(01 Feb 2014, 5:29 pm)aureolin wrote I was going to respond to this earlier, but really wanted to think about what I write. Photography in bus stations is something we've spoken about numerous times in the past, and is always going to be a subject that divides opinion. Some say there's no right and wrong stance here, but in the legal sense, the stance is still that it is trespass. One thing that I don't condone in the slightest though is abuse of policing powers.

The abuse (or misunderstanding) of policing powers when it comes to photography isn't exclusive to bus enthusiasts. There have been a number of cases in the public eye in what has essentially become an "anti-photographer" row. With the attitude of some officers, it's understandable why someone put on the spot may have chosen to delete their photos, rather than arguing and risk a visit to the nick.

The Met Police's guidelines on photography is quite interesting. Whilst what I type in no way constitutes legal advice, the guidelines make out that Police only have the right to view your images if they suspect you to be a terrorist. So before they view your images, they would have to make it perfectly clear what section of what act they're searching you under. From the research I've done, a search is not legal unless you're given this information. Deletion may only be carried out if you are provided with a court order to that effect. In the guy's case on Facebook, he should be going straight to the IPCC and also to Vera Baird as PCC.

I think nowadays some enthusiasts just need to understand that the owners of the bus stations do not want people standing on their private property taking photos without their expressed permission. They don't need to give a reason for this - it's simply their prerogative. This is exactly the same as an operator choosing that they don't want people to come onto their private property (depots) without permission and start taking photos. We're all guilty of the odd bus station photo, and could argue till we're blue in the face that it's different, but both examples are trespass. But fair play to intu if there's a form that can be filled in for a free permit, as Mr Hignett alludes to. If this is the case for the Metrocentre, I'd assume the same permit can be obtained for Eldon Square. Intu don't have to do this, and in fact, many organisations would choose to exploit this - Nexus and TfL for example.

I don't think the policies of the likes of Nexus will change any time soon, but it's certainly something we should unite and organise against. Breaking the law to protest will not get any one anywhere, but maybe the lobbying of councillors, the ITA, and your MPs would be a good start...

I have been thinking about this, we have only seen one side of the story, how are we to know 100% what happened, how are we to know he was not giving the Police or Intu a hard time over it, getting stroppy with the police, thus getting nicked...I do still believe it was a bit heavy handed though

But, as for Nexus, is it any wonder they dont like people taking photos, remember what I posted last year when the GNE radio controller put a BOLO* out to all drivers telling them to be extra careful in Park Lane as people were running into the road taking pics, If every man and his dog were to take photos in places like Park Lane all the time, then it is an accident waiting to happen...I will admit right now, I get the odd sneaky shot in the Interchange mostly if I see an odd working or brand off route, other than that I stand on Cowan Terrace or at the other entrance to Park Lane just off the property...

As for police searches, what powers do they have these days, can Section 60 still be used as a reason to stop and search as defined by the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act or does it come under Prevention of Terrorism

But this is an issue that we can argue about till were blue in the face and not be able to come up with an answer we all agree on...