Say what you see.

I will explain everything, tomorrow.

Basher, I hope you'll try to ignore the bashing. Responding in kind can get you kicked out of POTN even if others started the fight. I want to know how the plot comes out.

So far, we've got this (partly speculative): It's British Isles. A serious road incident occurred, and the driver pictured is charged with having been at fault for using his phone. Basher is working for the prosecution, perhaps seeking to establish whether jurors will be able to identify the rectangular object from blurry photos.

As promised, this is what it was all about.

In the UK, all the individual police forces have a system in place, which allows you to submit bad driving, via your dashcam. It is called 'Operation Snap'. A few months ago, on consecutive days, I managed to catch two people using their phones, whilst driving. The second of them, is the one shown here. However, that is when the trouble began. I was informed that the first one would be sent to court, but the second one, would not, due to it being of poor quality. This, despite the fact that the imagery in the first one [I have included it here], was actually LESS clear than the second. When I challenged this, I mentioned that I hope it wasn't racially motivated. This was because the driver of the first vehicle was black, and the second was white. As expected, this did not go down too well with the officer who made the decision, and he angrily denied being a racist. I then decided that this was probably true, and stated to his superiors that the only possible reason that I can come up with for his actions, was that the person in the video/images – was a friend or family member. A while later, they got back to me, and informed me that two of his colleagues also looked at the footage/images, and completely agreed with him. In other words, they were unable to see a hand [despite even the fingernails being visible, when enlarged], and also unable to see a phone [despite even the phone viewfinder being visible, when enlarged]. All attempts by me [So far] to obtain independent verification of the video and images, have unsurprisingly, fallen on deaf ears. This is the reason why I posted here. I simply want to get an idea of what non-police people, can actually see. Anyway, the matter is now being dealt with officially, so I will just have to wait and see if they will allow the evidence to be looked at independently.

Finally, as already stated, the images shown here, were those that were originally submitted to the police. Whenever I send them a video clip, I usually include screenshots [Some enlarged], in order to give more detail.

Thanks for the update. Interesting story.
I still fail to see how this is appropriate content for a photography forum, but that's just my opinion.

Basher wrote in post #19425962
In the UK, all the individual police forces have a system in place, which allows you to submit bad driving, via your dashcam. It is called 'Operation Snap'. A few months ago, on consecutive days, I managed to catch two people using their phones, whilst driving. . . . I was informed that the first one would be sent to court, but the second one, would not, due to it being of poor quality. This, despite the fact that the imagery in the first one . . . was actually LESS clear than the second. When I challenged this, I mentioned that I hope it wasn't racially motivated. This was because the driver of the first vehicle was black, and the second was white. As expected, this did not go down too well with the officer who made the decision, and he angrily denied being a racist. I then decided that this was probably true, and stated to his superiors that the only possible reason that I can come up with for his actions, was that the person in the video/images – was a friend or family member. A while later, they . . . informed me that two of his colleagues also looked at the footage/images, and completely agreed with him. In other words, they were unable to see a hand . . . and also unable to see a phone.

So you are indeed on the prosecution's side, though unofficially, as a concerned citizen (excuse me, as a concerned subject), and the pictured driver hasn't caused an accident, as far as we know.

Suggesting to the police that one of them might bend his perceptions to favor a friend or relative might not sit any better with them than suggesting that one of them is racist.

To me, the black driver's fingers show up more clearly than the white driver's. However, I do see a hand and fingers in the "white driver" photos. I also see a rectangular object but can't be sure it's a phone. When you ask your question in a forum of photographers, you'll get responses from people who are practiced in spotting details. This may help explain the difference from the police officers' judgment.

Practiced in 'spotting details' such as viewfinders, for example. Yes?

Simply wanted expert opinions, rather than relying on non-expert, police officers.

Too late, my friend. I have already been made the scapegoat.

Basher wrote in post #19426146
Simply wanted expert opinions, rather than relying on non-expert, police officers.

I doubt any of us here are experts in law enforcement, especially in a country other than our own

Basher wrote in post #19426159
Too late, my friend. I have already been made the scapegoat.

Hosted photo: posted by Basher in
./showthread.php?p=194​26159&i=i92543913
forum: The Lounge

No, you just didn't follow the rules of this forum.

.

It is best to be respectful and kind to people when writing replies to them, even if the post they wrote to you is insulting or rude. Be gracious to others, and your posts will not be deleted and you will not get warnings from moderators.


.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #19426195
.

It is best to be respectful and kind to people when writing replies to them, even if the post they wrote to you is insulting or rude. Be gracious to others, and your posts will not be deleted and you will not get warnings from moderators.


.

Or get BANNED entirely.

Basher wrote in post #19426159
Too late, my friend. I have already been made the scapegoat.

Hosted photo: posted by Basher in
./showthread.php?p=194​26159&i=i92543913
forum: The Lounge

Well, I tried to warn you. Scapegoat? I wouldn't say so. In general, when entering a new community, a virtual one or not, it's best to keep your head down until you've got a sense of the local customs and the style of moderation. I've sometimes had posts deleted when a discussion became heated and I replied to a post that was removed later or I expressed opinions that rubbed someone the wrong way. I don't think I expressed them rudely. Topic drift can also lead to deletions.

all i know is snitches get stitches.

BirdsofBC wrote in post #19426230
.
all i know is snitches get stitches.
.

.
And they should!

I have always had a real problem with tattletales. . Was brought up with the rule that we were never to tattle on others, no matter what they were doing or how wrong it was. . And I very heartily agree with that rule. . But I acknowledge that it looks like the OP has a legal right to do it, regardless of how distasteful it may be for someone to blow the whistle on someone else.


.

Tom Reichner wrote in post #19426253
.
And they should!

I have always had a real problem with tattletales. . Was brought up with the rule that we were never to tattle on others, no matter what they were doing or how wrong it was. . And I very heartily agree with that rule. . But I acknowledge that it looks like the OP has a legal right to do it, regardless of how distasteful it may be for someone to blow the whistle on someone else.

.

It depends on the situation. The vast majority of the time, I agree with your statement. This thread, I'd agree. People playing with their phone while driving (and we don't even know whether the person in the pictures was driving or parked) are very annoying but not usually worth bothering the police about them.

But you wouldn't at least get a tag number and call the police in this situation?
https://www.theguardia​n.com …employee-stops-carjacking