"I won't talk to you unless you turn the camera off"
Discussion
Whilst doing some paperwork the other night I had one of those low budget Road Wars/Cops with cameras type TV programs on, and one thing caught my attention.
Some traffic officers saw some chap in a newish BMW M3 (I think it was) driving a little too quickly, so gave chase to have a word with him.
The guy stopped promptly when he realised they were after him, and once the Police pulled up as well, naturally the camera crew jumped out the back of the police car and swarmed toward the BMW as they do.
The guy realised he was about to be embarrassed on some low budget TV program, so stayed in his car, wound down the window a few inches and let the officer approach.
The officer said something along the lines of "just need a chat about your driving I'm afraid, would you mind just jumping out the car and we'll take a seat in mine?"
The guy replied quite politely and very quietly "Look, I'm more than happy to discuss this with you, but I do not want to appear on TV and I do not want to be filmed, but if you turn the cameras off I will be happy to sit in the back of the police car".
At this point the TV narrator says "looks like this speedy driver is camera shy!" or some such drivel, and the camera crew stand outside the police car filming the outside of it while the driver sits in the back but the audio of the conversation is clearly head from the mic inside the police car.
Now I can completely understand where this guy is coming from with this. I would have absolutely zero interest whatsoever in 'appearing' in one of these programs just to be embarrassed on national TV, and would probably try to resist of refuse being filmed or recorded if the slim chance ever occurred.
Strangely, they appear to have been filming Road Wars quite a lot in my area of Cumbria recently, so it isn't out of this would to assume it is a slight possibility that it could happen!
Chances of it happening aside, I'm far more interested in the legality of refusing to speak to an officer or get out of your car until he/she gave you a guarantee that you wouldn't be recorded or filmed for the purposes of TV broadcast.
Any thoughts?
Some traffic officers saw some chap in a newish BMW M3 (I think it was) driving a little too quickly, so gave chase to have a word with him.
The guy stopped promptly when he realised they were after him, and once the Police pulled up as well, naturally the camera crew jumped out the back of the police car and swarmed toward the BMW as they do.
The guy realised he was about to be embarrassed on some low budget TV program, so stayed in his car, wound down the window a few inches and let the officer approach.
The officer said something along the lines of "just need a chat about your driving I'm afraid, would you mind just jumping out the car and we'll take a seat in mine?"
The guy replied quite politely and very quietly "Look, I'm more than happy to discuss this with you, but I do not want to appear on TV and I do not want to be filmed, but if you turn the cameras off I will be happy to sit in the back of the police car".
At this point the TV narrator says "looks like this speedy driver is camera shy!" or some such drivel, and the camera crew stand outside the police car filming the outside of it while the driver sits in the back but the audio of the conversation is clearly head from the mic inside the police car.
Now I can completely understand where this guy is coming from with this. I would have absolutely zero interest whatsoever in 'appearing' in one of these programs just to be embarrassed on national TV, and would probably try to resist of refuse being filmed or recorded if the slim chance ever occurred.
Strangely, they appear to have been filming Road Wars quite a lot in my area of Cumbria recently, so it isn't out of this would to assume it is a slight possibility that it could happen!
Chances of it happening aside, I'm far more interested in the legality of refusing to speak to an officer or get out of your car until he/she gave you a guarantee that you wouldn't be recorded or filmed for the purposes of TV broadcast.
Any thoughts?
I watched an episode last night on Sky Plus, they caught an unnamed celebrity with a dodgy private plate on a new Range Rover and showing as uninsured. It was fairly obviously Katie price as you could hear her voice.
She refused to get out the car and muttered something about her contract was with ITV and did not want the BBC to film her, and so the police officer sat in the passenger seat of her Range Rover. It turned out she was insured, but had to get the dodgy private plate made legal.
She refused to get out the car and muttered something about her contract was with ITV and did not want the BBC to film her, and so the police officer sat in the passenger seat of her Range Rover. It turned out she was insured, but had to get the dodgy private plate made legal.
This could be an interesting discussion.
Under the Human Rights Act you have the right to privacy, it is well established that this does include your own property including your car but this doesn't extend to Public places, where everybody has the right to film.
It would be interesting to know if the interior of Police Car counts are Public or Private property.
