Exactly, i call the police because my shop is being robbed and it takes a week for the police to come round but a man with a camera films something and two police vans arrive with blues and twos going, are the police really understaffed or do they choose the easy jobs
@@waynesaunders4599 Tesco and the like can call the police for someone filming or failing to wear a mask and the police are there in minutes. Auditors really need to make a point about this when the police turn up.
She has no power to detain to 'check things'. It technically amounts to false imprisonment. She has power to detain for stop and search (if she has RS), that's about it. Her real power to detain is her power of arrest, for which she needs reasonable suspicion (and necessity, of which there are 9 possible 'necessity' tests). She cannot detain to find out if she has grounds to suspect you of a crime (she was auggesting a byelaw, which to be honest sounds like absolute nonsense). This is basic stuff.
It's truly insane how they reason. "Why can't you understand that we want to stop you from doing something you're allowed to because someone who's sitting behind fences is paranoid?"
13:28 The response of the big dunce when the auditor said: "That's not illegal, is it?" "Depends what you're intentions are." Sounds like he wants to be a KGB interrogator.
@@ccrider3435 I have / could never understand that argument. What case was that? That someone was prosecuted and convicted of "casing the joint" or hostile reconnaissance? Has ever been such a case? That besides the crime itself, someone is convicted of preparing it?
An experiment was conducted on police women. The conclusion they came to was that female police become more aggressive when there is no perception of threat.
@@01matthewc The fact she believed a bylaw would apply to someone outside the site in which the bylaw applies, demonstrates that she doesn't actually understand the legal model behind bylaws.
some places do. Leeds-Bradford Airport has a no filming clause in their bylaws. it covers the whole site including the access roads! Many libraries have similar laws for inside.
@@neilcampbell2222 Interesting to know. Though, the bylaws only restrict filming on their site; which means, if you're in a public place the bylaw has no jurisdiction.
Funny how standing up for your rights is classed as obstructive Have you ever tried getting info off the police , then that’s the true definition of obstructive
@@liamloxley1222 Of course there needs to be a sign! Are we all meant to be mind readers? He left the site as soon as he was told to and there was absolutely no need for Lady Muck to speak to a member of the public like they're crap!
@@liamloxley1222 Want to link that law. to think all those companies being filmed undercover on panorama could have just refused permission for that undercover filming - good job weve got Lawyer Liam Loxley to solve 70 years of undercover reporting
8:40 There's is literally no legislation that permits the detention of another in order to establish whether a law exists to de facto detain that person.
7:30 And this is where the police's case falls apart. They know you are you filming for TH-cam and accept it. This will make it worse for the police and you will win a claim for unlawful detainment.
Indeed. They hate people who know and invoke their rights. They want a state where they can demand 'where are your papers!' A lot of them enjoyed lockdown for this reason.
Why the hell did they respond with lights and sirens and treat it as an emergency? Absolutely ridiculous. The police always complain that they're understaffed but they send 3 officers for this... if the site's protocols get them to call the police if they see a man with a camera then maybe the police should educate the site and get them to change their policies.
It's about time these muppets who call themselves police officers realise they are paid to serve all the public "without fear or favour". They were very concerned about that company's "concerns" - but showed no concerns about an auditor's rights to go about his own life in a lawful manner without getting his rights infringed! These cops should concern themselves more with educating the idiots who phoned them that they should not waste police time by calling them out when NO laws are being broken and NO crimes have been committed. These people who phoned the cops should be charged with the crime of wasting police time and thereby also wasting public money.
14:24 When asked how you got here, the proper answer is "by parachute" as it highlights the stupidity of their question and makes it obvious that you know why they are asking and that you won't play their games.
I had my house broken into and got a visit 2 days after by forensics looking for evidence. I laughed and said you are joking any evidence is now contaminated by me doing normal things. Two weeks later an old boy came around and I told him to do one then he went knocking on my neighbours doors. Embarrassing really.
"we're busy" Says the Grunt and her fellow Grunts stood around doing absolutely nothing. Their authority begins ONLY when a crime has been committed. They are nothing unless and until. A hard days work would cripple them.
When she said ' you are detained', you should of asked her under which power she is using to detain you, and what crime do you suspect I have broken for the detainment. They can't just say you are detained, while she squirrels about looking for something to incriminate you on.
Good audit mate ! Subbed. 👍 isn't it so strange how 2 vans turn up for a man with a camera, yet for serious crimes like burglary, they take days to arrive. That woman copper was one horrid specimen. You were free to leave, you were also free to stay.
Probably the most attention he’s got in a long long time. Sad this is the only way these sad pathetic attention seeking losers can get human interaction.
