video:Stopped yesterday for photographing in a public place!

[Yv]

Crazy crazy crazy! I'm looking forward to hearing how the radio interview goes, especially if they have someone from the police to comment as well. Also, to hear what happens to the PSCOs following this.

Dave posted a couple of links, but wasn't there a great 1 or 2 page document that was perfect for us as photographers to carry in our bags from one of the senior police, or is that just my imagination?

I seem to recall there was a 'letter' to all Met Police from someone high up, regarding photographers rights in public places, which was deliberately made public by the Met themselves and/or the home office, so everyone knew what officers were being told - this was in addition to a longer standing document written by a photographer [i think?] that had studied the legal side and drawn up some advice and published as a pdf which a lot of people carried around in their bags. I am sure someone can find the correct references for both, I am just off out the door.

 

[Photo Plod]

I seem to recall there was a 'letter' to all Met Police from someone high up, regarding photographers rights in public places, which was deliberately made public by the Met themselves and/or the home office, so everyone knew what officers were being told - this was in addition to a longer standing document written by a photographer [i think?] that had studied the legal side and drawn up some advice and published as a pdf which a lot of people carried around in their bags. I am sure someone can find the correct references for both, I am just off out the door.

Not a letter as such, but the guidelines were posted up on our internet site:

http://www.met.police.uk/about/photography.htm

This was in addition to numerous briefing slides (often repeated), intranet articles, corporate news bulletins, etc. Short of having senior officers walk around and personally drum it into the head of every single one of us, they really have done as much as they can to ensure that officers understand photographers' rights. Judging by the numbers of threads on police officer stops, I would say that the situation has greatly improved over the past year - most of what I see now relates to security guards and incidents like this with PCSOs.

 

[desantnik]

Whilst the rest of your post probably deserves a response this bit jumped out. Of course being arrested is a big deal, in the UK, once arrested you can be compelled to give DNA (which is normally held, even if there is NFA on the arrest. You will also require a visa to enter the USA, the visa waiver scheme actualy asks you to affirm you have never been arrested.

Just 2 things that popped into my head with 5 seconds thought, getting arrested can cause problems down the road.

And you can be de-arrested just as quickly... usually the best bet is to be cooperative enough to not have it happen to start with.

Leave it at "accosted".

As for Amerika... why would you want to go there anyway Comrade? ;-)

 

[Stratman]

......

Have you ever watched one of those police camera TV show things?

Every single damned incident contains someone arguing about what the police are trying to tell them, the person citing "you can't do that" and "i'm not doing anything wrong" and "i'm taking your badge number" and "i'm filing a complaint"
.........

Have you also noticed that when the chavs start complaining about the camera filming them, the plods reply with "He's in a public place, he can film whatever he wants to"?

 

[gazedd]

Have you also noticed that when the chavs start complaining about the camera filming them, the plods reply with "He's in a public place, he can film whatever he wants to"?

That is a point that should be made more to police at the scene of the incidents. however education is the key here, they will not know all of the laws of the land, God not even lawyers will know this and will need to research, however if police are policing a specific area, I personally feel the basics of the laws need to be tested on the police/PCSO's to show competence on what they are about to "Police"

 

[faddius]

I really dislike PCSOs, they're no different to an ordinary member of the public other than they have a nice shiney jacket. Most of them end up with a power complex thinking that they are real officers, with all the same powers. After dealings with them previously, I now will not speak or entertain a PCSO if they approach me, if they want to make a deal out of something Im doing I tell them they can radio for a real police officer to attend. This normally steals their thunder sufficiently.

On the one occasion I had a PCSO radio a real police officer after telling them to radio one or P*** off, an officer attended within about 10 minutes, who promptly laughed in the PCSO's face, told them they were wasting him time and walked off.

If you wanted to know what I had done, I was sat in an outdoor seating area of a bar in summer in the city centre enjoying a drink. PCSO had an issue with me drinking in this seating area as alcohol wasnt allowed to be consumed in public places in the city centre, despite it clearly being a seating area for the bar.

Muppets

 

[SpikeK6]

You are now confusing 2 very different things, a PCSO is a Police support officer, this is a civilian position and they have no extra powers of arrest above what a normal member of the public has.

A Special Constable (the clue is in the title) is a police constable who while only working part time has the full powers of a constable (even while off duty) and he can operate anywhere, a lot of forces are getting over the cuts by giving Specials response driving training and they patrol and answer calls solo. A Special Constable is given 16 weeks training and has to be signed off for independent patrol before working alone.

Ah right ok I thought they where the same, not really up on what a pcso was.

spike

 

[tiler65]

Crazy crazy crazy! I'm looking forward to hearing how the radio interview goes, especially if they have someone from the police to comment as well. Also, to hear what happens to the PSCOs following this.

I hope she will just be educated on the matter and no more, I would hate for her to have leave her job, whether voluntarily or forced, over something so trivial as this.

She is doing her job, we know she has it wrong but she didn't. She will know tomorrow but it is hardly cause for her to be called all sorts of names as has happened. (not necessarily on here)

Education is the key to this problem, not witch hunting.

I hope when and if the radio interview goes ahead that the OP will explain that he/she is giving the interview for education purposes and not to give law enforcement agencies a kicking.

 

[Carter64]

She is doing her job,

But she wasn't?

we know she has it wrong but she didn't.

But she should have.
At the very least, used her initiative to ask a higher authority if she was right.

 

[jon ryan]

I'm pretty certain that Devon still counts as England, but these damned celts are getting uppity about devolution everywhere you look!

And under our brave and visionary Celtic tribal leader, the invaders will be thrown back across the channel and our borders secured - forever! Very soon now, proud Engerland will once again be exactly what it was before the damned Romans came, enjoying a level of civilization perfectly suited to the refreshing ambition of Cameron, of Farage, of Griffin.

And the rest of the world (wherever that is) will show our leaders the respect they so richly deserve.

Pass the woad, brother!

 

[mr_v_s]

Just read this comment on the youtube page:

"Actually this officer did nothing wrong this video I 100% garuntee this video has been edited to make the officers comments sound wrong the person placing this video on youtube has no right to do so the officer clearly states she does not want images of her on the camera yes its a video but videos contain images you have no right to publish this video and I want you to remove this video with immediate effect ! I will be contacting Youtube in due corse to have your profile suspended."

Does that sound like the officer involved?

 

[tiler65]

But she wasn't?

But she should have.
At the very least, used her initiative to ask a higher authority if she was right.

She can't know every law, she did what she thought was correct, it is hardly critical in the everyday running of the country.

Once she has been educated on the matter she will see things totally different.

Regarding asking a higher authority, didn't her colleague radio to the station? Maybe he found out the law and then informed Miss PCSO and then she told the OP that that was the end of the matter and asked him to move along, in a round about way as to try and not lose face on the issue.

No big deal. This is about publicity for the OP not education about the law for the PCSO as it should be.

 

[mark1616]

Just read this comment on the youtube page:

"Actually this officer did nothing wrong this video I 100% garuntee this video has been edited to make the officers comments sound wrong the person placing this video on youtube has no right to do so the officer clearly states she does not want images of her on the camera yes its a video but videos contain images you have no right to publish this video and I want you to remove this video with immediate effect ! I will be contacting Youtube in due corse to have your profile suspended."

Does that sound like the officer involved?

LOL, genius! Could well be, or just someone else who doesn't realise that he was filming in public, the same way as a lot of shows do on TV...... watch dog, rogue trader etc etc.

 

[Tugster]

Is the law regarding taking still images of someone without their knowledge the same as videoing them ?

 

[mr_v_s]

She can't know every law, she did what she thought was correct, it is hardly critical in the everyday running of the country.

Once she has been educated on the matter she will see things totally different.

Regarding asking a higher authority, didn't her colleague radio to the station? Maybe he found out the law and then informed Miss PCSO and then she told the OP that that was the end of the matter and asked him to move along, in a round about way as to try and not lose face on the issue.

No big deal. This is about publicity for the OP not education about the law for the PCSO as it should be.

