Police Incident with my camera
Discussion
My guess:
Lady in the photgraph has had some big trouble in the past involving perhaps an aggressive ex-partner and the police.
She is now a gibbering wreck at home, can't eat, can't sleep, can't stop saying "he's found me, he's found me" etc etc.
Police know of the history (but can't tell you about it) and want to find out if you're an amateur PI or other category of investigative bad dude.
Your reaction has not helped allay those fears.
Plausible?
Lady in the photgraph has had some big trouble in the past involving perhaps an aggressive ex-partner and the police.
She is now a gibbering wreck at home, can't eat, can't sleep, can't stop saying "he's found me, he's found me" etc etc.
Police know of the history (but can't tell you about it) and want to find out if you're an amateur PI or other category of investigative bad dude.
Your reaction has not helped allay those fears.
Plausible?
V8LM said:
Why not show them the pictures you took to defuse the situation rather than go all 5th amendment and OJ Simpson?
Personally, I'm glad people like the OP are arses over this stuff. It needs to be more widely appreciated that an individual can take a picture in public without an expectation that it's reasonable to demand to know if they took a picture, why they took a picture, what was in the picture, to delete the picture, etc.Jasandjules said:
The Mad Monk said:
How did the police know where you lived?
Tesco guard took car reg plate and provided to plod would be my guess.threespires said:
I mentioned to the interviewer that as I left the supermarket I noticed the person who complained possibly taking a photo of me and my car on their phone. I can only assume that they did take a photo which is how the police traced me.
If they've been/spoken to Tesco too they're putting a remarkable amount of effort in.
SpeckledJim said:
My guess:
Lady in the photgraph has had some big trouble in the past involving perhaps an aggressive ex-partner and the police.
She is now a gibbering wreck at home, can't eat, can't sleep, can't stop saying "he's found me, he's found me" etc etc.
Police know of the history (but can't tell you about it) and want to find out if you're an amateur PI or other category of investigative bad dude.
Your reaction has not helped allay those fears.
Plausible?
So nobody is supposed to photograph her, nobody is allowed to know that they can't photograph her, let alone why, but the OP is at fault for acting in such a way that someone might jump to the conclusion that he was doing what he isn't allowed to know he isn't allowed to do.Lady in the photgraph has had some big trouble in the past involving perhaps an aggressive ex-partner and the police.
She is now a gibbering wreck at home, can't eat, can't sleep, can't stop saying "he's found me, he's found me" etc etc.
Police know of the history (but can't tell you about it) and want to find out if you're an amateur PI or other category of investigative bad dude.
Your reaction has not helped allay those fears.
Plausible?
paintman said:
threespires said:
Yesterday I went to a supermarket. Walking from my car to the entrance I saw a photo opportunity & pulled my camera out, framed the photo and I may or may not have taken a photo. The photo I framed included the local Cathedral in the background, a bird flying above a Tesco sign and three cars in the foreground, one of the cars had a man and a woman loading their shopping into the back of the car. The reason I framed the photo is that I do a 365 daily photo project and so I'm always on the hunt for today's photo.
When I got into the store the man who had been loading his car came up to me and asked why I was taking photos. I declined to answer & he said 'fair enough' & left.
Yet you're quite happy to come on a website and tell the world & his wife why you pointed a camera in a particular direction. Perhaps if you had told the chap what you've told us - which sounds perfectly reasonable to me - he would have been happy. Instead of being left wondering why you were taking photos & if you are a terrorist doing a recce for an attack on the local cathedral.When I got into the store the man who had been loading his car came up to me and asked why I was taking photos. I declined to answer & he said 'fair enough' & left.
You had nothing to hide but decided to be a dick about it anyway. Why on earth didn't you just tell the bloke what you told this forum of complete strangers?
Butter Face said:
Let's say it like it is.
OP was taking pictures of the woman's ass, husband spotted him, OP ran, gave some BS excuse when cornered, husband reported it to the police.
That's what they've reported him for, they think he's a massive pervert taking pictures of women in car parks and he's done nothing to prove otherwise.
As it's not a crime, he doesn't have to prove otherwise.OP was taking pictures of the woman's ass, husband spotted him, OP ran, gave some BS excuse when cornered, husband reported it to the police.
That's what they've reported him for, they think he's a massive pervert taking pictures of women in car parks and he's done nothing to prove otherwise.