@@brianbickle7395 Yet here YOU are watching and commenting on his videos, helping him get more engagement on his channel. Maybe he's on the autism spectrum and doesn't enjoy being in crowds
13:00 I'm surprised they didn't say "you were so cooperative and polite, only a terrorist would act that way" or "you answered every question and were so calm and nice, you must be hiding something!" - what clowns
Sounds like the time they followed me in my car and pulled me for sticking to the speed limits. Nobody drives dead on the speed limit, it’s suspicious. 🤦♂️
I was thinking how unusually reasonable and chilled the first cop was ; he obviously knew about auditing videos and just wanted to de-escalate the situation. Then she arrives, with a face like a bulldog licking piss off a nettle, determined to escalate the situation. Two vans and three cops sent out to harass a person with a camera on a busy road in broad daylight. Fuck me, not much going on in Barry then. Oh sorry, I forgot: "we're very busy" (by which I assume she means they have other places to go and stand around with their hands in their pockets).
I thought the wearing of sunglasses when engaging with the public was against their codes of practice. Under what legislation were you detained under. They blocked the pavement with their vehicles. They always want you to understand their point of view. Asking you to leave the area was an infringement of your human rights.
When they ask "Do you understand", that is a legal term meaning that you 'stand under' their authority. Never say yes, or say you understand as it implies you agree to their authority over you and it can be held against you if charged.
@@mavicmeister29 never read such rubbish in my life the term "do you understand" means exactly what you think it means. It means have you understood what has been said to you. When you're arrested you are also asked if you understand, if you say no the officer will explain the caution to you again but broken down to make it easier to understand.
@@mavicmeister29 The usual Copsplain is “You MUST understand” Well no we do not have to do anything but follow the law , not policies , and not feelings , just laws.
People turn to stone when she looks at them without the sunglasses. It's awfully bad for the Police reputation when she keeps turning members of the public into stone. She's been on a mad one since Perseus killed her gran.
These people are employed to enforce the law. If no law has been broken their services are not required. End of. It is plain and simple. So why all of the rest of the rubbish coming from their mouths? Beats me. They wanted you to clear off. Keep up the good work. Wales seems to be a good hunting ground.
It's nice to see a member of public awake and notices what's going on. And comes and speaks to you. He's absolutely right if you need police assistance for robbery just phone them and say is a man outside with a camera
If anyone has a question about where a property starts or ends, look at the sidewalks and driveways. where the seam on the walks and drives are is where the property line is. outside is utility right of way and inside is private property.
I love the way she says "compromise" , but means think the way we do and everything will be ok, just do what your told!!!!!!! Mmmmmmm thats not " compromise"
By detaining you they have removed your freedom and you are in custody. You need to document the time of detainment and for how long for a future claim against them for unlawfull detainment. Whether they feel that detainment is neccessary, is still unlawful as no crime has been committed and no crime could be reasonably suspected. Be careful what you say as they are constantly fishing as you've said (even the nice ones), but you still answered way too many leading questions that were designed to absolve them of any claim.
at my wedding i saw several people with cameras, im sure some were taking photos so i became very suspicious. in hindsight do you think i should have called the police?
The woman copper appears to be aggressive in her tone compared to most of the male cops ... the bearded one being the exception and a cop who definitely needs some extra training. Maybe she has something to prove just as some short cops do for example? She is also, obviously unaware that the cameraman can lawfully film anything he likes from a publicly accessible area. The cameraman was at no stage obstructive and not giving details, as she says, is not to be seen as obstructive! She asks him to leave the area .. I would have returned to film the site from a public street and would not have left! She is clueless regarding the rights of the public! I wasn't aware that the UK police acted as security guards for corporations when no criminality, threats or danger are involved.
That female officer is a straight up tyrant. She started off saying that there were restrictions in place that prevented filming. Her sergeant put her straight but she said nothing about it after the call.
Absolutely ridiculous, 3 officers for a man with a camera. Bonus sirens too 🤣 If you ever want the police to come quick just tell them someone is filming and threatening you with a camera
12:40 You weren't being obstructive. You were following the law and using your rights. If she thinks that asserting your rights is obstructive then she needs some re-training about using that as suspicion. Just because many sheeple might willing divulge everything about what they are doing doesn't mean that she can use the fact that you don't against you.
4:10 So he "trained" in counter-terrorism. And he proves how crap it is. I wonder if he'll go and think about how stupid he's been shown to be with all that top notch training going to waste.
Here’s an interesting few facts. They accused YOU of being ‘obstructive’, when in fact it was THEY who were falsely accusing YOU of committing an offence, whilst THEY were unlawfully detaining you as they attempted to obtain your details without good cause, as THEY were illegally obstructing the pavement with two vehicles, and you were in fact only doing a lawful activity! And the way they all kept asking the same questions was typical. I think the best policy in such cases might be to tell the second, third and forth ones that you’ve already told piggy number one, so if they’re curious that can ask him. As an excellent training film for how not to treat the public, this was a master class. Thank you for sharing Peace
Many years ago I was involved in the making of a TV drama where the plot was about an embassy siege in London. In preparation we were able to talk to a retired SAS officer to get advice. I asked him what was the first thing the SAS would do if they were given orders to storm the embassy and if necessary kill the terrorist. He said that “the first thing we would do is to get all the uniformed police away from the embassy” I asked him why. He replied “ because they’re all either fucking morons or just plain idiots” Looking at this video, I think I can see what he meant. 🙄
you answered every question, been completely open, explained yourself and that amounts to "quite obstructive" - the police are acting SUPER SUSPICIOUSLY - they need re-training
"I'm detaining you until I find out what the byelaws are" = unlawful detainment. If you felt like risking some time in a cage, with the upside of possible increased compensation, this might be a good time to walk away.
She unlawfully detained you and you said no problem Thank-you WTF I will just chat away like my rights are not being abused and answer all their useless questions that make them feel powerful. Learn your rights
Cops, seemingly anywhere, apparently don't have the mental acuity to process someone not committing an infraction MAY be less than reluctant to have their details floating around in a police data base...this woman was a classic example.
Especially when they have illegal parked their vehicles blocking the pavement making it difficult for pedestrians to walk along it. They should be talking to the person that called them before making any contact with yourself. This WPC was playing around with her body cam, I was wondering if she turned it on. If she did she failed to inform you of that
i like the officer saying that they have sensitive stuff on site and dont want it filmed and then pointing out the see through fence that is doing nothing to create any privacy
2:18 Asking you to delete your photos/video is totally wrong. It's like asking someone to break an ornament on their mantelpiece. It's your property and you own it. Dow have no authority to ask you to do anything with it.
One thing that might be worth mentioning to security when you think they'll escalate it to calling the police is letting them know that any actions they do will lead to a civil claim against their employer and they will likely called as a defendant. They will probably ignore it, but it helps your case.
@@budgetnuclearweapons7858 Yes you can. The claim against the police is separate from the claim against the company. That the company failed to adequately train their staff is their problem and that's where the claim will head. It's different to where someone calls the police because they think something wrong has occurred but don't have all the info or knowledge. But one of the Dow guys said he'd been trained in counter-terrorism so should've understood the difference between proper hostile recon and vlogging.
@@RightfulRecordings It's always useful to use your own narration as evidence of your thoughts. So saying "this looks like it's open to the public" will give you evidence to back up your side and show the other side is at fault. The point in informing them about a potential civil claim is that it means you are now recording evidence, so any attempt to stop you is paramount to perjury since they will be interfering with it.
It is a phenomenon with sows that they are guaranteed to ignorantly believe that a person must identify themselves upon request to an officer no matter what! Doesn't matter the country or type of law enforcement if accosted by a female one it is guaranteed to ignorantly believe that you must identify yourself upon request to an officer no matter what! They are guaranteed to be oblivious of all rights but especially your right to privacy and this is why they are the absolute best category to bait for lawsuits!!! Congratulations on this, I am very happy for you and please keep us posted on the process and outcome of this lawsuit whether it is settlement or award!!!
As soon as they can't give you what they are detaining you for walk away. If they then attempt to physically detain you add assault to your claim. They have to give the grounds for the detainment.
If she wants to make up laws like "I have just told you", she wants to quit being a copper and become a legislator. Next time tell them to put signs up or jog on.
Do you understand that we can make up perfectly illogical, really weird, not applicable and irrelevant reasons for detaining you on public property, for doing nothing against the law, while we insist on stripping you of your rights? And then the compromise is that you do what we want, you know, since you're not breaking the law but we don't really care about your rights.
So they drive other than on a road, obstruct the pavement, drive through red traffic signal when not on an emergency but detain you without a crime. Who was in the wrong?
Fella, I think you failed here, you answered far to many questions for someone carrying out a lawful activity, the police were phishing and trying to get you to incriminate yourself, silence is golden…
Letting the cops feel like they ran you off only encourages them to keep it up. Likewise, the security people feel like they had you chased off by their police force. "Wait here while I determine whether there is any basis for detention . . . "
Don’t forget … “ I can’t film the building…really?… which section of which Act is that?” The Golden Question. I’m being detained - “which section of which act gives you that power”? Two vans on blues and twos for a legal activity in public. But no one available for assaults or burglaries… PS. Do these bylaws apply to dash cams too? Should we switch them off when driving by? Turns out there is no bylaw. Lies. You weren’t obstructive. More lies. They asked you to leave a public area. Which section of which act is that. “Photography could be a crime - depends on your intentions”. Legally just crap. Utter nonsense. This is the Police today.
This is what you get for doing a lawful activity they had no right to detain you they don't know the law they tried everything in the book to pin something on you as the guy said you wouldn't see one of them in an emergency I hope they read this so they know what the public think of them great job well done to you.
“In this day and age “ you would think the police know the law or is that asking too much notice they break the law by parking fully on the pavement making it unusable for pedestrians
The police were perfectly amicable....except for that WPC 6362. Her whole attitude screamed contempt of the public and looking for a reason to stitch him up.
If your not going to tell her to piss off after she illegally detained you then dont bother auditing!! she is an ignorant bully, and you need to complain about her for abusing your rights!!!
When police say "Surely you must understand our concerns etc" it's to mitigate their actions in case of any civil claim - Their defense would be along the lines "The complainant said they understood, therefore knew their actions were antagonistic" etc - so never say you understand why they do or say anything.
When she said do you understand? I would have said, I understand the prejudice, I don't understand why a law abiding citizen should be harassed for doing nothing wrong. About time the government put a stop to this kind of prejudice against innocent people.
I'm astonished they felt that they needed the 'blues and twos' to cover 100 feet to a report of a 'suspicious man with a camera'!! And will someone please buy the WPC a hairbrush!!
They can't detain you while they 'check' if you committed an offence. When they detain you they must be able to articulate an offence they suspect that you have committed or about to commit
A corporation calls cops for nothing and they show up in droves. A citizen calls cops for an actual crime and the cops are too busy to attend.
Cops will abuse those they perceive as weak. They are not as quick to abuse network journalists because they have barristers on staff.
They have been busy you know , fucking tools the lot of them
what shite you’ve typed
Exactly, i call the police because my shop is being robbed and it takes a week for the police to come round but a man with a camera films something and two police vans arrive with blues and twos going, are the police really understaffed or do they choose the easy jobs
@@waynesaunders4599 Tesco and the like can call the police for someone filming or failing to wear a mask and the police are there in minutes.
Auditors really need to make a point about this when the police turn up.
You can always count on escalation once a female officer arrives.
That goes for the U.S too... lol
Sadly that's seems to be true. Overcompensation.
Sad but true
@Don't Shoot 😴😴😴
All of them hogs were fishing
She has no power to detain to 'check things'. It technically amounts to false imprisonment. She has power to detain for stop and search (if she has RS), that's about it.
Her real power to detain is her power of arrest, for which she needs reasonable suspicion (and necessity, of which there are 9 possible 'necessity' tests). She cannot detain to find out if she has grounds to suspect you of a crime (she was auggesting a byelaw, which to be honest sounds like absolute nonsense).
This is basic stuff.
If you do a simple Google search there are only 3 occasions in which English ( not sure about Scotland) can legally detain someone.
And if you are not detained "free to go" you are also "free to stay" no laws broken no crime commited, no arrests made.
You English are too nice. A nice right to the jaw or a chop to the throat will go a long ways of stopping that crap
@@billkaldem5099 He’s Welsh. The Normans conquered England in two weeks. It took them 200 years to conquer Wales!
Peace
Wow...you seem to know so much about laws in the UK...any other country? After all, ''this is basic atuff''...where's atuff...sounds Asian?
She can't say "I have just told you". Signs are needed, she can't just make up laws on the spot.
Funny really, that you're regarded as being obstructive when it's everyone else who is stopping you from doing a lawful activity.
It's truly insane how they reason. "Why can't you understand that we want to stop you from doing something you're allowed to because someone who's sitting behind fences is paranoid?"
Once they learn “obstruction” they use it as a catch-all for any situation. Exercising your rights always upsets them.
13:28
The response of the big dunce when the auditor said: "That's not illegal, is it?"
"Depends what you're intentions are."
Sounds like he wants to be a KGB interrogator.
@@ccrider3435 I have / could never understand that argument. What case was that? That someone was prosecuted and convicted of "casing the joint" or hostile reconnaissance? Has ever been such a case? That besides the crime itself, someone is convicted of preparing it?
Respect Focus Pocus 👍👊
It's strange that 2 members of public know that its legal but 3 police don't
Yeah strange eh.....isn't life odd ?
The woman cop was dying to make something big outa this, sad really.
W0men should never be given positions of authority
An experiment was conducted on police women. The conclusion they came to was that female police become more aggressive when there is no perception of threat.
@@thefoxhat6163 That sounds about right.
She was gutted after her Sargent told her 👍
Yes she looks like she’s dying
She is 100% talking crap, bylaws stopping you filming. Even military sites don't have that protection
8:02 just to be awkward, if I was with the cameraman I would have asked the policewoman to explain the "bylaws" to me and then watch her squirm. Lol.
@@01matthewc The fact she believed a bylaw would apply to someone outside the site in which the bylaw applies, demonstrates that she doesn't actually understand the legal model behind bylaws.
some places do. Leeds-Bradford Airport has a no filming clause in their bylaws. it covers the whole site including the access roads!
Many libraries have similar laws for inside.
@@neilcampbell2222 Interesting to know. Though, the bylaws only restrict filming on their site; which means, if you're in a public place the bylaw has no jurisdiction.
Neil Campbell :I take it dash cams are banned from the site as well along with iPhones ?
Surely she has to have a reason to detain you.
Terrible standards, hands in pockets and sunglasses on.
That guy at the end was spot on.
