Have marshals got the right to stop people filming and/or taking photos?

[alfaman]

If this is in the wrong thread please feel free to move it.

A simple question - do marshals have the right to stop people filming the aftermath of a crash?
I only ask because I was at Brands Hatch last Sunday (17/04/11) when there was that enormous accident during the MR2 race. I caught the crash on video and then went up to the top of Paddock Hill bend to see the aftermath of the crash.
As I tried to film the rescue operation I was barked at by more than one overly-aggressive marshal to stop filming and told somewhat ironically to "move as there was nothing to see"...
But what gives them the power to do that. The car had ended up in a public area so is it in their jurisdiction to stop me?
They were also using blankets to shield the driver whilst he received treatment and was eventually freed from the car.
If this meeting was being televised/recorded would they go up to an ITV camera and put their hands in front of it to stop them filming?
I noticed a snapper with accreditation wasn't stopped so why stop me?
They don't know what I'm filming. I could be taking discrete shots rather than zooming in on the injured driver but there was no room for discussion.
In fact I'm a TV reporter who's sadly seen much worse events than this but without any I.D to show which media organisation I work for I didn't think it was the time or place to argue.
I'm experienced enough and mature enough not to intrude on a difficult situation.
At work I adhere to strict taste and decency guidelines and I use the same rules when I'm at the race track.
I'm not there for gore and any footage I put on Youtube is edited tastefully and respectfully. Ultimately I wanted to tell the story of the crash, the aftermath, the rescue.
But on Sunday I got treated like some ghoul who's watching or filming for twisted kicks and personally I think certain marshals were heavy-handed and over-officious....

[Piglet]

Short answer? Yes. You're on private property, the marshals, as agents of the owner can ask you to stop filming. Tbh if you're a tv reporter I'm surprised you have to ask.

accredited media is different, the key being the word accredited, the organiser/owner has the ability to ensure that sensitive footage isn't used. An organiser or the msa steward will often send accredited media to the scene of an accident to record events, damage etc. this remains with the organiser/owner/msa and is used in any investigation coroners inquest etc.

Heavy handed? I suspect you were talking to a marshal who had jjust had two cars fired at them or witnessed two cars being fired at their friends. They may not have known that none of their colleagues had been killed or injured and they didn't know if their was a driver fatality. they then have to deal with lots of spectators trying to see what is happening and filming. Personally, I'd cut him a bit of slack and put it in perspective rather than making yourself look a bit daft with your comments.

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by alfaman

If this is in the wrong thread please feel free to move it.

A simple question - do marshals have the right to stop people filming the aftermath of a crash?
I only ask because I was at Brands Hatch last Sunday (17/04/11) when there was that enormous accident during the MR2 race. I caught the crash on video and then went up to the top of Paddock Hill bend to see the aftermath of the crash.
As I tried to film the rescue operation I was barked at by more than one overly-aggressive marshal to stop filming and told somewhat ironically to "move as there was nothing to see"...
But what gives them the power to do that. The car had ended up in a public area so is it in their jurisdiction to stop me?
They were also using blankets to shield the driver whilst he received treatment and was eventually freed from the car.
If this meeting was being televised/recorded would they go up to an ITV camera and put their hands in front of it to stop them filming?
I noticed a snapper with accreditation wasn't stopped so why stop me?
They don't know what I'm filming. I could be taking discrete shots rather than zooming in on the injured driver but there was no room for discussion.
In fact I'm a TV reporter who's sadly seen much worse events than this but without any I.D to show which media organisation I work for I didn't think it was the time or place to argue.
I'm experienced enough and mature enough not to intrude on a difficult situation.
At work I adhere to strict taste and decency guidelines and I use the same rules when I'm at the race track.
I'm not there for gore and any footage I put on Youtube is edited tastefully and respectfully. Ultimately I wanted to tell the story of the crash, the aftermath, the rescue.
But on Sunday I got treated like some ghoul who's watching or filming for twisted kicks and personally I think certain marshals were heavy-handed and over-officious....

again most definately, like piglet said youre on private property, and having experienced heavy incidents like that, almost having your head taken off by 2 tonne of metal isnt the best experience in the world and looking from a marshalling perspective if your stood there witha video camera then its bound to be seen as incredibly insensitive especially if your videoing as the driver is extracted! the marshals on scene didnt know whether you would be getting kicks out of it or just videoing it as a news reporter or not, so in the heat of the moment then what do you expect other than to get your head bitten off!!!....at the time the driver could have been critical/dead or dying, so its an incredibly insensitive thing to do in my opinion.

