Man arrested for photographing police in hot pursuit of fast-food

[chris_waller]

Another account of power out of control and attendant idiocy:-

<p>

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1046853/Man-arrested-locked-hours-taking-photo-police-van-ignoring-entry-

sign.html<p><b>Moderator: Please don't post random police stories on this thread. Stay on topic.</b>

[chris_waller]

That link takes you to a page which includes other stories - it's the story about half way down the page.

 

Here's another link:-

 

http://www.thisisbristol.co.uk/news/Police-apologise-Bedminster-man-arrested-taking-photo/article-275765-detail/article.html

[Matt Laur]

<i>power out of control</i>

<Br><br>

Actually, reading the article, it seems more like one guy with a (since corrected) attitude problem, and with a "power"

food chain that has fallen all over itself to apoligize to the offended party. Of course, he had to waste five hours at the

police station, twice. That wouldn't have happened if the officer in question had his head on straight. It's hard to say

which is the better outcome - the guy losing his job (which wouldn't have been a bad thing), or the guy

<i>keeping</i> his job, and being a walking talking example for his co-workers on how to take a deep breath before

reacting rashly when a fellow citizen spots you making a bad judgement call.

<br><br>

As for the original "offense" that ticked off the guy who took the picture... well, I'm not sure that backing up a police

vehicle on a one-way street is the end of the world. Those vehicles are designed to be very visible, and the people

driving them have gone through far more training than most drivers ever will. If the driver didn't see a risk, why burn the

fuel to drive all the way around the block? It's not about being above the law, it's about being professionally trained

and in a marked vehicle while looking to pull up to a business where, indeed, there was police business to do. I'm not

quite sure why that provoked the photographer so much, unless the officer(s) just seemed especially jerky from

where he was standing.

<br><br>

Our local county has been in a bit of a debate about whether or not officers driving their cruisers through speed-

camera-enforced areas should always be liable for exceeding the speed limit. Obviously, they are frequently in a

hurry to get where they're going, though they don't always have lights blazing. I think it really comes down to

comparing a given officer's daily behavior to his/her overall professionalism. Not everyone in that line of work is the

same, that's for sure. I've never met one, personally, that wasn't a decent sort. I realize that's heresy in certain

circles, but it's just my experience. It's always a shame when one of them does something idiotic in a high-profile

sort of way. Not helpful.

[Matt Laur]

Oh, and I should mention that your headline is somewhat misleading. They were at the fish-and-chips place to review

CCTV recordings in an investigation, not to grab a bite. Complaints about police are always more credible when you

at least get the basic story right. A cop being a jerk while doing his job (as opposed to being a jerk while having

lunch) is still a cop being a jerk. But context has a way of changing the spin a little bit.

[bjscharp]

But it's also not illegal to take a picture of a policecar or a policeman. The police are public servants, so I image the public is entitled to take pictures of them, should they have the urge.

[garry edwards]

Police officers who step out of line in the UK are something of a rarity. Most are good natured, reasonable human beings who try to help the public. The big problem, as I see it, is that when things do go wrong it's far too unusual for their superior officers to actually admit that one of their officers has crossed the line.

 

The good thing about this incident is that the police actually did something - they held a disciplinary meeting and apologised to the member of the public concerned.

 

The bad thing is that it took them 7 months to do so, and that the person concerned was held at the police station for 5 hours, which means that the Sgt in charge of the prisoner processing desk, whose job it is to protect prisoners and whose decision it is to either accept a prisoner or to order his release, may have done less than s/he should.

[starvy]

i agree with garry. it is rare for police constables to step out of line here in uk, however, i am pleased so see the officer disciplied in this instance. i would have thought that in the event of preventing a crime, surely a police van ought to be able to enter a no-entry zone, as long as this was not infringing on anyone's right of access?

 

what is of concern had been the number of stop and search arrests in london over the last few years. photographers are not immune from it either, and anything but the most mundane of point and shoot cameras used to shoot anywhere near government building seem to arouse major suspicion.

[markci]

The officer shouldn't have been "disciplined." He should have been fired and criminally charged with both assault and false arrest.

[digitmstr]

>>I'm not quite sure why that provoked the photographer so much, unless the officer(s) just seemed especially jerky from where he was standing. <<

 

That is not the point...

 

>>But context has a way of changing the spin a little bit.<<

 

Not the case here. The policeman had no right whatsoever to arrest the man, period. The arrest was ILLEGAL, his actions were motivated by personal feelings, not by the law.

 

No matter how you spin it either, the cop was wrong on all counts. Because policemen are entrusted with special power and authority over people, they are expected to behave perfectly and within thelaw thus, it is not inappropriate nor should it be viewed (as you put it) 'in certain' circles, as anything less than abuse of power, when they fail to do so.

 

There is no "circle" here, simply people telling stories of police abuse. One abuse is ONE too many.

 

I have quite a few friend in law enforcement and they are totally against any cop behaving in such a manner nor, would they cover it up. Not only was the cop breaking the law but, his actions reveal a hot temperament which, in certain cases, could actually place his partners' lives in danger! And that's a fact. Police work is very demanding and it's not for everyone; someone who behaves like that should not be on the force.

[Matt Laur]

We're not in disagreement, Giampi. But I've taken a lot of flack in some conversations for simply stating that most police officers are decent people. That notion seems impossible for some people hear without sending them into a spectacular rant. Those same people, mysteriously, often seem to be the ones who are always having run-ins with the law. Those are the circles I'm referring to: the ones that reflexively see the police as their enemy and as power-crazed thugs. I've never met a single officer that fits that caricature, so perhaps <i>I'm</i> the one that's off in my own little circle of pure luck in bumping into only the sensible, hard-working, under appreciated LEOs. And a reminder that my observation was that the officer in question losing his job would not be a bad thing.

[manut]

maybe a cultural issue. The cop is Aqil Farooq, an Asian/mediterrainian name, cops are somewhat the government in some thrid world countries and no one can challenge them, unless he is born and bought up in UK, which makes this assumption all wrong. The chief should look into the recruitment and training program again.

[garry edwards]

*maybe a cultural issue. The cop is Aqil Farooq, an Asian/mediterrainian name, cops are somewhat the government in some thrid world countries and no one can challenge them, unless he is born and bought up in UK, which makes this assumption all wrong. The chief should look into the recruitment and training program again.*

 

Not so. 'Asian* in the UK has a different meaning to that of the U.S. This gentleman will be of Pakistani decent but will have been educated here, and will be a British citizen. It is incredibly difficult for anyone to become a police officer in this country, the selection process is very thorough and so is the training. Most police forces have a 'positive discrimination' recruitment policy which many people feel to be unfair on white, straight potential recruits but this does not affect the standards.

 

Police officers are not allowed to go into takeaway food shops except in the course of their duty and they are not allowed to accept free food from them, but it happens all the time and my (uninformed) guess is that the victim here wrongly assumed that the officer was going to the shop to get free food as well as ignoring the road sign (which he is allowed to do only in an emergency). Perhaps he said something he shouldn't and that this provoked the very wrong actions of the officer concerned.

 

I'm sure that there are a lot of police officers who don't like being photographed but they simply accept that people have a right to photograph them. This case hit the news because the actions of the police officer were wrong.

[clive1]

Garry Edwards, although your statement <I>Police officers who step out of line in the UK are something of a

rarity</i> is open to different interpretations (how rare is rare?, etc), one reason that we hear less about UK police

misconduct than, say, in the '70s, is thanks to members of the public, such as Andrew Carter in this case, who

actively oppose it, in this case by photographing a police driver breaking a traffic rule.<P>

 

As for Aqil Farooq being of Pakistani origin, that's a calculated guess. The name could be Muslim Indian,

Bangladeshi or Arabic.<P>You seem to be so supportive of the cops here that I would suggest yours is not

an "uninformed guess," but a "uniformed guess."

[garry edwards]

Clive,

 

You're right that the name Aquil farooq is not necessarily of Pakistani origin, but the probability is that it is, and it doesn't really matter anyway.

 

You're wrong in your assumption that I have some connection with the police. I don't. I do happen to have several friends and aquaintances who happen to be police officers, this is simply because I shoot, and quite a few police officers belong to shooting clubs too (maybe they want to learn how to shoot to civilian standards...)

 

I feel that most of the (justified) complaints about the police, and especially with regard to photographers and their rights, are not against the actions of police officers but against the CPSO's or Community Police Support who are basically poorly trained 'extras' who patrol the streets with limited powers

[petemillis]

Garry, that'll be the PCSOs or "Police Community Support Officers".

[garry edwards]

Pete,

 

You're right. Sorry.

[petemillis]

Forgiven!

This is interesting.....PCSOs are generally employed full time, receive a salary, yet do not have the same powers as the regular police. BUT Special Constables are volunteers, not salaried, only work a few hours here and there, yet they do have the same powers as the regular police officers!

 

Sorry, this is off-topic, but it's sort of relevant in light of the discussion that has developed (I guess!)

[craig_gillette]

This obsession of photographers to expect perfection from police officers is laughable. Funny that some frantic

in threads about the end of a "free press" or government control find it unremarkable that photographers from all

over the world are discussing press articles about a cop who stepped out of line. Wasn't too long ago a thread

about a photographer convicted of involuntary manslaughter was locked after 10 comments.

 

This up to 16 and still open.

[lex_jenkins]

Nobody likes being photographed doing what they're not supposed to be doing. It's not just the authorities.

 

Years ago when I worked for the federal gummint documenting workplace safety violations I'd sometimes photograph or videotape construction site dangers from a public street in order to support our application for a warrant in case the employer refused access. A few times the employees would flip me off, which was pretty funny when presented as part of the evidence.

 

It only becomes a problem when the authorities abuse their positions to cover their butts. Or when individuals assault photographers when the act of photography does not violate any laws.