Did I do wrong? Told My camera would be conficated

dizz

dizz

Suspended / Banned
Messages
44
Name
Daryl
Edit My Images
Yes
Today a helicopter landed in the street near where i live so off i went camera in hand to get some shots.
It would appear that a car driver had crashed into a building and the air ambulance had been called.
By the time i reached the site the helicopter had landed and the police were in attendance too, so i was standing with some people taking some pictures when a police man told me if i took any pictures he would confiscate my camera when i asked why he said they would be evidence, I didn't understand what he ment by that but as i had taken what I wanted I left the scene.

This is the picture that has vital evidence.
004_web.jpg
 
You are allowed to take photographs of what you like including traffic accidents.
 
Yeh , dont see what the problem was really. They could have requested the picture off you for evidence but not convicate the camera itself.
 
Don't see how they can confiscate the camera unless it was part of the accident .......... lol. The pictures have nothing to do with evidence either as they would be post occurance.
 
Picture now added:)

A man standing next to me asked the police officer to explain why the pictures would be evidence, he of course could not answer and again told us to leave.
 
should have called his bluff.. chances are he wouldnt have wanted to have been bothered with the paperwork.

if you werent causing trouble then i dont see the problem.. Although rubbernecking with a camera isnt really for me.
 
There's a lot of paperwork and he probably wouldn't be able to justify why he took the camera away. You couldn't do anything with the photographs and you have the right to take a photograph of what you want.
 
Gary said:
should have called his bluff.. chances are he wouldnt have wanted to have been bothered with the paperwork.

if you werent causing trouble then i dont see the problem.. Although rubbernecking with a camera isnt really for me.
Click to expand...

Not really rubbernecking just don't often see a helicopter parked in the street.
 
Personally I may not take the pics as someone got hurt and presumably badly BUT that's personal preference and nothing more.

You can't be forced to hand over a camera OR the pics without a court order so whoever was telling you they would take it off you was well and truly in the wrong. You are in a public place (I assume the street is a public place and not privately owned) so taking pics is perfectly legal.
 
BouncyMelons said:
Personally I may not take the pics as someone got hurt and presumably badly BUT that's personal preference and nothing more.

You can't be forced to hand over a camera OR the pics without a court order so whoever was telling you they would take it off you was well and truly in the wrong. You are in a public place (I assume the street is a public place and not privately owned) so taking pics is perfectly legal.
Click to expand...

I only photographed the helicopter and had no intention of trying to photograph the paramedics as I agree that would be in bad taste.

It is a very public street and in no way privately owned.
 
Load of old tripe!

He actually has power to seize anything which is likely to be of use in evidence. A reasonable scenario, would be if you had images of the movement of vehicles/people preceeding a major accident or similar incident.

In this case the vehicles involved are still in situ, there are officers on the scene to give evidence of the position of vehciles, and to take or arrange photos if it's deemed necessary, so your images would have added nothing to the case in the way of evidence which the police couldn't provide themselves.

In a genuine case, I'm sure most people would be happy to co-operate anyway, and only the card would be required - there's certainly no need to seize the camera.

This was all happening in the public domain and you had every right to take your pictures unless by doing so you were obstructing the police in their duties.

Many people, including some cops, don't understand why anyone would be taking pics of this scenario, especially when someone is seriously injured, as could well have been the case in this instance, so you can always expect someone to object and think you a little 'strange'. ;)

The mere fact that you were told to stop taking pictures or the camera would be seized shows that this was a bit of intimidation rather than any serious threat, and he couldn't have any reasonable grounds for suspecting your images to be useful to the enquiry.
 
Whoever photoshopped the sign wants sacking.
 
Gary said:
fair enough :)

pretty bad of them to block of the route to Subway too, I often eat my lunch in there (if that chopper is parked where i think it is)
Click to expand...

You are correct, it is right outside Subway and very odd it was seeing it parked in the middle of the junction.
 
Another example of bad policing or intimidation as someone put it
 
CT is right... in certain circs the pictures (not the camera) may be seized for evidence. But it did sound typically heavy handed and plod like.
Tread carefully when refusing to co-operate - they use willful obstruction with increasing ease...
 
i'm not really one to pipe up in this type of thread but it does kinda get on my wick that even though the police are there to do a difficult job which i accept there will still be some using the air of authority to bully people.

it annoys me mainly because i know full well there are decent plods out there but it'd appear too many of the knobs seem to get away with it which is shocking

have you considered ringing the copshop and dropping in some kind of complaint/suggestion about the situation?
 
