Run In With The Neibhbours

[Hugh Wilton 11]

Right a quick update

 

This morning I had a chat with the FAO, who was concerned that I felt threatened and is going to look into this chaps Licence and see what conditions are on it.

 

I have also spoken to the cricket club and let them know what is going on and they seem to be fine with this. They are also happy for me to continue as I am.

 

To be honest I am not to shore how big a can I have opened but open it is and we will just have to see where it takes us.

[3175darren 1,100]

I still would make it very clear to him,that you do not give consent for any image of you to be prossessed displayed or used in any way with out your written consent,

[Hugh Wilton 11]

I will if I run into him again but as this was the first time in over 2 years that I have actually seen him I am not holding out much chance of "bumping" in to him. As far as going out of my way to find him, I just think that would just inflame the situation. I am just gong to let the plod do their job and try not to interfere.

[PaulEamonn 37]

Hi Hugh

 

It sounds to me like you're heading in the right direction by talking to the FEO and the cricket club. The best place for a 'can of worms' is out in the open. That way no one can say 'But why didn't you say something before?'

 

The only area you haven't really covered is this issue of your personal details and photo being recorded by the bloke. Did you mention to the FEO that he had taken photos and asked you for your details?

 

Whether you did or not, I'd be inclined to give the FEO another ring in a couple of days just to see what's happening and to ask if it's Ok for you to go back to the cricket club (whether you want to or not). By doing this you'll be coming across as the 'Mr Concerned' good, law abiding citizen.

 

While you're on the phone you could also 'drop in' the question about what the FEO thinks can be done about the images and details. Chances are, if the FEO hasn't talked to him yet or is going to be seeing him again, he may make a note in his diary to talk to the bloke about it and get it sorted.

 

I suspect that the police are more interested in prevention these days. The paper work involved after a crime has been committed and the subsequent prosecution must be far more than if the FEO just has a quick word. This is the same for you. Getting the FEO to sort out the photos will be cheaper than you having to go to a solicitor to force the bloke to remove images and details from the web page of an anti website.

 

Good luck with it. Just remember, you are in the right so you should have nothing to worry about.

 

Keep us informed with developments.

[The one 8,477]

Stick with it mate why should you be harassed for doing your sport legally

[Craig Fosse 286]

Exactly and also, I know how you feel about opening a can of worms, but I would not be happy at all mate with someone having photos of me. It's a privacy thing at the end of the day. He could do anything with them. If I was me this would be the main thing I would be annoyed with. I'd ask for some evidence of disposal by the plod or himself.

[The one 8,477]

Thing is somebody with a firearms cert is supposed to be squeaky clean , It sounds like your nieghbours trying to intimidate or threaten you ,and whats the first thing the police will do revoke his fa cert

[ghillies 209]

theres always a penny ant some where lol..

 

take his name, his credentials etc, and clearly state 'your in breach of the trespas laws, if you want to ring the police heres my phone..saves me doing it.'

 

beyond that dont engage in any other conversation lol..just look at him and wait.

[3175darren 1,100]

He probalby hasnt got a firearms,he just used that to keep the conversation going,it must be hard finding anyone sensless enought to want to protect rabbits,to talk to,

[Hugh Wilton 11]

Right a further update

 

I have just got off the phone with the FAO. This is the situation, as there is no evidence of him actually shooting on his land and as he was just talking about shooting with a .22 there is not a lot that they can do, as the .22 could just be a air rifle and therefor he would be doing nothing worse than me.

 

However I have found that he dose not have a fac and has not had one in the last 20 years, also his land has not been cleared nor will it ever be cleared for rim or any other fire arms.

 

The long and short of it is that they are not prepared to bust his door in on just hear say and his bravado. However they are going to keep him on their radar.

 

As for the photo there is nothing they can do about that as they were taken from the road, a public area. The only time that they can do anything about it is if he uses them to promot hatred or to insight violence. As he said it is a bit of a chicken and egg thing.

 

He has recommend that I make up some signs and put them up just inside the grounds when I am on the land, and if it dose become a problem then to contact the police and set up with them to call them each time I am on the land, to be honest this sounds like a bit of a pain.

 

The long and short of it is carry on as you are and if you get any more problems call the plod again.

 

If there is any further information I will let you all know.

[ghillies 209]

the photograghy side is quite ermmm bad really, i can literally photogragh you in your bathroom from the road side..its up to you to not be a public obsenaty..thats the negative way to look at it.

the posative way is from the road side i photogragh a crime in progress..or whatever to the good. law sais i can any way.

 

now then, i set foot on your property, i take a few snaps of your gargage and you walking out with a lumpa wood in your hand, you cant do jack shit about it untill you say 'oi! stop taking photograghs!!' at that point legally i have to stop, but! you cant have them pics deleted..the only persons who can order the pics deleted are a particular body, they usuay cover the 'terorism act' stuff, like photograghing a nuclea plant, military/goverment building like a court etc..they can be deleted then pending a stay and other investigative questioning etc they deside weather you are a terorist or not.

(tis illigal to trespass...)

 

taking pics of kids..welll...pedo shit innit.. touchy, but in publick places you can, as in theyre over there and not your zoomed in portrait shot so to speek, you need permision off of the gaurdien. to show or use the pics to make money they child cannot be clearly recognisable.

(schools and the likes..erghh sorta getting pedo now in the public eye, and of course if its lagit all parent at the school need to give permision properly, or at least all the kids involved as long as non are straying into shot.)

 

heres the kicker..yu cannot touch that camera no way no how...legally that is. its theft end of, and or agravated, criminal damage etc, even if you deside 'he wil delete them pics!'

nar then, yoou say oi stop takin pics and the guy continues, its then a provocasion/insightment to violence, the camera guy is now agrevating the subject illigally. (but...the laws a bit funny, if you brake the camera its 50 50 what happens in court..better punching the guy id it comes tothat but you'll to prove provicasion).

 

duh dahhhhh.... besides, the ictures were to intimadate you into a submisive 'listen and do as you are told' bollox...like i said, tell him stop, he has to, after that its ring the police...ish lol. as for conversasions your only peaceable voise is 'tell him, stand and wait...dont enter the banter it only feeds them...say yu bit politly..after its an afray if neather can prove the other started it.

 

edit in, theres been amendments to the terorismn act btw...its ring a solister whatever if your in that posion, i.e. you can photogragh the police ata riot, weather you get a beeting..legaly..etc...best avoid lol.

Edited February 20, 2013 by ghillies

[PaulEamonn 37]

If the old bill worked as hard at catching the villains as they do at avoiding work the nicks would be filled to the brim!

 

Sounds like all you can do is, as you say, carry on.

 

The signs may be a good idea, if nothing more than to keep the FEO happy and show that you're trying. Also, letting the local police know that you're going shooting will prevent him next door having the satisfaction of seeing you spread eagled over your car bonnet with a load of gung-ho armed response cops pointing guns at you because 'someone' has report a man with a gun at the cricket club.

 

While it may seem a pain in the arse, the thing you've got to consider here is that you are representing all of us in this too. If you allow this twat to beat you then he will have beaten all of us to and feel empowered to move on to the next shooter.

 

I know it's not easy but I hope you can just carry on as normal and beat him with the system rather than let him wear you down with his sh1te.

 

Best of luck and keep us posted.

[ghillies 209]

ahh yes the fone call to the bill...verses ooo look at all them guys in uniform shooting me!! and of course, anything like the neighbour insident, the police have a starting point, your legally there, and your comunative with the them..

[PaulEamonn 37]

Having just read Ghillie's reply just above my last one. The question that sprang into my mind is - Who owns the land that the cricket club stands on?

 

What I'm getting to here is, can you ask the cricket club committee (if they are so empowered) to order him to stay off 'their' land? If they can and he then enters the club area, he is trespassing.

 

Just a thought.

[Hugh Wilton 11]

The ownership of the land is one of his major problems. The land is owned by the council but is let to the cricket club.

 

Having read the minuets from the meaning that he was removed from, the council have no problems with the pest control that is taking place on that land. And when asked if, as a member of the council, if the complaints that he was making was on the behave of a member of his constitute, or was it a personnel vendetta. He then responded that it was a personal issue. Also in that meeting they were asked if they has ever received any other complaints about shooting on this land, and no no complaints.