Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Weds 1st April: G20 protests - discussion, reaction and chat

I thought you lot hated the law.
Why don't you get a clue what you are talking about.

A quick look over your posting history suggests that you came to u75 for photography and have expressed concern about bigotry and homophobia...

...only to lauch into "anti-hippy" hysteria on this thread today. Rather than make people hate your guts for ever more, why don't you take the time to think about what you are saying?

In this case, maybe you'd like to reconsider sweeping blanket statements about 'you lot' and indulging in fairly pathetic stereotyping.
 
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=8779031#post8779031 has the law. They do not appear to need intent. It is a question of how the photo could be used. It is a shite law that has never been tested in court and was obviously not intended to be used in this way.
They still can not force photographers to delete the images, unless they have been arrested, charged and then found guilty. If the photos are the evidence, then they must not be deleted, otherwise there is no case!

http://www.urban75.org/photos/photographers-rights-and-the-law.html#terrorism
 
It is a shite law...

Very true.

...that has never been tested in court...

Also true.

...and was obviously not intended to be used in this way.

Almost certainly not true. How would a picture of a copper help a terrorist? If their evil scheme hinged on knowing what coppers look like, could they not go and look at some and then just remember? Yet another case of slipping in bullshit legislation under the unassailable guise of 'anti-terrorism'.
 
fuck... ITV news just said 1 man's collapsed and died at the protests today.:(

said man in his 30's, and police complaints people have been notified (forgot the exact organisation name they said)

anyone know anything else about this?
 
They still can not force photographers to delete the images, unless they have been arrested, charged and then found guilty. If the photos are the evidence, then they must not be deleted, otherwise there is no case!

http://www.urban75.org/photos/photographers-rights-and-the-law.html#terrorism

great minds think alike.

from your excellent guide:

"There's nothing stopping you taking pictures of people in pubic places within reason, but if you start shoving your zoom lens up their nostrils or taking action shots of their every step, there's a chance you might get a clip around the ear from your aggrieved subject or possibly face a legal charge of harassment or breach of the peace." :D
 
If this is true then they really have overstepped the mark. They have no right to delete the images. If the images contain 'illegal' images, then they are evidence.

as said on twitter people have phones and lap tops e mail worldwarfreeatriseupdotnet for ftp access will upload any images
 
Almost certainly not true. How would a picture of a copper help a terrorist? If their evil scheme hinged on knowing what coppers look like, could they not go and look at some and then just remember? Yet another case of slipping in bullshit legislation under the unassailable guise of 'anti-terrorism'.

OK the Home Office might have slipped it in but whether it would be thought by the Appeal Court or House of Lords L that it was the intent of Parliament to stop climate protestors who were having the shit kicked out of them taking pictures is another matter.
 
Waterloo Station, 6pm. A police van arrives and out spill 8 riot cops. No helmets, but turtle necks and hi-vis jackets. I says to them, "Had fun?" Our brave boys in blue, "Fuck off, we can always nick one more!" To the sgt* "Why have none of your men got their numbers showing?" "Just fuck off now!"

So glad that 30% of the money I've earned today goes to the state.




*sgt was the only one with id on his shoulders, no numbers, just 3 stripes.
 
as said on twitter people have phones and lap tops e mail worldwarfreeatriseupdotnet for ftp access will upload any images

Good stuff. Hopefully some footage will show of coppers demanding that photos be deleted, if that is indeed what's been happening.
 
That's exactly it. All my posts today have been quite consistent re my views of the coverage - what the fuck are they playing at now?

I haven't seen News At Ten today but I'd assume it's because (a) people watch News At Ten and (b) nobody watches News24.

Same as with the recent protests with the foreign workers brought in - the News At Ten coverage was obviously deliberately edited to make the protestors out to be racists. Edited from their own footage shown later the same day on Newsnight (but obviously not watched by nearly as many people).
 
If this is true then they really have overstepped the mark. They have no right to delete the images. If the images contain 'illegal' images, then they are evidence.

I tried to take a phone pic of cops supervising two guys removeing two chalked @ Anarchy signs in Coleman Street - I was told that if I continued my phone would have to be "taken as evidence" - fucking surreal!!!
and scarey

I am totally enraged
 
I thought that they had exactly the right idea - if you're worried about being kettled in and not being able to move around, why not take a tent and some food and make staying there the whole point?

Which is why I imagine they have to be stomped on, I suppose. Can't have people who don't mind it when the police "contain them for public order reasons".
this makes me so so angry. compared to the shit storm up threadneedle street (which was largely allowed and bought about by the plod anyway), to hear about the fuckers intimidating such a fluffy bunch of people having such a decent time with an agreed plan of retreat smacks of heavy handed authoritarianism of the very worst. excel should be fun eh cunts yes:
 
I tried to take a phone pic of cops supervising two guys removeing two chalked @ Anarchy signs in Coleman Street - I was told that if I continued my phone would have to be "taken as evidence" - fucking surreal!!!
and scarey

I am totally enraged
yep, it's the police's legalised theft trump card:rolleyes:
 
22:20 - Climate Camp: Up to a thousand people remain inside the besiged camp. The police have said that they will allow people to leave, but will take names and addresses of everyone who does so. There's been a camp meeting but no consensus has been reached on what to do. Generally there is still a positive atmosphere amonst the peaceful demonstrators.
indymedia
 
according to sky a 30 year old man died at around 7.30pm this evening near the BofE.

the smear campaign is up and running, they're saying they were pelted with bottles when they tried to take him away.
 
It's OK, the MET has released a statement, "All those involved in today's violence will be tracked down and prosecuted."

That'll be a lot of Old Bill going down then.

Or am I naive?
 
btw, has there been any mention on urban about 10 space hijackers being nicked earlier in the day for 'impersonating a police officer'?

12:12 - Space Hijackers: 10 of them have been arrested under Section 19 of the Police Act for 'impersonating the police' outside News International. They have been taken to the West End central police station.
earlier
10:30: The Space Hijackers have turned up outside the RBS with an 'police armoured vehicle' with lots of CCTV cameras on top. The vehicle hasn't been able to move towards Bishopsgate because police has stopped it and are now conducting a thorough search.
indymedia again

fucking ridiculous charge if that's true... hope they're all doing ok, sure they'll be fine because they're generally fairly sorted IME.

so that's 10 of the 24 arrests:rolleyes:
 
according to sky a 30 year old man died at around 7.30pm this evening near the BofE.

the smear campaign is up and running, they're saying they were pelted with bottles when they tried to take him away.
Obviously nothing to do with the police forcing him to stay in that area for hours on end then.
 

article-1166349-04395000000005DC-112_468x286.jpg


Police have resorted to wearing riot gear this evening as they confront protesters

hollow lol. ''resorted'' Great pic/quote juxtaposition.
 
http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=8779031#post8779031 has the law. They do not appear to need intent. It is a question of how the photo could be used. It is a shite law that has never been tested in court and was obviously not intended to be used in this way.
The Court of Appeal inserted mens rea into a similar law a while back, and it's likely they'll do the same with this when a case reaches court. Which can't be too long if the police are making free with it.
 
Back
Top Bottom