Can someone explain the law to me

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hoogle

Hoogle

Suspended / Banned
Messages
55
Edit My Images
Yes
The other Day I took my Camera to Milton Keynes I was happily shooting away in the shopping center and in surrounding areas alone making sure I did not take pictures of people with maybe a few in the background where it couldnt be helped but they were out of focus.

Suddenly I was accompanied by police in there car with lights all going off and city center security who actually detained me for suspicious behaviour I was taken to the station made to wait in a holding area while they all looked at my pictures there were about 100 images on the memory card.

2 hours later I was interviewed under caution and after hearing everything from saying I could be a peodophile to terrorist scoping out the area I was made to delete all my photos and was let go with a warning.

I could understand if I had suspicious picture or images of people especially children but a lot of it was of the art work scultptures etc and some of the interesting buildings and enviroments. And purposefully avoided capturing brand names etc.

I was polite and went along with every request but did argue I felt I was not breaking any laws I was not tresspassing and the fact there were several people around me with cameras but I was targeted for having what is deemed as a professional camera and a large lens attached.

I was told if I wanted to continue shooting on public land or within the shopping district I will have to pay £75 for a commercial photographers waiver even though it was just for privat use and just a hobby.

Need to say I was no longer interested in doing anything after being made to feel like a criminal or terrorist even worse a peodophile.

Did they really have the right to make me delete the photos if there were no incriminating pictures on there.

I have emailed them complaining on the way I was treated and the response was basically we have a duty to protect everybody in our district and prevent suspicious behaviour. Did I have the right to refuse them the right to search my images as they had a lack of evidence to suspect me of any illegal activities.

Some comments were made that made me complain that I was targeted because of my age and I am younger than what they deem as a photographer.

I have read similar stories where people have been mistreated for there hobby of photography but you never realise how bad it can make you feel
 
The shopping centre in MK is (as far as I remember) private land to which the public are given access, and they can choose to not allow photography as they see fit.

Having said that, it sounds like you were on the receiving end of some heavy-handedness and you should be deciding whether you wish to make something of this or not. As a minimum, in your position I'd be contacting the Managing Director of the company that owns the shopping precinct and the Chief Constable of Thames Valley Police for an explanation of why you were treated this way. The alternative is to go straight to a solicitor.

There is a long running thread on Photography and Policing already.. so let's not turn this into a rehash of old arguments.
 
Yes I have just found that thread lol thanks. I have had a sort of apology as the bulk of my photography was not in the shopping center but around it. However it was not an explanation just a hey you visit our city you have to comply with our rules and we have the right to do whatever we want with your pictures. I did question if they needed a warrant to search my images and if they had the right to delete them. However That was seen as me being difficult and refucing to cooperate with the police. Turns out the points I raised were valid concerns and I can clearly say I was mis treated. However as I got a warning that will be on my record I am seeking legal advice to make a claim to get my record cleaned as they found no incriminating evidence.

the annoying thing is this has happened during an application to join the police which I am sure has already been discovered so I doubt I will hear back from them. Luckily it was not as a police officer.
 
It is a private place to which the public have access, however the Police are not allowed to look through your photos without your permission, if they think you are breaking the law then your camera needs to be seized and then they need to apply for a RIPA, which gives the Police authority to search through electronic items such as camera or phones etc.

If you allowed the Police to look through your camera and you volunteered to delete the photos then they have not done anything wrong.

The owners of the shopping centre do hold the rights to allow you to photograph or not, but your are well within your rights to photograph the centre from the outside when you are standing on a public footpath etc.

I hope this helps.
 
They had no right to make you delete your photos and there is a case to be answered for this.
 
Also a warning is not held on record unless you were reported for an offence. I cannot see that you have committed one so therefore no need for a warning, which usually comes in the way of a Caution/Reprimand.
 
First two things you need to do is
1. write to the shopping centre owners/management to complain about the treatment and don't stop until you get a proper apology
2. Write to the chief constable of the area where the police are from and complain about the arrest and about the deletion of the pictures. Again do not be fobbed off with the "duty to protect" rubbish. There are ways this is done and the way it was done in this case is not only wrong but illegal.
You also need to get any warning removed as this WILL appear on an enhanced CRB check as intelligence held by the police.
Add: it might be worth reminding the CC of this http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showpost.php?p=2957609&postcount=394

Hoogle said:
The other Day I took my Camera to Milton Keynes I was happily shooting away in the shopping center and in surrounding areas alone making sure I did not take pictures of people with maybe a few in the background where it couldnt be helped but they were out of focus.
Click to expand...
It is perfectly legal to take pictures of the shopping centre and people when YOU are on public land. The shopping centre however would (probably) not be public land and they should have notices displayed saying photography is not permitted. If there is not then you are free to take them UNTIL you are asked by the management or their representatives to stop. If you then continue to do so you are guilty of a trespass and they can ask you to leave.
If you do not leave when asked they can "escort" you or call the police to eject to you.

Hoogle said:
Suddenly I was accompanied by police in there car with lights all going off and city center security who actually detained me for suspicious behaviour I was taken to the station made to wait in a holding area while they all looked at my pictures there were about 100 images on the memory card.

2 hours later I was interviewed under caution and after hearing everything from saying I could be a peodophile to terrorist scoping out the area I was made to delete all my photos and was let go with a warning.
Click to expand...

This is the reason you should get in touch with the Chief constable.
There was no reason to take you to the station. Unless you were actually under arrest for something then you can refuse.
They cannot "make you" delete the pictures. To do so they must have a court order.

What reason was given for the "warning"?
Again, as long as you were only taking pictures and not getting lippy or the like then there is no requirement for a warning or anything else. Most especially not an arrest or a spell at the station.

Hoogle said:
I could understand if I had suspicious picture or images of people especially children but a lot of it was of the art work scultptures etc and some of the interesting buildings and enviroments. And purposefully avoided capturing brand names etc.
Click to expand...
It does not matter what or who you have pictures of. What they did was illegal plain and simple.

Hoogle said:
I was polite and went along with every request but did argue I felt I was not breaking any laws I was not tresspassing and the fact there were several people around me with cameras but I was targeted for having what is deemed as a professional camera and a large lens attached.
Click to expand...
You were NOT breaking any laws if you were just taking pictures. That does not matter if they were of people or anything else.

Hoogle said:
I was told if I wanted to continue shooting on public land or within the shopping district I will have to pay £75 for a commercial photographers waiver even though it was just for privat use and just a hobby.
Click to expand...
Total BS.
Who told you that?
If you wanted to shoot on the shopping centre land (private land) then they can impose whatever conditions they like. Many places (including Trafalgar Square and the South Bank area in London) have commercial photography licenses but no restrictions on private stuff.
On the public land there is absolutely no requirement for any permits or permissions.

Hoogle said:
Need to say I was no longer interested in doing anything after being made to feel like a criminal or terrorist even worse a peodophile.
Click to expand...
Understandable in the circumstances but don't let it stop you in the future. Just learn the rules and law (or rather lack of law).

Hoogle said:
Did they really have the right to make me delete the photos if there were no incriminating pictures on there.

I have emailed them complaining on the way I was treated and the response was basically we have a duty to protect everybody in our district and prevent suspicious behaviour. Did I have the right to refuse them the right to search my images as they had a lack of evidence to suspect me of any illegal activities.
Click to expand...
They (both the security and police) had and have absolutely NO AUTHORITY to make you delete the shots.
For that reason alone you should take this to the Chief Constable.


Hoogle said:
Some comments were made that made me complain that I was targeted because of my age and I am younger than what they deem as a photographer.

I have read similar stories where people have been mistreated for there hobby of photography but you never realise how bad it can make you feel
Click to expand...

