£5K payout for arrested photographer

http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=6&storycode=44853&c=1

A photographer who was arrested, handcuffed and detained for eight hours
when he tried to take pictures of a road accident has won more than £5,000
in damages and an apology from Thames Valley Police.

Police have also deleted the record of MK News photographer Andrew Handley
and destroyed DNA samples and fingerprints they took from him when he was
held.

Handley, a photographer for 34 years, was arrested by a sergeant as he tried
to take pictures at the scene of the accident, at Stony Stratford, Milton
Keynes, in September 2006.

 

Well, if they told him not to take the pictures and had warned him of an arrest then that's his fault he got arrested. He had plenty of warning!

 

Calan the Police can not stop you taking photographs except in very specific circumstances. We aren't in a police state and that is why they had to pay up for wrongful arrest!

 

Calan, maybe you didn't see THIS in an earlier thread.

 

If you do not wish to have your photograph taken you can stop them. If the person(s) involved in the accident did not want their photograph taken or the Police Officer did not want his or her photograph taken then he or she can stop them.

 

i dont believe there is anything you can do to stop anyone taking a photo in a public place and doing what they like with it EXCEPT maybe if there were security implications which would have to be proved. In this case it seems the Police were very out of order and the damages paid reflect that. A small victory for freedom.

 

Add the fact that he was a press photographer doing his job...the Police can not stop him (or anyone) except in exceptional security circumstances when the terroist act comes into play. Totally agree with Arthur Maunsell - which doesn't happen that often!

 

What do they feed them in Kent - ???

Do as I Say juice???

Unbelievable

 

Criminal Law, Civil Law, Corporate Law....

 

If you watch Road Wars or similar & the "suspect" protests about the presence of the camera, they are told by the police the cameraman is entitled to film where he likes in public. I know this is video as opposed to still photos, but I think the same rule applies.

 

There was a cops with camera's type of programme on the other night, around Swansea if I remember correctly.
This plod (and imho he deserved that title) U-turned and pulled a "known" in B&Q car park because he had "L" plates on his car.
The known then said to camera that he had made a complaint against said plod for harrasment, he & his family were acting reasonably, one son was filming on his phone when plod made several attempts to grab it off him. He didn't succeed, but the cheek of it, saying he can't record but the TV crew with me can!
Anyway he nicked the known for s4 public order act and threatened the rest of the family with the same unless they left B&Q cause they were causing a disturbance.
The missus and I were flabbergasted, I hope his superiors saw the show.
I'm not anti-police but this berk....well.

 

You will also see when they go to certain accidents bits are cut out...

 

In reply to 'BillR's' post.



That is EXACTLY what I'm trying to say. One rule for everyone! If you're requested not to film / take photos then you can't...


I also suspect his superiors have seen it...

 

But the whole point is legally YES YOU CAN.

 

Taken from HERE.

 

If you came and took photographs of me, and you didn't stop, I'd report you to the Police. They'd tell you to stop. If you didn't and you continued they could: arrest your for harassment OR failing to comply with a Police Officer. They have made a reasonable request in Law which you aren't complying with.

 

Life is what it is - you get good cops and bad cops. Thankfully the former are in the majority, but sadly, get tarred with the same brush as the numpty ones. If only the media were as quick to report the good work done by some officers as they are with the inevitable bad stuff. Rant over.