Recording Police actions
Discussion
There's a lot if this stuff happening, and then it goes on youtube/ liveleak etc, even if the officer is doing nothing wrong. Maybe we just expect that if it is filmed and put on YT etc, the people being filmed are worthy of being scrutinised/suspected. Seems like some sad people are determined to bore the rest of us with how they were stopped and searched even if it was done without any hiccups.
Made me think if recording police in automotive situations like traffic stops is permitted/ adviseable/ not. I mean, the benefits are that an officer being recorded may behave more carefully. The downside is it makes him/her irritated and less likely to let a driver go with a warning.
Where recording police is concerned, most questions are answerable with a simple google or using the God-guven bonce one has. Most answers are 'its OK to do it but dont make a pointless nuisance of yourself to the police or get in the way of their job', broadly speaking.
But the mind has a curious way of finding the questions where answers are not obvious, to me at least. that I cant find obvious answers to. For example:
The inside of police cars-
-Is it legal to record a traffic officer if being interviewed by them in a police car?
Not sure if the police car is a 'public place' but then again it is a place of public office. Does any of that change the legality of recording?
Using recording methods that are not obvious to the officer-
-E.g. if the recording is done without the officer knowing. For example, someone using their phone to record audio of a police interview, whether in the street or in a police car. Strikes me that this is ok because it does t seem different to using a pen and paper to note down officer's answers etc, even if done after the interview when a person recalls the interview for their own records/ defence etc. But on the ither hand it may be dodgy because consent may be required?
It may be that the answers are obvious ,but do enlighten us on this thread if you know. I am insomniac tonight for having had too many coffees, and need more than Russian dashcam videos to engage my brain away from boredom. Ta!
Made me think if recording police in automotive situations like traffic stops is permitted/ adviseable/ not. I mean, the benefits are that an officer being recorded may behave more carefully. The downside is it makes him/her irritated and less likely to let a driver go with a warning.
Where recording police is concerned, most questions are answerable with a simple google or using the God-guven bonce one has. Most answers are 'its OK to do it but dont make a pointless nuisance of yourself to the police or get in the way of their job', broadly speaking.
But the mind has a curious way of finding the questions where answers are not obvious, to me at least. that I cant find obvious answers to. For example:
The inside of police cars-
-Is it legal to record a traffic officer if being interviewed by them in a police car?
Not sure if the police car is a 'public place' but then again it is a place of public office. Does any of that change the legality of recording?
Using recording methods that are not obvious to the officer-
-E.g. if the recording is done without the officer knowing. For example, someone using their phone to record audio of a police interview, whether in the street or in a police car. Strikes me that this is ok because it does t seem different to using a pen and paper to note down officer's answers etc, even if done after the interview when a person recalls the interview for their own records/ defence etc. But on the ither hand it may be dodgy because consent may be required?
It may be that the answers are obvious ,but do enlighten us on this thread if you know. I am insomniac tonight for having had too many coffees, and need more than Russian dashcam videos to engage my brain away from boredom. Ta!
Edited by Light n Hairy on Saturday 30th August 05:48
If arrested they will take the camera or phone. Otherwise you don't have to go into their car (apart from if they are detaining for you certain reasons) in that case you could record I believe, but you would probably be in handcuffs.
Secret recordings are fine. Up to a judge if he allows them in court, if it shows the police doing something naughty he probably will. Apart from that no offence recording without knowledge or consent.
Good smart police won't care about being recorded. They know they can't stop it, and it's lawful. Indeed I'd say that it's perfectly acceptable in a modern digital era. Poor police officers will kick off about it an pd try and intimidate someone to stop. Save in rare cases they should be disciplined, and in my mind removed from service.
Ultimately the police have all the tools to stop someone recording if they want. Breach of the piece, obstructing a constable etc.. Personally I'd like to see all police having to wear a body worn cam which cannot be deleted or wiped when working. It would help the police as proving they haven't done x when accused, and will enforce the law by stopping them doing y. However bad police are very rare, I still personally feel something like this would improve public confidence in the police.
Secret recordings are fine. Up to a judge if he allows them in court, if it shows the police doing something naughty he probably will. Apart from that no offence recording without knowledge or consent.
Good smart police won't care about being recorded. They know they can't stop it, and it's lawful. Indeed I'd say that it's perfectly acceptable in a modern digital era. Poor police officers will kick off about it an pd try and intimidate someone to stop. Save in rare cases they should be disciplined, and in my mind removed from service.
Ultimately the police have all the tools to stop someone recording if they want. Breach of the piece, obstructing a constable etc.. Personally I'd like to see all police having to wear a body worn cam which cannot be deleted or wiped when working. It would help the police as proving they haven't done x when accused, and will enforce the law by stopping them doing y. However bad police are very rare, I still personally feel something like this would improve public confidence in the police.
CCTV in cell blocks has reduced the number of complaints against police. There could, of course, be two causes: 1/ the behaviour of the staff is modified by the fact that their every action is scrutinised, and 2/ those complained of have ample and dependable defence. From anyone's point of view, the result is positive.
CCTV out on the streets has done the same in my experience. I was in charge of Brighton's CCTV for 2 years. Officers used to ask for the camera to be on them when completing a stop. There were a number of cases where complainants have come into the station, occasionally with briefs, to make 'serious' complaints only to disappear once they are told the whole incident was recorded on CCTV.
I know some juvenile inspectors who have had great fun leading these on and then, right at signing time, saying: 'Once you've signed it, I'll organise a copy to the footage to be forwarded to you. It might take a few days.'
But only really childish inspectors would do such a thing. Or those who have had the brief tell a deliberate lie against an officer.
There was one incident where a group conspired to lie about a group of officers who moved in when they tried to release someone from arrest out on the street. The CCTV showed they behaved impeccably and with restraint.
Now imagine if you were one of those officers, being attacked by a large group, and despite you going by the book because you had no defence the complaint was substantiated. Next time you might think that an extra jab is called for as if you are going to be blamed for it, you might as well have done it.
CCTV in cell blocks was a move supported by the rank and file. It was expected to lower the rate of complaints, especially those substantiated, and it has delivered. Video on individual officers will probably do the same.
Given that a substantial number of people carry devices capable of video recording around with them at all times, if anything footage that hasn't been edited is more or less a necessity for a busy officer.
CCTV out on the streets has done the same in my experience. I was in charge of Brighton's CCTV for 2 years. Officers used to ask for the camera to be on them when completing a stop. There were a number of cases where complainants have come into the station, occasionally with briefs, to make 'serious' complaints only to disappear once they are told the whole incident was recorded on CCTV.
I know some juvenile inspectors who have had great fun leading these on and then, right at signing time, saying: 'Once you've signed it, I'll organise a copy to the footage to be forwarded to you. It might take a few days.'
But only really childish inspectors would do such a thing. Or those who have had the brief tell a deliberate lie against an officer.
There was one incident where a group conspired to lie about a group of officers who moved in when they tried to release someone from arrest out on the street. The CCTV showed they behaved impeccably and with restraint.
Now imagine if you were one of those officers, being attacked by a large group, and despite you going by the book because you had no defence the complaint was substantiated. Next time you might think that an extra jab is called for as if you are going to be blamed for it, you might as well have done it.
CCTV in cell blocks was a move supported by the rank and file. It was expected to lower the rate of complaints, especially those substantiated, and it has delivered. Video on individual officers will probably do the same.
Given that a substantial number of people carry devices capable of video recording around with them at all times, if anything footage that hasn't been edited is more or less a necessity for a busy officer.
Light n Hairy said:
There's a lot if this stuff happening, and then it goes on youtube/ liveleak etc, even if the officer is doing nothing wrong. Maybe we just expect that if it is filmed and put on YT etc, the people being filmed are worthy of being scrutinised/suspected. Seems like some sad people are determined to bore the rest of us with how they were stopped and searched even if it was done without any hiccups.
