UK photographers: the law and your rights: discussion

[Bahnhof Strasse]

Anyone fancy an urban photography day out in London? As individuals move in a loose pack and take pictures of 'sensitive' sites, Mi6, Mi5, MOD, BAe, McDonald's etc. - anyone who gets hassled gets photographed by the others.

Could be a hoot?

 

[Dr Dolittle]

A few years ago I went into my local newsagent for a paper, and the woman behind the counter told me this story:

"Someone tried to photograph my shop the other day [from the street, presumably]. I said to him, 'Hand over your camera, or I call the police,' so he did. No one photographs MY shop!"

I would like to have told her that if she'd called the police, they'd have told her the photographer wasn't committing any crime, but in taking his camera, she certainly was. One reason why I didn't was because she kept two huge Alsatians behind the counter. But I showed her what I thought by never going into that shop again.

 

[pogofish]

On the subject of photographing shops - Here's a pretty jawdropping report of an incident that happened over an upcoming exhibition on a controversial planning issue in my neck of the woods:

http://aberdeenvoice.com/2011/10/security-or-censorship-photos-banned-near-utg-show/

 

[gavman]

"I don't appreciate being filmed. [...] I am the law" - Met PC D724

the boy done good

 

[sim667]

Is there not a name and shame website for police and security guards where photographers/videographers can put up their pics and name them?

 

[weltweit]

Is there not a name and shame website for police and security guards where photographers/videographers can put up their pics and name them?

www.urban75.net

 

[sim667]

well that tells you your rights, and has case studies, there's no such name and shame though.

 

[XR75]

What was encouraging was that the police seem to have finally developed a clue but the security guards remains as stupid as ever.

Or they're doing exactly what they're told to.

Here's another incident with someone taking photos in a mall.

“He then said I had been spotted taking photos in the shopping centre which was ’illegal’ and not allowed and then asked me to delete any photos I had taken. I explained I had taken 2 photos of my daughter eating ice cream and that she was the only person in the photo so didn’t see any problem. i also said that I wasn’t that willing to delete the photo’s and there seemed little point as I had actually uploaded them to facebook.

“He then said i would have to stay right where I was while he called the police, which seemed as little extreme. My daughter was crying by this stage, but I said that was fine I would wait and began to comfort my daughter who was saying she didn’t like the man and wanted to go. After about 5 minutes two police officers arrived.

http://www.thelawyer.com/taking-photographs-at-braehead-shopping-centre/1009790.article

What makes it a little more mysterious is the statement released by the police further down in the article.

“The members of the public who asked for the security staff to become involved have told us that they did so for reasons which had absolutely nothing to do with him taking photographs of his daughter. They had a very specific concern, which I am not in a position to discuss publicly, that they felt the need to report. It was because of this very specific concern that security staff became involved. They were right to raise their concern and we are glad that they did so.

 

[weltweit]

It was because of this very specific concern that security staff became involved. They were right to raise their concern and we are glad that they did so.

What they mean is that a man taking photos of a little girl in these times is assumed to be a paedo ! even if the little girl is in fact his daughter! - what a fucking state of affairs we have gotten into!!

 

[winjer]

"Security guards have no right to prevent street photography," says Home Office

The Home Office and the British Security Industry Association have published a new set of guidelines for security guards confirming that photography in public places is legal and cannot be restricted. More than a year after Home Secretary Theresa May launched a review of the UK's counter-terrorism and security powers, a new set of guidelines have been published for security guards, who, in an increasing number of cases, have been accused of preventing professional photographers from working in public places.

http://www.bjp-online.com/british-j...guards-prevent-street-photography-home-office

 

[Hocus Eye.]

Thanks winjer for that link. I have downloaded the guidlines PDF to my mobile phone.

 

[FunkyUK]

Is anyone concerned that the Levenson enquiry is going to lead to rehash of the laws into photography in public places?

 

[Boo38]

Well, it seems s.44 of the Anti terror law is still rife in Hampshire.
I was stopped & searched under said act yesterday for taking a photograph of an Ambulance and a police car outside a property in my area, the usual Q's ensued and when I didn't consent they slapped on the bracelets and detained me for the purposes of a search under s.44.....and there was me thinking it had been canned as it was unlawful??

 

[FridgeMagnet]

Well, it seems s.44 of the Anti terror law is still rife in Hampshire.
I was stopped & searched under said act yesterday for taking a photograph of an Ambulance and a police car outside a property in my area, the usual Q's ensued and when I didn't consent they slapped on the bracelets and detained me for the purposes of a search under s.44.....and there was me thinking it had been canned as it was unlawful??

It has been, and I don't think S44 was ever in effect in Hampshire... though I could be wrong on the latter.

 

[Pickman's model]

Well, it seems s.44 of the Anti terror law is still rife in Hampshire.
I was stopped & searched under said act yesterday for taking a photograph of an Ambulance and a police car outside a property in my area, the usual Q's ensued and when I didn't consent they slapped on the bracelets and detained me for the purposes of a search under s.44.....and there was me thinking it had been canned as it was unlawful??

i hope you have the search form; i would consult a solicitor with regard to suing for assault - i would be interested to see how they'd justify the use of force and iirc use of handcuffs has to be recorded (don't quote me on that though)

 

[Boo38]

Yes got the form/receipt of the stop & search, complained to the Professional Standards department, and local MP, just wish I hadn't had a drink as only got 15 seconds of video footage before they slapped the cuffs on!

 

[editor]

I've added this to the growing case studies here: http://www.urban75.org/photos/photography-case-studies.html

 

[cybertect]

Does it actually say s44 on the form?!!!

Detained unlawfully if it does.

 

[fractionMan]

I know this will have been mentioned before, but is there a link to a FAQ on photographing at demos? I'll be taking my SLR tommorow.

eta: ah, here:http://www.urban75.org/photos/photographing-protests.html

 

[cybertect]

Are you in Southampton?

Rather disturbing story about a guy there having his camera taken as 'evidence' by two policemen today.

http://www.talkphotography.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=369433

It appears the the police were fakes (impersonating police officers, not PCSOs ) operating an elaborate scam.

 

[Boo38]

No Portsmouth....
Sorry for the delay in replying, been busy with this complaint.
So far I have informed my local MP and have emailed the Professional Standards Department, I'm about to send them a hard copy of my complaint also.
The form the use was a C12 A?? And they use codes for what type of search, mine was search code 'J' which translates into 'Terrorism s.44(2)'
I took some quick legal advice from a local firm I use and they simply said to make a formal complaint to the front desk at the station, that proved to be as much use as indicators on a submarine.
I will look into using Bindmans in London as they do this on a daily basis, unless anyone else can suggest a decent law firm who deal with these specific matters?
I'm a computer mong so can't upload the two photo's that lead to me being a terrorist, but I do have 15 seconds of video footage, just before they slap the bracelets on!

 

[cybertect]

The form the use was a C12 A?? And they use codes for what type of search, mine was search code 'J' which translates into 'Terrorism s.44(2)'

C12A is the standard form to be completed after a 'Street Encounter' in police-speak.

Hampshire police's Procedure documents are here

The most relevant being 24700, 24701 and 24702.

24701 is STREET ENCOUNTERS – USE OF FORMS C12A AND C12B

3.8.2.

In an effort to reduce unnecessary bureaucracy the information required to be recorded on the C12A Street Encounters form in relation to Stop and Account will be kept to the minimum that is necessary to comply with Government data recording requirements.

The minimum recording requirements are as follows:

a) Code;
b) Relevant Power;
c) Visual ID;
d) Self Defined Ethnicity;
e) Officer’s Last Name, Collar No., Rank and Station.

So, I'm correct in understanding that they've entered Code as 'J' and Relevant Power as 'Terrorism s.44(2)?

 

[cybertect]

Have you been in touch with Amateur Photographer magazine? They would be *very* interested in the story and may be able to give you some advice.

 

[Boo38]

Hi, thank you for your valuable advice,
I didn't think of AP, I'll get onto that over the weekend.
Yes code 'J' was entered into the form, and it refers to 'Terrorism s.44(2), correct.

AFAIK that act has been suspended, and it all now comes under something different? All I am really after is to make the force accountable for their actions and give them further bad publicity surrounding their dealings with the Public going about their normal lawful lives, I do not expect to be accused of being a terrorist every time I go out doing my hobby.

P.S. Just emailed AP to give them a heads up and ask for their advice.

 

[cybertect]

Great. Don't suppose there's a chance of a pic of the form?

 

[Boo38]

3.9. Terrorism Stops
3.9.1. Where a Section 44 Terrorism Act 2000 authorisation has been
made, it conveys the power for a police officer in uniform to
‘Stop AND Search’ a person in a location covered by that
authorisation.

3.9.4. When issuing C12A Street Encounters forms in respect of
Section 44 Terrorism Act 2000 stop and searches, officers
should write “RAINBOW” in the box titled ‘Operation Name’ and
enter the occurrence number in the box titled ‘Occurrence
Number’ which refers to the OCU vulnerable site that the C12A
relates to.

3.9.4. Is the clincher, no such wording was ever filled in as there was no such vulnerable site, just two enforcement officers feeling bored and wanting something to do.

 

[cybertect]

Thanks. You might want to redact your name and/or address on that, though.

Forgive me my blindness, but where's the mention of s44? Is it on the other side?

 

[Boo38]

No, I'm not bothered about them knowing my name etc I have nothing to fear, the mention of s.44 is the 'search code' box toward the bottom "J" is the code and "Terrorism s.44(2)" is the Legal power exercised!

 

[Pickman's model]

I know this will have been mentioned before, but is there a link to a FAQ on photographing at demos? I'll be taking my SLR tommorow.

eta: ah, here:http://www.urban75.org/photos/photographing-protests.html

No Portsmouth....
Sorry for the delay in replying, been busy with this complaint.
So far I have informed my local MP and have emailed the Professional Standards Department, I'm about to send them a hard copy of my complaint also.
The form the use was a C12 A?? And they use codes for what type of search, mine was search code 'J' which translates into 'Terrorism s.44(2)'
I took some quick legal advice from a local firm I use and they simply said to make a formal complaint to the front desk at the station, that proved to be as much use as indicators on a submarine.
I will look into using Bindmans in London as they do this on a daily basis, unless anyone else can suggest a decent law firm who deal with these specific matters?
I'm a computer mong so can't upload the two photo's that lead to me being a terrorist, but I do have 15 seconds of video footage, just before they slap the bracelets on!

from the sounds of the film you were detained unlawfully and the search itself was unlawful on the grounds that they are exercising a search power under section 1 of pace (pace box also ticked on form) but did not introduce themselves prior to the search giving their name (or warrant number) and the station to which they are attached, as per section 2 of pace.

 

[Boo38]

from the sounds of the film you were detained unlawfully and the search itself was unlawful on the grounds that they are exercising a search power under section 1 of pace (pace box also ticked on form) but did not introduce themselves prior to the search giving their name (or warrant number) and the station to which they are attached, as per section 2 of pace.

The footage is only a very brief afterthought on my part, they may have well introduced themselves prior to that footage being take, although I strongly doubt it as I only know the name of the enforcement revenue collector from the s&s form.

A PACE search was conducted, but the reason for the search was under s.44(2) of the Anti terror act. Which I am led to believe is suspended regarding ECHR.

And as you correctly say, I had no idea of which station they are from, still don't now??