So right, and sadly they all seem to do it. Its as if they all attend a "how to be a snake" class in police college. My respect for them has been greatly diminished and only because the camera doesn't lie (unlike most/all PCs). If I hadn't seen it time and time again in these auditing videos I would probably have given them the benefit of the doubt. But not anymore, they un-fortunately cannot be trusted. Does everyone have to carry a bodycam to expect fair treatment by these people who we have given such authority (by us) ? They seem to think that the uniform gives them carte blanche authority to infringe on others rights. Its disgraceful and alas its endemic to the force. And if people question them they go down the route of "have you had problems with the police before ?".
They just don't know how to engage with a member of the public, he knew you weren't breaking any laws but still tried to bully you around by saying it was private property. He's a bully plain and simple and needs a complaint putting in.
@@taIlboyandy23 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 and where does that money come from?? And don't say the Government, because they don't have ANY money. It ALL comes from the Public, so that's us B.T.W.
@@memezilla4370 The origins of funding provide zero magical access rights, otherwise I could enter the homes of everyone who is in receipt of Housing Benefit. Police buildings are owned, managed and maintained by the relevant constabulary, not the public. 'Public Building' means 'occupied by a public authority' not 'owned by the public'.
@@taIlboyandy23 I know your example was a slight tongue in cheek thing but if someone owned their own property but was in receipt of benefit you couldn't enter where they live. If it's council owned and said person is a council tenant then your example would at least have a little grounding in the realms of possibility. Funding for the police forces in the England and Wales is mainly comprised from a central government grant which will indeed include a percentage of tax we pay but as you say doesn't grant us access to sat all areas of a building deemed for public service (schools, hospitals, libraries, council offices, police stations etc).
@@skylined5534 The origins of funding ends when received by central government. It is no longer owned by the payee and only designated areas of police buildings are deemed to have a qualified right of public access which can be withdrawn at any time.
That was a perfect example of a persons' inferiority complex getting the better of them, that cop didn't need to lower or embarrass himself but just couldn't help it.
Bike cop tried to enforce an awful lot of imaginary laws. He should turn his hand to writing fiction, clearly not cut out for a career in law enforcement.
I'd suggest writing fiction is a requirement of the job these days. When was the last time you heard a cop who wasn't lying about something? How many witness statements do they make that bear no resemblance to reality?
Yep, he has been in the job for so long, unchallenged about anything he says so just gets all butt hurt, what a twot……should retire very soon and then can take the piss out of us all drawing his big fat pension…..
Officer Peter Pedantic desperately scrambling to find some legislation which he can misinterpret to allow him to impose some authority, while completely failing to realise how desperate & pathetic he actually makes himself look to the public.
*This interaction is a reminder that you should never, ever talk to the Police.* He went from polite friendly banter to looking for reasons for arrest in a few minutes.
@@silverstreetmoto1458 NNY is past that point in hiding his details. In fact knowing who he is, and that's he successfully sued the police, and still giving false directives and made up laws and acting like a tyrant (over stepping back two feet) proves that the cops only have a single brain cell.
I'm going to carry on enjoying my lawful activity of flying my drone constable. Now please zip up your leather jacket as I would not want to see you hurt if you fall of that Motorcycle. 🤣
Yes it went from friendly to the usual intimidation and looking for any excuse to impose the stasi will upon the people he is paid to serve. They just cannot help themselves!!!!!!! Do people feel uneasy when they go into town centres, shops, CCTV etc etc and are filmed constantly. The numptie then tried the private property imposition yet again and had to do the walk of shame.
That went from a friendly chat to out and out tyranny. He just couldn't help himself. That's the longest tea-break ever. Wonder if there's any jobs going.
"I can't stop you but people don't like being recorded" Says the organisation that records everything we do from conversations to vehicle registrations to ANPR to dash cams to bodyworn cameras to information gatherers to covert surveillance etc etc.....
But the organisation does not upload recorded data to social media platforms at the end of a shift just to ridicule. That daft comparison always just collapses when analysed.
@@taIlboyandy23 I don't think it does. My comment stands as accurate because it has nothing to do with uploading it to social media. That organisation record us for their purposes and now members of the public record them for theirs, simple as that.
@MAIN You misunderstand. State recorded data is not recorded and uploaded anywhere with impunity, it is controlled and unavailable unless it relates to the individual requesting it. RU-vid auditors however target normal everyday people just to incite and provoke a reaction. They get out of bed, make the journey to someone's workplace and for the sole purpose of upsetting them to gain notoriety and make money via advertising revenue. You have consented: 'It should be noted that it refers to the power of the police coming from the common consent of the public, as opposed to the power of the state. It does not mean the consent of an individual. No individual can chose to withdraw his or her consent from the police, or from a law.'
@@PINACI The 'simple' part is you don't find it comfortable. State recorded data is controlled, auditors upload with impunity, vastly, vastly different. Not thinking 'it' does will not alter the chasm between the two.
@@taIlboyandy23 Well "state" collected data hasn't proved to be the safest, controlled data collected has it. There have been many breaches of our state collected data over the years and not just from the state either, Social media themselves have all been fined £millions for selling our data as well so IMO the more date we can collect on the authorities to upload to social media the better because it makes them think twice in a lot of cases because as soon as they start to misbehave then people get their cameras out and they are starting to know it.
Some but few manage to maintain the nice, friendly, "will help anyone out" officer act throughout the entire Audit. That guy on the police bike just couldn't help himself. It's those ones that you need to watch out for !
But PCSO and PC recorded BWV footage isn't uploaded to RU-vid at the end of a shift, it is strictly controlled by data protection principles. Utterly stupid comparison.
@@taIlboyandy23 Yet you can request it and post it on RU-vid. Comparison is fair - they use camera, public uses cameras, private companies use cameras. No law being broken uploading to RU-vid. Many auditores/public get BWV footage and upload - wish I could see your point.
@@Dangerous_Brian You can only request data that relates to you, not others. Equally, it will be refused if it forms parts of an ongoing case/investigation. It is controlled by data protection and not uploaded at the end of a shift. The flawed comparison you attempted to make just collapses.
As other have said, this slippery character on the motorbike appeared friendly but quickly couldn't cope with his ego be challenged and came out with all sorts of patronising nonsense. Although he claimed his 'arrest record' was exemplary (one wonders!). He showed his true colours when he came out of the door barking orders. The First Aid chap was more helpful, but duty bound. It was ironic how he stated the police 'do not like' being filmed, but they seem to take delight in filming everyone on behalf of the government. Hopefully they will question their actions and morals, but I think we all know they won't. Well handled NNY - brilliant work.
@@extremeways2930 There doesn’t have to be any. Show me which legislation makes you breathing a ‘legal activity’. You won’t find any (because it’s not needed)
Cops missed a trick. They could have acted all concerned and asked where you got injured to possibly prevent someone else from getting hurt. Then they could have got a DNA blood sample to try and identify you.
Occupiers Liability Act 1957/ 1984. The owner of the land owes a visitor a reasonable duty of care to be safe and free from hazard whilst on their land, lawfully (1957) or unlawfully (1984). If you cut yourself on a hazard that could reasonably have been foreseen, then you have a claim against them not only in Statute but also in Tort. The land owner (he said it was the Police) will need to demonstrate they have a regular maintenance and inspection protocol in place and provide paperwork. Demand £250 to go away
I think it's fairly debatable whether that path is private property. You'd have thought that they'd have appreciated someone filming to show how busy they were, sure they were on a break for a bit but the number of cars in and out was nuts.
Everywhere in the UK is private property. There is no public property. The pavement, if maintained by the council, is the council's property. The council own it, not the public. The public own elect councillors, but the council is a state organisation. A pavement on land not owned by the council just means it's maintained by the owner, the pavement is still a pavement and designed for people to use. And if no barriers then there is no restriction.
@@TheSadButMadLad Private in terms of having no right of access. Council maintained roads or unmaintained roads still have a right of access. There's a private estate near me, all the roads have gates and barriers and there are signs which tell you about how access is limited. You can still walk along the path to visit someone who lives there. A sigh saying Private Parking Only is not restricting access.
@@corleth2868 As you state, private in not having a right to access means gates etc. Without them, private doesn't mean anything since all land is privately owned. Without them, it's publicly accessible and the only thing stopping people wandering onto it is social conventions (like not wandering onto someone front garden even if there is no wall) or that no one has time to explore or be nosey or is going from A to B without visiting C (but kids do have that and do explore and are nosey).
