"I am not a terrorist!", "Photography is not a crime!" - The fightback starts here...

milou said:
Meanwhile, just up the road: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/dec/08/police-search-photographer-terrorism-powers
Click to expand...

"Once this explanation was received there was no further action"

Only problem is because that was an official stop, and more so a search, his details have to be taken down and will be stored on record whether he likes it or not. Even if the officers decide it's not worth it, they still have to take the details once it becomes a stop rather than just a polite conversation.

Worth complaining though as apparently a section 44 stop complaint has to go to the IPCC which will cause much embarrassment and waste of time/money (okay it's not so good to waste time/money especially as it's our money, but maybe they'll start to see sense once the cost becomes excessive).

3 cars, riot van and 7 officers! :wacky:
 
Mass Photo Gathering Trafalgar Square 12 Noon Saturday 23rd January 2010


http://photographernotaterrorist.org/2009]12]mass-photo-gathering/


Posted 11 December 2009
Mass Gathering in defence of street photography

I’m a Photographer, Not a Terrorist! invite all Photographers to a mass photo gathering in defence of street photography.

Following a series of high profile detentions under s44 of the terrorism act including 7 armed police detaining an award winning architectural photographer in the City of London, the arrest of a press photographer covering campaigning santas at City Airport and the stop and search of a BBC photographer at St Pauls Cathedral and many others. PHNAT feels now is the time for a mass turnout of Photographers, professional and amateur to defend our rights and stop the abuse of the terror laws.
trsq-poster
 
Hope that doesn't count as an organised photo shoot as Trafalgar Square is one of the locations where you need permission to film and cough up money to do so! :D
 
Well the 'Blast' was supposed to be 'bugger' but I didn't think it would pass the filter....oh I wonder if it would have...
 
Well, I see the police are justifying their stop n search by touting the guy they arrested that had been doing covert surveillance on the underground etc. Surprise surprise! He used a mobile phone with video capability! NOT a honking great obvious SLR!
 
And their argument is flawed anyway. They arrested these people but none were convicted, all released and thus they are innocent.

The police have just trumped up this to say "look! terrorists are a threat with cameras. See!", when it turns out they aren't.

The real truth I feel is it's down to lazy policing. Rather than using intelligence and even some common sense, they would rather just stop everyone in the hope that statistically they'll strike lucky. Maybe it's another element of the targets culture.
 
deadkenny, if you're talking about the example shown in the papers last week (filming Liverpool St Station), then you're wrong. The group were arrested, convicted of Fraud, jailed for 4 years and deported at the end of their sentences. The CPS decided not to prosecute on terrorism charges because there would be no increase in sentence.

This isn't the thread for me to explain the principle of "totality" and concurrent sentencing, but basically any conviction for gathering terrorist material wouldn't add to their time spent in jail (typically, around 18 - 24 months for material-gathering offences), so it would "not be in the public interest" to run an expensive Crown Court trial.

However, I agree with the general sentiment in the thread; officers need to understand that photographers have a right to go about their business. Common sense must be applied. This is currently being hammered home by briefings, announcements and operational directives - both public and private. There is no point in stopping as many people as possible to show a statistical return of s44 stops; a point that was being made by operational officers to police management some time ago, and a point that has now been realised by senior management.
 
Photo Plod said:
deadkenny, if you're talking about the example shown in the papers last week (filming Liverpool St Station), then you're wrong. The group were arrested, convicted of Fraud, jailed for 4 years and deported at the end of their sentences. The CPS decided not to prosecute on terrorism charges because there would be no increase in sentence.

This isn't the thread for me to explain the principle of "totality" and concurrent sentencing, but basically any conviction for gathering terrorist material wouldn't add to their time spent in jail (typically, around 18 - 24 months for material-gathering offences), so it would "not be in the public interest" to run an expensive Crown Court trial.
Click to expand...
Typical. The stuff I read didn't explain this.

However, if the prosecution never went ahead, they are not terrorists in the eyes of the law. As far as I'm concerned I have no confidence they were terrorists. Whilst I understand the lack of desire to prosecute because of the no change to sentence, it does make me wonder if there was just not enough evidence. A suspect is always, always innocent until proven guilty in this country. One of the key parts of our justice system. Something Nu-Labour and much of the British press seem to have forgotten.

So really it just seems to me to be a rather weak example the police have used to justify their actions. It is also rather pathetic in the light of being advised to be more sensible about the stops, that rather than accept the advice, they instead trot out this to counter it.
 
Last edited:
deadkenny said:
It is also rather pathetic in the light of being advised to be more sensible about the stops, that rather than accept the advice, they instead trot out this to counter it.
Click to expand...

I think you'll find that, rather than saying "Sod off, we're going to continue as before", police management are now earnestly making the point to be more sensible about s44 stops to officers, owing to the huge backlash from photographers and alienating the public. This example was "trotted out" to show that, indeed, there are people out there doing this - not as a way of burying heads in the sand.
 
Hello All
Could I make a suggestion for the Jan 23rd meeting? Take a film camera not digital. Should the police ask to see your pics it might be a more interesting conversation. Especially if you don’t take any photos!
I quite like the idea of someone being asked to show photos that haven’t been taken on a camera with no “playback”. Just a thought.
 
Last edited:
ilikebowens said:
Take a film camera not digital. Should the police ask to see your pics it might be a more interesting conversation. Especially if you don’t take any photos!
Click to expand...

I think I said this in another thread - Take a film camera but don't put any film in it!


Steve.
 
Slipper-one said:
Mass Photo Gathering Trafalgar Square 12 Noon Saturday 23rd January 2010


http://photographernotaterrorist.org/2009]12]mass-photo-gathering/


Posted 11 December 2009
Mass Gathering in defence of street photography

I’m a Photographer, Not a Terrorist! invite all Photographers to a mass photo gathering in defence of street photography.

Following a series of high profile detentions under s44 of the terrorism act including 7 armed police detaining an award winning architectural photographer in the City of London, the arrest of a press photographer covering campaigning santas at City Airport and the stop and search of a BBC photographer at St Pauls Cathedral and many others. PHNAT feels now is the time for a mass turnout of Photographers, professional and amateur to defend our rights and stop the abuse of the terror laws.
trsq-poster
Click to expand...

This will serve to antagonise the police and give photographers a reputation for being as bad as all the other minority groups who just want to waste police time. What a STUPID idea!!!! The police are human too, annoy them and they will react by regarding all photographers as suspicious. Play the game and so will they. Frankly I doubt the professionalism of any pro photographer that attends this meeting.

The police have a job to do, it is very difficult to spot a terrorist and yes folks, the baddies DO use DSLR's with big lenses to gather intelligence through windows etc! How many of you would consider stopping the armed forces from using similar (and even stronger powers) in Afghanistan? The fight is on our streets too and it is the police who are having to deal with it on the streets - but with far less power than a squaddie with a rifle.

It's not just terrorists that want to see in detail what is happening behind windows. Thieves use big cameras too, let's try and see both sides here please.

If you are approached be polite, offer to show your images. When the officer sees that you are harmless he will leave you alone.
 
I a bit confused by your post

Al Brum said:
This will ... give photographers a reputation for being as bad as all the other minority groups who just want to waste police time.
Click to expand...

Is it your contention that the purpose of the demonstration is to waste police time?

Would you mind expanding on which other minority groups there are whose sole intention is to waste police time? I suppose it's possible that there's a minority Waste Police Time Action Group out there, but I've never heard of them. There may be other people exercising their democratic right to protest, but I doubt that's their sole, primary or even a minor aim.


It's not just terrorists that want to see in detail what is happening behind windows. Thieves use big cameras too
Click to expand...

I think you may have inadvertently put your finger on why this protest is relevant for some people. The powers granted under s44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 were granted to the police by Parliament for the purpose of combating terrorism. It's not there to be used in connection with theft, misuse of drugs, littering, loitering or any other matter, including people going about their lawful business.

It's not up to the police to arbitrarily use any power that they might possess in other contexts. If you or any government want to allow the police to allow the police to stop and search people for any other purpose, then let's have that debate in the Commons, the Lords and elsewhere, not through misuse of poorly drafted legislation.
 
Al Brum said:
Thieves use big cameras too, let's try and see both sides here please.
Click to expand...
Do they though? I'm sure maybe one or two have, but where's the evidence they generally do? Where's the evidence terrorists generally use big cameras?

There is none as far as I'm aware. The problem with the abuse of s44 in these situations is it places an assumption that anyone with a big camera is up to no good and has to prove their innocence (a violation of the basic legal right we have had for centuries in this country).

If I was a thief or a terrorist I'd use a little compact, or cameraphone and go around looking like a tourist to avoid suspicion.

The only people who use big cameras for less moral purposes are peados on beaches perhaps and the paparazzi to spy on the rich and famous.
 
Last edited:
Musicman said:
I a bit confused by your post



Is it your contention that the purpose of the demonstration is to waste police time?

Would you mind expanding on which other minority groups there are whose sole intention is to waste police time? I suppose it's possible that there's a minority Waste Police Time Action Group out there, but I've never heard of them. There may be other people exercising their democratic right to protest, but I doubt that's their sole, primary or even a minor aim.
Click to expand...

You appear to have misinterpreted my post here, always a problem with forum posts. It is clear your intention is to make an opinion heard and not to waste Police time, however it will result in wasting their time (peaceful protests often are). Personally I would rather the coppers that will be watching your protest were out catching real criminals.




Musicman said:
I think you may have inadvertently put your finger on why this protest is relevant for some people. The powers granted under s44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 were granted to the police by Parliament for the purpose of combating terrorism. It's not there to be used in connection with theft, misuse of drugs, littering, loitering or any other matter, including people going about their lawful business.

It's not up to the police to arbitrarily use any power that they might possess in other contexts. If you or any government want to allow the police to allow the police to stop and search people for any other purpose, then let's have that debate in the Commons, the Lords and elsewhere, not through misuse of poorly drafted legislation.
Click to expand...

Big news, terrorists do not have balaclavas on all the time nor do they carry AK47's all day. They are not all Muslims and they are not all of Middle Eastern origin. How on earth can you tell an innocent man from a criminal? - One very effective way is to approach them and talk to them! The police have been given their powers to keep YOU safe. If they ask you why you are photographing something there is no need to get defensive, just show them the pics! If they suspect a person is 'casing' a building for theft etc they are actually using their rights under other powers, not just S44.

Surely it makes more sense to co-operate with the police than to simply complain? Yes mistakes have been made on both sides, but making this hue and cry will be seen in the eyes of individual coppers as yet another waste of their time.
 
deadkenny said:
Do they though? I'm sure maybe one or two have, but where's the evidence they generally do? Where's the evidence terrorists generally use big cameras?

There is none as far as I'm aware. The problem with the abuse of s44 in these situations is it places an assumption that anyone with a big camera is up to no good and has to prove their innocence (a violation of the basic legal right we have had for centuries in this country).
Click to expand...

You have evidence that they don't then? My information comes from a police officer employed on a public disorder unit.

deadkenny said:
If I was a thief or a terrorist I'd use a little compact, or cameraphone and go around looking like a tourist to avoid suspicion.
Click to expand...

That's what I thought until I spoke to the policeman mentioned above.
 
Al Brum said:
You appear to have misinterpreted my post here, always a problem with forum posts. It is clear your intention is to make an opinion heard and not to waste Police time, however it will result in wasting their time (peaceful protests often are). Personally I would rather the coppers that will be watching your protest were out catching real criminals.
Click to expand...

Forgive me, I thought it was rather difficult to misinterpret something like "all the other minority groups who just want to waste police time" to mean anything other than their intention was to waste police time.

Clearly you were merely intending to be entirely dismissive of their legitimate intentions and substituting another in their place. I'm still none the wiser who those other groups are, BTW.

You grant that my intention is to make my opinion heard (I don't know where I came into it - I was careful to couch my language about protest in the third person) yet you then go on to reiterate your charge that I [sic] am wasting police time.

Given that 'wasting police time' is a specific offence in law, the phrase carries a particular weight that makes its casual use inadvisable.

If they suspect a person is 'casing' a building for theft etc they are actually using their rights under other powers, not just S44.
Click to expand...

Then they have to have "reasonable suspicion" or "specific intelligence" to conduct a search* [PACE Code A]. Your introduction of an equation of s44 with other powers is misleading and irrelevant to the debate of s44 stops and searches, under which all you have to be is "in the wrong place at the wrong time".

