The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
New Hampshire Photographer Faces Charges Of Impersonating A Firefighter
MATTHEW SPOLAR
Conconrd Monitor
The state police have confiscated the camera of a Concord photographer as they consider charging him with impersonating an emergency responder at a fatal car crash in Canterbury yesterday morning, officials said.
For about two years, Brian Blackden has been a regular at fire and disaster scenes in the Concord area as a correspondent for 1st Responder Newspaper, a monthly publication distributed to fire departments nationwide, and as a freelancer for local news outlets. He has also identified himself as a photographer for the Penacook Rescue Squad.
Blackden drives a converted ambulance with "1st Responder News" printed on the side and often dons protective gear for safety reasons, he said.
Blackden, 45, was wearing a fire coat and helmet yesterday as he snapped photos of the wreckage along Interstate 93 in Canterbury. Though the car was not on fire, he said wearing the gear is a routine procedure for him in case of an explosion.
But state police Lt. Scott Sweet said Blackden's dress blurs the line between journalist and emergency responder.
"You apparently have a member of the general public dressing as a firefighter to gain entry into areas they normally wouldn't have access to, for their financial benefit," Sweet said.
Trooper Christopher Decker seized Blackden's camera as he left the scene yesterday, Sweet said. Beforehand, Decker had called Assistant Merrimack County Attorney Susan Venus, who told him he could only take Blackden's camera if he was unable to verify for whom Blackden worked, County Attorney Katherine Rogers said.
Blackden said he told Decker he was at the scene yesterday with the Penacook Rescue Squad. About the same time he began working for 1st Responder Newspaper, Blackden said he was asked by squad members to be their photographer.
But Shawn Brechtel, the rescue squad's assistant chief, said Blackden does not hold a position in the department. He said he was not aware of anyone asking Blackden to become the squad's photographer.
Blackden said he also provided Decker with credentials from 1st Responder Newspaper and should be allowed to take photos regardless of his affiliations.
"It's a First Amendment issue," Blackden said. "If I have this issue, anybody can have this issue."
Sweet said the question is whether Blackden misrepresented himself at the scene.
"That's what we need to ascertain: whether he was there as a member of the fire department or whether he was there as a member of the media representing himself as a member of the fire department," Sweet said.
Under state law, a person can be found guilty of a misdemeanor first offense if they "indicate or imply that the person is a licensed emergency medical care provider" without the appropriate license.
Blackden, who also owns the store Pepper Defense Supply on North State Street, said his emergency medical technician license expired about 20 years ago. He said he has never posed as a firefighter or EMT. His fire helmet, he noted, says "photographer."
Blackden said he is often allowed into the thick of fire scenes in the Concord area to get up-close shots, but he said his clothing has nothing to do with it. Rather, it's because of "a good rapport and working relationship with the different departments," he said.
Concord fire Chief Dan Andrus said Blackden has showed up to many fires and has never represented himself as an emergency responder.
"I haven't experienced any negative incidents with him," Andrus said. "He simply is allowed the same kind of access as any member of the press would have to the scene."
Sweet said the state police are withholding Blackden's camera until they fully investigate his conduct at the scene yesterday and decide whether to bring charges.
Maj. Russell Conte said part of the investigation includes reviewing the photos taken by Blackden to determine whether he took any of the deceased victim, who has since been identified as 27- year-old Timothy Meserve of Dover. Blackden said he did not and has earned the trust of local fire departments because he is "not a sensationalist photographer."
Conte said he is also concerned Blackden may have "encroached on an active scene."
Blackden said he took pictures from a distance of at least 75 feet and was never in the way of any of the responders.
"We're not trying to keep anybody from good journalism," Conte said. "We're just trying to find out what the circumstances are."
Copyright 2010 ProQuest Information and Learning
All Rights Reserved
ProQuest SuperText
Copyright 2010 Concord Monitor/Sunday Monitor
August 26, 2010
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Da Chief - Jim O'Neill on
-
What a bunch of bullshit on the part of the NH State Police. I think one of the troopers had a hair across his ass or someone was just out to get this guy... Before I was a Firefighter I can remember wearing my helmet and coat to calls. We are talking a big city so I could not even be "affiliated" with the department although I was allowed to ride and work with a company. His helmet said "Photographer" on it. Maybe he isn't the photographer for the FD mentioned, his helmet said "Photographer", that identifies him. As for "indicating or implying" one is an emergency medical provider, where does that fit in? Did this guy indicate he was a First responder or an EMT? Did he treat the patient, although he could have under the Good Samaritan law if no other care was there at the time of his arrival. Like I said, someone is out for this guy and they are using this as an excuse. IMHO
-
Permalink Reply by Jack/dt on
-
Chief,
'What a bunch of bullshit on the part of the NH State Police."
That's a pretty hard assessment on your part to make. I know here the press is kept back with the rest of the general public until such time as the scene is declared safe and then only IF the IC decides to allow the press closer in.
If, as the photographer states, he was back 75 feet then there really was no need for PPE and his using it may have been to circumvent the yellow tape line. Crews may notice a civilian encroaching on the scene but a quick glance at someone with a helmet and turnout gear would most likely suggest another responder.
Even IF the guy was legit, my first assumption is that the trooper was just doing his job. To assume anything else implies a bias towards the trooper. Probably makes more sense to just wait and see what the upshot of it all is.
-
-
No, not hard, just an assessment... To the best of your knowledge, AND MINE, this man never presented himself as a Firefighter, an EMT or even a First Responder. He has apparently been photographing for some time so one would assume that he is known by both the Police and Fire Service. I honestly think that the Trooper, for some reason, either did not like this guy or had other causes to arrest him. Chief Andrus of the Concord FD, the Capitol City said, "Blackden has showed up to many fires and has never represented himself as an emergency responder" and I'm sure you will probably find that from most of the Chiefs in the area, but not the cops.... get my drift?
BTW, I loved your profile... Your reason for joing the Fire Service was... "I thought I was in line for the circus" and you think NIMS is "the usual nonsence" and your top issues are "illiterate people". "conspiracy theorists" and "flaming idiots"........... Jack, you got a mirror???
-
Permalink Reply by FETC on
-
He is a legit photographer. His rig and gear say photographer on them. Though I have never met Brian personally, I have heard he is not there to impersonate anyone. He is there to document the incident, otherwise your newspapers, magazines, journals would have only after incident damage photos.
I do know this for a fact, that WMUR-TV Channel 9 had a news reporter do a ride-a-long with Brian just a few months ago, documenting what he uses, wears, has for photography equipment and what he does at incident scenes and ran a piece on emergency scene coverage.
-
Permalink Reply by Oldman on
-
"state police have confiscated the camera of a Concord photographer as they consider charging him"
Indicates to me that they are investigating the issue.
"wearing a fire coat and helmet yesterday as he snapped photos....he said wearing the gear is a routine procedure for him in case of an explosion."
Really? As the PIO for my department, I deal with various media outlets, including stringers on many scenes. Never, not even once have they ever worn a fire helmet and coat to video, photograph, or interview, just in case of explosion. If there is that danger, they (the media) aren't allowed in.
"Blackden said he was asked by squad members to be their photographer. But Shawn Brechtel, the rescue squad's assistant chief, said Blackden does not hold a position in the department. He said he was not aware of anyone asking Blackden to become the squad's photographer....the question is whether Blackden misrepresented himself at the scene."
I can see how this might be a big question.
It's a First Amendment issue Oh please. I don't remember reading where the First Amendment give us the right of free speech AND taking pictures.
Really Chief, I'm afraid I must side with Jack on this one. Until the investigation is complete, and all the facts are in, I believe the trooper was in fact doing his job. IF charges are filed, both he and the trooper will have their day in court. Otherwise, we are speculating aren't we?
-
-
Jim,
You need to lighten up some and maybe accept that other people's sense of humor isn't like yours. There's a reason I have what I have on my profile and it's validated almost every day. Had you read the entire thing in context:
"Functionally illiterate people,
Conspiracy theorists,
Flaming idiots.
Do away with the above and the Fire Service stands a chance,"
it might have made more sense to you. Or maybe not. How's my choice of music, offensive to you as well?
-
Permalink Reply by George on
-
I must agree with the State Police on this one. They were doing there job. No media personnel are allowed in the "hot zone". And from my 28 year experience with the New Orleans Fire Department, no PPE is needed in the cold zone were Joe Public and Media personnel are located. I do many interviews with media personnel and all interviews are done in the cold zone. In my humble opinion, the photographer used his gear to get into the Hot or Hazard control zone.
-
Permalink Reply by John S-B on
-
The cop CANNOT confiscate the camera, there is NO law against taking photos in a public area. Most cops are ignorant as to that fact. Photographers can be held back from the immediate scene, but the can't hold his camera or delete photos. As for the impersonating charge, seems pretty thin to me.
-
-
As John S-B says, they cant just confiscate his camera or stop him from taking pictures in public. And the PPE we are talking about is a helmet that says "Photographer" on it and a coat. I wear my coat anytime I'm out on the Interstate, especially at night, wether it's a call I responded to or simply stopping on scene to render assistance while I'm out and about. I'm sure if you've done any MVA's up on I-10 or 610 you make sure you have something reflective on at night.
And, speaking of New Orleans, I have the pleasure of speaking before Supt. Parent and a group of NOLA Firefighters at the Plaza Suites Hotel this Sunday at noontime. If your available and want to stop by, by all means. I have been invited by the publisher of the new book "Katrina; A Freight Train Screaming" and it is dedicated to Capt. Rickie McCurly, the men of the NOFD, the out-of state Firefighters who responded to Katrina and some of the other personnel who came to NOLA to help in the aftermath of Katrina. Have a great day George.
Jim
-
Permalink Reply by John Crabbe on
-
And the PPE we are talking about is a helmet that says "Photographer" on it and a coat. I wear my coat anytime I'm out on the Interstate, especially at night, wether it's a call I responded to or simply stopping on scene to render assistance while I'm out and about
Difference is though, you ARE a FF, so even if questioned about impersonating one it wouldn't go anywhere. (unless of course you started being a hinderance to the responders who do cover the area) You also have training in order to be able to assist, you aren't putting the PPE on just to get close and get pictures.
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
