Another Arrest

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/dec/15/italian-student-police-arrest-filming

They're not even Police officers...

They're just hobby bobbies on a power trip. This is just getting absurd now.

As far as photographing goes we will be under the heel of a police state soon!

Watching the video of that I found it very interesting that the second PCSO actually payed no attention to what was going on - I felt his body language showed that he was embarrassed by the whole episode.

No allowance was made for her imperfect command of the language - yes her comprehension is obviously good - but occasionally she uses an expression / phrase that can be misinterpreted by a native / first language speaker .

I really think that the Police forces should be a little more careful in their approach . We are going to lose visitors because of episodes like this - who is going to want to come to London with a camera and risk being approached , asked to prove their ID and give the reason why they are taking pictures .

That PCSO was a complete ass, as for the police officers who arrested just on the say so of a PCSO what a joke.
As a police officer, I may of asked her why she was paying attention to the CCTV system alot, but there are ways and means of asking people questions that they do not have to feel harrashed, if you are a good copper you can even find out what you need to know, with out them even knowing you was asking them questions.
So yes as a policeman I would of found her actions of filming the CCTV alot very odd, and yes I may of asked her questions, but I think the PCSO took the wrong approach to it, he was an ass from the off, and had already made up his mind where that situation was going.

I agree but returning with 6 officers is a tad OTT... I was stopped by an officer under section 44 at Manchester airport and the officer obviously knew I was an enthusiast but he just had to go thru the motions. He was also very courteous and very open. At the end of the day he was doing his job which I fully understand but the guy in the video was just throwing his weight about.

While some PCSO and junior police officers continue to harrass photographers going about their lawful pursuits senior police repeatedly emphasise that there is no law against photography in public places in the UK. The Guardian reports Metropolitan Police Assistant Commissioner John Yates saying that there is no law against anyone taking pictures of buildings. This message does not seem to be getting through to some of the jobsworths in lower ranks. Perhaps its time for the bosses to start taking disciplinary action against their less enlightened colleagues further down the line.
Our political leaders should also examine the damage this aggressive attitude is having on Britain's tourist industry.
david

Very interesting video.

For once though, as an Italian myself, I actually don't think the first part of the story is inappropriate.

Had she been in italy her attitude would have been absolutely justified, and her initial reaction to the PCSO's completely normal. Having lived in this country for long enough though I understand that whilst it is ridiculous to be stopped under act 44 for taking pictures in public places, one ALWAYS has to put himself in the position of power, by telling the truth, and not by playing 'cocky' (because cocky she was - in the face of the pcso). Had she said from the beginning that she was an art student doing research on a project, then there wouldn't have been any problems. Not only, but showing what she had shot would have completely cleared the situation.

Instead she had the typical italian attitude towards authority, and instead of accepting the check (like security at the airport - that nobody likes - but evrybody accepts) she could have concluded the conversation in 2 minutes, and walked off making fun of the stupid pcso's that stopped her.

Now, whilst I obviously hate this whole idea of being checked for what you do, I also understand that a foreigner that comes to take pictures of buildings *can* be suspicious. I wouldn't do it without being very self reassured of my position, and ready to explain what i was doing to any authority.

What happened in the second part of the video is a different story, because clearly the PCSO's went to the police officers and toldthem that the girl was being thick, and the police officers went crazy and forcefully cuffed her. Again, I doubt that she didn't react in this instance either, its a very italian thing to do. Had she proven her status with the MET, probably nothing would have happened.

Unfortunately Italians are used to undermining authority, and for good reasons: there have been many cases in recent times, where young people have been arrested for a minor crime (small quantities of ash, or minor drug dealing) and have died whilst in custody - after having been beaten to death by policeman, or prison guards. No wonder italians dislike authority. (I would hope england to be a different story though)

Part of the problem is , I think , that she was interested in the buildings and trying to get shots of them . That's OK as far as it goes .

Where she came unstuck was that she included, in her filming, the various Security Cameras .

This is more or less avoidable with a still camera and being careful - but can you / do you , have time to ensure that you do not include the cameras ?

I still feel that if this sort of situation continues we are going to lose tourists . Gone are the days when Cops would stand happily and let you photograph them - they now wish to preserve their right to anonymity . That's understandable - they have a right to private life.

It takes a brave person to stand there when a PCSO comes up and says they are going to stop you taking photos , and want to see your ID .

How many of us do walk round with ID of the photographic type which is what the PCSOs will be wanting ?

Do you need to take with you the written instructions from someone to take these pictures ?

Is it going to become necessary to ask for permission to take photographs of buildings ? That would certainly spoil the spontaneity of this type of filming

One second.

nobody is asking for " ID of the photographic type" - and Yes, I go around with my ID because I want to. Because i'm a legal person, and don't mind proving my identity to somebody who is (too cautiously) inquiring into my actions. (which I understand being possibly suspicious)

"Do you need to take with you the written instructions from someone to take these pictures ?"

No, I don't think that's the point. THe point is IMO, to be aware of oneself, and what you are doing. THere is nothing wrong in taking photos of stuff in the street, then say it: 'Im a street photographer, I take street portraits, I am an amateur, and I am in this country legally, and have every right to take these photos. Actually look - this is a great portrait of a person in the streets of london - (showing photo). DOn;'t you think this would be enough?

I'm not disagreeing at all .

I am concerned that this taking photos 'thing' is going a bit far .

I don't carry ID with me [ unless out of the country - then I do ]

Yes we should be aware of ourselves AND other people .

I can imagine the reaction from some of the 'Jobsworth' types if you say I'm a street photographer - their instant reaction is likely to be "prove it " Whether or not you have to have one I'm willing to bet they will ask for your licence [ is there still one for Street photographers - I think there was at one time ] It's not just the PCSOs we have to be aware of - there are all the private Security Folk too - you just need to look at reports about their reactions - the Merrill Lynch episode recently is just one example.

I would always be happy to show my pictures [ such as they are ] but I'll handle my camera and they will NOT get my Memory card

AH!

What a marvel! Gareth and I agree on something!!!

A little clarity here on powers under which part of the Terrorism Act 2000 a Police Officer ie not a PCSO, may take action;

Under section 43 of the Terrorism Act 2000 a police officer may stop and search a person they reasonably suspect to be a terrorist, to discover whether that person has in their possession anything which may constitute evidence that they are a terrorist. This power can be exercised at any time and in any location.

NOTE - '..reasonably suspect..'

Under section 44, uniformed police officers may stop and search anyone within an authorised area, etc

NOTE - reasonable suspicion is not required, but if that exists then section 43 should be used.

NOTE - 'authorised areas' are secret for the purposes of National Security, but are known to Police, etc.

If you're stopped under section 44, first question should surely be 'Is this an authorised area for the purposes of the Terrorism Act 2000?'.

Forum members who are Police Officers may wish to confirm that PCSO's are not given powers under the Terrorism Act (unless accompanied by a Police Officer).

You are correct, PCSO's do not carry any of the section 44 powers, they have the same powers as anyone else, nothing more and nothing less.

Gareth - pm sent.

Should be there now. Said I'd sent it before I wrote it