This video was taken last Saturday by Jules Mattsson, a 16 year old freelance photographer, who tells his story here. (It's also reported by the British Journal of Photography and various others.) Ironically, the incident took place the day after photojournalist Marc Vallee and videographer Jason Parkinson won their case against the Metropolitan Police for preventing them from recording a demonstration at the Greek Embassy.
The most obvious question raised by the video is "Do we want to live in a country where the police regularly stop people who are taking pictures in public places?" But it's not the only issue.
Another is the question "Why are police officers apparently so ignorant of the law?" I've put together an abbreviated transcript below to show this. There are a few things that readers will notice. One is the number of times Mr. Mattsson asks "Under which law?" Another is how infrequently he gets an answer. A third is that the police change their story. Sometimes Mr. Mattsson is told that the problem is that he is photographing children, sometimes the problem is that he is photographing a military parade and there is a danger of terrorism. They aren't even sure why he isn't supposed to photograph a police officer. One gets the impression that the police don't really know what they are allowed to do. And when law enforcement officers are ignorant of the law - doesn't that suggest that perhaps we have too many laws?
But there is a third question. Who is responsible for the situation we are in when police officers are under the impression that they can stop people who photograph children and military parades in public places?
Abbreviated Transcript:
(Abbreviated because it's somewhat repetitive, it's long enough, and sometimes unclear because two or more people are talking at the same time.)
Police: The trouble is, sir, you’re taking photographs of children. You’ve been asked to stop, and you failed to do so.
Jules Mattsson: Because there’s no reasonable reason to stop.
You have no power to take photographs of military personnel. When asked a question all you’ve got to do is answer.
I was asked a question. I said what I was doing. You’ve already taken down my details.
That’s right. We can do that.
Under what law? (x3) ...My date of birth. I don’t have to give it.
Under what law are you taking my details? (x3)
Don’t have to have any law to take your details.
Yes you do.
No we don’t....
... if they’ve given you permission . ..
Are you saying sir, that in a public place, I have to ask permission of every person in my picture? I don’t. I know the law.
However, when you’re asked to stop photographing children, that then becomes a little bit of a grey area.
Well, if it’s a grey area, why am I being detained?
You’re not being detained.
Why did he prevent me from leaving?
You were acting silly. ...You were running around.
I wasn’t running around. I was walking away from your officer ...when he grabbed my arm, twisted it, and tried to grab my camera.... Can I have my ID back? ... I’m going to carry on working in this area.
At the moment, in this area they are trying to form up the parade, safely and securely.
They are welcome to do so, and I’m trying to do my job.
Under what law am I being detained? I’m allowed to have free movement because this is a public place...Under what law am I being detained? ....
Tell my why I'm being detained.
You're not. You're able to leave... that way.
You’re in the way
I'm not in the way.
You're in the way. Do you not understand?
I was never in anyone's way. What the question was, was my right to take a picture in a public place, as by law guaranteed. Is that not correct?
Unfortunately with regard to ...
Have you read the metropolitan police guidelines for dealing with the media?
When it regards to coming into contact with children and photographing children from an area (?) group, parents have to sign a consent form with regards to children.
No they don't. Not for editorial use, they don't. I’ve been doing this for years.
If you'd like to leave that way.
I don't want to leave the area, because I'm trying to work here. Now, under what law am I being asked to leave the area?
I'm moving you . . . breach of the peace . . . you're right in the middle of a military parade... I regard you as a hazard to the public right now. ...You will get trampled by soldiers.
I am aware of how to photograph a parade.
We are concerned about terrorism at this event. Taking photographs of police officers and police staff is a criminal offence, under these circumstances.
That's not true. No it's not. Under what law? ...Can you tell me what law it's an offence under?
Young man, you are an agitator.
I'm not an agitator. I'm trying to find out what law it's an offence under. Let me carry on with my work.
You will not interfere with the parade.
I'm not interfering with the parade.
I am not detaining you.
Then why am I not allowed to freely move around the area?
You are not allowed to push past me.
I'm not trying to push past you. I tried to walk, and you stood in my way.
Tell me under what law it's an offence to photograph a police officer. Under what law?
I have better things to do.
Then you have no legal basis to detain me, and I'm going to carry on working. ... I took a picture, one person stopped me and said “You have to ask permission” and I said “No I don’t” and I carried on.
We will facilitate you in your taking pictures, but you will not...
Take your hand off my lens.
You know what? I consider you a threat under the terrorism act.
Hey. Give me my camera back. Hands off me please. Under what law am I being detained, officer? Under what law am I being detained, officer? Could you please get your hand off me and tell me under what law am I being detained. Hands of me please. If you're arresting me you have to tell me what law it is under. Is that correct?... Oi! Did you just push me down the stairs? The officer just pushed me down the stairs. Hands off me please. Why am I being detained?
... your safety, taking images of children while their parents are present, in the very vocal disordered state that you are in ...
I'm not vocal ... I got vocal when I was pushed down the stairs by a police officer. .. Could you please stop doing it? There's no restriction on photographing you, is there?
We do not wish to be photographed by you.
Well you don't really have a right to stop me.
Can you please take your hands of my lens. Could you give me my camera. ...You have no legal right to do that. . . Because, I'm being detained illegally, and I have a right to photograph. Why is your hand on my lens?
I've asked you politely please do not take pictures of me because it will stop me doing covert operations in the future.
No, that's not in law actually. Under what law?
My public privacy law ...
In a public place there is no reasonable expectation of privacy.
...to prevent a breach of the peace.
OK. A breach of the peace. How?
You know what you were doing.
I took a picture. And that's my right to do so.
And it was. And we would support your right to photograph this parade in a reasonable way. However what you will not do, is you will not purposely disrupt uniformed police officers...
I did not purposely disrupt anything. One of your uniformed staff. .. I'm not going to stop
Do you know what? I've told you why you're detained. You are detained. I'm Inspector ---. That's on my authority ...
Under what law? The public order act?
...to prevent a breach of the peace because of the anxiety you were causing among members of the public back there ...
the anxiety I was causing taking pictures ...
... you are detained. You have been acting in an antisocial manner...
I have not been acting in an antisocial manner. Under what law am I going to supply my details?
Breach of the peace.
That's not breach of the peace law ...
Edit: The Register apparently telephoned the Metropolitan Police 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."Oh dear.
p.s. H/T Patently
9 comments:
All is takes is one sentence
"Are you detaining me?"
If the answer is no (and if you aren't being arrested, it will be), simply walk off. They cannot stop you. If they do, get a claim in. £3500 at the last count.
Oh, and never carry ID. You do not have to give your name and address or show your face. Trust me, I know.
I have forwarded a link to my MP, George Osborne. At least he can't say he didn't know.
We also need to get away from this "its my job" even, for we ALL should be free to take pictures.
I heard that a key phrase is "Are you refusing to tell me which law?".
IIRC a refusal is an act of gross misconduct for a police officer.
What I hate most in these situations is how they rapidly descend into a Kafka-esque point-of-no-return impossible-to-get-out-of situation where you feel completely powerless; compounded by the fact that so few witnesses will come to intervene.
Well, the police covered themselves in glory there......not!
I have utmost respect for the young journalist involved. He was reasoned, calm and considered in his dealings with the police despite severe provocation and harassment. Well done sir!
Hell's bells, there was an inspector involved. You'd have thought they'd give some rank to the brighter ones who could be relied on to turn up, stop telling the mongstables not to be so bloody stupid, and apologise to the member of the public they'd just been unreasonably inconveniencing. You don't expect them to bloody join in.
Congratulations to Jules, he kept remarkably calm for an extended period and clearly knows his stuff. That officer was flailing around accusing him of taking 'pictures of children', ie being a pedo, 'taking pictures military personel', ie being a spy/traitor, 'taking pictures of the police', ie being an 'agitator'; non of which are illegal in the circumstance of a public parade.
Well done Jules
History of polo ralph lauren. Polo fashions had its humble beginnings in 1968 when tie salesman Ralph Lauren gave it a kick start. By 1969 he had a boutique polo ralph lauren factory stores within the Manhattan department store Bloomingdale's. ... Brands and luxury standard. Since Ralph Lauren's first brand, Polo Ralph Lauren, was launched, the company has expanded to include a variety of luxury brands such as Polo Golf, Polo Denim, Polo Sport. You can buy cheap Ralph Lauren Clothing at Ralph Lauren outlet.Also We provide polo shirts
Ralph Lauren polo shirt, 50% OFF! polo ralph lauren outlet online is your best choice!In 2006, polo ralph lauren outlet became the first designer in Wimbledon's 133-year history to create official uniforms for the tournament. As part of this year's event, which starts next week, polo ralph lauren sale will introduces the first ... determination to maintain and enhance the values for which our two brands are famous throughout the world. The rugby ralph lauren brand brings to Wimbledon the look of timeless elegance, drawing on our rich history and traditions
NEVERTHELESS, THE CIVIL LAW is and must be neutral about who has a more noble or rewarding faith. The breakaway parishes ought to win every Office 2010facet of the lawsuit not becauseMicrosoft Office 2010 their beliefs or their politics are better, Microsoft wordbut because both lawOffice 2007and equity, along with common sense, are on Microsoft Officetheir side.Microsoft Office 2007 Not only does Virginia state law (the Division Statute)Office 2007 keyexplicitly apply to just such a Office 2007 downloadsituation as now exists, but the history Office 2007 Professionalespecially of The Falls Church argues against the claims of Outlook 2010the Virginia Diocese with which theyMicrosoft outlookhave disassociated.Microsoft outlook 2010First, The Falls Church wasWindows 7 founded, formed, and developed long before the diocese, or the national Episcopal Church, even existed.
Post a Comment