No matter what the reasons you were "targeted" there are ways and means of questioning people.

If all you say is fact (no reason to believe otherwise) then you should be complaining loud and long most especially about the deletion of the pictures.


There is a load of stuff on here and on the www regarding what the police can and can't do with regard to searching etc. Do a search and research it.

Basically there is NO law stopping any member of the public taking photos when they are in public.
When on private land (most shopping centres are private land) then it is upto the owners/management. But that does not mean they can just ride roughshed over people.
 
Last edited:
You say you were DETAINED.You are either under arrest or at liberty in this country.If the security staff DETAINED you under what lawful authority did they do so? If the police arrested you they have to tell at the time of arrest what offence they are arresting you for.
 
I have worked alongside law enforcement agencies and thought I had a good understanding of the law and never been in trouble in hein sight it is easy to say they had no right to do what they did they ask you to do something and out of fear you go along with it. I have never had confrontation with the law if it was just security guards to be honest it would not have esculated to anything but when you have the law coming at you with flashing lights you go brain dead and cooperate.

I guess it is an abuse of power I did ask if I was being arrested and on what grounds I was told reports of suspicious behaviour and pose an immediate threat to the area and the people in it (some terrorist speal about the lead up to the olympics BS)

Now I know more about the facts and the law I dont plan on it happening again and have an appointment on tuesday to see a solicitor to lodge a formal complaint against the Thames Valley police.

All though I was not forced to delete the pictures I was pressured to as they threatend to detain me longer and said I was complicating things and to be honest I was hungry and stressed out. I am good under pressure but not when I am being accused of being a criminal I just wanted to go home.

I have receipt of my stop and search and it states suspicious electronic equipment and usage as the reason.

But as I said it is easy to say you were missed treated after the event but when it is happening to you then you feel scared even more so when you do not believe you are in the wrong.

Thanks guys I dont suppose I will get an apology anytime soonas that will be them admitting they are in the wrong and leaves them open for a legal case.

And I dont mean to be stereo typical or racial profiling but I am as english looking as they come Smart in appearance and not any kind of look that could be seen as menacing to society etc. I now have key points of photography law etc laminated in my camera bag.
 
Hoogle said:
I was taken to the station made to wait in a holding area while they all looked at my pictures there were about 100 images on the memory card.

I was made to delete all my photos and was let go with a warning.
Click to expand...
That's was a little over the top :eek: I just wonder what would have happened had you been using a film camera, would have they had them developed first, or simply destroyed the film?


Hoogle said:
the annoying thing is this has happened during an application to join the police which I am sure has already been discovered so I doubt I will hear back from them. Luckily it was not as a police officer.
Click to expand...
You are at the moment applying to join the police, should you write and make a complaint could be an awkward one :thinking:
 
with regard to the points above about public land - they are correct , but MK is funny , much of what appears to be public land (such as the carparking out front, the land between the two centres, the covered market etc) isnt, and is in fact owned or at leased leased by the centre MK or by english partnerships, (this is a consequence of how ownership was handled when they broke up the development coorporation). This is why they can charge a fee for proffesional photography (which in their definition will include publishing pictures anywhere including on the net)
 
Last edited:
As an aside, your pictures may not be lost. If you haven't formatted the card and even if you have but not used it again there are recovery programmes out there which can get your pictures back for you.

Alan
 
Hoogle said:
I have worked alongside law enforcement agencies and thought I had a good understanding of the law and never been in trouble in hein sight it is easy to say they had no right to do what they did they ask you to do something and out of fear you go along with it. I have never had confrontation with the law if it was just security guards to be honest it would not have esculated to anything but when you have the law coming at you with flashing lights you go brain dead and cooperate.

I guess it is an abuse of power I did ask if I was being arrested and on what grounds I was told reports of suspicious behaviour and pose an immediate threat to the area and the people in it (some terrorist speal about the lead up to the olympics BS)

Now I know more about the facts and the law I dont plan on it happening again and have an appointment on tuesday to see a solicitor to lodge a formal complaint against the Thames Valley police.

All though I was not forced to delete the pictures I was pressured to as they threatend to detain me longer and said I was complicating things and to be honest I was hungry and stressed out. I am good under pressure but not when I am being accused of being a criminal I just wanted to go home.

I have receipt of my stop and search and it states suspicious electronic equipment and usage as the reason.

But as I said it is easy to say you were missed treated after the event but when it is happening to you then you feel scared even more so when you do not believe you are in the wrong.

Thanks guys I dont suppose I will get an apology anytime soonas that will be them admitting they are in the wrong and leaves them open for a legal case.

And I dont mean to be stereo typical or racial profiling but I am as english looking as they come Smart in appearance and not any kind of look that could be seen as menacing to society etc. I now have key points of photography law etc laminated in my camera bag.
Click to expand...

See solicitor and contact "Liberty" they love this sort of thing they gave free advice to a friend of mine who had been detained by B&Q staff,they sat on him!. He went to civil court and B&Q were found guilty of false imprisonment.HE REPRESENTED HIMSELF.I sat in the public gallery and watched.It can be done.
Also you can contact your MP and he will ask for an explanation from the Chief Constable. link http://www.writetothem.com/?cs=1 Don't bother with apologies they are worthless.
 
It's certainly a strange situation as most stories of being told not to photograph seem to involve security getting involved or a little heavy handed before bringing the police in, so to have them call the police before approach would seem to be out of the ordinary.
 
Thats probably an MK thing too - theres a lot of police in the centre area and the station is less than a block away. Also the centre are quite paranoid about security ( I always think they've been reading tom clancy's "teeth of the tiger" , wherein shopping centres are targetted by al queada )
 
neil_g said:
sounds very odd to me, they detained you but didnt actually arrest you?
Click to expand...

yeah i thought that too - if you arent under arrest you are free to leave at any time - and if you arent arrested then you can't be cautioned :thinking: (and yeah i know about street cautions for delinquent youth etc - i'm assuming that isnt relevant here)
 
Hoogle said:
I was told if I wanted to continue shooting on public land or within the shopping district I will have to pay £75 for a commercial photographers waiver even though it was just for privat use and just a hobby.
Click to expand...

So if you pay £75 you can photograph whatever you want, with no permit you are treated like a criminal?????

Sorry to hear your story, good luck with the solicitor and getting some redress. I think we were all hoping stories like this would come to an end.

David
 
Whats really odd is i have shot commercial shoots in CMK with permission and never paid a £75 fee. I did however get stopped by about 4 different security guards even after having permission to shoot.
 
There is nothing wrong with being stopped, I don't mind being stopped by security guards when I am taking photographs, as they are just doing their job. I can also understand the point about the terrorist threat, it is a real threat in the society we live in unfortunately, so I will always co-operate with security/police when it comes to these issues, however this gentlemen does seem to have been treated unfairly, and that is the point here, hopefully he gets an explanation of why the actions were carried out. I was in New York in December, I was walking around with a massive DSLR and taking photographs in Grand Central Station, on the Brooklyn Bridge, on the World Trade Centre site with a tripod and not once was I stopped or questioned. I even spoke to a Police man to ask him if it was okay to take photographs, he went out of his way to show me the best place to take a photo. I guess it may be a different ethos to it all in the States, or I may have just had a good experience.
 
Willid1 said:
So if you pay £75 you can photograph whatever you want, with no permit you are treated like a criminal?????

Sorry to hear your story, good luck with the solicitor and getting some redress. I think we were all hoping stories like this would come to an end.

David
Click to expand...

