Taking photographs and policing etc ...

Status
Not open for further replies.
PickleB

PickleB

Messages
587
Name
Bob
Edit My Images
Yes
I think it would be a good idea to have a thread to gather together useful lnks to official documents and advice to photographers about Stop and Search, Stop and Account, S43, S44 etc etc.

So please don't post links to news article recounting further photographer meets Police incidents here ... there are several other threads that are more suitable.

Your starters for 10 are ...
2006/2007 ACPO Police/Media guidelines
2008 ACPO NPIA Practice Advice on stop and search in relation to terrorism
2009 August Home Office Circular 012/2009
2009 August Met Police Photography Advice
2009 December ACPO circular letter on S44 and photography ... if anyone finds a better source, please post a link

2009 May UK Photographers Rights Guide v2
2009 December The Independent - Stop & search & photos: Know your rights this has the advantage of being short, but it misses out on the different policing powers given under Sections 43 and 44 of the Terrorism Act and where they can be applied

Please only use this thread to post further links (and not general comments) that are in this vein (official documents and advice - from any source - to photographers).

Thanks

BobG

PS How long will it take to get the message through? The bosses - ACPO - are trying, but ...

PPS I'm sure the moderators will edit/remove this post if appropriate
 
Last edited:
Having a companies logo in your image isn't infringement of copyright - logos are everywhere from shop signs to carrier bags to wrappers and more. It's what you do with the image that could make it infringement of copyright. If you're in a public place, you can take a photo, however shopping centres aren't public places, they're open to the public, but they're private establishments.
 
different pieces of land are owned by different people which makes them not public.
though public areas, roads, pavements, parks etc are public places.
 
Might be worth noting that Law in Action on Radio 4 later this afternoon questions whether the police's use of cameras endangers civil liberties.
 
Also be worth reading up on the privacy laws, regarding photography
 
There are very few places where it is actually an offence to take photos: train stations !; nuclear power stations; military bases etc
 
cowasaki said:
There are very few places where it is actually an offence to take photos: train stations !; nuclear power stations; military bases etc
Click to expand...

Care to mention which law?

The others would be covered as 'Prohibited Places' under the Official Secrets Act, where they have been designated as such by the Secretary of State, but railway stations?

AFAIK, no railway stations currently have been designated as Prohibited Places.

http://p10.hostingprod.com/@spyblog...j-prohibited-place-official-secrets-act-1911/


Railway companies have some additional powers over trespassers under the various Railways Acts that are not enjoyed by other organisations, which may make trespass a criminal, rather than civil offence. However, this is not specifically related to photography, but more for safety (trespass on the line) and revenue protection (being present on railway property without a valid ticket).
 
Musicman said:
Care to mention which law?

The others would be covered as 'Prohibited Places' under the Official Secrets Act, where they have been designated as such by the Secretary of State, but railway stations?

AFAIK, no railway stations currently have been designated as Prohibited Places.

http://p10.hostingprod.com/@spyblog...j-prohibited-place-official-secrets-act-1911/


Railway companies have some additional powers over trespassers under the various Railways Acts that are not enjoyed by other organisations, which may make trespass a criminal, rather than civil offence. However, this is not specifically related to photography, but more for safety (trespass on the line) and revenue protection (being present on railway property without a valid ticket).
Click to expand...

Sorry the reason that "train station" had an exclamation mark after it was because I was going to make a comment afterwards but got side tracked! I was going to put another line at the bottom saying (*train stations - according to the 65000 people that have been stopped under the prevention of terrorism act). It got missed though DOH :bang:

Yes there are VERY few places that it is actually illegal to take photographs - the rest of my list :)
 
I dont know if anyone got the free gift that was given away with one of the well know photography mags earlier this year but it was actually something useful for two reasons.

1. It was a free lens cloth
2. it had a letter printed on it that they recommended you show if you are stopped by our fine law enforcers.

" Dear Police officer / PCSO
These guidelines have been issued to all police staff by the head of specalist operations for the metropolitan police service, to assist them in dealing with professional and amateur photographers taking pictures in public places:

Whilst we must remain vigilant at all times in dealing with suspicious behaviour staff also must be clear that:


  • There is no restriction on people taking photographs in public spaces or of any building other than in very exceptional circumstances.
  • There is no prohibition on photographing frontline uniform staff
  • The act of taking a photograph in itself is not usually sufficient to carry out a stop
  • Unless there is a very good reason, people taking photographs should not be stopped
  • Officers do not have the power to delete digital images,distroy film or to prevent photography in a public place under either power (sections 43 and 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000)
"

It might be work keeping a copy of this in our camera bags just in case.
 
lensworx said:
I dont know if anyone got the free gift that was given away with one of the well know photography mags earlier this year but it was actually something useful for two reasons.

1. It was a free lens cloth
2. it had a letter printed on it that they recommended you show if you are stopped by our fine law enforcers.

" Dear Police officer / PCSO
These guidelines have been issued to all police staff by the head of specalist operations for the metropolitan police service, to assist them in dealing with professional and amateur photographers taking pictures in public places:

Whilst we must remain vigilant at all times in dealing with suspicious behaviour staff also must be clear that:


  • There is no restriction on people taking photographs in public spaces or of any building other than in very exceptional circumstances.
  • There is no prohibition on photographing frontline uniform staff
  • The act of taking a photograph in itself is not usually sufficient to carry out a stop
  • Unless there is a very good reason, people taking photographs should not be stopped
  • Officers do not have the power to delete digital images,distroy film or to prevent photography in a public place under either power (sections 43 and 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000)
"

It might be work keeping a copy of this in our camera bags just in case.
Click to expand...

This is a little out of date as s44 has been deemed illegal anyway but it is irrelevant unless you are in london as the met has no jurisdiction outside their own area in relation to what officers from other forces do or don't do.
 
No trouble today from this police officer he just across at me turned and walked away.
 
hi folks i am a serving police officer in a police force outside of the Metpol, and i can confirm that the above post from the met is standard accross every police force, i am also a amature photographer !
so yes we (The Police) do not have the power to delete photos or seize equipment etc.. unless obviously "a criminal act has been committed".
generally it is absolutely fine to photograph in a public place but milatary and sensitive areas are a different matter and you need to get permission if you are unsure just ask ! as to the taking of photos of officers ( it doesnt bother me ! we are there to serve the public so why shouild it bother us !)

hope this helps you guys in your queries !!

Regards Perran
 
perrano said:
hi folks i am a serving police officer in a police force outside of the Metpol, and i can confirm that the above post from the met is standard accross every police force, i am also a amature photographer !
so yes we (The Police) do not have the power to delete photos or seize equipment etc.. unless obviously "a criminal act has been committed".
generally it is absolutely fine to photograph in a public place but milatary and sensitive areas are a different matter and you need to get permission if you are unsure just ask ! as to the taking of photos of officers ( it doesnt bother me ! we are there to serve the public so why shouild it bother us !)

hope this helps you guys in your queries !!

Regards Perran
Click to expand...

Actually Perran I didn't even see him before I took the pic, I am in the process of taking pics of all the pubs in my area for a calendar.
 
perrano said:
hi folks i am a serving police officer in a police force outside of the Metpol, and i can confirm that the above post from the met is standard accross every police force, i am also a amature photographer !
so yes we (The Police) do not have the power to delete photos or seize equipment etc.. unless obviously "a criminal act has been committed".
generally it is absolutely fine to photograph in a public place but milatary and sensitive areas are a different matter and you need to get permission if you are unsure just ask ! as to the taking of photos of officers ( it doesnt bother me ! we are there to serve the public so why shouild it bother us !)

hope this helps you guys in your queries !!

Regards Perran
Click to expand...


Quite often people in power for get that Policeman and Polictician come from the latin meaning man of the people.
 
perrano said:
hi folks i am a serving police officer in a police force outside of the Metpol, and i can confirm that the above post from the met is standard accross every police force, i am also a amature photographer !
so yes we (The Police) do not have the power to delete photos or seize equipment etc.. unless obviously "a criminal act has been committed".
generally it is absolutely fine to photograph in a public place but milatary and sensitive areas are a different matter and you need to get permission if you are unsure just ask ! as to the taking of photos of officers ( it doesnt bother me ! we are there to serve the public so why shouild it bother us !)

hope this helps you guys in your queries !!

Regards Perran
Click to expand...

haha i work in the westminster borough and have my picture taken nearly everyshift by tourists!
 
savannahphilo said:
I saw a documentary which included the police taking photographs of peacfull demonstarters at protests. Also see in this story that they are planning on taking photgraphs of citizens and not just the criminals.
Click to expand...

If people can take pictures of the police it is only fair if they can take them back!

Lots of people who later cause trouble started as peaceful! Getting their picture earlier means they have it later.
 
Even if you know your legal "rights" it's very difficult to exercise them if two sixteen stone coppers have you in arm locks ;),
 
Last edited:
cowasaki said:
If people can take pictures of the police it is only fair if they can take them back!

Lots of people who later cause trouble started as peaceful! Getting their picture earlier means they have it later.
Click to expand...

Getting their picture means they can prove they were there, which means they can arrest them at a later date when they want people who might 'cause a disturbance' by exercising their right to protest, like what happened with the royal wedding. What an embarrassment that was...

Oh, and isn't it only the Met that have that clause? Apparently it's down to the individual forces, but i can't find any others who've defined it. I'd say it's a given that you can photograph them, but still, would be nice to have a source to back it up.
 
Superewza said:
Getting their picture means they can prove they were there, which means they can arrest them at a later date when they want people who might 'cause a disturbance' by exercising their right to protest, like what happened with the royal wedding. What an embarrassment that was...

Oh, and isn't it only the Met that have that clause? Apparently it's down to the individual forces, but i can't find any others who've defined it. I'd say it's a given that you can photograph them, but still, would be nice to have a source to back it up.
Click to expand...

There is no law or regulation that is specific to only one police force. Policies differ, but laws do not.
 
I think a lot depends on where you live. I live in a quiet rural council estate. During this incident the police only asked me to refrain from taking photographs when they brought the suspect out.

police02.jpg


police01.jpg
 
This is not a new thing.

I am 53, my first camera was my lovely Praktica Super TL with an f2.8 Tessar, I have always loved and still do, taking photographs.

When I was fifteen I would walk round Frimley and Camberley rolling off all the black and white I could afford, and home process as it was all I could afford.

Taking photographs in Camberley one day I was stopped by a self opinionated PC, about 20, he asked why I am taking photographs, I asked why and he said because burglars do that so they know where to break into, like jewellers.

I was fifteen he could see that, this was 1972.

If I had know now what I knew then I would have told him where to go.
 
Last edited:
JSER said:
This is not a new thing.

I am 53, my first camera was my lovely Praktica Super TL with an f2.8 Tessar, I have always loved and still do, taking photographs.

When I was fifteen I would walk round Frimley and Camberley rolling off all the black and white I could afford, and home process as it was all I could afford.

Taking photographs in Camberley one day I was stopped by a self opinionated PC, about 20, he asked why I am taking photographs, I asked why and he said because burglars do that so they know where to break into, like jewellers.

I was fifteen he could see that, this was 1972.

If I had know now what I knew then I would have told him where to go.
Click to expand...

In 1972 it wouldn't have done you any good. That was a few years before PACE came in and the rules were rather different then.
 
Not the point.

There have always been those who "know their rights" and those like me who "sit quietly and take it".

Today I would say "go on then arrest me", regardless of rules, and the law, had I said that back then he may have done and looked a fool.

Why are these morons worried about photographers like me/us, with SLRs and large lenses, idiots like "you can't photograph your Paul in the Christmas play, it worries other parents".

I have been "into" IT for many a year now, and carry key ring cameras, pen cameras, MP3 cameras!, all available and "unseen" in use, from Ebay, anyone can use a phone, and yet the jobsworths stick their noses into an "openly seen photographers" business.

These days "I IGNORE THEM, and dare them to call the Police".
 
Has anyone got the definitive answer to public photography and videography, I came across this you tube video, where it appears that local event stewards were telling someone that they could not film here without the consent of the parents, whose children were in the event, I take pictures of everything and was alarmed when I came across this video, (A.) because I was looking for part of Sky Atlantics series called fish town & (B.) because I didn't know and still don't know what the law is, even though I have ploughed through this thread and links attached.
 
Common sense.

I will take what I want where I want "within reason", and using standard common sense, if I am told not to take it I will expect a good reason or arrest me.

In AP this week a chap was told not to take photos at an event by the sea, on public land, or they would call the police, he stopped, it is people like him that allow mr/mrs jobsworth to get away with thinking they are in the right, I would have carried on and said "call the Police", "go on".
 
Stop and Account is no longer valid, just Stop and Search. Obviously this does not stop an officer for asking what you are doing in an area but they no longer have to complete a form to show this, unless they search you.
 
oblivion said:
Stop and Account is no longer valid, just Stop and Search. Obviously this does not stop an officer for asking what you are doing in an area but they no longer have to complete a form to show this, unless they search you.
Click to expand...

Yep, they must have a valid reason of suspicion to search you and if in public they cannot go beyond outermost layer, gloves + shoes. Anything else contravenes your human rights.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top