That's the usual phrasing of trespass laws, and remain here means "remain after approaching". I can't see any judge siding with a cop following someone and requiring him to stay 25 feet away.

You’re overestimating judges. Even aside from the possibility of corruption, which has certainly happened before and will again, some judges are awful people or not very clever. Generally the minimum requirement to be a judge is to pass the bar and then get elected by people who don’t know anything about you. It usually helps to be a friend of cops.

Here’s a judge who jailed a guy known for reporting on police misconduct under the excuse that he refused to become a sworn witness in the trial of a cop murderer - which he had nothing to do with, and was simply attending in the audience. https://therealnews.com/a-cop-watcher-attended-the-trial-of-...

(I think what they were trying was just kick him out of the courtroom; my understanding is that when someone is a (potential) witness testifying in a trial they are not allowed to attend)

You can't legislate away corrupt judges. Also when one of the sides asks to question you as a witness and the judge proceeds to swear you in, you do just that and later complain, not start and argument there and then.

> Generally the minimum requirement to be a judge is to pass the bar and then get elected by people who don’t know anything about you.

In large swaths of the rural parts of the US, judges are not required to pass the bar exam.

Or have a legal degree.

Or have a college degree.

Here I was thinking Roy Bean had vanished into legend and myth.

I agree with your implicit statement that this is a problem. It’s also important to note that “lay judges” only exist in eight states, and, AFAIK, where they exist, their authority is almost if not entirely limited to misdemeanor cases.

Still problematic, in my opinion.

> I think what they were trying was just kick him out of the courtroom; my understanding is that when someone is a (potential) witness testifying in a trial they are not allowed to attend.

If the judge just wants someone out of their courtroom they can simply order them to leave. If they do not leave a bailiff or two will be happy to encourage them to go.

Earlier that week officer Dean had been convicted of killing Jefferson. The trial then moved to the sentencing phase.

On the day the conviction was announced there had been a group protesting in front of the court. When the officer's family was escorted out through a side door many of the protest group moved to there and confronted the family. There were allegations that this included threats against the family, including specific death threats.

One of that group, Mata, showed up in court later as a spectator but instead of sitting with Jefferson's family and supporters sat with Dean's supporters, within immediate reach of Dean's family.

The defense attorneys wanted to talk to him to bolster their case that the trial should have been moved to another county. The judge wanted to talk to him because the judge was concerned that someone who was part of the group that had allegedly issued death threats to Dean's family was sitting right next to that family [1].

[1] https://www.dallasnews.com/news/crime/2022/12/19/man-arreste...

Once the law is on the books it gives cops an(other) easy excuse to arrest you and throw you in jail for recording them. Many people can't afford to miss a day of work, let alone try a case in court.

What happens in court is irrelevant. The police will have arrested you, and they had a "reasonable pretext", so they won't face any repercussions. You, however, will not only lose the opportunity of filming them, but will at least spend one night in jail. You might get some damages from the city, but most likely not enough to cover the court costs of even pursuing this.

> I can't see any judge siding with a cop

Then simply you've never hung around a single judge.

I come from a family that had more than its fair share of members that work in law enforcement and first responders. I've hung out with judges at barbecues at their house. The people at these private events are mostly other elected officials and other law enforcement officers. These people are their friends, they've known them for years or decades, hell, quite often grew up together. And yea, while a judge can attempt to be unbiased as possible, human nature always leads people to bias toward those they know and against those they do not.

Unless the judges actively punish the cops for doing this, the cops win, and are incentives to bully away any potential witnesses. It is not enough for the judge to just throw out the charges.

The remainder of 33 is really important. If the first responder needs to move in the direction of the videographer in order to perform their duty, then the videogrpaher should move.and give them space. If the movement is not necessary, then they would have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the videographer was remaining in place to harass the responder or otherwise was impeding to their duty.

It is not a crime to be within 25 feet of the first reaponder, it is only a crime if all elements of the statute are met.