What possible justification could the police have for such an action? Did you say HIPAA? Probably not, because that wouldn't make any sense . . . wait . . . oh dear:
The deputy wrote on the citation, "While handling a medical/check the welfare (call), (Henderson) was filming it. Data privacy HIPAA violation. Refused to identify self. Had to stop dealing with sit(uation) to deal w/Henderson."Let's see what a Stanford law professor has to say about that:
The allegation that his recording of the incident violated HIPAA . . . is nonsense, said Jennifer Granick, a specialist on privacy issues at Stanford University Law School.
The rule deals with how health care providers handle consumers' health information.
"There's nothing in HIPAA that prevents someone who's not subject to HIPAA from taking photographs on the public streets," Granick said. "HIPAA has absolutely nothing to say about that."That sounds about right to me.
Now, you may be thinking "Phil, what does this have to do with employment law? Wait, is this just another shameless ploy to promote your Medical Records Law seminar?"