What 'powers' do bodyguards have?
Discussion
Came across a couple of news articles and videos on-line which got me thinking. What powers do non-law enforcement bodyguards actually have in law? Is it a case of justifiable force to keep someone safe? Some newspaper articles claim that in the following examples, the bodyguards were guilty of excessive force but I'm not so sure.
I'm thinking about these in particular:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gukwO4uCgTY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3nCL8A3iBg
And associated news articles:
http://www.classicalite.com/articles/18575/2015030...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-21897...
I'm thinking about these in particular:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gukwO4uCgTY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3nCL8A3iBg
And associated news articles:
http://www.classicalite.com/articles/18575/2015030...
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-21897...
A bodyguard doesn't have any power or authority beyond that a member of the public has.
No qualifications, training or experience is required to be one.
The celebs who employ them will often hope there will be a member of the public who lunges at them so their bodyguard can do there stuff thus creating some interest the media will pick up on.
In these articles it'd be easy for Lady Gaga to go around with nobody being any the wiser, take her make up off and just wear a hoodie and she would be pretty non descript but that would defeat the object which is publicity.
No qualifications, training or experience is required to be one.
The celebs who employ them will often hope there will be a member of the public who lunges at them so their bodyguard can do there stuff thus creating some interest the media will pick up on.
In these articles it'd be easy for Lady Gaga to go around with nobody being any the wiser, take her make up off and just wear a hoodie and she would be pretty non descript but that would defeat the object which is publicity.
Edited by Thankyou4calling on Saturday 27th June 20:33
I actually know one of the Royal family's bodyguards.
The guy is a serving police officer and one of the close protection officers assigned to senior royals. He travels with them, Balmoral, Sandringham absolutely side by side with HRH.
About 5ft 9, maybe 11 stone. Totally unassuming and quiet, not powerfully built and the sort if he gave you the finger in traffic you'd be on him and expect to put him down.
But he wouldn't give you the finger, he wouldn't get a job with a pop star or suchlike, doesn't look the part at all.
BUT, he is armed at all times and even without his firearm he will put you on your back in a flash, no matter who you are or think you are this guy is lethal.
Totally different to the bodyguards of Madonna and the likes of Rhianna etc. a different animal who'd laugh at those guys.
The guy is a serving police officer and one of the close protection officers assigned to senior royals. He travels with them, Balmoral, Sandringham absolutely side by side with HRH.
About 5ft 9, maybe 11 stone. Totally unassuming and quiet, not powerfully built and the sort if he gave you the finger in traffic you'd be on him and expect to put him down.
But he wouldn't give you the finger, he wouldn't get a job with a pop star or suchlike, doesn't look the part at all.
BUT, he is armed at all times and even without his firearm he will put you on your back in a flash, no matter who you are or think you are this guy is lethal.
Totally different to the bodyguards of Madonna and the likes of Rhianna etc. a different animal who'd laugh at those guys.
Thankyou4calling said:
A bodyguard doesn't have any power or authority beyond that a member of the public has.
that is correct Thankyou4calling said:
No qualifications, training or experience is required to be one.
thati s incorrect, however the SIA 'close protection' badge is a bit of a joke standard.I
But anyone can call themselves a bodyguard.
Get a business card printed saying bodyguard and you are one, same as Personal Trainer, Hairdresser or Estate Agent.
mph1977 said:
thati s incorrect, however the SIA 'close protection' badge is a bit of a joke standard.
I'm not looking to be argumentative (honest :-) But anyone can call themselves a bodyguard.
Get a business card printed saying bodyguard and you are one, same as Personal Trainer, Hairdresser or Estate Agent.
Edited by Thankyou4calling on Saturday 27th June 14:24
t houses with a brain the size of a peanut 
mph1977 said:
Thankyou4calling said:
A bodyguard doesn't have any power or authority beyond that a member of the public has.
that is correct Thankyou4calling said:
No qualifications, training or experience is required to be one.
thati s incorrect, however the SIA 'close protection' badge is a bit of a joke standard.However holding a valid SIA badge isn't going to get you a job, but you need to hold one to legally do the job.
The Spruce goose said:
they act like bouncers no style or finesse just brute force.
Edited by Pagey on Saturday 27th June 18:09
Martin_M said:
The first video. The situation should never have occurred! That revolving door should have been risk assessed and covered during the walk through. Thankyou4calling said:
The celebs who employ them will often hope there will be a member of the public who lunges at them so their bodyguard can do there stuff thus creating some interest the media will pick up on.
Certain 'celebs' will have a 'situation' orchestrated by their entourage when they want some publicity 
Perhaps I'm alone in thinking that protecting Lady Gaga and similar celebrities would be quite enjoyable (and I'd imagine, well paid), if that's the field you're in.
If they have no additional powers above a member of the public then how exactly does that work in practice? What I mean is, how can a bodyguard lay hands on someone at all? In the two videos I posted initially, although we can't be certain, it would seem that the two members of the public did not intend to cause any harm so on that basis, how can the bodyguards in question justify laying hands on them at all?
I'm not slating them as I actually think they did well in both cases but I'm just keen to know more.
If they have no additional powers above a member of the public then how exactly does that work in practice? What I mean is, how can a bodyguard lay hands on someone at all? In the two videos I posted initially, although we can't be certain, it would seem that the two members of the public did not intend to cause any harm so on that basis, how can the bodyguards in question justify laying hands on them at all?
I'm not slating them as I actually think they did well in both cases but I'm just keen to know more.
People get away with stuff all the time, but that doesn't mean that their actions were justified. The bodyguards could have been charged with assault. They can only use force in self defence or in defence of others, just like you and me, and the force used must be proportionate to the risk.
In terms of the Gaga videos, two people aren't sufficient for the control and 'sterile area' they are trying to maintain. That's probably half the reason they've had to get so hands on on two occasions.
Talking specifically about the UK, most people don't realise when the police use force they are nearly always using the same laws that apply and are available to everyone. If a police officer is doing close-protection for a royal and has to push someone back, they'd be using the same laws applicable / available to a private individual (normal member of the public) guarding a celebrity.
Essentially, we're talking about the below:
You can read more here: http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/self_defence/
The obvious limitation and police vs public difference would be searching someone. A private individual would have no power to detain and search someone for weapons / drugs etc. Although a private individual could request to voluntarily search someone, whereas the police can't do that.
Martin_M said:
Perhaps I'm alone in thinking that protecting Lady Gaga and similar celebrities would be quite enjoyable (and I'd imagine, well paid), if that's the field you're in.
If they have no additional powers above a member of the public then how exactly does that work in practice? What I mean is, how can a bodyguard lay hands on someone at all? In the two videos I posted initially, although we can't be certain, it would seem that the two members of the public did not intend to cause any harm so on that basis, how can the bodyguards in question justify laying hands on them at all?
I'm not slating them as I actually think they did well in both cases but I'm just keen to know more.
This topic has international scope. Laws and powers are going to vary considerably across different countries. Perhaps in some countries body guards may have more powers. If they have no additional powers above a member of the public then how exactly does that work in practice? What I mean is, how can a bodyguard lay hands on someone at all? In the two videos I posted initially, although we can't be certain, it would seem that the two members of the public did not intend to cause any harm so on that basis, how can the bodyguards in question justify laying hands on them at all?
I'm not slating them as I actually think they did well in both cases but I'm just keen to know more.
Talking specifically about the UK, most people don't realise when the police use force they are nearly always using the same laws that apply and are available to everyone. If a police officer is doing close-protection for a royal and has to push someone back, they'd be using the same laws applicable / available to a private individual (normal member of the public) guarding a celebrity.
Essentially, we're talking about the below:
CPS said:
A person may use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances for the purposes of:
self-defence; or
defence of another; or
defence of property; or
prevention of crime; or
lawful arrest.
In assessing the reasonableness of the force used, prosecutors should ask two questions:
was the use of force necessary in the circumstances, i.e. Was there a need for any force at all? and was the force used reasonable in the circumstances?
Close-protection will nearly always be the defence of another, and again, applies to the police and public alike. self-defence; or
defence of another; or
defence of property; or
prevention of crime; or
lawful arrest.
In assessing the reasonableness of the force used, prosecutors should ask two questions:
was the use of force necessary in the circumstances, i.e. Was there a need for any force at all? and was the force used reasonable in the circumstances?
You can read more here: http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/s_to_u/self_defence/
The obvious limitation and police vs public difference would be searching someone. A private individual would have no power to detain and search someone for weapons / drugs etc. Although a private individual could request to voluntarily search someone, whereas the police can't do that.
Breadvan72 said:
People get away with stuff all the time, but that doesn't mean that their actions were justified. The bodyguards could have been charged with assault. They can only use force in self defence or in defence of others, just like you and me, and the force used must be proportionate to the risk.
Indeed!In the first video the guy ran towards 'the client' arms out in front of him holding items in his hands.
(Yes watching the video it's fair to assume now that he was quite probably an over zealous autograph hunter/fan) at the time though the No2/wingman was caught on the hop and had to react instantaneously
Targets Running at client, arms outstretched, objects in hand (He has seen this out of the corner of his eye) who is to say that he didn't have a knife, gun etc etc under that piece of paper? Or that the pen wasn't a knife....
The No2's arm goes up to create a barrier between the client and the fan, the split second the fan runs into his arm he has good reason to react and drag/bundle the guy away the bald guy steps across to assist and pushes the fan backwards/away from his client and colleague yes I accept he may have pushed him quite hard but there are times when you have got to bluntly drive the 'back off' message quite quickly.
It's a proactive and reactive job.
Watch the video again - as I mentioned earlier , that revolving door should have been covered, the fan shouldn't have managed more than 1 step out of it! The No2 should have had it covered, the taller bald guy looked at the door and disregarded it!
La Liga said:
In terms of the Gaga videos, two people aren't sufficient for the control and 'sterile area' they are trying to maintain. That's probably half the reason they've had to get so hands on on two occasions.
It was a 3 man team 
Clock the taller bald guy in the blue suit 2 seconds ahead of the group of 3. He is then stationed outside the exit point. Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff