This is the unedited video of Robert just before and including when he was tazed. You should note that Robert announced when the officer had battered him and Robert stepped back a.k.a. retreated and then announced it just before he was tazed that the officer was about to taze. Even if one refuses to take the legal document into account.... Idaho Rule 45. Cameras In the Courtroom. (a) Audio/visual coverage, as used in this rule, means broadcast, video, audio, and photographic coverage or recording of public proceedings before district and magistrate judges. Robert was not appearing before any judge. There are no rules or laws against videotaping other than before district and magistrate judges. The Federal Appeals Court has ruled that video recording the police in a public place is a constitutional right for all U.S. citizens. SIMON GLIK, Plaintiff, Appellee, v. JOHN CUNNIFFE, in his individual capacity; PETER J. SAVALIS, in his individual capacity; JEROME HALL-BREWSTER, in his individual capacity; CITY OF BOSTON It is actually legal to videotape inside the courtrooms in New Hampshire and there is no law stating that it is illegal to videotape outside the courtrooms. Case law and the Supreme Court guidelines on cameras in the courtroom indicate that cameras are generally permissible, both in New Jersey courtrooms, in quasi judicial hearings before municipal bodies or agencies, and generally before any municipal bodies or agencies in open public meetings. Supreme Court guidelines for cameras in the more formalistic Superior Court actions allowed for cameras by media only, the Appellate Division saw no reason to apply such restrictions to municipal agency meetings wherein the necessity for regulation is less stringent. In effect, the Appellate Division reasoned that there is no constitutional bar to videotaping. And since our Supreme Court allows cameras, under regulation, in our criminal trials and in general most other trials--where the need for decorum, formality, and strict adherence to rules of procedure is greater, there is no valid reason for disallowing the use of cameras or tape recordings of municipal meetings. The courts have said a public body may not ban videotaping but may adopt rules for videotaping. In December 1995, a Tennessee high court adopted rules that allow cameras in the courtroom but specifically prohibit the photography of any minor, except when "being tried for a criminal offense as an adult." Posted with the express permission of Robert Peterson, my son, who cannot post himself as he is in Kootenai County Jail. Judge charged Robert with indirect contempt based on unsworn accountings by officers involved and he was then charged with 3 counts of battery against the officers that supposedly occurred during these videos. Bail is currently set at 50,000 currently because battery penalties are enhanced when an officer is involved. What it really means is that they do not want him out on bail. In Idaho, TITLE 18 CHAPTER 9 18-903. Battery defined. A battery is any: (a) Willful and unlawful use of force or violence upon the person of another; or (b) Actual, intentional and unlawful touching or striking of another person against the will of the other; or (c) Unlawfully and intentionally causing bodily harm to an individual.