Judge to police officer , please identify yourself for the court please, Officer replies, " I don't need too, its all over me", judge to court officers, please take the officer 'Who doesn't need to identify herself', down to the cells and we will see if she remembers in two hours. Next case please.......
This is a prime example of the cops taking no notice of the latest memo from the POlice commissioners committee not to bother photographers! Sec 43 needs reasonable evidence.
Barrister: "So PC Plod you identified a man as a terrorist and decided to search him under S43 of the Terrorist Act. But before doing that you and WPC Karen decided to go round the corner for a chat. When you came back the suspect had stabbed to death five innocent members of the public. Can you spot where you went wrong there? "
Not only did you miss the chance to dismiss them you missed the chance to shout walk of shame to them too! But what an awesome audit! You stood your ground enabling them to make themselves look stupid and incapable of carrying out their duties in a manner that would give them the respect that they weren’t worthy of!
They got the message. Once the debate reached critical mass...the gendarmes let discretion become the better part of valor,,and effected the hasty retreat....
His copsplaining to get them out of the hole they dug was melting my brain!! Female officers..because these cups aren't going to wash themselves up !! 😆
19:31 "That's fine, I am just copsplaining because I need to try and insert some authority, to justify our earned paranoia of the public, due to how we treat you"
Why do the Senior Officers try and defend the idiocy all the time? The guy said it exactly right, if you suspect someone of terrorism, would you really walk away from them and leave them out of sight?
I've often thought an auditor should start timing the amount of copsplaining these people submit. Many of the sarge's responses were completely unrelated to why he was there.
Ozzie and Harriet here weren't prepared for the pushback at point blank range of a HD camera...so they opted to be as official as they could...but in a lot of cases like this..the game goes down in flame...
Abysmal treatment by the cops. So glad you are making complaints, I would also complain to the Police and Crimes commissioner. This is abuse of section 43.. and why did section 44 get took away from them, because they abused it to the high heavens.
If you give details when not committing an offense it goes in the computer, your data and civil rights are abused, why should a person who has never committed a crime in their life have there name put on record as being spoke to?
I was wondering how long it was going to be before the sergeant would say that he was getting soaked. It was funny to watch the pavement slowly getting shinier. On the whole he was calm and reasonable and a thumbs up to him. Not like those other two that were really trying to stir things up!
I have officers always say about terrorism in order to search me regardless what I say to there is no intent before hand it’s a massive abuse witch is overlooked because apart from that they have no power to incriminate public doing lawful duties I’m sick of them
Recording a police station is illegal, it can be related to terrorism as you are recording things like cameras and rotors to plan an attack in VERY EXTREME CASES. The guy was just being a nob. Police had all the right to search and stop him
@@TheJack246 there is no law stopping someone for filming a police station, however it is suspicious. Under section 41 and 43 of the terrorism act of 2000 they can stop and search you for filming a police station as it is suspicious
These people are so arrogant and rude, they should not be allowed to trump up terrorist charges and use section 43 just to inconvenience you, mainly because they are pissed of that you know the law.
Real bad attitude from the 1st 2 officers, especially the Female officer. Interestingly, later on when she switched her body cam on she made sure she conducted her investigation appropriately. Or as best she can. Also, the officers need to act on what knowledge they know and not what they speculate or presume. It's obvious here that they dont like being filmed in public and pull out section 43 just to try and punish you personally, a good point you mentioned was why did they turn their backs on you if you are being suspected as a terrorist. Consistency throughout the police force is what's needed. Training and education needs to be improved. Last officer was better.
He is difficult to understand, he stops and starts and stutters, it's like he doesnt know how to speak properly or cant think of what he wants to say....but we appreciate him fighting and flexing his rights and everyone else's rights as well....
check the UK Legislation, but for over here in NZ our New Zealand Bill Of Rights Act 1990 s23 specifies our right while Arrested or DETAINED which is what they did under section 43, therefore they should have mirandized you immediately after detaining you, and you are correct in thinking that you have the right to remain silent either while Arrested, DETAINED or Free for that matter.
Did they really drive that (my) car 20m to the outside of the police station and back? The Sgt handles that pretty well...hopefully later in the day a bit of developmental feedback was given to the PCs on how to deal with someone with a camera. The idea of reconnaissance is not to be detected so standing outside a police station with a camera isn’t very bright even by Four Lions standards.
Tell them to remove all their CCTV cameras, they might get your number plate driving past.. For your security.. 😆 They'd immidiately be like "No, we're not gonna do that"
Not at all surprised by the police's arrogance and entitlement. The majority of the video was spent by the Gestapo trying to justify tbeit own action. Just as well you kept on recording otherwise you you have been attacked, battered and arrested.
Police should know you don’t need to identify yourself unless suspected of a crime. This police officer is bang out of order, showing himself up in front of his female colleague.
The female Officers ego and massive power trip made her emotionally charged and irrational. Constantly talking over and down to a member of public I think she needs retraining and the massive chip needs removing. I hope both these watch this back and learn a little honour your oaths. POOR DO BETTER
Right behind you mate. These robots need reforming and educating. Keep up the great work and good luck with the subs. The copsplaining has been outstandingly useless.
It seems they cannot help themselves, the police hate someone who has a bit of knowledge and is assertive in giving answers and putting them on the back foot, the WPC should be done for speeding lol
WoW, pure police abuse of power. They just can't help themselves can they. The ONLY reason they are abusing section 43 is for the purpose of trying to find your ID. Is it OK to highlight some snippets of your videos and your channel on my channel ?
@@UKTransparency Thanks. My only advice atm would be to make sure you run a bodycam and also possibly have an additional livestream camera rolling too. The reason for the bodycam is because the police often refuse your subject access requests for their bodycam footage quoting DATA protection legislation so make sure you have your own and if you livestream your encounters as well then you will have footage of any encounters even if they seize your cameras and phones.
Bullies and a disgrace , I've had lots of problems with Wolverhampton police aswel as Telford police , I wouldn't go to police even if my life depended on it after there abuse towards me.
They have concerns about their security, so what risk assessments do they have in place , that's their senior officers responsibility not the photographers.
🚣🏴 Data and civil rights protection cannot be construed as a suspicion of terrorism ask AB and the vulnerable street people who benefitted from the out of court settlement. Peace and love everyone Rick🇬🇧
Here from pinaci. Excellent questions on the requirements for S43 to apply; do you believe that I AM a terrorist and you must know what you are searching for. Police failed on both. Well done and good luck 👍
Wtf is wrong with police today. Their family must be so proud of them harassing a man with a walking stick and a camera on a public pavement. Threatening to search him under the terrorist act. Good job the Sargent came out to resolve it just like they should of done. Let's hope they both get reprimanded and thought how they should approach the public. What happened to hello sir can I help you at all I'm pc# blah blah blah. No thanks I'm fine I'm just recording anything I can see from public. That's fine sir and then off on your way you can go continuing your legal activity 👍👍
Very very poor interaction with both the officers at the start , why are you filming there lower part of their body , you let them talk over you all the time plus you have to be a little more sure of what your going to say as you were stuttering and seemed slow and unsure when conversing with the police , there was to much filming of the ground , why didn’t you say to the the sgt im ready to be searched under section 43 of the terrorisim act as the two officers said they were going to do ?
17:19 "As you are aware.." Why would he be aware? Members of the general public have absolutely no idea what the terrorism threat is. It's something that is posted on the police noticeboard, not the local supermarket. If you are going to interact with the police, you need to pick up on this sort of language otherwise they will walk all over you.
In law, apparently "reasonable suspicion" is all they need, they never state what that "cause" is (using a camera ???) LOL however the term "reasonable suspicion" itself needs to be clarified and quantified so Joe Public can understand it, otherwise what is the point ?? - and we are all fooked, cos idiots like this will use it, just to save face or keep the upper hand - did anyone pick up on the females exasperated noises as she plopped her fat backside onto the subordinates seat in the car at the end of the vid? she had obviously not listened to a word the Sargent had said - such disrespect and lack of empathy for the man she had just interacted with, just proves that these vids are NEEDED if only to highlight fools and incompetents like this - they should not be in positions like this, totally egotistical and power hungry, you can just imagine the conversation between the two of them as they drove away, convincing each other that they had behaved in a totally correct fair and respectful way, and had not abused their positions in public office - sadly for them the general public watching this video would disagree with that conclusion - Toss Potts, and yet they continue to work ??? what's all that about ??? what kind of vetting, training, social awareness or people skills did these baboons undertake ?? Very very disturbing - if this is the low standard of Police work these days that we have sunk down to, then god help us - do they just read the Sun 24/7 ?? - probably.
West Midlands police keep officers on the books in spite of over 20 reports of excessive force who injured a man so severely he couldn't work again when all he was doing was recording outside a football ground and was no threat whatsoever and in a statement they gave a full apology and admitted liability a settlement was reached to the victim of £350,000 and yet the officer in question is still employed check out crimebodge and watch the video.
This terrorism act is getting a bit ridiculous and is an embarrassment to the police. We all know its nothing to do with terrorism and its just abuse. They should be reprimanded for this behaviour. The public trust is rock bottom and they're making it worse
Worried about a terrorist threat my arse. Saw at least one vehicle (building maintenance - nice fully enclosed van) enter and the driver (presumably civilian) had his own swipe card. The possibilities for terrorism are endless (I'll say no more but you don't have to be a master terrorist to work it out).