Cat/Vario- thank you for your responses.
Rovinghawk said:
Butter Face said:
Let's say it like it is.
OP was taking pictures of the woman's ass, husband spotted him, OP ran, gave some BS excuse when cornered, husband reported it to the police.
That's what they've reported him for, they think he's a massive pervert taking pictures of women in car parks and he's done nothing to prove otherwise.
As it's not a crime, he doesn't have to prove otherwise.OP was taking pictures of the woman's ass, husband spotted him, OP ran, gave some BS excuse when cornered, husband reported it to the police.
That's what they've reported him for, they think he's a massive pervert taking pictures of women in car parks and he's done nothing to prove otherwise.
Cat/Vario- thank you for your responses.
Husband would have said 'I'm really sorry to have bothered you, my wife gets quite strange about things like this, have a good day' then said to his wife 'He was taking a picture of the cathedral you silly bint' and everyone carries on with their lives. As it goes, OP now has had a visit from the police, a visit to the police and I would say more to follow, ain't not 'having to prove' great?
There really are a whole load of inconsistencies, half-truths and downright bulls
t that are spouted regarding photography in public. Sadly, many of the worst offenders are Police officers.
As an example, I was very nearly arrested at a public sector march a few years back by two rather comnfrontational and over zealous Met officer's. This was despite me wearing a clearly marked marshal's bib and seeking permission to photograph people when appropriate, including Police officers.
In the end nothing came of it, but it left a bad taste in my mouth and for a while after I had a negative attitude towards the Police.
t that are spouted regarding photography in public. Sadly, many of the worst offenders are Police officers.As an example, I was very nearly arrested at a public sector march a few years back by two rather comnfrontational and over zealous Met officer's. This was despite me wearing a clearly marked marshal's bib and seeking permission to photograph people when appropriate, including Police officers.
In the end nothing came of it, but it left a bad taste in my mouth and for a while after I had a negative attitude towards the Police.
You know I often hear of the "attitude test" and personally I seem to have managed to live my life so that I've never had to think about it because encounters with the Police simply don't happen, let alone on the seemingly regular basis they do to some on here.
Surely to goodness the simple option here is just to act like a normal human being?
Would "I'm doing a photo project and saw a good photo opportunity" have been too difficult rather than sticking it to the man with the usual "I declined to answer" stuff?
Rights are fine, but common sense also has to come into it and if someone in a car pulled up outside your house right now and started taking photos I doubt that you'd simply sit in your living room thinking "It's fine, public place, they aren't breaking any laws, that's their right".
I don't get why people are so daft over simple things and then spend time online trying to work out what they should do when a simple "Taking a picture of the Cathedral" would have probably been the end of it
Surely to goodness the simple option here is just to act like a normal human being?
Would "I'm doing a photo project and saw a good photo opportunity" have been too difficult rather than sticking it to the man with the usual "I declined to answer" stuff?
Rights are fine, but common sense also has to come into it and if someone in a car pulled up outside your house right now and started taking photos I doubt that you'd simply sit in your living room thinking "It's fine, public place, they aren't breaking any laws, that's their right".
I don't get why people are so daft over simple things and then spend time online trying to work out what they should do when a simple "Taking a picture of the Cathedral" would have probably been the end of it
Dr Jekyll said:
SpeckledJim said:
My guess:
Lady in the photgraph has had some big trouble in the past involving perhaps an aggressive ex-partner and the police.
She is now a gibbering wreck at home, can't eat, can't sleep, can't stop saying "he's found me, he's found me" etc etc.
Police know of the history (but can't tell you about it) and want to find out if you're an amateur PI or other category of investigative bad dude.
Your reaction has not helped allay those fears.
Plausible?
So nobody is supposed to photograph her, nobody is allowed to know that they can't photograph her, let alone why, but the OP is at fault for acting in such a way that someone might jump to the conclusion that he was doing what he isn't allowed to know he isn't allowed to do.Lady in the photgraph has had some big trouble in the past involving perhaps an aggressive ex-partner and the police.
She is now a gibbering wreck at home, can't eat, can't sleep, can't stop saying "he's found me, he's found me" etc etc.
Police know of the history (but can't tell you about it) and want to find out if you're an amateur PI or other category of investigative bad dude.
Your reaction has not helped allay those fears.
