I know it's not the point, but the first question I would be asking those cops is why they can't ever just park their cars. They are literally in a car park and have to park it length ways across about 4 empty spaces. I know they do it to show that they don't have to follow the rules like us mere mortals but it really annoys me. Rant over 😊
Just the other day i saw a van full of pork park on double yellow lines to get a coffee when i told him he was on double yellows he said "i know". utter scumbags
If they respond to a report then there duly bound to attend you twat ..as for the person who report it good for them it's only this nonce word he not try car doors of course he's not gonna show that part ..cops should have detained him simple
We have had this for 200 years . NO MORE . The police do not have any right to harrass intimidate threaten or assault UNLESS a crime has been committed .
It is not an offence to swear as part of your normal vocabulary and unless you are swearing with threats violence intimidation it’s not a section 5. Threatening to detain stop search is a section 26 abuse of power in public office, it’s also an assault from a person in uniform
Under article 8 of the human rights act you don't have to explain why you are doing a legal activity. Thoughts motives intentions ideas etc we can keep them from government interference.
seen a few of this guy's videos before, i have said it before and i will say it again, he is an absolute legend and is the go to guy to see how to do auditing properly. please put a link to his videos up please.
He's taking photos _" . . . . of, potentially, vehicles"._ Police often pad out their language to make innocuous behaviour seem suspicious, obviously taking photos of vehicles (as grounds for a stop) is ridiculous, so he has to insert 'potentially' (not that it even makes sense in English) to suggest something nefarious, the unsaid part is that 'potential' is wrongdoing of some kind . . . it's like the difference between saying 'he was drinking coffee in the park' and 'he was potentially drinking coffee in the park', the insertion of 'potentially' in the second example makes it sound like he was doing something wrong . . . . these pricks manipulate people through language, and a lot of it is fairly subtle.
Article one protocol one of the human rights act allows you to enjoy your possessions like your camera equipment. As long as you don't infringe on other people's rights. Talking video or film in public is not infringing on anyone's rights. ANYONE trying to stop you is infringing on your rights.
I’m glad u quickly changed auditor too photographer, cos K isn’t an auditor but trolls still too this day get on his case about how “*****” auditor’s are. It’s got so bad that he has had too add a pre video disclaimer at the head of his videos explaining what he does. So again cheers for that mate 👍✌️🇬🇧
3:24 You’re calling the police for legal advice 😳?!? You’d be better off asking a criminal 😄. Asking a cop for legal advice is like asking a bricklayer how to bake a cake 😬🤣
Well done, but don`t tell them "search me, do it" because in court, they will say, you give them consent (or at least this is how they understand your words)
That cop said the auditor was being rude yet it was pc plod who lied an then got rude bcos he got butt hurt, hypocrites they are so childish when ppl don't crawl to their ridiculous questions.
Freedom to photograph and film "Members of the public and the media do not need a permit to film or photograph in public places and police have no power to stop them filming or photographing incidents or police personnel." - MET police. Basically, ANYTHING you can see from a public point of view can be recorded. How is that so difficult to understand? And swearing in public CANNOT be a crime as it is a protected human right of "freedom of opinion and expression". So, as long as you dont threaten or incite hate/violence towards others, you can say whatever the f*ck you want.
Nice quote of the "guidance" that the met police put out, it"s got zero legal bearing though so totally useless. The (mis)quote of Article 10 though just shows that you don't do photography or understand why you cannot film on private property, even if it does have public access and why those not understanding it are the actual oppressors to the freedom of expression. Lets look at Article 10 and see why not only the auditor is wrong but also the guy who put this video out and anyone who thinks you can take rights off other people. Paragraph 2 is what you need to read here. Freedom of expression 1Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This Article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises. 2The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary. That little part where it sats "for the protection of the reputation or rights of others". This basically says that if you are expressing a freedom, that person doing so has to PROTECT the rights of others. If you are filming on private property (which this is, it isn't the US, it's the UK) and Government funded places are not owned by the public, so the rights if ALL of the people are being abused if no permission has been granted to film (especially for commertial purposes), and this then goes against article 17, could well also go against article 8 and can lead to not only a trespass (including aggravated trespass) but also a public nuisance offence. And this is what happens if you have no idea of what you can or cannot do whilst expressing a freedom, it's called oppression.
I usually like his stuff he is one of the better auditors. But sadly, here, he's wrong. NHS property is private and the "right to film" we enjoy on public streets and roads doesn't exist there. He should try reading the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 section 119. It explains why they CAN stop and prevent filming and that trespass on NHS property after refusing to leave IS actually a criminal offence.
@Vegan Pete Don't think your argument would stand up against a magistrate too well. The POLICY of no photography is backed by the law. Normally its the enforcement of trespass law, but in this case we have specific legislation. If you refuse to leave NHS property when told, -its an offence. That's irrespective of lexical definitions.
Another new level of low by the auditor/photographer idiots, to go onto NHS grounds causing alarm and distress to NHS staff going about there working day . Then wasting security and police time in a pre orchestrated attempt to draw attention to yourself and your actions just to boost your Ego arguing and to earn money off advertising revenue for yourself ! You should donate any financial gains to the NHS . I hope the police and NHS refuse you help if you ever need assistance in life .
@Vegan Pete They don't "specifically" ban fighting either, so do you think that they could not prevent it? On private property its the landowner that calls the shots not visitors or trespassers. Whatever they chose, the law gives them the right to enforce. So long as it doesn't breach discrimination laws.
@Vegan Pete Why oh why do people try to pursue the auditing mantra of "photography is not a crime". Just simply accept the FACT that there are occasions when it IS. Court filming - Ask AB about that one. Convicted of filming into the court building whist standing on the public footpath outside. Breaching privacy, when it can occasionally apply in public. Railway property or NHS property when you're causing a nuisance..OR, refused to leave or stop filming. "GSZ sites" and "protected places" under the OSA have specific law relating to photography too. Its all too easy to say "I can film anywhere I want, in public" ...that's generally true, but not entirely. Offence of causing nuisance or disturbance on NHS premises (1)A person commits an offence if- (a)the person causes, without reasonable excuse and while on NHS premises, a nuisance or disturbance to an NHS staff member who is working there or is otherwise there in connection with work, (b)the person refuses, without reasonable excuse, to leave the NHS premises when asked to do so by a constable or an NHS sta ANY reasonable person would consider filming without permission, and refusing to stop filming, to fall well within the scope of "causing a nuisance"...which would make this legislation applicable. So filming after you've been told to stop, DOES amount to a criminal offence, as does refusing to leave.
This photograph is really good at capturing street scenes, close ups of everyday items you wouldn’t normally give a second glance at. Unfortunately he has stopped using You Tube and no longer displays his work, a shame.
I bet there was no policy about cameras in the first place. They just made that up. Poor security morons were completely flummoxed they had absolutely no control of you.
Regarding 6:07, I assume the public order offence you're claiming he committed is the use of the phrase "you just made shit up". This phrase is not offensive. It's just a colloquial way to accuse someone of lying. Many people in the anglosphere seem to make the assumption that any use of certain words is offensive by default, but it actually depends on the context, regardless of which words you're using, i.e. "your mum is ugly and I hope she dies in pain" although containing no "naughty words" is always more offensive than saying "you guys have done a fucking brilliant job!", which isn't offensive at all. If the UK wanted the use of certain words to be punishable by law regardless of context, the law would surely have to include a list of forbidden words, which I wouldn't put past them because they actually have such a list for broadcasters and that is why you won't hear words like "fuck" etc. on TV or radio in the UK before a certain time of day.
Photography was invented in 1822 Sir Robert Peel became home secretary in 1822. The first professional police force was started in 1829 and named the metropolitan police. Photography is 7 years older than the police and has been used for 202 years and the police still haven't learned how to deal with it in the correct manner. I think if Sir Robert Peel could see what his brilliant idea has turned into he'd be disappointed and ashamed. I'm sure he didn't think his police constables would be despised because they're untrustworthy, tyrannical, habitual liars, manipulators, abusers, paedophiles, rapists and murderers and arresting people for speech and because someone had their feelings hurt and I'm sure he'd be disgusted that they're arresting Christian ministers for talking about Jesus on the street, handing out gospel verses and even silently praying. If things don't change very soon they will lose all control and then we'll be in an even bigger mess.
