Police Guidlines PDF

T

tiler65

Suspended / Banned
Messages
10,544
Name
Tom (I think)
Edit My Images
Yes
Have tried to search for this on here but could not find it so I thought I post a link.

Section 2.8 is the relevant section.

NeeNawNeeNaw

EG and friends are safe..............................
 
Excellent. Nice to print out, laminate and keep a copy in your bag just incase.

My first thoughts of the end of it "The person being searched should never be asked or allowed to turn the device
on or off because of the danger of evidence being lost or damaged."
made me worry a little, as if they started following this to the letter, then us offering to show an officer our photos to appease them wouldn't be allowed.

But then I thought well either they do the official stop and search without viewing the images, or they arrest and seize the camera and card....No middle ground, which I think is a good thing. Theyre not likely to arrest and seize are they?
 
Marcel said:
Excellent. Nice to print out, laminate and keep a copy in your bag just incase.
Click to expand...
Agreed, although I think there would be an art in presenting the officers in question with said laminated sheet and avoiding it looking like you are being a smug git! :D
 
I printed pages 19 (about Photography) and 17 too

17 covers the reasons that need to be considered for the search under the Terrorism Act 2000 (so you can challenge their reasoning if needed), but it also specifically states that these powers shouldn't be used as a 'public order tactic'

Cheers for the interesting link - those pages now added to camera bag!

DD
 
Here's a useful link too... http://www.ipcc.gov.uk/index/complaints.htm

There's even a nice 4 page form you can download, print & carry with you - perhaps the Officer(s) in question could lend you a pen to complete it ??? :D

You MUST get any name, rank & ID number to complain about - here's an excerpt from the link too... (below)

It would certainly make any 'uncertain' Officer think twice about pressing you to delete images or threaten arrest on spurious grounds

DD


What you should include in your complaint;

As well as your full contact details, please try to provide the following information;

WHO? Which police force is your complaint about?
WHERE? Where did the incident/s happen that led to your complaint?
WHEN? When did the incident/s happen that led to your complaint?
WHAT? Please describe the circumstances that have led to you feeling the police have treated you badly.

Please include details of:

* Who was involved
* What was said and done
* Any other people who witnessed the incident
* If there was any damage or injury
* Details of any witnesses
 
I've got an IPCC complaint form in my camera bag, and a chewed biro.

I know what you're thinking, punk. You're thinking, does that biro have any ink in it, or is it empty? Well to tell you the truth, I don't know myself in all this excitement. But being as this is an Argos pen, the most powerful small disposable biro in the world and will complete thousands of ring and reserve slips, you've got to ask yourself a question: do I feel lucky?

Well do ya, punk?
 
I think the first question anyone being stopped & searched under s.44 should ask is if authorisation has actually been given, who by and has the home secretary been informed?

I think a lot of stops under s.44 aren't proper for this very reason. p22 of the pdf covers it in detail.
 
Carrying around laminated copies of legislation is just asking for trouble. You're definitely up to no good if you are that prepared!
 
Gary Holliday said:
Carrying around laminated copies of legislation is just asking for trouble. You're definitely up to no good if you are that prepared!
Click to expand...

What rubbish! I am still waiting for the day I get challenged, and if I ever do, Ill be prepared. I dont want to be stopped from doing something I love :shrug:
 
Gary Holliday said:
Carrying around laminated copies of legislation is just asking for trouble. You're definitely up to no good if you are that prepared!
Click to expand...

Betty said:
What rubbish! I am still waiting for the day I get challenged, and if I ever do, Ill be prepared. I dont want to be stopped from doing something I love :shrug:
Click to expand...

I agree with Betty, why would anyone up to no good be prepared in this way? unless there's some sort of double bluff going on then the bad guys tend to be more inconspicuous..
 
Marcel said:
My first thoughts of the end of it "The person being searched should never be asked or allowed to turn the device
on or off because of the danger of evidence being lost or damaged."
made me worry a little, as if they started following this to the letter, then us offering to show an officer our photos to appease them wouldn't be allowed.
Click to expand...

The law may differ up here, or it might just have been down to the individual officers involved, but any time I have offered to show a policeman/woman the images on my camera they have refused and have blindly continued with their insistence that photography in public is illegal/requires a licence/is not allowed under the Data Protection Act (:shrug:)/is a breach of the peace.

Neither have they been even remotely interested in what it said in the Photographer's Rights pdf by that lecturer at Stirling Uni. I'm going to print some copies a copy (it's 64 pages) of this off anyway and carry them it with me - I wonder if it will make the slightest difference?
 
Flash In The Pan said:
The law may differ up here, or it might just have been down to the individual officers involved, but any time I have offered to show a policeman/woman the images on my camera they have refused and have blindly continued with their insistence that photography in public is illegal/requires a licence/is not allowed under the Data Protection Act (:shrug:)/is a breach of the peace.

Neither have they been even remotely interested in what it said in the Photographer's Rights pdf by that lecturer at Stirling Uni. I'm going to print some copies a copy (it's 64 pages) of this off anyway and carry them it with me - I wonder if it will make the slightest difference?
Click to expand...

If you are up in Scotland then god knows what the rules are up there. They follow some similar principles regarding public order legislation etc but have far more 'draconian' powers north of the border and PACE doesn't come into it!
 
hiddybiddy said:
If you are up in Scotland then god knows what the rules are up there. They follow some similar principles regarding public order legislation etc but have far more 'draconian' powers north of the border and PACE doesn't come into it!
Click to expand...


I don't even know if the Terrorism Act applies up here - maybe they decided after what happened to the would-be bombers at Glasgow Airport that we didn't need it :lol:
 
Flash In The Pan said:
I don't even know if the Terrorism Act applies up here - maybe they decided after what happened to the would-be bombers at Glasgow Airport that we didn't need it :lol:
Click to expand...


Here's a link to the Scottish Executive guidance to complaining about the police... Linky, and yes, the act applies equally in Scotland :)
 
I used to carry a little book of useful info when i used to go hill walking that contained bits of local info, timetables for trains, contact numbers etc

think i should do the same for my photo bag and although not carry a laminated copy a copy taped on the inside cover could help me out in the future.
 
An awful lot on how your meeting with the Police on the street will conclude is decided in the initial exchange of words.

I can tell you for sure that trying to be clever, producing laminated "rights cards" and questioning their authority will not produce an outcome that either side is happy with.

Some of you must imagine that our Police have never met any wise guys before and that you really have thought of something nobody else ever did....

I've said it before and I'll say it again, really, really, really go for the confrontation avoidance approach because anything else won't help you.

In fact, the confrontation avoidance approach will actually wrong foot them far more - because just about everyone else they have met all day will have tried the other crap...
 
:agree: but it's a pity that the default position of a copper seems to be that they're dealing with a smart mouth in the first place.
 
Or that photography is illegal, and that they have carte blanche powers to stop a photographer taking photos.

BTW I think Garry Holliday was being sarcastic ;)
 
I'd like to know how you would avoid a "confrontation" when the purveyors of the law (the Police) have a completely different belief to the average photographer.

Copper "Excuse me sir, what are you doing ?"

Tog "Erm, I'm taking photos of this building"

Copper "Why ?"

Tog "Because I think it makes a good subject, is there a problem ?"

Copper "Well actually sir, you are not allowed to do that".....

Now, ANY response you come back with other than siding with the copper is going to be confrontational. You and I both know he is in the wrong, but he is not going to back down once that threshold has been passed. You're in a situation that you are going to lose, and I would want to make sure that I told the copper what I believed to be correct, and that I would be prepared to discuss it with his superiors if necessary; if you don't, they'll continue to do it.

So, tell me what you would do given the above conversation....

Steve
 
Perhaps one tact would be to say "Oh, ok I'm very sorry. I wasn't aware it was illegal, could you provide me with details of the law I was breaking? I'd like to make sure I don't make the same mistake again" or similar, at least then you're putting the onus on them to quote the law at you rather than vice versa. Of course, chances are they can't so you could ask them to check for you ;)
 
I agree Steve, and when I've been in these situations (and its happened a few times), I am always polite, never arsey but also completely willing to assert my rights.

I will not be "moved on" like some cattle.
 
Marcel: Good point about switching the device on/off...
 
Christ some of you must be a real joy to meet in person.

I realise in every situation that subconciously we, as animals, perform subtle calculations to work out who is the top animal on the patch, but lets face it you might as well in these encounters make the assumption that right or wrong the Police man/woman is the "top dog".

Why? Because you aren't going to be able to escalate your way out of this argument. All that will happen is that it will keep going until you get locked into cuffs and slung in the back of a van.

I'd actually assert that some of the attitudes shown on this forum recently with regard to the authorities are actually what the hell is wrong with society in the first place.

Bloody hell, I'm starting to sound like the Daily Mail now...
 
desantnik said:
but lets face it you might as well in these encounters make the assumption that right or wrong the Police man/woman is the "top dog".
Click to expand...

Incredibly foolish statement - the Police are here to serve and protect. They are not "top dogs" and to put them into that position, even subconsiosly says an awful lot about you.

desantnik said:
All that will happen is that it will keep going until you get locked into cuffs and slung in the back of a van.
Click to expand...

Which is a wholly inappropritate response to a Photographer enjoying his hobby.
desantnik said:
regard to the authorities are actually what the hell is wrong with society in the first place.
Click to expand...

If you want to just bend over and take it, thats fine. Enjoy the soap on a rope.
 
And clearly "fight the power" is the way forward instead...

I find it more than a little amusing that it seems I'm the only one supporting polite normal society, which is funny because just about everyone else usually brands me the rebel.

I suppose I'm being revolutionary in the idea of actually behaving reasonably when nobody else is.
 
But the real problem IS with the Police. It is the absence of proper training or guidance on the subject of photography and photographers. I fully appreciate that they do have better things to do than swot up on every tiny aspect of modern life and the laws pertaining thereto but this void in their training tends to be replaced, in the mind of individual officers, by arrogant and misconceived assumptions. Assumptions that are just plain WRONG.
 
desantnik said:
I find it more than a little amusing that it seems I'm the only one supporting polite normal society, which is funny because just about everyone else usually brands me the rebel.

I suppose I'm being revolutionary in the idea of actually behaving reasonably when nobody else is.
Click to expand...

No you're not.... I'm always polite and courteous when dealing with authority of any kind. BUT, to let a Police officer have the "upper hand" when they are clearly in the wrong does nothing for society. In fact I would even go as far as saying that the attitude of many people in authority is partly to blame on for why our country is the way it is.

When was the last time you had a "discussion" with Police when you were in the right and they weren't, and been allowed to prove your point ? (except when they are on their own - I find that single traffic cops for instance are far easier to deal with than when they are "buddied up").

Steve
 
No doubt part of the training is that a copper should always look in control and appear to be a figure of authority. When faced with a situation where they don't know the specifics of the applicable laws then a certain amount of bluff is required. When faced with someone who then argues that bluff the copper doesn't have much choice, they can hardly admit they don't know what they're talking about and that they might have been wrong in the first place, so options become very limited. Giving them a way out can diffuse the situation and keep things calm, after all the point here is to continue your pursuit not make the copper look stupid. As I posted earlier, agree with them and ask for details of the law, then when they can't be specific see if they can get advice over the radio. Hopefully it will result in a little education and everyone will remain friendly. The key here though is to start from a position of complete co-operation rather than confrontation.
 
pxl8 said:
No doubt part of the training is that a copper should always look in control and appear to be a figure of authority. When faced with a situation where they don't know the specifics of the applicable laws then a certain amount of bluff is required. When faced with someone who then argues that bluff the copper doesn't have much choice, they can hardly admit they don't know what they're talking about and that they might have been wrong in the first place, so options become very limited. Giving them a way out can diffuse the situation and keep things calm, after all the point here is to continue your pursuit not make the copper look stupid. As I posted earlier, agree with them and ask for details of the law, then when they can't be specific see if they can get advice over the radio. Hopefully it will result in a little education and everyone will remain friendly. The key here though is to start from a position of complete co-operation rather than confrontation.
Click to expand...

Well put that man! :clap:
 
OK, I'm 47, don't have a police record and other than a few speeding fines have never been in trouble with the law. So why is it that some police officers take a very aggressive approach to a situation when it can quite easily be sorted by a few casual questions ?

I don't expect them to know every point of law, that would be impossible, but what I would expect from them is courtesy and an "open mind". They have a hell of a job to do and I for I would support them all the way if they were civil.

I don't mind them asking questions, stopping my car etc, but just be civil about it, and when the copper realises that the guy he's questioning may be in the right, there's no need for them to "make you move on" just because they can - it's wrong, and one bad copper causes grief to 50 others.

And yes, I have experienced this on a number of occasions. However, I have also had the fortune to meet some really nice polite and even comical coppers while out on my bike and while at car meets. It's not difficult, just treat people how you would like to be treated and everybody should be happy.....

I'll leave it at that as this thread is deviating from what the OP intended.....

Steve
 
Jelster said:
OK, I'm 47, don't have a police record and other than a few speeding fines have never been in trouble with the law. So why is it that some police officers take a very aggressive approach to a situation when it can quite easily be sorted by a few casual questions ?

I don't expect them to know every point of law, that would be impossible, but what I would expect from them is courtesy and an "open mind". They have a hell of a job to do and I for I would support them all the way if they were civil.

I don't mind them asking questions, stopping my car etc, but just be civil about it, and when the copper realises that the guy he's questioning may be in the right, there's no need for them to "make you move on" just because they can - it's wrong, and one bad copper causes grief to 50 others.

And yes, I have experienced this on a number of occasions. However, I have also had the fortune to meet some really nice polite and even comical coppers while out on my bike and while at car meets. It's not difficult, just treat people how you would like to be treated and everybody should be happy.....

I'll leave it at that as this thread is deviating from what the OP intended.....

Steve
Click to expand...

Because like everyone else, coppers have personalities and, like other people, some of them have personality issues.
 
Jus copied a small part of the PDF section 2.8 below:
"Cameras and other devices should be left in the state they were found and forwarded to appropriately trained staff for forensic examination. The person being searched should never be asked or allowed to turn the device on or off because of the danger of evidence being lost or damaged."

Now I assume that most of us have our cameras set to auto switch off after so many minutes. Oops!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top