DeathAxe Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Seems like alot of UK police don't even have to go through exams any more. Most of them do not know what the law even is. How are we going to feel safe with baboons in uniforms that do not do as paid? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
upinwath Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 Thought I'd better back up what I said about arrests. http://jonathanturley.org/2010/01/28/dork-hunters-english-police-use-anti-terror-laws-to-detain-film-crew-of-childrens-program/ http://jonathanturley.org/2009/12/16/the-accidental-tourist-art-student-arrested-in-london-for-photographing-ironic-sites-as-terrorist-threat/ http://jonathanturley.org/2009/12/16/the-accidental-tourist-art-student-arrested-in-london-for-photographing-ironic-sites-as-terrorist-threat/ http://boingboing.net/2009/01/11/another-london-photo.html http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/amateur_photographer_arrested_for_police_officer_pic_news_285995.html There are loads more if you search. I suspect the guy in the OP was out to make a point. A dick he may be, but he's still right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pcspb1 Posted January 8, 2011 Share Posted January 8, 2011 PCspb1,Thank you for your clarification and advice post No8 . Are you able to define what reasonable grounds are? The police in this footage would claim that their grounds for name/address details were reasonable. The photographers would claim the grounds were unreasonable. I can't define 'reasonable grounds' for you any better than you could do yourself. In the eyes of the law, well, the eyes of the police really, reasonable grounds, or reasonable cause, has to be that degree of suspicion held by an officer, that a crime has been, or is about to be committed, and by his/her actions can 'justify' that or those actions to a judge or magistrate, should the matter be preferred to prosecution. ie: "Having had reasonable grounds for arrest, I detained the (person) in accordance with S5 of the public order act, because (that person) had been using behaviour likely to cause harassment, alarm, or distress in a public place." The Police in the footage, did not, or were not sure, that they had reasonable grounds - and I would say, as most would IMO - that they had no grounds for the imminent arrest, and they were just ever so slightly peeved and put off balance by a man who knew his rights regarding identification. His later release, some 8 hours after the arrest - release with no charge to answer, shows that the Police could not justify the detention further, and I would summise only did so to ascertain the mans identity, because he didn't toe their line. Also, thank you for Bolding my username, I assume, as others have in the past, thought I have something to do with the Police on a professional footing, however, I have not, nor have I ever. I just take a great deal of interest in the law, and of those who are there to both uphold it, and serve it. pcspb are my actual initials, and 1 refers to the user account here on SF! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Longcol Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 It takes time to filter down though but you should see less incidents like this. Carrier pigeon hasn't reached Accrington yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hadron Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 The public can inform any photographer that they do not want to be photographed. Being in a public space though means that they can be photgraphed like on Google street maps. If the premises, like Meadowhall, is private then they must ask permission and also put up signs to say that photography is taking place with contact details. It would be wise to wear some form of high visibilty clothing with printed information of his hobby or business. Although this photgrapher has done nothing wrong he has acted in a way that catches people by suprise which is unwanted by anyone but I fail to see it as anti-social. Both the photographer and police have highlighted their ignorance and I hope lessons have been learned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Janus Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 ;Also, thank you for Bolding my username, I assume, as others have in the past, thought I have something to do with the Police on a professional footing, however, I have not, nor have I ever. I just take a great deal of interest in the law, and of those who are there to both uphold it, and serve it. pcspb are my actual initials, and 1 refers to the user account here on SF! You are indeed correct sir with your assumptions in respect of my erroneous way of thinking on this occasion. I thank you for your unbiased opinions over this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Digsy Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VfQrDK9YHas Police tried to nick this bloke for recording in his own garden. Darren Pollard started a small but loud movement in Birmingham called the Love Police. He also Joined this forum once to discuss the freeman movement I believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
freezer Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 He seems to know his rights very well for a man having a "bit of fun". Very odd. Not odd at all - this issue has received lots of coverage in photography magazines and websites, and anyone who regularly takes photos in public would be aware of other cases where the police have tried to abuse their power in this way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 I think we discussed this issue several times in the past when these arrests were actually happening. It's stopped happening since the chief constables got a kicking from the home office, particularly the met which was the worst offender. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cressida Posted January 9, 2011 Share Posted January 9, 2011 Tourists take photos all the time and cannot help but include members of the public when they do Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.