Jump to content

Police..Camera...Action!


Amadeus

Recommended Posts

Can anyone tell me where are we going with all this?

 

1984tu3.jpg

 

:ph34r:

 

 

Motorhead at the Villa?

 

What is the problem with this idea? You're all sounding off about the death of freedom but isn't it just a more reliable version of the copper's notebook.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is the problem with this idea? You're all sounding off about the death of freedom but isn't it just a more reliable version of the copper's notebook.

If a little bit of freedom is taken away every day, then one day we'll wake up and find they have taken it all.

 

Why should we end up in a 'police notebook' when we have done nothing wrong? Why should a police record be kept of everyday activities? What rules are there for turning it off and on? That's how it might go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why should we end up in a 'police notebook' when we have done nothing wrong? Why should a police record be kept of everyday activities? What rules are there for turning it off and on?

 

Quite so. At the moment I would be more than happy to go up to a policeman in the Isle of Man for a chat about something I may have witnessed or might have concerns about. I'm not sure I will be so happy if I find myself staring into a CCTV camera with the full knowledge that I will recorded. It will make me less trustfull of the police.

 

How long would they keep a video for? Would it be held indefinately 'just in case' ???

 

Would people be concerned if the UK Big Brother culture came to the Isle of Man and our lives were monitored and tracked by the Government???

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The ODPS guidelines on CCTV are available online.

 

http://www.gov.im/lib/docs/odps/cctv1.doc

 

I suspect that the first principle (fair processing) is breached fairly regularly by busineeses/authorities with CCTV who do not provide details of the Data Controller.

 

It was possible up until the case referred to in the Sixth Principle to have a free reign to royally piss Data Controllers off by making a £10 subject access request after you've been walking around their shop all day/week or drinking in a pub all night and nothing happens. Now, the subject access request is limited to specific incidents. They're obliged to give you copies of all data they hold and the processing costs are nightmarish. But for the case limiting subject access requests to a specific incident, a concerted effort by anti-surveillance 'volunteers / donors' could soon have seen shops running up big compliacne and/or legal advice costs...As it is, the specific incident' limitation on subject access rights gives a bit more of a free hand to CCTV installation.

 

The fourth principle actually shows the fallibility of CCTV particularly for use as evidence in criminal trials. How often do you see a blurred photo shot on the front of the Courier seeking advice on some skit-rat violence/vandalism, yet when the case gets to Court the CCTV evidence was merely a lead to the evidence actually relied upon to convict? The laws on admissibility of evidence are pretty strict over here, largely because in the case of computers you have to have corroborating statements from all those responsible for gathering, processing and producing images that the machine was working correctly at all phases.

 

Anyway, I really dislike CCTV generally and whilst I hope that the new head cams provide two-way clarification on cross-allegations between plod and suspect, I doubt if this will actually be the case. More likely it will only ever be used when a pissed up chav gets gobby (which I appreciate is the vast majority of cases) rather than when plod is out of line (rare but it happens, esp. specials trying to win 'proper' police stripes).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...