PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice Support health workers

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Auditors, photography and a headache., Its not FMOTL.
Darkatmosphere
post Tue, 5 Mar 2019 - 21:54
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 108
Joined: 30 Dec 2018
Member No.: 101,643



Well it's hit, Auditing has hit the UK thanks to the Yank's in the US although I could think of better names that start with W.

I got shown some video's recently and again I cringed at the miss information on both sides of the isle.

Ill post links below.

So the aim of the "game" here is "not to id" not to go to the station under arrest, make the police look weak and stupid, post it on youtube simples!.

Unfortunately these "odditors" are ending up being arrested.

Now personally I feel photography isn't a crime when it is applied in a common sense way, like don't walk into a school and dont hang round the gates of a school, inside public urinals etc.

I saw one of the video's where there was a pair of "photographers" who took it upon themselves to go to a Invicta barracks. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5HJG1GrIzkw Now I personally did not see what they did wrong in terms of putting themselves foul of the law perhaps someone else may and point that law to me I would be interested to research it.

Another here in Scotland. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OL4uRiTa1Io

Another at Liverpool port https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oUpgInx0m7w

Another from the police abusing powers guy got arrested https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFmRU9blxm0&t=224s

A guy called "urban explorer" I found this one to be "iffy" at the end and still trying to figure out their angle of attack on that one . https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7C8_XdKpg4&t=13s

Another guy call west Yorkshire police in action. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PZgFzFozcYo
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6gIWjujP97s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YRI2mlqSW6U

From what I see, Public order section 4 and or 5 seems to the last resort clutch at law these officers tend to dwindle down to.

Usually they try terrorism act 2006 section 43 to gain your details and search of your property form outset when this fails revert to PACE and if this fails, try and subtly incite a Public order offence or an Assault and Battery Criminal Justice Act .

Shockingly I have heard examples of Section 44 of the terrorism act still being quoted by some officers that has been repealed I don't specifically know if this is quoted in the above links but ive watched so many.

Leave your thoughts, comments and criticisms below.

Thank you.



--------------------
There are a lot of laws in this country, but there isn't any justice.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >  
Start new topic
Replies (40 - 59)
Advertisement
post Tue, 5 Mar 2019 - 21:54
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
nigelbb
post Fri, 8 Mar 2019 - 16:14
Post #41


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,768
Joined: 17 Mar 2013
Member No.: 60,602



QUOTE (ViroBono @ Fri, 8 Mar 2019 - 15:17) *
What grips me about these 'auditors' is their sanctimonious attitude - as if they are performing some sort of public service. They aren't - they are just a nuisance who do it, presumably, because their lives are otherwise unfulfilled and the have a need for attention.

They appear to have a different agenda to the generally commendable photographers & journalists behind the campaign group I’m a Photographer Not a Terrorist https://phnat.org


--------------------
British Parking Association Ltd Code of Practice(Appendix C contains Schedule 4 of POFA 2012 ) & can be found here http://www.britishparking.co.uk/Code-of-Pr...ance-monitoring
DfT Guidance on Section 56 and Schedule 4 of POFA 2012 https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/syste...ing-charges.pdf
Damning OFT advice on levels of parking charges that was ignored by the BPA Ltd Reference Request Number: IAT/FOIA/135010 – 12 October 2012
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ViroBono
post Fri, 8 Mar 2019 - 18:11
Post #42


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 135
Joined: 9 Jan 2011
Member No.: 43,323



QUOTE (nigelbb @ Fri, 8 Mar 2019 - 16:14) *
QUOTE (ViroBono @ Fri, 8 Mar 2019 - 15:17) *
What grips me about these 'auditors' is their sanctimonious attitude - as if they are performing some sort of public service. They aren't - they are just a nuisance who do it, presumably, because their lives are otherwise unfulfilled and the have a need for attention.

They appear to have a different agenda to the generally commendable photographers & journalists behind the campaign group I’m a Photographer Not a Terrorist https://phnat.org



Indeed. As an amateur photographer I used to be concerned after hearing that in London there had been some cases of police demanding that images taken in public places were deleted. It’s clearer now. I was once approached by security guards labouring under the impression that permission is needed to take an image in which their employer’s building featured in the background. I was polite, and invited security to call the police; the officers who responded were helpful, and told the security guards that I wasn’t doing anything illegal, and that they had no need to be concerned. I certainly wouldn’t deliberately try to bait people for a reaction, and I have no problem identifying myself to police.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
seank
post Fri, 8 Mar 2019 - 19:28
Post #43


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 398
Joined: 15 Apr 2013
Member No.: 61,183



QUOTE (Dean123 @ Fri, 8 Mar 2019 - 13:12) *
" He has to have much more than a suspicion. If he arrests MoP he opens the door to a civil claim against the Police for battery and unlawful arrest."
But PACE says the officer merely needs suspicion of an offence to arrest.


Simply not true.
This is covered in PACE Code G.
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/go...code-g-2012.pdf
2. Elements of Arrest under section 24 PACE
2.1 A lawful arrest requires two elements:
A person’s involvement or suspected involvement or attempted involvement
in the commission of a criminal offence;
AND
Reasonable grounds for believing that the person’s arrest is necessary.
• both elements must be satisfied, and
• it can never be necessary to arrest a person unless there are reasonable
grounds to suspect them of committing an offence.

As stated, if Plod arrests someone and it transpires that no offence has been committed, Plod is liable to pay compensation and the sums are approaching 5 figures.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
southpaw82
post Fri, 8 Mar 2019 - 20:22
Post #44


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 33,610
Joined: 2 Apr 2008
From: Not in the UK
Member No.: 18,483



QUOTE (seank @ Fri, 8 Mar 2019 - 19:28) *
As stated, if Plod arrests someone and it transpires that no offence has been committed, Plod is liable to pay compensation and the sums are approaching 5 figures.

That can’t be the case, otherwise everyone acquitted in court could sue. A civil claim would only be successful if it could be shown that the constable didn’t have reasonable grounds to suspect an offence had been committed (or other preconditions weren’t met). Whether an offence had been committed or not is relevant to the reasonable grounds but the lack of an offence doesn’t mean there can be no reasonable grounds.


--------------------
Moderator

Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Fri, 8 Mar 2019 - 21:13
Post #45


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25,726
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Fri, 8 Mar 2019 - 20:22) *
QUOTE (seank @ Fri, 8 Mar 2019 - 19:28) *
As stated, if Plod arrests someone and it transpires that no offence has been committed, Plod is liable to pay compensation and the sums are approaching 5 figures.

That can’t be the case, otherwise everyone acquitted in court could sue. A civil claim would only be successful if it could be shown that the constable didn’t have reasonable grounds to suspect an offence had been committed (or other preconditions weren’t met). Whether an offence had been committed or not is relevant to the reasonable grounds but the lack of an offence doesn’t mean there can be no reasonable grounds.


Yup
Go back to Seank's scenario with a long lens taking photos though someone's bedroom window.
The bedroom owner dials 999 and says that there is some pervert with a camera photographing the teenage daughter while she was getting changed.
Doesn't matter if that is what the camera owner was doing or not, this is a possible offence, a crime that has been reported. (taking indecent images of a juvenile).
That goes someway towards satisfying the first element of PACE, finding the guy with the camera and long lens where reported would strengthen that.
Reasonable suspicion would also be established.
"But I told the copper I was birdwatching, trying to get a photo of the lesser spotted grebe reported as nesting on that chimney over there"
Okay, may also be true but I would still expect the Old Bill to be sure.
In fact they have to be or face possible headlines a month or two down the road when some young girl is kidnapped by the birdwatcher and it turns out that the cop who interviewed him had done nothing.

BTW, Police state ??
Don't make me laff.
I've been to countries where a police state existed (USSR) and people knew that if they stepped out of line, they could simply disappear.
Same in China.
Or just corrupt such as Arab dictatorships like Gaddafi's Libya where the cost of passing a checkpoint was $50 or 5,6,7 hours (or more) while they checked you out.
Even so called democracies like India can see cops charging 100 rupees after pulling over your hire car and finding a westerner.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Darkatmosphere
post Fri, 8 Mar 2019 - 22:09
Post #46


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 108
Joined: 30 Dec 2018
Member No.: 101,643



Seank's rather flawed scenario would see the appropriate use of PACE.

