video:Stopped yesterday for photographing in a public place!

Anyway, I was really pleased that Supt. Winter said that while the police have no right to delete a picture, the Nottinghamshire Police can ask to have pictures deleted if they think it appropriate to do so.
Click to expand...
It is incorrect for him to say that. Pictures can only be deleted after obtaining a Court Order - it is not down to the decision of the Police as to whether they will be deleted.
 
Again another case of the police getting it wrong,and again another case of the police not backing down when they get things wrong.

As of yet we do not live a police state,and yes they are accountable for their actions.

:(
 
BlueBall said:
It is incorrect for him to say that. Pictures can only be deleted after obtaining a Court Order - it is not down to the decision of the Police as to whether they will be deleted.
Click to expand...

No it's not incorrect, he said the police can ASK you to delete an image, anyone can do that. It's then a judgement call by you as to how important the image is to you versus how much do you respect the persons wishes.
 
irelanst said:
No it's not incorrect, he said the police can ASK you to delete an image, anyone can do that. It's then a judgement call by you as to how important the image is to you versus how much do you respect the persons wishes.
Click to expand...
Fair point, I didn't read it the right way I guess. Cheers.
 
BlueBall said:
It is incorrect for him to say that. Pictures can only be deleted after obtaining a Court Order - it is not down to the decision of the Police as to whether they will be deleted.
Click to expand...
Because he's bumbling a lot and emphasis some phrases in an odd way, it's very easy to take what he says out of context.

He says (minus all the "erm" noises):
"Well, we have no right to actually delete that picture. We obviously have the right if we feel it's appropriate to ask somebody to delete a picture, but we can't force them to do it, unless we thought there was some evidence of a criminal offence, but in which case we could ask them to hand over the picture to us, and the only way that we would then actually then take, you know, get in possession of that picture was if we thought it would be either destroyed or damaged or lost, etc.."

Now read it again, but stop when you get to the italics.
 
Last edited:
If there is evidence of criminal offence then they MUST NOT delete the picture because it is now evidence!
 
Wow... Was gonna take my new camera to Kingston town and take some pics. Now I know how I stand a bit more.
 
gramps said:
I too disagree, there are times to stand your ground but there are also times to exercise common sense - rights also incur responsibilities. Creating an issue can work against not only you but also the wider photographic society.
Sure there will always be testosterone-filled photographers who are anxiopus to create confrontation but it does not necessarily work for the general advantage.
Click to expand...

Yes I agree with what you are saying but the OP both stood his ground AND excercised common sense so I don't get the point you're trying to make :shrug:
 
BlueBall said:
It is incorrect for him to say that. Pictures can only be deleted after obtaining a Court Order - it is not down to the decision of the Police as to whether they will be deleted.
Click to expand...

It's not incorrect for him to say they have the right to ASK for them to be deleted. I mean they have the right to ask me to jump on one leg, but they don't have a LEGAL right. (y)
 
irelanst said:
No it's not incorrect, he said the police can ASK you to delete an image, anyone can do that. It's then a judgement call by you as to how important the image is to you versus how much do you respect the persons wishes.
Click to expand...

I think it's a bit more than that. If a random stranger on the street asked you to delete some pictures, then you'd take a judgement call. However a police officer APPEARS to have more authority (to the average member of the public) and a request from a police officer would be taken more as an instruction to most people.

I appreciate that their request has no more authority in law, but perception is everything, add in a little menace and veiled threats of arrest and lots of people would just follow what they'd perceive as an order from a law enforcement officer.:cautious:
 
Previous conversation on the matter, showing how those in authority are unaware of what they can and can't do.

Him: We are certainly permitted to ask said punter to delete or remove any images and to ask them to show that they have been deleted.

Me: You certainly are permitted to ask. Just as I'm certainly permitted to refuse. After that, you're only really permitted to sulk about it.
 
Phil V said:
I think it's a bit more than that. If a random stranger on the street asked you to delete some pictures, then you'd take a judgement call. However a police officer APPEARS to have more authority (to the average member of the public) and a request from a police officer would be taken more as an instruction to most people.

I appreciate that their request has no more authority in law, but perception is everything, add in a little menace and veiled threats of arrest and lots of people would just follow what they'd perceive as an order from a law enforcement officer.:cautious:
Click to expand...

It's is called abuse of power :)
 
Have none of these people once stopped to consider the wonders of file recovery software.

A standing in the street image delete in the camera is like screwing up a written message so no one can read it. Unfold the paper and there it is :D

I hope there are some serious repercussions from this, seems some forces have still not managed to drill down to their beat officers what is and is not permitted.

