Raid

Police hat on the dashboard of our van. © Magnus Andersson

The picture above is from a police raid that I went on this morning but sadly - for reasons I can't divulge - it was called off. A bit like all the blog posts that I had planned from Perpignan haven't materialised either. I will try to do better, maybe find some time this weekend, next week or before Christmas at least. I call it the 'Perpignan effect'. The festival experience was great but you feel a bit empty afterwards. Behind the scenes there is work on my homepage plus book finishing still going on so hopefully you'll be updated again soon.

The end is nigh

An angry motorist snaps (sorry) after being photographed by a Lambeth Council CCTV Enforcement vehicle, and starts photographing the two officers on his mobile phone, shouting: "If you can photograph me I can photograph you!" © Magnus Andersson

I think we all have had enough of Big Brother, and there might actually be an end in sight for the stupid use of 'Section 44 of the Anti terrorism Act' against terrorists photographers. Earlier today Lord Carlile of Berriew - the independent terror law reviewer for the Government - called for S44 to be scrapped, weeks after the European Court of Human Rights found it illegal, as BJP reports.

Good news indeed. More from the Evening Standard here, including this ominous Carlile quote: "Nothing fills my in-tray and in-box more than complaints on the use of Section 44."

When a law reviewer gets concerned about his inbox there must be a serious problem at hand. If S44 is scrapped, perhaps the police can go back to whatever they were doing before, i.e. catching camera wielding people criminals.

Here's a good read on the chances of being killed by terrorism (spoiler: 1-in-a-million chance for each person, about the same as the chance of flipping a coin 20 times and it coming up heads every time).


© Leon Neal/AFP

In other news, here is a fantastic blog post from the Winter Olympics in Vancouver by AFP photographer Leon Neal. Great read, lots of insight on covering such a huge event and stellar pictures too, especially the picture of one of the luge riders staring at the metal pillar which killed his team mate before the Olympics had even started. A very sad yet telling picture.


A lone girl is refreshing under the late monsoon rain in the impoverished Oriya Basti Colony in Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh, India, near the former Union Carbide industrial complex. © Alex Masi

And finally, only last night I met up with my dear friend Alex Masi and it is good to see that his solid good work has been rewarded yet again, this time with a 2nd prize in the PGB awards. Big up!

Hey, stupid! Camera = WMD?

© Steve Bell/The Guardian

I'm saving the best for last in this post, so here we go: This is totally getting out of hand. The ACPO issued a letter to their staff last week stating that photographers should no longer be persecuted. The big question is: has this worked out on the ground? In short, no.

Exhibit A

Exhibit B

Exhibit C

I like the fact that the guy in 'Exhibit A' used film and therefore the ill informed officers were unable to see a preview of the images he had taken. Is that the solution if you want to take a photo in public; go old school on their Metropolitan asses?

The big point for me is that the police seems to have forgotten what they are there to do, namely catch criminals. That differs quite wildly from incriminating anybody with a camera, i.e. anyone with a mobile phone, which equates to pretty much every single person on the street, tourist, casual or professional. Are the police underused? Have we got a case of too many officers on the payroll without doing any proper work? Could this be the source of this police obsession with cameras?

In the recent case of Grant Smith, who took pictures of a church near to the Bank of America, where four police units, some of them armed, responded to a person with a camera doing his job. Surely it would have been much more beneficial to society if police actually would have gone inside the premises of the bank to see what the employees were up to?


Detailed view of Westminster as seen on Google Street Maps.

Its been said before, but I doubt very much the idea that criminals intent on doing some serious recon would use a full DSLR setup. Personally I would stick to Google's Street Maps.


© Steve Bell/The Guardian

Last time I looked, the powers fighting terrorists were branded MI5 and MI6. Somehow our friendly neighbourhood officers seems to have overdosed on Spooks and decided that the chosen weapon of mass destruction is a camera.


