brave policemen save armed forces from evil photographers

Discussion in 'The Intelligence Cell' started by brighton hippy, Jun 30, 2010.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:


    hilarious but sad two police cadet officers attempt to bully a 16 yr old photographer and come off worse looks like his tution fees will be paid by the met :twisted: photography is not a crime apart from mdns album obviously. Its fair one to ask what someones doing with a camera if out of the ordianry but that can be done without making somebody feel like a criminal

    Two police officers stopped a teenage photographer from taking pictures of an Armed Forces Day parade - and then claimed they did not need a law to detain him.

    Jules Mattsson, a 16-year-old freelancer from Hackney, east London, was photographing police cadets on Saturday when he was ordered to stop and give his personal details by an adult cadet officer who claimed he needed parental permission to capture images of the cadets.

    The student, who works as a freelance photojournalist in his spare time, decided to record his confrontation on his mobile phone, providing an insight into the legal arguments that the officers were using to justify stopping him from taking photographs.

    The parade he was photographing was one 350 public marches held to mark Armed Forces Day, a new event which was created last year amid criticism that the country didn't do enough to honour its military.

    Mr Mattson said his confrontation began when he started taking photographs of police cadets.

    “I was quickly and aggressively stopped by one of their adult officers asking me who I worked for,” he wrote on his blog. “I responded that I was a freelance and upon being told I needed parental permission to photograph them, I explained this was a public event in a public place and that I didn’t for editorial use.”

    The audio recording begins minutes later with an officer initially arguing that it is illegal to take photographs of children. He then claims that it is illegal to take images of army members and police officers
  2. Brave police save children in uniform from child with a camera by lying about their authority?

    Whoop-de-do. Roll on the "Great Reform Bill".
    • Like Like x 1
  3. It's really quite pathetic when you listen to it isn't it?
  4. Yet again, uniformed fuzz prove the old adage, "A little knowledge is a dangerous thing."
    Who the fcuk is teaching them these days, B and Q customer service?
    • Like Like x 2
  5. ancienturion

    ancienturion LE Book Reviewer

    It is unfortunate that the previous government allowed the constabularies and their senior offices to get grand ideas and the term "force" was, and still is, bandied about. It would seem that, similar to certain MPs, there are those police officers who consider themselves above the law or providing their own law. The use of the descriptive term force is not necessary and the police should stop using it.
  6. the_boy_syrup

    the_boy_syrup LE Book Reviewer

    Phiotographer was a fukcwit
    When asked by plod what he was up to he should have pointed out he wanted to call them all baby killers, priase allah and jihad
    They would have gave him grandstand seats
    • Like Like x 1
  7. The cadet instructor attempts to throw around weight that he does not have. When his bluff is called by the photographer, the fun started.

    They initially make vague accusations that the photographer is a paedophile. When this fails to intimidate him, they state that he is a suspected terrorist. That puts him in a group of 300,000 people who were stopped on that basis last year.

    When that also fails, they fall back on breach of the peace and anti-social behaviour. Although he was never arrested, he was "detained" (what's the difference) and taken out of the public view before, allegedly, being pushed down a flight of stairs.

    Harassement of people like this is becoming a serious problem, so much so that the Met have published guidelines for all police and PCSOs about what they can and can't do to photographers.

    I am aware of:-

    A woman being pushed to the ground and handcuffed to a railing in a tube station for photographing police searching her boyfriend for drugs.

    A bloke being arrested 'on suspicion of terrorism' because he videoed a police car driving the wrong way down a one way street to collect fish and chips from a chippy.

    Another arrest on 'suspicion of terrorism' for photographing a celeb switching on the Christmas lights. The arrest and physical detention of the photographer was made by a PCSO who has no powers of arrest on suspicion. Strictly speaking, I think the PCSO was guilty of kidnapping.

    A councillor, stopped and searched under the terrorism act for taking photos of the ward he represents to put on his web site.

    There are a whole load of videos about this on youtube.
  8. Hopefully, this government might look at the ridiculous amount of legislation introcuded by the last, and simnplify it.

    Hopefully this government could look to regaining our rights to make our own laws, and remove the unnecessary and crushingly inefficient needs to meet Eurpoean Laws.

    Hopefully this governmen't actual plan to reduce the emphais on targets and allow CC's to police to their own priorities will assist, and might even rsult in more police officers being qualified to get out facing the public again.

    hopefully this government will nnot go ahead with its marvellous new idea of reducing prison places, to have more offenders out on the street.

    That is, however, a lotta lotta hope.
  9. I strongly suspect the boy may eventually get enough compensation to buy a fancy new camera or two. I hope he does. At one point in my career I was an attorney for a police department on my side of the pond. Where I worked this would have resulted in a period of retraining for all officers involved and perhaps a bit of vacation time without pay.
  10. Curious. There might be a confusion in the report:

    Were the people being photographed on this Armed Forces Day parade really 'police cadets', or were they in fact army, air or sea cadets?

    Police cadets are not children.

    But an ACF officer would have had no authority to order a member of the public to give his personal details.

    Persistent and annoying taking of photographs could amount to an assault or breach of the peace type offence in extreme circumstances, but I would find it hard to argue that normal photography of cadets engaged in a public Armed Forces Day commemoration requires the photographer to obtain permission from the cadets' parents.
  11. If you watch and listen to the video on the Indie link it is police cadets, then he changes his mind as there are ACF/ATC there and then again to 'taking pictures of the soldiers or the police is illegal'. The main protagonist is clearly a more mature police constable. It's very reminiscent of Constable Dimbleby at his best...
  12. OldSnowy

    OldSnowy LE Moderator Book Reviewer

    Compensation would be nice - but only to restitute what was broken or damaged, rather than for damaged feelings. It all comes out of the public purse anyway.

    What should happen is that those involved be named, shamed, and trained in the law correctly. I don't for a second think that this will happen - the Coppers will close ranks and defend their own (much as the Army did in Basra). This is laudable in one way, as a show of group spirit and loyalty, but can be pretty offensive to the vast majority of people looking on from the outside, I'm afraid.
  13. msr

    msr LE

    You would find it impossible, as it doesn't.

  14. So photojournalism is "illegal" but its perfectly fine for CCTV surveillance to capture all our images, all the time?

  15. I know some members of this site are also part of the Old Bill - they need to fucking grip their people. This properly grips my shit as the fuzz are out of control. This is relatively minor compared to several instances of police actions I've witnessed during three years living in the north...including a platoon strength riot police squad complete with dogs literally attacking a student house party. Only 5 people ended up in hospital, were any weapons or drugs found? No. Were the damages to property and physical abuse paid by the police. No.

    Can't fucking stand the police in this country.

    Attached Files: