Paul Smith
16/12/2009, 11:26
As I'm sure many of you will be aware the Police have for some time been routinely abusing the powers granted to them under section 44 of the terrorism act 2000. There have been countless tales for many months now of innocent photographers being stopped, having images deleted or even being arrested for going about their daily business. It would seem that the police and a large proportion of the public totally misunderstand the rights of photographers and the powers of the authorities.
Recently the Police have shot themselves in the foot by stopping an increasing number of accredited journalists and so we're finally beginning to see the media take an interest in the heavy handed manner in which many police forces are dealing with these cases. The Independent and the BBC have recently run a whole series of stories relating to public photography and I thought it would be worth posting some of them here to raise awareness of the issues.
I'll start with some of the many horror stories to give an idea of the kind of over reaction photographers are facing.
http://www.boingboing.net/2009/03/03/manchester-man-arres.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/apr/16/police-delete-tourist-photos
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/jerome-taylor-i-was-questioned-over-my-harmless-snapshot-1833130.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/warning-do-not-take-this-picture-1833127.html
http://www.bjp-online.com/public/showPage.html?page=871742
And these are just a handful of dozens of cases you can easily find online covering pretty much every police force in the land. For some reason they appear to assume that anyone with an SLR must automatically be a terrorist suspect.
After growing condemnation the Association of Chief Police Officers "reminded" their officers that the terrorism act did not give them absolute power and that taking a photo of a police officer did not breach the act
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/police-uturn-on-photographers-and-antiterror-laws-1834626.html
The rank and file responded by detaining a wedding photographer during a wedding reception, seizing her camera and telling her that they now owned the copyright on the images
http://www.bindmans.com/index.php?id=672
arresting someone with an Leica M6 in Hounslow
http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/Photographer_arrested_with_Leica_M6_in_London_subu rb_news_292842.html
and instructing London security guards to report any photographers to them as suspects
http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/police_crackdown_on_city_photographers_news_292881 .html?aff=rss
So there are clearly some issues between ACPO and the bobby on the beat.
This report from the independent lays out what your rights are supposed to be
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/stop-amp-search-amp-photos-know-your-rights-1833327.html
Although sticking to your rights to not give your name appears to result in you getting at least threatened with arrest.
Clearly something somewhere has gone very wrong and you can't help feeling that it's probably not going to improve any day soon.
Recently the Police have shot themselves in the foot by stopping an increasing number of accredited journalists and so we're finally beginning to see the media take an interest in the heavy handed manner in which many police forces are dealing with these cases. The Independent and the BBC have recently run a whole series of stories relating to public photography and I thought it would be worth posting some of them here to raise awareness of the issues.
I'll start with some of the many horror stories to give an idea of the kind of over reaction photographers are facing.
http://www.boingboing.net/2009/03/03/manchester-man-arres.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/apr/16/police-delete-tourist-photos
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/jerome-taylor-i-was-questioned-over-my-harmless-snapshot-1833130.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/warning-do-not-take-this-picture-1833127.html
http://www.bjp-online.com/public/showPage.html?page=871742
And these are just a handful of dozens of cases you can easily find online covering pretty much every police force in the land. For some reason they appear to assume that anyone with an SLR must automatically be a terrorist suspect.
After growing condemnation the Association of Chief Police Officers "reminded" their officers that the terrorism act did not give them absolute power and that taking a photo of a police officer did not breach the act
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/police-uturn-on-photographers-and-antiterror-laws-1834626.html
The rank and file responded by detaining a wedding photographer during a wedding reception, seizing her camera and telling her that they now owned the copyright on the images
http://www.bindmans.com/index.php?id=672
arresting someone with an Leica M6 in Hounslow
http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/Photographer_arrested_with_Leica_M6_in_London_subu rb_news_292842.html
and instructing London security guards to report any photographers to them as suspects
http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/news/police_crackdown_on_city_photographers_news_292881 .html?aff=rss
So there are clearly some issues between ACPO and the bobby on the beat.
This report from the independent lays out what your rights are supposed to be
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/stop-amp-search-amp-photos-know-your-rights-1833327.html
Although sticking to your rights to not give your name appears to result in you getting at least threatened with arrest.
Clearly something somewhere has gone very wrong and you can't help feeling that it's probably not going to improve any day soon.