David
 
HMansfield said:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/p00m2hfq/Andy_Whittaker_14_12_2011/

.
However, she definately has checkerboard banding on her hat. Intriguing.....
Click to expand...

Battenburg on the hat is not a definitive way to tell PC from PCSO, I know of a number of forces that use it on PCSO uniforms.

For example
http://www.sussex.police.uk/your-neighbourhood/your-district/gatwick/local-team/GA1NH1
http://neighbourhoodpolicing.devon-cornwall.police.uk/bcu-1632/sector-1639/nb-1803/pages/pcsoe.aspx

EDIT:

BUT
There doesn't seem to be a female PCSO working in Mansfield town centre, there is however, a female PC.

http://www.nottinghamshire.police.u..._south/mansfield_south/mansfield_town_centre/


.
 
Last edited:
My applogies to the OP of this thread, I have tracked the young lady in the OP's video down



Once again my apologies the the OP, seems I got this wrong
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Right, ALL of you can wind your necks in, or the thread hits the bin and that seems like a waste of an otherwise interesting thread.

if you have a problem, report it! If you dont like a response to something you have said, report it.

Back to the subject at hand....
 
Tom (The OP) ....


IF you are going to get stopped again, and take some footage, can you do it in Forest Town West next time please?

The PCSO over there is much, much cuter!

Thanks! :)
 
I saw the youtube vid, and thought you handled it pretty well Tom.
Not quite sure how they would arrest you for "harrasment" if they had returned tho. A tad over zealous on their end.
Perhaps a letter to the local cop shop, putting forward your position.
 
JSER said:
ITS AN ACCESS ONLY ROAD it is a ROAD not a private road, access only is a legal sign in the highway code if people don't know the sigh or law that is their fault.

Owners, :bang: its a ROAD that is access only.

This is why it has ROAD signs each end stating

Access only

sheeesh :bang:

Image1-3.jpg
Click to expand...


Thats clearly a TRO - as those are the signs used for a TRO prohibiting vehicles except for access. ( I know, when i was the ridgeway NTO we used to administer about thirty winter TROs on byway sections)

However TROs of this type are not common on roads in england (Restricted Access TROs are much more common on byways usually for winter months only) and as i said before with the exception of traffic regulation orders misuse of a right of way is an issue of civil trespass against the owner of the land that the right of way crosses (rights of way do have owners - the highway authority maintains the surface to the depth of one spit (spade depth but the landowner retains title to the underlying ground.)

I'd also note that although the police can issue a £30 fixed penalty for violating a TRO, if the driver refuses to take it ithis type is virtually impossible to enforce in court unless the police have observed them entering and cutting through without stopping - as the driver can simply claim I was dropping something off at house x ( and thus legitimately claim that their use falls within 'access' ) for this reason most forces wont even try to enforce them and rely soley on the deterent effect of the signs

incidentally a give away that this is a TRO not straight forward road signing is the duplication of the sign on both sides of a single lane highway - this is required for legal enforcement of a TRO - if there is only one sign the TRO cannot be enforced. Whereas routine road signing only requires a single sign facing the direction of travel

None of which has anything to do with the matter at hand (sorry Yv)
 
Last edited:
I think you were just unlucky with a couple of plastic police. Ive shot various things around Mansfield, and had conversations with a copper or two.Passing interest in what i was shooting.
Even taken photographs of PC's at a few events(admiuttedly asked if they mind me using them. non have minded).
never had any probs.
 
ding76uk said:
Will you please take your bickering about a bloody road to pm or something! It has no place in this thread!
Click to expand...

Was thinking the same. What on earth are they jibbering on about? Take the poxy road talk elsewhere please.

To the OP, thought you handled it well. Those PCSO's were pathetic. I probably would have lost my temper sooner.
 
clicktor said:
Was thinking the same. What on earth are they jibbering on about? Take the poxy road talk elsewhere please.

To the OP, thought you handled it well. Those PCSO's were pathetic. I probably would have lost my temper sooner.
Click to expand...

Did the OP lose his temper? :thinking: I didn't think so :)
 
ding76uk said:
Will you please take your bickering about a bloody road to pm or something! It has no place in this thread!
Click to expand...

Ding - my congratulation, on your promotion to moderator


What

oh you havent been - then get out of my face, we've got as much right to discuss tangenitial issues as you have, and two posts is hardly bickering.
 
Last edited:
spaniel said:
I think you mean 'tangenitial', but there again you might not ;)
Click to expand...

LOL - I think I may just have coined a new phrase to describe talking b*****cks :LOL:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top