Photograper arrested

  • Thread starter Thread starter Holden Caulfield
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
BouncyMelons said:
I've said it before and I'll say it again.

Just because a member of the public has a concern that does not mean that the Police can wade in and do as they please. They have to apply the law, as it is written, whether you, me or the Home Secretary likes it.

And the law says that photography in a public place is perfectly legal (for now) and that he should not have been stopped since he was doing nothing wrong in the first place.

That is what creates situations in the first place. The posession of a camera in a public is not a stoppable or arrestable offence and they had no right to stop him and were acting outwith their authority. When challenged they then change tack to try to find some piece of legislation they can use to keep him which again is wrong. So it's false arrest and false imprisonment according to the law.

And if he does file a complaint he will get a nice payout which we, the taxpayer will have to fund.

It's inadequate training on the part of the Police and trying to di it on the cheap with PCSO's who are not trained or have the authority to do the job properly in the first place.
Click to expand...

:clap:
 
Slightly off-subject.

Police using airport-style metal detectors in Piccadilly Gardens, Manchester, on Friday evening. 17:50.

They were checking people leaving their workplace, and people coming into town for the evening "for knives".

4370305357_77c38dc1f9.jpg
 
Some of the posts absolutely amaze me. We don't really know all the circumstances of how this tog and his mate came to the attention of the old bill. But we do know that one refused repeatedly to give his name and address. Whilst he believed he was technically correct to decline to give these details he certainly was not wise to refuse.
Police on the beat are, in general terms, trying to detect and prevent crime. As a consequence the 'unusual' sticks out and will often attract their more personal attention!. Two lads in hoodies, a black lad on a corner, someone running from a shop, people arguing loudly or...maybe a tog. I do have friends who are in the Police and whether you like it or not nothing but nothing p***es them off more than people not cooperating in the most simple and basic manner.
And its not about rights or the law its about getting on with other people,police, public and 'subjects' you are photographing, it beggars belief that this individual was so ignorant and stupid that he ended up in a cell for refusing to cooperate. How simple and easy would it have been to smile and say, 'morning officer just taking a few shots of whatever, hope I am not causing a problem!'
'Happy to show you what I have taken, do you want a photo for the other half?!
Details? 'No prob Officer, I am.......

Job done, there is no issue and no aggro and almost without exception there will be smiles all round. IF it goes pear shaped and you are asked to stop or you are unhappy make a note of the officers number and deal with it through the complaints procedure. Yes, there is one and yes officers do not enjoy having to account for their behaviour when they are in the wrong.
My final tip, already obvious to all but the really daft, is do not argue with police officer YOU WILL COME SECOND even if you think you are right.

:bonk:

Dunc
 
Duncan.F said:
And its not about rights or the law its about getting on with other people,police, public and 'subjects' you are photographing, it beggars belief that this individual was so ignorant and stupid that he ended up in a cell for refusing to cooperate. How simple and easy would it have been to smile and say, 'morning officer just taking a few shots of whatever, hope I am not causing a problem!'
'Happy to show you what I have taken, do you want a photo for the other half?!
Details? 'No prob Officer, I am.......
Click to expand...

Are terrorists always grumpy then?
 
GrittyShaker said:
Aren't they a suspected terrorist though? Surely that's more important than a couple of Glasgow drunks knocking seven shades out of each other? :D

I don't really understand what there is to gain from the police/PCSOs asking what a photographer is doing. Terrorist or not, the answer will be "taking photos of that [points finger]".
Click to expand...


The Police don't need to ask what he's photographing, just strike up a conversation. From that point an experience well trained officer should be able to assess if the person needs to be questioned further.


We still need to be shown that there is a connection between terrorism and photography. We don't see the police stopping everybody with a rucksack.
 
Duncan.F said:
do not argue with police officers YOU WILL COME SECOND even if you think you are right.
Click to expand...

Yup, and therein lies the problem...
 
Good post Duncan.

I'd also just make the point that yet again this involves PCSO's and an acting Sergeant. As I said earlier, 8 hours at the nick seems a long time to deal with this farcical incident, but if he was steadfastly refusing to give his details to the Custody Sergeant there was no way at all he was going to be released until that officer was satisfied with his identity.
 
foggy4ever said:
We still need to be shown that there is a connection between terrorism and photography. We don't see the police stopping everybody with a rucksack.
Click to expand...
The issue here though is a couple of people who thought theyd try it on imho using the terrorism issue as a way of been clever who then get upset when it all goes wrong.

Issues like police taking cameras off people and deleting images with no cause is not the same. In these cases the police did right as those been asked for their details did not co-operate from the off set.

Terran
 
ccsnet said:
The issue here though is a couple of people who thought theyd try it on imho using the terrorism issue as a way of been clever who then get upset when it all goes wrong.

Issues like police taking cameras off people and deleting images with no cause is not the same. In these cases the police did right as those been asked for their details did not co-operate from the off set.

Terran
Click to expand...

The issue is innocent people being stopped and questioned by inadequatly trained PCSO's and the miss use of anti terrorism laws.
 
ccsnet said:
The issue here though is a couple of people who thought theyd try it on imho using the terrorism issue as a way of been clever who then get upset when it all goes wrong.

Issues like police taking cameras off people and deleting images with no cause is not the same. In these cases the police did right as those been asked for their details did not co-operate from the off set.

Terran
Click to expand...

The Police cannot just take a camera and delete the images stored on it. They did not do right as you put it.
 
Police on the beat are, in general terms, trying to detect and prevent crime. As a consequence the 'unusual' sticks out and will often attract their more personal attention!. Two lads in hoodies, a black lad on a corner, someone running from a shop, people arguing loudly or...maybe a tog.
Click to expand...

Ah great so it's casual racism and police picking on people because of what they wear that you support, not just harassing innocent photographers. Marvellous.
 
This guy is a div, just creating trouble. He should get off his high horse and realise he is a nobody.

If he just did what he was asked to then there would be no problems. If he's not doing anything wrong there is no problem, but he's just being difficult for the sake of it.

Where's the smiley for shaking your head.
 
ccsnet said:
The issue here though is a couple of people who thought theyd try it on imho using the terrorism issue as a way of been clever who then get upset when it all goes wrong.
Issues like police taking cameras off people and deleting images with no cause is not the same. In these cases the police did right as those been asked for their details did not co-operate from the off set.

Terran
Click to expand...

ah , so the pcso/police werent trying to use the terrorism issue then ? and when they realised it wouldnt wash , they came up with this mythical member of the public who had complained ,,,yeah right
 
As said, there are two sides to a story, we seemed to have heard only one side. What were they photographing to alarm the police, we wern't there so we can only go upon that of what we have seen on the video recording.

I'am sure people would change there opinions if it was a case of a photographer photographing up some ladys skirt or such like. These two chaps were looking for a confrontation, equipted and ready..

They were arrested for breaking the law, simple...
 
Given that the chap was released without charge - obviously as had done nothing wrong - I wonder if police should be fined for wasting police time......?
 
hjwatso1 said:
This guy is a div, just creating trouble. He should get off his high horse and realise he is a nobody.

If he just did what he was asked to then there would be no problems. If he's not doing anything wrong there is no problem, but he's just being difficult for the sake of it.

Where's the smiley for shaking your head.
Click to expand...

So this is how we should respond to the police...
kermit-goatse-21442-1248344208-41.jpg
Click to expand...

Do as your told!
 
he was playing security guard bating, its fairly obvious from the article. The problem came in not being nice to the coppers telling them what you were doing and having a bit of a chuckle.

'most every situation can be diffused
 
Rocket said:
I'am sure people would change there opinions if it was a case of a photographer photographing up some ladys skirt or such like. These two chaps were looking for a confrontation, equipted and ready..

They were arrested for breaking the law, simple...
Click to expand...

you're right were that the case I'd change my mind, but he wasn't and there was never any suspcision that was what he was doing so don't really see your point?

What law was he breaking? is simple remember :shrug:

Hugh
 
david1701 said:
he was playing security guard bating, its fairly obvious from the article. The problem came in not being nice to the coppers telling them what you were doing and having a bit of a chuckle.

'most every situation can be diffused
Click to expand...
Don't you think the police should be defusing them?
 
inkiboo said:
The mythical "You have to anything a police officer tells you" law.

I do wonder about the intelligent of some people on this forum.
Click to expand...
I don't know that law - is it one that idiot coppers make up?
 
It's really depressing how the government has been successful in creating a climate of paranoia and suspicion in this country.

Funny how this kind of curtailing of liberty was never deemed necessary under the IRA terrorist threat, even by a supposedly much more right-wing government. :(
 
Voyager said:
Don't you think the police should be defusing them?
Click to expand...

that statement should have been qualified with 'unless one or more parties really wanna fight'

if the copper has had a bad day the tog is in trouble if he's being a pain in the arse

if the tog wants to make a show of it (the guy got a video camera out for chrissakes) then the nicest copper in the world will still get wound up and maybe nick him

coppers are people too, though I assume they don't break as many minor laws to get funky pictures :D
 
david1701 said:
that statement should have been qualified with 'unless one or more parties really wanna fight'

if the copper has had a bad day the tog is in trouble if he's being a pain in the arse

if the tog wants to make a show of it (the guy got a video camera out for chrissakes) then the nicest copper in the world will still get wound up and maybe nick him
Click to expand...
No, the lass asking for their names and addresses without any reason was the problem - the constables should have let it go at that.

But because the photographer knew his rights they thought they would make sure he know his place - no backing down or defusing anything - so, as I said on the first page, good on him and the Guardian in highlighting the particular stupidity of those day-glo uniform wearers.
david1701 said:
coppers are people too, though I assume they don't break as many minor laws to get funky pictures :D
Click to expand...
What laws were broken again?
 
From another forum I am on. Couldn't agree more with this:

"If a police officer asks you for details you are perfectly entitled to ask him to stop being so nosey.
How would you feel if I walked up to you and asked who you are, where you are going oh and where do you live?
BiB are members of the public who are paid to do full time the duties of any citzen.
If no crime has been comitted then they should have no power at all over other, equal to themselves, citizens."
 
Good grief...

Just to put an end to this (I hope)...

Those of you who want to give your details, please continue to do so.

Those who don't, please continue to do so.

Don't bitch about it on t'internet afterwards.

I know what I do when i'm stopped, but you don't see me on here afterwards.

Actually, as a straw poll...

How many of the people who have chipped in on this thread have been stopped?
 
Time and time again threads like this come along and in my opinion, the problems always stem from some stroppy photographer wanting to prove a point.

In this instance we only get to hear one side of the story as in many of this nature. In my view the copper was right to cuff this guy, I just wish they had charged him. If a copper stops me and asks for my name I will give it to him as I have absolutely nothing to hide. This them and us gets really boring.
 
Quaker said:
In my view the copper was right to cuff this guy, I just wish they had charged him.
Click to expand...

I do so like the way people make this sort of statement and are then unable to answer the simple question 'with what would they of charged him?'
 
boyfalldown said:
I do so like the way people make this sort of statement and are then unable to answer the simple question 'with what would they of charged him?'
Click to expand...

I'd like to know if these people have also been stopped by police while photographing?!
 
Cheers Grum you've just made my day before I go to work :D
 
jamesb84 said:
Good grief...

Just to put an end to this (I hope)...

Those of you who want to give your details, please continue to do so.

Those who don't, please continue to do so.

Don't bitch about it on t'internet afterwards.

I know what I do when i'm stopped, but you don't see me on here afterwards.

Actually, as a straw poll...

How many of the people who have chipped in on this thread have been stopped?
Click to expand...
Stopped and searched only once. Understandable though as was about to photograph Princess Anne.;)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top