Photographer questioned by police under anti-terror laws...

Under the 2002 Police Reform Act, PCSOs have the power to demand the name and address of a person suspected of committing a criminal offence or for antisocial behaviour.

I'm just wondering where will this end up?
End up in a data base where from future reference, shows that one is 'suspected of photography under Section 44?'?
 
Can you just refuse to provide them with any details at all? On a sort of "arrest me or go away" basis?
 
It really is pretty disgraceful the way they think DSLR users are more "dangerous" than P&S users. Surely a P&S takes a very much decent enough picture for the purpose and is a way more covert way of taking pictures. I think they should arrest more P&S users then we'd see a backlash against this blatant excessive display of power!
 
I hadn't seen the BBC photographer clip before but it is an eye-opener. Havng seen so many shots being taken for the Christmas lights switch on in town centres, I do wonder what next. Oh dear, better stop taking photos of the moon incase I am accused of plotting to invade it...
Come to think of it, maybe it is a law to say if you cant get an exposure right to be able to take a light/night shot on first attempt, and I'm no pro, its an arrestable offence?
 
ChazHurst said:
It really is pretty disgraceful the way they think DSLR users are more "dangerous" than P&S users. Surely a P&S takes a very much decent enough picture for the purpose and is a way more covert way of taking pictures.
Click to expand...

Aye where I work we're much more concerned by users of P&S ones than SLR's.
 
Personally I believe that the National Union of Journalists etc., should take a stand on this. Basically everyone involved in the Media should refuse to show pictures (moving or stills) of Politicians for one month.... I wonder what they would do then when they (the Politicians) are starved of the oxygen of publicity.

Perhaps the boycott could begin on the run up to the next general election.
 
I like the political boycott idea. But the fact is that while the DSLR user is being persecuted, they, sorry we, are easy targets. A big camera with a big lens is easier to spot than a little P&S device. Equally, why not persecute users of free to use mapping and satellite services like google earth. If one man's right to freedom is being challenged then why not every?
 
I’ve been stopped by police about 10 times this year, but are they dumb if I wanted some photos of a place to terrorise I would use Google street.
 
Also, according to another article by The Independent you don't have to provide name and address unless stopped while driving a car.
 
Here's the circular sent out and published on Home Office webbie
http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/about-us/publications/home-office-circulars/circulars-2009/012-2009/

and here's a recent news:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/dec/08/police-search-photographer-terrorism-powers?CMP=AFCYAH

Guardian said:
City of London police said its response to Smith had been proportionate. "When questioned by officers, the man declined to give an explanation and he was therefore informed that in light of the concerns of security staff and in the absence of an explanation, he would be searched under the Terrorism Act," said a spokesman. "After the man's bag was searched, he explained he was a freelance photographer taking photos of buildings. Once this explanation was received there was no further action."
Click to expand...

Nice to know that it's search first, ask questions later with an approach by 7 officers!
 
In England & Wales, you don't have to give your name and address to a Police Officer unless he/she suspects you of committing an offence, is going to report you for it, and tells you what it is. (The law is different in Scotland, where you do have to give your details to a Police Officer, so don't withold it or you could be arrested for that!)

If you are stopped and searched under the terroism acts, then you still don't have to give your name and address if you don't want to, unless the first paragraph applies.

Many people do though, because it's 'easier', and more painless that way.

:)
 
Mr Jones said:
Nice to know that it's search first, ask questions later with an approach by 7 officers!
Click to expand...

Or how about the fact he didn't answer a simple question and could have avoided having his bag searched simply by answering the first question by saying "I'm an freelance photographer taking some building shots"

A lot of photographers don't do themselves any favors by throwing their toys out of the pram when questioned.
 
That is true but when you're approached by 7 officers, wouldn't you have your tongue caught in the mouth? Common sense would have an officer approach with a casual chat rather than decent in force tbh.
 
he was spotted and followed by two Police Community Support Officers.
Click to expand...

There were no 'policemen' involved here. PCSOs are not policemen, and don't have the same powers as policemen.THey don;t have the power of arrest. Depending on the area, the most they can do is detain you for 20 minutes and wait for a 'proper' policemen come. they cannot stop you simply walking off though. They don;t have the power to search either.

I don't want it to sound like such a sweeping generalisation, but some PCSOs are notorious for doing this kind of thing. a lot of police officers don't get on with PCSOs for their 'tell tail' esque behaviour.
 
Tooks said:
In England & Wales, you don't have to give your name and address to a Police Officer unless he/she suspects you of committing an offence, is going to report you for it, and tells you what it is. (The law is different in Scotland, where you do have to give your details to a Police Officer, so don't withold it or you could be arrested for that!)

If you are stopped and searched under the terroism acts, then you still don't have to give your name and address if you don't want to, unless the first paragraph applies.

Many people do though, because it's 'easier', and more painless that way.

:)
Click to expand...


Even if your driving and they want to check if you have a licence?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom