The officers are the ones instigating here. It's not necessarily apparent.
They came to us knowing full well that we were within our right to record
under Glik v. Cunniffe. When I crossed part of the street I knowingly stayed
at the sidewalk between the east and west bound lanes as to not interfere.
When an officer comes to you it's them interfering with recording and not the
other way around. You can legally get as close as a foot to an officer
provided there is no interference. So for instance one can get a few feet
from a scene as a member of the press where an officer is ticketing somebody
for an offence.
In this case there was a clear violation of the authority under which they
had to operate the checkpoint in the first place. Disorderly conduct in New
Hampshire is broad, but can't be violated here. I was not being detained here
and the officers went to an immediate arrest. Up to the point of the arrest
the officers were issuing requests- not orders. The officer post-arrest then
retroactively told me he was issuing an order.
If an officer asks for your name while your not being detained you have no
obligation to provide it or provide an accurate name. It's only after
detainment.
The police can't simply setup a checkpoint. They have to get an order from
the superior court that lays out a plan to conduct a checkpoint and follow
that plan exactly. The officers involved exceeded their limited jurisdiction
(normally an officer has jurisdiction everywhere in the state of New
Hampshire, but not here, and that isn't true of every state).
