Is it an offence to take a photograph from a car?

[Gromit]

Police have shamed 80 drivers who took photographs of a crash on the M1.

Pictures of them appear in todays Daily Mail and the story says they have committed an offence by using a camera while driving.

It is the first time I have heard of that. Are they telling Porkies?

Drivers committed an offence by using phones and cameras at the wheel

http://www.dailymail....fe.html#ixzz23nWZmIZe

They were undeniably ghoulish but is it right to publish their photos?

[Kiki-frog]

It may be more to do with using phones while driving, which is definitely illegal. And taking pics probably constitutes dangerous driving, come to think of it

[Baldric]

Driving without due care and attention?

[bazwillrun]

Apart from anything else the catch all offence they can use is "driving without due care and attention"

[StarBeast]

The offence, is not having proper control, taking pictures is the reason. It is not an offence per se to take pictures from a car but if the driver is doing it I'd say the police are correct in saying they do not have proper control.

[bazwillrun]

Snap........ pun intended !

[rojash]

Whether or not it's an offence, it's definitely offensive (at least in this case). It's also potentially dangerous, and extremely inconsiderate of other road users.

[StarBeast]

The whole mobile phone thing didn't really need legislation as the law was quite clear on the "proper control" anyway. However the use of mobile phones while driving is akin DUI in potential for disaster so I can see why they gave it its own statute.

[Gromit]

These people have not been prosecuted or found guilty of anything. And the police publish their photos. That must be wrong?

[bazwillrun]

theyre not too happy when the public try and take pics of them though are they ?

[ummmm]

I was going to say that, Gromit. All that they have said at the moment is that they have written to them. It was in my local paper (Northants) but pictures were not published.

[bazwillrun]

forgot link

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7888301.stm

all under the guise of terrorism

[StarBeast]

Bit of a grey area that Gromit, I think we can all pretty well take pictures of anyone and send them to the papers, if they choose to publish, if there is an offence, it would be against the Editor/organisation.

[Kiki-frog]

Yes, I thought that the police had just written to them as a warning. I wonder where the Daily Mail got the pics from? They're all copyright Geoff Robinson, i.e. an individual, rather than a police force. Strange....

[anotheoldgit]

It is an offence to use a mobile phone in a car, so is it any difference using a mobile phone/camera?

As regards publishing their photos I cannot see any photos that identify the drivers.

But if they were to, yes I agree they should be published for all to see, not just for being ghoulish but such actions as slowing down on a motorway to take pictures could cause a multi vehicle pile-up, and maybe a loss of life.

[Baldric]

I went to look at the story, not in my D/Mail today that I can see?

Page ?

[Gromit]

Traffic slows to a crawl as you pass accidents on the opposite carriageway. They are likely not to have slowed down deliberately, but because they had to. There are 2 photos in the Daily Mail that are definitely not phones but cameras. I am sure you could identify the person in the main photo (using camera not a phone). Can they be certain these were drivers and not passengers? There are a lot more foreign cars driving on motorways.

[sp1814]

Baldric

Have a look at the link in the question.

Gromit - whilst there's no specific law governing the taking of pictures from a moving vehicle, I think the drivers could get a warning for driving without due care and attention.

My guess is that they won't actually face prosecution because nothing came of it (ie. they didn't cause an accident themselves).

Some eople are very weird when it comes to accidents.

A teenager got knocked down and seriously injured outside outside our offices last week. A crowd gathered on the street to observe the emergency services.

It took the paramedics a while to get her stabilised before transporting the kid to hospital, and in all that time, the crowd just stood gawping.

[sp1814]

And there was a recent case of a chap who saw a badly injured man lying in the middle of the street, who stopped his car, jumped out, took a photo of the (I think) dying man with his cameraphone, jumped back into his car and drove off.

...without even contacting emergency services.

Just to reiterate - he took the photo with his cameraPHONE.

[FredPuli43]

The offence is described (s42(D) of the Road Traffic Act 1988, as amended) as 'driving a motor vehicle while using a hand held mobile telephone or other hand held interactive communication device'.
That raises the interesting question of whether someone using an ordinary camera in these cirumstances commits an offence. Plainly they'd commit no offence under this section, as the camera would not be a phone or 'device' for this purpose. So does the fact that the camera is an adjunct to a phone make use of it an offence? Surely not, for the words 'or other hand held communication device' make it clear that it the phone itself has to be being used as such a device; it's the communication which is is the mischief to which the section, and any regulation made under it (there is a reference to construction and use regulations in the section), is directed.

This argument is supported by the magistrate's decision in a case against Jimmy Carr, obviously not binding authority, that using the phone merely as a dictaphone was not an offence.

The drivers could, perhaps, be prosecuted successfully for another offence, such as driving without due care and attention, or failing to keep proper control of a vehicle, but that depends on the circumstances.

[bazwillrun]

A lot of detail on that incident....... from somebody who wasnt gawping !