A man was held for eight hours by police under anti-terrorism legislation after taking pictures of Christmas celebrations. And former paramedic Bob Patefield used his video camera to capture the moment police stopped him.
He was suspected of both suspicious and anti-social behaviour when using his camera to snap the festive footage in Accrington town centre.
Mr Patefield was questioned on three separate occasions by three police officers before being arrested under the Police Reform Act for not giving them his personal details.
On December 19, after being held for eight hours, he was released without any charges against him. A friend who had been with him all day, gave the police his name, and walked free. Shocked following the ordeal, amateur photographer Mr Patefield said the rights of the individual are being eroded by the day.
He said: "I didn’t go out to get arrested. I just wanted to be able to go about and take photos - my hobby - without interference."
He added: "We wanted to try out a new camera but I felt like we had been basically bullied out of the town centre. When I was arrested I felt pretty low. Our rights are being eroded by the day. We need to educate ourselves as to what our rights are in these situations."
Mr Patefield, who is in his 40s, shot footage leading up to his own arrest.
During the video he says there was a pleasant Christmas atmosphere on Accrington’s streets and that he was taking photos of everyday goings-on and people in fancy dress.
But he was soon approached, firstly by a PCSO who queried why he was taking pictures; then by a police officer who accused Mr Patefield of being sneaky; then by an acting sergeant who eventually arrested Mr Patefield after he refused to give his name and address.
MP for Hyndburn Greg Pope thinks the police acted properly: "At first glance you might think big brother Britain but I think they acted proportionately. It is his own fault because he didn’t explain himself."
Mr Pope added: "I’m not for a second saying he is a danger but I’m glad the police were on the ball. He is innocent because he has been released but I don’t think the police acted unreasonably."
Lancashire Constabulary maintain officers were within their rights to quiz Mr Patefield and encouraged him to complain if he wished.
A spokesperson said: "The constabulary does not routinely stop people taking photographs in a public place but clearly felt that the manner in which he was positioning his camera and the way it was making some members of the public feel could be construed as anti-social or indecent."
Council leader Peter Britcliffe said: "There’s a great fear of a terrorist strike at the moment, especially with the impending general election. It is difficult for me to comment as I haven’t seen the video of this incident. We live in uncertain times but the one thing we don’t want is to turn into a police state."
A comment left on a popular photography website said: "Credit must go to Bob Patefield for standing his ground. He was merely going about his lawful business of street photography, a genre made famous by Cartier Bresson. It is neither unlawful nor suspicious nor antisocial."
Tweet
Showing comments 1 to 10 and replies | View All
DJ_Jaybee (26/02/2010 at 13:29)
Too Right...
Mike Brailsford, Blackpool (26/02/2010 at 16:58)
Top o'th' Brow (28/02/2010 at 17:11)
So thank you Mr Pope and New Labour for this Orwellian Nightmare, "Things can only get Better"
Mrs Miggins (03/03/2010 at 22:35)
DJ_Jaybee (04/03/2010 at 18:11)
As professional and amateur photographers, we are deeply concerned about the treatment of those taking pictures in public places. Photographers using equipment larger than a compact camera are frequently stopped and searched under anti-terrorist legislation, which they find humiliating.
"We do not believe it likely that real terrorists would bother to set up a tripod or use a heavy SLR camera, as perfectly satisfactory pictures for their purposes could be taken on a discrete camera phone. If our photography has an effect on law and order, it is beneficial, as wrongdoers are unlikely to commit crimes in close proximity to someone visibly holding a camera.
"Meanwhile, some in the police, especially PCSOs, believe it is illegal to take any pictures of a police officer. This is because of ambiguous legislation, introduced earlier this year, which made it an imprisonable offence to collect "information of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism". Given the existence of Google street view, we do not believe the legislation should be used against ordinary photographers.
"In March, at a meeting with representatives of the Royal Photographic Society, the British Institute of Professional Photography and Amateur Photographer, the Home Office agreed to issue guidelines to police forces spelling out that the law must not be misused against those engaged in legitimate photographic activity. This does not appear to have had the desired effect.
"Rather than treat photographers as terrorists, the Government should amend the Anti-Terrorism Act to prevent its misuse and explain to forces that a hostile attitude towards photographers is unwelcome."
njspl, accy (04/03/2010 at 20:56)
the police seem to cause more trouble than help. does anyone feel that they could ask a bobby for help? no them days are gone.
njspl, accy (10/03/2010 at 19:23)
Why does someone deserve to be arrested for taking photos. the police are saying they are down on staff. Probably due to silly arrests like this. its a joke!
lancs lad (25/03/2010 at 13:16)
Almighty God, Salford - vote Green (25/03/2010 at 14:31)
Almighty God, Salford - vote Green (25/03/2010 at 14:33)
since when did we have to explain our actions just for being? this is bang out of order