Filming kids in park

pendulum

Living next to a park/playground can be a bit of a nightmare, I can imagine him having all kinds of trouble over the years with kids throwing things at his house (stones, litter), but its at night when things really kick off, you can get teenage gangs and drugs/alcohol abuse in even the nicest areas.

You say your sisters boyfriend never had any trouble, and none of the other houses have CCTV, but that doesn't mean there isn't a problem there. As another poster pointed out why exactly would he have bars on the windows if there wasn't a problem with security or property damage? To be honest I half expect you to say "to stop the children from escaping" as you seem to think the absolute worst of him when all he and his wife (why didn't you mention his wife in the first post instead of saying "an old man"?) almost certainly want to do is make the area a safer place and deter damage to their property or misuse of the park.

Lirin

I'm a photographer, and I also have a CCTV setup at the back of my house, which does film onto the parking area behind me. It's there to protect the cars- we had a period when drunk teens were meeting around the back, and there was minor damage to a few cars. Thankfully, that isn't an issue, but we find the cameras useful.
The neighbours are aware of the camera, and the reason, as we explained. They find it useful as it captures their cars as well. Incidentally, there are young children who often play in the area- I am more than happy to show footage to their parents if need be.
It may be that you are blowing it out of porportion- and once a rumour starts, it's damn hard to stop. If you have concerns, by all means, do go to the Police, but at the moment, his intentions are unclear, and you do need to be careful how you approach this. Not only for your sake- but his as well. He could be perfectly innocent, or he may be suspect. You do not know.
Without knowing the type of camera, model and lens well, it can be very hard to know where it is filming- if at all. It could be a dummy setup to deter vandalism.
There are innocent reasons for filming in public. I've stood countless times and explained why I'm there, what I'm doing, and yes, I can photograph. I do always try to be nice about it- it pays off better. I've also photographed my stepdaughter in public, and occasionally when I've setup for some relaxing nature shots, a child or adult does wander into the image. Yes, I can legally photograph them- I do have photos of children both from hobby photography and pro work, and I usually would attempt to find the parents and give them my card. It's the end use or intent of the images that is the main issue..

aliasojo

looby75 wrote: »

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.

Looby, I may have missed it but I cant see where it says the house has cameras front and back?

paddyrg wrote: »

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.

I completely agree with you, but my point is, she doesn't know, no-one here knows, so surely instead of all the speculation, she should do something about ascertaining whether there may be a problem or not by having a word with the local bobby? That's not tarring and feathering, it's a member of society voicing a concern which I'm sure she would be happy to find out was completely unfounded if that's the case.

The only options are:

ignore the situation completely for fear of upsetting an innocent householder

do nothing but discuss the situation with all and sundry (which will no doubt cause the tar and feathering situation you describe above)

do nothing and potentially risk some sort of child issue occuring under the noses of those who chose to ignore it and let it go

have a quiet informal chat with the local bobby making it clear there is no actual complaint, just a concern.

Imo, the only sensible option is the last one. Most reasonable people will understand their actions being queried.

looby75

aliasojo wrote: »

Looby, I may have missed it but I cant see where it says the house has cameras front and back?

emweaver also knows the area it would seem and posted this

emweaver wrote: »

Op was merely hoping for advice on wether it was allowed and where to turn for advice. the fact the park is opposite the school makes it more concering for me. Ive since been informed he has cctv facing the main road so not only he recording children playing but coming in and out of school.

it's worrying that she jumped to the conclusion the cctv must have been put there just to film the children going in and our of school

aliasojo

looby75 wrote: »

emweaver also knows the area it would seem and posted this........

Thanks looby. To be fair though, that doesn't mean there's a camera on the front of the house and the back?

In fact, I thought the OP said there was no camera at the front where his front door was?

OP can you clarify please? If the school is being filmed too as has been suggested, is this by a second camera? If so where is this sited?

looby75

aliasojo wrote: »

Thanks looby. To be fair though, that doesn't mean there's a camera on the front of the house and the back?

In fact, I thought the OP said there was no camera at the front where his front door was?

OP can you clarify please? If the school is being filmed too as has been suggested, is this by a second camera? If so where is this sited?

I think they said the front door is at the side of the house.

The fact that they say there is a second camera pointing at the main road and the back of the house backs onto the park/play field would suggest it's at the front to me, but either way it's there to film a different angle and would convince me even more that its a security thing.

Alison_B

I would have thought that it was illegal for anyone to film. We had trouble a few years back when someone who had an argument with my children decided to take revenge by egging our house and throwing coins at the windows. We contacted the police about this and asked if we could put up a camera to catch them in the act and was informed that under no circumstances could we film anything that went off the edge of our drive. They were standing on next doors drive and throwing from there but we were not allowed to capture that, even with next doors permission to film. We were told that we could be prosecuted if we did film beyond our boundary.

pogofish

Alison_B wrote: »

I would have thought that it was illegal for anyone to film. We had trouble a few years back when someone who had an argument with my children decided to take revenge by egging our house and throwing coins at the windows. We contacted the police about this and asked if we could put up a camera to catch them in the act and was informed that under no circumstances could we film anything that went off the edge of our drive. They were standing on next doors drive and throwing from there but we were not allowed to capture that, even with next doors permission to film. We were told that we could be prosecuted if we did film beyond our boundary.

Absolute rubbish - mind you, the police have repeatedly shown ignorance or arguably malicious misdirection in matters relating to photography.

Saying that, the evidential value of photography in this situation would have been limited. A contemperanious written record of the events and other forms of witnessing/identification would almost certainly have been considered first. In any action, photo/video evidence would normally only be admitted after all other options had been exhausted.

Good summary of the law and common practice relating to photography can be downloaded here:

http://www.sirimo.co.uk/2009/05/14/uk-photographers-rights-v2/

oldone_2

Alison_B wrote: »

I would have thought that it was illegal for anyone to film. We had trouble a few years back when someone who had an argument with my children decided to take revenge by egging our house and throwing coins at the windows. We contacted the police about this and asked if we could put up a camera to catch them in the act and was informed that under no circumstances could we film anything that went off the edge of our drive. They were standing on next doors drive and throwing from there but we were not allowed to capture that, even with next doors permission to film. We were told that we could be prosecuted if we did film beyond our boundary.

This conflicts with every episode of Road Wars that I have watched. Cameras follow the police around, and when a criminal is apprehended and protests about being filmed, the police tell him that anyone can film in a public place, and it is not against the law ( with minor exceptions that involve National Security)

One criminal when told this said it breached hi 'uman rights'.

aliasojo

looby75 wrote: »

I think they said the front door is at the side of the house.

The fact that they say there is a second camera pointing at the main road and the back of the house backs onto the park/play field would suggest it's at the front to me, but either way it's there to film a different angle and would convince me even more that its a security thing.

'his door is on the front of his house park is on back so that is not the case, and as i said not accusing anyone of anything. if his property has been damaged then wouldnt it make more sense to actually have it on his property? if vandals wanted to cause damage/break in the would jus have to jump the wall and got throught the side windows and doors where there is no cctv'

Front door is at the front. My impression is that the camera is at the back only, filming nowhere near the door or windows where access could be got.

I'm not sure if there is a second camera or if the same camera films both areas.

Clarification is needed imo.