Arrested for filming a public council meeting
Have Carmarthenshire Council and Dyfed Powys Police acted illiberally?
By David Allen Green Published 13 June 2011 18:42
The blogger and campaigner Jacqui Thompson was last week arrested, handcuffed, marched to a police car, and then detained at a police station for two hours. All she had done was to film a public meeting of Carmarthenshire Council on her camera-phone.
One would expect that transparency of public council meetings would now be the norm, not a police matter. Indeed, in a letter dated 23 February 2011, the coalition government set out guidance for English councils on filming. Included in the guidance is the following statement:
There are recent stories about people being ejected from council meetings for blogging, tweeting or filming. This potentially is at odds with the fundamentals of democracy and I want to encourage all councils to take a welcoming approach to those who want to bring local news stories to a wider audience. The public should rightly expect that elected representatives who have put themselves up for public office be prepared for their decisions to be as transparent as possible and welcome a direct line of communication to their electorate. I do hope that you and your colleagues will do your utmost to maximise the transparency and openness of your council.
While it seems this guidance does not extend to Wales -- local government is a "devolved" matter -- it is clearly an articulation of good practice in a democracy. Indeed, one would hope that councils would not need such guidance.
But it appears Carmarthenshire Council is different. The following statements set out a narrative what happened that day when Jacqui Thompson was arrested and detained.
We can start with the council's general press statement about the incident:
Ms Thompson refused repeated requests to stop filming proceedings in the Chamber which is not allowed. She then refused repeated requests to leave the public gallery. The Chair was left with no other option other than to call the police to remove her from the gallery so that County Council business could proceed.
Jacqui Thompson:
Clearly my presence was noted when I entered the Public Gallery and when the row commenced over the Day Club, I started filming with my phone, (not terribly well I know but better than nothing) I was asked to leave by the Chairman and [Chief Executive] Mark James, I said that I was not doing anything wrong, it is not against the law nor even in their standing orders (rules for meetings), neither was I disturbing the meeting in any shape or form.
Alexander Smith of the Carmarthen Journal:
Councillor Pam Palmer halted the meeting part-way through when she spotted a member of the public had a camera-phone.
Recognising the blogger, who has been in trouble for filming meetings before, chief executive Mark James said: "Mrs Thompson, you have been asked time and time again not to film."
Mrs Thompson said she was doing nothing wrong, to which Mr James replied: "I hope you've got a good picture for your website.
"Clearly Mrs Thompson doesn't want to put the camera down.
"Can we ask for the police to come and remove her from the chamber?"
Chairman Ivor Jackson said: "I am going to suspend the meeting to remove that lady from the chamber."
The meeting then broke up with the councillors loudly complaining and talking among themselves.
The footage of the council meeting in the minutes up to the adjournment is now on YouTube.
And so back to Jacqui Thompson:
As I didn't leave, Mr James and the Chair called the police and then adjourned the meeting. . . it only took ten minutes today for two police cars and four police officers to appear in the Gallery.
I asked the council on what legal basis they thought filming of public meetings was not allowed:
The law requires the Council to allow public access to its meetings, but it does not require Council to allow the public to film them. There is no Welsh Government Assembly guidance requiring this and in fact they also do not allow individual members of the public to record their proceedings. Neither does Parliament. As owner of the building the Council is entitled to regulate what happens on their premises.
I also asked the council on what legal basis she was asked to leave the public gallery:
The Council's standing orders provide that if a meetings is being disrupted by a person in the public gallery, the Chair should ask for that person to be removed. If he or she refuses to leave when requested, the Chair can adjourn the meeting to enable this to happen and for order to be restored.
The police were called. They later issued this formal police statement:
At approximately 10:20 on the 8th of June 2011 officers were asked to attend at County Hall, Carmarthen to deal with an incident involving a woman in the public gallery. On arrival, officers spoke to a 49 year old woman but she refused to co-operate and she was then arrested to prevent a further breach of the peace. She was later released with no further action.
