was for her client. The police were successful in separating her from her client.

Being arrested for resisting arrest when you are not resisting arrest is just a way for them to put you in custody, which they did.

Furthermore, nice as it is for us to be outraged by this violation, the fact remains that none of us was there. Cheering from the sidelines makes us feel good, but achieves little. I cited a very strong case from the worst of times in which authority was confronted. Again, it is nice of us to doff our hats now.

Like any other harm or crime, any remedies must come after the fact. What we need is a way to prevent the damage before it occurs.

As for the police, they may be specially restrained from taking pictures, but I am not aware of that, if it is so. I do know that you lose your presumption of privacy when you leave your home. Anyone can take your picture in public. That being so, the police were just being bullies. They did not need to confront and arrest Tillotson. They could have taken their pictures and been done with it.

I'm not sure what you're commenting about or how that relates to the topic of the post.

If you watched the Youtube, you would notice that she offered absolutely no resistance. When threatened with arrest while maintaining her representation, she said 'Go ahead'.

A lawyer knows the magic words, like "Speak 'Friend' and enter." Standing up to authority is always easier for OTHER people to do. In Berlin 1943 there was a protest of Aryan women wanting their Jewish husbands released. (Wikipedia here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rosenstrass...) Nice to applaud now... Harder to do then... Same here. We can only support her now. We were not there to stand with her then. Still and all, she had the same status as they did, and was able to stand her ground, though it seems that her client was interrogated nonetheless. And this was for shoplifting, a minor crime against property. God forbid that the accused was charged with a political crime.

What was the first thing they were going to arrest her for but she resisted. How they can charge her with resisting arrest if there was no original reason to arrest her?