AND when a crime is committed yet no CCTV cameras picked it up, they ask the public if they have any dashcam, phone video or doorbell footage that might help them with their enquiries 🤦♂🤪
Please everyone... stop assuming they don't know the law. Of course they know the law. They just don't care. Really... how long would you follow the law if you knew there would be no consequences for NOT following the law?
Nah, they don't. They are untrained idiots, you don't need to know the law to be a police officer. They teach them other things, like how to fish and fine you for anything though.
@@gibsonms No, you should not use your mobile phone if the engine is running in your car: The penalty for using a mobile phone while driving is a £200 fine and six points. If you need to use your phone while your car is stationary, you can use hands-free technology. You can also use your phone as a sat nav by connecting it to Bluetooth or mounting it on your dashboard. Contrary to what many drivers seem to think, the law still applies when your vehicle is stopped at lights or in heavy traffic. If your engine is running, your phone shouldn't be in your hands. This is still the case if the engine stops automatically to save fuel (called 'start-stop technology').
@ the vehicle is not stopped in heavy traffic, or at lights though. It is stationary, on its own, pulled to the kerb, on a road. The fact that the engine is on is irrelevant.
It’s unbelievable police are still telling people not to film, based on their own personal opinions, rather than law. Made even more ridiculous by the fact they’re filming people without first informing them, as stipulated by their body worn camera policy.
It also makes for some great social photography, have a look at some of the great photographers of the recent past (last 80 years) who still inspire today! Though I am not sure why people are starting to get twitchy about being on camera, they used to crowd around the cameraman, now they either run away or accost them.
This is a train station. It’s private property, owned by Network Rail. There’s no “right to film” like there is on public streets. There is a ‘blanket permission’ on the NR website allowing people to film and photograph but it can be revoked or restricted by any BTP officer or NR employee. It’s not quite the case of “it’s public so I can film” like some auditors think.
@@MostlyLoveOfMusic Some folk do not want to remain strangers and stick thier big bloaty faces in the camera for all the world to see . coz Attention seekers think the world revolves around them and they are the centre of attention . the control freaks and public menaces exposed .
IF ANY MEMBER OF PUBLIC WAS SITTING IN THERE CAR PARKED WITH THE ENGINE RUNNING GAURANTEED A POLICE OFFICER WILL COME TO THE CAR AND GIVE A BIG SPEEL ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT AND CHARGE YOU.IF THE POLICE COME OVER TO YOUR CAR AND YOUR ENGINE IS RUNNING AND YOU'RE USING THE PHONE THEY'LL GO IN TO A MASSIVE HOSTILE CONVERSATION ABOUT YOU BEING DANGEROUS TO THE PUBLIC USING A PHONE WHILE IN CONTROL OF A MOTOR VEHICLE AND COLLECT DATA,FEES AND GIVE YOU A CRIMINAL RECORD BUT THEY CAN PLEASE THEMSELVES WHAT THEY DO ABSOLUTELY DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR.
It says nothing of the sort and doesn’t even mention filming. If you read it, you’ll see it’s simply an amendment to the definition of public place in relation to section 9(1) Public Order Act 1936. There doesn’t need to be a law that allows us to film, as the starting point is that everything is legal unless there’s a law that prohibits it. If police tell you not to film, instead of quoting the irrelevant section 33, turn the tables on them and ask them to tell you which law you’re breaking (they obviously won’t be able to, because there isn’t one).
End of day it does look dodgy lurking about like these auditors do ,, face fully covered ,,, weather its not illegal or not ,,, if they did it around a school when a bloke was picking there kid up i dont think it would end well would it ……
@@Gord_fellow007 Which auditors have you ever seen that films around schools? 🤔 if they did they would probably get arrested for something but I haven’t seen any auditors do that, could you tell me if you have? Because I don’t think you have either…
"This is not a police matter. Go away and leave me alone" And then don't say another word to them. Walk away, stand somewhere else and carry on. Repeat if necessary.
It’s becoming quite frustrating listening to coppers who have zero clue what they’re talking about. Another clown in fancy dress, making it up as he goes along.
The law that allows cops to record people in public and CCTV to record people in public is EXACTLY the same law that allows ANYONE to record people in public. You should have told that cop to stop lying and trying to put feelings above rights.
There is no law that allows us to film, as that’s not how laws work. Laws exist to prohibit activities, not allow them. There is no law that prevents us filming people, therefore it’s legal. There are laws and regulations relating to CCTV and police body worn cameras though.
Not at all. You claimed there was a law that allows filming and was EXACTLY the same for police, CCTV & the public, which is completely untrue. There are laws that cover the use of CCTV, but there are no laws that cover someone using their phone/camera to film people in the street.
@hadley-rz1xt there are laws that say what can't be done and there are laws that say what can and laws that say what cannot be restricted. These laws apply here. There most definitely are laws that say what someone in the street can or cannot film.
This is why auditors provide such a great public service, not just entertainment. It's well known that if something becomes commonly and routinely accepted as not being permissible, despite no change in the Law, then it defacto becomes an unwritten Law by which everyone is expected to obey. The same applies in reverse with Laws which have never been repealed.
You make a very good point. The police are happy for people to record others when they can use the footage as evidence. I bet they won’t be so keen to use this footage to prosecute the driver of that police van for using his phone though.
I'm sure if you asked them " why is UK police the most corrupt, deviant organisations in the UK " , they would be question avoidance on their behalf - DON'T ANSWER THEIR QUESTIONS - they definitely aren't there for the public.
To the two tyrants, photography is not a crime, you are not the "feelings police". I'll give you some advice, you should STOP asking people not to film or photograph in public.
Some Police Forces will tell you in their Code of Conduct, Dress Section - Do not tuck your trousers into your boots as if you are a Para- Military Unit. You are Police Constables, behave like a Police Constables.
It's time to put on makeup It's time to dress up right It's time to raise the curtain on the Muppet Show tonight It's time to get things started On the most sensational inspirational, celebrational, Muppetational This is what we call the Muppet Show!
Well seeing as how the condescending pignorant officer thinks it's OK for them to record and cctv because it's identifiable. Then why don't they stop everyone with a dashcam and ask them to stop recording people 🤷.
@Phookinell From a public area you can, a police drone runs over my house every other month. However, there is privacy if you are close enough to take pictures through a window you better have a good reason. Example is cars parked outside my door with built in camera systems. See Tesla for extreme version.
2:17 everyone has the opportunity to wear a face mask if they want privacy in public Constable !! Personally I wear a balaclava as I can’t breathe with a face mask but we all have the right and the opportunity to!!!
Lawful activity by pedestrians have no legal immunity, so when someone that has legal immunity have other powers, they could be used against a public person if their feelings are not constrained within the duty of their roles, and could use their legal immunity to perhaps stand beyond their work duty and use it out of context (their feelings [and parenting skills]) and thus, overstepping the duty of that lawful employed person to help police the populous. I have seen many interactions on here, and it looks like they are just like any other person who is triggered by being video'd, except, they have the sleight of hand with the card "legal immunity" that is a get out of jail for free card, they have no worries about getting into trouble, because they can't, and that must have an effect on someone, or at least some of them, as I am sure with being used a lot of the time it could become a bad habit, or a good excuse to bully someone with that legal excuse without any comeback, that must be quite a powerful place to be, and really it should be monitored carefully so that you don't get a loose cannon, through desensitization or complacency. Though I can't see that being changed, but you never know, this woke nonsense may bite back in some departments in the future, who knows?
Where did you get that from? Before the days of cameras being everywhere they were violent savages. You told them what they wanted to hear or get beaten up. Why do you think vulnerable people have had their senteces quoshed years after serving it. They would do the same now if they could get away with it.
@2.48min…it’s very different…because I’m a police officer, that’s different…LOL since the police have this hyper paranoia to recording devices, they might want to petition the government to shut down those corporations that manufacture the 10’s of millions of recording devices for public consumption, every year !
In the United Kingdom, it's generally not illegal to take photos of people in public spaces without their permission. However, there are some exceptions:
They couldn’t give a shit who you record as long as it’s not them😂 imagine telling somebody not to record people as you record them,you couldn’t make this shit up.
Two tier khier's Police force, one rule for them and one rule for us, (on phone while in charge of a vehicle) doesn't it just stink of hypocrisy. And saying it's ok I'm a police constable try telling that to Wayne cousin's!!!!!
@1:54 👉🏻"""with consent " PACE 1984. section 64A .... Photographing of suspects (1A) photographed elsewhere than at a police station- (a) with the appropriate consent; ( unless (1B) is in place ) (1B) (a) arrested by constable (PC) (6A) “photograph” includes a moving image police guidance CODE :- CODE D5.12A ....Photographs taken under PACE, section 64A: (a) may be taken with the👉🏻 person’s consent, or 👉🏻without their consent if 👉🏻consent is withheld CODE D5.15 a photograph may be obtained 👉🏻without the person’s consent taken at any time on a camera system installed 👉🏻 anywhere IN the police station. CASE :- Wood v Commissioner of police (2009) = for """retention"" of the photographs (not for taking photographs) and under common law @3:12 by consent ,, consent denied but as we witness further pursuance and ongoing is ABH and causing harassment alarm & distress to cause fear by PC who now can be arrested to prevent further incident then his colleague will take arrest to prevent a "breach of the peace" to then by walking away and no doubt de=arrest as the "breach has now passed" now we know that's not going to happen then it would be failure to provide service :'- Police Act 1996 section 91.. causing disaffection. (1) any member of a police force to withhold his services, shall be guilty of an offence and liable- (b) to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or to a fine, or to both. (3) Liability under subsection (1) for any behaviour is in addition to any civil liability for that behaviour.
It's all well and good saying that you have a right to film in public, but I don't want a camera shoved in my face by someone wearing a hoodie and a mask either. But the copper at the wheel on his phone, scrolling fb or whatever whilst on duty, well that's just wrong init
Wow wow this is another banger. Can't film in public but they will ignore protecting our daughters
I don't have a daughter.
AND when a crime is committed yet no CCTV cameras picked it up, they ask the public if they have any dashcam, phone video or doorbell footage that might help them with their enquiries 🤦♂🤪
Maybe the spent force in uniform has an eye for young boys and the camera makes him nervous .
Fix your country, how can you allow your government to smother you in all you do.
Another police officer who doesn't know the law.
None of them do !
Please everyone... stop assuming they don't know the law. Of course they know the law. They just don't care. Really... how long would you follow the law if you knew there would be no consequences for NOT following the law?
Nah, they don't. They are untrained idiots, you don't need to know the law to be a police officer. They teach them other things, like how to fish and fine you for anything though.
I’m a police officer,
THE EXACT WORDS OF WAYNE COUSINS
TRUE !
“But I’m the police”
Yes, that’s what Sarah Everard thought
The Feelings police at their finest
If you have nothing to hide what do they have to fear ,
THEIR WORDS
On the phone in charge of a phone while the engine is running.3 points on your licence officer.
It’s a minimum of 6 points these days.
@@hadley-rz1xtu beat me to this one
No it’s not. The vehicle has to be being driven. If it’s clearly parked with the handbrake on then it’s fine.
@@gibsonms No, you should not use your mobile phone if the engine is running in your car: The penalty for using a mobile phone while driving is a £200 fine and six points.
If you need to use your phone while your car is stationary, you can use hands-free technology. You can also use your phone as a sat nav by connecting it to Bluetooth or mounting it on your dashboard.
Contrary to what many drivers seem to think, the law still applies when your vehicle is stopped at lights or in heavy traffic. If your engine is running, your phone shouldn't be in your hands. This is still the case if the engine stops automatically to save fuel (called 'start-stop technology').
@ the vehicle is not stopped in heavy traffic, or at lights though. It is stationary, on its own, pulled to the kerb, on a road. The fact that the engine is on is irrelevant.
Get rid of cctv then if u can't record your day
Hypocritical of the Police to stop people filming,when they film all the time.
Considering not only recording but the police bodycams also live stream to hq or coms
That cop is a fool of the highest order. How can he wear that uniform when he hasn't got a clue.
It’s unbelievable police are still telling people not to film, based on their own personal opinions, rather than law. Made even more ridiculous by the fact they’re filming people without first informing them, as stipulated by their body worn camera policy.
meanwhile they film you.
theres a rotten fish somewhere for sure.
The state record us all the time!
You are 100% entitled to take photos of people that you don't know... Photography of strangers in public is a key human right in this country
It also makes for some great social photography, have a look at some of the great photographers of the recent past (last 80 years) who still inspire today! Though I am not sure why people are starting to get twitchy about being on camera, they used to crowd around the cameraman, now they either run away or accost them.
You can’t expect privacy in a public place, you can film anything the eye can see.
Not on private property you can’t. Only on public rights of way. This is a train station legally owned by Network Rail.
More and More Proof That they do not know the Rights of The People that they are Hired by 😢😢
This is a train station. It’s private property, owned by Network Rail. There’s no “right to film” like there is on public streets. There is a ‘blanket permission’ on the NR website allowing people to film and photograph but it can be revoked or restricted by any BTP officer or NR employee.
It’s not quite the case of “it’s public so I can film” like some auditors think.
2:08 always have to give orders…..
Only order to give the spent force featured is Foxtrot Oscar Yankee Charlie .
@@EvenBigger-Brother😂💯💯
You are 100% entitled to take photos of people that you don't know... Photography of strangers in public is a key human right in this country
@@MostlyLoveOfMusic Some folk do not want to remain strangers and stick thier big bloaty faces in the camera for all the world to see . coz Attention seekers think the world revolves around them and they are the centre of attention . the control freaks and public menaces exposed .
@@MostlyLoveOfMusic it's not really a human right, we only get to do it because they have to make it law so they can do it.
They come begging for home security or doorbell footage etc when they need it 😂
IF ANY MEMBER OF PUBLIC WAS SITTING IN THERE CAR PARKED WITH THE ENGINE RUNNING GAURANTEED A POLICE OFFICER WILL COME TO THE CAR AND GIVE A BIG SPEEL ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENT AND CHARGE YOU.IF THE POLICE COME OVER TO YOUR CAR AND YOUR ENGINE IS RUNNING AND YOU'RE USING THE PHONE THEY'LL GO IN TO A MASSIVE HOSTILE CONVERSATION ABOUT YOU BEING DANGEROUS TO THE PUBLIC USING A PHONE WHILE IN CONTROL OF A MOTOR VEHICLE AND COLLECT DATA,FEES AND GIVE YOU A CRIMINAL RECORD BUT THEY CAN PLEASE THEMSELVES WHAT THEY DO ABSOLUTELY DISGUSTING BEHAVIOUR.
Section 33 criminal justice act 1972 says you can film anything in public
It says nothing of the sort and doesn’t even mention filming. If you read it, you’ll see it’s simply an amendment to the definition of public place in relation to section 9(1) Public Order Act 1936. There doesn’t need to be a law that allows us to film, as the starting point is that everything is legal unless there’s a law that prohibits it. If police tell you not to film, instead of quoting the irrelevant section 33, turn the tables on them and ask them to tell you which law you’re breaking (they obviously won’t be able to, because there isn’t one).
End of day it does look dodgy lurking about like these auditors do ,, face fully covered ,,, weather its not illegal or not ,,, if they did it around a school when a bloke was picking there kid up i dont think it would end well would it ……
Go and read section 33. Education is so import, as proven by your idiotic comment. Section 33 is all about ice cream vans.
@@hadley-rz1xt 💯% correct mate, 👏👏👏 well said 👍🙏
@@Gord_fellow007 Which auditors have you ever seen that films around schools? 🤔 if they did they would probably get arrested for something but I haven’t seen any auditors do that, could you tell me if you have? Because I don’t think you have either…
Cop: Stop recording me ; - doing NOTHING - on tax-dime-duty !!!
He was confusing his opinion with the Law
It’s a power thing. They can’t help it. It’s what you get when you employ narcissists in that role.
NEVER SAY YOU I UNDERSTAND 😂😂😂
"This is not a police matter. Go away and leave me alone" And then don't say another word to them. Walk away, stand somewhere else and carry on. Repeat if necessary.
Totally agree, how dare they talk to anyone who is not committing a crime.
But the police can take film crews round with them and film people being arrested for shows like police camera action and police interceptors !
It's all about control, I wouldn't be surprised if in the not too distant future filming in public will be a crime.
Police have to inform a member of the public when they switch their BWC on not only is it their policy under GDPR it's the law
Policies aren’t law.
More cops talking bollocks as per usual.
It’s becoming quite frustrating listening to coppers who have zero clue what they’re talking about. Another clown in fancy dress, making it up as he goes along.
Very ignorant police who don't know it is legal to film in public there is no privacy when your in public
The law that allows cops to record people in public and CCTV to record people in public is EXACTLY the same law that allows ANYONE to record people in public. You should have told that cop to stop lying and trying to put feelings above rights.
There is no law that allows us to film, as that’s not how laws work. Laws exist to prohibit activities, not allow them. There is no law that prevents us filming people, therefore it’s legal. There are laws and regulations relating to CCTV and police body worn cameras though.
@hadley-rz1xt semantics
Not at all. You claimed there was a law that allows filming and was EXACTLY the same for police, CCTV & the public, which is completely untrue. There are laws that cover the use of CCTV, but there are no laws that cover someone using their phone/camera to film people in the street.
@hadley-rz1xt there are laws that say what can't be done and there are laws that say what can and laws that say what cannot be restricted. These laws apply here. There most definitely are laws that say what someone in the street can or cannot film.
Filming is protected under the human rights act.
They just can’t keep their mouths shut.
Feeling police again.
Was the police vehicle's engine running when he was on his mobile?
It certainly looks like he was deemed to be driving while using his phone, which is 6 points and &200 for a FPN, or possibly more if it went to court.
Doesn’t, matter. He was in control of the vehicle
@@martynanstis1620😂😂😂😂
No, he was parked, rather than in traffic.
@@EveryUserName doesn’t matter. He is deemed in control of the vehicle. If he failed a breath test would he be prosecuted. Yes, he was in control
He's taking your rights away... Because he thinks it's improper to photograph people you don't know
This is why auditors provide such a great public service, not just entertainment. It's well known that if something becomes commonly and routinely accepted as not being permissible, despite no change in the Law, then it defacto becomes an unwritten Law by which everyone is expected to obey. The same applies in reverse with Laws which have never been repealed.
Time to retire police officer...
They love it when cyclingmikey does their job for them by filming in public
You make a very good point. The police are happy for people to record others when they can use the footage as evidence. I bet they won’t be so keen to use this footage to prosecute the driver of that police van for using his phone though.
I'm sure if you asked them " why is UK police the most corrupt, deviant organisations in the UK " , they would be question avoidance on their behalf - DON'T ANSWER THEIR QUESTIONS - they definitely aren't there for the public.
Why on earth did you take notice of those so called officer's? 🤦
I am joking with them
To the two tyrants, photography is not a crime, you are not the "feelings police". I'll give you some advice, you should STOP asking people not to film or photograph in public.
Some Police Forces will tell you in their Code of Conduct, Dress Section - Do not tuck your trousers into your boots as if you are a Para- Military Unit. You are Police Constables, behave like a Police Constables.
It's time to put on makeup
It's time to dress up right
It's time to raise the curtain on the Muppet Show tonight
It's time to get things started
On the most sensational inspirational, celebrational, Muppetational
This is what we call the Muppet Show!
It's the "DON'T DO THIS , DON'T DO THAT" because I say so gang..
Well seeing as how the condescending pignorant officer thinks it's OK for them to record and cctv because it's identifiable.
Then why don't they stop everyone with a dashcam and ask them to stop recording people 🤷.
Their are video cameras in every shop,bank, school, highstreet cafe, everywhere. Sorry, officer, go and actually enforce laws
So, if you have cctv in your home, that means I can film in your house?
@Phookinell wtaf ? Re-read that sentence yourself?
@Phookinell From a public area you can, a police drone runs over my house every other month. However, there is privacy if you are close enough to take pictures through a window you better have a good reason. Example is cars parked outside my door with built in camera systems. See Tesla for extreme version.
A spent force policing on personal feelings , so the order is Foxtrot Oscar Yankee Charlie .
2:17 everyone has the opportunity to wear a face mask if they want privacy in public Constable !! Personally I wear a balaclava as I can’t breathe with a face mask but we all have the right and the opportunity to!!!
Poor camera angles makes this difficult to watch
If you don’t like it officer, GET THE LAW CHANGED
Key in the ignition & the engine running. That's a fine & points on his licence.
I recorded this idiot using his phone before but he to above the law in his own mind to give poo 1 law for 1 law for others
02:12
"Other people don't have the opportunity to wear a face mask."
Really? Why not?
Making the law up as he goes 😮
"it is the police, it is very different" that says it all. us and them.
I didn't know that James Whale was a copper
Its the spitting image lmao.🤣
I thought James Whale had a brother who was a sumo wrestler.
I got an upheld complaint against a Met Police officer because they were using their phone with the engine running.
Recording in public is perfectly legal.
there is no expectation of privacy in public.
if you want privacy stay at home.
Behind the wheel of a van!! Police Crime!!!
The headmaster who lost his job
If you audit in Brighton and want any help
More importantly engine idling is an Offence but local authorities do not prosecute.
Lawful activity by pedestrians have no legal immunity, so when someone that has legal immunity have other powers, they could be used against a public person if their feelings are not constrained within the duty of their roles, and could use their legal immunity to perhaps stand beyond their work duty and use it out of context (their feelings [and parenting skills]) and thus, overstepping the duty of that lawful employed person to help police the populous. I have seen many interactions on here, and it looks like they are just like any other person who is triggered by being video'd, except, they have the sleight of hand with the card "legal immunity" that is a get out of jail for free card, they have no worries about getting into trouble, because they can't, and that must have an effect on someone, or at least some of them, as I am sure with being used a lot of the time it could become a bad habit, or a good excuse to bully someone with that legal excuse without any comeback, that must be quite a powerful place to be, and really it should be monitored carefully so that you don't get a loose cannon, through desensitization or complacency. Though I can't see that being changed, but you never know, this woke nonsense may bite back in some departments in the future, who knows?
Wonder if the people being arrested liked being filmed on their police camera action TV shows ?
i am old enough to remember the days when policemen were generally respected and had common sense. sadly those days are gone
Where did you get that from? Before the days of cameras being everywhere they were violent savages. You told them what they wanted to hear or get beaten up. Why do you think vulnerable people have had their senteces quoshed years after serving it. They would do the same now if they could get away with it.
@2.48min…it’s very different…because I’m a police officer, that’s different…LOL
since the police have this hyper paranoia to recording devices, they might want to petition the government to shut down those corporations that manufacture the 10’s of millions of recording devices for public consumption, every year !
🤣🤣🤣🤣Thanks for the entertainment from the Keystone cops.
cops "offer advice" as if 1. anyone wants their advice 2. anyone asked for it 3. it is of any value. stick to upholding laws....for a change
He didn’t get the memo did he?
Clearly breaking the law browsing his phone with engine running on a public road!
Another officer breaking the law….you can’t do that sunshine!
In the United Kingdom, it's generally not illegal to take photos of people in public spaces without their permission. However, there are some exceptions:
He even has a bodycam and thinks it's he shouldn't record people, how dumb. Too many cops are clearly very intellectually short like this.
Yes, in the UK, you can generally film people in public places without their consent, unless it's for criminal or terrorist purposes.
Yea. More concerned about police than the public recording the police.
It started off ok,till he said don’t film,he is wrong,his reasoningis
ENGINE RUNNING AND ON PHONE IF THAT WAS US THATS 6 POINTS
Yes it is if your. Engine is running whilst using your phone 6 points
@@auditingyounext4548 Not if you are parked. Your engine doesn't have to be off to be parked 🤷♂
@@auditingyounext4548 see my edit above ... Couldn't reply to this for some reason with the contents 🤷
Sitting in the van policing, Facebook crimes.
Very fast to ask you for footage though should a crime be committed.
It is not the police’s job to moralise.
That police man is taking rubbish its legal to film anyone in public that is the law
feeling police at it again
Unbelievable police still dont understand the law...right to film public that the law and his right to do it and that should be the end of the matter.
Photography of strangers is done by many street photographers in the UK and needs no permission. That police officers is spouting misinformation 🤣
They make me feel uncomfortable when they film me!
You wimp! The officer was plainly wrong but you didn't challenge or debate him at all.
So he is basically telling you not to follow the law...... That's what he is saying.
They always have to give lame directives
They couldn’t give a shit who you record as long as it’s not them😂 imagine telling somebody not to record people as you record them,you couldn’t make this shit up.
Two tier khier's Police force, one rule for them and one rule for us, (on phone while in charge of a vehicle) doesn't it just stink of hypocrisy. And saying it's ok I'm a police constable try telling that to Wayne cousin's!!!!!
Couzens was also a police officer,its legal to film.
Wayne Couzens was a police officer!
Officer needs re training
Wayne cousin was a Police officer
Wow! Knowledgable and not opinionated, not! Looking good (again), Sussex Police.
@1:54 👉🏻"""with consent "
PACE 1984.
section 64A .... Photographing of suspects
(1A) photographed elsewhere than at a police station-
(a) with the appropriate consent; ( unless (1B) is in place )
(1B) (a) arrested by constable (PC)
(6A) “photograph” includes a moving image
police guidance CODE :-
CODE D5.12A ....Photographs taken under PACE, section 64A:
(a) may be taken with the👉🏻 person’s consent, or 👉🏻without their consent if 👉🏻consent is withheld
CODE D5.15 a photograph may be obtained 👉🏻without the person’s consent taken at any time on a camera system installed
👉🏻 anywhere IN the police station.
CASE :- Wood v Commissioner of police (2009) = for """retention"" of the photographs (not for taking photographs)
and under common law @3:12 by consent ,, consent denied but as we witness further pursuance and ongoing is ABH and causing harassment alarm & distress to cause fear by PC who now can be arrested to prevent further incident then his colleague will take arrest to prevent a
"breach of the peace" to then by walking away and no doubt de=arrest as the "breach has now passed"
now we know that's not going to happen then it would be failure to provide service :'-
Police Act 1996
section 91.. causing disaffection.
(1) any member of a police force to withhold his services, shall be guilty of an offence and liable-
(b) to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or to a fine, or to both.
(3) Liability under subsection (1) for any behaviour is in addition to any civil liability for that behaviour.
Always record 😊 never stop
"Don't record in public"?????but yet they can record no watch us all by machines in the air????😂😂😂😂😂😄😄😄😄😄😉.
I have an identity 😂😂
It's all well and good saying that you have a right to film in public, but I don't want a camera shoved in my face by someone wearing a hoodie and a mask either.
But the copper at the wheel on his phone, scrolling fb or whatever whilst on duty, well that's just wrong init