Note to editor
Police responded to the call as filming in the public gallery is prohibited under council regulations (as reported by the Council.)
However, the council Standing Orders (not regulations) do not prohibit filming. Instead rule 22.1 provides:
Removal of member of the public
If a member of the public interrupts proceedings, the Chair will warn the person concerned. If they continue to interrupt, the Chair will order their removal from the meeting room.
Interruptions may lead to the removal of a member of the public, but not photography or filming -- and there is no evidence that Jacqui Thompson was being disruptive. The "Note to Editor" rather suggests that either the council or the police (or both) misdirected themselves as to the meaning and legal force of the Standing Orders.
I asked the council whether the chair asked the police to arrest Ms Thompson or whether it was left as a matter for the police:
The person in the gallery had been asked to stop filming and to leave the gallery on a previous occasion. When an officer asked her to do this she accused that officer of assaulting her. That has been investigated by the Police and the officer completely exonerated. Because of this background there was no alternative but to ask the Police to deal with the person concerned. The way in which the police officers dealt with the matter was entirely a matter for them.
Jacqui Thompson:
I tried to argue my point but was then arrested in the Public Gallery for 'breaching the peace'.
From the Blackstone's Police Operational Handbook 2011:
Meaning of breach of the peace
A breach of the peace may occur where harm is done or is likely to be done to a person, or to their property in their presence, or they are in fear of being harmed through assault, affray, riot, or other disturbance (R v Howell [1982] QB 416, QBD).
I asked the council if it supported the decision to have Jacqui Thompson arrested:
The Council have had no influence over whether Mrs Thompson was arrested or not and no view on the fact that she was arrested. Their only reason for calling the Police was to restore order in the Council chamber to enable the democratic process to proceed.
I asked the police in what possible way was filming a public council meeting a breach of the peace? Dyfed Powys Police are hoping to provide an answer on this later this week (I asked on Friday). However, one would have thought they would have known the answer to this before they went and arrested someone.
I also asked the Dyfed Powys Police to confirm that filming a public council meeting was not actually an arrestable offence. Again, Dyfed Powys Police are hoping to provide an answer to this later this week. And again, one would have expected Dyfed Powys Police to be able to answer this one straightaway. Any police force should know its powers of arrest.
Jacqui Thompson:
I was taken outside the door, handcuffed, searched, my phone taken and marched out to the waiting police cars.
Alexander Smith of the Carmarthen Journal has blogged what happened next:
We can't have been on the steps longer than five minutes when four police officers led Mrs Thompson, in cuffs, round the side of the building, perhaps wanting to avoid the attention of the front steps?
They didn't see me coming, but I only managed to take one photo before the blonde officer [pictured, right] grabbed my arm and tried to take the camera. I wriggled free and explained I was from the Journal.
After showing my press pass I asked them what the arrest was for. One of the male officers replied: "That's none of your business."
Jacqui Thompson:
I was then taken 30 miles to Llanelli police station where I remained handcuffed for another hour before being 'processed', and put in a cell for another two hours.
Jacqui Thompson had been ejected from the public council meeting. But why was she then taken to a police station and detained? And why was she then kept several hours at the police station?
Dyfed Powys Police were not able to answer my questions, but they hope to get back to me later this week.
According to Jacqui Thompson:
By this time I was very disorientated, worried about my young daughter who needed picking up from school, I was cold (the police had taken my jacket and shoes and socks) and distressed. Without a solicitor present, I was then threatened by three police officers who said that if I didn't sign an 'undertaking' not to film/record any more meetings I would be kept in overnight, I am not sure now whether they could even keep me that long. I was then, eventually, released.
So I asked the police why was she threatened with court if she did not sign an "undertaking": And what possible offence was the police threatening with charging her? Do the police realise that this is a free expression issue? Will the police now apologise to Ms Thompson?
Dyfed Powys Police do not currently have any answers to these questions, but they do hope to be able tell me later this week.
It appears to me that Ms Thompson was not in breach of any council Standing Order or committing (or threatening to commit) any breach of the peace. Accordingly, there seems to be no good basis whatsoever for her arrest. There is also no good reason why she was taken to a police station and required, on pain of further detention, to sign an undertaking.
In my view, Carmarthenshire Council and Dyfed Powys Police have simply acted in an altogether hapless, illiberal, and alarming manner. A person, surely, should not be arrested and detained just for filming a public council meeting, and a council should not be able to prevent someone from doing so in this manner. In my opinion, all the councillors, officials, and police officers involved in this sad sequence of events really should be ashamed of themselves.
David Allen Green is legal correspondent of the New Statesman
Latest tweets
More from New Statesman
- Online writers:
- Steven Baxter
- Rowenna Davis
- David Allen Green
- Mehdi Hasan
- Nelson Jones
- Gavin Kelly
- Helen Lewis
- Laurie Penny
- The V Spot
- Alex Hern
- Martha Gill
- Alan White
- Samira Shackle
- Alex Andreou
- Nicky Woolf in America
- Bim Adewunmi
- Glosswitch
- Kate Mossman on pop
- Ryan Gilbey on Film
- Martin Robbins
- Rafael Behr
- Eleanor Margolis
- Tools and services:
- Polls
- Predictions
- Archive
- Magazine
- PDF edition
- RSS feeds
- Advertising
- Subscribe
- Special supplements
- Stockists




















92 comments
I have seen that car insurance companies know the motors which are susceptible to accidents and also other risks. They also know what style of cars are susceptible to higher risk and also the higher risk they've already the higher the actual premium charge. Understanding the very simple basics with car insurance just might help you choose the right kind of insurance policy that may take care of your family needs in case you happen to be involved in an accident. Thank you for sharing the actual ideas in your blog.
Excellent article. I like the way you have targeted the important points. A lot of commentators (mostly attacking Jacqui) seem to be concerned with irrelevant issues such as her breaking 'the rules'. But as you say, what is the stautory basis for these rules, and in what way does the council think it is lawfully exercising its discretion (where it has any?) The fact that it admits it is obliged to admit the public to meetings dispenses with a large part of its case.
As for the police invloved, they appear to be in some trouble. Hopefully this will be a step towards arrest for 'not doing as you're told'.
Time to start recall actions
Well assembled precis, but why the scare quotes 'round "devolved"?
Excellent deconstruction of events.
You've strayed from saying anything more than the council and Police "should be ashamed" but isn't it a bit more serious than that?
As more and more community bloggers are attempting to hold power to account shouldn't the decisions made by the council and Police here be challenged?
Otherwise, is the door not wide open for other councils and forces in all devolved nations to do exactly the same?
I have suddenly found Dave the legal eagle is banning my comments.
Therefore, I am out to get you Dave.
You are obviously flying a fanker here on NS. It is obvious.
The night is short but the year is long, I am on your case, and am going to hound you off NS. But if it isn't you that is totally deleting my comments, fair enough.
What makes it worse is I am from Carnarthenshire, so you are using me as a twat, as carmartheshire.
I could decend to threats, as you want but I won't. Your just a basic english twat, you must be. Shale gas exploration which, ahem, involved non-profit at the moment or not. You english are idiots.
Is Carmarthenshire Council entitled to forbid filming of its meetings? Yes. The same rules apply at Westminster.
When a member of the public disrupts proceedings by creating a distraction is the Council entitled to ask that person to leave? Yes.
Should Jacqui Thompson have left when she was asked? Yes, not to do so was a breach of the peace.
Given Thompson's refusal to leave what was the inevitable next step? For her removal to be effected with the help of the police.
Thompson was arrested for ignoring the lawful direction of a police officer. Acting in this way in any situation will always result in arrest.
It is Thompson, not the Council, who are at fault and it is her not them who should be held to account, including bearing the full cost to the Council and police of this ridiculous stunt.
I was at that meeting and, as a member of the public, was hugely shocked and inconvenienced by Thompson's absurd, selfish and truculent response to a very reasonable attempt by the Council to uphold their own rules. I hope she's prosecuted.
I amfrom Carmarthenshire, and every fair comment that I have posted has been deleted. Whether from the author, or NS itself, if will ask further, if I am bothered.
George Eaton? Nah, fuck it. This is legal looser town. I am sure Dave has his reasons.
We have laws, rules and regulations. If these are to be challenged, there are ways to challenge them. However, whilst these laws, rules and regulations are in force, they should be respected, however ridiculous they might seem. Alternatively, where do we draw the line?
NS is making itself look like idiots, headlining this story, by the way. It is a storm in a teacup. Next we will hear that NS will become pathetic nimbey anti-windmillers.
Fight the NWO corrupt big brother police state and bilderberg filth! they want to destroy you and take away your freedom using the pretence of "protecting you" scanners at airports "protecting you" cctv cameras everywhere "protecting you" more police powers "protecting you" do not be fooled join the fight against tyranny and the NWO and protect yourself and your family and your fellow patriots!
I'm afraid this is typical of Carmarthenshire County Council, which has behaved like an autocratic and unaccountable banana republic for many years; far too many of the councillors are timeserving mediocrities with grossly exaggerated notions of their own importance. The behaviour of the police, who should have known better, is the truly worrying aspect of this, and should be addressed immediately by the Welsh government - but as that, too, has an equally arms-length relationship with the notions of freedom of information and accountability, you can bet it won't be.
Rachel Green - did you read the article? The Council does NOT have rules prohibiting filming. They could have but they don't
David - the link to the guidance on filming doesn't work (404 error) any chance of fixing?
@Rachel: How is a member of the public disrupting the proceedings by the silent act of filming? Many parliamentary bodies are filmed for the public benefit as normal procedure.
It seems the councillors chose to be disrupted. It makes one ask what matters they wish to keep away from the publci record.
good example of the Streisand effect.
I think finishing on "should be ashamed" is fine if the rest of the article is showing exactly how it looks like they broke the law by exceeding their powers.
Why did she have to film in secret? Wouldn't the reasonable ground to have asked permission before the meeting began? A refusal by the council would have set enough tounges wagging especialy if the refusal was filmed and the grounds the refusal was given. Food for thought!I was under the impression that filming people without their permission was unlawful.
As you point out, Alexander Smith says: "I only managed to take one photo before the blonde officer [pictured] grabbed my arm and tried to take the camera".
On what grounds - and on what legal basis - did she do that?
The council and the police are at fault. They should be prosecuted for violating the right to freedom of expression and for harrassment and wrongful detention.
Someone (Civil Liberties?) should be helping this lady take the police to court for detaining her illegally, so that a precedent is set in cases like these. Maybe there is also a case against the council for harassment?
"On what grounds - and on what legal basis - did she do that?"
I deliberately take photos of the police when I walk past them... they're forever convinced there's some kind of law against filming them. I'm sufficiently certain there isn't.
A better question might be could it qualify as battery?
As you say, '..they should be ashamed' but won't be, since the arrogant councillors and officers who sit in Carmarthen's County Hall have egos that would be hard pressed to fit inside the dome of St Paul's Cathedral while the pathetic array of Assembly Members who sit in the Senedd at Cardiff will only bleat, yet again, 'We can do nothing.' But then, they never do.
The Chair of the meeting did warn the lady, so, sorry I have little sympathy. If she hadn't been warned and just arrested then I'd feel differently.
"Any police force should know its powers of arrest."
Unfortunately, as the American criminologist L. Craig Parker Jr. has demonstrated through psychological testing, the police don't know the law, but assume that anything of which they personally disapprove must de facto be illegal. Consequently, they arrest and harass people for doing nothing wrong. Until this attitude problem is addressed, nothing is going to improve.
