Police Bullying

Have a look and listen:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cpP6tRqLaM8

The PC is way out of order, illegal search, illegal siezure/theft, threatening behaviour, lies, and more.

In my opinion he should be in court.

I agree the PC is bring rather heavy-handed in his approach, Then again it's in pretty bad taste for the amateur photographer to be shooting the aftermath of the incident. I would've stayed well away with my camera. I can't understand why he wanted to shoot it?

Heavy handed? Theft - he illegal took the camera, threats of assault, lies, speaking total rubbish, illegal search ..., illegally demanding the persons details - he had done nothing wrong and the police have no authority to demand them as no crime had been committed.

And what is wrong with recoding an accident in pictures? How many times do police appeal for pictures from the public.

Perhaps I should have watched all of the clip! Was at work at the time.

I agree with you Gamka. This behaviour reminds me of the attitude of the police in South Africa where I grew up in the 60's an 70's in the very bad days of apartheid.

Horrendous behaviour from a member of the police.

---

Pentax hybrid user - Digital K3, film 645 and 35mm SLR and Pentax (&other) lenses adapted to Fuji X and Panasonic L digital
Fan of DA limited and old manual lenses

On top of the Met Police guidance there is also:

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B0eNVR3Ar16ZVm1WNU9ZaFhwNzg/edit?pli=1

It's OK, you'll just get an ipna in future .....

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/10472978/What-does-Ipna-stand-for-...

---

Lurking is shirking.!

Of all this sort of stuff we have seen this is one of the worst.

---

Ken
“We must avoid however, snapping away, shooting quickly and without thought, overloading ourselves with unnecessary images that clutter our memory and diminish the clarity of the whole.” - Henri Cartier-Bresson -

The problem with this case is the person was dying in the car and whilst I don't agree with the majority of actions of the police officer his reasoning for what he did was actually sensible.

He argued that he didn't want the photographer to post on to the internet the number plate of the car which would then identify the dying lady before the police could, put yourself in the family's position carrying on with their daily business looking on Facebook and then come across a photo of potentially their dying relative.

The photographer was being a right jerk about too and like I said the copper could have handled it all a little better too without threatening to delete images, arrest, wasting the guys day etc.... I wish people would just be civil and talk to each other to get their points across without this endless going around in circles...

If he had been a genuine photojournalist he would have spoken to the copper at the scene first anyhow to find out exactly what was happening and introduced himself to the police.

---

PPG Wedding photography Flickr
Concert photography

Currently on a Pentax hiatus until an FF Pentax is released

Unlikely.

I have tried that and basically been told to "**** off" by another who did not know the law of the land or the orders from his superiors. I just ignored the threats and then started to photograph.

If the police officer was so adamant that an arrestable offence had been committed, he then basically committed perjury by demanding that evidence of that offence be destroyed by deleting the images.
Even ignoring evidence destruction, making the threat of violence to the photographer and threatening to have him arrested and detained for no other reason than to cause him grief should be enough for disciplinary action and penalty.

If I swore at a police officer for any reason, let alone threatening violence, I would be arrested and fined, at the very least. If the police are to maintain any credibility at all then this sort of behaviour by police officers should be seen to be punished, to the same level that anyone else would be.

it's looking bad for the police if the Mail is on their tail ....

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2535198/Well-nick-I-make-day-living-hell...


A bit more on IPNA, seems a little open to interpretation!
IPNA: from the Guardian by George Monbiot.

The bill would permit injunctions against anyone of 10 or older who "has engaged or threatens to engage in conduct capable of causing nuisance or annoyance to any person". It would replace asbos with ipnas (injunctions to prevent nuisance and annoyance), which would not only forbid certain forms of behaviour, but also force the recipient to discharge positive obligations.

---

Lurking is shirking.!

I agree with that too, but it's hard to remain civil when a policeman is being as overbearing and unreasonable as the one here. The officer could have asked the guy to desist from taking photos while he was doing his job, and refrain from publishing them online until the woman's relatives were informed. Not on the basis of the law, but on the basis of common courtesy.

For all we know the police officer might have done this and met with a defensive attitude from the photographer, which may have escalated the situation.

---

[link=https://500px.com/will_brealey/[/link]

There is a clamour of application for jobs in the police, I don't see the problem in getting rid of people who can't cut the mustard and understand "policing by consent".

If any one of my colleagues treated somebody in this way they would be out on their ear.

Standards should be set high as the pool of applicants is large. How Simon Harwood was ever re-employed by the police is an indictment of the system. As Andrew Mitchell found out the police sometimes are a law unto themselves so us mere mortals need fewer draconian laws and the highest standards from the police.

---

Lurking is shirking.!