A few polite well chosen words at the beginning and it's all over. You are innocent of any wrongdoing until proven otherwise and you don't have to help with any inquiries.
It`s marvellous when something happens the police ask if anyone has video or photo`s of this incident can we have it please. That is called the W.I.S. (When It Suits ) law.
Boosts the Appeal of Your ImagesPhotographers can use location to boost the appeal of your images. Photos with a great location look more artistic, but they can also get more attention than ones in which you took it upon yourself to find some interesting scenery.
The Police these days are really stupid Apparently you can, from this year, pass an interview Online, without speaking to Anyone, ad get a place in Police Training. It's an Utter Joke
Actually, saying you are more likely to be killed by police than anything - which you did - is ludicrous. That is not even true in the USA, never mind in England. How many people per year are killed by cops in the UK? Complain about the cops by all means but don't descend into idiocy.
So police killed 217 people last year alone in the uk and more then 1500 accused of violence against women. That not included all the excessive force cases. So in my opinion are more likely to be injured by the police then anything else. You might not feel the same
No. No. No. Just because it’s got public access doesn’t mean it’s “fair game”. The land is owned by the NHS Trust. They have rights under Common Law to use reasonable force, where necessary to remove you. That said it is NOT a crime.
Strange at a hospital they say no pictures. I suppose they stop every vehicle entering and ask them to remove their dashcam. Teslas would be banned as the cameras continually film. What is wrong with these people in security roles ?
"I just get the camera, press the button and it takes a picture"... Legendary! 😂. Remember folks, photography is NOT a crime! 💪👊
I know it's not the point, but the first question I would be asking those cops is why they can't ever just park their cars. They are literally in a car park and have to park it length ways across about 4 empty spaces. I know they do it to show that they don't have to follow the rules like us mere mortals but it really annoys me. Rant over 😊
It creates 'Presence' and draws the attention of onlookers! - All part of the 'Encounter Process!'
Just the other day i saw a van full of pork park on double yellow lines to get a coffee when i told him he was on double yellows he said "i know". utter scumbags
"Can I ask what are you doing"? ,, "I don't know, what's your capabilities, can you?"
"Ohh you meant, may I ask"!
and they own you...or they think they do because they have a uniform..
Piggy piggy
This Officer is another feelings emotions and ego enforcement type. Terrible behaviour not professional escalate and lies.
If they respond to a report then there duly bound to attend you twat ..as for the person who report it good for them it's only this nonce word he not try car doors of course he's not gonna show that part ..cops should have detained him simple
So , protecting yourself from an unlawful detainment is now considered awkward
So is exercising your rights, according to tyrants anyway.
Its getting worse -- it seems the police now seen cameras as a threat and anyone with a camera needs to be harassed.
A camera is a threat to them because is exposes their corruption to the world 😂
We have had this for 200 years . NO MORE .
The police do not have any right to harrass intimidate threaten or assault UNLESS a crime has been committed .
It is not an offence to swear as part of your normal vocabulary and unless you are swearing with threats violence intimidation it’s not a section 5. Threatening to detain stop search is a section 26 abuse of power in public office, it’s also an assault from a person in uniform
Thank you for that.
Great commentary on a great audit. NEVER, EVER help or cooperate with the police.
Great work, thank you, subscribed.
Lying, fantasist, harassing, prevaricating Pig Cops. Is there any other type?
Agreed. You are more likely to come to harm engaging with old bill.
Under article 8 of the human rights act you don't have to explain why you are doing a legal activity. Thoughts motives intentions ideas etc we can keep them from government interference.
Funny how a country that does nothing but surveil its citizen 24/7 has a problem with public photography.
They really do believe that we the British public, in a public place must obey them.
seen a few of this guy's videos before, i have said it before and i will say it again, he is an absolute legend and is the go to guy to see how to do auditing properly. please put a link to his videos up please.
This link to his channel and video are in the description
He's taking photos _" . . . . of, potentially, vehicles"._
Police often pad out their language to make innocuous behaviour seem suspicious, obviously taking photos of vehicles (as grounds for a stop) is ridiculous, so he has to insert 'potentially' (not that it even makes sense in English) to suggest something nefarious, the unsaid part is that 'potential' is wrongdoing of some kind . . . it's like the difference between saying 'he was drinking coffee in the park' and 'he was potentially drinking coffee in the park', the insertion of 'potentially' in the second example makes it sound like he was doing something wrong . . . . these pricks manipulate people through language, and a lot of it is fairly subtle.
