The other responders are correct, in a public place you do not have an expectation of privacy, so a photographer can capture you image and you can't stop them.

The other responders are correct, in a public place you do not have an expectation of privacy, so a photographer can capture you image and you can't stop them. However, should that photographer chose to publish the image, things get more complicated. Take the example of an ad agency snapping a picture of you on a public sidewalk and later broadcasting that image in a $10M CocaCola Superbowl commercial. You own your own image, and are owed compensation for that advertisement. And it is fully within your rights to not accept an agency's offer to compensate you at all, thereby preventing them from legally using the image you have been capture in for commercial purposes. Now, if you are in a picture, but nearly impossible to identify (ie: a crowd shot taken at a baseball game, or a marathon finish) then the image can probably be used without your permission and without compensation. Newsworthy events, of which this clearly qualifies, also change the rules. Press have expanded rights when it comes to publication of images. But is reddit a news site? When it comes to UGC relating to a news worthy event, do the individuals publishing enjoy similar rights to the press? To what extent? And assuming that there aren't 6 murderers all wearing backpacks, can the innocent ones successfully sue for defamation if/when their names get published? Answers to these questions aren't clear, so I expect that one of these internet-witch-hunts-that-identify-the-wrong-person will end up in court sometime soon. Maybe one already has? Anyone know?