Made me think if recording police in automotive situations like traffic stops is permitted/ adviseable/ not. I mean, the benefits are that an officer being recorded may behave more carefully. The downside is it makes him/her irritated and less likely to let a driver go with a warning.
Where recording police is concerned, most questions are answerable with a simple google or using the God-guven bonce one has. Most answers are 'its OK to do it but dont make a pointless nuisance of yourself to the police or get in the way of their job', broadly speaking.
But the mind has a curious way of finding the questions where answers are not obvious, to me at least. that I cant find obvious answers to. For example:
The inside of police cars-
-Is it legal to record a traffic officer if being interviewed by them in a police car?
Not sure if the police car is a 'public place' but then again it is a place of public office. Does any of that change the legality of recording?
Using recording methods that are not obvious to the officer-
-E.g. if the recording is done without the officer knowing. For example, someone using their phone to record audio of a police interview, whether in the street or in a police car. Strikes me that this is ok because it does t seem different to using a pen and paper to note down officer's answers etc, even if done after the interview when a person recalls the interview for their own records/ defence etc. But on the ither hand it may be dodgy because consent may be required?
It may be that the answers are obvious ,but do enlighten us on this thread if you know. I am insomniac tonight for having had too many coffees, and need more than Russian dashcam videos to engage my brain away from boredom. Ta!
A vehicle in a public place is a public place. Made me think if recording police in automotive situations like traffic stops is permitted/ adviseable/ not. I mean, the benefits are that an officer being recorded may behave more carefully. The downside is it makes him/her irritated and less likely to let a driver go with a warning.
Where recording police is concerned, most questions are answerable with a simple google or using the God-guven bonce one has. Most answers are 'its OK to do it but dont make a pointless nuisance of yourself to the police or get in the way of their job', broadly speaking.
But the mind has a curious way of finding the questions where answers are not obvious, to me at least. that I cant find obvious answers to. For example:
The inside of police cars-
-Is it legal to record a traffic officer if being interviewed by them in a police car?
Not sure if the police car is a 'public place' but then again it is a place of public office. Does any of that change the legality of recording?
Using recording methods that are not obvious to the officer-
-E.g. if the recording is done without the officer knowing. For example, someone using their phone to record audio of a police interview, whether in the street or in a police car. Strikes me that this is ok because it does t seem different to using a pen and paper to note down officer's answers etc, even if done after the interview when a person recalls the interview for their own records/ defence etc. But on the ither hand it may be dodgy because consent may be required?
It may be that the answers are obvious ,but do enlighten us on this thread if you know. I am insomniac tonight for having had too many coffees, and need more than Russian dashcam videos to engage my brain away from boredom. Ta!
I was CCTV operator at a league club ground (premier and 1st div) for a number of years. We'd also deploy a mobile camera team -cameraman and two spotters - to be out and about in the vicinity of the ground, town centre, railway stations etc.
The in-ground system made little difference to disorder inside the ground - we still had as many punch ups - we were just able to watch them over again and often were able to make arrests on the strength of the footage. The mobile crew made a great difference. We'd direct them to any possible trouble brewing - their presence would generally diffuse situations and prevented disorder on a number of occasions.
If the cameras are obvious - they will often change peoples behaviour. If theyre not obvious to them then it seems people will still act up unless the cameras are seen to be pointing directly at them.
Dont see any problems with cops being recorded during stops. I'm sure they dont all finish up on the net.
They often seem to highlight lack of knowledge by cops in relation to filming in public and also in relation to stop/search procedures.
The in-ground system made little difference to disorder inside the ground - we still had as many punch ups - we were just able to watch them over again and often were able to make arrests on the strength of the footage. The mobile crew made a great difference. We'd direct them to any possible trouble brewing - their presence would generally diffuse situations and prevented disorder on a number of occasions.
If the cameras are obvious - they will often change peoples behaviour. If theyre not obvious to them then it seems people will still act up unless the cameras are seen to be pointing directly at them.
Dont see any problems with cops being recorded during stops. I'm sure they dont all finish up on the net.
They often seem to highlight lack of knowledge by cops in relation to filming in public and also in relation to stop/search procedures.
Light n Hairy said:
Using recording methods that are not obvious to the officer-
-E.g. if the recording is done without the officer knowing. For example, someone using their phone to record audio of a police interview, whether in the street or in a police car. Strikes me that this is ok because it does t seem different to using a pen and paper to note down officer's answers etc, even if done after the interview when a person recalls the interview for their own records/ defence etc. But on the ither hand it may be dodgy because consent may be required?
You don't need consent to take photo or video of someone in a public place, so I don't think you need consent to record audio of someone in a public place. (Here I'm referring to being interviewed on the street for example.) So I don't think there's any problem whatsoever with covert recording of any kind in public.-E.g. if the recording is done without the officer knowing. For example, someone using their phone to record audio of a police interview, whether in the street or in a police car. Strikes me that this is ok because it does t seem different to using a pen and paper to note down officer's answers etc, even if done after the interview when a person recalls the interview for their own records/ defence etc. But on the ither hand it may be dodgy because consent may be required?
You might be conflating this issue with covert recording of phone calls, which I understand is not allowed; you have to tell someone if you're recording their call I think.
I went to a job at a campsite recently. Got there and started to speak with the " offending" parties. Immediately faced with at least 4 or 5 mobile cameras thrust in my face, with shouts that I was being recorded and "can't do anything about it" etc etc.
After about 5 minutes of me clearly not giving a toss about them using up their storage on their phones, they slowly decided that I wasn't reacting, couldn't care less, and stopped recording.
I couldn't give a damn if people want to thrust cameras in my face. As long as it's not stopping me doing my job, then crack on.
I find it slightly sad that they find this behaviour exciting, and relish the fact that they'll have a video of a cop on their phone...but maybe because I am a cop. The last thing I want on my phone is cops! I hate them!
After about 5 minutes of me clearly not giving a toss about them using up their storage on their phones, they slowly decided that I wasn't reacting, couldn't care less, and stopped recording.
I couldn't give a damn if people want to thrust cameras in my face. As long as it's not stopping me doing my job, then crack on.
I find it slightly sad that they find this behaviour exciting, and relish the fact that they'll have a video of a cop on their phone...but maybe because I am a cop. The last thing I want on my phone is cops! I hate them!
mrmr96 said:
You don't need consent to take photo or video of someone in a public place, so I don't think you need consent to record audio of someone in a public place. (Here I'm referring to being interviewed on the street for example.) So I don't think there's any problem whatsoever with covert recording of any kind in public.
You might be conflating this issue with covert recording of phone calls, which I understand is not allowed; you have to tell someone if you're recording their call I think.
There is no requirement for a private individual to disclose they are recoding a phone conversation. Many organisations will panic and tell you otherwise when caught out, however you are completely within your rights to do this. You might be conflating this issue with covert recording of phone calls, which I understand is not allowed; you have to tell someone if you're recording their call I think.
Publishing the recordings, or passing them to a third party is another matter. However if you do not "intend" to do this at the point of recording/call then you are 100% okay.
If you get in my car, you don't need to get your phone out. I always switch the internal camera on and everything is recorded/filmed. I don't tell people their being recorded, but the big screen with them on it should give it away. Despite that, people still lie about what was said/done. Always nice to pop the DVD in and show the interaction.
I had four 'fine, upstanding members of the community' make a serious complaint about me. They included a solicitor, a councillor and a vet. Without going into circumstances, they didn't get their own way at an incident and a couple of days later, I'm served with forms detailing things I'm supposed to have done. I mean, such educated people wouldn't lie would they?
Fortunately, someone HAD filmed the incident, which showed they lied through their teeth.
