They started off so well didn't they. But instead of leaving it there. They had to throw in a few implied threats at the end. Not once did they consider warning the company workers about wasting police time with LYING phone calls.
The Police trying to enforce a civil matter? I am tired of paying for private security for businesses - the Police should be out catching criminals, not making up 'an offence' when one clearly hasn't been committed.
There’s enough funding to protect corporations who tax dodge with offshore accounts, but not to investigate burglaries etc of citizens who pay their wages
@@mathew8581 Because we dont, (generally) plus the police risk nothing if they are wrong, but we risk prosecution, and on a lower court in the UK, for expediance its guilty till proven innocent, (interesting to watch, but annoying)
Hilarious how E-on can act " Alarmed Harassed and Distressed " but they break into your home and force you to have a meter fitted with the police holding their hand whilst they do it
Indeed. Tell the police numpties to stop harassing you, because if you were to lose sight of the drone it would stay up in the air all day and fly away ... 🙄
Have the police really stooped So low that they really expect us the public to take orders and direction from clowns who choose to dress up in what looks like a fancy dress uniform complete with a rubber duck fully on show?
It really boils down to whether the Police have a reasonable suspicion that he has or is about to commit an offence. What he did was lawful, and would not qualify as a public order offence (S4a and S5); therefore, the Police powers in this interaction only amount to a stop & account. However, Rice Connally 1966 means a person is not obliged to answer any questions from the Police, or go anywhere with the Police, unless under arrest. Either the Officer who said he could be arrested under S5 was deliberately lying, or he is simply unaware that filming from a public place (S33 of CJA 1972 which adds onto S9(1) of POA 1936) cannot be used as a premise for a S5, as there was no reasonable expectation of privacy in this circumstance. In conclusion, the auditor was free to walk away at any point.
@@martinsanders6124 the beginning of your comment reasonable suspicion, is that not an oxymoron? , dictionary definition of suspicion, presumption or assumption without any facts or evidence to back it up, didn't read the rest of your comment. If you do reply will spend the time to read the rest👍
@@somespreadliesothersknowth3392 You're using the vernacular definition of suspicion, or rather, the Police are using a definition of suspicion as an antecedent to a consequent, e.g., an offence.
@@martinsanders6124 for the police, it's the Holy Grail of words to them, they can justify anything with that word , it is the number one word they use
I’m sure if you ask them, they will tell you they own the universe and expect you to leave. Secondly these cops pretend to be friendly but would love to trump up a charge so that they can get your details. That then would satisfy their obsession with getting everyone’s private information. A sad obsession.
If they try that thing about getting your details again, demand his personal details and threaten him with a citizens arrest if he refuses to give them. Just throw around the word terrorism like they do.
Two disappointed pc's in reality. They wanted to do more and wanted to exert more authority but you knew too much for them. E-on are poor all round, their customer service is appalling and it is no surprise when you consider how these guys behaved.
I have mixed feelings about this, i.e., on one hand they had a belief that filming someone with out their permission would amount to a public order offence (S5) even though this would be a false premise, as the law provides no expectation of privacy in public (the area was publicly accessible under S33 CJA 1972; therefore, according to their belief they could have arrested him for a public order offence, however that would have been a false arrest and assault (S39 CJA 1988) which would have got both officers in trouble. So, in that regard it was generous of them not to act on their gut reaction and arrest him. However, on the other hand they should not have taken sides with a corporation, and acted in the interests of that corporation, as well as misusing S5.
@@martinsanders6124 The short little gollums bias was obvious and I’m glad it was caught on camera. The taller Constable, I didn’t particularly like, he kept making culex threats of escalation, which seemed unnecessary…. But he tried to appear reasonable. I give them both a fail…. But appreciate the taller ones efforts.
The thing is, they want to get rid of you. They don't have any suspicion or crime but they need to find some excuse to move you on because they are not enforcing the law, if they were they'd just explain it to the people in the building and leave, they are siding with one particular group.
@@nightjar9021 exactly... you can predict who they'll side with every time and it's not the side of law - this is the extreme state that "democracy" has brought us to - what is the "representative" that you "voted" for doing about fundamental human rights and if there is someone willing to change it what are his chances of even being registered?
36:10 Correct, they need to inform you to leave the property. They can't pass that task on to the police. That would mean the police are getting involved in a civil matter. And the police can't solicit a trespass either, so they can't make the people tell you to leave since again they would be interfering with a civil matter.
So am I getting this right? Obviously you can film in a public place, but I gather you can also film on a publicly accessible private place because there's no expectation of privacy there? But they can then ask you to leave (state trespass)? Here in oz you're not allowed to point a cctv on a publicly accessible property so that it looks into adjacent private properties such as residences. So no filming into people's houses. How does that work in uk? And we also have to put up notices apparently when there's cctv to warn people they're being filmed on a private but publicly accessible place? Seems somewhat contradictory.
@@nihilistic7840 In the UK you can use a camera anywhere, a public place or private place. In the UK there is no public property, everywhere is privately owned. A reasonable expectation of privacy can occur in a public place if you're using an ATM for instance, or having a conversation on a park bench. Absolute privacy is in your own home or a public toilet. No privacy is where there other members of the public around or where they wander. CCTV in the UK on homes can't be pointed at neighbours. Not unless it's can't be helped due to the angle of view. But the main part that should be recorded is your own property. So a NEST or RING doorbell recording neighbours across the street is OK as it's in the distance. Signs on homes are optional, but compulsory at businesses and elsewhere.
@@TheSadButMadLad erm I think your mistaken there is public property in the U.K., all the government buildings and public services are public property.
@@Awakend7 Nope. They're not owned by the public. They're owned by the state. And the public doesn't own the state either. The public elects politicians to control the direction of the state, but that's it. Government buildings are also called Crown Property. This shows how much they are not public property. What we do have in the UK is the concept of a "public place" which is where people can wander across land to get from A to B. The public are also allowed to go certain places when they are open, such as receptions, front desks, foyers, and many other places including museums, shops, etc.
49:40 The copper's right that there needs to be a valid reason to feel alarmed, harassed or distressed. They can't use that as a made up reason nor can they use it just because they are snowflakes. They need to properly fear you and just being upset by your presence isn't enough.
Spot on. S5 (harassment, alarm or distress) is presupposed on abusive or threatening words or behaviour. The law provides no expectation of privacy in public (the area is deemed publicly accessible under S33 CJA 1972); therefore, the staff could not expect to not be filmed.
@@martinsanders6124 Public place appears in many places in legislation, including s74(1) of the Anti-social Behaviour Act. Case law has defined it too. And since just about everywhere in the UK is private property, that aspect is meaningless. It's all about where the public can wander. That many don't wander into certain places is just social convention, so the land owner can't complain if they haven't told the stupid public to keep out.
No. Harrasment alarm and distress requires threatening or abusive behaviour. No accusation of threats or abuse, no grounds for arrest. The policemen are literally lying through their teeth.
The shorter copper of the two looked like he wanted to kill you, but he was reasonably respectful. The other one thought he was going to own you and failed at every turn. Great video and thank you.
What on earth is their chief constable thinking if he sees this, can that officer hang any more junk from his uniform, perhaps a fluffy dice might look good, hand in pocket which seems to be the norm now, no discipline or pride anymore
Can you imagine what some of the old school police officers must think of the gum chewing, hands in pckets, unpolished shoes tattoo riddled rude and contemptuous ignorant of the law idiots that you get today. I remember when one police officer with humour and respect cleared an area. Now it takes a team of aggressive blockheads to rile everyone up and create a situation.
46:05 The copper misses out a few key words from his harassment alarm and distress statement. The key words are "intent to cause". It's like how they always miss out the threatening bit of section 5 for behaviour that causes harassment alarm or distress.
Also, your whole demeanour shows that you are being violent or threatening or anything like that since you've been so open with them. So the whole HAD is a moot point.
Blatant Lies by the staff members, their HR department should deal with that, but probably won't. The PC never told you he was recording and His Passive Aggressive chat where he kept telling you the different ways in which he could arrest you, while not once asking to see your recording, which would have proved that the staff were liars and you were 100% innocent. Nothing came close to causing harm or distress to anyone. Not a good showing by the Police.!!
Really hard to take someone seriously when they have a rubber ducky attached to their paramilitary uniform, and was the one on the right doing a bit a quiet recording of you on his mobile phone?
47:35 He admits "it's difficult" and this is where 99% of such cases just needs both sides being listened to and deescalation of the situation rather than listening to one side and jumping to conclusions and making an arrest. This is where it's very difficult for many police since this requires proper social interaction skills rather than there usual gung-ho attitude where violence and control is the answer to everything.
The only "difficulty" is that that policeman wanted to scare PTTP off by ignoring the fact that harrasment, alarm and distress requires threatening or abusive behaviour. He could get fifty calls and that's still no grounds for arrest. He was just a tyrant.
25:10 When someone who obviously doesn't know anything about the law says "this is private property" one response is to ask them if they know all the laws around private property and if they know what a public place is. They will usually waffle on about "we can ask you to leave". This is when you start quoting sections of law at them (section 33) and mentioning case law (Williams vs DPP which defines public place) and stating that common law doesn't allow them to do anything. Gaslight them and sound knowledgeable about the law and make them realise they can't gaslight you.
Beardy boy trying his hardest to enforce his ‘powers’ passive aggressive clown. Should have told his oppo not to solicit a trespass and to leave his body cam on as proof.
Harassment , alarm & distress (secondary) is in ""2 parts"" , BOTH HAVE to be met. BUT :- it begins with the threat of unlawful violence (primary) without it there is no offence ✌ PTTP I like your demeanor 👌
37:15 Good tactic of quoting all the sections of public order at them. Makes them realise they can't gaslight you and make up laws. You can also add on a case law reference such as Harvey v DPP.
That talkative policeman so wanted to get you on something. He said he knew the law yet claimed he could arrest you on suspicion (not true, he needs grounds for suspicion of an offence) or for causing staff "alarm, harrasment or distress" (not enough - section 5 says it has to be caused by threatening or abusive behaviour). Liars in uniform are always a threat because they're not motivated by humanity but by a demon.
They always start "well" but this AGAIN shows how the laws we have are ridiculously badly worded (designed with the help of police) to make us comply because it's easy to do fear alarm and distress is a "personal" thing and unless laws are being broken it shouldn't even be applied but oh how is that handy when someone you want to be shifted but has not violated the law. I believe the law was brought in for hate speech but even that's a full month in court to decide who, and what on that.
34:30 Quick note about aggravated trespass. That requires someone to be on the property. If you walked around and no one was around it can't be aggravated. It is arguable that someone is on the property since they are inside, but the point is that there is no one around you that you could be stopping them from working.
Aggravated trespass is also presupposed on obstructing, disrupting or intimidating others from carrying out lawful activity. In this circumstance, the staff approached and interacted with him, thus negating the premises behind aggravated trespass.
@@martinsanders6124 An internet lawyer 😂 From that comment it’s clear you know little to nothing about the law. They’re being drawn away from lawful activity to engage with said idiot with camera causing a nuisance. How does it feel being an idiot?
The wrinkled pug pig appeared to be using his phone to additionally record you, possibly for his what's app group. And then he went to solicit a trespass to try create a possible crime. How impartial they truly are!! Corporate policy officers the lot of them!
For me even if some one call the police on you, when they attend it is still a Stop & Account which is an operation procedure and they do not have any statutory powers.
I like the way that you show us EVERYTHING that you've recorded on the video, and fast-forward the boring bits. But as I appreciate, you DO show us everything.
He is lying when he said it would be a lawful arrest based on his suspicion, as his suspicion needs more than just claims made, it is following the claims that he should look for evidence to make a reasoned assessment of suspicion. Not they said so, so I now have a reasoned suspicion.
Jesus Christ these clowns wouldn’t stop trying to get the last word in believing they knew the law better then you . He really thought he was going to get you on anything
That Eon van driver is a top barrister and has done some big cases at the old Bailey. He just does a bit moonlighting on the side to keep his hand in on trespassing laws. Windsor Davies and Don Estelle did a song about him…….. Whispering….. I can’t remember the rest of it.
7220 does a great job of copsplaining the rational for fabricating charges while talking himself out of it at the same time. Its a camera, now jog on 7220 and take your threats with you.
As a ex Civil enforcement officer my understanding is, wherever there is double/single yellow lines the highways can issue a zero 1 PCN after 5 mins observation of a stationary vehicle. Unless a blue badge+clock is seen then they have 3 hrs+15 mins to park.🇬🇧
Brilliant just brilliant well done matey thank you so much for your videos When the officers said they maybe can't turn the pc screens around what a load of bull shit.. Them buildings are designed for use with office pc to work in.. Not to show any ione what's on then... Police seem to know when they get up from their desks then lock screens.. He seems to have all the answers And I did not hear him say his body cam was on.... Lies again
More police ignorant of the law and suggesting all kinds of directives to get you to leave. When are these public servants ie the police going to start telling these muppets the facts surrounding the law and maybe start warning them that they risk a nicking for false reporting. And then more bullshit surrounding your details. Good on ya fella for standing your ground when threatened with arrest.
You certainly meet some interesting people on your travels. Amazing these employees have no idea about GDPR rules. Pathetic also that the police turn up for a complaint of a man with a camera. I wonder if they are that responsive to a burglary call? Another excellent video.
Wonder who told them to say they feel alarmed harassed and distressed. No way the people at the office said that to the police but the police say DO YOU FEEL ALARMED AND DISTRESSED if so I’ll knick him
Correct, they need to inform you to leave the property. They can't pass that task on to the police. That would mean the police are getting involved in a civil matter...🚓
Public Order Offences wind me up so much. They always come out with "Others are finding what you're doing yadda, yadda, yadda" Just say to them that with that logic, you find people sat outside Starbucks or Costa drinking coffee alarming, harassing and distressing, so would they pinch everyone for having a Caramel Snickerdoodle Frappuccino (It is a real order)
I had someone explain a Mocha drink to me, as coffee with chocolate in it,I said, around my way, we just call that "sloppy table manners". So much for poncy sales gimmicks. 😳
52:25 Generally the two coppers were fine. They did go on about the whole public order stuff but they did seem to realise that you were an auditor, knew what that was, worked out that you knew the laws, but they still tried to explain it all to you. And they still had to issue a directive that would make an arrest if they had to come back.
I sometimes wonder if the police training includes things like posture, bearing and mannerisms when engaging with the public so as to present an professional and efficient appearance. One hand in the pocket, a rubber duck on a chain and flapping his hand around as he spoke would indicate not.
Excellent point.... it would be interesting to see them come up against someone who wanted to hurt them, and they stand there with their hands in their pockets. Both rubber ducky and the homosexual one would be out like a light in a split second. The best advice ever given to me was that nothing you do is routine, treat everything and everyone as a potential danger. That does not mean that you have to treat people badly, just be cautious.
Amazon flex is where you and your cars are used to deliver as a self-employed and what times suit you it is not an offence to not give your detain if you have not broken any laws filming and taking photos in public is not a public order offence PINAC It is not the police job to go and ask if you want me to tell him to leave trespass is a civil matter and it is up to their solicitor to deal with it they need to read up on the harassment alarm and stress you should have asked him if the duck is part of his uniform issue
38:00 I think the copper needs to go back to training. He's got something else wrong. If he suspects you've committed an offence, he can't arrest for you refusing to give your details. He has to arrest first before he gets your details. The only exception is the "policeman's friend", section 50 ant-social behaviour, where details need to be given before arrest.
Why do the copretards always either miss out part of a section 5 when they threaten it or just not finish it or misrepresent it?? Section 5 A person is guilty of an offence if he- (a)uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour... Using a device that every person on scene has a least 3 of about their person (cameras) could hardly be offensive threatening or abusive...
no i dont get why a cop would be all like whoa wat you doing wandering around our yard ect ect coz if it was a security risk then they would make it so public couldnt wander in .... i mean come on .. when was the last time an auditor just wandered on to a military barracks 🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️ if it was such a security threat then there would be measeures put in place .
Ask why his SIA badge isn't on display. Like the music in between your shots! Focus Pocus often does this ... great idea! Handled very well ... thanks.
Childish I know, but it makes me chuckle when Mr Pocus , speeds up the film and you get a squeaky ,squealing sound .it's the simple pleasures.......... 😁
Good video mate. My only gripe is the length of the video. Despite you (and me) fast forwarding, it took about 40 minutes, which is far too long. Apart from that, you’re a pretty good auditor and I am pleased I came across your channel.
Aggravated trespass gets thrown around a lot but it requires proof that you are there with intention of disrupting their lawful use of their property INTENT. They can only remove you with a court order. Section 5 needs violence threats intimidation etc
It's pointless me coming here because, as you can see there are no small ponds around so I can float my ducky, but I suppose I could use a puddle but my mate has his battle ship in the van so we was, well just going to spend the rest of the day, you know possible sailing but now you are causing us alarm and distress when we just want to sail our ducky and ship!
they love abusing section 5 don't they? It's not simply causing harassment alarm or distress. It's using threatening [or abusive] words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour likely to cause harassment alarm or distress.
Are they aware that trespass is a civil matter and not a criminal matter? Even if your implied right of access has been revoked, they CAN NOT remove you from the property. What are they even talking about?
They started off so well didn't they. But instead of leaving it there. They had to throw in a few implied threats at the end. Not once did they consider warning the company workers about wasting police time with LYING phone calls.
Yes strange that .one rule for one .and one rule for anouther
The Police trying to enforce a civil matter? I am tired of paying for private security for businesses - the Police should be out catching criminals, not making up 'an offence' when one clearly hasn't been committed.
🙏
There’s enough funding to protect corporations who tax dodge with offshore accounts, but not to investigate burglaries etc of citizens who pay their wages
and most of them hide in westminster..
Meanwhile old lady was burgled and no officers can attend SORRY they pick and choose who to bully. Idiots
@@WilsonCarefree im on board with that,
They hate it when you know your rights
And have a camera, because if you dont, They dont care about human rights (or the "law" for that matter)
Of course.
Equally they love it when you don't and most people don't.
That officer was totally full of shit! Trying to impose his authority when he had no lawful reason to do so.
As usual. Their all the fkn same.
Spewing speak cos they think people don’t know their rights
@@mathew8581 Because we dont, (generally) plus the police risk nothing if they are wrong, but we risk prosecution, and on a lower court in the UK, for expediance its guilty till proven innocent, (interesting to watch, but annoying)
Try to understand him. Imagine that you look like him and that the only job you can do is to be a policeman.
Hilarious how E-on can act " Alarmed Harassed and Distressed " but they break into your home and force you to have a meter fitted with the police holding their hand whilst they do it
Always tell them you’re about to fly a drone above even if you don’t have one 😉
Or better still, pretend to fly one....That really foxes people!
@@charlesdale1462 omg, I love this!! I hen the police arrive and try and charge you for having the drone out of line of sight. 🤪
Indeed. Tell the police numpties to stop harassing you, because if you were to lose sight of the drone it would stay up in the air all day and fly away ... 🙄
Funny how the lady knows about GDPR, and still has all the computer screens facing the windows.
Typical know fuck all KAREN!
I don't think you know what GDPR is to be completely honest.
@@Mrwm117 The fact that you think is a step in the right direction, Now read up on dataprotection.
@@daytona1212 Maybe you should read up on what overt surveillance is. Do you think it’s acceptable to do what the idiot with the camera is doing?
@@daytona1212 - Luvved that reply. LOL
To constitute an aggravated trespass you must intend to intimidate obstruct or restrict anyone doing their lawful business
Have the police really stooped So low that they really expect us the public to take orders and direction from clowns who choose to dress up in what looks like a fancy dress uniform complete with a rubber duck fully on show?
It really boils down to whether the Police have a reasonable suspicion that he has or is about to commit an offence. What he did was lawful, and would not qualify as a public order offence (S4a and S5); therefore, the Police powers in this interaction only amount to a stop & account. However, Rice Connally 1966 means a person is not obliged to answer any questions from the Police, or go anywhere with the Police, unless under arrest.
Either the Officer who said he could be arrested under S5 was deliberately lying, or he is simply unaware that filming from a public place (S33 of CJA 1972 which adds onto S9(1) of POA 1936) cannot be used as a premise for a S5, as there was no reasonable expectation of privacy in this circumstance.
In conclusion, the auditor was free to walk away at any point.