Hi N N Y, thank you again, another good one, the policeman you were talking with does not seem to be the sort to get caught in an illegal arrest in the first place, he still seems to be more interested in telling you stuff rather than listen and learn, then he tells you that some of the property is private as if that makes any difference to your access. Furthermore the police have no jurisdiction on private property.Public access to property does not require legitimate cause he can ask as must a she likes it does not make any difference how polite he is, what a twat he turned out to be!. An obvious and devoted student of cop-waffle, he learned all the lessons. The last is nearly as bad trying to put you in the wrong for the irrational attitudes of some of the people around the place. Minor cuts like that will quickly stop bleeding as soon as the flesh around the injury reacts and closes off the area, all you really need to do is make sure the wound is clean and then just hold it closed for a few minutes, once the leakage stops cover the cut with a double layer of microporous tape, the top layer of which you can carefully peel off after a day or two, the wound will heal completely under the tape. I make this suggestion based on my own long experience of self-inflicted wounds in the course of my construction work, really bad deep cuts might need more layers of tape and sometimes there is quite a lot of blood around before I can get it taped up, if I can I will staunch the flow with a handful of kitchen towel, I keep these supplies handy all the time I am working. Cheers, Richard.
Last cop says weknow we cannot stop you but your making us uneasy ,so you are doing nothing illegal therefore they feel this gives them the right to harass ,intimidate ,and speak down to you. If only we were blessed with the reasoning powers of our servants!
Yes, all police premises are private with only a qualified right of access to specific areas set aside for public interaction such as the enquiry desk. That qualified right of access can be withdrawn at any time and if you refuse to leave, then common law provides the power to remove using reasonable force.
@@taIlboyandy23 that's is such a moronic reply, show me any where in the law or even legislation that state a public police station is private property, a police station is not a corporation, I know they are trying to push this narritive, but when it get down to the nitty gritty in court the police would lose.
@@newsnownorfolkuk5156 most police stations are actually leased and the newer ones were built under the private funding initiative..ergo they are private property..
@@briancooper4232the police are a public service and not a private corporation, they take public money, so private rental or privately owned buildings are still open to public scrutiny, have you read the Government Transparancy Act 2015, when it get to an era again where police and councils are classes as private/political and cant be held accountable by transparancy but also can not be scrutinised by the public, we are then back in the years of the Third Reich and Gestapo times, not nice language but factual, this is what a democracy represent, the police and federal buildings are trying to do exactly the same nonsense in America. Look at how parts of Austraila, Canada and NZ are at, they are well under the way to becoming a full blown state dictatorship. Trudeau has confirmed he admire China's comminist tactics and want to go down the same line.
@@newsnownorfolkuk5156 nice copy and paste...the majority of police stations are actually privately owned property, therefore they actually belong to the owner leasing the property. If you rent a house you have absolutely 100% privacy rights,,however it remains private property as you don't actually own itI. Simple as that.
He tried so hard to fake being Mr Nice Guy for the camera but the tyrant in him just wouldn't allow that to happen. It was the old 'move back three steps' ego trip.
This is the police garage where they do repairs and servicing. Its on the Kenmore Rd estate which is actually owned by Morrison's. They're technically not public roads and paths but its Morrison's that would need to have a beef ...And they won't care. Further down this road is unit D which is the stores and supply for the police. Uniform and small equipment storage and distribution. On t'other side of the roundabout in Brunei Rd there's a unit that does all the conversions ambulances.
Stephenson Way is a publicly maintained road, so not all the estate is Morrison's. I would think that Morrison's only lease their bit from the owner of the whole estate, if there is one. Looking at the Land Registry boundaries map, the only large estate is the one called Wakefield Industrial Estate further up Kenmore Rd, all the other parts are split into different parcels of land.
@@TheSadButMadLad No, its not. The entire estate is owned and maintained by Morrison's. I think the main road running through the estate Kenmore Road, has been adopted and maybe maintained by the council, but not sure. There are a couple of footpaths, and two byways, (one of which has been illegally blocked) further up on the estate. Kenmore (named after Ken Morrison) Rd, the footpaths and byways are RoWs, but all other roads and footways on the estate are definitely private including Stephenson Way. Or at least they were last time I was there, unless its changed in three weeks.
The bike cop is a muppet, he has to Be right in enforcing the boundary line to about 2feet away from where you were standing, what a come come for a traffic cop, he spends all that time learning traffic law to prosecute motorists breaking the law, but someone calls him out to a man with a drone to get him to move to two feet outside a restricted area , what a waste of a traffic cops time and resources as their were plenty of other cops around the garage area.
Here's your chance to ask a relevant question. That first van. The next time you come across it - it's their biggest van - ask them just how they would get a disabled person in a wheelchair onto it? And where would they put the disabled, CAN'T EFFING ACTUALLY WALK , person? See, despite the huge amounts of money being spent - esp. for cops drones. body armour, side arms and assault weapons - they don't have a single C-Pac ( yet lots of people have breathing issues ) and none of the vans have a hoist and/ or ramp. Cops don't give a damn about people in my situation. And as I'm house bound I need you to confront these swines.
O no, he started so well. Why did he just not keep it cordial instead of bickering over a petty two foot. That drive is a shared drive, not police property. That's why he skidadled, I think he realised he was getting silly.
Am very surprised there isn't enough space to accommodate all these vehicles, especially when we pay as much tax to these government run organisations, unbelievable.🙄🙄Stay safe and enjoy your day, NNY❤️🇬🇧👍
What I find absolutely deplorable, is that they believe every piece of babble that is formed by their mouth. Their need to control is only surpassed by their ignorance. How long will it take before they learn? Thankfully I enjoy their journey of being educated and corrected, keep up the good work guys. If I was 40 years younger I’d be out there with you .
Why do they al believe simply by asking you politely, means there is some legal or moral obligation on you to comply? Start asking (politely) for them to do things and see if the imaginary legal or moral obligation to comply works both ways.
Evil knevil starts looking for anything when he realizes that he got the drone law wrong , this is a bad officer , they need to sack this guy for lying , how can you trust anything he says.
THEY JUST CAN NOT HELP THEMSELVES CAN THEY ABSOLUTELY NO NEED FOR HIM BOTH TIMES. HE’S PROBABLY HAD PROBLEMS WITH HIS MRS MOANING ABOUT A COUPLE OF INCHES THAT’S WHY HE’S SO PEDANTIC OVER IT BROTHER
They all lie. You could see him trying to find an offence, he didn't know you were flying. What a liar. The first thing he said to you (16:23) when he approached you was that you were not allowed to fly over occupied spaces. He wasn't long back-tracking on his initial pretense that he knew what he was talking about when he suspected that you knew more than he did. Thats why it so important to record them, if its not recorded its their word against yours. And obviously they never lie.......
The doctor said to the mother: - Mam your sun is going to be a bit slow learning and lack comprehension skills! - Why, doctor!? - Well it happens sometimes. - But do not worry, he can apply for a job as a policeman, and he will live a very happy life! - Oh, my poor baby!
Highly instructive video, this. For anyone out there who's confused about the motivations of 'good cops'. This one arrives as if he's alright but very quickly turns into the bully that he is. If they're being okay with you, do t let that disarm you. It's very likely just a way to get you to let your guard down. This foolish badged thug was honestly trying to say that he NNY couldn't be on a path that feeds other businesses. What a wanker.
The moral of this tale is never ever trust any police officer. They are not in the job to help only to exorcise their own inadequacies and social insufficienties. Period.
This guy didn't understand a policeman is not a lawyer 😅 he is lucky of having that nice police because they're not so nice in other democratic countries.
Yes, a civil matter dealt with by common law, this one: Halsbury’s Laws of England, Paragraph 1400, Volume 45, IVth Edition. “If a trespasser peaceably enters or is on land, the person who is in or entitled to possession may request him to leave, and if he refuses to leave may remove him from the land using no more force than is reasonably necessary." Once instructed to leave, if you don't, then force can be used.
@@taIlboyandy23 so how does publicly accessible fit into this scenario and implied right of access? Because the pie van was not a police vehicle or was it?
@@davidsmith5523 The landowner or those entitled to possession decide who can be on land they own/control. The auditor was not one of those people. Once the implied right is removed, you are no longer welcome and you can then be physically removed if you refuse to leave.
@@taIlboyandy23 indeed. So theoretically the land owners representative had that power in this case. However surely this opens up the topic of reasonable force?
18:12 When in doubt of the LAW.... Escalate, Escalate, Escalate! Ego adjustment is clearly needed, Cop unable to have a civil conversation with a member of public.
Six of them sitting behind a skip doing fuck all. I know you're entitled to a break but I would wager a lot that all six didn't happen to have their break at the same time.