Like i said earlier none of the land arround the centre mk is publicly owned (apart from the actual road which i assume you werent standing on) - so you are on a hiding to nothing there as they are within their rights to ask the poice to remove you from private land,
 
big soft moose said:
Like i said earlier none of the land arround the centre mk is publicly owned (apart from the actual road which i assume you werent standing on) - so you are on a hiding to nothing there as they are within their rights to ask the poice to remove you from private land,
Click to expand...

But not to delete the photos...
 
completely genuine question to the OP...

Where you actually arrested as in PACE read out to you.. i.e. the "i am arresting you on suspicion / for x. You do not have to say anyting but anythingyou do say may be given in evidence" blurb.....

Or did they ask what you were up to, asked you to show them then asked you to delete them.....

I only ask this as there is some sound and some contradictory advice in the posts above. I have been asked a couple of times by Police and PCSO's as to what I am "up to". and upon being amicable and friendly, and shown them.... one has been a bit of a tog himself and was very very chatty and "have a nice evening Sir... If you get stopped againg tonight please ask them to radio 'plod123' " ....

Basically if on private land, you have no rights whatsoever unless permission is implied or granted. (I.e. if they don't say you cannot, you can reasonably assume you can, or if you have a permit to do so.. i.e. canary wharf, you can - it then gets a bit more complicated as to publiuc areas in the shopping mall and within shops themselves.... basically the deeper you go into the place, the less "rights" / "permissions" you have / can assume) If a public highway, you can pretty much phtograph anything you want to within reason and without infringing upon peoples privacy. i.e. If I set up a 600mm lens on a public highway focussing through your front room window, that's a bit of a no no..... but if i take a pic of a person in a street in Norwich / Cambridge wherever, even of a child..... then there is no law being broken... people could ask me to delete but I wouldn't have to.... (and to be honest, I wouldn't want to take it in the first place) ...
 
Lynton said:
completely genuine question to the OP...

Where you actually arrested as in PACE read out to you.. i.e. the "i am arresting you on suspicion / for x. You do not have to say anyting but anythingyou do say may be given in evidence" blurb.....

Or did they ask what you were up to, asked you to show them then asked you to delete them.....

I only ask this as there is some sound and some contradictory advice in the posts above. I have been asked a couple of times by Police and PCSO's as to what I am "up to". and upon being amicable and friendly, and shown them.... one has been a bit of a tog himself and was very very chatty and "have a nice evening Sir... If you get stopped againg tonight please ask them to radio 'plod123' " ....

Basically if on private land, you have no rights whatsoever unless permission is implied or granted. (I.e. if they don't say you cannot, you can reasonably assume you can, or if you have a permit to do so.. i.e. canary wharf, you can - it then gets a bit more complicated as to publiuc areas in the shopping mall and within shops themselves.... basically the deeper you go into the place, the less "rights" / "permissions" you have / can assume) If a public highway, you can pretty much phtograph anything you want to within reason and without infringing upon peoples privacy. i.e. If I set up a 600mm lens on a public highway focussing through your front room window, that's a bit of a no no..... but if i take a pic of a person in a street in Norwich / Cambridge wherever, even of a child..... then there is no law being broken... people could ask me to delete but I wouldn't have to.... (and to be honest, I wouldn't want to take it in the first place) ...
Click to expand...

Ouch! .... Now my head hurts... ;)
 
Donnie said:
Hmmm, should be interesting when I go over with the camera club at the end of May for our outdoor "shooting the city at night" night :-)
Click to expand...

Why restrict it to the camera club? National TP meet???????????????
 
big soft moose said:
Like i said earlier none of the land arround the centre mk is publicly owned (apart from the actual road which i assume you werent standing on) - so you are on a hiding to nothing there as they are within their rights to ask the poice to remove you from private land,
Click to expand...
Sure, but not to take him to the police station against his will (although it sounds like he was happy to go) and not to make him delete his pictures or be held further.
 
Splog said:
Ouch! .... Now my head hurts... ;)
Click to expand...

OK splog just for you

Canary wharf - turn up - they tell you to sod off. Ask nicely beforehand, they are generally OK with a few caveats.....

Photography on pulbic land - genrally Ok... but if i was standing at your front fence... with a big lens through your living room window.... bit of a no no...

Likewise on public land, nothing to stop you taking a pic of a kid.... though you may get called all sorts of things, dependinding on the length of the lens....

(off topic - and on that last point... last time i was in Cambridge... saw an absolute corker of a shot.. I'll find it when i get back home tomorrow, of a kid - about 3, hand in hand with mum, fascinated by her helium balloon.... not a care in the world... took a chance.... showed mum the pic on the screen and emailed her the pic..... the light and everything just "worked".... she loved it and thanked me... wants to have a big print of it..... as it was just a day happy snapping, as far as I am concerned, she can have it... )
 
Lynton said:
OK splog just for you

Canary wharf - turn up - they tell you to sod off. Ask nicely beforehand, they are generally OK with a few caveats.....

Photography on pulbic land - genrally Ok... but if i was standing at your front fence... with a big lens through your living room window.... bit of a no no...

Likewise on public land, nothing to stop you taking a pic of a kid.... though you may get called all sorts of things, dependinding on the length of the lens....

(off topic - and on that last point... last time i was in Cambridge... saw an absolute corker of a shot.. I'll find it when i get back home tomorrow, of a kid - about 3, hand in hand with mum, fascinated by her helium balloon.... not a care in the world... took a chance.... showed mum the pic on the screen and emailed her the pic..... the light and everything just "worked".... she loved it and thanked me... wants to have a big print of it..... as it was just a day happy snapping, as far as I am concerned, she can have it... )
Click to expand...

Thanks! ..... Are you in a bad mood tonight? ;)
 
nope not in the slighest................ chilled as a cucumber thats been in the fridge...
 
I could be wrong Keith and I'm sure I'll quickly be corrected if I am but I don't think English forces "detain" like our Scottish Forces do. We could Detain under S14 of the Criminal Procedures (Scotland) Act 1995 for such an event but as has already been stated, we would not have the right to look through any photos without consent or a RIPSA application.

Sounds like the OP has been subject to the "ways and means act" which cops often use for good reason but on this occasion I suggest that despite the fact the initial concerns may be justified, the end result was a little harsh.
 
Last edited:
Let make something clear,you were doing nothing wrong.

I would take futher action,by going to the police station,and asking to speak to an senior police offices,and find out what the hell was going on.

1.Why you were detained
2.Why were you asked to delete your photos

And let them know if your not happy with their awswers,you will make an complained to the IPPC.

We do not live in an police state yet,stand up for your rights.

Good Luck :)
 
I'd also consider contact these guys over this.

http://www.scenethat.co.uk/default.asp

From what you've posted, this has been an utter hash from the beginning.

You mention you're quite young. How young are you?

Did any of the shopping center staff speak to you before they called the police?
 
Go to the press too! There was a recent one in Scotland that made national news - A guy took an image of his daughter inside a shopping centre (Braehead) and was basically accused of all sorts and held by security and police!

The centre changed their rules and now ALLOW photography for your average joe bloggs!
 
You say you were taken to a police station?
Ok, so when you arrived, you spoke to a Sergeant?
Were you told you had certain entitlements, one of which was to speak to a solicitor?
Why didn't you take that option?
 
Triggaaar said:
Sure, but not to take him to the police station against his will (although it sounds like he was happy to go) and not to make him delete his pictures or be held further.
Click to expand...

on the former point if he was arrested he could be taken against his will - if he wasnt arrested then he must have gone willingly.

likewise if he was arrested he can be held further, otherwise he isnt being held at all

I find it very hard to believe that the MK police have suddenly decided to throw pace out of the window and started detaining people without arrest or charge.

you are right about the photo deletion , but is it really worth a law suit - particular for someone who is hoping to join the police that doesnt look like a good idea. (he can also probably recover the card so nothing has really been lost)
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top