You're saying she can hardly know every law but once educated will see things differently? Hmmmm...I wouldn't want her as my PCSO! I think it does sound like education about the law and hope it gets the publicity it deserves.

She wasn't professional about the situation and I'm sure she'll regret the "I'll tell you once I've arrested you" line.

 

[SpikeK6]

There is still no mention of what the other officer did, the OP said he walked away talking on his radio, did he come back with relevent facts, did he just stay away, did he walk off thinking I do not want to be associated with her????? we need the OP to come back and tell us what the other officer did after the event.

spike

 

[Donnie]

And you can be de-arrested just as quickly...

Ummmm you can be arrested then de-arrested if say on the way to the cop shop they can change their mind, however, if you've been arrested and theyve fingerprinted and dna'd you, it's all too late :shrug:

 

[Bernie174]

I think you do need to be fair to PCSO's. They aren't Police Officers, and they aren't very well trained. I've made 2 complaints against them, both of which were arguably over things they really should have known, not something thats isn't any everyday job.
I don't agree with them to be honest, they are there to do policing on the cheap, and they've been over used. Yes, I can see a point to having them do things like man cordons, or collect witness statements, but patrolling? No, I think they need to be withdrawn from that.
Anyway, while photography might well be a big issue to the majority on here, from the Police in general's point of view, its not something they deal with often. Yes, I accept it's flavour of the month at briefings at times, it's not likely to be something that sticks in the mind for use 6 months later.
Anyway, I was stopped last week, was it lawful? Yes, was it painless? Yes. Did any of the guidelines so often mentioned here apply? Nope. Was it to do with terrorism? No, not directly. Did it matter to me? Nope, not a jot.

Just a point about the US visa waver application, the requirement is to answer this question:
B) Have you ever been arrested or convicted for an offense or crime involving moral turpitude or a violation related to a controlled substance; or have been arrested or convicted for two or more offenses for which the aggregate sentence to confinement was five years or more; or have been a controlled substance trafficker; or are you seeking entry to engage in criminal or immoral activities? *

SSo the fears are ill founded. Oh? did someone who isn't a police officer make a mistake? If you can, you can't expect the Police to be perfect either.

 

[Donnie]

But she wasn't?

But she should have.
At the very least, used her initiative to ask a higher authority if she was right.

"Ignorance is no defence" I believe is the phrase.

 

[SpikeK6]

I think you do need to be fair to PCSO's. They aren't Police Officers, and they aren't very well trained. I've made 2 complaints against them, both of which were arguably over things they really should have known, not something thats isn't any everyday job.
I don't agree with them to be honest, they are there to do policing on the cheap, and they've been over used. Yes, I can see a point to having them do things like man cordons, or collect witness statements, but patrolling? No, I think they need to be withdrawn from that.
Anyway, while photography might well be a big issue to the majority on here, from the Police in general's point of view, its not something they deal with often. Yes, I accept it's flavour of the month at briefings at times, it's not likely to be something that sticks in the mind for use 6 months later.
Anyway, I was stopped last week, was it lawful? Yes, was it painless? Yes. Did any of the guidelines so often mentioned here apply? Nope. Was it to do with terrorism? No, not directly. Did it matter to me? Nope, not a jot.

Just a point about the US visa waver application, the requirement is to answer this question:
B) Have you ever been arrested or convicted for an offense or crime involving moral turpitude or a violation related to a controlled substance; or have been arrested or convicted for two or more offenses for which the aggregate sentence to confinement was five years or more; or have been a controlled substance trafficker; or are you seeking entry to engage in criminal or immoral activities? *

SSo the fears are ill founded. Oh? did someone who isn't a police officer make a mistake? If you can, you can't expect the Police to be perfect either.

The thing is though they are just a radio call away from finding out what is right and what is not, you are right no one person is ever perfect, but in the position they are trying to up hold they should at least have common sence.
We stilll need tohear back from OP to see what happend with the other copper to see what he had to say after being on his radio

spike

 

[DemiLion]

Just a point about the US visa waver application, the requirement is to answer this question:
B) Have you ever been arrested or convicted for an offense or crime involving moral turpitude or a violation related to a controlled substance; or have been arrested or convicted for two or more offenses for which the aggregate sentence to confinement was five years or more; or have been a controlled substance trafficker; or are you seeking entry to engage in criminal or immoral activities?

Not anymore it isn't:

.... Travelers who have been arrested, even if the arrest did not result in a criminal conviction, those with criminal records, (the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act does not apply to U.S. visa law), certain serious communicable illnesses, those who have been refused admission into, or have been deported from, the United States, or have previously overstayed on the VWP are not eligible to travel visa free under the Visa Waiver Program.

http://london.usembassy.gov/vwp3.html

further expanded here:

http://london.usembassy.gov/add_req.html

 

[Donnie]

yep, and while it may be marginally excusable to take the position that "nobody's perfect" and "they can't know every law" I think that this situation's obviously not one of those to be honest.

This PCSO is either a bully or an idiot characterised by her "I'll check later" comment about which law she was threatening the arrest under.

 

[Bernie174]

Demi
I stand corrected.
Just shows everyone can make mistakes, and no one can be expected to be 100% current with everything.
Not sure how they would know though, if for example you'd been arrested but exonerated after enquiries.

Spike.
for god knows how manyth times, it wasn't another 'copper' it was a PCSO. The 2 things are different!
In a perfect world, yes, everyone should know everything about what they are dealing with, but, as we all know its an imperfect world, and you can't train for everything. I dealt with things I had no idea about when I was a Police officer, and got some of them wrongly. Unfortunately, when faced with that situation, what seems right, sometimes isn't.
and your point about asking on the radio would in my policing days have held much more validity, if the bloody thing worked! These days however, all the operators are civvies, with probably less knowledge than the PCSO's.

 

[desantnik]

Not anymore it isn't:

http://london.usembassy.gov/vwp3.html

further expanded here:

http://london.usembassy.gov/add_req.html

That's visa free, not prohibited access at all... Visa free travel is just something we in the EU have got used to. Go anywhere else and it's a different matter. Try Russia ;-)

 

[Donnie]

Demi
I stand corrected.
Just shows everyone can make mistakes, and no one can be expected to be 100% current with everything.
Not sure how they would know though, if for example you'd been arrested but exonerated after enquiries.

ummm because your dna and fingerprints are on the system for a start as is a record of the arrest?

 

[SpikeK6]

Good arguments going on on youtube over the video,

spike

 

[DemiLion]

That's visa free, not prohibited access at all... Visa free travel is just something we in the EU have got used to. Go anywhere else and it's a different matter. Try Russia ;-)

Yup I realise that, and I'd require a visa for the US anyway, but the waiver programme is a massive bonus if you are eligible!

 

[Marcel]

A Special Constable (the clue is in the title) is a police constable who while only working part time has the full powers of a constable (even while off duty) and he can operate anywhere

Almost
Edit : I'm clearly talking guff, it has changed since You're right.

As for being arrested. Of course it's a big thing. Aside from the Visa / DNA discussions etc, your liberty is being taken away. For some this is a huge thing. If you speak to some experienced police officers I bet they will tell you the same. For some people it is a very big thing.

 

[Bernie174]

Donnie
Which is only of use if the US authorities are permitted to compare yours against those held by the UK Police. I'm not sure that they would be able to. Given the numbers of people who apply it would be impractical to check every application.

 

[neil_g]

Good arguments going on on youtube over the video,

spike

Some good trolling by that truffle person..

 

[Mank]

Try spending a night in a cell and having everything taken off you (even your shoes!! lol) for being wrongly arrested and then tell me its not a big deal.

 

[HMansfield]

Almost
As for being arrested. Of course it's a big thing.

Ever had to ring your boss and tell him that the reason you didn't show up for work yesterday was because you were in a police cell?

Ever had "all eyes on you" as you walk through the street in cuffs to the back of a police car?

Every had to explain to your childs school that someone else would be picking your child up as you're currently under arrest?

To some of us, things like that are a big deal. To go through that, all because a support officer wanted to throw their weight around, would make a lot of people mightily annoyed.

These days however, all the operators are civvies, with probably less knowledge than the PCSO's.

PCSOs are able to contact the duty sargeant. Alternatively, they can request an actual police officer for support, who also has the ability to contact the duty sargeant.

Even if they can only contact civvies, civvies are quite capable of accessing the MET website and reading out its guidelines for photography in public.

What particularly irks me about this video, is that even though the photographer keeps explaining why he's commited no offense, the PCSO refuses to check the information he's giving. It could have been sorted out with a radio/phone call. She chose not to do this, further enflaming the situation.

 

[danjama]

I think if this ever happens to me, I will simply say 'i'm allowed to photograph in a public place, see ya now' and walk away, rather than wasting my time standing and arguing with them, expanding their ego further.

Pathetic woman.

 

[desantnik]

Ever had to ring your boss and tell him that the reason you didn't show up for work yesterday was because you were in a police cell?.

I'm not suggesting taking one from Judge Dredd here, the trick is to pick your battles.

Worth a shouting match resulting in being arrested for taking a photo? Errr not in my book (there are things worth "fighting the power" but this aint one of them!)

Worth calmly take note of what the officer tells you, going away and phoning the nick? Certainly.

Follow it up with a politely worded letter to their boss, cc'ed to the local paper and MP... for sure.

Having a row about how you know more than a PCSO in the street isn't going to do anyone any favours.

I don't know what has got into people these days, there's just rage and outrage everywhere. Nobody wants to handle things calmly.

:bang:

 

[BlueBall]

Nobody wants to handle things calmly.

:bang:

When somebody is in the wrong and is messing me about then sorry they deserve everything they get.

 

[desantnik]

When somebody is in the wrong and is messing me about then sorry they deserve everything they get.

Yes, exactly my point... and exactly why you WILL get slung in the back of a Police van...

 

[wysiwyg]

Re walking away and phoning the nick, surely the onus should be on the police to prove you're wrong and not you that you're right? By walking away your admitting defeat almost, and that would be you done shooting for the day? Or walk off and bump into then 30 mins later taking more pics? I'd ask for them to radio for clarification I suppose.

 

[desantnik]

Re walking away and phoning the nick, surely the onus should be on the police to prove you're wrong and not you that you're right? By walking away your admitting defeat almost, and that would be you done shooting for the day? Or walk off and bump into then 30 mins later taking more pics? I'd ask for them to radio for clarification I suppose.

Go round corner, phone nick, job done in how many minutes?

Walking away isn't "defeat", again stop thinking that you can win a shouting match with a police officer... you won't. No matter what kind of attitude you have, how much kung-fu (physical or mental) you think you know, it won't work.

As I said earlier, just watch some TV progs and see how that works...

In the time you've wasted arguing the toss you could have resolved the issue and carried on shooting without any further hassle...

 

[BlueBall]

Yes, exactly my point... and exactly why you WILL get slung in the back of a Police van...

and you missed my point, I didn't say I would be aggressive but that they deserve all the ridicule or reprimands they get. If you are going to do a job, learn it well and do it to the best of your ability; otherwise step back and let someone else do it. You can CHOOSE to be good at your job or you can be average.

 

[tamphotography]

Again, I'm not saying what happened was good... but...

Have you ever watched one of those police camera TV show things?

Every single damned incident contains someone arguing about what the police are trying to tell them, the person citing "you can't do that" and "i'm not doing anything wrong" and "i'm taking your badge number" and "i'm filing a complaint"

Imagine that, 12 hours a day, 5 days a week... it must get:

a) pretty boring
b) pretty frustrating
c) after time... just bloody well ignored.

Probably a little calmer response to start with would have helped, not citing that "I studied law" and other stuff like that - its not going to make the situation any better.

Easy for me to say with hindsight and from a distant perspective but I'm sure this could be replayed with a totally different outcome.

i totaly understand what its like to be in the forces, both my parents and brother are or were officers. being told out loud in public I'm harassing people when I'm not is totally wrong, when speaking to the family they were not at all surprised and were not happy with how they handled the situation, and yes they should know the law if they are wearing the uniform of the law