It's apparent that DOW Chemical is paying a premium to have the police in their pocket responding quicker than for ordinary citizens
She was detaining you whilst waiting for deliveroo to bring her McDonald’s Big Mac
She detained you with NO reasonable grounds to suspect you’d committed a crime.
HNK Solicitors!!
Funny how standing up for your rights is classed as obstructive
Have you ever tried getting info off the police , then that’s the true definition of obstructive
"There aren't any signs up saying no photography,".........."Well I'm telling you." The arrogance and hatred for the public, right there!
@@liamloxley1222 Of course there needs to be a sign! Are we all meant to be mind readers? He left the site as soon as he was told to and there was absolutely no need for Lady Muck to speak to a member of the public like they're crap!
@@liamloxley1222 Want to link that law. to think all those companies being filmed undercover on panorama could have just refused permission for that undercover filming - good job weve got Lawyer Liam Loxley to solve 70 years of undercover reporting
8:40 There's is literally no legislation that permits the detention of another in order to establish whether a law exists to de facto detain that person.
When they say "why are you being awkward?" That's the moment you know they are pissed off because they're not getting their way.
7:30 And this is where the police's case falls apart. They know you are you filming for TH-cam and accept it. This will make it worse for the police and you will win a claim for unlawful detainment.
I love it when they try to say using your right to not tell then your details is suspicious or being obstructive.
I like the way you are "being obstructive" just because you won't submit to giving up your information.
Indeed. They hate people who know and invoke their rights. They want a state where they can demand 'where are your papers!'
A lot of them enjoyed lockdown for this reason.
@@PlattLaneEnd Just like Hitler’s gestapo .
It's just a standard mind trick to put you on the defensive and make out that's it's you, and not the police, who have the problem.
Why the hell did they respond with lights and sirens and treat it as an emergency? Absolutely ridiculous.
The police always complain that they're understaffed but they send 3 officers for this... if the site's protocols get them to call the police if they see a man with a camera then maybe the police should educate the site and get them to change their policies.
And they said the security guard called 999! Imagine what they’d say if you called 999 for someone filming outside your house.
"we are too busy to follow you around" but not too busy to respond to a non emergency 999 call for a man with a camera.
Cop:What's with the camo?
Good citizen:Just my every day gear.
Cop:You go fishing?
Good citizens:No as much as you.
It's about time these muppets who call themselves police officers realise they are paid to serve all the public "without fear or favour".
They were very concerned about that company's "concerns" - but showed no concerns about an auditor's rights to go about his own life in a lawful manner without getting his rights infringed!
These cops should concern themselves more with educating the idiots who phoned them that they should not waste police time by calling them out when NO laws are being broken and NO crimes have been committed.
These people who phoned the cops should be charged with the crime of wasting police time and thereby also wasting public money.
And there's the problem; upholding your rights as the law states is described as being obstructive
It's amazing how they turn up on a phone call but if your house was being burgled, there'd be no sign of them!
Police working for corporations and dealing with a civil matters if any, such as trespassing. They really need to get educated.
You should have got her to accept that she lied to you about your right to photograph that site.
Very nicely done bro.
14:24 When asked how you got here, the proper answer is "by parachute" as it highlights the stupidity of their question and makes it obvious that you know why they are asking and that you won't play their games.
Or you can say "my mother's womb "
@@marcellachine5718 That's a good one.
That guy at the end was spot on if only cops attitudes were like his
So Buckingham palace has lots of high value items and artefacts so best stop all the tourists from filming outside.
So long as we can hang the nonces that live in it.
how dare you use common sense ...whatever next!
I had my house broken into and got a visit 2 days after by forensics looking for evidence.
I laughed and said you are joking any evidence is now contaminated by me doing normal things. Two weeks later an old boy came around and I told him to do one then he went knocking on my neighbours doors. Embarrassing really.
"we're busy"
Says the Grunt and her fellow Grunts stood around doing absolutely nothing.
Their authority begins ONLY when a crime has been committed.
They are nothing unless and until.
A hard days work would cripple them.
She was trying to bully hin into not doing something that is perfectly legal. Doing so should be made illegal. It is the foundation of a police state.
When she said ' you are detained', you should of asked her under which power she is using to detain you, and what crime do you suspect I have broken for the detainment. They can't just say you are detained, while she squirrels about looking for something to incriminate you on.
They can, she did.
@@geoffwhite6383 no they can’t she abused her authority
They can, they did and they continue to do so obviously they shouldn’t have and never should but they do
Good audit mate ! Subbed. 👍 isn't it so strange how 2 vans turn up for a man with a camera, yet for serious crimes like burglary, they take days to arrive. That woman copper was one horrid specimen. You were free to leave, you were also free to stay.
Appreciate the sub 👍❤️
You are engaging with at least three cops at one time, DO NOT DO THAT. Deal with one cop and ONLY ONE cop at a time.
Probably the most attention he’s got in a long long time. Sad this is the only way these sad pathetic attention seeking losers can get human interaction.
@@brianbickle7395 that's exactly why they join the blue line gang so they can force people to interact with them, sad really but that's pig's for ya
@@brianbickle7395 Bootlicker..🤣🤣🤣
@@brianbickle7395 I agree, it's very sad these cops had to stop this guy just to get the attention they crave.
@@brianbickle7395 Yet here YOU are watching and commenting on his videos, helping him get more engagement on his channel. Maybe he's on the autism spectrum and doesn't enjoy being in crowds
13:00 I'm surprised they didn't say "you were so cooperative and polite, only a terrorist would act that way" or "you answered every question and were so calm and nice, you must be hiding something!" - what clowns
Sounds like the time they followed me in my car and pulled me for sticking to the speed limits. Nobody drives dead on the speed limit, it’s suspicious. 🤦♂️
I was thinking how unusually reasonable and chilled the first cop was ; he obviously knew about auditing videos and just wanted to de-escalate the situation. Then she arrives, with a face like a bulldog licking piss off a nettle, determined to escalate the situation. Two vans and three cops sent out to harass a person with a camera on a busy road in broad daylight. Fuck me, not much going on in Barry then. Oh sorry, I forgot: "we're very busy" (by which I assume she means they have other places to go and stand around with their hands in their pockets).
Why would an officer of the law ask a member of the public to compromise the rights that millions of people died to win for him?
8:35 Unlawful detainment doesn't require physical force to be used. Verbal instructions and even just an opinion that you are detained is enough.
All the use physical force does is increase the amount of compensation.
I thought the wearing of sunglasses when engaging with the public was against their codes of practice. Under what legislation were you detained under. They blocked the pavement with their vehicles. They always want you to understand their point of view. Asking you to leave the area was an infringement of your human rights.
When they ask "Do you understand", that is a legal term meaning that you 'stand under' their authority. Never say yes, or say you understand as it implies you agree to their authority over you and it can be held against you if charged.
@@mavicmeister29 never read such rubbish in my life the term "do you understand" means exactly what you think it means. It means have you understood what has been said to you. When you're arrested you are also asked if you understand, if you say no the officer will explain the caution to you again but broken down to make it easier to understand.
@@mavicmeister29 The usual Copsplain is “You MUST understand”
Well no we do not have to do anything but follow the law , not policies , and not feelings , just laws.
People turn to stone when she looks at them without the sunglasses. It's awfully bad for the Police reputation when she keeps turning members of the public into stone. She's been on a mad one since Perseus killed her gran.
@@sharoko1784 it is correct, it's asking if you are prepared for the officer to grant authority over you.
Should always ask what grounds they are detaining you under straight away.
These people are employed to enforce the law. If no law has been broken their services are not required. End of. It is plain and simple. So why all of the rest of the rubbish coming from their mouths? Beats me. They wanted you to clear off. Keep up the good work. Wales seems to be a good hunting ground.
Filming is generally a civil matter. They leap at the opportunity to criminalize it through either manipulation or ignorance of the relevant laws.
It's nice to see a member of public awake and notices what's going on. And comes and speaks to you. He's absolutely right if you need police assistance for robbery just phone them and say is a man outside with a camera
If anyone has a question about where a property starts or ends, look at the sidewalks and driveways. where the seam on the walks and drives are is where the property line is. outside is utility right of way and inside is private property.
I love the way she says "compromise" , but means think the way we do and everything will be ok, just do what your told!!!!!!! Mmmmmmm thats not " compromise"
By detaining you they have removed your freedom and you are in custody. You need to document the time of detainment and for how long for a future claim against them for unlawfull detainment. Whether they feel that detainment is neccessary, is still unlawful as no crime has been committed and no crime could be reasonably suspected.
Be careful what you say as they are constantly fishing as you've said (even the nice ones), but you still answered way too many leading questions that were designed to absolve them of any claim.
That's fucking ridiculous. Blue lights, driving on the wrong side of the road, on the pavement and really stupid police / waste of taxpayers money.
at my wedding i saw several people with cameras, im sure some were taking photos so i became very suspicious. in hindsight do you think i should have called the police?
Frankly I’m amazed that you didn’t.
The woman copper appears to be aggressive in her tone compared to most of the male cops ... the bearded one being the exception and a cop who definitely needs some extra training.
Maybe she has something to prove just as some short cops do for example? She is also, obviously unaware that the cameraman can lawfully film anything he likes from a publicly accessible area. The cameraman was at no stage obstructive and not giving details, as she says, is not to be seen as obstructive! She asks him to leave the area .. I would have returned to film the site from a public street and would not have left! She is clueless regarding the rights of the public!
I wasn't aware that the UK police acted as security guards for corporations when no criminality, threats or danger are involved.
Should have asked what section of the law you were being detained under, for a potential claim
Aaaaaah its not being obstructive to exercise your rights!!!! Very nicely handled chap...subscribed
Appreciate the sub 👍❤️
won't comply.....instantly being awkward. that's the mindset right there.
That female officer is a straight up tyrant. She started off saying that there were restrictions in place that prevented filming. Her sergeant put her straight but she said nothing about it after the call.
Absolutely ridiculous, 3 officers for a man with a camera. Bonus sirens too 🤣
If you ever want the police to come quick just tell them someone is filming and threatening you with a camera
The fella at the end summed it just right ... we would end up like Russia if they had their way. Respect to you, keep it up!!
12:40 You weren't being obstructive. You were following the law and using your rights. If she thinks that asserting your rights is obstructive then she needs some re-training about using that as suspicion. Just because many sheeple might willing divulge everything about what they are doing doesn't mean that she can use the fact that you don't against you.
Speaking as a wheelchair user I would have pointed out that the cops were being obstructive by parking on the pavement.
That constable was impersonating one of the blues brothers.
‘The police are the enemy of the people’
4:10 So he "trained" in counter-terrorism. And he proves how crap it is. I wonder if he'll go and think about how stupid he's been shown to be with all that top notch training going to waste.
Here’s an interesting few facts. They accused YOU of being ‘obstructive’, when in fact it was THEY who were falsely accusing YOU of committing an offence, whilst THEY were unlawfully detaining you as they attempted to obtain your details without good cause, as THEY were illegally obstructing the pavement with two vehicles, and you were in fact only doing a lawful activity!
And the way they all kept asking the same questions was typical. I think the best policy in such cases might be to tell the second, third and forth ones that you’ve already told piggy number one, so if they’re curious that can ask him.
As an excellent training film for how not to treat the public, this was a master class.
Thank you for sharing
Peace
I wish we all got the same police response to all our requests!!! Keep up the great work and stay safe. @
That police woman looked anorexic. PS never walk away from police committing a crime.
Many years ago I was involved in the making of a TV drama where the plot was about an embassy siege in London. In preparation we were able to talk to a retired SAS officer to get advice. I asked him what was the first thing the SAS would do if they were given orders to storm the embassy and if necessary kill the terrorist. He said that “the first thing we would do is to get all the uniformed police away from the embassy” I asked him why. He replied “ because they’re all either fucking morons or just plain idiots” Looking at this video, I think I can see what he meant. 🙄
🤣👍
I my have watched that, as I remember somebody saying that.
you answered every question, been completely open, explained yourself and that amounts to "quite obstructive" - the police are acting SUPER SUSPICIOUSLY - they need re-training
"I'm detaining you until I find out what the byelaws are" = unlawful detainment. If you felt like risking some time in a cage, with the upside of possible increased compensation, this might be a good time to walk away.
Every morning after she's looked in the mirror she feels the need for vengeance on someone, anyone.
She unlawfully detained you and you said no problem Thank-you WTF
I will just chat away like my rights are not being abused and answer all their useless questions that make them feel powerful.
Learn your rights
Got to say I also enjoyed this video. Big up Ash, as I found your channel because of that brother 👍🏽👍🏽
Cops, seemingly anywhere, apparently don't have the mental acuity to process someone not committing an infraction MAY be less than reluctant to have their details floating around in a police data base...this woman was a classic example.
4:44 "why are you being awkward" meaning "normally I'm able to bully anyone into compliance, why are you resisting my demands?"
Great content, always better to let them speak whilst you just point out the actual laws they are supposed to be enforcing.
Especially when they have illegal parked their vehicles blocking the pavement making it difficult for pedestrians to walk along it. They should be talking to the person that called them before making any contact with yourself. This WPC was playing around with her body cam, I was wondering if she turned it on. If she did she failed to inform you of that
i like the officer saying that they have sensitive stuff on site and dont want it filmed and then pointing out the see through fence that is doing nothing to create any privacy
2:18 Asking you to delete your photos/video is totally wrong. It's like asking someone to break an ornament on their mantelpiece. It's your property and you own it. Dow have no authority to ask you to do anything with it.
But its theft, their photons have been stolen.
You should always ask what section are you detained under
One thing that might be worth mentioning to security when you think they'll escalate it to calling the police is letting them know that any actions they do will lead to a civil claim against their employer and they will likely called as a defendant. They will probably ignore it, but it helps your case.
If the police ARE called and act illegally, you can't then hold the person or company that called the police responsible.
@@budgetnuclearweapons7858 Yes you can. The claim against the police is separate from the claim against the company. That the company failed to adequately train their staff is their problem and that's where the claim will head. It's different to where someone calls the police because they think something wrong has occurred but don't have all the info or knowledge. But one of the Dow guys said he'd been trained in counter-terrorism so should've understood the difference between proper hostile recon and vlogging.
Will keep this in mind 👍
@@RightfulRecordings It's always useful to use your own narration as evidence of your thoughts. So saying "this looks like it's open to the public" will give you evidence to back up your side and show the other side is at fault.