I had four 'fine, upstanding members of the community' make a serious complaint about me. They included a solicitor, a councillor and a vet. Without going into circumstances, they didn't get their own way at an incident and a couple of days later, I'm served with forms detailing things I'm supposed to have done. I mean, such educated people wouldn't lie would they?
Fortunately, someone HAD filmed the incident, which showed they lied through their teeth.
Elroy Blue said:
If you get in my car, you don't need to get your phone out. I always switch the internal camera on and everything is recorded/filmed. I don't tell people their being recorded, but the big screen with them on it should give it away. Despite that, people still lie about what was said/done. Always nice to pop the DVD in and show the interaction.
I had four 'fine, upstanding members of the community' make a serious complaint about me. They included a solicitor, a councillor and a vet. Without going into circumstances, they didn't get their own way at an incident and a couple of days later, I'm served with forms detailing things I'm supposed to have done. I mean, such educated people wouldn't lie would they?
Fortunately, someone HAD filmed the incident, which showed they lied through their teeth.
Just as a matter of interest when someones in the back of your car voluntarily for a traffic matter- are the child locks on - are they free to leave (as you'll of course have told them)- or do they have to wait for you to finish before you let them out?I had four 'fine, upstanding members of the community' make a serious complaint about me. They included a solicitor, a councillor and a vet. Without going into circumstances, they didn't get their own way at an incident and a couple of days later, I'm served with forms detailing things I'm supposed to have done. I mean, such educated people wouldn't lie would they?
Fortunately, someone HAD filmed the incident, which showed they lied through their teeth.
I think video/audio recording of the day-to-day interactions between the Police and MoP would be a good protection for both sides.
During a fraught time in 2012/13, when I was helping an acquaintance demonstrate Police wrongdoing in court, the local Bobbies began to take an interest in me and turn a blind eye to associated criminal damage against me. They were very desperate to nail my acquaintance and were not intending on letting anything get in their way.
I had to call them one day after yet another instance of harassment against my pregnant OH and I. When the officer arrived, the first thing he asked me was "are you recording this conversation, as if you are, I'm leaving". He had no reason to think that I was. He then proceeded to tell me that he had forgotten to bring his notebook, so jotted things on a scrap piece of paper. He then used the meeting to tell me that my talking to another person in town was probably intimidation of a witness (there had been no complaint, and the other person was not at that point a witness in the case I was involved in).
Half way through the meeting, the officer said he'd need to talk to his sergeant to ask what to do about our complaint. He went outside to do this, where I saw him produce his notebook and begin reading from it whilst speaking to someone on the phone.
I subsequently found out that on the way to our house, the officer had called at my mother's house to tell her to move her car as there had been complaints about it (it was neither obstructing anyone nor had there ever been a complaint when I lived there for 5 years and parked in the same place). The parking in town was in any case decriminalised and looked after by the local authority. My mother works daily with the Police as a courier and the officer knew that.
My solicitor and barrister both made it clear this and other events, including a prosecution against me, were motivated by my helping the acquaintance and unearthing solid evidence of their wrongdoing.
Had the officers involved all worn video recording systems, it would have been far harder for them to undertake their course of harassment against us in the way that they did.
During a fraught time in 2012/13, when I was helping an acquaintance demonstrate Police wrongdoing in court, the local Bobbies began to take an interest in me and turn a blind eye to associated criminal damage against me. They were very desperate to nail my acquaintance and were not intending on letting anything get in their way.
I had to call them one day after yet another instance of harassment against my pregnant OH and I. When the officer arrived, the first thing he asked me was "are you recording this conversation, as if you are, I'm leaving". He had no reason to think that I was. He then proceeded to tell me that he had forgotten to bring his notebook, so jotted things on a scrap piece of paper. He then used the meeting to tell me that my talking to another person in town was probably intimidation of a witness (there had been no complaint, and the other person was not at that point a witness in the case I was involved in).
Half way through the meeting, the officer said he'd need to talk to his sergeant to ask what to do about our complaint. He went outside to do this, where I saw him produce his notebook and begin reading from it whilst speaking to someone on the phone.
I subsequently found out that on the way to our house, the officer had called at my mother's house to tell her to move her car as there had been complaints about it (it was neither obstructing anyone nor had there ever been a complaint when I lived there for 5 years and parked in the same place). The parking in town was in any case decriminalised and looked after by the local authority. My mother works daily with the Police as a courier and the officer knew that.
My solicitor and barrister both made it clear this and other events, including a prosecution against me, were motivated by my helping the acquaintance and unearthing solid evidence of their wrongdoing.
Had the officers involved all worn video recording systems, it would have been far harder for them to undertake their course of harassment against us in the way that they did.
I love it when I get filmed when having someone stopped I dont care a jot as I don't have anything to hide, but I decided to turn the tables on them one day when I got called to assist a colleague who had stopped four males and they all had there phones out, right up in my face.
So,I got my phone out and started to film them guess what they kicked off big time before I filmed them I asked are you going to put it on you tube the answer "YEAH MAN WHY YOU CANT STOP ME" I then said I will be putting mine on as well,reply " YOU DO AND I WILL SUE YOU" to this date no footage to my knowledge has appeared.
But just goes to show it's all right for one to do it but not the other, imagine if everytime I stopped someone and stood at the side of the road in a public place decided to film everyone and then put it on youtube I think people would get a little pissed off, but hey its a free country and anyone can film anywhere in a public place provided it doesnt breach any national security. Keep smiling and keep filming
So,I got my phone out and started to film them guess what they kicked off big time before I filmed them I asked are you going to put it on you tube the answer "YEAH MAN WHY YOU CANT STOP ME" I then said I will be putting mine on as well,reply " YOU DO AND I WILL SUE YOU" to this date no footage to my knowledge has appeared.
But just goes to show it's all right for one to do it but not the other, imagine if everytime I stopped someone and stood at the side of the road in a public place decided to film everyone and then put it on youtube I think people would get a little pissed off, but hey its a free country and anyone can film anywhere in a public place provided it doesnt breach any national security. Keep smiling and keep filming
Bigends said:
Just as a matter of interest when someones in the back of your car voluntarily for a traffic matter- are the child locks on - are they free to leave (as you'll of course have told them)- or do they have to wait for you to finish before you let them out?
Child locks are always on in my car. If they are voluntary, and decided they want to leave, I'll either let them out, or if the necessity and grounds are there, I'll arrest in order to carry on my need to interview. Just the same as in a police station.Mk3Spitfire said:
Bigends said:
Just as a matter of interest when someones in the back of your car voluntarily for a traffic matter- are the child locks on - are they free to leave (as you'll of course have told them)- or do they have to wait for you to finish before you let them out?
Child locks are always on in my car. If they are voluntary, and decided they want to leave, I'll either let them out, or if the necessity and grounds are there, I'll arrest in order to carry on my need to interview. Just the same as in a police station.Hmmm definitely wont be getting into one if thats the case across the board then.
When would you need to arrest in order to complete an interview?
Edited by Bigends on Saturday 30th August 13:44
Bigends said:
So, having established name address - docs etc you'll decide whether or not to let them go!!
Hmmm definitely wont be getting into one if thats the case across the board then.
???Hmmm definitely wont be getting into one if thats the case across the board then.
If they've committed an arrestable offence, and I need to obtain evidence by questioning, and the suspect subsequently refuses to cooperate, I still need to obtain that evidence. So yes, I would potentially arrest. What's the issue with that?
Mk3Spitfire said:
???
If they've committed an arrestable offence, and I need to obtain evidence by questioning, and the suspect subsequently refuses to cooperate, I still need to obtain that evidence. So yes, I would potentially arrest. What's the issue with that?
I think he's assuming you have stopped him for doing 34 in a 30 or something similar. If they've committed an arrestable offence, and I need to obtain evidence by questioning, and the suspect subsequently refuses to cooperate, I still need to obtain that evidence. So yes, I would potentially arrest. What's the issue with that?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff