The 23-year-old South Carolina man who used his phone to videotape a police officer fatally shooting a suspect in the back multiple times said Thursday that another officer who arrived on the scene ordered him to stop recording.

Feidin Santana, who was walking to work, said he stumbled upon a scuffle between the officer and suspect, and he began filming. The 3-minute-long footage was ultimately viewed by millions online and on television and paved the way for the arrest and firing of North Charleston Police Officer Michael Slager, who is accused of murdering 50-year-old Walter Scott.

"One of the officers told me to stop, but it was because I [said] to them that what they did it was an abuse and I witnessed everything," Santana told CNN. He said the officer also instructed him to stay where he was, but Santana said he left the scene for work.

Santana eventually turned the tape over to the victim's family after what the police were saying about the shooting didn't match what he saw, he said.

"I felt that my life, with this information, might be in danger. I thought about erasing the video and just getting out of the community, you know Charleston, and living some place else," Santana told NBC. "I knew the cop didn't do the right thing."

Santana's comments rekindle the debate about the lawfulness of the public recording police, and they come as North Charleston Police authorities released dash cam footage of the traffic stop leading up to the chase and Scott's death.

That dash cam recording corroborates the officer's statement that Scott fled the scene after Slager pulled him over for a taillight infraction. But the video, captured from Slager's vehicle, doesn't show the ensuing chase or shooting. The dead man's family said Scott may have fled because he had a bench warrant against him regarding unpaid child-support payments.

Further Reading Ferguson cops “routinely” block public from filming them, DOJ says

After the officer's arrest Tuesday, North Charleston authorities said they were following in the recent footsteps of police departments across the country in deciding to purchase body cameras for their department. The move was made, in part, to become more transparent to a South Carolina public unsettled by the shooting. It was also a bid to counter the public's increased appetite for filming the police—which again was illustrated Friday when two Southern California officers were placed on leave after video caught them beating a suspect.

But sometimes officers don't want to be recorded, as was illustrated by Santana's comments. What's more, the Justice Department last month dinged Ferguson, Missouri, police officers for having a hostile relationship with members of the public who are filming them—especially as tensions ran hot in the wake of this summer's shooting death of a black teen by a Ferguson officer.

Further Reading Filming cops from within a 25-foot radius could be illegal in Texas

That's prompted lawmakers in California and Colorado to propose legislation to protect those who are filming from being retaliated against by police.

Colorado's legislation allows payments of $15,000 to people intimidated by the police for filming them and to people whose footage was illegally taken. California's proposed law says filming an officer is not automatically interfering with the officer's duties.

The public has the First Amendment right to record the police, although it is not unfettered and it can be limited. Officers may order people to back away if they are interfering with police activity, for example.

Toward that end, a Texas lawmaker has proposed a law creating a 25-foot radius around a crime scene where filming would be barred by the public.

Listing image by Pablo Ares Gastesi