The point in informing them about a potential civil claim is that it means you are now recording evidence, so any attempt to stop you is paramount to perjury since they will be interfering with it.
@@TheSadButMadLad That's terrible advice, both from a legal and commonsense, point of view.
It is a phenomenon with sows that they are guaranteed to ignorantly believe that a person must identify themselves upon request to an officer no matter what! Doesn't matter the country or type of law enforcement if accosted by a female one it is guaranteed to ignorantly believe that you must identify yourself upon request to an officer no matter what! They are guaranteed to be oblivious of all rights but especially your right to privacy and this is why they are the absolute best category to bait for lawsuits!!! Congratulations on this, I am very happy for you and please keep us posted on the process and outcome of this lawsuit whether it is settlement or award!!!
As soon as they can't give you what they are detaining you for walk away. If they then attempt to physically detain you add assault to your claim. They have to give the grounds for the detainment.
She really thinks she’s in charge of the public ! Wrong ! She works for the public.
Free to leave, then free to stay.
Unbelievable waste of time by Muppets. And an Elvis impersonator. All for a lawful activity. Will they ever learn? Cheers.
If she wants to make up laws like "I have just told you", she wants to quit being a copper and become a legislator. Next time tell them to put signs up or jog on.
I love the British "why are you being awkward?" LOL. That question is just too polite.
It's a very loaded question under the guise of civility. It's like asking someone when they stopped beating their partner.
Corporate police ; how lovely they have their own publicly funded security firm.
2:22 the delete button is broken
Do you understand that we can make up perfectly illogical, really weird, not applicable and irrelevant reasons for detaining you on public property, for doing nothing against the law, while we insist on stripping you of your rights?
And then the compromise is that you do what we want, you know, since you're not breaking the law but we don't really care about your rights.
So they drive other than on a road, obstruct the pavement, drive through red traffic signal when not on an emergency but detain you without a crime. Who was in the wrong?
Fella, I think you failed here, you answered far to many questions for someone carrying out a lawful activity, the police were phishing and trying to get you to incriminate yourself, silence is golden…
Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than speak and remove all doubt
Complete fail , coppers owned you here tbh
It doesn't make for a very entertaining video though, if auditors were always silent. But I agree that's best thing to do
Letting the cops feel like they ran you off only encourages them to keep it up. Likewise, the security people feel like they had you chased off by their police force. "Wait here while I determine whether there is any basis for detention . . . "
If refusing details arouses suspicion, then remaining silent must mean you are guilty.
Handled perfectly. 👏🏼
No wonder you can't get a copper if they are all tied up with men with camera's. It's getting daft now.
Don’t forget … “ I can’t film the building…really?… which section of which Act is that?” The Golden Question.
I’m being detained - “which section of which act gives you that power”?
Two vans on blues and twos for a legal activity in public. But no one available for assaults or burglaries…
PS. Do these bylaws apply to dash cams too? Should we switch them off when driving by? Turns out there is no bylaw. Lies. You weren’t obstructive. More lies.
They asked you to leave a public area. Which section of which act is that.
“Photography could be a crime - depends on your intentions”. Legally just crap. Utter nonsense. This is the Police today.
When they start questioning you about your details ask if you can see their fishing licence.
This is what you get for doing a lawful activity they had no right to detain you they don't know the law they tried everything in the book to pin something on you as the guy said you wouldn't see one of them in an emergency I hope they read this so they know what the public think of them great job well done to you.
“In this day and age “ you would think the police know the law or is that asking too much notice they break the law by parking fully on the pavement making it unusable for pedestrians
Classic “good cop;bad cop” routine, followed by a litany of unfounded accusations about why you are wrong despite not breaking any laws.
The police were perfectly amicable....except for that WPC 6362. Her whole attitude screamed contempt of the public and looking for a reason to stitch him up.
If your not going to tell her to piss off after she illegally detained you then dont bother auditing!! she is an ignorant bully, and you need to complain about her for abusing your rights!!!
When police say "Surely you must understand our concerns etc" it's to mitigate their actions in case of any civil claim - Their defense would be along the lines "The complainant said they understood, therefore knew their actions were antagonistic" etc - so never say you understand why they do or say anything.
When she said do you understand? I would have said, I understand the prejudice, I don't understand why a law abiding citizen should be harassed for doing nothing wrong.
About time the government put a stop to this kind of prejudice against innocent people.
Good clip well done 👍. How about wearing a high viz jacket next time 👌🏻. 🧐🤩🍺✅
Pity the first cop, who seemed to understand, didn't put the female correct without her detaining you and going to ring "Sarge".
I'm astonished they felt that they needed the 'blues and twos' to cover 100 feet to a report of a 'suspicious man with a camera'!!
And will someone please buy the WPC a hairbrush!!
A horse brush.
They can't detain you while they 'check' if you committed an offence. When they detain you they must be able to articulate an offence they suspect that you have committed or about to commit