Police seize photographer's film

  hssutton 23:22 22 Jan 08
Locked

What on earth is this country coming to.

click here

  Forum Editor 23:28 22 Jan 08

by Humberside Police following complaints from members of the public about photos being taken in the area of the Prospect Centre. Any person who appears to be taking photos in a covert manner should expect to be stopped and spoken to by police to enquire into what their business is."


People complained, and the police acted upon the complaints, which is precisely what they should do.

  WhiteTruckMan 23:29 22 Jan 08

who are still using photographic film. Just save a few snaps on the end of a roll and take them in a covert and suspicious seeming manner in your local high street, then simply stand back and wait for your local friendly constabulary to develop them for you, free of charge, with free collection and delivery thrown in as well!

WTM

  Brumas 23:30 22 Jan 08

I am proud of the fact I was born and bred in Hull, I am even prouder of the fact that, I left it 45 years ago to find work and never have had the inclination to return to live. I visit periodically to visit relatives but there is no way I would ever live in a big city again!!

  Kemistri 23:45 22 Jan 08

Based on what I have read about the laws that affect photography, this doesn't stack up. There must be something missing from that news report -- did he harass anyone, for example? Was he actually on private property (not a public thoroughfare)? I'm curious and concerned by this.

  Forum Editor 23:59 22 Jan 08

He was on private property - the Prospect centre is owned by nominees of Barclays Property Investments.

The police acted following complaints by members of the public. They (the police) have the power to seize film in such circumstances, and they did.

  Kemistri 00:11 23 Jan 08

Well, that's fair in that case -- up to a point. I'm concerned by differing information regarding the power to confiscate and in precisely what circumstances it can legitimately happen.

  K_elt 00:12 23 Jan 08

I fail to see the justification in the police action on this occasion. Quite often a photographer will take covert photos to capture real life shots that aren't wasted by the subject being aware and "posing".

As Kemistri says, laws affecting photography allow for photo's to be taken in public places, but if someone asks you to stop you should. This isn't mentioned, and the refusal to explain in more detail doesn't help.

K_elt

  Blackhat 00:20 23 Jan 08

Many years ago I used to do candid photography around Birmingham city centre. On one occasion I was photographing a group of buskers, one of them approached me and was very abrupt and almost violent towards me accusing me of being gutter press.

After processing my photo’s I noticed the badges they were wearing, I had been photographing a group who were raising money for the striking miners at the time.

Thinking back to those days I would probably have gotten into trouble with some of the images in today’s P.C. world, nothing untoward just street life.

As a keen amateur photographer I often go to local nature spots for photography these days and I am very conscious of avoiding capturing images of children just in case a parents objects.

  Forum Editor 00:30 23 Jan 08

in public places, but the law also allows a police officer to seize photographic film in circumstances such as this. In this case, as I've already stated, the officers acted in response to complaints from members of the public, who were obviously concerned.

The law and photography in public places is a well-known issue - confusion and misinformation is rife, but the photographer in this case was on private property, and the owners of such property have a legal right to impose whatever conditions they like in respect of photography - even when the property is readily accessible to the public. I have no idea if such conditions were in force in this case, but that's not the point - the officers exercised their power as police officers to stop this man, and their common law powers to seize his film.

  Forum Editor 00:32 23 Jan 08

A side issue is that nowadays any photograph that clearly identifies an individual is almost certainly going to come within the orbit of the data protection laws.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Huawei P10 review

1995-2015: How technology has changed the world in 20 years

An overview: What leading creative agencies are doing to improve diversity

New iPad, iPhone SE & Red iPhone 7 on sale now