Skip to content

Licensed Attorney Barred From Cherokee County Courthouse For Recording

Ron Durbin, a practicing attorney, was threatened with arrest and escorted out of Cherokee County Courthouse simply for carrying a camera in the public lobby. Officials cited vague "county policies" with no posted signs or written copies available for review.

Table of Contents

A licensed attorney was threatened with arrest and ultimately escorted from Cherokee County Courthouse for the simple act of carrying a recording device in the public lobby. Ron Durbin's attempt to exercise his First Amendment rights quickly escalated into a constitutional standoff that exposed troubling gaps in how officials handle public access to government buildings. The entire confrontation was captured on camera, revealing a pattern of evasion and intimidation that raises serious questions about transparency in Cherokee County.

The Investigation That Started It All

Durbin arrived at the courthouse investigating a previous incident where someone had been arrested for filming. When he began asking deputies about the arrest, the response was immediate hostility. One deputy flatly refused to identify himself, stating there was "no law" requiring him to provide his name or badge number while working in his official capacity.

The deputy's evasiveness set the tone for what would become an hour-long battle over basic constitutional rights. Rather than addressing Durbin's legitimate questions about the previous arrest, officials immediately shifted focus to his camera, claiming recording was prohibited throughout the entire courthouse.

The Rule That Doesn't Exist

When Durbin asked to see the written policy prohibiting recording, deputies couldn't produce it. One officer claimed the rule was "passed by county commissioners" but admitted he had no copy of it. Another suggested it should be "posted on the front door," but no such signage was visible.

Despite being unable to provide any documentation of the alleged policy, officers continued to threaten arrest if Durbin didn't leave immediately. The contradiction was stark: officials claiming to enforce the law while refusing to show what law they were actually enforcing.

Constitutional Law Meets County Policy

As a practicing attorney, Durbin calmly explained established 10th Circuit precedent protecting the right to record in public areas of government buildings. He distinguished between truly restricted areas and public spaces like courthouse lobbies, noting that "if the public has the right to go, then a camera has the right to go."

The legal discussion took an ominous turn when Durbin mentioned qualified immunity. He explained to the officers that their immunity from lawsuits is "qualified," not absolute, and that violating well-established constitutional rights could expose them to personal liability. The officers' demeanor shifted noticeably as the legal stakes became clear.

The Escalation Strategy

Under Sheriff James Brown eventually emerged to handle the situation, but his approach followed the same troubling pattern. Rather than addressing the constitutional issues Durbin raised, Brown outlined an escalation process: first ask to stop recording, then ask the person to leave, then "escort" them out.

When Durbin pressed for clarity about what would happen if he refused to leave voluntarily, the answers became deliberately vague. Brown claimed they would only arrest for "resisting" during the escort process, but couldn't articulate what underlying authority they had to remove someone engaged in constitutionally protected activity.

The Final Confrontation

The standoff reached its climax when Durbin offered a compromise: he would leave voluntarily if officials would simply state on camera that he would be arrested for recording. Even this reasonable request met resistance, with officers seeming to understand that making such a statement would create damaging evidence of constitutional violations.

Ultimately, Durbin was "escorted" from the building under threat of arrest, but not before obtaining the names of the officers involved. As he left, questions remained unanswered about the mysterious county policy, the previous arrest that started his investigation, and whether Cherokee County officials understand the constitutional limits of their authority.

Watch the full confrontation to see how this constitutional crisis unfolded and whether county officials can justify their actions.

Comments

Latest