the law on public photography

urbansecrets

urbansecrets

Messages
154
Name
Barry
Edit My Images
No
Seeing as there has been a few public photography problems posted on here i thought i would post this to help clarify the legal position according to the ACPO
, keep it in your bag as ammo for when plod decide to make up laws when bored !

http://wp.me/p2Ikhj-1pL

Click the "then use this letter" link to download the letter as PDF file and print it out then feel free to school plod on their laws :whistle:
 
I'm sure that a site called crimebodge carries a lot of clout in law...
 
If you read the about page the site loses 100% credibility. It's run by a guy with an absolute vendetta. It is nonsense.
 
Some years ago I photographed an incident as it happened where three police officers were in the process of subduing a bloke they were arresting with several swift kicks to the body for good measure. One copper on scene then approached me and demanded I surrender my camera immediately. I had to 'respectfully' reminded him that through his actions he was effectively attempting to both intimidate a witness and tamper with evidence. I informed him that if he persisted then I would take note of his number and report him to his Chief Constable with a view to having him charged with two criminal offences. He walked away.
 
Nod said:
I'm sure that a site called crimebodge carries a lot of clout in law...
Click to expand...
kev2010 said:
If you read the about page the site loses 100% credibility. It's run by a guy with an absolute vendetta. It is nonsense.
Click to expand...
Agree with both those comments. However, the linked letter, to which urban secrets was referring, is a genuine letter issued by ACPO and does not contain any of the negativity apparent from the site.
 
urbansecrets said:
Seeing as there has been a few public photography problems posted on here i thought i would post this to help clarify the legal position according to the ACPO
, keep it in your bag as ammo for when plod decide to make up laws when bored !

http://wp.me/p2Ikhj-1pL

Click the "then use this letter" link to download the letter as PDF file and print it out then feel free to school plod on their laws :whistle:
Click to expand...
Very good and legally correct.Nice one.
 
oh and do make sure you're in a public place before you get high and mighty - a public place does not mean anywhere the public are allowed to go. - for example nearly every shopping centre, pub, resteraunt etc, most parks and playgrounds, public transport , bus and railways stations, tube, airports etc are actually private premises to which the public have access by permission.
 
big soft moose said:
oh and do make sure you're in a public place before you get high and mighty - a public place does not mean anywhere the public are allowed to go. - for example nearly every shopping centre, pub, resteraunt etc, most parks and playgrounds, public transport , bus and railways stations, tube, airports etc are actually private premises to which the public have access by permission.
Click to expand...

No permission is required as they come under the implied right of access law I believe
 
urbansecrets said:
No permission is required as they come under the implied right of access law I believe
Click to expand...

you believe wrong - all the above places are open by permission/invitation of their owners or operators , hence they can be closed. If there was an implied right of access to say a shopping centre they wouldn't be able to close their doors at night.

There's no such thing as 'implied right of access' in law - you either have a right of access ( public roads, access land, and rights of way ) or you don't (everywhere else)
its also worth noting that in England and wales a landowner could prohibit photography on access land or a right of way across his land if he so chose (although hardly any do)

however as far as this thread goes your 'rights' as a photographer in 'public' are pretty much only applicable to photography in the street - and only then if its a public road. ( photographers on private land by permission do still have rights of course - notably that the land/ premises owner can only tell you to stop or leave - he can't take your camera or force you to delete photos (at least not without a court order)
 
Common sense and good manners...

print out whatever you like.. argue the rules and laws.. do what your allowed make your point.... sigh..... OR? Common sense and good manners...
 
KIPAX said:
Common sense and good manners...

Common sense and good manners...
Click to expand...


The first attribute I have in buckets.......................the second, I struggle
 
big soft moose said:
you believe wrong - all the above places are open by permission/invitation of their owners or operators , hence they can be closed. If there was an implied right of access to say a shopping centre they wouldn't be able to close their doors at night.

There's no such thing as 'implied right of access' in law - you either have a right of access ( public roads, access land, and rights of way ) or you don't (everywhere else)
its also worth noting that in England and wales a landowner could prohibit photography on access land or a right of way across his land if he so chose (although hardly any do)

however as far as this thread goes your 'rights' as a photographer in 'public' are pretty much only applicable to photography in the street - and only then if its a public road. ( photographers on private land by permission do still have rights of course - notably that the land/ premises owner can only tell you to stop or leave - he can't take your camera or force you to delete photos (at least not without a court order)
Click to expand...

I understand where your coming from, but the new thing I hate is that certain people think they have a right to privacy where ever they are, you just lift your camera to your eye, and they feel they have to right to ask you what your doing, yet we live in the most watched country by ctv by are government.

:(
 
As well as being generally quite negative the article is also factually incorrect. There is no such thing as a RIPA warrant. There are RIPA authorisations for things like surveillance, accessing communications data, undercover operations and other covert tactics. Overtly seizing a camera (if it contained evidence as opposed to being evidence itself) is covered by S19 of PACE.
Section 19 of PACE, Police and Criminal Evidence Act, gives the police general powers to seize evidence.

Under section 19 when a constable (in uniform or otherwise) is lawfully on any premises he can seize anything which he finds on the premises if he has reasonable grounds for believing:
(i) that it has been obtained in consequence of the commission of an offence; or
(ii) that it is evidence in relation to an offence which he is investigating or any other offence;
And (iii) that it is necessary to seize it in order to prevent it being concealed, lost, damaged, altered or destroyed.

I should add that 'premises' includes a public or private place (Section 23 PACE)
 
Last edited:
smudgie49 said:
As well as being generally quite negative the article is also factually incorrect. There is no such thing as a RIPA warrant. There are RIPA authorisations for things like surveillance, accessing communications data, undercover operations and other covert tactics. Overtly seizing a camera (if it contained evidence as opposed to being evidence itself) is covered by S19 of PACE.
Section 19 of PACE, Police and Criminal Evidence Act, gives the police general powers to seize evidence.

Under section 19 when a constable (in uniform or otherwise) is lawfully on any premises he can seize anything which he finds on the premises if he has reasonable grounds for believing:
(i) that it has been obtained in consequence of the commission of an offence; or
(ii) that it is evidence in relation to an offence which he is investigating or any other offence;
And (iii) that it is necessary to seize it in order to prevent it being concealed, lost, damaged, altered or destroyed.

I should add that 'premises' includes a public or private place (Section 23 PACE)
Click to expand...


PACE? England and Wales only I believe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top