Let me put another scenario out there with no auditor intention to elicit response in mind either:

I'm at Britain's second largest castle, Wales largest, a town has been built around it with lots of varying degree's of architecture, there is also a close by railway, close by court and police station, Lots of the homes around the area are of 17-1800's in design.

I'm walking not far from the castle, there is a quaint row of houses, I am photographing them from the public foot path across the street, and when I am done I sit on the moat pathway bench, taking snaps of the castle taking in the scenery and wildlife procrastinating going back to the car and going home.
2 Police constables approach and ask if I had taken photo's of the row of houses, I say yes, they ask for my identification, I ask why? and its at this point I'm grabbed by the arm slammed to the ground and cuffed, I'm searched and my camera is then searched, rifled through, there's nothing untoward, But security for a near by business (who called them) makes contact with the constables and my personal details is handed to them "just incase they feel the need to trespass me from their premises", there's no photo's of their business in the camera and the constables proceed to hand them my personal info anyway, the camera film or movie footage is also nothing untoward either, no zoomed in shots of Mrs Caerphilly beauty winner getting changed in infront of her open draped bedroom window at 12pm in the afternoon there is nothing but tourist type shots on there.
Then instead of being released, I am arrested with obstructing a police constable in the course of his duties, and taken to Newport central police station, booking authorised, I am finger printed, DNA swabbed, and placed in a cell, 20hrs later I am interviewed, and then 2 hours later released free of any charges, My vehicle is in Caerphilly which has now got a ticket on, and I am also out of pocket for expenses in getting back to my car I also get home to find that the images I had taken which included other images of say a friends wedding form the weekend before have all be erased whilst I was in custody.

Fair and just would people say?

This post has been edited by Darkatmosphere: Fri, 8 Mar 2019 - 22:24


--------------------
There are a lot of laws in this country, but there isn't any justice.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Fri, 8 Mar 2019 - 22:36
Post #47


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25,726
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



QUOTE (Darkatmosphere @ Fri, 8 Mar 2019 - 22:09) *
... I ask why? and its at this point I'm grabbed by the arm slammed to the ground and cuffed...


Uhm, why?
While I would not say that would never happen in the UK, it does seem as though there is something missing between an relatively innocuous question and being slammed to the ground.

Which is the problem with made up scenarios, they rely on a suspension of belief.
Or perhaps belief that this would be normal behaviour for cops?

I can only speak from my own experiences, perhaps I have been lucky but I have never had an issue with cops.
Pulled over many times in my younger days, can only ever remember one occasion when the cops were (IMO) overly aggressive, otherwise invariably polite and professional.
Treating them politely and cooperating has always seen me through.
And I'll include actually being arrested (charges dropped, eventually) for GBH. Even then the cops were reasonable about it, could only fault them for having the wrong guy, not for the way they behaved.
I have seen the other side where people have seemingly gone out of their way to be offensive to cops, that often doesn't work out well but even then, the cops gave fair warning that actions would be taken.
Then they acted.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Darkatmosphere
post Fri, 8 Mar 2019 - 23:49
Post #48


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 108
Joined: 30 Dec 2018
Member No.: 101,643



QUOTE (DancingDad @ Fri, 8 Mar 2019 - 22:36) *
QUOTE (Darkatmosphere @ Fri, 8 Mar 2019 - 22:09) *
... I ask why? and its at this point I'm grabbed by the arm slammed to the ground and cuffed...


Uhm, why?
While I would not say that would never happen in the UK, it does seem as though there is something missing between an relatively innocuous question and being slammed to the ground.

Which is the problem with made up scenarios, they rely on a suspension of belief.
Or perhaps belief that this would be normal behaviour for cops?

I can only speak from my own experiences, perhaps I have been lucky but I have never had an issue with cops.
Pulled over many times in my younger days, can only ever remember one occasion when the cops were (IMO) overly aggressive, otherwise invariably polite and professional.
Treating them politely and cooperating has always seen me through.
And I'll include actually being arrested (charges dropped, eventually) for GBH. Even then the cops were reasonable about it, could only fault them for having the wrong guy, not for the way they behaved.
I have seen the other side where people have seemingly gone out of their way to be offensive to cops, that often doesn't work out well but even then, the cops gave fair warning that actions would be taken.
Then they acted.

contempt of cop lets say, he's impatient didn't like having his question responded with a question.

