Young photojournalist detained for army cadet pics
A photojournalist, Jules Mattsson, was detained under anti-terrorism laws after he took images of an Armed Forces Day parade in Romford's city centre
Author: Olivier Laurent
28 Jun 2010 Tags: Metropolitan policeSection 44Terrorism act 2000Street rights
UPDATE: Jules Mattsson has, once again, been stopped and searched by police officers on 06 July.
On Saturday 26 June, photojournalist Jules Mattsson, who is a minor and was documenting the Armed Forces Day parade in Romford, was questioned and detained by a police officer after taking a photo of young cadets. [Photojournalist Edmond Terakopian met with Mattsson, visit his blog for further details and a photo of the 15-year-old photographer].
According to Mattsson, who spoke to BJP, after taking the photo he was told by a police officer that he would need parental permission for his image. The photographer answered that, legally, he didn't. While he tried to leave the scene to continue shooting, a second officer allegedly grabbed his arm to question him further.
According an audio recording of the incident, the police officer argued, at first, that it was illegal to take photographs of children, before adding that it was illegal to take images of army members, and, finally, of police officers. When asked under what legislation powers he was being stopped, the police officer said that Mattsson presented a threat under anti-terrorism laws. The photographer was pushed down on stairs and detained until the end of the parade and after the intervention of three other photographers.
A spokeswoman, before commenting on the case, questioned, in a conversation with BJP, why Mattsson used an audio recording device, in this case a phone, to record the incident. Asked about it Mattsson says that he started recording only after he was "agressively taken aside by an officer". He also says that it isn't the first time he's been stopped and wanted a record of the incident to prove he wasn't breaching any laws.
The recording can be heard in this YouTube video put together by Mattsson. The photographer was stopped for the fourth image shown in this video.
The spokeswoman for the Metropolitan Police Service has now issued a statement to BJP: "It is clearly not the intention of the MPS to prevent people from taking photographs, although, as the public would expect, officers will remain vigilant, particularly in crowded public places. Any allegations or complaints about police treatment of photographers are taken very seriously by the MPS."
She adds: "Anyone who is unhappy with the actions of individual police officers can make a formal complaint, which will be thoroughly investigated. Although at this time we have not received a complaint about this incident and no allegations of crime have been made, we will investigate the circumstances. Our officers do receive guidance around the issue of photography through briefings and internal communications and we continue to drive this work forward."
Mattsson plans on seeking legal advice. However, it isn't the first time photographers and photojournalists have been stopped from taking pictures in public places. BJP, as well as other press organisations such as Amateur Photographer, have led campaigns to highlight the increasing use of anti-terrorism legislation to stop photographers. Read all of our articles here.
While photographers have been clamoring for years that they are being targetted by over-zealous police officers, the issue only received national interest in December last year when a journalist for The Independent was himself stopped for taking a picture of the House of Parliament.
The incident caused a media blitz, with newspapers such as The Independent, The Daily Telegraph, The Guardian and Daily Mail, as well as the BBC publishing articles on the issue of public photography. Under pressure, the Association of Chief Police Officers sent a memo to all police forces around the country informing them that they 'should not be stopping an searching people for taking photos.' The memo continued: 'There are no powers prohibiting the taking of photographs, film or digital images in a public place.'
However, despite reassurances that anti-terrorism powers were not targetting photographers, police officers, since then, have continued to quote the legislation to stop photographer from working in public places. In fact, only a few days following the memo's release, award-winning architectural photographer Grant Smith was detained after taking photos near the Bank of America - Merrill Lynch building.
In January, more than 1000 photographers protested stop-and-search powers in a mass gathering in Trafalgar Square. The protest was soon followed by a statement from the Lord Carlile, the UK's terror watchdog, who called for Section 44 powers to be scrapped - to no avail.
The government was dealt another blow after the European Court of Human Rights found that the anti-terrorism powers were illegal. In its ruling, the court said: "The public nature of the search, with the discomfort of having personal information exposed to public view, might even in certain cases compound the seriousness of the interference because of an element of humiliation and embarrassment."
It added that it was "struck by the statistical and other evidence showing the extent to which police officers resorted to the powers of stop and search under section 44 of the Act and found that there was a clear risk of arbitrariness in granting such broad discretion to the police officer. There was, furthermore, a risk that such a widely framed power could be misused against demonstrators and protestors in breach of Article 10 and/or 11 of the Convention."
Despite the ruling, the previous government appealed the decision. And while the new government has promised to reform the anti-terrorism legislation, it has yet to do so, arguing that it will wait for the European Court to rule on its appeal.
To stay updated on this case, sign up to our free email newsletter here.
This article was first published on Monday 28 June at 11.30am, updated at 5.30pm with Metropolitan Police statement, and on Tuesday 29 June at 10.30am with further background on previous incidents between photographers and police officers.
Comments
I do not know what worries me most about this report.
is it the fact that a journalist, someone who has clearly identified himself as such, is being detained, and hassled for no good reason.
Or should I be more concerned because of what appears to be the complete ignorance of the police personnel, and lack of knowledge of the law they are trying to use whilst doing so?
Move to sunny South Africa. The weather is better, we're past such draconian laws and terrorism fears, and after this weekend there are no more soccer fans around.
A symptom of serious training failures
On a day when the armed forces were supposed to be showing themselves to the public in a positive light, this sends entirely the wrong (though not necessarily incorrect) message about the relationship between the British state and the public.
Beyond the freedom of expression and freedom of movement issues, what's going on here is that a police officer is simply inventing law ("when it comes to children you need signed parental consent to photograph"; "it is a criminal offence to photograph a police officer") and citing it as justification for obstructing lawful activity and reporting.
Unless there are disciplinary consequences, it's easy to see how officers can slip into a kind of fantasy world where anything that strikes them as dodgy is assumed to be illegal, and devil take the detail. I suspect a lot more of this goes on unseen in less educated communities - and is perhaps an even greater threat to freedom than impeding photographers.
From this and other incidents, it seems clear that officers are specifically trained not to respond to requests to explain the legal basis for their actions. That really isn't good enough.
What we don't see is how the photographer was acting. However, from the recording onwards we do. And, it's worse.
To me this really sounded like a police officer saw a "young" photographer then decided to shove his power crazed weight around.
His colleagues backed him up, and they tried to intimidate the photographer.
They changed approach several times.
The U.K. Police force are becoming a disgrace.
Actually this has been going on too long, they already are. Shame on the UK, shame on you.
The officers' involved in this MUST be disciplined. Mattson reapeateddly asked what he was doing wrong, and wehn told nothing asked to carry on with his business and was told he could not, He asked again why, and was never given an answer. In the end he was arrested because "of the anxiety caused to members of the public"? Poppycock!
Police officers need to be reminded that they are instruments of the law, and exist to enforce the laws enacted by parliament. It is not for them to make up the law, ever. The only "anxiety" in this case was that the officer has no bloody idea whay he was doing.
I hope Mattson sues.
Heavy-handed and totally out-of-context to the supposed 'terrorism' threat (which the police alluded to) at the event. George Orwell's '1984' is beginning to become fact.
Taking photos is potentially a crime? What a farce!
Simple as that. Get a claim in, sit back and expect a pay out of around £3K
European human Rights Act 2008, freedom of Expression.
I don't think the police or the government realise how dangerous this kind of behaviour is. The public will lose trust assuming that all are power-crazed bullies wanting to record your DNA on a database.
Once this trust is lost solving crimes will become so much harder. We've seen what happens with gang-related murders, and the unwillingness of people to come forward. This kind of attitude will spread and the police will have a hard time getting any witnesses for any crime.
As an ex serviceman who was regularly part of public parades and would be fully expected to be photographed by journalists and members of public alike. Taking photographs does not in anyway constitute a risk to security or a possible act of terrorism. What does constitute a risk to security is when a number of police officers who should be be looking out for suspicious items and known targets appear to be all concentrating on trying to bully a photographer.
The police escalated this incident from what appears to be their inability to back down and lack of knowledege of the law. The use of anti terrorism legislation in this case was a disgrace for which they should be ashamed of and I hope an enquiry is held into this matter.
Inspector John Fisher - making laws up while u wait!
What a shower of bullying imbeciles!
It was like they were going for the record in citing the most made-up or irrelevant laws in the shortest time possible.
Hope you get justice on this.
All Cadet Forces get parental consent to photographs (taken & published) whilst "on Duty or Assignment" (not just once but almost every time they are 'parading publicly') - I have done this many times in past for my son (as an Army Cadet Band Member) & also my parents did this in the past when I was a Air Cadet
Never mind the fact that its a public place so permission is NOT Required
After further thought on this matter is not the policeman we hear and see, and all those others involved in this incident guilty of 'causing an obstruction', the very law that is cited to photographers when Police persons can't think of anything better to justify their actions.
Interfering with a member of the public going about his lawful business is no longer something that should be taken so lightly and treated so cavalierly by the Police, whichever force they belong to,.
It really is about time Police training was hiked up a notch or two, and raised awareness was applied to policing in the street.
I agree entirely - this is a disgrace - Big Brother Watch is keen to help
http://www.bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/home/2010/06/unbelievably-photographers-are-still-being-abused-by-the-police-for-exercising-basic-rights.html
Community policing at it's best....
Bullying and ignorant police officers...very sad state of affairs.
This once again is Police bulling and harassment by the ignorant and pig headed members of the police force today. I have been stopped twice in the past few months with the most flimsy excuses that they can think of at the time. We are photographers Not terrorists.
Sadly this is nothing new, had it all through my career. Yet even when the photographer is trying very hard to do his part the right way, calm and assertive, he can not get the Officer to see reason. It seems the Police had decided his face did not fit, there is no excuse for them obstructing the photographer, assaulting him by grabbing his camera or pushing him, how would the CPS justify such?
Also why did the Police have a problem with the situation being recorded?
There are things to do in such situations, the first thing is to get notice out of the immediate officer or two. Ask them to call their commanding officer for advice, yes it works, tell them other officers have been disciplined for this behaviour. If your a working media photographer, call you desk or the Police press office, you could even call 999 and request assistance fearing the officers actions.
If you see it happen to another photographer, get close so you can observe, photograph or video the situation. Additionally if you see a senior officer get them involved.
As photographers we should not stand by, several times I have turned my camera on a colleague being harassed by an officer to see the Police withdraw, the same has been true in reverse. I asked an officer to clearly state his name rank and number for the tv crew's microphone, he vanished and I thanked the crew.
Taking a longer view, maybe the NUJ should make representations to the Police Federation, this is a professional standards issue. An issue that is beginning to undermine the Police in a large group of the population, we have a great Police force and should not let a few misguided incidents damage their reputation. Time the Police understood the only thing to fear from a camera is when they are breaking the law.
Police just say and do what they like
What disgusts me about these incidents is the it's the Police who always create a scene, then cite 'public order' reasons to detain a photographer.
It seems to come so easily to them. How often do they use these tactics on other members of the public?
I just find this despicable and outrageous these officers should be arrested themselves. Little more than Thugs! Ranting on about children because they know what a pathetic brainwashed society we have become educated by hysteria like that. It is a DISGRACE to live in this Country under laws and politics as low as this! Why did we bother fighting the Nazi's ...this is no different!
'The spokeswoman for the Metropolitan Police Service has now issued a statement to BJP: "It is clearly not the intention of the MPS to prevent people from taking photographs...'
That woman has some chutzpah! Quite clearly it was the intention of the MPS officers there to prevent someone from taking photographs, and with no basis in law.
So, since when does the UK send children to war? What a bullsh*t argument, "taking pictures of children". Ridiculous!
Related Articles
BJP Daily
Most Popular Articles
World Press Photo controversy: Objectivity, manipulation and the search for truth
The life and soul of Gigi Giannuzzi
Magnum Photos launches photobook masterclass
Getty Images expands grant programme to portrait photography
Magnum photographer Wayne Miller has died
Hasselblad puts an end to its V line of cameras
Updating your subscription status 
About us
British Journal of Photography is the world’s longest running photography magazine, established in 1854, and online since 1997. A high-quality monthly printed edition is available as a subscription or from selected newsagents in the UK and around the world.
Jobs
Key Account Manager
We have a vacancy for a Key Account Manager working on The British Journal of Photography
Head of Photography
Magnet Harlequin, one of the UK's leading Creative Production Agencies is seeking a new Head of Photography.
Photographer at Bonhams
Bonhams is looking for a full-time photographer for its sale catalogues
Popular Topics