[Tim Falce]

I would think providing you are not trackside marshals have no right.to tell you what to do, it should be the jurisdiction of MSV staff.

[Andy77]

I am sure this somewhat different but perhaps not so much either. I am no marshal but a volunteering firefighter and as that occasionally get alerts to road accidents. At an accident site we are entitled to keep the rights of potential victims and that includes holding nosy people back as well as too nosy news reporters away from the scene unless the commander on scene allows the photographer/reporter/tv cameraman through.

Mind you, it is one of the more annoying jobs holding these (pesky) folks away. And it keeps servicemen distracted from their normal job like rescue, first aid and all sorts of other needed work.

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by Tim Falce

I would think providing you are not trackside marshals have no right.to tell you what to do, it should be the jurisdiction of MSV staff.

il assume next time your trapped in a car with internal bleeding and unconcious youd be fine with me taking a video of you in agony and putting it on youtube then!

[Tim Falce]

Originally Posted by ascarracinguk

il assume next time your trapped in a car with internal bleeding and unconcious youd be fine with me taking a video of you in agony and putting it on youtube then!

If that's what rocks your boat feel free.

[Steve Milward]

Originally Posted by Piglet

Short answer? Yes. You're on private property, the marshals, as agents of the owner can ask you to stop filming. Tbh if you're a tv reporter I'm surprised you have to ask.

As long as the member of the public paid to get into the event and is stood in an area open to the public then he is doing no wrong.

However on moral grounds who would want to take those sort of pictures and for what purpose.

[Piglet]

Originally Posted by Tim Falce

I would think providing you are not trackside marshals have no right.to tell you what to do, it should be the jurisdiction of MSV staff.

On what basis Tim? You've noticed marshals operating other than trackside I assume? Pits, Paddock, Startline, Assembly, Spectator? In the good old days there might have been sufficient security at a circuit, these days there aren't and marshals regularly carry out this role.

As said above, it's a thankless task, I've done it and been threatened with physical violence from those who, as with the OP, think it's their "right" to be able to gawp at, photograph and video an accident scene that includes someone who is injured and being extricated from a vehicle.

Have you seen the original pictures of the London bus crashes taken by bystanders? The early ones showed limbs that had been blown off victims which could be seen at one side of the bus. I'm sure the families of the victims and (when they were published) those who didn't know if their loved ones were involved felt reassured by seeing these.

Accredited media know that there is a fine line to what they can publish, they are often allowed to continue to shoot in the knowledge that they will hand over footage to the appropriate authorities. I know many photographers who have very sensitive footage that could make them money but that they will not publish.

If the OP wants to be accredited media, he needs to arrange this with the organisers/circuit ahead of time as all other professional media do.

[Piglet]

Originally Posted by Mildrop

As long as the member of the public paid to get into the event and is stood in an area open to the public then he is doing no wrong.

However on moral grounds who would want to take those sort of pictures and for what purpose.

Again on what basis? He is on public property, has been admitted with the consent of the owner and the owner (and this extends to the operating club) can set rules as to what that person can and can't do. As to why, many people do it so that they can flog sensationalist footage to dodgy newspapers and make a quick buck at someone else's expense, let's face it footage of injured or dying drivers would be very popular in some media outlets.

T'ish funny these days, everyone has "rights" but nobody has responsibilities.

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by Tim Falce

If that's what rocks your boat feel free.

it doesnt roick my boat, im just making the point that you wouldnt like it, but say that marshals shouldnt be allowed to stop it, only msvr circuit staff

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by Piglet

T'ish funny these days, everyone has "rights" but nobody has responsibilities.

very true piglet, i think it also says on the back of your ticket that videoing is either not allowed but if it is the video/photo belongs to msvr or something to that effect....not sure tho!