Not only a rubber duck but his glasses are a criminal offence!!!!
@@martinsanders6124 the beginning of your comment reasonable suspicion, is that not an oxymoron? , dictionary definition of suspicion, presumption or assumption without any facts or evidence to back it up, didn't read the rest of your comment. If you do reply will spend the time to read the rest👍
@@somespreadliesothersknowth3392 You're using the vernacular definition of suspicion, or rather, the Police are using a definition of suspicion as an antecedent to a consequent, e.g., an offence.
@@martinsanders6124 for the police, it's the Holy Grail of words to them, they can justify anything with that word , it is the number one word they use
I’m sure if you ask them, they will tell you they own the universe and expect you to leave. Secondly these cops pretend to be friendly but would love to trump up a charge so that they can get your details. That then would satisfy their obsession with getting everyone’s private information. A sad obsession.
Yup, Sad but True Patrick me ole mucca. Sad but true.
Yes that the Devon and Cornwall constabulary for you corrupt bunch of wankers
If they try that thing about getting your details again, demand his personal details and threaten him with a citizens arrest if he refuses to give them. Just throw around the word terrorism like they do.
Pretending to be friendly is nothing less than the superficial charm of the subclinical sociopath.
Thats ur discount
Two disappointed pc's in reality. They wanted to do more and wanted to exert more authority but you knew too much for them. E-on are poor all round, their customer service is appalling and it is no surprise when you consider how these guys behaved.
I have mixed feelings about this, i.e., on one hand they had a belief that filming someone with out their permission would amount to a public order offence (S5) even though this would be a false premise, as the law provides no expectation of privacy in public (the area was publicly accessible under S33 CJA 1972; therefore, according to their belief they could have arrested him for a public order offence, however that would have been a false arrest and assault (S39 CJA 1988) which would have got both officers in trouble. So, in that regard it was generous of them not to act on their gut reaction and arrest him.
However, on the other hand they should not have taken sides with a corporation, and acted in the interests of that corporation, as well as misusing S5.
@@martinsanders6124
The short little gollums bias was obvious and I’m glad it was caught on camera.
The taller Constable, I didn’t particularly like, he kept making culex threats of escalation, which seemed unnecessary…. But he tried to appear reasonable.
I give them both a fail…. But appreciate the taller ones efforts.
The thing is, they want to get rid of you. They don't have any suspicion or crime but they need to find some excuse to move you on because they are not enforcing the law, if they were they'd just explain it to the people in the building and leave, they are siding with one particular group.
They always seem to side with corporate entities..
@@nightjar9021 exactly... you can predict who they'll side with every time and it's not the side of law - this is the extreme state that "democracy" has brought us to - what is the "representative" that you "voted" for doing about fundamental human rights and if there is someone willing to change it what are his chances of even being registered?
Because there a corporate criminal gang attacking innocent people by abusing rights
36:10 Correct, they need to inform you to leave the property. They can't pass that task on to the police. That would mean the police are getting involved in a civil matter. And the police can't solicit a trespass either, so they can't make the people tell you to leave since again they would be interfering with a civil matter.
So am I getting this right? Obviously you can film in a public place, but I gather you can also film on a publicly accessible private place because there's no expectation of privacy there? But they can then ask you to leave (state trespass)? Here in oz you're not allowed to point a cctv on a publicly accessible property so that it looks into adjacent private properties such as residences. So no filming into people's houses. How does that work in uk? And we also have to put up notices apparently when there's cctv to warn people they're being filmed on a private but publicly accessible place? Seems somewhat contradictory.
@@nihilistic7840 In the UK you can use a camera anywhere, a public place or private place. In the UK there is no public property, everywhere is privately owned.
A reasonable expectation of privacy can occur in a public place if you're using an ATM for instance, or having a conversation on a park bench. Absolute privacy is in your own home or a public toilet. No privacy is where there other members of the public around or where they wander.
CCTV in the UK on homes can't be pointed at neighbours. Not unless it's can't be helped due to the angle of view. But the main part that should be recorded is your own property. So a NEST or RING doorbell recording neighbours across the street is OK as it's in the distance. Signs on homes are optional, but compulsory at businesses and elsewhere.
Thanks @@TheSadButMadLad
@@TheSadButMadLad erm I think your mistaken there is public property in the U.K., all the government buildings and public services are public property.
@@Awakend7 Nope. They're not owned by the public. They're owned by the state. And the public doesn't own the state either. The public elects politicians to control the direction of the state, but that's it.
Government buildings are also called Crown Property. This shows how much they are not public property.
What we do have in the UK is the concept of a "public place" which is where people can wander across land to get from A to B. The public are also allowed to go certain places when they are open, such as receptions, front desks, foyers, and many other places including museums, shops, etc.
Interesting to seehow his body language changed when he realised you knew the law, fighting to hide his irritation, can't bullshit bully.
He ca.nt hold the camera still.
49:40 The copper's right that there needs to be a valid reason to feel alarmed, harassed or distressed. They can't use that as a made up reason nor can they use it just because they are snowflakes. They need to properly fear you and just being upset by your presence isn't enough.
Spot on. S5 (harassment, alarm or distress) is presupposed on abusive or threatening words or behaviour. The law provides no expectation of privacy in public (the area is deemed publicly accessible under S33 CJA 1972); therefore, the staff could not expect to not be filmed.
The Droids have faulty programming,they don't mention the threatening and abusive criteria on sec 5,------- back to the factory , reboot needed.🙄
@@martinsanders6124 Public place appears in many places in legislation, including s74(1) of the Anti-social Behaviour Act. Case law has defined it too. And since just about everywhere in the UK is private property, that aspect is meaningless. It's all about where the public can wander. That many don't wander into certain places is just social convention, so the land owner can't complain if they haven't told the stupid public to keep out.
@@TheSadButMadLad Cant expect plod to know any of that, it's just the "toolkit" to get you away and make you comply
No. Harrasment alarm and distress requires threatening or abusive behaviour. No accusation of threats or abuse, no grounds for arrest. The policemen are literally lying through their teeth.
Why do they coppers lie? Because they can. No consequences.
The shorter copper of the two looked like he wanted to kill you, but he was reasonably respectful. The other one thought he was going to own you and failed at every turn. Great video and thank you.
That little gollum looks like a danger. I BET we’ll see him on PAP for an assault or fraud.
Maybe I'm being overly generous but I read it more as a general 'this is a complete waste of my time' look, which is more on the staff at eOn.
What on earth is their chief constable thinking if he sees this, can that officer hang any more junk from his uniform, perhaps a fluffy dice might look good, hand in pocket which seems to be the norm now, no discipline or pride anymore
Can you imagine what some of the old school police officers must think of the gum chewing, hands in pckets, unpolished shoes tattoo riddled rude and contemptuous ignorant of the law idiots that you get today. I remember when one police officer with humour and respect cleared an area. Now it takes a team of aggressive blockheads to rile everyone up and create a situation.
46:05 The copper misses out a few key words from his harassment alarm and distress statement. The key words are "intent to cause". It's like how they always miss out the threatening bit of section 5 for behaviour that causes harassment alarm or distress.
Also, your whole demeanour shows that you are being violent or threatening or anything like that since you've been so open with them. So the whole HAD is a moot point.
Blatant Lies by the staff members, their HR department should deal with that, but probably won't. The PC never told you he was recording and His Passive Aggressive chat where he kept telling you the different ways in which he could arrest you, while not once asking to see your recording, which would have proved that the staff were liars and you were 100% innocent. Nothing came close to causing harm or distress to anyone. Not a good showing by the Police.!!
Well said
He did joke about entering the open door to the building.
Cold wet and miserable. The things you do for us. Many thanks.
It took 2 hours for police to come to a motorbike accident on a local street,can't belive how quickly they respond to any businesses.
Really hard to take someone seriously when they have a rubber ducky attached to their paramilitary uniform, and was the one on the right doing a bit a quiet recording of you on his mobile phone?
47:35 He admits "it's difficult" and this is where 99% of such cases just needs both sides being listened to and deescalation of the situation rather than listening to one side and jumping to conclusions and making an arrest. This is where it's very difficult for many police since this requires proper social interaction skills rather than there usual gung-ho attitude where violence and control is the answer to everything.
The only "difficulty" is that that policeman wanted to scare PTTP off by ignoring the fact that harrasment, alarm and distress requires threatening or abusive behaviour. He could get fifty calls and that's still no grounds for arrest. He was just a tyrant.
25:10 When someone who obviously doesn't know anything about the law says "this is private property" one response is to ask them if they know all the laws around private property and if they know what a public place is. They will usually waffle on about "we can ask you to leave". This is when you start quoting sections of law at them (section 33) and mentioning case law (Williams vs DPP which defines public place) and stating that common law doesn't allow them to do anything. Gaslight them and sound knowledgeable about the law and make them realise they can't gaslight you.
Beardy boy trying his hardest to enforce his ‘powers’ passive aggressive clown. Should have told his oppo not to solicit a trespass and to leave his body cam on as proof.
Harassment , alarm & distress (secondary) is in ""2 parts"" , BOTH HAVE to be met. BUT :-
it begins with the threat of unlawful violence (primary)
without it there is no offence ✌
PTTP I like your demeanor 👌
37:15 Good tactic of quoting all the sections of public order at them. Makes them realise they can't gaslight you and make up laws. You can also add on a case law reference such as Harvey v DPP.
That talkative policeman so wanted to get you on something. He said he knew the law yet claimed he could arrest you on suspicion (not true, he needs grounds for suspicion of an offence) or for causing staff "alarm, harrasment or distress" (not enough - section 5 says it has to be caused by threatening or abusive behaviour). Liars in uniform are always a threat because they're not motivated by humanity but by a demon.
They always start "well" but this AGAIN shows how the laws we have are ridiculously badly worded (designed with the help of police) to make us comply because it's easy to do fear alarm and distress is a "personal" thing and unless laws are being broken it shouldn't even be applied but oh how is that handy when someone you want to be shifted but has not violated the law.
I believe the law was brought in for hate speech but even that's a full month in court to decide who, and what on that.
34:30 Quick note about aggravated trespass. That requires someone to be on the property. If you walked around and no one was around it can't be aggravated. It is arguable that someone is on the property since they are inside, but the point is that there is no one around you that you could be stopping them from working.
Aggravated trespass is also presupposed on obstructing, disrupting or intimidating others from carrying out lawful activity. In this circumstance, the staff approached and interacted with him, thus negating the premises behind aggravated trespass.
@@martinsanders6124 An internet lawyer 😂 From that comment it’s clear you know little to nothing about the law. They’re being drawn away from lawful activity to engage with said idiot with camera causing a nuisance. How does it feel being an idiot?
Never trust a friendly copper. He’s probing you for what you know, he’s probing you for a perceived weakness. Tell them nothing .
The wrinkled pug pig appeared to be using his phone to additionally record you, possibly for his what's app group. And then he went to solicit a trespass to try create a possible crime. How impartial they truly are!! Corporate policy officers the lot of them!
Yes, he appeared to be recording. After he was asked for his number he looked down at the screen.
Watching to the end I can only say what a bollox pair of coppers🤬🤬🤬
Another absolutely fantastic video. More of these videos and stay safe PLEASE.
The police are getting to look like scarecrow now days especially them to sausages.
They give Worzel Gummidge a bad name.
For me even if some one call the police on you, when they attend it is still a Stop & Account which is an operation procedure and they do not have any statutory powers.
cop 7220 using copsplaining (making shit up) to try and embarrass/bully you into leaving
I like the way that you show us EVERYTHING that you've recorded on the video, and fast-forward the boring bits. But as I appreciate, you DO show us everything.
They couldn't Catch a Cold never mind hardened Criminals. Great Video.👍🇬🇧🇮🇱🇺🇦🇬🇧✌️
Copper had to come back to threaten Public Order offence.
Remind the police constables that u can stand there all day and that the taxpayers pay there wages not a private company.
During your recording these two constables failed in their duty and were only interested in making threats to intimidate you.
Good audit 👍🇬🇧
That little rubber ducky though...😆😆
He is lying when he said it would be a lawful arrest based on his suspicion, as his suspicion needs more than just claims made, it is following the claims that he should look for evidence to make a reasoned assessment of suspicion. Not they said so, so I now have a reasoned suspicion.
They can start an investigation based on hearsay, but they can't arrest on it.
Why do the public know the law better than those paid to uphold it? What a waste of money.
Why don't the police tidy themselves up,they always back up the corporates and never the public?well done PTTP.
She's called Karen 🤣🤣🤣🤣😭😭😭😭
Jesus Christ these clowns wouldn’t stop trying to get the last word in believing they knew the law better then you . He really thought he was going to get you on anything
That Eon van driver is a top barrister and has done some big cases at the old Bailey. He just does a bit moonlighting on the side to keep his hand in on trespassing laws. Windsor Davies and Don Estelle did a song about him…….. Whispering….. I can’t remember the rest of it.
Whispering Grass is the title....
Cop sounds like he’s on helium
7220 does a great job of copsplaining the rational for fabricating charges while talking himself out of it at the same time. Its a camera, now jog on 7220 and take your threats with you.
As a ex Civil enforcement officer my understanding is, wherever there is double/single yellow lines the highways can issue a zero 1 PCN after 5 mins observation of a stationary vehicle. Unless a blue badge+clock is seen then they have 3 hrs+15 mins to park.🇬🇧
I love watching their misunderstandings melt!
Brilliant just brilliant well done matey thank you so much for your videos
When the officers said they maybe can't turn the pc screens around what a load of bull shit.. Them buildings are designed for use with office pc to work in.. Not to show any ione what's on then...
Police seem to know when they get up from their desks then lock screens.. He seems to have all the answers
And I did not hear him say his body cam was on.... Lies again
The patience you show with these dipsticks is fantastic not one of them knows anything about the law or rights
Eon are a bunch of muppets worked for them for four years
one of the best keep up the excellent work!
More police ignorant of the law and suggesting all kinds of directives to get you to leave. When are these public servants ie the police going to start telling these muppets the facts surrounding the law and maybe start warning them that they risk a nicking for false reporting. And then more bullshit surrounding your details. Good on ya fella for standing your ground when threatened with arrest.
Never ever talk to cops ever
Even section 15 does NOT obligate you to give details. Without your consent, there is ZERO obligation. Period.
" it's one of those occasions " were they always believe the big business and NEVER Joe public
Copper on the right recording
on his phone ....being sneaky...naughty naughty
You certainly meet some interesting people on your travels. Amazing these employees have no idea about GDPR rules. Pathetic also that the police turn up for a complaint of a man with a camera. I wonder if they are that responsive to a burglary call? Another excellent video.
Wonder who told them to say they feel alarmed harassed and distressed. No way the people at the office said that to the police but the police say DO YOU FEEL ALARMED AND DISTRESSED if so I’ll knick him
Even if they arrest you, you still don’t have to give your details, you have the right of silence and the cannot keep you until you give details.
Their desperate to find some grain of authority over you !😂
Correct, they need to inform you to leave the property. They can't pass that task on to the police. That would mean the police are getting involved in a civil matter...🚓
Data protection is for authorities to protect and not the public. How ridiculous some people are?
As soon as he said 'I'm from the area' that's when he changed,one rule especially he told them door was open ,accountability works both ways
Public Order Offences wind me up so much. They always come out with "Others are finding what you're doing yadda, yadda, yadda" Just say to them that with that logic, you find people sat outside Starbucks or Costa drinking coffee alarming, harassing and distressing, so would they pinch everyone for having a Caramel Snickerdoodle Frappuccino (It is a real order)
I had someone explain a Mocha drink to me, as coffee with chocolate in it,I said, around my way, we just call that "sloppy table manners".
So much for poncy sales gimmicks. 😳
Great audit. Well done. Oh yes...Hello Duckie...
52:25 Generally the two coppers were fine. They did go on about the whole public order stuff but they did seem to realise that you were an auditor, knew what that was, worked out that you knew the laws, but they still tried to explain it all to you. And they still had to issue a directive that would make an arrest if they had to come back.
I sometimes wonder if the police training includes things like posture, bearing and mannerisms when engaging with the public so as to present an professional and efficient appearance. One hand in the pocket, a rubber duck on a chain and flapping his hand around as he spoke would indicate not.
Excellent point.... it would be interesting to see them come up against someone who wanted to hurt them, and they stand there with their hands in their pockets. Both rubber ducky and the homosexual one would be out like a light in a split second. The best advice ever given to me was that nothing you do is routine, treat everything and everyone as a potential danger. That does not mean that you have to treat people badly, just be cautious.
Hands in pockets policy.
Corporate tyrant copper.
Send our troupes out with cameras if they cause Alarm they are more effective than weapons
The tiny officer accused u where as the other implied
Only employed due to diversity quotas.
Amazon flex is where you and your cars are used to deliver as a self-employed and what times suit you it is not an offence to not give your detain if you have not broken any laws filming and taking photos in public is not a public order offence PINAC It is not the police job to go and ask if you want me to tell him to leave trespass is a civil matter and it is up to their solicitor to deal with it they need to read up on the harassment alarm and stress you should have asked him if the duck is part of his uniform issue
38:00 I think the copper needs to go back to training. He's got something else wrong. If he suspects you've committed an offence, he can't arrest for you refusing to give your details. He has to arrest first before he gets your details. The only exception is the "policeman's friend", section 50 ant-social behaviour, where details need to be given before arrest.
He did correct himself a bit later on, but he initial statement was wrong.
Why are these public servants allowed to be wearing rubber ducks, gang signs etc on their uniform. Cops working for industry’s as usual.
Eon Karen I don’t know why but that made me chuckle
Why do the copretards always either miss out part of a section 5 when they threaten it or just not finish it or misrepresent it??
Section 5
A person is guilty of an offence if he-
(a)uses threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour...
Using a device that every person on scene has a least 3 of about their person (cameras) could hardly be offensive threatening or abusive...
Why are so many people uncomfortable?, maybe they should carry a cushion around with them, 🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧
Hiya PTTP Super cool video job good job so please keep them coming GL&HF coming from Dulwich London England(✌peace✌)
no i dont get why a cop would be all like whoa wat you doing wandering around our yard ect ect coz if it was a security risk then they would make it so public couldnt wander in .... i mean come on .. when was the last time an auditor just wandered on to a military barracks 🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️🤷♂️ if it was such a security threat then there would be measeures put in place .
Ask why his SIA badge isn't on display. Like the music in between your shots! Focus Pocus often does this ... great idea! Handled very well ... thanks.
Childish I know, but it makes me chuckle when Mr Pocus , speeds up the film and you get a squeaky ,squealing sound .it's the simple pleasures.......... 😁
@@ianhill4585 Can't beat the odd simple pleasure in life eh? With ya!
Clowns!....absolutely!!
Good video mate. My only gripe is the length of the video. Despite you (and me) fast forwarding, it took about 40 minutes, which is far too long. Apart from that, you’re a pretty good auditor and I am pleased I came across your channel.
No worries better than watching a couple of episodes of Dead Enders.
Super cool auditor 😎
Why do cops always need to state the blindingly obvious at such length
Can’t help themselves they have to leave you with a threat.
Think my reply back to that parting threat would be a "Thunberg", ------ as in ,blah,blah,blah.
Aggravated trespass gets thrown around a lot but it requires proof that you are there with intention of disrupting their lawful use of their property INTENT. They can only remove you with a court order. Section 5 needs violence threats intimidation etc
The moral of this is don't buy from Amazon
Thanks!
Thank you so much Sean Aidan! Sorry I've just seen this I don't get notified for some reason 🤔
@@powertotheproletariat you’re welcome a very small contribution
Brrrrrr that was a chilly audit ! Well done.
It's pointless me coming here because, as you can see there are no small ponds around so I can float my ducky, but I suppose I could use a puddle but my mate has his battle ship in the van so we was, well just going to spend the rest of the day, you know possible sailing but now you are causing us alarm and distress when we just want to sail our ducky and ship!
Suspicion is NOT a crime 🙈😆👍👍👍
they love abusing section 5 don't they?
It's not simply causing harassment alarm or distress. It's using threatening [or abusive] words or behaviour, or disorderly behaviour likely to cause harassment alarm or distress.
Are they aware that trespass is a civil matter and not a criminal matter? Even if your implied right of access has been revoked, they CAN NOT remove you from the property. What are they even talking about?
They can remove you with reasonable force.
Please start telling them they're NOT feelings police. Good audit