The broadcast is a different matter and as I understand it ofcom rules prevent member of the public being subject to ridicule or humiliation.
Under the Human Rights Act you have the right to privacy, it is well established that this does include your own property including your car but this doesn't extend to Public places, where everybody has the right to film.
It would be interesting to know if the interior of Police Car counts are Public or Private property.
The broadcast is a different matter and as I understand it ofcom rules prevent member of the public being subject to ridicule or humiliation.
Edited by Martin4x4 on Friday 20th February 11:27
Martin4x4 said:
Under the Human Rights Act you have the right to privacy, it is well established that this does include your own property including your car but this doesn't extend to Public places, where everybody has the right to film.
But then you get gray areas to do with being incidental to the filming or the specific target and it being in the public interest or not.As far as I am aware you do not have the right to not be filmed incidental to the filming, so you could not demand that someone stop filming their holiday or filming the news because you happen to be walking past. However, if they started to follow you around and focus on you specifically you could stop them, unless it was in the public interest. This is why the cop shows can film people who have committed a crime, and also you get some strange ones where some people are blurred (who have not committed a crime, or not come to court yet) and some people (who have been found guilty) are shown. Same reason why celebrities sue journalists and sometimes win, sometimes lose. Is a celebrity out jogging in the public interest or not? Depends on where you draw the line.
Martin4x4 said:
This could be an interesting discussion.
Under the Human Rights Act you have the right to privacy, it is well established that this does include your own property including your car but this doesn't extend to Public places, where everybody has the right to film.
It would be interesting to know if the interior of Police Car counts are Public or Private property.
The broadcast is a different matter and as I understand it ofcom rules prevent member of the public being subject to ridicule or humiliation.
Yep.Under the Human Rights Act you have the right to privacy, it is well established that this does include your own property including your car but this doesn't extend to Public places, where everybody has the right to film.
It would be interesting to know if the interior of Police Car counts are Public or Private property.
The broadcast is a different matter and as I understand it ofcom rules prevent member of the public being subject to ridicule or humiliation.
Edited by Martin4x4 on Friday 20th February 11:27
It's the 'TV Broadcast' bit that interests me.
The Police can record and film me all they like, I don't have an issue with that, but I'm curious as to what would happen if you refused to cooperate or discuss anything with then whatsoever until the TV cameras were turned off?
I can't see your actions as being classed as obstructive or unreasonable in any way? You are merely asking for some privacy whilst being dealt with.
As far as I can see, no member of the public comes of these sort of programmes looking good. It's basically public humiliation and I cannot understand why more people don't refuse to cooperate until the cameras are turned off.
What interests me with these shows is the police plainly stating, when the "criminal" demands the cameras be turned off or "get outta me face", that the camera crew have every right to be here and filming this incident. Yet on the flip side you have threads here and many other incidents of people filming in public locations at protests or anywhere of the police storming in and demanding that they stop filming in a public place for various "security" reasons.
In all honesty, unless you were driving in a manner where you'd end up getting arrested (100mph in a 30, overtaking on blind bends etc), they probably won't use footage of a completely routine and polite traffic stop. The programme would be incredibly boring if it showed umpteen courteous drivers pulling over, getting their documents checked, and either getting handed a ticket or driving away. They probably film hundreds of routine stops and discard the footage as nobody would watch a programme where nothing of interest happens.
sebhaque said:
In all honesty, unless you were driving in a manner where you'd end up getting arrested (100mph in a 30, overtaking on blind bends etc), they probably won't use footage of a completely routine and polite traffic stop. The programme would be incredibly boring if it showed umpteen courteous drivers pulling over, getting their documents checked, and either getting handed a ticket or driving away. They probably film hundreds of routine stops and discard the footage as nobody would watch a programme where nothing of interest happens.
Have you watched these programs?Some of them ARE made up of routine stops for things like dodgy numberplate spacing, cutting it a bit fine with a red light, doing 50 in a 40 etc.
There was one the other day where about 10 minutes of the entire program was dedicated to a policewoman arguing the finer points of number plate legislation with a retired farmer because he had B16 BOL altered fractionally to look like B1G BOL on his VW Touareg.
The example I cited where the motorist asked not to be filmed, which was promised by the police officer, but then they still played the audio from the conversation in the police car, was stopped because he was about 11mph over the 60mph limit and there wasn't anything else wrong with either his car or his documents.
Brigand said:
What interests me with these shows is the police plainly stating, when the "criminal" demands the cameras be turned off or "get outta me face", that the camera crew have every right to be here and filming this incident. Yet on the flip side you have threads here and many other incidents of people filming in public locations at protests or anywhere of the police storming in and demanding that they stop filming in a public place for various "security" reasons.
That would come under the 1997 ACT sub section 2: one rule for us and one rule for you. Martin4x4 said:
Under the Human Rights Act you have the right to privacy, it is well established that this does include your own property including your car but this doesn't extend to Public places, where everybody has the right to film.
Doesn't seem to stop speed/safety camerasEdited by Martin4x4 on Friday 20th February 11:27
My understanding is that you cannot stop them filimg you so if you started playing games then the Polcie could get heavy handed. You would hope they would sometimes tell the TV crew to go away to calm things down but I have seen on the shows they don't (though often it is some a
hole being done over so worthy of TV footage).
hole being done over so worthy of TV footage).You would hope, that if you asked the police politely to turn the TV cameras off before you discussed why you had been stopped, they would do so out of professional courtesy.
If they refused, then it would be quite a shocking example of them having more interest in featuring in crap TV shows than actually being civil to a citizen who they are dealing with.
If they refused, then it would be quite a shocking example of them having more interest in featuring in crap TV shows than actually being civil to a citizen who they are dealing with.
NinjaPower said:
You would hope, that if you asked the police politely to turn the TV cameras off before you discussed why you had been stopped, they would do so out of professional courtesy.
If they refused, then it would be quite a shocking example of them having more interest in featuring in crap TV shows than actually being civil to a citizen who they are dealing with.
Not necessarily - they have an interest in publicising their work as what they show may then educate others.If they refused, then it would be quite a shocking example of them having more interest in featuring in crap TV shows than actually being civil to a citizen who they are dealing with.
I suspects though it is where the so called atitude test may come in handy. If you have doen osmething minor and ask nicely they may turn it off or the Tv company may not be arsed to show it anyway whereas anything major or a nasty character will make good TV and good PR possibly.
Mojooo said:
NinjaPower said:
You would hope, that if you asked the police politely to turn the TV cameras off before you discussed why you had been stopped, they would do so out of professional courtesy.
If they refused, then it would be quite a shocking example of them having more interest in featuring in crap TV shows than actually being civil to a citizen who they are dealing with.
Not necessarily - they have an interest in publicising their work as what they show may then educate others.If they refused, then it would be quite a shocking example of them having more interest in featuring in crap TV shows than actually being civil to a citizen who they are dealing with.
I suspects though it is where the so called atitude test may come in handy. If you have doen osmething minor and ask nicely they may turn it off or the Tv company may not be arsed to show it anyway whereas anything major or a nasty character will make good TV and good PR possibly.
Notwithstanding the innocence, or otherwise, of the individuals featured, shouldn't the companies making these shows be requesting that the individuals featured sign release forms consenting for their image to be used? I for one would not consent to someone profiting from footage they'd taken of me unless they were paying me.
MitchT said:
Notwithstanding the innocence, or otherwise, of the individuals featured, shouldn't the companies making these shows be requesting that the individuals featured sign release forms consenting for their image to be used? I for one would not consent to someone profiting from footage they'd taken of me unless they were paying me.
Cheap telly -thats why its done and feeds the reality telly massesMitchT said:
Notwithstanding the innocence, or otherwise, of the individuals featured, shouldn't the companies making these shows be requesting that the individuals featured sign release forms consenting for their image to be used? I for one would not consent to someone profiting from footage they'd taken of me unless they were paying me.
I'm afraid that no one needs your permission to film or photograph you in a public place and then profit from it or sell it to a TV program.The point of this thread is whether or not that you can demand that the police allow you privacy from TV broadcast when discussing an alleged crime or driving offence with you.
Is sitting in the back of a police car with the doors shut talking to an officer considered 'private' for example?
What if you politely but firmly refused to even talk about what you are alleged to have done unless the cameras were switched off? Would that be a crime of any kind?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff