GRAVESEND: Blogger says he was treated like terrorist by station staff (From News Shopper)

Do you think the REOs were called Bill Shakespeare and Chas Dickens??

I hope the REO's got told off for wasting Police time and are going to get some retraining.

There is apparently an internal investigation ongoing, the police are involved. However I'm not hoping for too much joy as I've had a rather bile filled comment on my blog by an amployee of Go-Ahead, the parent company of Southeastern...

The trouble with most of their staff is they have a god complex mixed with a little Hitler. Give them a uniform and some high vis, they think they can lord it up over everyone.

Olly C, would you please let us know here if anything futher comes of this?

I too am regularly confronted by these individuals with something of a "god complex." They invent as many different powers as they possibly can, until you try and call them on it, so well done! Sue for false imprisonment! hehe

If some twit started taking pictures of me without as much as a 'by your leave' I'd tend to want to teach him some manners. I'd ask for them to be deleted. I'd be pretty angry with them and intimidated by a buffoon in a pig head.

It's not about rail staff, it's about basic courtesy.

martnal wrote:
If some twit started taking pictures of me without as much as a 'by your leave' I'd tend to want to teach him some manners. I'd ask for them to be deleted. I'd be pretty angry with them and intimidated by a buffoon in a pig head. It's not about rail staff, it's about basic courtesy.

Errr, I think you'll find that he wasn't wearing the pig's head when he travelled by train.

And basic courtesy should work both ways. Not just for the advantage of some uniformed goon who thinks a hi-vis jacket gives him power over others.

I think you are being more than a bit selfish 'Olly'. Its OK for you to conceal your identity but at the same time find it OK to reveal other peoples. As some one else said it would be polite to ask first.

martnal wrote:
If some twit started taking pictures of me without as much as a 'by your leave' I'd tend to want to teach him some manners. I'd ask for them to be deleted. I'd be pretty angry with them and intimidated by a buffoon in a pig head. It's not about rail staff, it's about basic courtesy.

You sound like you would punch him. Pictures are taken of people every day . Think about CCTV. We are allowed to take pictures. The way these people reacted was wrong. Only a court order can get pictures deleted.

To be clear I wasn't wearing my pig mask during this incident. I wear it because I protect my anonymity for a reason. If you visit my blog/website you'll see why.

Use Google visit the blog and then get all the details of the incident, and the follow up posts. You'll be interested to see what Go-Ahead think of customers who complain about their services.

Southeastern say it's a common courtesy to ask to take pictures of their staff, it's not a byelaw, a condition of carriage nor is it against the law. I would have been quite happy to ask but since I was trying to get the text on the back of their hi-vis vests I saw no reason to ask, and I was definitely not going to allow them to see or force me to delete the pictures.

I get the polite angle I really do but I'm not about to have my civil liberties trampled over by a pair of REOs who were operating above their authority. If they'd approached me in a polite manner I may have been a little more accomodating...

To add... This story isn't about asking for permission to take pictures, it's about how REOs are under the impression that they have the authority to ask you to delete pictures. Not even the police have those powers.

Even after advising them more than several times that they did not have these powers they still threatened me with potential arrest if I did not get off the train with them. They then held me against my will at Dartford until the BTP arrived who then advised they had no authority to ask me to delete my pictures.

They were in the wrong and Souteastern haven't even bothered with an apology. Just fobbed the whole thing off with "You should have asked for permission" totally ignoring the fact that their employees had over-stepped their authority....

It's a developing story.... I ain't done yet!

Since the middle of the nineteenth century it has been an offence under railway byelaws to "interfere with the comfort of passengers", in the current 2005 byelaws the offence is now "6(8) No person shall molest or wilfully interfere with the comfort or convenience of any person on the railway." Any person clearly includes railway staff.

If the railway staff concerned had complained about the interference with their comfort rather than what they are alledged to have said regarding terrorism then the outcome might well have been a visit to the magistrates court.

Bill Ellson wrote:
Since the middle of the nineteenth century it has been an offence under railway byelaws to "interfere with the comfort of passengers", in the current 2005 byelaws the offence is now "6(8) No person shall molest or wilfully interfere with the comfort or convenience of any person on the railway." Any person clearly includes railway staff. If the railway staff concerned had complained about the interference with their comfort rather than what they are alledged to have said regarding terrorism then the outcome might well have been a visit to the magistrates court.

I think the Police would of told them to grow up and stop being so silly. Take a picture is not covered under this.

Bill Ellson wrote:
Since the middle of the nineteenth century it has been an offence under railway byelaws to "interfere with the comfort of passengers", in the current 2005 byelaws the offence is now "6(8) No person shall molest or wilfully interfere with the comfort or convenience of any person on the railway." Any person clearly includes railway staff. If the railway staff concerned had complained about the interference with their comfort rather than what they are alledged to have said regarding terrorism then the outcome might well have been a visit to the magistrates court.

Catch 22 there matey since they were interfering with my comfort... they molested me "by intimidation" and interfered with my convenience by delaying my journey home by almost 2 hours. If it had gone the way of a magistrate I'd hazard a guess it'd have been thrown out.

Help us out here Olly. I have searched for your blog and cannot find it for the life of me.
Can you post a link please.
Thanks

Type this into Google search:

southeastern blogger rail enforcement officer

Should be in top 5 results

I have to question why this individual would take photos of REOs or indeed anybody else in the execution of their duty. By doing so and then refusing to show them the photos, you have successfully constructed a problem where one would not have existed. I guess you may be the sort of troublemaker that the Railway companies employ them to deter from their system. If you buy a ticket and behave properly during your journey, they won't give you any problems. If you took a photo of me or my family without explanation and refused to show it or delete it, I'd take issue with you too!!! Rather than highlight their actions, why don't you consider your own?

mungia1 wrote:
I have to question why this individual would take photos of REOs or indeed anybody else in the execution of their duty. By doing so and then refusing to show them the photos, you have successfully constructed a problem where one would not have existed. I guess you may be the sort of troublemaker that the Railway companies employ them to deter from their system. If you buy a ticket and behave properly during your journey, they won't give you any problems. If you took a photo of me or my family without explanation and refused to show it or delete it, I'd take issue with you too!!! Rather than highlight their actions, why don't you consider your own?

Interesting.

Whenever there's a story like this one, which highlights the way some people abuse the powers given to them (or in this case, pretend to have powers given to them), there's always SOMEONE who pops up to say 'Shut up! Just do as they say, submit and don't step out of line, and everything will be fine!'.

I think people like mungia1 pose more of a danger to a free society than the out-of-control REOs in this story, frankly...

........maybe.......
......or possibly they are 'beards' who actually work for South Eastern trains.

JuliaM wrote:

mungia1 wrote:
I have to question why this individual would take photos of REOs or indeed anybody else in the execution of their duty. By doing so and then refusing to show them the photos, you have successfully constructed a problem where one would not have existed. I guess you may be the sort of troublemaker that the Railway companies employ them to deter from their system. If you buy a ticket and behave properly during your journey, they won't give you any problems. If you took a photo of me or my family without explanation and refused to show it or delete it, I'd take issue with you too!!! Rather than highlight their actions, why don't you consider your own?

Interesting.

Whenever there's a story like this one, which highlights the way some people abuse the powers given to them (or in this case, pretend to have powers given to them), there's always SOMEONE who pops up to say 'Shut up! Just do as they say, submit and don't step out of line, and everything will be fine!'.

I think people like mungia1 pose more of a danger to a free society than the out-of-control REOs in this story, frankly...

A free society??? Don't make me laugh... By free I expect you mean evading fares and making other travellers' lives hell on trains. Just pay your fare and behave yourself, is that so unreasonabl?. Don't forget, everyone else has civil liberties too, not just you and the geezer in the pig mask...Yes, even REOs. Olly states that if they'd have approached him more politely, he might have complied with their rerquests about the pictures, what about his approach to them. This guy gets 'fame' through highlighting perceived injustice. He has clearly engineered this episode and sucked you in.

mungia1 wrote:

JuliaM wrote:

mungia1 wrote: I have to question why this individual would take photos of REOs or indeed anybody else in the execution of their duty. By doing so and then refusing to show them the photos, you have successfully constructed a problem where one would not have existed. I guess you may be the sort of troublemaker that the Railway companies employ them to deter from their system. If you buy a ticket and behave properly during your journey, they won't give you any problems. If you took a photo of me or my family without explanation and refused to show it or delete it, I'd take issue with you too!!! Rather than highlight their actions, why don't you consider your own?

Interesting. Whenever there's a story like this one, which highlights the way some people abuse the powers given to them (or in this case, pretend to have powers given to them), there's always SOMEONE who pops up to say 'Shut up! Just do as they say, submit and don't step out of line, and everything will be fine!'. I think people like mungia1 pose more of a danger to a free society than the out-of-control REOs in this story, frankly...

A free society??? Don't make me laugh... By free I expect you mean evading fares and making other travellers' lives hell on trains. Just pay your fare and behave yourself, is that so unreasonabl?. Don't forget, everyone else has civil liberties too, not just you and the geezer in the pig mask...Yes, even REOs. Olly states that if they'd have approached him more politely, he might have complied with their rerquests about the pictures, what about his approach to them. This guy gets 'fame' through highlighting perceived injustice. He has clearly engineered this episode and sucked you in.

Engineered? LMAO! Hardly matey. If the REOs had not overstepped their authority none of this will have happened. At no time did I approach them or talk to them or even goad them. They approached me on the train. Their mistake. I was quite happy to sit on the train until I got to my destination.

This has nothing to do with fares either, and you are intentionally being obtuse about the "free society" you know exactly what was meant. There is no law against taking photographs.

Also I said I'd have been more accomodating if they'd been a little more polite. That doesn't mean I'd have allowed them to look at or delete any of my pictures.

I wonder like was mentioned earlier if you do indeed have any connection to Southeastern or either of the REOs or some other "vested interest".

If you find the time later tonight visit my site there's two more updates to come, where Southeastern have more or less admitted they (the REOs) were in the wrong.

Olly_C, if you had nothing to hide and was doing nothing wrong? why did you refuse to show them the pictures? all you had to do was show them when they asked and then everything would have blown over. Or was it a case of getting your 5 minutes of fame? me thinks it was the latter.

apak24 wrote:
Olly_C, if you had nothing to hide and was doing nothing wrong? why did you refuse to show them the pictures? all you had to do was show them when they asked and then everything would have blown over. Or was it a case of getting your 5 minutes of fame? me thinks it was the latter.

Why does he have too?
We all have rights and are free to make choices. Rather than being one of life's little sheep, he exercised his legal right not to do so.

apak24 wrote:
Olly_C, if you had nothing to hide and was doing nothing wrong? why did you refuse to show them the pictures? all you had to do was show them when they asked and then everything would have blown over. Or was it a case of getting your 5 minutes of fame? me thinks it was the latter.

I had nothing to hide whatsoever. It's the principle of the thing. If I'd given in and let them see the pictures then they'd think they were entitled to do so with every one of their customers. Which they're not.

If I came up to you in the middle of town and asked to see the pictures on your phone would you let me? I'm guessing not.

I hardly need 5 minutes of fame ;-) Yes I'm pushing this story as much as possible anywhere and anyhow I can, but not for fame. I want as many people to read about it as possible so they're a little more enlightened as to what their rights are. Simple.

bexleyman wrote:

apak24 wrote: Olly_C, if you had nothing to hide and was doing nothing wrong? why did you refuse to show them the pictures? all you had to do was show them when they asked and then everything would have blown over. Or was it a case of getting your 5 minutes of fame? me thinks it was the latter.

Why does he have too? We all have rights and are free to make choices. Rather than being one of life's little sheep, he exercised his legal right not to do so.

I did not say he had to, i asked why he did not.

Olly_C wrote:

apak24 wrote: Olly_C, if you had nothing to hide and was doing nothing wrong? why did you refuse to show them the pictures? all you had to do was show them when they asked and then everything would have blown over. Or was it a case of getting your 5 minutes of fame? me thinks it was the latter.

I had nothing to hide whatsoever. It's the principle of the thing. If I'd given in and let them see the pictures then they'd think they were entitled to do so with every one of their customers. Which they're not. If I came up to you in the middle of town and asked to see the pictures on your phone would you let me? I'm guessing not. I hardly need 5 minutes of fame ;-) Yes I'm pushing this story as much as possible anywhere and anyhow I can, but not for fame. I want as many people to read about it as possible so they're a little more enlightened as to what their rights are. Simple.

If i was taking pictures of lets say your house or flat and you then came up and asked me to see the pictures i would show you them if i had nothing to hide.

If as the report says was that you where taking pictures for your blog? why did you not tell them that. If someone was taking pictures of me doing my job i would ask why and if they did not tell me i would then call the police and report them for taking picture without my consent.

You could have gone up to them and asked them if it was ok to take some pictures of them for your blog, and if you asked the proberly would have said ok.

Lets just say I don't want my picture on your blog. That's my right isn't it ?
I would say you're pushing your luck taking anyones picture without asking and publishing it anywhere.
Come try take my picture, you'd need a proctologist to find and remove the camera from up your anus. Smile and say cheeeese !!

star-fish...LOL !

Olly_c I was actually defending you against that early argument but you've got up my nose now!
You have a clearly valid point, perhaps one that needs making a bit more often, but you've gone out of your way to instigate a confrontation. As the southeastern policy states, you had not politely asked permission to take photos of those individuals. Take pictures of people without their permission and you will illicit a confrontational response in almost all cases, just in this case it went a bit too far

I have just noticed that you have given out a clue to your blog, if anyone has an ounce of commen they will do as toyu say and google it and come up with your ID, so whats the point of wearing a mask of a pig when by now everyoner knows who your are Gary.

Gary Allanach alias 'Olly Cromwell'

A Liberal Democrat Blogger from Medway, Kent.

Say no more! God save us from liberals in a pig mask perleeese.

LMFAO.... I am not Gary and I'm hardly a Lib Dem supporter.... I'm sure he'll take issue with that. I live in London not Kent. Did you not read the above article? A blogger from Streatham....

http://www.youve-bee
n-cromwelled.org don't say I didn't warn you.

My ID is hidden....and that's how it's staying ;-)

@Gypo, I wasn't attempting to take pictures of the REOs just the text on their hi-vis jackets, as you'll see from the original pictures. I was a bit slow at times and caught them as they turned. If they'd seen me taking pictures and asked me to stop in a polite manner I probably would have obliged.

As it stands they assumed I'd taken pictures of them. I told them I was a blogger and I was just after the text on their jackets. They weren't having any of it. I didn't go to the station to take pictures I was on the way home from somewhere.

@ bexleyman... I didn't go out of my way to instigate a confrontation, but you can believe what you want.

Olly_C wrote:
LMFAO.... I am not Gary and I'm hardly a Lib Dem supporter.... I'm sure he'll take issue with that. I live in London not Kent. Did you not read the above article? A blogger from Streatham.... http://www.youve-bee n-cromwelled.org don't say I didn't warn you. My ID is hidden....and that's how it's staying ;-) @Gypo, I wasn't attempting to take pictures of the REOs just the text on their hi-vis jackets, as you'll see from the original pictures. I was a bit slow at times and caught them as they turned. If they'd seen me taking pictures and asked me to stop in a polite manner I probably would have obliged. As it stands they assumed I'd taken pictures of them. I told them I was a blogger and I was just after the text on their jackets. They weren't having any of it. I didn't go to the station to take pictures I was on the way home from somewhere. @ bexleyman... I didn't go out of my way to instigate a confrontation, but you can believe what you want.

I dont want to burst your bubble mate but you have just admitted that you wanted to take a photo of there text on there vest, i hope you know that you have just broken the copyright law.

Are people protected by intellectual property rights?
People are not protected by intellectual property rights. But be cautious when you photograph someone who is wearing something protected by copyright, industrial design or trademark rights. For example:

•A model wearing a piece of haute couture or some jewelry;
•An actor wearing a theatrical costume; or
•A sportsperson wearing a t-shirt with a badge or logo or some sort of text on it.

I've maintained all along that when I saw them I wanted to get a picture of the text on their hi-vis vests.

When simple text that says "Rail Enforcement Officer" becomes copyrighted in law feel free to let me know. That's akin to telling me I can't take a picture of anything really.

I'm sorry but you aren't making sense at all, by your logic absolutely nothing at all can be photographed...

If that's the case every single organisation that uses cctv is also breaking copyright law etc, etc.

However it still doesn't make what they did right at all. This is what a lot of people are forgetting in this discussion...

Yeah but have you checked that the high-vis vests are unrestricted intellectual property for you to distribute? And just because you weren't attempting to photograph their faces they could still be indentifiable to some/many. Therefore this really started where you infringed the REOs civil liberties, and then escalated a confrontation in a case of very poor customer service. Something most of us experience regularly enough, but somehow struggle on as free independant citizens in this stifiling autocratic world....