In-car recording of all Police 'encounters'?
Discussion
A large number of threads call into question the veracity of conversations between police and 'suspect'. I would have thought that modern technology would make video recording of all such encounters a relatively trivial matter.
Are there 'Data Protection' reasons why this isn't done as a matter of course?
edited to add: can the police object to your recording the incident on your phone?
Are there 'Data Protection' reasons why this isn't done as a matter of course?
edited to add: can the police object to your recording the incident on your phone?
Edited by anonymous-user on Monday 11th January 21:29
280E said:
Does the inside of a police vehicle count as a 'public place'?
Yes. Just be sensible and grown up about it and say politely that you are going to record. No officer will have a problem with it. If you start shouting about rights and freeman of the land nonsense while shoving a camera in the officers face then it's a different situation. Plenty of examples on Youtube of these idiots just trying to provoke a reaction. HantsRat said:
Just be sensible and grown up about it and say politely that you are going to record. No officer will have a problem with it.
Remember Jules Mattsson? The good ones won't have a problem. Then again, the good ones don't need to be recorded.Apologies for using the Mail but the recording in the article illustrates my point.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2073072/Ju...
Edited by Rovinghawk on Monday 11th January 22:27
Roo said:
Sorry, a bit O/T.
Retired after 30yrs a few years back - still working for 'em. You?Bigends said:
My force all have personal issue bodycams. Force instructions are that they are switched on for all Police /public encounters. Quickly downloaded onto a secure server at the end of the day. Many forces still dont have them
Are you really in the BiB?Edited by Bigends on Monday 11th January 23:19
Bigends said:
Retired after 30yrs a few years back - still working for 'em. You?
No I'm not.Edited by Bigends on Monday 11th January 23:19
But judging by your reply to this post..
Bigends said:
Collectingbrass said:
OP - look at it from their perspective. You've obviously attracted their attention enough for them to want to get you to modify your behaviour, in this case excess speed.
They can write you up for 50 mph plus, which in a 30 is a court visit for which
- you and they need to attend
- you need a lawyer
- paperwork paperwork paperwork
and the outcome is you get a penalty, probably fairly low as it is your first offence and if your brief is any good plenty of mitigation, and the penalty modifies your behaviour by 95%
Or they can write you up for 45 mph, which is 3 points and £100 but no court visit. As you've just bought the bike the £100 is probably going to sting and between that and the time at the roadside they've a good chance of modifying your behaviour by 90%.
If you don't think they've got any evidence then by all means take it to court, if I remember correctly you have seven days to return the ticket saying you don't accept the fixed penalty and you're going to try your luck in court. But as others have said, the police will have sufficient evidence to prosecute and you've got two of her majesty's finest against a scramble bike rider in front of a bench of magistrates. The odds are not in your favour (from what you have written) and a lawyer who can get you off will cost you more than the PCN, never mind the odds of that and the fine ( & costs) you may face if you loose.
To me it looks like you passed the attitude test, no small feat in itself on a bike like that, and were rewarded for it. In your shoes I would pay up and kick the cat.
Surely the officer cant just pick and choose the excess speed figure they wish to present to the court can they?They can write you up for 50 mph plus, which in a 30 is a court visit for which
- you and they need to attend
- you need a lawyer
- paperwork paperwork paperwork
and the outcome is you get a penalty, probably fairly low as it is your first offence and if your brief is any good plenty of mitigation, and the penalty modifies your behaviour by 95%
Or they can write you up for 45 mph, which is 3 points and £100 but no court visit. As you've just bought the bike the £100 is probably going to sting and between that and the time at the roadside they've a good chance of modifying your behaviour by 90%.
If you don't think they've got any evidence then by all means take it to court, if I remember correctly you have seven days to return the ticket saying you don't accept the fixed penalty and you're going to try your luck in court. But as others have said, the police will have sufficient evidence to prosecute and you've got two of her majesty's finest against a scramble bike rider in front of a bench of magistrates. The odds are not in your favour (from what you have written) and a lawyer who can get you off will cost you more than the PCN, never mind the odds of that and the fine ( & costs) you may face if you loose.
To me it looks like you passed the attitude test, no small feat in itself on a bike like that, and were rewarded for it. In your shoes I would pay up and kick the cat.
I have absolutely no issue with people recording any interraction I have with them as I am polite and courteous at all times. However, given the job that I do, I always (very politely) ask that if they do wish to visually record they can take down my collar number but please don't film my face. The simple reason being my collar number identifies me at an official level, but I don't think I should be subjected to abuse and assaulted while out on a date night with my Wife because my face has been recognised from a clip of video that someone posted on facetube or youbook. This has actually happened to me. So yes, film away, but just not my face because some people hate me just because of my job. A bit like football fans hating their rivals, or Eclassy hating me for my job.
Roo said:
Bigends said:
Retired after 30yrs a few years back - still working for 'em. You?
No I'm not.Edited by Bigends on Monday 11th January 23:19
But judging by your reply to this post..
Bigends said:
Collectingbrass said:
OP - look at it from their perspective. You've obviously attracted their attention enough for them to want to get you to modify your behaviour, in this case excess speed.
They can write you up for 50 mph plus, which in a 30 is a court visit for which
- you and they need to attend
- you need a lawyer
- paperwork paperwork paperwork
and the outcome is you get a penalty, probably fairly low as it is your first offence and if your brief is any good plenty of mitigation, and the penalty modifies your behaviour by 95%
Or they can write you up for 45 mph, which is 3 points and £100 but no court visit. As you've just bought the bike the £100 is probably going to sting and between that and the time at the roadside they've a good chance of modifying your behaviour by 90%.
If you don't think they've got any evidence then by all means take it to court, if I remember correctly you have seven days to return the ticket saying you don't accept the fixed penalty and you're going to try your luck in court. But as others have said, the police will have sufficient evidence to prosecute and you've got two of her majesty's finest against a scramble bike rider in front of a bench of magistrates. The odds are not in your favour (from what you have written) and a lawyer who can get you off will cost you more than the PCN, never mind the odds of that and the fine ( & costs) you may face if you loose.
To me it looks like you passed the attitude test, no small feat in itself on a bike like that, and were rewarded for it. In your shoes I would pay up and kick the cat.
Surely the officer cant just pick and choose the excess speed figure they wish to present to the court can they?They can write you up for 50 mph plus, which in a 30 is a court visit for which
- you and they need to attend
- you need a lawyer
- paperwork paperwork paperwork
and the outcome is you get a penalty, probably fairly low as it is your first offence and if your brief is any good plenty of mitigation, and the penalty modifies your behaviour by 95%
Or they can write you up for 45 mph, which is 3 points and £100 but no court visit. As you've just bought the bike the £100 is probably going to sting and between that and the time at the roadside they've a good chance of modifying your behaviour by 90%.
If you don't think they've got any evidence then by all means take it to court, if I remember correctly you have seven days to return the ticket saying you don't accept the fixed penalty and you're going to try your luck in court. But as others have said, the police will have sufficient evidence to prosecute and you've got two of her majesty's finest against a scramble bike rider in front of a bench of magistrates. The odds are not in your favour (from what you have written) and a lawyer who can get you off will cost you more than the PCN, never mind the odds of that and the fine ( & costs) you may face if you loose.
To me it looks like you passed the attitude test, no small feat in itself on a bike like that, and were rewarded for it. In your shoes I would pay up and kick the cat.
Collectingbrass said:
HantsRat said:
All of our traffic cars record inside though when required.
Isn't that the result of there being a million and one "Police, Camera, Crash Bang Wallop Chasey Chasey Bitey Bitey Look at the Scroates" programmes these days? 
I for one would be extremely unhappy to say the least if I believed I would be appearing on TV for the purposes of entertainment.
I also don't believe it is appropriate in the slightest for the Police to allow a matter between them and a member of the public to become cheap public entertainment. They should be ashamed.
NinjaPower said:
Those programs are truly awful.
I for one would be extremely unhappy to say the least if I believed I would be appearing on TV for the purposes of entertainment.
I also don't believe it is appropriate in the slightest for the Police to allow a matter between them and a member of the public to become cheap public entertainment. They should be ashamed.
They should be ashamed? Really? lolI for one would be extremely unhappy to say the least if I believed I would be appearing on TV for the purposes of entertainment.
I also don't believe it is appropriate in the slightest for the Police to allow a matter between them and a member of the public to become cheap public entertainment. They should be ashamed.
The people breaking the law should be ashamed! If they don't want to be on TV they can object and have faces blurred.
HantsRat said:
NinjaPower said:
Those programs are truly awful.
I for one would be extremely unhappy to say the least if I believed I would be appearing on TV for the purposes of entertainment.
I also don't believe it is appropriate in the slightest for the Police to allow a matter between them and a member of the public to become cheap public entertainment. They should be ashamed.
They should be ashamed? Really? lolI for one would be extremely unhappy to say the least if I believed I would be appearing on TV for the purposes of entertainment.
I also don't believe it is appropriate in the slightest for the Police to allow a matter between them and a member of the public to become cheap public entertainment. They should be ashamed.
The people breaking the law should be ashamed! If they don't want to be on TV they can object and have faces blurred.
one had a group of teens / early 20's lads being chatted to by BiB they were all blurred. They said they were waiting for a mate to pick them up, and knew nothing about people throwing stones at cars, turned out they were telling the truth and so they got blurred but you could hear the conversation. I think the point was that neither party was aggressive and they parted laughing and joking.
Bigends said:
280E said:
HantsRat said:
If you are in a public place, you can record what you like!
Does the inside of a police vehicle count as a 'public place'?jesta1865 said:
HantsRat said:
NinjaPower said:
Those programs are truly awful.
I for one would be extremely unhappy to say the least if I believed I would be appearing on TV for the purposes of entertainment.
I also don't believe it is appropriate in the slightest for the Police to allow a matter between them and a member of the public to become cheap public entertainment. They should be ashamed.
They should be ashamed? Really? lolI for one would be extremely unhappy to say the least if I believed I would be appearing on TV for the purposes of entertainment.
I also don't believe it is appropriate in the slightest for the Police to allow a matter between them and a member of the public to become cheap public entertainment. They should be ashamed.
The people breaking the law should be ashamed! If they don't want to be on TV they can object and have faces blurred.
one had a group of teens / early 20's lads being chatted to by BiB they were all blurred. They said they were waiting for a mate to pick them up, and knew nothing about people throwing stones at cars, turned out they were telling the truth and so they got blurred but you could hear the conversation. I think the point was that neither party was aggressive and they parted laughing and joking.
10 minutes later they picked up the actual suspect (who pretty much admitted it there and then), so in fact the first person was completely innocent!
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff