Psuedonymous canal boater 'Maffi' of NB Millie M says he's a terrorist.
He's posted a story about being questioned by PC 1933 Burchett of Thames Valley Police in High St Kidlington last Wednesday for photographing in public:
Then the fight started. Walking down the high street to the fish shop I noticed a larger than normal police presence. I passed one officer and asked “What is going on”, to which he replied, “nothing”.
Two police vehicles and three officers is not nothing, well not in Kidlington.
Anyway I took a picture of two police officers. They walked towards me and the girl asked me to delete the picture. I said “No” and that they “were not allowed to ask me to do that”.
“Oh yes we can”, said she.
“Well no you can’t and you cannot confiscate my camera either”. (I only read the rules last week).
"You didn't ask my permission”, she said.
I wasn't there, but I suspect Maffi didn't endear them with his response. In his position I would bombard the constabulary with such a surfeit of personal information that they quickly regret their approach. I talk far too much and it drives people away, but sometimes that's handy.
But Maffi is quite right, and the police were wrong. See the I'm A Photographer Not A Terrorist 'bust card'.
According to the form given to Maffi (below) he was stopped under Part 5 Section 43 of the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2000 (the part called 'Suspected Terrorists') under the following grounds:
(1) A constable may stop and search a person whom he reasonably suspects to be a terrorist to discover whether he has in his possession anything which may constitute evidence that he is a terrorist.
However, PC Burchett seems to have got it wrong on the form. I think he should have quoted Section 44 of the act, not S43.
As Andy Trotter, Chief Constable of the British Transport Police said in an article in The Independent in December:
Everyone – photographers, members of the media and the general public – has a right to take photographs and film in public places. It's as simple and as clear as that.
... The threat of terrorism is real, particularly in London, and the power to stop and search anyone under Section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 is an important one. That power, however, only applies in specially designated areas and has to be renewed by the Home Secretary every 28 days.
Police can also stop people and ask them to account for their actions, commonly referred to as a stop and account. Officers are then required by law to record details of that encounter, although the person stopped is under no obligation to provide them.
But an argumentative Briton taking photos of the police is NOT 'reasonable suspicion of being a terrorist'. A pain in the arse, perhaps, but that's not a crime. Not yet, anyway.
Too often the police are forgetting they are public servants, like nurses and firemen, and misusing the law to feel self-important. In short, too many policeman these days strut.
I feel sad saying this, as I'm the son of a policeman. My daddy was trained at Hendon and in the City of London police before WW2, before a life spent policing around the world, (including in the hot terrorist spot of Aden in the 1960s, where his car was bombed and he was shot at several times.) The one thing he never did was strut.
My abiding memory of Kidlington was of Granny Buttons being stoned by youths at Kidlington Lock in 2001. (I wrote about it here.) I took telephoto pictures of the yobs and went to the local police station. They laughed and said "We won't have any trouble identifying them!", but I heard nothing more.
See also:
Daily Telegraph: I'm sorry, officer, my husband is so childish.
Granny Buttons: Terrorist thwarted from blowing up Merchant Square, Paddington Basin.
Times Educational Supplement: Felipe Fernández-Armesto says police officers need the academy's guidance.
Recent Comments