It would appear to me that if a breach of the peace did occur then it was the chair of the council trying to eject a member of public from the gallery who was perfectly entitled to be there are was not breaking any of their standing orders.
An excellent piece and spot on.
This is a Council that has already been reported by the BBC in a recent program concerning old people as "Denying people their basic right of freedom of expression".
What you have missed is that JT was in fact filming a debate about the closure of Day Centres for the elderly in Carmarthenshire.
This debate was created because a number of elderly people managed to raise a petition of 1500 signatures against the closure of their Day Centre in Llandeilo.
This debate was a farce and basically these peoples concerns were brushed aside.
This was the debate that JT was trying to film to show people who could not get to the debate to hear the arguments for and against.
This is what the Executive Board don't want you to see. The fact that the Democratic process is being usurped and communities are not being represented.
So yes - the heavy handed action is designed to intimidate the public.
This is the action of arrogant people who decide and implement what they think is best for the rest of us, not for the good of the community.
Yet they are all supposed to be Public Servants, supporting the community not repressing it.
JT was not taken to a local police station in Carmarthen but taken to a police station 20 miles away in Llanelli, held for hours, not charged but forced to sign a form (raised by whom you may ask)preventing her from doing something perfectly legal.
Aren't the police supposed to stop people doing things that are illegal?
So the Council Officers, a number of Councillors and the Police should hang their heads in shame.
Perhaps it is time that all Council meetings open to the public were recorded so we can review what is really happening.
Perhaps then we will start to get some interest in politics and Councillors representing their constituents at last.
As a footnote perhaps it is relevant to state that the people whose Day Centre is now closed to save a paltry few pounds are the people who fought for this country to keep Hitler out.
I expect many of them are thinking "Why did we bother?"
Only 10 minutes for the police to turn up? Dammit, they took 2 days when I was burgled, but then I am not a council member or wealthy. Oh to have their pull.
oh shit Dave, Wales young lads got absolutely slaughter by NZ young lads, 92-nil.
Do i feel a bit pissed off now? An understatement.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/rugby_union/welsh/13752205.stm
Fifteen players called Mandy Rice-Davies would have performed better for Wales I think.
I didn't mean further above by the way. Hot talk, steamed up.
In between snide remarks about Dyfed-Powys police knowing its powers of arrest, have you managed to find out whether guidance to English authorities automatically applies in another country? It "seems" as if you're unsure from the article.
I would like to think Rachel Green actually watched the proceedings, which Jacqui Thompson succeeded in capturing with her camera, where the lead councillor dismissed the petition and any discussion, to the surprise and shock of the person serving the perition, and apparently some other councillors. Is she condoning this action over Ms Thompson bringing this disgraceful regard for local people's concerns to the public eye, so something can be done about it? And not just in her constituancy but others where councils believe they have god-given rights over everyone else?
@copyrightgirl, sorry to come back late - long day of creating literary work of little originality :)
I'm interested (as a non-lawyer) when you say that making the work creates a technical infringement. With s.58 it'd be their copyright as authors of speech (rather than as performers). And the copyright is only created by the act of recording (s.3). Without the recording (fixation), there's no copyright. As I read it, you couldn't therefore use s.58 to require prior consent to record, only to provide remedy for unauthorised publication afterwards. As @DAG says, a claim for infringement would probably be pretty defensible anyway.
Considering @richard's point, s.11(2) specifically refers to employees. Councillors aren't employed by council or Crown, so I would presume any assertion under CDPA would be theirs as individuals.
Alan, Coventry: so if someone does something I don't like, I can have them arrested – provided I warn them to stop first and they refuse? Even if it's not a crime? Do you understand what the rule of law is?
Question) If the police arrest someone for 'breach of the peace' and that person is later brought in front of a court. If it later transpires that no breach of the peace occurred AND the police knew there was no breach of the peace, can/should those police officers who's names appear on the charging documents be held in contempt? Ditto abuse of anti-terrorism legislation.
I note that on BBC Wales news CCC still state it was against the rules to film! What rules? Surely if it is not in the standing orders then it can't be a rule. Where is this written down? And they also stated it is THEIR building and they have the right to say what goes on inside. I THINK NOT! That building belongs to every council tax payer in Carmarthen!
As for the police and the signing of the document ( I can't wait to find out who raised that document) surely they are there to
enforce the law? They are not the law makers. KGB springs to mind.
As a matter of interest do they have CCTV cameras inside the building? If so then
mark james has created his own little fiefedom, and does not tolerate disent or anyone questiojning his authority. cllrs in carmarthen are afraid to question his authority, planning regulation does not exist here.
and pam palmer is a very haughty lady, she also hates anyone questioning her authority.
Excellent article; I can't wait for the - inevitably awkward - rationales!
Worth mentioning that in deepest, bluest Tory Surrey, both Waverley Borough Council and Surrey County Council have meetings webcast.
I shared the link to this piece, and a friend has commented the following: "I don't have a problem with elected members being fair game for the camera but council employees are a different matter. I wasn't aware that it's an implied term of a council employee's employment contract that your employer allows anybody who pleases to film you while doing your job."
I don't really agree (as a Council employee myself; in my view, Police officers, parking attendants, grass cutters, roads operatives and all others who do their work in a public place just have to accept that they might be filmed or photographed - I really don't see what is different about Council employees taking part in a public council meeting.)
But I wonder what you think of my friend's point about Council officials?
Rachel Green, you seem to be unaware of a TV station called "BBC Parliament", that shows nothing but parliamentary debates in the House of Commons. I do not see how someone filming a council meeting is any different. So unless there is an overriding security or privacy concern, no, Carmarthen council can't just make up rules as they go along.
But if you want to open a puppy farm, Carmarthenshire council will bend over backwards to help - it's a mad, mad world :-(
Dear Rachel @ 18:45
"Should Jacqui Thompson have left when she was asked? Yes, not to do so was a breach of the peace."
I'm unclear as to how her actions meant that harm came, or might come, to either anyone in the chamber or their possessions in their presence. Could you run me through that please?
Also :
"Thompson was arrested for ignoring the lawful direction of a police officer. Acting in this way in any situation will always result in arrest."
You may be interested to know that their is no requirement to "follow a lawful order of a police officer". Nor is there an arrestible offence for it. That you seem an otherwise intelligent woman and yet think there might be is deeply worrying.
People died for the liberties you and I enjoy. Oddly enough, some of those who died were no doubt friends of those the council is now trying to tread all over - ie the old folks at the centre.
Martin.
I wonder what would happen if 20 people turned up at the council meetings each filming the proceedings with their mobile phone cameras.
Carmarthenshire Council should be charged with wasting police time.
What were they trying to cover up?
Mr. Divine said:
"I wonder what would happen if 20 people turned up at the council meetings each filming the proceedings with their mobile phone cameras."
My sentiments exactly. Government supports (in word if not deed) openness & transparency, yet the actions of Carmarthenshire Council betray that aspect of our local administrations. Too much going on behind closed doors, & without public consultation or, in this case, ignoring public petitions...
May I ask of Mr Green, did you get to speak to the Council Chair direct or did all your questions have to go through a press officer? The same question applies to who spoke for Dyfed Powys Police, who don't even seen able to define their own powers (and legal limitations) of arresting someone... I thought a charge for arrest had to be made on the spot before doing so, but no-one seems to know what exactly it was! Why is it going to take them a week to come up with one!?
Is it liberal to go and film any worker whilst they're doing their job without prior warning? Did anyone bother finding out if these citizens at work really want to be filmed?
There is a huge nuclear bunker underneath Carmarthen Town. Should I have said that? Needs know and all that? Ah well, I have now. Everyone local knows about it, since local redundant miners built it in the early 1980's. Or it could be a local urban myth, though. Maybe the later.
One more step towards the totalitarian state.