Is that the law?

[devonwoody]

My daughter took a photograph on her mobile telephone of some young youths doing criminal damage to a farm property. I think the children have been cautioned but a parent has made a complaint in retaliation of the photograph being taken of her child and our daughter has been warned this is also an offence.

Is this correct?

 

[Chrispy]

I would hope not so put me down for a no please.

 

[adidat]

did a copper warn her of this, pretty sure its boll*cks!

i thought you're daughter only needs the parents permission to publish it.

adidat

edit: strikes me the mother of the little sh@te is trying to get back at her.

 

[Random Orbital Bob]

so every owner of CCTV is breaking the law continuously (incl traffic cameras)??

 

[Baldhead]

A friend with a disabled child was told by a local councillor to video/photographer other kids when they were nasty and abusive to his daughter, the police when called advised him not to do this because a complaint had been made against him accusing him of being a paedophile.
This doesn't answer your question, but I hope your daughter doesn't get into any trouble doing what I think is totally acceptable.

BH

 

[AndyT]

No. Taking a photo in a public place is not an offence. BUT this is a highly contentious area and many people (even some whose job is to enforce the law) seem to be unsure of what the law is. This has led to many cases of professional and other photographers being hassled by the police though they were doing nothing wrong.

Professional photographers have tried to correct the situation by publishing guides to what the law really says and even summary cards to hand out to people to put them right.

One such site is http://www.urban75.org/photos/photographers-rights-and-the-law.html which includes this quote from Home Office Minister Tony McNulty:

"There is no legal restriction on photography in public places, and there is no presumption of privacy for individuals in a public place.

It is for the Chief Constable to ensure that Officers and Police Community Support Officers are acting appropriately with regards to photography in public places, and any queries regarding this should be addressed to the Chief Constable.

However decisions may be made locally to restrict photography, for example to protect children. Any questions on such local decisions should also be addressed to the force concerned."

That said, the legal position is one thing; what criminals and their families will do when cornered is another matter entirely. Being in the right legally won't stop someone else assaulting you or damaging your gear.

For a more detailed guide, see http://www.sirimo.co.uk/2009/05/14/uk-photographers-rights-v2

 

[petermillard]

As a general rule, provided you're in a public area and the pictures a for non-commercial use, you can photograph whatever you can see, with the exception of government buildings e.g. police stations, military installations etc... so your daughter should be OK. However, if a complaint is made against her, the police are duty-bound to follow it up.

More general info here :- http://www.photographersrights.org.uk/page6/page6.html

HTH Pete

 

[hanser]

A big 'well done' to your daughter from me.

 

[devonwoody]

I don't think there is any problem on repercussions, I think this quote from peter millards post is the situation but no action is taken.

However, if a complaint is made against her, the police are duty-bound to follow it up.


I donut think the law has any sense these days, I reckon if she had physically stopped them from doing anymore damage she could be arrested herself.

We need to go back to Victorian times I reckon. :roll: :roll: :roll:

 

[UTMonkey]

To me it boils down to intent. The intention of the photograph was to provide evidence, once it has been used there is no reason for her to keep it.

I know this is by now means hard and fast, but they gave up the right to bleat about it when they perpetrated the crime.

I am certain that if there was a problem with that evidence the police would have mentioned it.

P.s. I am definitely not an expert.

 

[Graham Orm]

I took photo's of teens on motocrossers behaving dangerously in the park that adjoined our property. I took many pics of the actions and close ups of their faces. They were racing round the field while toddlers and under 10's were playing football and running around. The police accepted the photo's willingly and asked me to forward any more.
The youths on the bikes were early teens, but the photo's inevitably included the youngsters who were put in danger. Never once was any offence that I might be committing mentioned. On the contrary the cops were grateful.

Your daughter did the right thing. Would there have been an issue raised if they had set fire to the place and her photo's helped identify the culprits? I can't believe the parent of the offenders had the nerve to raise this.

 

[Eric The Viking]

Same here as Graham. I took a good close-up photo of someone snooping around in our back lane last year. The police (who nipped round to collect it on CD) were delighted.

In DW's daughter's case, I think the parents are trying to intimidate. She's done nothing illegal if the picture was taken from her land or a public place. Although the politicians would like to change it, there is no right to privacy here (Court proceedings are different, obviously).

I'm surprised the police aren't pursuing the criminal damage issue, as they now have evidence.

E.

 

[devonwoody]

Telling my daughter last evening of your replies and comments, she replied thanks, but what really got her goat was that the police took three days to attend to the incidence when reported on the telephone to them but only minutes to come back about taking the photographs.

 

[Hivenhoe]

Telling my daughter last evening of your replies and comments, she replied thanks, but what really got her goat was that the police took three days to attend to the incidence when reported on the telephone to them but only minutes to come back about taking the photographs.

.... and they wonder why the people have little confidence in the police and a reluctance to step forward to help?
Go figure?

And it's b@ll@x too.

 

[bugbear]

did a copper warn her of this, pretty sure its boll*cks!

Many police personal are (sadly) a little vague on law.

BugBear

 

[mind_the_goat]

Ask them to define exactly what 'law' they are cautioning you under, then put in a complaint to the your police commissioner.
It's abhorrent that someone should be harassed by the police for reporting a crime, it's no wonder that so many people turn a blind eye to crime.

 

[bugbear]

Google is helpful:

https://www.askthe.police.uk/content/Q717.htm

BugBear

 

[JakeS]

put in a complaint to the your police commissioner.

Seconded. Much like every other remaining public service, the police are hounded by statistics and targets and other such crap, so adding to their negative statistics is probably one of the few ways we have to influence their behaviour!

 

[Hardwood66]

The back of our house backs on to some small woods as a result the local kids play there in its self not a problem as I used to do the same until the were spray painting the back of are fence with rude words, but we hasn't seen it so I was keeping an eye out and notest the fence going black, well one of the delightful kids was pissing on our fence I then made him jump by banging on the fence making him pee all over him self his mother then complained I was scaring the kids for fun
Russ

 

[mind_the_goat]

both cases can be summed up by 'The problem with kids today is the parents'