A plainclothes officer covers the camera of Guardian journalist Paul Lewis.© Paul Lewis/The Guardian

If you are interested in disturbing video evidence of the Kafka-esque society in which we live today, look no further. It really is frightening.

Marc Vallee has a comment piece here.

Even The Daily Mail has raised the issue here.

Working together?

The financial district of London partially immersed in clouds, as seen from Greenwich Cemetery. © Magnus Andersson

There was one very significant development over the weekend here in the UK after chief constable Andy Trotter declared that photography was no longer to be seen as a threat by police officers. Both amateur and professional photographers should now be allowed to enjoy the hobby/work without being hassled by real police and/or plastic police (Police Community Support Officers).

And then this happened today. Photographer Grant Smith was first questioned by security guards (who have no rights to do so) on why he is taking pictures of a building. It should be noted that Smith is an experienced London architectural photographer. The security guards call the police and shortly three police cars and one police van are on the scene, with up to six armed police officers. WTF?

The problem seems to lie with ground staff's training: #1 why would the police operator who took the call decide to dispatch four patrols to a photographer? #2 why would the officers at the scene think that this was a terrorist at work? #3 why did the security guards get involved at all? Smith was photographing the building next to theirs.

You might argue that a crime was potentially prevented here, but I would argue that a crime was potentially enabled here; four police units and two security guards allowed themselves to be drawn into a perfectly peaceful and non-violent past time of most UK citizens, i.e. photography. Meanwhile genuine criminals went about their normal criminal routines, safe in the knowledge that the officers on the ground waste their time pursuing law abiding, tax paying citizens. These officers don't have a clue about how to interpret the laws in place.

Here's the official line from the Met Police. Their slogan is: 'Working together for a safer London'.

Great piece from Henry Porter in The Guardian.

Tomorrow's BJP piece.

And perhaps a silver lining to all the media exposure these events have been given in the last few days?

I would like to know the exact figure on stopped photographers versus discovered terrorists. I suspect it stands at umpteenth vs. none. I think the Met slogan should read 'Working to alienate the population of London, especially anyone with a camera'.

Even more scary, today it was announced that the British Transport Police will be allowed to carry 50,000volt taser guns. For those that remember, the police officer that illegally confiscated my camera was also from the British Transport Police. And next time he will be armed with a taser gun as well? Lordy.

Getting rid of the evidence

A WPC (without clearly displaying her ID number) attempts to batter me as Jeff Moore (to her right) of BPPA does nothing to stop her. © Magnus Andersson

The picture above is from the 'I'm a photographer, not a terrorist' event which I attended at The Foundry in August (some background links in this post).

Now it has been revealed that the Metropolitan Police are asking their photographers to delete any images showing officers with their identity numbers hidden/removed.

Basically the Met are asking that any evidence of misconduct by the police are to be destroyed. Does this actually happen in 2009? Was it previously OK for officers to remove their ID numbers, prior to the G20 demonstrations? Was this actually a directive?

How high up in the police hierarchy does this go? Surely someone at the top must get looked into for issuing such orders to destroy evidence, and prior to this, allowing the removal of their ID numbers?

If this was a court case, it would be perverting the course of justice.

If this was business it would be insider trading and then covering your tracks.

If it had been history it would have been David Irving.

The truly frightening thing is that this is all of the above. This is 2009 in the UK, the official police state of the Western world, where the police bends the law to protect their own, where photography is seen as a terrorist sport whilst we are the most photographed population in the world courtesy of CCTV footage.

These are the chilling words from the people that are supposed to look out for us; The Metropolitan Police:

'As of now, any still or moving photography or images of police officers must show them wearing their correct shoulder numbers/markings and name badges if these areas of uniform are included within the shot.'

and:

'As a precaution, if you hold any photography or images that do not meet this instruction they should be culled from your libraries.'

Embargoed

AP photographer Dominic Lipinski filing his pictures in direct sunlight, opposite the police station in Lambeth North. © Magnus Andersson

A while back I showed you some of the stuff from the early morning dangerous dogs raid that I went on and I just found this little gem of AP's Dominic Lipinski editing his shots after the raid. We had been embargoed, meaning we couldn't release any pictures until after 11am (we started at 05:30am), ensuring that all raids across the country had finished before they end up on the news...so what to do?

Grab a coffee anda croissant, edit your shots, wait for the deadline to expire and then start filing. Impossible to do in bright sunlight like that of course...unless you have one of these nice little hoods for you laptop.

I've got an early start tomorrow...

Dangerous dogs raid

A very angry bitch is collared by two of the dog handlers. Note the blood in her mouth - she managed to bite one of the handlers. © Magnus Andersson

A little while back I was on an early morning raid codenamed Operation Navara with the Metropolitan police. Their aim was to remove certain undesirable canines off the streets of London, targeting people using their dog as a weapon.


A large numbers of officers attend the briefing at Kennington Police HQ. © Magnus Andersson

More and more, gang members are substituting the knife and gun for a vicious dog. There are many issues regarding breeds, especially illegal breeds, and so when we set off on an early morning to knock/break down the doors of known gang members, I was a little unsure of what to expect.


A battering ram is used to gain forced entry into one property. © Magnus Andersson

Normally when you go on a police raid you either get a bullet proof vest or a stab vest. On this occasion nothing was offered, we just had to trust the dog handlers which go in before anyone else.


The dog handlers are equipped with kevlar arm protection, metal poles with loops and a fire extinguisher. © Magnus Andersson

Those guys are equipped though: a kevlar re-inforced arm, a metal pole with a loop to collar the dog and most importantly - a fire extinguisher.


A bitch is bungled into a car. © Magnus Andersson

Why on earth would the police need a fire extinguisher, you might ask. Well, a charging dog will apparently be scared and confused by the cloud of foam and also disorientated by the noise, therefore making the dog easy pickings for the dog handlers and their metal pole loops.


One of the confiscated dogs licks his nose through the mesh door. © Magnus Andersson

Operation Navara is nationwide and will go on for a long period of time. I was present at the launch and witnessed four raids. 20 'weapon dogs' were seized in under three hours, which can seem like a lot, but the task is a big one. The sheer amount of dogs handled by gang members is ridiculous, and its gets more complicated when the law implicates the owner, as opposed to the handler of the dog/weapon.


A pup is also confiscated and he actually wet himself on the way out as he was so frightened. © Magnus Andersson

Steps have been put in place to try and combat this, but currently, the 'dangerous dog' is usually 'owned' by an older relative - e.g. Grandma -while it is being full time 'handled' by gang members X, Y and Z, thus making it complicated (and stupid) for the legal system to prosecute Grandma - the legal owner of the dog - for crimes being committed by the handler; the gang member/s.


One address yielded a a haul of six puppies. The trade of illegal dogs can be very lucrative. © Magnus Andersson

The law and the application of laws are two very different things, and gang members are making the most of it.


Police speak through the door to the owner at one of the addresses. © Magnus Andersson

So what happens to the confiscated dogs? The court will decide if the dog is dangerous or not, and occasionally the owner will have their dog returned. If not, it will go to a dogs home to be re-housed and in some rare cases it will be destroyed.


An American pit bull type dog which was confiscated. © Magnus Andersson

The UK law has banned four breeds; Japanese Tosas, Dogo Argentinos, Fila Brasileiros and ‘pit bull terrier’ type breeds. The last option leaves it a bit wide open for the law, but any combination of these is deemed illegal.


The battering ram is left next to the door mat. © Magnus Andersson

Be there or (let yourself) be squared by the police

A stupid copper. © Magnus Andersson

Next Saturday, if you are a person enjoying taking pictures in public and you happen to be in London, please join us for a demonstration at The Foundry on Old Street, London, UK. Its also a favourite pub of mine which I have been going to since I arrived here in 1997.

For more info on the demonstration, the flickr page is here, more info from BJP here.

And why do I include the picture of the copper above, when a majority of police are decent people? Answer in an earlier post here.

France here we come!

Graffitti as part of a sculpture park on the top floors of Peckham Rye multistory car park which opened yesterday, 30/06/09, for three months. It has a temporary bar and cafe and nearly 30 artists are exhibiting their works. © Magnus Andersson

Alright, it was decided today: I will tag along with a whole bunch of Swedish photojournalists to Visa Pour l'Image in Perpignan! Many thanks to Christina at PFK for allowing me to stay in the same hotel as the Swedes, and to Mattias for sorting it out for me. It looks like Mattias and me will also be room mates, which could be a problem...apparently he snores like a duck. Mattias is a veteran though, he went last year, so those readers that understand Swedish can look at his posts from 2008 here.

In other news, it looks like 100 photographers might be loosing their jobs soon, but don't worry, they are from the dark side, they're only police. Whole article from BJP here.

Tomorrow could be good, or it could be bad. OK, not very conclusive I know, but I'm supposed to be photographing the fastest man on the planet, Usain Bolt, and I fear that there will be a posse of other photojournalists, minimizing the chance of coming away with any decent and/or unique picture, but I'll keep you posted.

Photography Matters - live update II

Commander Broadhurst tries to answer photographer Michael Preston's (who had his arm broken by an officer) queries regarding training of officers. © Magnus Andersson

Right, the conference is actually drawing to a close, we are now in the final session for the day, but the previous session - concerning the changing legal landscape - was by far the most interesting, not to mention worrying - of the day.

Commander Robert Broadhurst, responsible for policing all public order events across the Metropolitan Police Force area, spoke of the difficulty officers are facing when policing events. However, when he questioned who actually gets a press card and then admitting that he is unaware of the vetting process behind it, it was literally a case of being in the wrong place at the wrong time.

A senior officer - invited by the press to speak on dealing with the press - displaying such a lack of knowledge led to a number of raised voices before - amongst many others - Marc Vallee and Michael Preston (who had his arm broken by police) asked some pertinent questions and tried to get reassurances that positive change actually will happen. See pictures above and below.


Photographer Marc Vallee (left) queries Commander Broadhurst. © Magnus Andersson



Met Police Commander Robert Broadhurst (centre) gives an unimpressive performance when questionedby Jeff Moore (R) on press card issues. © Magnus Andersson

G20 (updated)

Anti capitalist and climate change activists demonstrate in the City of London on April 1, 2009 in London, England. Protesters marched through London demanding action on poverty, climate change and jobs, as World leaders arrived in London ahead of the G20 summit. Getty Images / Jeff J. Mitchell

The G20 meeting is in town and so are the protesters. Much as I would have loved to cover these events, two things prevented me; 1) my newspaper only cover events south of the river Thames (all protests are to the north of it) and 2) yesterday I was incapacitated in bed with a migraine (bohoo), watching it all unfold via BBC News 24 on my laptop. Looked like fun though. And while it dominated front pages for one or two newspapers here in the UK today, The Sacramento Bee in the US has the best photographic coverage! Shame on the UK press for disregarding good photojournalism to this extent.


An injured policeman, second from right, is helped by colleagues during clashes with protestors near the Bank of England, in London, on April 1, 2009. Leaders wrangled Wednesday on how a G20 London summit could fix the global economy as demonstrators attacked a bank in an anti-capitalist riot in the British capital's main financial district. AFP/ Getty Images / AFP Carl De Souza

Update: BTW, an Anonymous reader informed me of this, following on from this. Good stuff, keep it coming.

HA HA HA!

Our intelligent anti-terrorist officers have come up with a brilliant, two-pronged, new plan to beat terrorism;

#1: go through your neighbours trash. If its full of takeaway boxes and beer cans, report him/her, otherwise they might have an early death.

#2: did you see anyone taking a picture of a CCTV camera? Report them! Any half decent photographer will tell you that the background is just as important as the person you are photographing.

I like the idea of turning the population into your own little Stasi machine, imagine how much time it will save the intelligence gathering folks? Boingboing has the story here.

It also looks like this will set off another avalanche of brilliant remixes of these posters, flickr has a bunch already; here, here, here, here, here and here, to name but a few.


Link

This relates to the previous police posters, where this poor fella got done for having a beard. A "big brown beard". Quality.

If you actually have any problems with the police, here's what to do.

However, its encouraging to see that at least parts of the government doesn't agree with how the police treats journalists.

Sign up! (updated)

John on the bench he was photographing. © Magnus Andersson

Local historian John Beasley was taking photos of this bench in Holly Grove, Peckham, when he was stopped and questioned under the Prevention of Terrorism Act in January. An elderly gentleman with a compact film camera is now seen as a terrorist.

With this in mind, please sign up to photographer Simon Taylor's petition to 10 Downing Street to remove new restrictions on photography in the United Kingdom. Section 76 of the Counter Terrorism Act, introduced on February 16, makes it an offence to “elicit, publish or communicate information” relating to members of the Armed Forces, police and intelligence services if that information is “likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism”.

Those convicted under Section 76 could face a fine or up to 10 years’ imprisonment.


Update: cutting from NUJ's latest newsletter, not on the Terrorism Act but on the cuts we face in the regional press;

Please lobby UK Members of Parliament – NOW
Tomorrow (Wednesday) NUJ members are lobbying the UK parliament over the massive job cuts in the regional media. If you can’t attend but live in the UK please support the activity by sending a letter to your MP NOW. You can find a suggested text and a free, quick way to send it here.

Let’s make regional media the talk of the House of Commons. If you plan to attend and you haven’t received a briefing from NUJ HQ please email campaigns@nuj.org.uk.

Arrested for NOT taking pictures

Terror suspect without any pictures... © Channel M

Seriously, this is quite funny, but contrasting that story is this piece from The Guardian, which shows how police specifically target journalists and keep the info on file for seven years. You have to wonder why the police feels it must control the media?

A bit harsh?

Last week in Balham: a police officer on his way to ask me not to photograph...the friend of a victim who got hit by a train - fair enough. © Magnus Andersson

I might have been a bit harsh in my language in the previous post on the police, of course not all police are bad, but there is a certain kind, and those were the intended target. Anyway, my colleague Hannah was recently handcuffed and led away from a crime scene and initiated a police complaint. The police wondered if it would be better if she came in and gave their new recruits a little talk on what its like from our side. Great idea! She was down there today, I haven't had time to hear back from her yet, but dialogue usually sorts most problems.


The view from the 20th floor in Draper House. © Magnus Andersson

The other day I had to walk 20 flights of stairs up a tower block where the lifts had broken down over 40 times in the last two months. I must say I was pretty knackered with a full kit on my back and the flash kit in my hand - I had to stop three times on the way up - but imagine the elderly, or those with little kids in buggies..?!? Prisoners in their own homes.

The view was nice as the sun was setting though...and for those of you who understand Swedish, check this post out from India based Swedish tog Martin von Krogh, hilarious account on how we PJ's scorn the sunset shot, but secretly make lots of money from them! If you don't understand Swedish, let Google translate it for you, well worth it.

Now I'm off to see Fleet Foxes at The Roundhouse in Camden!

Dear Jacqui, when will you ever learn?

Home Secretary Jacqui on the left. © Birmingham Mail

STOP PRESS: It's ILLEGAL, if a cop - even a smiling one - decides it is! Disregard my previous post.

Sweet Jesus, this is an incredible development. BJP reports here that Home Secretary Jacqui Smith (above left), after the November meeting with the NUJ, has said that photography CAN be limited in public places in special circumstances, see her quote below, (my brackets):

'This may be on the grounds of national security (PJ's photographs a terrorist in the act - surely not news?) or there may be situations in which the taking of photographs may cause or lead to public order situations or inflame an already tense situation (perhaps the institutionally racist Met Police beating up black people? Nah, not of interest to the public) or raise security considerations (weddings as we all know, are of a high extremist danger, read on). Additionally, the police may require a person to move on in order to prevent a breach of the peace or to avoid a public order situation or for the person's own safety and welfare or for the safety and welfare of others'.

Thank you very much, Jacqui Smith!

Just to clarify, Jacqui, if there happens to be police officers present at my next job, can I assume that there is bound to be nothing of interest - whatsoever - for the public for me to report on? Nothing in the interest of the people that you serve, the people that elected you? Please, Jacqui, please get in touch, don't be so (camera) shy.

What exactly are the police protecting us photographers - and thereby the public at large - from seeing? Did the UK just become a four-letter word that spells I-R-A-N? No crime reported in the newspapers? Then surely we must live in a crime free society! Hurrah, Jacqui. Civilisation at last, thanks to New Labour - and The Met - one of the oldest police organisations in the world.

Here's some sobering facts on how the Met, in extreme cases such as public disorder, the armed forces were deployed, instead of what we have now, individual officers left to decide when to take individual journalists out of the equation.

Imagine Brixton in 1981, imagine 1985 imagine 1995, without the media. Erased from history, Jacqui? A young and promising photojournalist by the name of David Hodge was killed at the 1985 riots, and yes others died as well, but from governmental failures; institutional wrongdoing.

Individual officers deciding when to pull the hood over the nations eyes, let alone multiple bullets to the head. These are dangerous times, indeed.

Without getting too political, this government has had serious misjudgments on the issue of national security ever since the '45 minute' claim. A decision which so far has lead to the loss of over 100.000 Iraqi civilian lives.

But wait - Jacqui Smith, Home Secretary - makes things worse. Seven days ago a wedding photographer in London - on the very day of UN Human Rights Day - was detained for 45 minutes (oh, the irony!) under section 44 of the Terrorism Act. Laugh your head off/cry your eyes out here.

So please, Mrs Thatcher, Jacqui Smith, I'm expecting a personal reply from you to the question; Exactly how many crimes have been prevented, how many lives have been saved by criminalising trained photojournalists to carry out their profession and their chosen duty to inform the public of events in their society?

Alternatively, Jacqui, here's another question; do we have a police force inexcusably unaware of its own operating limits, without proper training? Surely you wouldn't start killing innocent civilians to protect national security? Surely you have security of this country under control, without resorting to extreme measures?

PS, Jacqui, here's some video of your boys protecting national security in the last few days:
http://www.1854.eu/2008/12/heavyhanded_policing_against_p.html
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=XxXfcgC67Z4 (gets interesting just before 4:00, and after that becomes compelling viewing for the mere fact that these (just like all the other) police officers don't have a clue what they are doing, no explanations for their actions, no knowledge of the law, no knowledge that they can get serious repercussions, even loose their job over this).

At least in my case, as soon as the officer in charge found out what the plods were doing, my equipment was released immediately. Don't know what happened to the promise that "all ground staff would get proper training on how to treat the press", though...do you, Jacqui?

ps, Jacqui Smith, Home Secretary: there is plenty more to come at Marc Vallee.

Bedtime reading for Jacqui only: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2005/apr/24/britishidentity.race Yes we have come along way, but why rewind the clock in the name of national security?

OMG, public photography is lawful!!!

Several (white) police officers detain two (black) people after an argument and ask the photographer not to take any pictures. In this instance, are we - photographer, the detained and the police (for breaching their own guidelines) - all criminals? © Magnus Andersson

Maybe we are making progress? Story on how officers are reminded that it actually isnt a crime, not even a terrorist crime, to take pictures! That said, one of our photographers was handcuffed and led away from a crime scene in London two weeks ago.

Do you live in a climate of fear?

I mentioned Marc Vallee in the last post; now he and the NUJ has produced a film about the assaults, intimidation, spying and the general targeting that we UK photojournalists are being subjected to by the police on a daily basis.

What's most worrying is that the plod on the street simply doesn't seem to care if he breaks the law or not. Removing the offending journalist seems to be the task at hand at any public event nowadays - not securing the public or ensuring people's right to protest and for us to document it. Climate of fear? Yes - fear of fascism.

I know that there are many countries in which the situation is a lot worse, but for a country that tries to promote democracy and freedom around the world, it certainly doesn't look good.

The map above is from Reporters without Borders, click the image to see a larger version.

Being shouted at and crying in the same day

Another month of work has gone by and we are now in September, my favourite month! Its got nothing (much) to do with it being my birthday towards the end of it, but more to do with the fresh air coming in and the last-days-of-a-dying-summer feeling; although to be fair, in the UK, the summer never really sprung to life this year. But this is where September usually comes in and rescues things with some amazingly beautiful days of warm sunshine. Seasons aside, this was the day:

My first job was down at Brixton prison where fire departments from three different stations had been called out to. Six fire engines were standing around doing nothing. I chatted to a friendly fireman when I got there and he said it was just a suspect device that they were checking out inside the prison, probably nothing, the number of trucks was just standard procedure, etc.

I then went over to the cordon - which anybody can walk up to - and took a couple of snaps and was then approached by a jobsworth fireman. He politely asked me to 'get the fuck out' despite all the regular office workers being allowed to stand next to me and look (at a scene where nothing was going on, I might add).

When I asked him why he said it was his managers orders. Sadly, this upstanding fireman 'wasn't in a position to reveal his managers name', or to get said manager to come down and say it in person to me, and then he promptly said the POLICE will come if I don't move. I said that is fine, you can bring the police if you want, and you'll see that they cant move me either, unless you first extend your cordon and remove these 'civilians' as well.

In the end I just said 'I'll move' and did so after getting my frames, but why, oh why, are people in uniform hellbent on telling trained members of the press what to do, while at the same time letting people stand around with their camera phones and not moving them? Some battles are not worth fighting, and this was one of them, but dang, I thought firemen were professionals as well? Next time I'll just bring my (future tense) P6000.

Two minutes later the firemen were given the all clear and they rolled back home to their stations...

The place to get the latest on these developments is, as always, on photographer Marc Vallee's blog. Interesting to see how we have moved on since the 90's.

The last job of the day was a vigil for a murder victim who died in Camberwell in September last year*. Quite a large group of friends and family had come, including the victims mother. As always on these occasions, it takes a lot longer than planned, but it doesn't matter.

A priest led the prayers after which people were invited to say what they felt. A Rastafarian friend of the victim sung an amazing hymn on the spur of the moment, dedicated to his family, and then people, one after the other, voiced their love for this man.

In 2007, I'd been at this very place to photograph the crime scene. Tonight I couldn't see through my viewfinder as I was overcome by emotion, tears were going down my face. My thoughts go out with all of the people present.

*He will remain nameless out of respect and because of an ongoing trial, but for the record, we were the only media invited by the family and the only media present.



© Magnus Andersson



© Magnus Andersson



© Magnus Andersson

"it's about the cumulative damage done by suspicion"

Good film by Rajesh Thind on the issue of being confronted by officers who have very little understanding of the law when it comes to taking pictures and filming in public places.

I mentioned my ordeal in a previous post, and now security expert Bruce Schneier has weighed in with a good article in The Guardian.

The Times also had a piece on the subject from which the beautiful sentence to this post title was lifted.

Here's a download on what our rights are. I just wish they would show it to the officers, because I'm pretty sure we photographers know the score.