CT said:
Load of old tripe!

He actually has power to seize anything which is likely to be of use in evidence. A reasonable scenario, would be if you had images of the movement of vehicles/people preceeding a major accident or similar incident.

In this case the vehicles involved are still in situ, there are officers on the scene to give evidence of the position of vehciles, and to take or arrange photos if it's deemed necessary, so your images would have added nothing to the case in the way of evidence which the police couldn't provide themselves.

In a genuine case, I'm sure most people would be happy to co-operate anyway, and only the card would be required - there's certainly no need to seize the camera.

This was all happening in the public domain and you had every right to take your pictures unless by doing so you were obstructing the police in their duties.

Many people, including some cops, don't understand why anyone would be taking pics of this scenario, especially when someone is seriously injured, as could well have been the case in this instance, so you can always expect someone to object and think you a little 'strange'. ;)

The mere fact that you were told to stop taking pictures or the camera would be seized shows that this was a bit of intimidation rather than any serious threat, and he couldn't have any reasonable grounds for suspecting your images to be useful to the enquiry.
Click to expand...

That makes sense.

Perhaps the main issue was this Policeman's inability to communicate to You this very point in a polite and non aggressive manner. Or Worse, it was done purposely!

In my opinion misinforming (i prefer harassing) photographer has become another 'target' to achieve by the establishment.
 
Interesting such a thread like this had popped up as it was only two mornings ago I came up against what was a nasty accident while on my way to work. There was ambulances and police everywhere and I had a clear view of the whole thing from the driver's seat where I could easily see the two cars (or what was left of them since they were involved in a collision) sprawled all over the road.
I had my fully charged up S5600 to hand, but I just could not bring myself to take pictures. The opportunity was there and lighting was excellent as the early morning sun was coming up, but I had this sickly feeling in my stomach knowing someone might have died in that accident. I did a three-point turn (as I couldn't get through that road) and went on my way.
 
I think your instincts were right Ian tbh. Ambulance chasing photographers are at the bottom of a very long photographic food chain. They do it because it's their bread and butter - you don't have to. ;)
 
Reminds me of when I read about a certain early 1900s photographer working for the NY Times who had a police radio in his car and would frequently get to crime scenes before they did to photograph the evidence!

I've offered photographs to the police in mid Wales on more than one occasion and frequently get told "I'm sure we can compensate you some how". So I've taken photos at accidents and given them to the local constabulary on a CD with a b-card in the sleeve but never heard anything back...:shrug:

As far as I can see if you offer the photos to the police then fair enough, otherwise taking the photo is pointless as is threatening to confiscate the camera! :bonk:
 
my thoughts would be take the photos and delete them later if i felt they didn't serve any purpose, the problem with a situation like that is conflicting emotions, when in reality there could be any number of good photo opportunities to be had, even if it's just giving the police/paper the pics as a deterrent to acting stupid on the roads

granted if it was going to be causing disruption or was likely to upset anyone involved i'd not bother

however photo in question, it's a pretty innocent shot with nothing glaringly distressing :)
 
I really do think we need to fight this kind of thing every time it happens. Most of the Police are OK, decent blokes who pretty much care about what they do. But, they're there to uphold the law, not make it up as they go along. And there's no law against taking photographs in public places.

If we don't object, it pretty soon becomes the norm. I don't want that, do you?
 
Strangely enough on my way to a job in St Helens on Friday morning the route was shrouded in thick fog, as I came to a roundabout at the end of a dual carriageway I could see a police car parked on the roundabout the other side of the arrows sign was an upturned car, the road was blocked and I was sat directly opposite the car for approx 10 mins, I noted that the car roof was completely crushed the Police person was sat in his car, the side of the car had been covered with a high vis coat, I felt sick to the pit of my stomach almost certain of the fact that loss of life had occurred, eventually when I got to the clients I explained the reason for my lateness and was astounded when they asked if I had taken any photos, the last thing on my mind was to take pictures it never even crossed my thoughts
 
Bendihossan said:
Reminds me of when I read about a certain early 1900s photographer working for the NY Times who had a police radio in his car and would frequently get to crime scenes before they did to photograph the evidence!
Click to expand...