Your lucky in your encounters with police, I was minding my own business listening to my then Sony MP3, walking down a street when cop came flying up in the car, passenger jumped out and shouted stay there at me and when i stopped and I pulled my headset out my ears to ask what he had said and expecting an verbal interaction, before I could say anything he run full pelt at me shoulder barging me against a wall then tripped me up to the floor, stuck his knee in my lower back and put as much force down on me as he could while pulling my arm to my back, then his colleague came put his knee in the side of my face whilst grabbing my other arm, when they were done cuffing me, they lifted me up and whilst they were marching me back to the car the one who shoulder barged mer grabbed my right ring finger and twisted it up my back with arms forcing my head forward and downwards ready to get in the back of the car, resulting in him dislocating it and disfiguring it so I now have limited use of it, the shoulder barge also resulting in me having a cut lip and bleeding nose.
They too got wrong guy, I didn't even match the description of the person who they were looking for only that I was wearing the same colour trainers, they were young lads, wearing grey and black hoodies, I had no hoodie on, and I was wearing shorts and blue jacket, they were in a track pant, apparently I later learned 2 people had robbed a shop at knife point a few streets away, I was promptly De-arrested and an ambulance was called I didn't even get a sorry IPCC found no wrong doing on behalf of the policemen.


--------------------
There are a lot of laws in this country, but there isn't any justice.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dean123
post Sat, 9 Mar 2019 - 00:12
Post #49


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25
Joined: 1 Apr 2015
Member No.: 76,562



QUOTE (Darkatmosphere @ Fri, 8 Mar 2019 - 23:49) *
2 people had robbed a shop at knife point a few streets away, I was promptly De-arrested and an ambulance was called I didn't even get a sorry IPCC found no wrong doing on behalf of the policemen.


Crappy outcome for you but unarmed cops tackling a male who they thought had a knife... Hindsight is a wonderful thing when you have all the information to hand.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
seank
post Sat, 9 Mar 2019 - 08:47
Post #50


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 398
Joined: 15 Apr 2013
Member No.: 61,183



QUOTE (Dean123 @ Sat, 9 Mar 2019 - 00:12) *
QUOTE (Darkatmosphere @ Fri, 8 Mar 2019 - 23:49) *
2 people had robbed a shop at knife point a few streets away, I was promptly De-arrested and an ambulance was called I didn't even get a sorry IPCC found no wrong doing on behalf of the policemen.


Crappy outcome for you but unarmed cops tackling a male who they thought had a knife... Hindsight is a wonderful thing when you have all the information to hand.

Are you seriously saying that he should just have accepted what Plod did to him?
Just a casualty of war, or whatever phrase you choose?
The reality is that they were completely in the wrong.
Is today a good day to go down to the tube station? Not if your name is Jean Charles de Menezez, shot 6 times in the head for legally going about his business. The aptly-named woman who authorised his killing got seriously promoted. I mean you, Cressida Dick.
What about the well-known thug in uniform who pushed an innocent news vendor over and killed him? He denied it until a MoP produced the exact footage.https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10728685

Seeing is believing and there are literally thousands of videos on Youtube and similar showing Plod behaving completely out of control.
No wonder Plod doesn't like cameras.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dean123
post Sat, 9 Mar 2019 - 08:55
Post #51


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25
Joined: 1 Apr 2015
Member No.: 76,562



QUOTE (seank @ Sat, 9 Mar 2019 - 08:47) *
Seeing is believing and there are literally thousands of videos on Youtube and similar showing Plod behaving completely out of control.
No wonder Plod doesn't like cameras.


But what you don't see on YouTube is the hundreds of thousands of interactions with Police that happen everyday where nothing happens.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
seank
post Sat, 9 Mar 2019 - 10:18
Post #52


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 398
Joined: 15 Apr 2013
Member No.: 61,183



QUOTE (Dean123 @ Sat, 9 Mar 2019 - 08:55) *
QUOTE (seank @ Sat, 9 Mar 2019 - 08:47) *
Seeing is believing and there are literally thousands of videos on Youtube and similar showing Plod behaving completely out of control.
No wonder Plod doesn't like cameras.


But what you don't see on YouTube is the hundreds of thousands of interactions with Police that happen everyday where nothing happens.

Because nobody would be interested.
Where is your response to Post 43? You make statements that are simply not supported by facts and then just carry on when challenged.
I don't like seeing innocent MoP abused by Plod, killed by Plod, or Plod lying through their teeth until a MoP provides the clearest video evidence.
Have you actually watched the Youtube clips listed in the thread?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Sat, 9 Mar 2019 - 11:30
Post #53


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25,726
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



QUOTE (seank @ Sat, 9 Mar 2019 - 10:18) *
QUOTE (Dean123 @ Sat, 9 Mar 2019 - 08:55) *
QUOTE (seank @ Sat, 9 Mar 2019 - 08:47) *
Seeing is believing and there are literally thousands of videos on Youtube and similar showing Plod behaving completely out of control.
No wonder Plod doesn't like cameras.


But what you don't see on YouTube is the hundreds of thousands of interactions with Police that happen everyday where nothing happens.

Because nobody would be interested.
Where is your response to Post 43? You make statements that are simply not supported by facts and then just carry on when challenged.
I don't like seeing innocent MoP abused by Plod, killed by Plod, or Plod lying through their teeth until a MoP provides the clearest video evidence.
Have you actually watched the Youtube clips listed in the thread?


Well, people should be interested, if only to get a balanced view.
How many interactions with public in a year?
How many arrests?
How many complaints?
How many injuries, deaths, officers punished in that period.
For that matter, how many cops injured or killed in that period.
Otherwise you are damning a whole slew of police who could well be trying to do the best they can and doing it well.

Yes, there are incidents, some major, where individual officers or the powers that be fecked up.
Worse, tried to cover up some but to use those as reason to damn all is no different to saying all Muslims are terrorists, all Catholic Priests are paedophiles, all doctors are serial killers.
(Shipman does not represent all)

I've had direct involvement with police over the years and never seen one seriously out of line.
Obviously that does not mean that all cops are angels, only the ones I have seen.
Nor does cases like Menezes or Tomlinson make all coppers killers.
No objection to anyone trying to improve how cops deal with the public and avoid mistakes.
Have a serious objection to those who go out of their way to provoke and then complain and to those who simply take the view that all cops are scum.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
seank
post Sat, 9 Mar 2019 - 11:56
Post #54


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 398
Joined: 15 Apr 2013
Member No.: 61,183



That is a perfectly reasonable response.
My own view is that the auditors mostly seem to be jobless layabouts with no real life, who try to provoke reactions from their subjects.
It surprises me how little knowledge of the law Plod appears to have, yet we are expected to know every detail. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.
My own experience of the law recently was when I watched the SCP people lie through their teeth in the Beckham NIP case. They weren't "mistaken" or anything like that. Their testimony was meticulously dissected by Nick Freeman and they were left shocked and embarrassed, as if nobody had ever taken them to task before.
We've seen the lying and dereliction of duty on a mega-scale. look at SY police's Colin Crompton, who "turned two blind eyes" to the rape and abuse of 1400 children. He certainly got his act together after they sacked him for gross incompetence though. Straight off to the tribunal to claim £600,000.
Look at the Hillsborough disaster. The "match commander" hadn't a clue what he was doing to justify his £235,000 salary. People died, apparently because of him, but he's wriggling like an eel on a hook, at present.
More rapes of children at Oxford, at Rochdale. Where was Plod? Manning speed scammer vans?
I keep reading about lack of Plod resources, yet the thick blue line has never been fuller. What they need is managing, by managers brought in from industry, rather than promotion from the doughnut canteen.
The YT videos are there for all to see. I couldn't care less whether there are umpteen properly-conducted interactions. What I see on YT are literally hundreds of Plod abuses of power, usually of vulnerable MoP who just comply yet are assaulted, battered or killed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fredd
post Sat, 9 Mar 2019 - 12:33
Post #55


Webmaster
Group Icon

Group: Root Admin
Posts: 8,205
Joined: 30 Mar 2003
From: Wokingham, UK
Member No.: 2



QUOTE (seank @ Sat, 9 Mar 2019 - 11:56) *
The YT videos are there for all to see. I couldn't care less whether there are umpteen properly-conducted interactions. What I see on YT are literally hundreds of Plod abuses of power, usually of vulnerable MoP who just comply yet are assaulted, battered or killed.

