Law? We don't need a law - HotUKDeals
We use cookie files to improve site functionality and personalisation. By continuing to use HUKD, you accept our cookie and privacy policy.
Get the HUKD app free at Google Play

Search Error

An error occurred when searching, please try again!

Login / Sign UpSubmit

Law? We don't need a law

peodude Avatar
6y, 5m agoPosted 6 years, 5 months ago
Two police officers stopped a teenage photographer from taking pictures of an Armed Forces Day parade - and then claimed they did not need a law to detain him.
The audio recording begins minutes later with an officer initially arguing that it is illegal to take photographs of children. He then claims that it is illegal to take images of army members and police officers.

Under laws that guarantee the freedom of press in Britain, there is no restriction on photography of children, police or armed forces in a public space. There is new legislation to protect the identities of some police officers but only those working undercover or in instances where an officer genuinely believes a photographer is collecting data for terrorist purposes.



In the audio recording, when asked by Mr Mattsson what law police were using to detain him and ask for details, one officer replies: We dont have to have a law.



The 16-year-old continues to argue his case, informing the officers that he has a right to photograph in public places and asks whether he can get back to work.


Instead he is told by a second officer that he is now considered a threat under the Terrorism Act and escorted away from the parade. Mr Mattsson claims he was then pushed down a set of four concrete stairs and detained until the parade passed.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/officers-claim-they-dont-need-law-to-stop-photographer-taking-pictures-2012827.html

Yet another case, of after not being able to find a relevant law, falling back onto abuse of the Terrorism Act.
peodude Avatar
6y, 5m agoPosted 6 years, 5 months ago
Options

All Comments

(30) Jump to unreadPost a comment
Comments/page:
#2
The kid understands the law better than the guy who is enforcing it, epic failz
#3
You have to love these incidents.

I'm sure we have all see the fly on the wall police programs, where a camera follows them around.
I have seen on many occasions, where the detainee does not like having their photograph taken, yet the police laugh about it smugly, stating they are alowed.

Quite the opposite, when the rolls are reversed though.

I hope he get compensation like the others in the article.
#4
Why is it always really annoying photographers?

I get what they are saying and think the police occasionally abuse powers (perhaps for the greater good) but I always want these photographers to get arrested
#5
bazzaric
but I always want these photographers to get arrested


For what?
#6
peodude
For what?


for standing up for their rights.

I get it, I really do but Police are human too and I know how annoying a 'difficult customer' can be :-D
#7
bazzaric
for standing up for their rights.

I get it, I really do but Police are human too and I know how annoying a 'difficult customer' can be :-D


....All i can do is sigh here.
#8
bazzaric
for standing up for their rights.

I get it, I really do but Police are human too and I know how annoying a 'difficult customer' can be :-D


If that is the case why are they harassing this kid, for doing noting wrong.

After all he was only doing his job, and the police were being difficult harassing him. So you you could look at it that way.
#9
bazzaric
for standing up for their rights.

I get it, I really do but Police are human too and I know how annoying a 'difficult customer' can be :-D


I see what you are trying to say, BUT, the police made the customer difficult. All they had to do is walk away, admitting they were wrong, but they just wouldn't and kept trying to find something until eventually they said " I think you're a terrorist"

It was all their own doing. It's their job to police the law, so they should know what the laws are (especially when they were given a briefing about this thing 24 hrs earlier) Would you go into work only half knowing your job?
#10
sven256
If that is the case why are they harassing this kid, for doing noting wrong.

After all he was only doing his job, and the police were being difficult harassing him. So you you could look at it that way.


They were also the instigators or both the obstruction and breach of the peace yet they fail to see that. Case of do as I say or else me thinks, and the "I'm in charge of the parade...etc" officer needs a good kick up the ****.
The cadets "children" have already given their permission to be photographed events, iirc they have to sign a release or some such when they become cadets.
#11
As an amateur photographer, I completely sympathize with the camera boy. However, what i'm saying is I would like to see someone actually manage to get a good argument going with the police and actually prove a point.

I can see what they are saying but they are all just very poor at getting their point across in these situations (a bit like me now). They always seem to just repeat what they are saying until they get arrested.
banned#12
ah another good police thread.. subscribed ..
#13
bazzaric
As an amateur photographer, I completely sympathize with the camera boy. However, what i'm saying is I would like to see someone actually manage to get a good argument going with the police and actually prove a point.

I can see what they are saying but they are all just very poor at getting their point across in these situations (a bit like me now). They always seem to just repeat what they are saying until they get arrested.


As the police would/could not give the relevant law or instrument under which they were acting how could the lad formulate an case.
banned#14
Flynn Jack;8948757
As the police would/could not give the relevant law or instrument under which they were acting how could the lad formulate an case.

mm some deja vu :thinking:
#15
dog_cop
ah another good police thread.. subscribed ..


It'd be nice to hear a policeman's opinion on the matter
banned#16
peodude;8948802
It'd be nice to hear a policeman's opinion on the matter

ok its a difficult one as the crux of the news stroy is the word "cadet", so best not for me to guess what was going through the officers mind at the time.
For me with many years in , even I now have to think twice in certain situations before you make a choice.
If the situation is a reasonable one there can be times to make the relavent call to a supervisor to check on legislation or to double check, before taking a certain route, in regard to taking pictures of minors, that is now a mine field, but for me is "if in doubt " check.. but we can now arrest for anything, but getting it past the custody Sgt is the acid test once you have expalined the circumstances..
But reported are not always factual and bend the truth here and there..
Sorry its such a bland reply but every situation is different and not so cut and dried, I have known to speak to a member of the public in a polite manner only for the reply to be aggresive and with a torrent of foul and abusive language, and all I was trying to do was answer a simple question? So what would you do
#17
What people dont understand is that police officers have no sense of people skills whatsoever and are the most corrupt group of people in the UK.

Edit : they will abuse their authority the first chance that they get. This is fact.

/thread
banned#18
StevenA2000_uk;8948876
What people dont understand is that police officers have no sense of people skills whatsoever and are the most corrupt group of people in the UK.

Edit : they will abuse their authority the first chance that they get. This is fact.

/thread

correct and the odd back hander and cuff the odd granny round the ear for walking on the cracks in the pavement :thumbsup:
#19
dog_cop

Sorry its such a bland reply but every situation is different and not so cut and dried, I have known to speak to a member of the public in a polite manner only for the reply to be aggresive and with a torrent of foul and abusive language, and all I was trying to do was answer a simple question?
So what would you do


You are right, I have witnessed a number of those types of situations where the police are subjected to abuse for simply doing their job.

BUT in this instance you cannot relate the two very different situations; fact is that he was doing nothing wrong, so why should he be lied to with regards the law?
These officers need to be reprimanded for abusing their powers and even bringing the profession into disrepute.

With regards to your question, we both know that all offficers must keep their emotions in check and remain professional in order to deal with these types of situations appropriately.:thumbsup:
#20
don't know who is the most annoying the smart alec kid or the daft police who seemed to be making it up us they went along just to save face after being made to look like idiots by the smart alec kid.
banned#21
Bash1;8948941
You are right, I have witnessed a number of those types of situations where the police are subjected to abuse for simply doing their job.

BUT in this instance you cannot relate the two very different situations; fact is that he was doing nothing wrong, so why should he be lied to with regards the law?
These officers need to be reprimanded for abusing their powers and even bringing the profession into disrepute.

With regards to your question, we both know that all offficers must keep their emotions in check and remain professional in order to deal with these types of situations appropriately.:thumbsup:

we only have one side of the story and thats from the press .. so how can we all pontificate the rights and wrongs etc.. like all things there are always two sides to every story :thumbsup:

anyway stat 2.. toodle pip
#22
peodude;8948655
I see what you are trying to say, BUT, the police made the customer difficult. All they had to do is walk away, admitting they were wrong, but they just wouldn't and kept trying to find something until eventually they said " I think you're a terrorist"

It was all their own doing. It's their job to police the law, so they should know what the laws are (especially when they were given a briefing about this thing 24 hrs earlier) Would you go into work only half knowing your job?

+1
#23
it'll be interesting to see how this incident pans out.
#24
richp
it'll be interesting to see how this incident pans out.


i read somewhere he got £3500 in damage or something...

though both the dim copper and the the attitude the photographer gives i'm not surprised it ended like the way it did.
#25
dog_cop
we only have one side of the story and thats from the press .. so how can we all pontificate the rights and wrongs etc.. like all things there are always two sides to every story :thumbsup:

anyway stat 2.. toodle pip


You're right, there are always 2 sides to every story...the cops version and his colleagues version. :whistling:
#26
dog_cop
we only have one side of the story and thats from the press .. so how can we all pontificate the rights and wrongs etc.. like all things there are always two sides to every story :thumbsup:

anyway stat 2.. toodle pip


Location: If in doubt...Lie you know it makes sense.
Was this changed 'cos of this post or have you had that location for a while? :w00t:

I used to have the utmost respect for the police, but more and more stories like this one are starting to erode all that away.
banned#27
StevenA2000_uk;8949900
You're right, there are always 2 sides to every story...the cops version and his colleagues version. :whistling:

:roll:

Jumpingphil;8951348
Location: If in doubt...Lie you know it makes sense.
Was this changed 'cos of this post or have you had that location for a while? :w00t:

I used to have the utmost respect for the police, but more and more stories like this one are starting to erode all that away.

had it for ages .. relates to many of the users on here that tell more lies than I care to mention .. :whistling:
#28
where did PACE go XD
banned#29
dog_cop
we only have one side of the story and thats from the press .. so how can we all pontificate the rights and wrongs etc.. like all things there are always two sides to every story :thumbsup:

anyway stat 2.. toodle pip


well to be fair, there is a 9 minute audio recording so hardly only getting one side, unless you are saying the press made the recording up?
These incidents regulary happen with photographers so it's not as if it's a one off mistake.

Bit more on the story here

I particulary liked this bit

We therefore phoned the Met’s call centre last night to inquire what the law was in relation to taking photographs on the street. The member of staff who took the call was aware that it was legal to photograph police officers – but rather less good when it comes to exercising one’s legal right to photograph other people, including children. He told us: "You can’t just go round taking photos."

Worryingly, he added, in respect of photographing children: "You can understand what is going to happen."

When asked why the police would not protect a photographer going about their lawful business, the call was terminated.


Errr, yes you can. Idiots.
banned#30
This film is a real eye opener so look out for it if its ever allowed to be shown on TV again.

TRUE STORIES:TAKING LIBERTIES

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bUsNQkV6o04

Post a Comment

You don't need an account to leave a comment. Just enter your email address. We'll keep it private.

...OR log in with your social account

...OR comment using your social account

Thanks for your comment! Keep it up!
We just need to have a quick look and it will be live soon.
The community is happy to hear your opinion! Keep contributing!