Plausible?
Imagine this thread from the position of the guy loading his car:
"My wife has a troubled past with a VERY unpleasant character. Long story involving viiolence, threats to life, and lots of police but it's in the past, but suffice to say if this guy learns where she is, there will be more trouble.
"Anyway, we were loading the car at the supermarket the other day and I catch a guy photographing us from across the car park. We don't know him at all, but we are naturally suspicious because of the above, and he isn't photographing anything else - just us. I go and ask him what he's up to. He refuses to answer me.
"I've got his reg-plate - what should I do?"
Edited by SpeckledJim on Sunday 31st January 09:58
Butter Face said:
Rovinghawk said:
Butter Face said:
Let's say it like it is.
OP was taking pictures of the woman's ass, husband spotted him, OP ran, gave some BS excuse when cornered, husband reported it to the police.
That's what they've reported him for, they think he's a massive pervert taking pictures of women in car parks and he's done nothing to prove otherwise.
As it's not a crime, he doesn't have to prove otherwise.OP was taking pictures of the woman's ass, husband spotted him, OP ran, gave some BS excuse when cornered, husband reported it to the police.
That's what they've reported him for, they think he's a massive pervert taking pictures of women in car parks and he's done nothing to prove otherwise.
Cat/Vario- thank you for your responses.
Husband would have said 'I'm really sorry to have bothered you, my wife gets quite strange about things like this, have a good day' then said to his wife 'He was taking a picture of the cathedral you silly bint' and everyone carries on with their lives. As it goes, OP now has had a visit from the police, a visit to the police and I would say more to follow, ain't not 'having to prove' great?
On a more serious note RH says 'no offence' but wouldn't the scenario above constitute possible harassment or unsociable behaviour or some other similar offence?
You are allowed to take pictures in public. Minors are a special case.
I'd track this fker down and bring a harassment charge just for sts and giggles and to teach the fker and the numbnut cop a lesson in UK law.
You don't get to make it up - only the aholes in Westminster get to do that.
I'd track this f
ker down and bring a harassment charge just for sts and giggles and to teach the fker and the numbnut cop a lesson in UK law.You don't get to make it up - only the a
holes in Westminster get to do that.There is an important issue being discussed here regarding the rights to take photographs in public places. A legal brief was posted a few years ago and as far as I am aware has not been superseded. The right is strongly defended by the large army of "street photographers' who set out to document everyday life in pictures. There is always a risk of offending someone (as apparently did the OP) and so one must have a strategy of dealing with confrontation. It seems a pity that this has escalated and I am not sure why the police have become involved - it does seem a waste of their time and our money. Will be interested to see how this plays out
I,ve only skimmed through the post so forgive me if I,ve missed something. When this bloke approached you I take it he didn't inform you he was actually a police officer which would have made difference anyway, however he then takes your photo and following this you are invited to the station to have a chat.
Personally I would have put a complaint in for the misuse of police time and harassment. Not the best use of police resorces.
The police need to explain there course of action, by the way I have no axe to grind here I respect the police have challenging job to do
Personally I would have put a complaint in for the misuse of police time and harassment. Not the best use of police resorces.
The police need to explain there course of action, by the way I have no axe to grind here I respect the police have challenging job to do
Don said:
You are allowed to take pictures in public. Minors are a special case.
I'd track this fker down and bring a harassment charge just for sts and giggles and to teach the fker and the numbnut cop a lesson in UK law.
You don't get to make it up - only the aholes in Westminster get to do that.
No, minors aren't a special case in law. If the OP has kids then anyone is perfectly entitled to take their photos in a public place and then take exactly the same attitude as he has. Sauce for the goose & all that.I'd track this f
ker down and bring a harassment charge just for sts and giggles and to teach the fker and the numbnut cop a lesson in UK law.You don't get to make it up - only the a
holes in Westminster get to do that.No harassment involved in what happened here, so that simply won't fly. Harassment has to be a "course of conduct" (ie: more than a single act) that happens on "more than one occasion" and that a "reasonable person" would consider as harassement. Asking the OP and then reporting it could amount to a "course of conduct" but it's only happened once and the responses on here make it pretty clear that a lot of reasonable people don't consider what happened as harassment of the OP. Some do but a lot don't.
So, unless you're an a
hole in Westminster, please stop making it up 
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff