Met Commissioner: "I cannot guarantee photography guidelines will be rightly interpreted"

Street Photography Rights

The Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson has reaffirmed street photography rights at a Metropolitan Police Authority Committee meeting last week, but was unable to guarantee that all police officers would interpret the law in the right way

Author: Olivier Laurent

The Metropolitan Police commissioner made the comments at a Metropolitan Police Authority Committee meeting in City Hall on 22 July, after being intensively questioned by Liberal Democrat London Assembly member Dee Doocey.

During the meeting, which is video-recorded and can be viewed online, Doocey asked the commissioner if he was "confident that your officers are aware of the law when it comes to members of the public taking photographs in public places?"

Stephenson answered: "It is a stated fact and public record that we did go through a period when there was a spate of these types of incidents. And I admit, I could not be confident at that time, because they were happening, and it was a matter, occasionally of morning despair of what we were doing on occasions around it."

He added: "The problem is, of course, getting 33,000+ police officers and 4000+ PCSOs to exercise the judgement that you have at 9am in the morning. At the result of that, we did issue very precise guidelines to officers, did an awful lot there. John Yates said at the time to everyone – and we did a huge amount to get out this message because it was costing such a disproportionate loss of reputation for us – that there is no restriction on people taking photos in public places or any other building other than in very exceptional circumstances."

Stephenson also said that, on previous occasions, he "did make the comment here and various other places that people come to London actually to photograph it. It’s crazy [for tourists not to be able] to do that."

The commissioner added that he had been made aware of the most recent incident, involving the 16-year-old Jules Mattsson, who was stopped and detained by two police officers after taking pictures of a cadet parade in Romford. "We do keep re-issuing those instructions. We do try to get the level of discretion used correctly. Sometimes this level of discretion isn't always right and I know in that incident, while we have not received any official complaint this time, the officers have received words of advice."

However, Stephenson's answer didn't satisfy Doocey, who hit back, saying that the audio recording of the incident showed that the officers were clearly acting out of their rights. She said: "I don't know if you have listened to the recording but it's actually eight minutes of two of your officers intimidating somebody, and at one stage they say that they don't need a law to stop them photographing, but much more worrying, they don't need a law to take them away. It’s not a question in my view of… It’s so serious that it don’t’ think it should be somebody giving them words of advice and I don't also agree with you that it is a question of officers using their discretion."

She continued: "This was very black and white: Two of your officers who, despite the fact that I know you have given them guidelines because I have a copy of it, who totally disregarded them and were either so completely ignorant of the law, or decided to ignore the law – they were just going to say they knew the law better than the person they were talking to – they were very seriously intimidating. I find it quite worrying that I don't think you are taking this quite as seriously as I think you should be.”

Stephenson went on the defensive arguing that he had never suggested that the officers involved in the Romford incident had demonstrated the right judgement. "I am not in any way suggesting they used their discretion appropriately on this occasion."

Doocey also asked the commissioner to review the issue thoroughly, as, she said, "I see this as part of an ongoing problem," adding: "I don't know how you communicate with officers – I don’t know how John Yates communicates with his officers – but, clearly, whatever communication there was hasn't actually got through to quite a lot of people and I think you need to just review it."

While the commissioner argued that the message had gone through, he admitted that he was ready to look at other cases to see what went wrong.

UPDATE: In a statement released to BJP, Dee Doocey says that she "wasn't entirely satisfied" with the commissioner's reply. "The Met have a long standing problem in enforcing guidance to all police officers on a range of issues."
 
She adds that she "will certainly continue to raise this issue until absolutely confident that real changes have been made."

View the video recording of the Metropolitan Police Authority Committee meeting here (debate starts at 67min56sec).

To stay updated, sign up to our free email newsletter here.

  • Comment
  • Print
  • RSS
  • LinkedIn

Comments

One law for US , and another law for them

Having followed so many of these unnecessary stops, and hassling of photographers over the past couple of years, when it seems to have got worse not better, I have come to the conclusion that until the law is properly applied to police officers, and until we actually see a few transgressors actually publicly punished for taking the law into their own hands, the poor quality police behaviour we keep hearing about will not go away.

It is obviously going to take more than Government spokespeople of Police representatives assuring us again and again.

Police officer, Community Police persons, security guards, should be taught the law properly. if they act outside of it then they should be suitably reprimanded, and punished.

This includes preventing members of the press from working, interfering with amateur photographers, and greater offences such as assault.

We know these offences occur because we keep seeing them. It is now time to see justice dispensed to police officers as well as the rest of us.

In a fair and equal society like ours it is only right and proper

Posted by: Pete Jenkins on 28 Jul 2010 at 18:56

Action by Clegg, see the Clegg website

Very clear, the last government were going to clarify the law on photography. the Coalition have to as part of the clegg bonfire state clearly that anyone has the right to take photographs and that photographs can only be deleted by a judge in court.
Exception Prohibited places under Defence regulations if necessary
In the mean time threaten PO and PCO with assault if they wrongly use the laws for purposes not intended.

Posted by: ian campbell on 02 Aug 2010 at 09:47

Bringing the cops to justice

There are two possible approaches here: first, an action in the civil courts for compensation; we have already seen damages of 3K and 5K awarded. Could be a nice pickup if you are arrested and locked in a cell. Downside of this is the copper is not punished. Second approach is to privately prosecute him in the Magistrates Court. This can be done without a solicitor. It is important to bring summary-only charges such as common assault (battery), breach of the peace, threatening behaviour, intentional harassment, alarm or distress, threatening/abusive words /behaviour, unlawful intimidation contrary to the trade union and labour relations act 1992 s41. (This latter offence is not restricted to industrial cases). The downside is that you will have to issue the proceedings against the named officer (should be on his collar or record of arrest) and send it to police headquarters pending his court appearance whereupon he will have to give his home address. This will alert the Force who will run to the CPS to ask them to take over your proceedings and drop the charges. However, once the charges are issue, if you are quick, you can alert the press and send a letter to all the police forces stating what you have done. Hopefully the publicity will have a 'chilling' effect and maker the coppers think again before unlawfully interfering with a photographer. Me? I can't wait to be stopped again now I am fully au fait with my rights and the legal situation. As to my response after arrest? I haven't decided yet.

Posted by: MURRAY on 02 Aug 2010 at 13:44

Updating your subscription status Loading