Here we go again

According to The Register once more a photographer has been having police problems


link

This seems to be not the first time this poor guy has had problems as he is mentioned in another item from El Reg

link

Would you have left without your 'phone - or a receipt for it, together with an explanation, I wouldn't. This sounds weird to me, given that the photographer has had previous dealings. Always two sides .....

Ray

I would love to have been a fly on London Wall and seen how this little drama unfolded. As Ray says, there are always two sides.

Al

At least they had their numbers visible.
And there is a free press to hold them to account.
An allegation of theft is likely to cause a fairly senior response.

Its the security types that make me a little sick. You can't tell them not to report as you (the public/police) need their help. The building owners won't act as they'd prefer no publicity apart from that which they sanction.

I'd like to see private property which allows public access, like shopping centres and plaza's to office buildings to be treated the same as public spaces. If land owners want to stop free access / photography they should be forced to do so and enclose and secure the whole of their property and warn the public with a nasty signage proclaiming their rights at their gatehouses.

It would be clearer who owns what.

If you can wander off the street into a private space, it should be treated as public.

Also any security guard providing information to the police resulting in a section 44 or similar should be listed on any paperwork and should be required to give written statement at a police station. It should become a public record, searchable and accountable. Any with good reason will not have a problem doing so.

It would be interesting to see them perjuring themselves. "Well he was bolshie when I said 'you can't do that'" etc etc.

Rent-a-cops have no more legal powers than you or I, you're perfectly within your rights to walk away from them and leave the area. If they try to grab you then it becomes assault. They have no right to see images, cannot search you, and cannot force you to delete images.

A friend of mine used to work in that industry (he left because the company was almost bankrupt and failed to pay him for over a month, despite promises to the contrary. They've since gone bust and reappeared under a different name while he and other former staff attempt to get their back pay from the receivers). IIRC security staff are now legally required to be registered, if anyone can remember the name of the industry body then you could probably scare them a bit by asking to see their registration card and noting all the details on it. Petty bullies don't like it when the spectre of someone bigger and meaner is invoked!

Sometimes I wonder why these things happen. Could it be the way we behave?

Once I have been approached by security, while taking pictures of airplanes at their stand in a Norwegian airport. Very polite he asked why I was photographing, and just as polite I explained my great interest in avionics, and that was that. He went away, and I continued my photography.

Over the years I have learned not to upset security people. After all they have a job to do, but if you behave properly you won't experience too much hassle.

I find courtesy always helps, with a lot of these videos, there seems to be a non co-operative attitude with the tog. I always carry two pieces of I.D. with me.

Apparently England is a different country then the rest of the EU Terry, I wouldn't worry to much about it. They even ride on the left side on the road

...and when we drive on the right side, they must drive on the wrong side, right?

Yes you got it

The differences became apparent when talking about ID in another thread.
In the Netherlands and Germany don't know about Norway but we need to carry a form of ID here in case we get halted by the police for walking through a red stop sign or things like that. For me it isn't a problem and neither for the rest of the Netherlands but somehow the English see it as a form of breach in privacy. Also a thing as in helping with a police investigation by giving your DNA is a no go for most.
Someone put it here perfectly, in the Netherlands most think that what have you got to worry if you've done nothing wrong but most English think, why should I do that if I've done nothing wrong.
Not that one is better then the other but it shows you the difference

And I think things like this with the police and politics have something to do with it, don't know if it's the nature of the people or have they have grown to become that way because of all the things that has happened.

Well put Stefan!

My ( and I stress my ) opinion is this:
The (now previous) government brought in so many laws which eroded civil liberties. The laws were, for the most, poorly worded, allowing for mis-interpretation. Or, was this deliberate to allow for easily extending their use without having to go back before parliament?

An example. Anti-terrorism laws which enabled local councils to carry out surveillance led to a family ( including children ) being placed under surveillance. Their crime? They had applied for a place at the local primary school and the council didn't believe they were living where they said they were!

DNA. If I were to give my DNA as part of a police enquiry, even if I wasn't charged with any crime, the government would keep that on file permanently. Even the European courts have said that is illegal, but the UK government ( again, the previous administration ) just said they'd "consider the finding".

It is this kind of thing which has led to the mis-trust building up over the past decade to levels I have never seen before.

That's SO true! I don't think that I've ever seen (in the last 2 or 3 decades) a piece of legislation, once passed, that hasn't been misinterpreted out of all proportion and common-sense, to the point where it becomes a joke. Recent examples have included parts of PACE, parts of H&SE law, the Terrorism Act generally and anything that touches on stop and search.

The genie's well and truly out of the bottle now and it would take a massive upheaval and probably some European Court action to get it all back to a reasonable position again. Meanwhile, lawyers are nest-feathering and feelings run higher and higher.

Ray.

Father Ted things like you describe aren't allowed in the Netherlands, they need to get approval of the court to surveillance someone and when you take part of such an DNA test so to speak it can only be used for that case and it isn't kept on record either. Only when you've a criminal record your DNA is on record by the police and can it be used.
I can see why you've such an attitude because of all the things.

By the looks of it, it's only escalating things.

Wasn't the UK against the EU Constitution

So you don't feel competent to decide when it's safe to cross the road. No smiley.