Nikon photographer arrest threat over jet ski drama

Discussion in 'Nikon' started by Phil Stovell, Oct 29, 2009.

  1. Phil Stovell

    Phil Stovell Guest

    Police banned a photographer from taking pictures of people on a jet ski
    and threatened to arrest him despite an officer admitting the images he
    had taken were perfectly lawful.

    Keen photographer Garry Chinchen was left stunned when police threatened
    to arrest him yesterday for 'breach of the peace'.

    Garry, who was using a Nikon D200 and 17-200mm lens, said his photo
    session had turned into a 'bit of a disaster'.

    Garry had stopped in a lay-by after seeing a picture opportunity at Glyn
    Neath Lakes - a watersports centre adjacent to the A465 in South Wales.

    He said he had been taking photos from a public area for 'ten minutes'
    when a man claiming to be the lake's landowner approached. 'A guy came
    over and said "stop photographing the children,"' said Garry. 'He said you
    need permission to take photographs of children.'

    Phil Stovell, Oct 29, 2009
    1. Advertisements

  2. In which case should they not be arresting the person who actually
    breaches the peace rather than the person performing a lawful activity?
    Graham Murray, Oct 29, 2009
    1. Advertisements

  3. Phil Stovell

    Tim Rogers Guest

    Including the police it would appear!
    Tim Rogers, Oct 29, 2009
  4. Phil Stovell

    Fredxx Guest

    Why the need to contact his employer?
    Fredxx, Oct 29, 2009
  5. Phil Stovell

    Tim Rogers Guest

    Was he under any obligation to give his details (seeing as he hadn't
    committed an offence and wasn't suspected of doing so?)

    Tim Rogers, Oct 29, 2009
  6. Phil Stovell

    Ian Jackson Guest

    I'm sure this is the case. Confronted by an ordinary, sane, law-abiding
    photographer and some lunatic self-appointed 'protector of the
    children', who is threatening all sorts of mayhem if the photographer
    doesn't stop taking photographs, the choice is extremely simple -
    threaten to arrest the guy who is most likely to do what he is told.
    Again, a logical (although inconvenient) course of action. The police
    know that the general public do not usually support strikes, and have
    little choice but to make a show of upholding the rights of the
    individual instead of will the mob. And, if they have time, they can
    always arrest any passing photographers 'for inflaming the situation'.
    Ian Jackson, Oct 29, 2009
  7. I think the london flickr group sometimes arranges flash mobs where people
    have been harassed by security guards when doing architecture photography
    quite legally from a public right of way.
    Adrian Boliston, Oct 29, 2009
  8. Phil Stovell

    Big Les Wade Guest

    In law, no he wasn't. In practice, if he hadn't done so, the police
    would have arrested him on some specious charge. He would then have been
    left with the choice of going along with the arrest and trying to sue
    later on for wrongful arrest; or of resisting arrest, being injured in a
    forcible arrest, and then probably later have a magistrate convict him
    of public order offences. It's not for nothing that magistrates' courts
    used to be known as "police courts".
    Big Les Wade, Oct 29, 2009
  9. Phil Stovell

    Chris H Guest

    In message <
    That would not be lawful
    The police have no power to do that.
    Chris H, Oct 30, 2009
  10. Phil Stovell

    Graculus Guest

    That doesn't stop them in some cases trying to.
    Graculus, Oct 30, 2009
  11. Phil Stovell

    Chris H Guest

    True however the logic to use is:-

    If it is not illegal they can not delete.
    If it IS illegal then they are evidence and can not be deleted.

    Always carry the Mark Thomas Stop and Search Card. (Along with the BFP
    card, the Photographernotaterrorist bust card and the met police advice
    from their web site and the home office letters re photography... )

    This small pack of information will deter any UK policeman who is not
    100% certain that a real crime is being committed. Even then it will
    stop some as they then realises that what they thought was a crime
    Chris H, Oct 30, 2009
  12. Phil Stovell

    Ian Jackson Guest

    Is there a matching 'Photographernopaedophile' card?
    Ian Jackson, Oct 30, 2009
  13. Phil Stovell

    Chris H Guest

    Chris H, Oct 30, 2009
  14. Phil Stovell

    Ian Jackson Guest

    I'll take that as a "No", then!

    It is likely that the photographer was suspected of being a paedophile,
    and not a terrorist. An 'I'm not a terrorist' card wouldn't work.
    Ian Jackson, Oct 30, 2009
  15. Phil Stovell

    Chris H Guest

    I was not aware it was illegal to be a foot doctor :))))

    It's all part of the same pointless paranoia
    Chris H, Oct 30, 2009
  16. Phil Stovell

    Chris H Guest

    Chris H, Oct 31, 2009
  17. Phil Stovell

    Chris H Guest

    Read Digital Camera Feb 08. Had a major item on this as appertaining to
    UK law as of Feb 2008 . There must be some copies about somewhere or
    try their web site

    Also see this link to the UK Photographers Rights guide.

    REMEMBER the police do NOT know the law on photography The PCSO's less

    and related links on that page.
    This was MARCH 2008 in the UK

    You might find this of interest, since it sets out the powers of PCSOs:
    Chris H, Oct 31, 2009
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.