Met Police - "I don't need to know" (just following orders) - March 26

New video in HD = "Oh for fuck sake not you again" - -- Relevant Legislation -- Section 3, Criminal Justice Act 2003 Section 174, Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 Part 2, Other repeals and revocations

More Videos...

Mayor & city Council break law, Cops refuse to ticket
Escondido Mayor and other upper staffers believe that they are above the law, as this video shows them illegally parked in a real red zone, watch as parking enforcement Escondido PD to include Lt. and a Fire Capt. do everything they can do, to squirm their way out of doing their job, and ticket these Law Breakers, many laughs along the way

Cambridgeshire Police's Intimidation Fails Again - Anti-Fur Protests Continue
Riot squad cop 1241 Paul Adams trying to misuse Section 50 to gain an activists details. Off camera he threaten to stand in a female activist's face until she leaves and tells a passer-by we have links to 'terrorism' -- the passer-by put him straight and gave him a earful!

Your not having my name.
The people that seem to be offended by my video tend to be SHEEPLE. If you wasnt a SHEEPLE you would understand why i took the piss like i did. Let me make it clear. I didnt actually want to hug the plod, this is a tactic, how can they get me on a 'section 4 public order' or a 'to prevent a breach of the peace' if ive asked for a hug? They cant. After being refused a hug the first time, there was not much chance of getting one at all. So i tried to get his back up in a nice way. I didnt consent to the search & they didnt actually get to touch me. I turned my pockets out. Yes i f'cking slipped up. You can see it in the old blokes face that he was calling my bluff. But i didnt see it at the time. Also my 4 hour pay & display was running out. I didnt want a PCN, but i do now know how to get out of paying a PCN. I think i did well seeing as i'd only been reading into common law for about 4 weeks. I did have them scratching their heads for a bit. Also, you people i have upset, answer me this. If you was arrested & charged with a NON CRIMINAL OFFENCE ie being charged & dragged through the courts based on someones HEARSAY, would you be friends with these revenue collections officers? I very much doubt you would. Well thats what the cnuts did to me. They charged me on hearsay from someones malicious accusations. Even the panel of 3 Magistrates found me not guilty. Serve and protect???? Dont make me laugh. They just want our hard earned money. I'll say it again anways. TRAFFIC WARDENS..... GET A PROPER JOB!!! What they do by giving out PCN's to extort money from hard working people (not many doley scum can afford to buy, never mind run a vehicle) by distributing PCN's is UNLAWFUL without consent. And if you consent, it means your a dickhead. Im sorry but its true. ------------------------------------ Reading into Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 1 Power of constable to stop and search persons, vehicles etc. (1)A constable may exercise any power CONFERRED by this section— CONFERRED means to grant or bestow (a title, degree, benefit, or right).. Doesn't that mean he needs my consent to make a search? So has he blatantly lied to me, or does he just not know the law? Join and read up on your rights. What you dont see is what happened for about 2 minutes before i started filming, when i was approached by PC 9887 inside Holland & Barrett's. I now realise that they are trained to say "WHATS WRONG WITH YOU? WHY ARE YOU GETTING AGITATED? WHATS YOUR PROBLEM? YOU ARE, YOUR AGITATED". Its Police training to get their victim to raise their voice so as they can get you for a breach of the peace. Ive had a sergeant say virtually the same thing on a previous occasion. AGITATED AGITATED AGITATED. Its said to pull ones strings. DO NOT FALL FOR IT. All i can say is dont raise your voice & dont swear. They are pretty helpless if you dont do either of them.. I hate to say this but, the older copper was actually a decentish bloke. Fcukers for not wanting to give me a hug though. How does Charlie Veitch do it?

You Are Not Allowed To Film When You Are Filmed! Video produce by NufffRespect Youtube Channel: Photographers Rights And The Law In The UK - A brief guide for street photographers. Know your rights when you're out with your camera. Despite the law being clear on a citizen's rights to freely take pictures in public places (with a few restrictions) there is growing evidence of the police, police community support officers (PCSOs), security guards and general jobsworths failing to respect the rights of photographers going about their lawful business. For more info on photographers rights, please visit: Special thanks to: UPDATE: In the UK, a new "Counter Terrorism Act" came into force on 16th February 2009. It contains an amendment to Section 58 of the Terrorism Act 2000. This amendment will make it an offence, punishable by up to ten years imprisonment, to publish or elicit information about any police constable "of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism". Furthermore, Schedule 7 of the Bill applies this amendment to internet service providers and web hosting services. This means they will have a legal duty to remove all sites perceived to fall under this offence, and has provisions for use at home and abroad. It is unclear what information will be classed as useful to terrorists, but due to this ambiguous wording, the Bill has implications for bloggers, journalists, photographers, activists and anyone who values freedom of speech. We must show that we won't be intimidated, or called terrorists for resisting or monitoring repressive policing. Fitwatch are one of the groups who could be targeted by this new legislation. Fitwatch, started two years ago by activists, resists and opposes the use of Forward Intelligence Teams (FIT) on demonstrations. FIT are police officers who photograph, follow, and generally intimidate protesters. They bring, in the words of Jacqui Smith, harassment style policing to protests. As part of this opposition, Fitwatch run a blog where they share information about these officers. We feel this blog could be under threat from this new legislation. Whilst Fitwatch may not like officers who act outside of the law, they are certainly not terrorists. Neither are: * people filming, and uploading to Youtube, footage of police officers acting illegally. * bloggers writing about being randomly stopped and searched. * journalists publishing details of corrupt or racist cops. * photographers publishing photographs of police on protests. The list goes on, but all are under threat. This legislation not only attempts to stifle our ability to hold the police force to account for their actions, but also attacks the principles of open publishing on the internet. It must be resisted. Please join the mass action and oppose this ludicrous law.