back to article The war on photographers - you're all al Qaeda suspects now

When you hear the phrase "helping police with their inquiries", does an image of dedicated selfless citizenry instantly spring to mind? Or do you wonder whether the reality is not slightly more sinister? How about "voluntarily handing over film to the police". Stephen Carroll is a keen amateur photographer, with an interest …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

Silver badge

Some thoughts

1. So much for all those tourist snaps in front of Big Ben and Westminster. "I'm sorry missus, but we'll be needing to impound your Nikon and send your two whelps to the workhouse because you were taking pictures in front of the seat of government"

2. Can I go down to the local police station and tell them that I need to impound their CCTV photography because it caught me in a particularly disheveled state, thereby harming my self-esteem, social standing and employment prospects. Can I go further and argue that CCTV images are stealing my soul? Perhaps if I argue the latter and wave a Koran in their face they will produce the last 3 years of CCTV records for my neighborhood.

0
0
Unhappy

Surveillance mentality

I am shocked you would even publish this article knowing terrorists are on the lookout for evidence of how we protect our society. People don't take photographs just for fun you know they have a reason and the police are within their rights to ask how they have the time when they should be elsewhere. Besides, only terrorists would spend so much money on an SLR, so that's pretty clear evidence of guilt.

But they need to go much further to protect us. We need every form of surveillance available. They need to install CCTV and recording equipment on every street corner and in every room in every home. I for one wish they would install them in the countryside too. There is a lot going on out there that is not being watched closely enough. What are those people watching on TV and listening to on the radio, what are they saying in the pubs and why are they laughing like that...?

We should praise all those who watch us and those who watch the watchers. They are doing all this surveillance stuff in my name and in the names of so many other innocent UK citizens to make our lives safe from tyranny and repression. If the terrorists won they would make us live in a surveillance state, everyone reporting on everyone else. Do you want to live in a country like that, because I don't.

But all this surveillance stuff is really expensive so we need to think of cost saving ways of doing it. When I visit the US I hope the UK authorities ensure my fingerprints and photograph, as well as everyone else's, are passed back to the security services of the UK for inclusion in our national register. It would save so much time and trouble rather than seeking Parliamentary approval to collect such data. Why stop there? I also hope the government realises just how much money and paperwork can be saved by asking the security service's of other nations to record my phone calls, indeed everyone's phone calls. Having to fill in a load of paperwork and get warrants must be such a pain when they have such an important job tracking down terrorists and those who would challenge the freedoms laid down in Magna Carta. Terrorists you see don't appreciate Magna Carta because it is such an old bit of parchment. It's all out of date these days.

Lets encourage the authorities to introduce national ID cards as quickly as possible. During the second world war ID cards were such a help as it allowed the Germans to identify French resistance fighters because each of their cards had 'RESISTANCE FIGHTER' written in big letters on it. Today we could print 'TERRORIST' on the card making ID cards such an easy way for the police to know the holders intention.

Finally, we need to make sure there is no hiding place for terrorists and for that reason we have to encourage those who protect us to monitor MP's as well even if they tell the MP's it against some rule or other. After all, imagine what would happen if the MP's started to meet in corners and planned to defeat these surveillance measures. That would make them no better than terrorists plotting to overthrow the will of the people.

So that's why asking people why they are taking photographs of buildings is so necessary.

0
0
Stop

photography *not* banned at Canary Wharf

Living close to CW, and having seen the plastic police harrassing photographers myself, I thought I would look at the Canary Wharf website to see if there was a list of the dos and don't of the estate - it being private property and all that. I was hoping they might have them on the web as I certainly have never seen a sign with them listed on the estate itself.

www.canarywharf.co.uk has no information about what is and isn't allowed on its private land - no information even of the fact that you will be stopped by their plastic police and inexpertly swabbed for explosives if you drive in.

Google however provided this gem from a Flickr user questioning the CW Estate Security Manager on this very topic:

http://www.flickr.com/groups/canarywharf/discuss/72057594125957343/

[snip] "Photography is not banned on the Estate and therefore there are no signs advising of its prohibition. However, professional photography is only permitted with our permission and when granted, a permit is issued. Amateur photography is welcomed but, in the light of the current extremely high threat from terrorism, photographers may be questioned by security staff. Once satisfied with their legitimacy, security personnel will permit the photography to continue and I am very disappointed at your comments about the threats to confiscate the memory card or delete the photos. " [snip]

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Deleting the pictures, yeah, that'll fix it.