* N.B. The Metropolitan Police consider that viewing images on a digital camera constitutes a search in law. It is upon that basis that they claim the right to view such images under s43 and s44.

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

It may also be worth noting that under a revision to PACE in 2003, there is no longer any such thing as a voluntary search.
 
Last edited:
Clearly you are the sort of person that loves to argue without actually thinking about what is being said. By making the police attend what is in my opinion a pointless protest you are, in my opinion, wasting their time.
 
Anyone thought that if a major 'law change' occurs and Police are all advised NOT to stop peeps with 'big' cameras that Bin Laden & chums will all start to use D3s etc soonest???

It'd be much easier then for them to plonk a D3 on a big tripod outside Scotland Yard (or wherever) and shoot to their criminal hearts content, than to sneak around with mobiles :D

DD
 
Al Brum said:
You appear to have misinterpreted my post here, always a problem with forum posts. It is clear your intention is to make an opinion heard and not to waste Police time, however it will result in wasting their time (peaceful protests often are). Personally I would rather the coppers that will be watching your protest were out catching real criminals.
Click to expand...

so what you're saying is peaceful protest is a waste of time? - is that cause you prefer violent protest, or because you don't agree with the cause being protested?. Making an opinion heard in a civil society is never a waste of time. Even your opinions that not all agree with

Big news, terrorists do not have balaclavas on all the time nor do they carry AK47's all day. They are not all Muslims and they are not all of Middle Eastern origin. How on earth can you tell an innocent man from a criminal? - One very effective way is to approach them and talk to them! The police have been given their powers to keep YOU safe. If they ask you why you are photographing something there is no need to get defensive, just show them the pics! If they suspect a person is 'casing' a building for theft etc they are actually using their rights under other powers, not just S44.

Surely it makes more sense to co-operate with the police than to simply complain? Yes mistakes have been made on both sides, but making this hue and cry will be seen in the eyes of individual coppers as yet another waste of their time.
Click to expand...

Don't quite understand this. Muslim terrorists tend to be errmm............Muslim :wacky:, just as the IRA tended to be Irish Catholics. No racism or religious slurs there - just facts. The police acting reasonably I'll support all day long, but stopping someone just for having a camera isn't reasonable and all to often it looks more like bullying on there part 7 officers and 3 cars to nick a photographer -???

The police police by our consent. I think there is a very real danger of them losing that at present (not just on this issue)
 
Last edited:
DiddyDave said:
Anyone thought that if a major 'law change' occurs and Police are all advised NOT to stop peeps with 'big' cameras that Bin Laden & chums will all start to use D3s etc soonest???

It'd be much easier then for them to plonk a D3 on a big tripod outside Scotland Yard (or wherever) and shoot to their criminal hearts content, than to sneak around with mobiles :D

DD
Click to expand...

:D:D possible but they coud just look at google earth still.....................I was impressed by the stupidity of the 'terrorists' photographing tube maps - the TFL website has them all over.
 
boyfalldown said:
:D:D possible but they coud just look at google earth still.....................I was impressed by the stupidity of the 'terrorists' photographing tube maps - the TFL website has them all over.
Click to expand...

And therein lies our greatest defense - most terrorists (and crims of any kind for that matter) are stupid :D

This recent one was somewhere close to me I believe... guys smashes car window to steal sat nav. Police look down at the snow and see he cycled up to the car, they follow the cycle tracks straight to his house less than a mile away - result - one stupid nicked crim and speedy return of sat nav :LOL:

DD
 
Al Brum said:
Clearly you are the sort of person that loves to argue without actually thinking about what is being said. By making the police attend what is in my opinion a pointless protest you are, in my opinion, wasting their time.
Click to expand...

Nobody is making the police attend, no need for them to be there, their are just a bunch of people with cameras in one place, no laws being broken at all.
 
Al Brum said:
You have evidence that they don't then? My information comes from a police officer employed on a public disorder unit.

(snip)

That's what I thought until I spoke to the policeman mentioned above.
Click to expand...
Are you talking about one incident or does this policeman claim to know thieves or terrorists generally go about with big cameras?

In the case of thieves, considering most are opportunists and drug addicts, I seriously doubt that. Only evidence I have seen that the police have trotted out to the public about terrorists and cameras involved cameraphones spotted on CCTV, and even then they were not terrorists in the eyes of the law as they were never convicted (again, innocent until proven guilty).

Also one policeman's view is not a fact. They are subject to misleading information and advice just like the rest of us (hence the amount of misinformed PCSOs who have been making a lot of these photographer stops). If you have documented statistics you can share with us, then that's another matter.
 
Last edited:
Waste of time. Coppers do what coppers do... some know what they are allowed to do , some don't have a scooby. And as for having a protest in Canary Wharf!! It's got security everywhere. When I used to drop Work at the picture desk of Mirror grp I had to have a pass just to enter the area and drop work at the reception desk. And that was 15 years back.....

But you do what you have to do.....
 
boyfalldown said:
so what you're saying is peaceful protest is a waste of time? - is that cause you prefer violent protest, or because you don't agree with the cause being protested?. Making an opinion heard in a civil society is never a waste of time. Even your opinions that not all agree with



Don't quite understand this. Muslim terrorists tend to be errmm............Muslim :wacky:, just as the IRA tended to be Irish Catholics. No racism or religious slurs there - just facts. The police acting reasonably I'll support all day long, but stopping someone just for having a camera isn't reasonable and all to often it looks more like bullying on there part 7 officers and 3 cars to nick a photographer -???

The police police by our consent. I think there is a very real danger of them losing that at present (not just on this issue)
Click to expand...

You are mis quoting me, I never mentioned muslim terrorists specifically.

Once you get a big enough crowd of people hanging around together in London the police will turn up, invited or not!
 
Al Brum said:
You are mis quoting me, I never mentioned muslim terrorists specifically.

Once you get a big enough crowd of people hanging around together in London the police will turn up, invited or not!
Click to expand...

your post did read that way though.
 
boyfalldown said:
your post did read that way though.
Click to expand...

Only because you wanted it to though. That is the big problem with internet forums, they are easily mis-read.

Even Muslim terrorists are not as thick as some would like to believe. Want to recce an area of a Capital city? Recruit a white man, tell him not to grow a beard or wear any of the clothes associated with Muslims. Give him a camera and maybe even the kit that is worn by any regular photography hobbyist (i.e. normal clothes) and tell him to go take photos of the area you are interested in.

That, folks, is what the Police are up against. They are not going to see a bloke with a beard and a Kaftan with "I love The Taliban" on it!

There are other organisations out there that would just as happily blow up a bomb if they could, some are from N. Ireland, some are from Europe.

This thread is geting nowhere, you have a right to protest and the fact that you have is down to the Police and other security organisations helping to stop nutters get their way.
To secure your rights the police have and use certain powers. As responsible citizens in this free country we should be helping them do so instead of attempting to have those powers removed or curtailed.
 
The group were arrested, convicted of Fraud, jailed for 4 years and deported at the end of their sentences. The CPS decided not to prosecute on terrorism charges because there would be no increase in sentence.
Click to expand...

Really , more likley that the CPS could not build a case for terrorism that would stand up in a court of law.

Sometimes the powers that be must think the general public are stupid, what senior Police officer would be happy to prosecute for fraud when a good conviction for terrorism acheavable?
 
Even Muslim terrorists are not as thick as some would like to believe. Want to recce an area of a Capital city? Recruit a white man, tell him not to grow a beard or wear any of the clothes associated with Muslims. Give him a camera and maybe even the kit that is worn by any regular photography hobbyist (i.e. normal clothes) and tell him to go take photos of the area you are interested in.
Click to expand...

Which would be a pretty stupid thing to do given the high profile of photgraphers being stopped and the reason for this thread ) DoH)

Why not use bing maps or google earth, and who say that photographing CCTV cameras is usefull anyway ?

You would have to work out the coverage and the foal lenth of the lens used, which is just about impossible.

I can walk down the strteet and 'clock' most of the overt CCTV cameras nip around the corner and write them down on an A-Z .

And what good would it do a terrorist ... not much
 
Al Brum said:
Only because you wanted it to though. That is the big problem with internet forums, they are easily mis-read.
Click to expand...
no - that would be cause of the way you wrote it.

Even Muslim terrorists are not as thick as some would like to believe. Want to recce an area of a Capital city? Recruit a white man, tell him not to grow a beard or wear any of the clothes associated with Muslims. Give him a camera and maybe even the kit that is worn by any regular photography hobbyist (i.e. normal clothes) and tell him to go take photos of the area you are interested in.

That, folks, is what the Police are up against. They are not going to see a bloke with a beard and a Kaftan with "I love The Taliban" on it!

There are other organisations out there that would just as happily blow up a bomb if they could, some are from N. Ireland, some are from Europe.

This thread is geting nowhere, you have a right to protest and the fact that you have is down to the Police and other security organisations helping to stop nutters get their way.
To secure your rights the police have and use certain powers. As responsible citizens in this free country we should be helping them do so instead of attempting to have those powers removed or curtailed.
Click to expand...


as a responsible citizen in this country I will support the police in their reasonable actions - however their recent actions towards photographers haven't been reasonable - far from it. Yours is an old and frankly tired argument, the police in this society police only with the consent of its citizens they are responsible for protecting that society but are also answerable to it I'm not trying to have those powers curtailed but have them used correctly. If I'm no longer able toenjoy basic freedoms the terrorists have already won.

Perhaps you can point me towards terrorists using an SLR prior to an attack - just one instance which is proven.

I don't believe real terrorists are stupid far from it, but seeing as they are not wouldn't it be easier to look on the web for the info the seek - the could even avoid any awkward questions doing so.

Would love to know who these hostile European groups are of whom you speak
 
This will serve to antagonise the police and give photographers a reputation for being as bad as all the other minority groups who just want to waste police time.
Click to expand...

Yeah . like anti war protesters who don't like the idea of our nations sons and daughters being sent to fight and die in unwinable illegal wars ?

or


Individuals who beleive that we are using up the planets resourses faster than they are replenished?

Yes, best stay in we dont want to 'antagonise' the police do we, they always know best , and rights what would we want those for if we are innocent.
 
Al Brum said:
That, folks, is what the Police are up against.
Click to expand...
Says who? Except your police mate unless he can actually provide hard facts to show this is what the police are up against. Honestly, I've yet to see anything convincing.

Compacts and cameraphones, yes, but even there the police "evidence" is weak.

The reality is, "folks", is that there is no evidence whatsoever being presented to the public that anyone with an SLR is actually a risk to national security.

Whilst a demonstration might seem to you and others to be a waste of police time, do not forget that the right to demonstrate like this is one of the core basic freedoms in this country. Whether the police turn up or not is not the issue. The issue is the point we are trying to make, which is one of basic freedoms and rights.

This is what we're standing up for.

The instant we just give in, say nothing and let our rights be taken away for the "protection of the nation", then the terrorists have won. Not that the terrorists have actually done anything here. This is FUD spread by the press, police and government.
 
The reality is, "folks", is that there is no evidence whatsoever being presented to the public that anyone with an SLR is actually a risk to national security.
Click to expand...

I agree, but dosent it reinforce the current government and media driven Paranoia which permiates our society.

The terrorist on every corner propaganda is a great way to :-

A, Carry on with a pointless illegal and unwinnable war

B, Bring in more draconian legislation

C, Make the power of the public weaker and increase the power of the state

;)
 
Am i too late to join the badwagon? :D

terrorist.jpg
 
Al Brum said:
Even Muslim terrorists are not as thick as some would like to believe. Want to recce an area of a Capital city? Recruit a white man, tell him not to grow a beard or wear any of the clothes associated with Muslims. Give him a camera and maybe even the kit that is worn by any regular photography hobbyist (i.e. normal clothes) and tell him to go take photos of the area you are interested in.

That, folks, is what the Police are up against.
Click to expand...

Okay then Einstein, suppose I had been recruited by Al Quieda to go take photographs of 'The Gherkin' in London because him and his cronies wanted to blow stuff up. I go out with my kit and take some snaps and get stopped. How then is the officer going to know if I was just a happy snapper or a terrorist, given, as you mentioned in your example, there is no difference? What, are my photos of the building going to have 'terrorist pics lol' stamped on them?

Exactly. Your logic fails and you're just beginning to sound like a troll with a grudge against togs.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top