Police action here, honesty zero, integrity zero lying 100% absolutely terrible, one would expect better
What an absolute scumbag, he was unbelievable. His body language said everything as well absolutely disgusting behaviour. 🤬🤬🤬🤬
You had them by the bolloc#s lad love it
Article one protocol one of the human rights act allows you to enjoy your possessions like your camera equipment. As long as you don't infringe on other people's rights. Talking video or film in public is not infringing on anyone's rights. ANYONE trying to stop you is infringing on your rights.
I’m glad u quickly changed auditor too photographer, cos K isn’t an auditor but trolls still too this day get on his case about how “*****” auditor’s are. It’s got so bad that he has had too add a pre video disclaimer at the head of his videos explaining what he does. So again cheers for that mate 👍✌️🇬🇧
3:24 You’re calling the police for legal advice 😳?!? You’d be better off asking a criminal 😄. Asking a cop for legal advice is like asking a bricklayer how to bake a cake 😬🤣
what on earth is wrong with these people..they seem paranoid about a camera lol
Well done, but don`t tell them "search me, do it" because in court, they will say, you give them consent (or at least this is how they understand your words)
When you sped up the camera I thought you were being chased for a moment😂
Fiend Photo, Kevin, had a great channel. Gone now?
I would of had them two tea wats in civil court.
That cop said the auditor was being rude yet it was pc plod who lied an then got rude bcos he got butt hurt, hypocrites they are so childish when ppl don't crawl to their ridiculous questions.
Brilliant dialogue, excellent video, what a bunch of pratts. Well done PA
Lawdy these people are hilariously silly. Unfortunately, it also makes them dangerous.
These police are very unprofessional, know people skills clueless about the rights to film in public, what a disgrace stay safe, retired, lifeboatman
Saying the word shit does'nt constitute a public order offence even if everyone hears it.
Silly times 💯💔
That police officer should be dismissed.
Probably get promoted
It’s time these water heads were simply told to bugger off.
I really liked this guy's content. Such a shame he's removed it all.
The police are not here for the people they are here for the state
Sir your are a legend
Another bulley with his gang badge.
This is what we have as police now unbelievable
Yes they are butthurt cops because he knew the law and stud up for himself well done .
Freedom to photograph and film
"Members of the public and the media do not need a permit to film or photograph in public places and police have no power to stop them filming or photographing incidents or police personnel." - MET police.
Basically, ANYTHING you can see from a public point of view can be recorded. How is that so difficult to understand?
And swearing in public CANNOT be a crime as it is a protected human right of "freedom of opinion and expression". So, as long as you dont threaten or incite hate/violence towards others, you can say whatever the f*ck you want.
Nice quote of the "guidance" that the met police put out, it"s got zero legal bearing though so totally useless.
The (mis)quote of Article 10 though just shows that you don't do photography or understand why you cannot film on private property, even if it does have public access and why those not understanding it are the actual oppressors to the freedom of expression.
Lets look at Article 10 and see why not only the auditor is wrong but also the guy who put this video out and anyone who thinks you can take rights off other people. Paragraph 2 is what you need to read here.
Freedom of expression
1Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers. This Article shall not prevent States from requiring the licensing of broadcasting, television or cinema enterprises.
2The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety, for the prevention of disorder or crime, for the protection of health or morals, for the protection of the reputation or rights of others, for preventing the disclosure of information received in confidence, or for maintaining the authority and impartiality of the judiciary.
That little part where it sats "for the protection of the reputation or rights of others".
This basically says that if you are expressing a freedom, that person doing so has to PROTECT the rights of others.
If you are filming on private property (which this is, it isn't the US, it's the UK) and Government funded places are not owned by the public, so the rights if ALL of the people are being abused if no permission has been granted to film (especially for commertial purposes), and this then goes against article 17, could well also go against article 8 and can lead to not only a trespass (including aggravated trespass) but also a public nuisance offence.
And this is what happens if you have no idea of what you can or cannot do whilst expressing a freedom, it's called oppression.
Being rude to the police is a crime?
I usually like his stuff he is one of the better auditors. But sadly, here, he's wrong. NHS property is private and the "right to film" we enjoy on public streets and roads doesn't exist there. He should try reading the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 section 119. It explains why they CAN stop and prevent filming and that trespass on NHS property after refusing to leave IS actually a criminal offence.
@Vegan Pete Don't think your argument would stand up against a magistrate too well. The POLICY of no photography is backed by the law. Normally its the enforcement of trespass law, but in this case we have specific legislation. If you refuse to leave NHS property when told, -its an offence. That's irrespective of lexical definitions.
Another new level of low by the auditor/photographer idiots, to go onto NHS grounds causing alarm and distress to NHS staff going about there working day . Then wasting security and police time in a pre orchestrated attempt to draw attention to yourself and your actions just to boost your Ego arguing and to earn money off advertising revenue for yourself ! You should donate any financial gains to the NHS .
I hope the police and NHS refuse you help if you ever need assistance in life .
@@VeganPete "It doesn't t specifically mention"......is SO sovereign citizen.
@Vegan Pete They don't "specifically" ban fighting either, so do you think that they could not prevent it?
On private property its the landowner that calls the shots not visitors or trespassers. Whatever they chose, the law gives them the right to enforce. So long as it doesn't breach discrimination laws.
@Vegan Pete Why oh why do people try to pursue the auditing mantra of "photography is not a crime". Just simply accept the FACT that there are occasions when it IS.
Court filming - Ask AB about that one. Convicted of filming into the court building whist standing on the public footpath outside. Breaching privacy, when it can occasionally apply in public. Railway property or NHS property when you're causing a nuisance..OR, refused to leave or stop filming. "GSZ sites" and "protected places" under the OSA have specific law relating to photography too. Its all too easy to say "I can film anywhere I want, in public" ...that's generally true, but not entirely.
Offence of causing nuisance or disturbance on NHS premises
(1)A person commits an offence if-
(a)the person causes, without reasonable excuse and while on NHS premises, a nuisance or disturbance to an NHS staff member who is working there or is otherwise there in connection with work,
(b)the person refuses, without reasonable excuse, to leave the NHS premises when asked to do so by a constable or an NHS sta
ANY reasonable person would consider filming without permission, and refusing to stop filming, to fall well within the scope of "causing a nuisance"...which would make this legislation applicable. So filming after you've been told to stop, DOES amount to a criminal offence, as does refusing to leave.
This photograph is really good at capturing street scenes, close ups of everyday items you wouldn’t normally give a second glance at. Unfortunately he has stopped using You Tube and no longer displays his work, a shame.
Don’t give him your name; he’ll make a hospital appointment for you and you’ll be waiting 18 months, if you’re lucky.
I bet there was no policy about cameras in the first place. They just made that up.
Poor security morons were completely flummoxed they had absolutely no control of you.
I wonder why the original has been removed.
This one has been copyright © on it.
This is our police
This channel was very good. Ine of my favorites. It was individual. He showed his photography, local wildlife and his auditing was great.
Regarding 6:07, I assume the public order offence you're claiming he committed is the use of the phrase "you just made shit up". This phrase is not offensive. It's just a colloquial way to accuse someone of lying.
Many people in the anglosphere seem to make the assumption that any use of certain words is offensive by default, but it actually depends on the context, regardless of which words you're using, i.e. "your mum is ugly and I hope she dies in pain" although containing no "naughty words" is always more offensive than saying "you guys have done a fucking brilliant job!", which isn't offensive at all.
If the UK wanted the use of certain words to be punishable by law regardless of context, the law would surely have to include a list of forbidden words, which I wouldn't put past them because they actually have such a list for broadcasters and that is why you won't hear words like "fuck" etc. on TV or radio in the UK before a certain time of day.
Photography was invented in 1822
Sir Robert Peel became home secretary in 1822.
The first professional police force was started in 1829 and named the metropolitan police.
Photography is 7 years older than the police and has been used for 202 years and the police still haven't learned how to deal with it in the correct manner.
I think if Sir Robert Peel could see what his brilliant idea has turned into he'd be disappointed and ashamed.
I'm sure he didn't think his police constables would be despised because they're untrustworthy, tyrannical, habitual liars, manipulators, abusers, paedophiles, rapists and murderers and arresting people for speech and because someone had their feelings hurt and I'm sure he'd be disgusted that they're arresting Christian ministers for talking about Jesus on the street, handing out gospel verses and even silently praying.
If things don't change very soon they will lose all control and then we'll be in an even bigger mess.
A few polite well chosen words at the beginning and it's all over. You are innocent of any wrongdoing until proven otherwise and you don't have to help with any inquiries.
Wait for them to report him to the police for doing something he actually didn’t do? False accusations?
It`s marvellous when something happens the police ask if anyone has video or photo`s of this incident can we have it please. That is called the W.I.S. (When It Suits ) law.
Boosts the Appeal of Your ImagesPhotographers can use location to boost the appeal of your images. Photos with a great location look more artistic, but they can also get more attention than ones in which you took it upon yourself to find some interesting scenery.
I was watching a car program about bad guy car's no1 was police car as a lot of bad things happen when they turn up
Section 26 offence committed there,
hold the costumed clowns to account
i always thought you had to have proof of a crime not just hear say ....oh silly me i forgot guilty until proven innocent
They are not threatening, they are childish. Babies. 👶👶😉
Also if you go on Google almost every entity on there also has indoor pictures as well but if i stand outside and take pictures its a problem
These authority people were around 30 years ago. It was worse then as there were no mobile phones so had to use a real camera.
Watch Me takes some great photos
Logical thinking is obviously not their strong point, hence the face nappies.
Typical bully police throwing there balls about before investigating
people aint allowed to smoke on hospital grounds yet they all stand outside the main doors doing it anyway...
Where about is this place bro
No obligation to be polite.
👮♀️ Cop's, oh dear never mind
Don't let these criminals near you.
"Lets here that again" what
Hear....
Silly billys
A complaint to police is here say .
Unless
supported by FACTS observed directly by police .
The Police these days are really stupid
Apparently you can, from this year, pass an interview Online, without speaking to Anyone, ad get a place in Police Training. It's an Utter Joke
Actually, saying you are more likely to be killed by police than anything - which you did - is ludicrous. That is not even true in the USA, never mind in England. How many people per year are killed by cops in the UK? Complain about the cops by all means but don't descend into idiocy.
So police killed 217 people last year alone in the uk and more then 1500 accused of violence against women. That not included all the excessive force cases. So in my opinion are more likely to be injured by the police then anything else. You might not feel the same
@@pinac-audit And loads more have died in 'police custody' over the last 10 years.
More public die in police custody than police on the street.
Is this at the James Paget Hospital - located just south of Gorleston / Great Yarmouth in Norfolk?
Should be prosecuted for breach of GDPR. The officers I mean.
They simply stop harassing muppets ... the camera is an irrelevance
Hear?
I did not add the text on this video
False accusations, quite normal .😢
Copsplaining teacher right there
Who is this photography Hero ? !
Hahahaha awesome job
Messy
Utterly useless plod does not know the law, thinks he can harrass the punblc without any consequences to himself
Bad cops
The state of policing, the old school coppers would be ashamed
🤣😂like they were any better
Which is why so many have left the job.
Muppet polis
H E A R
All the text on the video was in the original video
It's nice of you to take the little piggy cops for a walk. 😅
Cops just being cops.
No. No. No.
Just because it’s got public access doesn’t mean it’s “fair game”.
The land is owned by the NHS Trust.
They have rights under Common Law to use reasonable force, where necessary to remove you.
That said it is NOT a crime.
Who owns the NHS then ?
Yep, go on put the face nappy on outside...
can you not get a job instead of wasting policemans time
Steady constable, I think the people who made the unfounded allegations, are the ones who have waisted police time.
His job is photography..!
Nice work officer..should have arrested him, for being a complete tool
Pigs will be pigs…
Brilliant !! Really stupid Copper who wanted to act the Bully Boy. He's in the wrong job!
Strange at a hospital they say no pictures. I suppose they stop every vehicle entering and ask them to remove their dashcam. Teslas would be banned as the cameras continually film. What is wrong with these people in security roles ?