Terror arrest threat for taking photos on overcrowded train. (Mail 07/07/10)

[whole diary]

[JayMac]

From Mail Online:

Terror arrest threat for rail passenger who took photos on train to prove overcrowding

A rail passenger who took photographs of an overcrowded train carriage was threatened with arrest under anti-terror laws.

Nigel Roberts, 41, was so appalled by the cramped conditions commuters have to endure he warned a ticket inspector that dangerous overcrowding could cost lives. But when the IT worker showed his mobile phone photos of luggage-crammed aisles and exits he was told it is 'illegal' to take such pictures and threatened with prosecution. The inspector then demanded Mr Roberts' personal details.

Mr Roberts' traumatic journey began when he joined South West Trains' Weymouth to London service at Southampton. As soon as he boarded the train he saw the carriages were full of piled-up suitcases, bags and backpacks. Even the overhead racks were stuffed with heavy luggage - and vital passageways to the doors were also blocked.

'The train was full of passengers who had got off cruise liners and aircraft at Southampton who obviously all had luggage,' Mr Roberts said. 'But it was a disaster waiting to happen - conditions on the train were unsafe and in an emergency people would not have been able to get out. I saw one elderly couple in their 70's desperately calling for help from station staff because they were unable to get out at their stop in time because the aisle was blocked. And if the train had to make an emergency stop a 20kg medium-size suitcase travelling at 50mph would probably decapitate any passenger it hits - it would almost certainly kill them. A passenger announcement on the train invited us to raise any concerns with the ticket inspector, which I did because it was not the first time I had seen the problem first-hand on that route. I told him I was going to make a complaint to the Office of Rail Regulation because conditions on the train were unsafe.'

Mr Roberts added: 'But when I told him I had taken some photos he said it was illegal under the Terrorism Act and that I could be arrested and demanded my name and address. He said there were police officers on the train and I may be arrested for taking the photographs. He said he had powers given to him under the Railways Act to ask me for the information and it was an even more serious offence for me not to comply. I felt as if I was in a police state. He explained that for some reason it was for my own protection but my argument was that every passenger on the train would have needed protection in the event of an emergency. He told me he would make a note of our conversation so that they could be used in the event of a prosecution. He was pleasant enough but it was a frightening and chilling experience for me.'

Mr Roberts, who lives on Alderney in the Channel Islands, claimed he was told that newer South West Trains often didn't have enough luggage space because operators wanted carriages that could hold more fare-paying people than baggage.

He said: 'I have asked the rail company for an explanation but they haven't replied. It appears to be a serious and institutional breach of their duty of care towards their passengers.'

A spokeswoman for South West Trains - owned by the Stagecoach group - said today: 'Staff are aware they need to be particularly attentive to unusual photos being taken or suspicious behaviour and to challenge this if necessary. However this was clearly not an issue in this case and we will ensure our staff are re-briefed to avoid any misunderstanding in the future. We are sorry for any upset and anxiety caused to Mr Roberts. We need to strike a balance between seating, room for luggage as well as provide toilets and we do as much as we can to provide luggage room within the constraints of available space. But we understand there can be pressure on space at busy times and we ask for the co-operation of our customers in not compromising safety by blocking the aisles with luggage.

[6 OF 2 redundant adjunct of unimatrix 01]

welcome to the age of 'meh so what' modern railways are designed with the thought that all you will take with you is your clothes and ticket, you will sit in your seat and have a car at the other end, and everything is simple and easy! 

[Brucey]

I never quite understand the banning of photos ... surely someone can just sit there and observe exactly the same thing??

If I was that chap (knowing the law on taking photos myself), I would have given my name and address (as required by the Railway Byelaws) and ask the "inspector" to get the police officer.  There is no obligation to provide the police with your name and address, even if they wish to search you.  You are still entitled to a "search form" if they search you, even if you don't give a name/address.  They cannot delete or ask you to delete the photos, but they can ask you to stop taking any more*.

* = in a public place, e.g. a street, they cannot stop you taking photographs (except under the Official Secrets Act) but as the railway is a private place, they can ask you to stop.

[6 OF 2 redundant adjunct of unimatrix 01]

Brucey im pretty sure that failing to provide the police with your details is obstruction

[Brucey]

Brucey im pretty sure that failing to provide the police with your details is obstruction

http://www.met.police.uk/stopandsearch/what_is.htm#whatshould

It's up to you whether you provide your name and address. You don't have to, but the best advice is that you should co-operate with the police.

[LiskeardRich]

i'd provide details in such an event, as otherwise you may get the "what you hiding?" treatment!

[IndustryInsider]

Mr Roberts' traumatic journey began when he joined South West Trains' Weymouth to London service at Southampton.

Oh dear - that'll certainly give the venomous 'Hogrider' online magazine from the South Hampshire Rail User Group plenty of scope to attack SWT^▸ (South West Trains) in their next edition!  The latest edition of this easy-to-read, balanced and totally fair publication can be seen at: http://www.shrug.info/

[grahame]

"Hogrider" almost makes me feel sympathic to South West Trains at times.  Perhaps he's on their payroll and that's the idea 

[6 OF 2 redundant adjunct of unimatrix 01]

it does irritate me, why would you not want to give police your details... wanted?

[inspector_blakey]

I think the point of law here is this, although this is only my understanding and not definitive. A passenger commits an offence if s/he refuses to provide their name and address to a member of railway staff in connection with a ticketing irregularity. However, railway staff most certainly do not have the authority to demand a passenger's name and address without that reason, and certainly cannot threaten arrest.

It's a well-worn argument in the papers (and in particular in the railway press), but there is no law the prevents the taking of photos for personal use in a public place. Unfortunately there are rather too many cretinous police officers and rail staff out there who despite repeated injunctions from their superiors reminding them that photography is banned seem to enjoy throwing their weight around using the cock-and-bull story about these things being banned due to anti-terrorism laws. That is utter garbage.

Whilst I don't have a great deal of sympathy with this article or the rather precious approach of the person involved, the suggestion from the rail staff that he faced arrest for not providing his details is, if true, absolutely outrageous.

[JayMac]

From Amateur Photographer:

Climbdown over train 'terror' pics threat

A rail firm has been forced into an embarrassing climbdown - and to make an apology - after a passenger was told he faced arrest under anti-terror laws for taking pictures on a train.

Nigel Roberts, 41, had taken photographs with his mobile phone on a Weymouth to London train to highlight what he saw as overcrowding and potential danger caused by heavy luggage in the aisles. Roberts claimed that, in an emergency, passengers would not have been able to get out of the train and he raised his concerns with a ticket inspector, showing him the pictures he had taken.

However, the inspector said Roberts risked being arrested under anti-terrorism legislation and threatened to call police. The guard told Roberts that, under the Terrorism Act, he was not allowed to take pictures on any trains.

'But this is not the case,' a South West Trains spokeswoman told Amateur Photographer. 'This was clearly a misunderstanding. These pictures were not a threat to the public. As far as we are concerned, people can take pictures on our trains.'

South West Trains admitted that the train had been crowded with people, who had been on a cruise, returning from Southampton. The spokeswoman said the train company has now issued a written apology to Roberts.

[Btline]

Look - the fact is SWT^▸ (South West Trains) is a busy commuter railway. Every rush hour they have to cart thousands of commuters into Waterloo with very few paths and a maximum train length of 10 coaches (on this route). This means they will maximise passenger capacity at the cost to luggage space. So I fail to understand why the man needed to take a photo to "prove" there is overcrowding. We all know about it!

And Daily Mail, how on earth could a 20 kg bag decapitate someone when a 50 mph train did an emergency stop? What utter nonsense!

[paul7575]

DFT^▸ (Department for Transport)'s original SWT^▸ (South West Trains) franchise spec (online somewhere) still requires them modify the 444 and 159 fleets over the next few years, to squeeze a few more seats in here and there. Not a vast amount, but enough to see even less space for luggage. 

I agree SWT have been fairly honest in reply to questions about luggage over the last few years, they just say they are a commuter railway, 'end of webchat'... 

The main problems are that the overhead racks are practically empty (they were probably fine before the standard luggage became hard cased with wheels), and pax then take everything including the kitchen sink right to their seat, not just because they can, but because of the damned 'security announcements'...

Paul

[158747]

This guard is either ill-informed or more likely is one of an increasing number of individuals who are in a position of authority who abuse that power to intimidate members of the public. Sadly incidents like this gives the railway a bad name in the eyes of the public.

[readytostart]

'The train was full of passengers who had got off cruise liners and aircraft at Southampton who obviously all had luggage,' Mr Roberts said. 'But it was a disaster waiting to happen - conditions on the train were unsafe and in an emergency people would not have been able to get out.'

This line always gets me, now I know there are times when trains are packed to the gunnels and you literally can't squeeze anyone else in but generally nowhere near as bad as a tube train at rush hour. A disaster waiting to happen and unsafe?, yet he still decided to travel on that train.