What would a politician be hiding when he or she lets the police enforce verbal restriction against making a video of them in an open meeting? If they won’t allow recordings, then why did they make it an open meeting? This is not coherent action. It is dumb to do such thing. We should ask ourselves, “Why do they do it? What is the politician afraid of? Are they hiding something? Can we trust that they are telling the truth? Why can’t we film them? Will they accomplish what they are saying?”
It would be a suspicious thing to me to see this done at an open meeting. First, a video is a somewhat permanent file that a person can keep and at any time make public to show proof that a politician’s words and actions do not match up. A video is an artefact that cannot be denied when wanting to uncover a lie and show those who believed it the reality of things. A video is to be feared by someone who is covering something up. Recording a video at something open to the public, I believe is not a crime, but a right.
If politicians let the police enforce this type of restriction at an open meeting, I can only suppose these things. That the politician is covering something up, not being honest, and that he knows that his words will not be coherent with his actions. Therefore, he won’t allow proof to be used against him and use the power of the law to make it a false illegal act to take a video of him or her at an “open” meeting.