BBC photographer stopped from taking a picture @ St Pauls in London

it's not too different here in L.A.
i got "surveilled" while photographing the goings-on at the RedBull soapbox derby this year.
 
mark-b said:
it's not too different here in L.A.
i got "surveilled" while photographing the goings-on at the RedBull soapbox derby this year.
Click to expand...

Hmmmm.... Were you planning on blowing them up, or doing unspeakable things to them?

Surely you cannot just have been taking pictures of kids (and adults too, where I live) having fun, getting off their arses, devising all kinds of ingenious technical tricks, and getting out in the fresh air? (Well, fairly fresh. You did say L.A.)

After all, taking pictures of people enjoying themselves, and sharing their pleasure, is so 20th century.

Cheers,

R.
 
I was stopped once by the Thames in East London by a trio of PCSOs. I had my Mamiya 6 on a tripod and was waiting for late afternoon light over the river towards Canary Wharf. PCSO 1 enquires "Can I ask what you're doing sir?"

I resist the temptation to point out to the officer in question that her question ought correctly to have been phrased "May I ask what you're doing?" (or perhaps just "What are you doing?"). Instead I simply answer, "Sure. Ask away."

PCSO 1: "Er well. What are you doing?"
Me: "I'm taking photographs."
PCSO 1: "What of?"
Me: "The river."
PCSO 1 (gesturing towards Canary Wharf): "What about those buildings?"
Me: "Yep. Them too. They'll be in the photo."
PCSO 1: "Can I see the photos please sir?"
Me: "No. Afraid not. It's film you see."

The PCSOs then proceed to attempt to take my personal details. Naturally I refuse and remind them that while police officers are obliged to identify themselves to me, I am not obliged to identify myselves to police officers let alone mere PCSOs. At this stage, I make a point of taking the badge numbers of the 3 PCSOs and scribble them down in my notebook.

The three amigos trundle off slightly flummoxed by the situation. The light begins to change and I get some nice shots. Not long after, the trio returns, with two real police officers, handcuffs, batons and other accoutrements on display on their belts.

The first copper comes over to me and says, "I understand there's some trouble sir."

I explain that there's no trouble at all and that while I appreciated the need for vigilance, it should have been evident to the 3 PCSOs that I was a hobby photographer out enjoying the light rather than some nefarious terrorist plotter. I said that I thought their disturbing me was an uneccessary and unwarranted intrusion.

Thankfully, it took the copper in question about 5 seconds to agree with me. It was evident to anyone with a brain that there was really nothing suspicious about my activity. The copper apologises for the disturbace and all 5 wander off, leaving me to the light.

I had a similar experience walking through London Bridge station when I was randomly stopped and searched by a PCSO acting under supervision of real police officers. I allowed the PCSO to look in my rucksack. The PCSO gets his notebook out and asks for my details. I refuse. This really throws the PCSO, who insists that I need to give my personal details so he can fill out his form. I tell him that I really don't have to tell him who I am or where I live. He seeks advice from one of the supervising coppers who tells him to just take my description. The copper knew full well I didn't have to identify myself unless they intended to nick me for something.

These 2 experiences really annoyed me. London does feel like a police state sometimes. Even more annoying is the fact that vast swathes of what one would imagine to be public space is actually private property, where controls on phography can be quite legitimately imposed. I learned this recently beside St Pauls cathedral where there is a modernised courtyard shopping area owned by a private company whose security guards refuse to allow you to set up a tripod to photograph the cathedral from what would otherwise be a great spot.
 
I have been stopped several times by guards at the Canary Wharf office complex where I was taking pictures on the OUTSIDE. They told me the whole complex was a "private estate" and that I needed to get a permit from the publicity office for all photography. (This is, of course, mentioned nowhere in any sign.) I thanked them, moved off to another area, and began taking pictures again. What a PITA. What I should have told them is that there are detailed photos of all the buildings in Canary Wharf on its Website, which I'm sure are very helpful to anyone with evil thoughts.
 
Rather than railing against the 'UK police state', we would probably be better remembering that many (although obviously not all) PCSOs and private security guards are social inadequates who crave the authority of a uniform but are too intellectually or physically 'challenged' to have passed the police recruiting process. As a corollary to this, I'm pretty sure it's still the case that you don't need any formal educational qualifications to be a police officer in the UK. I live in central London and carry a camera much of the time, but I haven't ever been stopped or questioned by anyone. I don't think there is any sinister campaign to curtail our civil liberties as photographers; I do think there's a good deal of 'Jack-in-Office' stupidity by plastic coppers who ought to know better but clearly don't...
 
Ade-oh said:
Rather than railing against the 'UK police state', we would probably be better remembering that many (although obviously not all) PCSOs and private security guards are social inadequates who crave the authority of a uniform but are too intellectually or physically 'challenged' to have passed the police recruiting process. As a corollary to this, I'm pretty sure it's still the case that you don't need any formal educational qualifications to be a police officer in the UK. I live in central London and carry a camera much of the time, but I haven't ever been stopped or questioned by anyone. I don't think there is any sinister campaign to curtail our civil liberties as photographers; I do think there's a good deal of 'Jack-in-Office' stupidity by plastic coppers who ought to know better but clearly don't...
Click to expand...

I think that is a more accurate assessment of the reasons behind these intrusions. It saddens me on another level as they are unlikely to provide us with ant real security.
 
Last edited:
It just never ends. From this morning's Guardian:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/feb/21/photographer-films-anti-terror-arrest

So, now you no longer need to be a "terrorist." If some cop thinks what you're doing as a photographer is "suspicious," or even if someone complains to a cop that it's suspicious, they can require you to give them your name and address and perhaps even "detain" you. Note that no charges were ever made against this poor guy.
 
The statements by the PCSO (is "amateur cop" too harsh?) clearly indicate zealotry on her part. I.e. "Because of the Terrorism Act and everything in the country, we need to get everyone's details who is taking pictures of the town." "[E]verything in the country..." is clearly over the top, and I wonder if the officer can point to the section of the Terrorism Act that directs police to get the details of everyone who is taking pictures in the town of Accrington.

The statement by the Lancashire police that they responded in part because members of the public were concerned prompts me to ask would they chase down and detain anyone using a camera if someone else complained? Is one complaint sufficient? Or, does it take two? Three?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom