Police order photographer to delete pictures

buford_t_justice.jpg


"What we're dealing with here is a complete lack of respect for the law."

"And don't go home, and don't go to eat, and don't play with yourself. and don't use an mp3 player or a camera It wouldn't look nice on my highway.
Now, you can THINK about it... but don't do it!"
 
Moadib said:
Ridiculous laws giving police such powers (or confidence in the erroneous belief they have even more powers than they have), as well as no recourse in the case powers are overstepped. Ridiculous laws that DNA evidence is gathered, and will not be deleted even if the person was innocent, and/or the arrest was wrongful.

Those were the ones I was referring to - sorry if it wasn't clear, I didn't mean to imply any photography laws were involved. I do think rights need to be stood up for, but it's potentially at a significant cost to the individual, since so many rights and so much freedom has already been conceded. Given that, exactly how to go about standing up for your rights becomes potentially critical.
Click to expand...

Ah fair enough. Is there actually a law permitting police to keep DNA "evidence" now, or is it simply the case that there is no law forcing them to destroy it?
 
bod said:
Ah fair enough. Is there actually a law permitting police to keep DNA "evidence" now, or is it simply the case that there is no law forcing them to destroy it?
Click to expand...

It's part of existing law that they can be retained (in England), and these powers are extended in the Counter Terrorism Bill 2008 which is being waived blindly straight into law, er, I mean being rigorously debated at the moment by our ever vigilant MPs.
 
so they know it was one of three officers .why dont they just ask them all and see who owns up to being the one ? or is he a lying [PLEASE DON'T TRY TO BYPASS THE SWEAR FILTER]
 
I think this photo deleting thing is a joke. It happened to me once so all I did was delete the test shots. Then afterwards I looked to see if there was any Photographer Rights about this thing. Found there was and now that bit of paper is in my bag. At least I know my rights now thou!!!
 
I have to say to the guy in the photo...Haha..OWNED!
 
Well, that's a really good reason for NOT deleting..... we got you!

It's gone a bit kerazy...!
 
I can't help but feel that the photographer contributed to his own downfall there. I wonder if he'd have refused to delete it had it been a digital camera? I can understand why perfect strangers get upset at candid and street photography.
 
tigerimages said:
I can't help but feel that the photographer contributed to his own downfall there. I wonder if he'd have refused to delete it had it been a digital camera? I can understand why perfect strangers get upset at candid and street photography.
Click to expand...

but he explained that he was unable to delete because it wasn't digital? how does that aggrevate the situation? :shrug:
 
wilmorh said:
but he explained that he was unable to delete because it wasn't digital? how does that aggrevate the situation? :shrug:
Click to expand...
As it wasn't digital he couldn't delete it, would he have deleted if it was digital?
 
tigerimages said:
I can't help but feel that the photographer contributed to his own downfall there. I wonder if he'd have refused to delete it had it been a digital camera? I can understand why perfect strangers get upset at candid and street photography.
Click to expand...

I assume that these people that get annoyed about street photography also get really angry about the dozens of CCTV cameras everywhere as well? :shrug:
 
namllihs said:
As it wasn't digital he couldn't delete it, would he have deleted if it was digital?
Click to expand...

fair point, i was just wondering about the 'contributing to his own downfall'. Wasn't picking fault, just wasn't understanding? :)
 
Things are becoming more stupid in this country, I know friends who have tried to take images in London, say at the London Eye, or other places of interest and have been asked to move on, although their are quite a few areas of London which are classed a private land, even though there's nothing to tell you so and if you happen to have a tripod with you say for some night scenes, be quick.....

I know definitely you’re not allowed to take photographs on the underground....well not without a permit.....

It seems more and more of our freedom is being scrutinized.

Although we are not as bad in the States. Lady in her 60's described on another forum of her experince while waiting in a car park for a friend, she's a keen photographer, so decided while she was waiting to take some photo's, next minute, surrounded by 6 cops, pointing guns ordering her to drop the camera and get face down. Surprised she didn't keel over there and then.

Peter
 
mattyh said:
I assume that these people that get annoyed about street photography also get really angry about the dozens of CCTV cameras everywhere as well? :shrug:
Click to expand...

Oh come on, theres a world of difference between an official, permanent CCTV camera and any Tom, **** or Harry taking random photos of people in their faces.
 
tigerimages said:
Oh come on, theres a world of difference between an official, permanent CCTV camera and any Tom, **** or Harry taking random photos of people in their faces.
Click to expand...

I think you may have hit the nail on the head there. There is also a world of difference between taking discreet street photos and blatantly pointing a camera in somebody's face, although beating the living sh*t out of someone for doing it is going a bit overboard.
 