Not to reiterate the point that this is blindingly stupid, but in all of these incidents where the police "force" people to delete all the pictures and then let them go on their way there's a small problem; they are deleting pictures with the camera's built-in functionality. They're not crushing the memory cards and grinding them into dust. They're not over-writing the data will military spec erasing techniques.

They're simply asking the camera to delete the picture.

And on my camera, which uses an SD memory card formatted to FAT32, that means that it does what FAT32 does and blanks the first entry of the file name in the directory table. It is completely recoverable - well as long as you're not flummoxed when prompted to complete the file name of the picture file ?ICT0001.JPG...

And frankly... if you're going to arrest someone in Boots for taking pictures that may or may not be for terrorist causes then, really, why didn't they just cough up the money and have the film run through their 1 hour processing thingy. You are standing in Boots after all.

*flick* *flick* *flick*

*shuffle*

*sort*

*hand back*

"Oh, okay, well I guess you weren't taking any dodgy pictures.

Err glad we could help get your order developed in 10 minutes there, Sir.

Have a nice day."

:)

0
0
Thumb Down

@david

"As for the peeeedo concern, I can understand it's at least distasteful to think that someone's taken pics of your kids in public for sexual gratification, but I'm not sure what harm it does anyone."

Try taking pictures of my kids for sexual gratification and while you're on the floor catching my boot you can think about who's getting harmed...

0
0
Flame

Behaviour likely to cause a breach of the peace

This needs stamping on - in due course (following the American pattern as we seem destined to do) somebody will film the police acting outside the law and post it on the web. Next step is a riot (think "Rodney King") so a determined police crackdown on photographers will prevent a riot. Nothing like preventive policing </end sarcasm>

0
0
Anonymous Coward

A scapegoat

Lots of people complaining about their privacy from individuals taking photographs, yet the store, council, police, tv, everyone TAKING VIDEOS.... to me this is the classic deflection. People feel pissed off at their lack of privacy and see this as the little bit of privacy they can hold on to. A scapegoat to make their point perhaps?

0
0
Thumb Up

The best solution is to never stand down.

The best solution is to keep getting stopped over and over again surely we can outlast plod with this issue and they will tire and find something else to do. If we stop our photography then they've won.

I got stopped last week by a city centre ranger in Swansea. As soon as I was stopped I went on the attack right away and the poor chap wasn't prepared for it at all. I explained my rights he explained I needed to get everybody's consent who I had fit into the frame. I told him that wasn't likely and I voluntarily showed him my pictures to be kind since I was on a rage and volunteered my contact information (business card) and he said he would check with his superiors since I needed a license to photograph in a public. I explained how my tax's paid for this public space I've never been phoned anyway.

Don't stand down, also its classed as assault to have your images forcibly deleted from your camera.

Thumbs up for the positive energy I'm hoping to give off.

0
0
Tim

Suprising

I read this and was really surprised, not by the fact the police stole the mans film but there were police officers in Hull City Centre. I work in the City Centre and only ever see the pretend police, who as far as I can tell have no real powers.

0
0
Black Helicopters

Regarding the Hull case

The original story was broken by Hull Daily Mail and on BBC Look North when the 2 noddies, sorry PCSOs took this poor blokes films, which were eventually returned to him, they had followed him approximately 3/4 of a mile before challenging him and impounding his films. The gentleman in question was not using a DSLR but a Leica rangefinder and was in Boots to get the films developed using their 1 hour service. The photographer had been taking candids from eyelevel but had been seen by the people passing who kept looking at him and spoiling his shots, this lead to him holding his camera ar waist level to get the candid shots he wanted. The musclebrained idiots posing as PCSO's rather than asking him about his hobby and establishing what was going on took the usual action of a moron in a new uniform and came down on him like a ton of bricks.

Look North, when following up this story, were then told, in a damage limitation exercise, further lies by Humberside Police who stated they could have siezed the camera under common law. This lead to an online and telephone discussion between myself and the producer of Look North which resulted in him agreeing to seek legal clarification in future cases rather than accepting a Police cover up.

Remember if visiting North East Lincolshire and East Yorkshire, Humberside Police, No1 for speed camera's, No1 for ignorance of the law, No1 for issueing crime numbers & No 1 for crappest police force in the UK, as official stated by HM Inspector of Police.

Black helicopter and anonymous for obvious reasons

0
0
Pirate

US exports meth-heads to keep English cops busy.

AC in Humberside wrote: "The force is so desperate to look like they're doing something that they make up easy crimes, instead of dealing with the hard ones."

I almost envy you. Here in the US we've got so much crime that the cops are so busy with crack-heads and gangs and car-jackings and murderers and busting meth labs and the like, the cops don't have any time/energy left over to hassle the rest of us...

So, once *all* of England finally gets completely taken over by meth users and crackheads (it's coming! just a matter of time! we're here to help!) who have to *steal* everything that isn't bolted down to support their habits, then the cops will be too busy to bother you anymore - and they will probably also become much meaner. Of course, you'll have to install some top-notch security systems in your home and car, and brush up on your martial arts skills to ward off the scum who try to steal from you...

BTW don't believe the statistics you hear sometimes about U.S. crime being less now, it isn't, it's just that people get too discouraged to even bother reporting it anymore (like *that* does any good) and the stats only show *reported* crime.

0
0

Just like in North Korea!

Comrade Stalin would approve of these measures.

0
0

@andy

unless you catch david choking the chicken there and then or standing on dustbins to take a snap of them in the nuddy, how do you know it is for sexual gratification?

Also, when it comes down to it, if your answer to "who does it hurt" is "someone will commit a crime" that isn't actually answering the question, is it. Might as well say that not having all the nice stuff in the shops causes someone to rob it, so stores should give way all their stuff. Silly and not really answering the question of "what harm".

Look up non-sequitor.

PS if I saw you kicking the shit out of someone I'd break your legs and cut off at least one of your thumbs.

0
0

At last - I'm a terrorist !

Once upon a few years ago, I was the Secretary of the local camera club, and the whole membership went to a certain refinery in a Northern Country to take photos by night for a Club competition. Since it's the only refinery in a certain Northern Country, I am reasonably certain it's the same one as in the comment above !

Not only does this make me a terrorist, but another 30 or so people of generally harmless and inoffensive natures.

PS I still have the negatives, and am open to offer I this was a few years ago ) !

Chris Cosgrove

0
0

@andy

You're one of the reasons this stupid state of affairs has come about.

0
0
Thumb Down

al Qaeda has a front company

al Qaeda created a company called Google to photograph the world and get away with it. Once they have the photos, they are planning on folding up Google as it will no longer be useful.

The police need to arrest everyone at Google because they are terrorists.

Go the Police and don't forget that half the public are terrorists too, they have cameras in their cellphones.

This is not paranoia, just prevention.

0
0

I suggest photographers set up a sting on police.

I suggest photographers set up a sting on police.

Have the bait photographer wearing an audio transmitter, and a team of other photographers recording the scene.

Post the results on the internet.

Worldwide, the press should run more stings on police. It seems the only video showing police misbehaviour is photography done by the general public.

But I suppose the ability to do their jobs, means crime journalists and photographers must curry favor with police.

0
0
Tim
Coat

cameras?

but millions of "authorised" public cameras taking pictures of who knows what is OK whereas one or two private citizens are a menace.

they didn't need to ban free speech - I'm speechless enough already.

0
0
Unhappy

No longer a Gradual Erosion..........

I have increasingly very little time for our law enforcement agencies and very unsympathetic to their seemingly bazaar conception of the law which appears to be pyramidal in structure. As far as the Police are concerned the major criminal elements lie at the base of this edifice. Why then are they directed to the pinnacle and work downwards from the geeks, passive photographers, pensioners and anoraks. The answer is simple, much like their instructed mentality. An easy pinch with little or no objection. Keeps the stats in the right direction AND subjugates government into thinking that a pay rise is justified.

0
0
Flame

A similar state of affairs in Oz

A couple a years ago a friend of mine was arrested and had his camera confiscated for taking pictures of a train derailment in Adelaide. This, while the news cameras were all over the place filming everything, but members of the public are not allowed to? My friend of course told the PIGS all this, and for his trouble lost his camera for several weeks while it went through the courts. He eventually did get it back, with pictures intact, but the PIGS were never prosecuted for false arrest or harassment.

Last year, when I was in Melbourne, I went around taking night shots of the city. While I wasn't stopped or questioned, all the time I was taking photos I was waiting for it. What kind of society do we live in when a law-abiding citizen is more afraid of the PIGS than of being mugged or robbed for the camera? A PIG-FUCKING POLICE STATE, that's what!

Yeah. Not police. PIGS. FUCKING PIGS.

And yes I'll put my name to this. Bring it on, PIG.

0
0
Flame

Of course photographers are a threat!

Photographers might accidentally document a plod breaking the law while "urging" someone to "help the police with their inquiries". The police are generally wary of evidence not under their control, because such evidence may be used to prove police brutality or bribery or other acts they'd rather see not documented.

0
0
Unhappy

Heritage-listed buildings too....

The New South Wales Government Tourism site lists some of Sydney's architectural marvels. Amongst them is the Societe Generale Building next to Martin Place, with "a marvelous original Art-Deco foyer, well worth a visit".

Except, well, don't.

Taking an overseas colleague around town on a Sunday afternoon to see some of the famous buildings, we stopped off at Societe Generale. The building's quite public foyer was wide open, so in went went, SLRs ready, we smelly Jobsworth from Mr.Nastiperson Rent-A-Cop-Or-Thug pounced on us literally.

"You can't take photos in here" - OK, fair call, it's private property, so we went back out onto the street, where I promptly turned and took a photo of the foyer - to be tackled by said security guard. He grabbed my camera, and I refused to let go, and got my arm yanked fairly hard in the process.

I got away with the camera intact, and in hindsite I should have made a complaint and filed assault charges, but really, are the cops going to actually do anything about it?

'

Yes, I could spend cash getting lawyers, taking it to court, but I have a living to make, and only finite time.

If someone organises a crowd, though, I'll be there.

0
0

cctv

Can I please have my image removed from all those cctv camera that have taken my picture without my consent. Thanks.

Oh and while you're at it, next time there's an 'incident' and you appeal for pics from members of the publ .... oh never mind

0
0
Black Helicopters

Camera Manufacturers

Why aren't the camera manufacturers helping to lobby for change?

People are buying their cameras and being prevented from using them, and if you think you're going to be harrased by the police, PCSOs and security guards then what's the point in spending a fortune on an SLR and some lenses? It seems the safest thing to do is buy a mobile phone with a few megapixels. Canon and Nikon must be losing money by people not buying their products or choosing to buy smaller and cheaper models.

0
0
Silver badge
Happy

Oooh...

"Try taking pictures of my kids for sexual gratification..."

If that's an invitation, the least you could do is include your address....

0
0

Not that it'll make any difference...

but there's an online petition relating to this where you can be officially ignored!

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/photographylaw/

0
0
Paris Hilton

Filthy Rozzers

@Richard:

<quote>5. If in the event you arrested for failing to comply, behave calmly and co-operatively. When you are presented to the cop shop, remind the officers there you have been arrested illegaly for a non-existent crime, and demand (politely, but firmly) that the law is checked there and then. Make sure the arresting officers stay present to hear the outcome of this. When you are let go, request that the officers are dealt with in respect to false arrests.</quote>

You forgot to mention the bit where they'll take you DNA and fingerprints, even if they have to let you go due to arresting you on a non-existent charge. You try getting your DAN out of the 'database' after that...

Paris, 'cos we'd have her DNA by now if she tried any of that drink-driving over here...

0
0

@ Andy

"Try taking pictures of my kids for sexual gratification and while you're on the floor catching my boot you can think about who's getting harmed..."

I think you're missing the point. Even if I was taking photos for sexual gratification (and I don't know how you would determine that), it isn't illegal. So why harrass everyone who has a camera in public and is within 100 yards of kids?

0
0
Silver badge

Legal Public photography

Isn't it amazing that on all these TV shows with photographers going around with the police any complaints from the public about being caught on camera are answered by the Police a phrase along the lines of "he's allowed to film here it's a public place". No asking everyone present for their permission to be shown on TV (OK the scrotes get their faces blanked on request and also some of the Police, but not the crowds of shoppers going about their perfectly lawful business) for them.

0
0
Unhappy

The real reason...

...that the JobsWorth security boys act the way they do, is that photography is outside their tiny sphere of intellect. Why would anyone want to spend their free time out in the street with a camera, whey you could be sitting at home on a sofa vegetating.

If you don't fall into the lowest common denominator of society, you get persecuted. This is why we now have many more TV stations, all of which cater to f*ckwits.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Terrorists...

Anyone else starting to wonder if they're on the right side?

0
0

tit-le demanded,

@jonb

nope, they're just interested in controlling the minutae of your life to their standards. Both sides are The Enemy (tm).

they can all get lost - whatever happened to self determination and personal responsibility?

0
0
Flame

@ JonB

"Terrorists... Anyone else starting to wonder if they're on the right side?"

Seeing as the Home Office currently have my passport*, I can't _possibly_ comment....

*yes, _again_ ... you'd think it'd be easier for a Commonwealth citizen than a Czechoslovakian to make a bloody living here (y'know, the entire British Empire thing)... just waiting to get a new application form for RoA where it asks if I own a camera (alongside such gems as "Are you a terrywrist? Y/N")

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Political correctness?

It's strange that some of the biggest purveyors of terrorism scare stories and paedomania were such esteemed papers and The Daily Mail, Express, Sun etc.

Now they could be accused of many things but political correctness isn't one of them.

0
0

@Wotan Son of Tharg

<Quote>I am shocked you would even publish this article knowing terrorists are on the lookout for evidence of how we protect our society.</Quote>

Er, if you've figured it out, dont'cha think the bad guys have?

Sigh

0
0

London Bobbies

As a foreign tourist in London a couple of months ago I never had any problem with taking photos. Never even had an inkling such problems existed. I even asked a policeman if I could take his photo - which he smilingly allowed. (I think with taking a "portrait" photo of a person in a public place it is at least good manners to ask permission).

Anyway - sad to hear such problems are arising. Good to hear people are questioning the actions of officialdom and giving advice on how to react.

0
0

@JonB

For once, and surprisingly, yes.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

@andy

LoL internet hard man, you show them how tough you are!

You beat up a guy taking photos of kids becouse the only reason in your pea sized brain to take photo of children is becouse you're a peadophile, turns out guy is parent of other kid taking a picture of a heart warming moment, or he's collect evidence of long term erosion of the ground and hadn't even noticed children in his shot. However you're busy being a big man!

Go you.

You're my hero.

0
0
ian
Black Helicopters

"Have the police not thought this through?"

Well what do you think, given the average copper has an IQ equivalent to their shoe size.

0
0
Coat

Whoops!!! Stupid me...

I was on the london eye recently, with me missus and a single-use camera. I'm not even an amateur, but I can point the thing and press the button.

Background info from the S.ecurity S.ervices/Daily Hatemail point of view:

Half my family is from [secular but mainly muslim country]. My missus is from the Republic Of Ireland. I use unregistered phones and change them every few months. I often make cash deposits to my bank account. Several of my T-shirts are not permitted within a mile of parliament. I have been arrested for posession of Cannabis. I didn't unquestioningly buy the whole "drugs are baaaaad mmmmkay!" thing: I think for myself, therefore I'm a potential subversive. I have computing qualifications, therefore I am a potential hacker who could click his mouse and Chernobyl the country off the face of the earth. While we're at it I'm probably lurking in chat rooms grooming your little sons and daughters while wanking like a safari park chimp.

While on the eye, I took some, maybe 2 or 3, tech porn pics of the machinery, just on impulse. Then I realised the risk I was taking. I'm a harmless tech geek FFS!

Now, I doubt I'll be developing that film anywhere in this stazi piss-hole. In fact I half expected to be greeted at the exit ramp by more than a few of our friendly local jackbooted rambo-wannabes.

AC because I'm *not* paranoid: "they" really are after people like me!

Mine's the one with the wads of undeclared income and a one-way ticket to a free country in the inside pocket....

0
0
Thumb Down

Legal advice not quite right

I'm an ex-cop, it's partly due to sh*t like this that I left the force.

However there is something missing from your guide to what you can and can't do.

Police have the right, without needing a court order, to confiscate evidence of a crime. This means that if you have taken pictures of a crime scene before, during or after a crime (or where it is reasonably thought a crime may take place or have taken place), or if the Police think that you may have taken pictures of yourself committing a crime, they can seize the film/card at least. And a court would likely to class it reasonable to seize the camera as well if the officer isn't confident they can extract the film/card safely, or in the case of digital if they reasonably suspect the camera has in-built memory.

The aftermath of a car accident. building fire, fight etc. are considered crime scenes even once the Police have arrived. So any pictures you take can still be considered evidence (you may have caught one of the perpetrators still hanging around, images of substances that are about to get washed away by the pending rain cloud etc. etc.) so an officer can still confiscate with warrent in those circustances. Note that it is not necessary to prove that you HAVE taken useful pictures, just that there may REASONABLY be the chance that evidence may appear in them. The press are generally afforded professional curtisy in these situations (although not always), on the basis that they will likely publish anything useful anyway.

So remember, its not always taking the photo that is the crime, it is withholding evidence of another crime.

But of course the officer has (usually, or at least should have) discretion...and some common sense may be nice..?

0
0
Thumb Down

SuperTech to the rescue! (cue theme tune)

Is it a bird? Is it a plane? Well, actually, no-one can tell since if you've got decent optics in public you're a terrorist. Ruined that intro.

So we just need a camera that will save to an SD card as well as a Bluetooth HDD. Or a backup camera. Or go the whole hog and have the file saved across the Internet.

Any electronics nerds out there should have a go at getting a small GPRS modem and a microcontroller to talk (Even PICs can manage this) then use the SD card's SPI mode to let the microcontroller to read data from the SD card. Rig this all up to work inside a camera (there's gotta be space inside the camera- or in a small professional-looking box that's stuck on the side of it) and have the microcontroller switch between "scan-SD-for-differences-and-FTP-them-home" mode and "take, review and "delete" photos" mode.

Or use your camera-phone and find a network-drive program (it's out for WM5/WM6 phones, so it should be possible for the rest of you!) and set your camera to save there.

Also, fitting a microphone and miniature camera in there would probably be pretty good so you could record what the police were saying for future reference...

This isn't even a law that's ridiculous. It's not even a misapplication of a law- there IS NOT a law out there that covers this. It's state-sponsored bullying, plain and simple.

0
0
Flame

So where's Liberty when we need it?

Nothing in the press or Liberty's website to suggest it cares about this particular abuse of police power.

0
0
Black Helicopters

CCTV

So where does CCTV feature in all this? They're photographing pretty well everywhere all the time, including buildings in Hull and (gasp!) children...

0
0
Anonymous Coward

Stop

When is somebody going to stop the police from behaving this way?

We have now reached a point where the police are as menacing, and cause as much misery and suffering as do the criminals. Something needs to be done.

AC for obvious reasons

0
0

Re: I'm 'gobsmacked'

I should hope you'd be locked up for inadvertantly taking photos of the Golf Balls at Flyingdales; they've been gone for years

I'm all for photography; but strange mutant powers are pushing it :)

0
0
Pirate

Unsafe Baiting

I have a mate at work who is.....shall we say more susceptable to tanning than me. About 3 weeks after the tube shooting he went on a tourist visit to London and found himself outside the Ministry of Defence. As he was wearing his rucksack over the top of his heavy coat (he feels the cold more than me for some reason!), he decided this would be a good time to take a photo of the security cameras stuck to the building.

No reaction from the plods (by which I mean he is still alive and not dressed in orange overalls), but braver than me - thats for sure.

0
0
Paris Hilton

So now it's your turn...

When they took away the right to defend yourself, you supported them "for the good of the children/people".

When they harassed male educators and men who enjoy helping youngsters grow, you supported them "for the good of the children".

When they decided it was criminal to say anything others might take offense to, you supported them "for the good of the individual".

When they decided men and women should be asexual in any sort of non-relationship environment, you supported them "for the good of the gender".

Guess what! It's your turn!

Perhaps you should consider supporting the rights of others, even if you disagree with their life choices, so they can be there to support your rights.

Mike, the gun tooting, plain talking, child mentoring supporter of individual freedoms.

Paris, because she also cares little for the needs of others until the problem comes home to roost.

0
0
Stop

A protest plan...

http://www.flickr.com/groups/nophotographs/

0
0
Anonymous Coward

A bit rich!

It's a bit rich of the Humberside police to be playing the paedo' card, considering their part in the Ian Huntley/Soham murders!

They should be disbanded and replaced by a more competent, neighbouring, police force.

Wankers!

0
0

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.

Forums

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2018