Filming kids in park

suited-aces

emweaver wrote: »

Camera is not filming his porperty just the park! Why would he need / want to video record children under 11 playing?

If it is football damage, a camera focused solely on his property wouldnt be much use, unless you can think of a way to find the culprit from footage of a ball materialising from thin air

MackemPunk

As a parent of two young bairns, so what. someones filming the park they are playing in, who cares my kids are probably in the background of thousands of films and photos that I don't know about, if this bloke was doing anything dodgy he'd probably have less obvious cameras.
As his house backs onto a public park he may be worried about burglars ect, my parents used to live in a house backing onto a park so had cctv up, its no big deal.

Oopsadaisy

Next up for hanging....ASDA...I mean they've got lots of cameras up filming all our children.

After that...the Police....see no-ones safe in 1984, ooops 2011.

vyle

How do we know it's an old man who lives there? Could it be a young lady? Would that make it okay?

What about a middle aged transgendered individual?

A geriatric spinster?

A tweenaged dude?

What if it's a perfectly well adjusted family?

I expect that the camera hasn't got a good enough lens to see a great deal anyway, may even be low res, poorly focussed with a bad frame rate.

Just to add: My friend's dad has cameras outside his property. One on the front door, one on the back, and one on the garage, in case of burglary. He can switch view between all three at will through his tv.

Also, regarding the "mother couldn't film neighbours," is it not the case that unless somebody KNOWS they're being filmed, it isn't admissible in court?

The only way someone would REALLY be able to film children properly would be with a video camera with decent auto focussing, a good sensor and adjustable zoom, and nobody would hang one of those outside.

moonrakerz

emweaver wrote: »

Do you record and photograph children? Would you? Im sure if you did you would find a fair few parents complaining.

Its attitudes like this that encourages these predators . I mean a predator isnt going to admit is he hes going to use the excuse of being an amateur to

When I read absolute drivel like this I despair !

As for your accusing me of being a "predator" acting under the guise of being an "amateur" -

you are beneath contempt !!!

perhaps you would like to apologise.................

BUT I know you won't because in your narrow, bigoted mind YOU are right and everyone else is wrong.

Sublime_2

Zoe, it sounds like a security issue to me, so wouldn't be worried. He's probably had problems with vandals, and disturbance.

If you were that worried perhaps you could have a chat with the houseowner. If you accompany your children to the park they are in no danger, and if you don't feel comfortable with taking them somewhere, don't.

emweaver

moonrakerz wrote: »

BUT I know you won't because in your narrow, bigoted mind YOU are right and everyone else is wrong.

Pot, Kettle, Black . . . . .

aliasojo

I am really shocked at the amount of posters who have immediately jumped on the OP and defended the householder. This could well be an entirely innocent situation but no-one knows who the householder is or what the intent is behind the filming so how anyone can either attack or defend him/her beats the hell out of me.

Some of the posts here are based purely on assumption, perhaps the OP has assumed too much too but some of the replies are laughable. Whatever happened to reason and being open minded? Those who jump to defend are just as bad as those who jump to attack imo.

Yes, child predators are a minority group, but they are out there somewhere. It may well be this is a completely innocent situation, there again it may not be. Best person to consider the situation fairly is the community policeman. A quiet word just voicing your concerns would do no harm OP.

looby75

emweaver wrote: »

I see no point in continuing this here Zoe, perhaps if some parents were to read then some more sensible, sympathetic views would be heard.

I am a parent of 2 and I think you and the OP are jumping to conclusions and are worrying about nothing.

You say no teens use the park, well it must be the only park in the country that teens don't congregate in after dark/evening. Our local park is great through the day, lots of younger children and their parents using it, organised football matches after school etc, but after about 8pm the local teens tend to use it and it's not such a great place. A lot of the houses surrounding it have CCTV now as a deterrent to the teens, they have been caught trying to break into sheds, bonking in the bushes and being generally anti social. The police and council wardens do patrol the area at night but they can't be there all the time so the residents have to do what they can to protect their properties.

The fact that this house has cameras both at the front and the back makes it pretty clear to me that it's a security issue and nothing more sinister.

paddyrg

aliasojo wrote: »

...could well be an entirely innocent situation but no-one knows who the householder is or what the intent is behind the filming...

That's the problem I think, there are dozens of possible reasons/rationalities but the OP has jumped to the most sensationalist one bypassing all else, people are trying to suggest that whilst *possible*, there are so many other things it could be, and victimising a resident based on no evidence and wild speculation is positively harmful. It is the kind of tar and feathering that can ruin lives very easily, spurred on by hysteria and newspaper sensationalism. That's the whole point of our law - innocent until proven guilty, without that we're back in the dark ages.

Now we know the device looks like a telescope, not a stethascope, have we reviewed if it *is* a telescope? During the day it may make sense to not point it skywards iin case it starts a fire, but it may be used to study Mars, or whatever. An ancient and noble passtime. Someone trying to better themselves could be hounded down/attacked for a knee-jerk paranoic reaction...