Of course you see hundreds of such videos on Youtube, because the more you watch videos there on a particular niche subject, the more similar ones Youtube will recommend and even autoplay. Before you know it you'll be convinced that that's the norm. Thus are flat-earthers and anti-vaxers born.


--------------------
Regards,
Fredd

__________________________________________________________________________
Pepipoo relies on you
to keep this site running!
Donate to Pepipoo now using your
Visa, Mastercard, debit card or PayPal account
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
seank
post Sat, 9 Mar 2019 - 12:47
Post #56


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 398
Joined: 15 Apr 2013
Member No.: 61,183



QUOTE (Fredd @ Sat, 9 Mar 2019 - 12:33) *
QUOTE (seank @ Sat, 9 Mar 2019 - 11:56) *
The YT videos are there for all to see. I couldn't care less whether there are umpteen properly-conducted interactions. What I see on YT are literally hundreds of Plod abuses of power, usually of vulnerable MoP who just comply yet are assaulted, battered or killed.

Of course you see hundreds of such videos on Youtube, because the more you watch videos there on a particular niche subject, the more similar ones Youtube will recommend and even autoplay. Before you know it you'll be convinced that that's the norm. Thus are flat-earthers and anti-vaxers born.

I'm well aware of that. As part of Google, YT tracks users and their preferences.
Targeted advertising works well, maybe something you should try here rather than the stuff I occasionally see.
ISTR John Prescott moaning about constantly receiving ads for Thai brides.

Folks try to put the Plod abuses in proportion, and I'd ask what a reasonable failure rate would be in other occupations.
If Plod packed parachutes for a living, how many deaths would be accepatable?
If they delivered babies in a maternity suite...
If they prescribed drugs to seriously ill recipients...

I recall an Italian car company, decades ago.
Lancia.
As well as the usual Italian corrosion problems and chronic unreliability, Lancia made a catastrophic design error with the front suspension. In about 3 cases the suspension burst through the bonnet and the drivers were killed.
You could have stood outside every Lancia dealer in the country, offering the cars for tuppence-halfpenny, but there were no takers. It killed the brand and Lancia pulled out of the UK for decades. They tried to come back recently, in the hope that folks have no memory. We have.
So it is with Plod. Either they get their act together or they will find public support for them receding.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
DancingDad
post Sat, 9 Mar 2019 - 13:16
Post #57


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 25,726
Joined: 28 Jun 2010
From: Area 51
Member No.: 38,559



Just picking up on one of those as it relates directly to so called rights.
Rochdale.
One of the reasons, excuses, call it what you will but is fact is that the powers that be, from council to police were overly conscious of race.
Scared spitless of being accused of racialism so did not target the culprits with the dedication the victims deserved.
This not only at the top but the culture of political correctness meant that no one dared mention race for fear of losing their job.
As such it was treated as isolated incidents rather then organised.
Couple that with that the victims were from iffy backgrounds so not regarded as credible so CPS would not recommend prosecution.
A right mess that should and could have been dealt with but one where it is overly simplistic to blame solely the police.

Right an proper that ethnic groups should have protection against racial discrimination.
Totally wrong when this is (and has been) translated into that no one in authority can even mention racial issues in case they offend.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
seank
post Sat, 9 Mar 2019 - 13:31
Post #58


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 398
Joined: 15 Apr 2013
Member No.: 61,183



If I went out and criticised Islam, I'd likely be arrested for a "hate crime" even though Islamism is just a religion, not a race. I listened to that bloke on Question Time the other day. Owen Jones, whose IQ is lower than his age, telling us Islamism abuse was racial abuse against Muslims.
If I openly criticised Catholicism, Flat-earthism or any other belief in sky fairies and suchlike, I'd be just ignored.
Time to get Plod out of all this political correctness, for just the reasons you describe above.
Plod should be out catching criminals, rather than eating doughnuts in their comfy stations. How many times do we see hordes of them standing around after an incident?
If I call Elton John an obese pouffe, having I committed a hate crime?
I don't see any of this nonsense outside of the UK. In Germany, France and especially Belgium, Plod are helpful and get involved when they need to apprehend villains or investigate crimes.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Darkatmosphere
post Sat, 9 Mar 2019 - 14:25
Post #59


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 108
Joined: 30 Dec 2018
Member No.: 101,643



Ok so having let this run, taken the points of view and looked glaringly and wantingly at the laws to make them fit into this subject, I’ve can only come to a single most proportionate conclusion to photography in public, instagative or innocently done.

My main conclusion is of one of a simple thing, training of frontline staff, mainly of those who answer 101 and 999, this staff also prioritise businesses and companies over the single individual member of the public in these cases for E.G if you call 101 as an individual stating someone is videoing you in a public space doing nothing but standing there videoing, the most basic reaction you get from 101 is of “this is not illegal we won’t send someone out for this”, same scenario but now your a company “we’ll send someone as soon as we can” there should be no prioritising of calls like this, staff should be told unless a someone in regards to taking photo’s in public has committed an offence and the caller can establish this and the call handler can establish this then the call should be stood Down and the company told if the photographer is on the property it’s a civil matter if not and in public space then this is legal and to not approach but watch and monitor. Of course common sense should prevail in regards to schools or crèches in this regard, although no law may have broken a talking to to establish intent I feel is warranted.

The consensus is that the auditors are out to cause a nuisance, some people are passionate they are wasting police time and its the fault of the auditor, but like it or not it is a form protest and speech that is rightfully allowed to be exercised that breaches no laws, it is not the auditor calling the police but the person whom is subject to the photography be it security or a person on the street being miss-informed and the front line staff from 101 or 999 are not correcting the callers due to lack of training and of course the officer who does turn up isn't told this is a protest so is treated by the officer like he would treat a any other photographer so what you see in the videos is the genuin intent and approach the officer would take with someone.

People opinions of auditors is really irellivant. The truth remain that public photography is not a criminal offence, it’s not an invasion of privacy, no matter how people would like to interject this feeling and class it as a criminal offence or claim its the auditors fault for being an auditor instigating it, truth remains 101 and 999 should be saying its nothing to be alarmed about, the photographer has a right to take pictures from a public space therefore no officer would turn up, and the whole YouTube side of auditing would essentially die out.
Security companies and the frontline staff of the call handlers should all be trained to recognise the same and only send police when it is necessary.

The NPCC has a letter to all chief constables advising them of public photography it is upto the chief constable to educate their constables and call handlers of this and train accordingling in order to avoid embarrassing YouTube videos.

Someone said that Official secrets act "protected places" would prevent photography of Military installation regardless, The trouble I find with this is, look up as many Military Installations as you can on google earth app and Google Maps, you can clearly see much more from above than you could say from a public footpath if the act applied then google would be forced under the act to blur out these installations, the fact they are not, is a simple one, the MOD do not deem these bases to be of any secrecy importance, Some military bases have decommissioned equipment displayed out front or on the perimeter, I find this inviting as I would take a photo so to me there is a degree of "implied consent" that if you display them for the public, then obviously the public will take photos and or video's.
I also you would expect posted notices of this is a protected place under official secrets act photography filmography is strictly not permitted.

Some may agree with my conclusion of my relatively short study of this some may disagree.

It is what it is.

Darkatmosphere.

This post has been edited by Darkatmosphere: Sat, 9 Mar 2019 - 18:54


--------------------
There are a lot of laws in this country, but there isn't any justice.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
666
post Sat, 9 Mar 2019 - 17:45
Post #60


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 3,300
Joined: 17 Jun 2011
Member No.: 47,602



QUOTE (seank @ Sat, 9 Mar 2019 - 11:56) *
Look at the Hillsborough disaster. The "match commander" hadn't a clue what he was doing to justify his £235,000 salary. People died, apparently because of him, but he's wriggling like an eel on a hook, at present.

I don't know offhand how much a Chief Superintendent was paid in 1989, but I'm fairly confident it was significantly less than £235k
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Thursday, 28th March 2024 - 23:31
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.
IPS Driver Error

IPS Driver Error

There appears to be an error with the database.
You can try to refresh the page by clicking here