So does that mean a security guard or a store dic' cannot follow you out onto the public street and detain you until the police arrive as they have no powers outside the shop? I've seen that on those police tv shows where you see someone running out the door with a bag of stolen stuff and you have one or two security staff running after them out onto the street and detaining them until the police arrive.

I know it's a different situation but surely the store dic's so called powers stop at the entrance to the shop and they can't continue on outside the property. Here's another one, why does no one object to having cctv cameras following them around whether it's in a city centre (cameras on the side of a public building on a public street), in a park or outside or inside a shopping centre? I don't recall giving my local council permission for them to point cameras at me, or for that matter the police or the owners of the shopping centre.

You can't see who is watching you or identify them. Whereas if you are out in public filming, everyone can identify you when they see you setting up and starting to shoot. I've also gotten that 'oh look he's a paedo'. I just laugh it off but you feel like saying to the person come on over here and say that again you asshole. It appears to me that you need a much thicker skin now than in the 1990's, things were much simpler back then.

Were I live a lot of the old town was demolished in the late 1990's and I filmed the work and regeneration of it for the local council (hopefully none of them are reading this) but you just had to get permission from one person and off you went. Now there are 100 pencil pushers you have to get permission from and everyone you want to film has to be asked, what has happened here? And don't get me started on school children during the school holidays, it's like they are hanging around just waiting for you to turn up and take the tripod out.

From what I read in Guru's post.

If the guard knows (not suspects) you've committed a "serious" offence - eg shoplifting, then they (or any other civilian) can detain you.

For a minor civil offence (eg trespass) no.

Plenty do!
Personally, I'd rather have them there - although being able to identify someone after they've mugged me (and then slapping their wrist) is less preferable than Jack Warner being highly visible and thus preventing the mugging in the first place. But I can understand all those who consider being caught committing minor crimes is an infringement of their civil liberties

Would you care to rephrase that?

__________________
Tim

When it comes to powers of arrest there are two "classes" of people.

1. Police Officers
2. The rest.

So a security guard, store detective, traffic warden, etc. etc has no more power than you or I. Security men don't like to be reminded of that fact but just because they're wearing a uniform doesn't give them any additional rights or powers. So, their "powers" don't stop at the property boundry because they don't have any powers!
They CANNOT search you without your permission and they cannot detain you. So they can't make you wait for the police to arrive, for example, unless they're making a so-called "citizens arrest". Either they arrest you or eject you, that's all.

So, basically, their only advantage over you is that, as a representative of the owner, they can ask you to leave the property and, if you refuse, eject you.

"If an arrestable offence has been committed anyone may detain the person committing that offence."
An "arrestable offence is an offence with a prison term of more than five years, so murder, theft and so on are "arrestable offences". Stuff like highway obstruction, breach of the peace, threatening behaviour etc. aren't "arrestable offences" but the police, and only the police, have seperate powers of arrest for these misdemeanors

So, shoplifting is theft, an "arrestable offence" and a member of the public (ie a security guard or store detective) can make an arrest. They MUST then hand the "prisoner" to the police AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. So they can't force you into the manager's office if you are willing to wait at the point of arrest for the police to arrive. They have no right to question you or demand any property (such as your film, tape or camera) from you.
There is no power of arrest for common trespass.

There is a notable exception to this, namely on board a ship or aircraft, where anti-terrorism and air-safety legislation gives the crew extra powers and, I must be honest, I'm not too sure about what they are.

Are you in the UK? If so a common assault is also referred to as a section 47 assault. There is no such assault as a section 42...unless A Level Law has been lying to me!!!

Sorry...I get really anal about these things

__________________
www.nothingissound.co.uk // http://www.youtube.com/user/truebassist

Sony DSR-PDX10 // Sony Wide Angle Conversion Lens 0.7x // Sony ECM-NV1 // RØDE NTG-1 // Dolly [coming soon]

Adobe CS4 Master Suite // MacBook Pro Alu 2.4Ghz

Wrong again. You should have paid closer attention in school.

Section 47 is NOT a "common assault". S.47 is also known as ABH, or assault occasioning actual bodily harm. This means that there is some injury, a bruise will suffice. "Section 42" is an assault where no visible injury is present. It isn't an arrestable offence and can only be dealt with by a magistrate or civil claim. It is called a section 42 assault since it was an offence under S42 of the Offences Against the Persons Act 1861. I believe that it is now been superceded by other legislation although still referred to as a "section 42".

Getting legal stuff right doesn't seem to be your forte, I remember you giving duff info on copyright law. So, if you going to get anal, try and get your facts right!

http://www.swarb.co.uk/acts/1861Offe...ersonAct.shtml

The above is the legislation if you're interested. Don't forget this is a thread about restrictions on filming, not assaults.

Sorry - I meant a section 39 common assault or battery not a section 47 assault occasioning ABH.

=]]

But my two pennies for the film part!

I was once filming along a quiet residential road from the back of my dads' car (boot up) so I could get a really nice tracking shot when a police car passed us on the other side of the road. The look on the officers faces was priceless!! We stopped pretty quickly and they came up to us asking what was going on and I explained about the filming. They told me I would have to stop as it was dangerous and rather illegal (I would have never thought...) but after I pleaded with them for a few minutes and told them about it being an A Level project (it was by the way) they gave me 30 minutes to shoot and said if they came back then and found me here I would be in big trouble!

So if in a similar situation...it can't hurt to grovel a bit!!

__________________
www.nothingissound.co.uk // http://www.youtube.com/user/truebassist

Sony DSR-PDX10 // Sony Wide Angle Conversion Lens 0.7x // Sony ECM-NV1 // RØDE NTG-1 // Dolly [coming soon]

Adobe CS4 Master Suite // MacBook Pro Alu 2.4Ghz

Section 39 appears to have been to do with protecting those engaged in dealing with wheat, grain and market produce and was repealed even before I was born.

A word of advice. When you're in a hole... stop digging.

Edit. Maybe a mod could delete these last four posts and spare the blushes of TrueBassist.

Without wishing to pretend I know anything at all about law, I did a little bit of Googling (and consequently I'm prepared to accept this may not be 100% accurate) but it appears we are talking about Common Assult originally covered by Section 42 of the Offences Against the Persons Act 1861 (now repealed as stated by the Guru) and now covered by Section 39 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988.

I really hope this is correct because it means everyone's right and we can all be friends again.

__________________
Tim

Christ - it's bloody LA law !

Guru you are scaring me with your legal knowledge - how many strings do you have ?
Bassist - like the boot story. Another reason I like by big pro cam - the police rarely hassle me for such stunts as the cam says ' pro crew with all the rigght insurances ' _ i guess.

After graduating from film school (about thirty years ago now) I discovered that I wasn't as dim as I thought and, a few years later, got interested in law, and had a go at a law degree. The criminal stuff was interesting but tort and civil law was, for me, mind-numbingly boring so I went back to doing what I did best.... Filming and getting into trouble. Now that I "guest-lecture" at various institutions I make sure that I'm up to speed for the students' questions.

To get this back on thread.

In the UK, only a police officer can confiscate your tapes , film or equipment from you.
Only a police officer can search you or detain you for the purpose of search, without your consent.
Security guards can only demand that you leave private premises and can eject you if you refuse and are just normal members of the public when it comes to powers of arrest etc.
Just because you're not committing an offence specific to filming doesn't mean that you're not committing some other offence under different legislation.

I have been arrested many times for filming, in Sudan, Kosovo, Montenegro, Georgia and Germany. Never in the UK though. It's important that I/we/you don't let press freedom be eroded through ignorance.