Blackpool police today announced a crack new team to deal with the growing threat of photographers on the streets:

buford2.jpg


Simpsons%20Cop.JPG


250px-Boss_Hogg.jpg


funny-police.jpg


380129-main.jpg
 
surely it comes down to someone ordering you to delete your photos which technically they can't, seeing as even police can't without arresting you and a court order etc, would end up as a form of assault? the fact the guy lamped the photographer anyway sort of seals the deal.
 
fabs said:
I think you may have hit the nail on the head there. There is also a world of difference between taking discreet street photos and blatantly pointing a camera in somebody's face, although beating the living sh*t out of someone for doing it is going a bit overboard.
Click to expand...
I agree with that. I guess he just picked on the wrong person!
 
Speaking of DNA, I was reading a book (fiction) but it noted that Government Bodies, presumably the dark ones, secretly acquire DNA on the population not only through direct routes such as being arrested but also when you go to hospital or give blood etc.

Apparently about 80% of the UK population is already on a database and eventually the who population will as DNA will be taken at childbirth (and those who haven't been put on will eventually die!).

Scary if it's true...I mean these ideas have to come from somewhere!
 
Sounds like rubbish to me. Like all that dross about aeroplane vapour trails being Government drugs to make us all submissive, like UFO crap and Michael Moore's tat. You can believe anything if you want to. And that's not an attack on you gman, I'm just saying.
 
namllihs said:
you can always delete them, then use zero assumption to get them back:lol:
Click to expand...

How do you do this? would be usefull to know for other reasons! I accidently deleted some from memory card other day that i thought i'd put on my laptop, was so gutted!
 
tigerimages said:
Oh come on, theres a world of difference between an official, permanent CCTV camera and any Tom, **** or Harry taking random photos of people in their faces.
Click to expand...

Yeah, don't mind Tom, **** or Harry having a go in the street, long as I can point a camera back.
 
How can you ask people permission. It's not like they are going to pose for your picture.
They just want to get on.. they don't care.
 
gman said:
Speaking of DNA, I was reading a book (fiction) but it noted that Government Bodies, presumably the dark ones, secretly acquire DNA on the population not only through direct routes such as being arrested but also when you go to hospital or give blood etc.
Click to expand...
Whatever the methods, DNA on file from a previous arrest helped lead to this conviction. It's a tricky one though. One way of looking at it is to say that if you're not a criminal, you shouldn't have anything to hide. But at the same time perhaps it really is just one more step towards a regime where every single thing we do is monitored.
 
Ian T said:
Sounds like rubbish to me. Like all that dross about aeroplane vapour trails being Government drugs to make us all submissive, like UFO crap and Michael Moore's tat. You can believe anything if you want to. And that's not an attack on you gman, I'm just saying.
Click to expand...

Nah, not saying I believe it but more a case of it could rationally be true in theory.

I mean take George Orwell's 1984, it was fiction but look how that has panned out! Michael Crichton's book "Timeline" which is based around time travel goes into quite some depth about Quantum Physics and processor to explain how theoritically it could be possible and now such technology is in development to make teleportation possible - which technically it is! Granted we have only been able to do it at an atomic level but it's a start like most other technologies and will probably only become more and more real!

The first digital camera was created in the 70's apparently but I bet the public didn't believe such a thing could be possible in the 60's!

I suppose what I'm ultimately trying to say is that I don't like to write off any idea just because it seems unrealistic and there's no harm keeping that possibliy tucked away in a small corner of my mind, but I'm not going to get paranoid about it or anything.
 
squidgeyem said:
How do you do this? would be usefull to know for other reasons! I accidently deleted some from memory card other day that i thought i'd put on my laptop, was so gutted!
Click to expand...

I've never had use it myself but by the looks of it all you need to do is download the relevant software (some seem to be freeware) and you're good to go. Run it through a search engine and you'll get a few different ones.
 
gman said:
Speaking of DNA, I was reading a book (fiction) but it noted that Government Bodies, presumably the dark ones, secretly acquire DNA on the population not only through direct routes such as being arrested but also when you go to hospital or give blood etc.

Apparently about 80% of the UK population is already on a database and eventually the who population will as DNA will be taken at childbirth (and those who haven't been put on will eventually die!).

Scary if it's true...I mean these ideas have to come from somewhere!
Click to expand...

All newborn babies have a blood test, which is used to screen for life threating conditions, but it would be easy to keep some for a DNA profile. Also i have always wondered what hospitals do with all the extra blood that is taken from patients during boold tests.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top