Prev: Raios de Sul, photos of southern Portugal
Next: Home Secretary announces review of ant-terror legislation
From: Phil Stovell on 9 Jul 2010 05:14
http://photographernotaterrorist.org/2010/07/section-44-suspended/
From: tim.... on 9 Jul 2010 07:03

"Phil Stovell" <phil(a)stovell.nospam.org.uk> wrote in message
news:pan.2010.07.09.09.14.06.771884(a)stovell.nospam.org.uk...
> http://photographernotaterrorist.org/2010/07/section-44-suspended/

I remain to be convinced that plod aren't going to continue use "taking a
photograph of a public place" as reasonable suspicion

tim


From: Jethro on 9 Jul 2010 07:12
On 9 July, 12:03, "tim...." <tims_new_h...(a)yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> "Phil Stovell" <p...(a)stovell.nospam.org.uk> wrote in message
>
> news:pan.2010.07.09.09.14.06.771884(a)stovell.nospam.org.uk...
>
> >http://photographernotaterrorist.org/2010/07/section-44-suspended/
>
> I remain to be convinced that plod aren't going to continue use "taking a
> photograph of a public place" as reasonable suspicion
>
> tim

If the law works as it should though, then the officer could be
required to defend himself against a civil claim. Before an aggrieved
person had no comeback, as there was no need for the police to justify
the stop, beyond the fact that it was in accordance with S44.

However we now know (threads passim) that in many cases, the S44 stops
*were* unlawful, as the proscribed actions had not been completed
properly.
From: Alan Clifford on 9 Jul 2010 15:57
On Fri, 9 Jul 2010, tim.... wrote:

>
> "Phil Stovell" <phil(a)stovell.nospam.org.uk> wrote in message
> news:pan.2010.07.09.09.14.06.771884(a)stovell.nospam.org.uk...
>> http://photographernotaterrorist.org/2010/07/section-44-suspended/
>
> I remain to be convinced that plod aren't going to continue use "taking a
> photograph of a public place" as reasonable suspicion
>
> tim
>
>
>

For reasonable suspicion to be uses over time, a large proportion of
stops, say 95%, must be of actual terrorists. If not, the suspicion is
not reasonable.

I feel the way to combat this is financial. A lot of stops over time,
using section 43, that are not of actual terrorists, means that the
parameters for suspicion are incorrect, and the police would be wasting
time and resources. This waste of resourses should be the vehicle for
stoping the activity rather than trying for years to determine whether the
stops are lawful.

--
Alan

From: Bruce on 9 Jul 2010 17:44
On Fri, 9 Jul 2010 20:57:41 +0100, Alan Clifford
<sardines(a)purse-seine.net> wrote:
>
>For reasonable suspicion to be uses over time, a large proportion of
>stops, say 95%, must be of actual terrorists. If not, the suspicion is
>not reasonable.


Don't be ridiculous. 95%? That's complete and utter nonsense.

If 1% of stops produced "actual terrorists" it would more than justify
a stop and search policy.

 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: Raios de Sul, photos of southern Portugal
Next: Home Secretary announces review of ant-terror legislation