This was common practice with many photographers certainly as late as the 60's and 70's-listening for serious road accidents and heading straight out there.
 
BouncyMelons said:
Personally I may not take the pics as someone got hurt and presumably badly BUT that's personal preference and nothing more.

You can't be forced to hand over a camera OR the pics without a court order so whoever was telling you they would take it off you was well and truly in the wrong. You are in a public place (I assume the street is a public place and not privately owned) so taking pics is perfectly legal.
Click to expand...

:plusone:
 
CT said:
This was common practice with many photographers certainly as late as the 60's and 70's-listening for serious road accidents and heading straight out there.
Click to expand...

I occasionally pop into another photography forum (:suspect:), its US based, but there are a few threads on which radio to buy to pick up to listen to police waves. I also just checked out a photojournalism book from the library and 4th page in they have a radio as a must for any press photographer!

Reminds me of when I read about a certain early 1900s photographer working for the NY Times who had a police radio in his car and would frequently get to crime scenes before they did to photograph the evidence!
Click to expand...

That'll be WeeGee then, quite a man of his time.
 
Many eons ago, when I had a "Pentax ME Super" I was on the way back to the office only to find the M2 bridge over the River Medway had just been sealed off. Looked out of the window to see a petrol tanker on it's side across all 3 lanes. I quickly run off a few shots before we were "evacuated" from the area.

My Mrs worked for a local paper at the time, so I popped in to see her and dropped the film in. It was on the front page of the local that evening - my one & only published shot....

Sometimes you're just in the right place at the right time. In those days the Police would ask you to move on nice and politely, and even let you run that last shot or two off. No fear of that today !!

Steve
 
i photographed a four vehicle smash (injured had gone to hospital before i got to the scene) and the police were fine they said it was ok just dont get the officers in the pic.

i dont have any qualms about doing this sort of thing my idea of hell is studio photography i like to be out and about.
 
If I am first to come across an accident, and I have been in the past, then the first thing I would do is call the emergency services and see if I can assist any casualties until the emergency services arrive, the last thing on my mind would be getting my camera out.

If I come across a major incident, and the emergency services are already present, then yes I will take pictures and try and sell them onto papers/TV to earn a few bob.

I dont go chasing as such, if I hear of a major incident near by then I will go and try a get some shots, hopefully before the rest of the gang arrive - I certainly dont go to every major incident I hear of miles away as I can pretty much guarantee that someone would have already been there, taken shots and have them winging there way to the papers/TV before I even get there

Just remember the news you watch, the papers you read, someone has to take the pictures.

I have never had the police tell me to stop taking pictures, yet, I have had one tell me to move back a bit when I was getting some shots of a petrol station fire once
 
Actually, that reminded me about something else . . . an occasion back in the early '90's, a time when I only owned a film camera but I didn't have any films on me at all.

It was one evening when I was sitting at home watching the telly when I heard and felt this loud rumble. I thought it was a tremor, so I stepped outside to see this huge lorry carrying massive rolls of steel wires completely lying on it's side down the bottom end of my street!
The lorry took this curved road at the bottom of a long straight steep section too sharply and the lot just rolled over. It was quite late in the evening and after seeing that there was no-one about and I could see the driver standing next to the lorry holding his head in despair, I found myself wishing I could take photos!
Ten minutes later the police turned up. It wasn't until the next day a huge crane was drafted in to upright the lorry.

Bear in mind it was at a time when Folkestone Harbour was still operating as a proper harbour so we used to have lots of freight lorries passing by. Not the case any more these days, so much quieter . . . apart from the boy racers.
 
dizz said:
when a police man told me if i took any pictures he would confiscate my camera
Click to expand...

I know this is picky but I do have a point if anyone else comes accross this.. given that we all love our cameras and they cost us a lot of money.... If push came to shove then its not the camera that would be evidence its the memory card.. i would hang on to my camera for dear life :)
 
No wonder people are sick of the Police.

In my opinion they like to threaten law abiding people.

Next time take the officers number and complain.
 
What cobblers!
This is exactly the sort of thing local papers would be interested in buying...
Tell the dozy Plod to read up on the Law...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top