[Steve Milward]

Originally Posted by Piglet

Again on what basis? He is on public property, has been admitted with the consent of the owner and the owner (and this extends to the operating club) can set rules as to what that person can and can't do. As to why, many people do it so that they can flog sensationalist footage to dodgy newspapers and make a quick buck at someone else's expense, let's face it footage of injured or dying drivers would be very popular in some media outlets.

T'ish funny these days, everyone has "rights" but nobody has responsibilities.

Unless specifically stated on the ticket stub that was given back to the spectator he can take as many photo's as he or she likes.

By the way I'm not supporting what the photographer has done at all, in fact quite the opposite. I am however pointing out the rights of the individual.

Also by suggesting that the marshal is somehow an agent of the race track owner therefore within his or her rights to stop the photographer is also incorrect. It is in fact the responsibilty of the MSVR staff to carry out this task should it be required.

[Andy77]

Originally Posted by Piglet

..... As to why, many people do it so that they can flog sensationalist footage to dodgy newspapers and make a quick buck at someone else's expense, let's face it footage of injured or dying drivers would be very popular in some media outlets. ....

Not just would, I fear.

[ascarracinguk]

Originally Posted by Mildrop

Also by suggesting that the marshal is somehow an agent of the race track owner therefore within his or her rights to stop the photographer is also incorrect. It is in fact the responsibilty of the MSVR staff to carry out this task should it be required.

well in that case lets hire circuit staff for every member of the public with a camera and follow them around to stop them taking videos of bad accidents, its not practicle, the marshals are there to protect themselves, the drivers and the public, if that means getting snotty with someone who is too insensitive to video a driver that has been badly injured in a crash then im sorry stuff your human rights, the rights of the injured driver come above an individual whos videoing it for personal uses....at the end of the day the marshals need to act in the drivers interest, im sure if youd ask the driver he wouldnt be too keen on getting videos taken of him!

[Steve Milward]

Originally Posted by ascarracinguk

well in that case lets hire circuit staff for every member of the public with a camera and follow them around to stop them taking videos of bad accidents, its not practicle, the marshals are there to protect themselves, the drivers and the public, if that means getting snotty with someone who is too insensitive to video a driver that has been badly injured in a crash then im sorry stuff your human rights, the rights of the injured driver come above an individual whos videoing it for personal uses....at the end of the day the marshals need to act in the drivers interest, im sure if youd ask the driver he wouldnt be too keen on getting videos taken of him!

I tottaly agree but I was responding to the original question which was

Do marshals have the right to stop people filming the aftermath of a crash?

And the simple answer is no

[chezza]

I'm with Anita on this one, marshals to have the right to request that you stop filming/take pictures. OK this car ended up in a public area, but as a race incident it falls under their juridiction. As you said the marshal wouldn't have known if you were taking wide shots or zooming in on the driver...another reason why they would have asked you to stop.

As a marshal I have in the past asked someone to stop taking pictures of a particularly heavy incident. Its out of respect of the drivers privacy, which is why the blankets would have been up also. As has been noted in other posts...i'm sure if it was you in the driving seat after the accident you wouldn't want people videoing the aftermath. Also you specifically mention having to move to go to video the aftermath...I assume this is the media person in you, but with such a nasty accident I can't think of anything worse than people rushing to see the aftermath. I think its terrible, just the same as those who cheer when people crash...its just sick.

Also I think if you had had your media ID on you it would have gotten you an even shorter answer, one of the things marshals are told is to not give details to the media as it would be up to the circuit/club/championship reps to release any details and that would include any pictures/film.

Also as has been said the acredited photographer would have been allowed to carry on with pictures should they have been needed for any investigation or inquiry. They know that those pictures were not to be published and would be handed over to the circuit so that they can be used for such reasons.

[Stephen Green]

Originally Posted by chezza

Also as has been said the acredited photographer would have been allowed to carry on with pictures should they have been needed for any investigation or inquiry. They know that those pictures were not to be published and would be handed over to the circuit so that they can be used for such reasons.

I would add that accredited photographers are often asked by the Clerks to take pictures which can later be used as evidence if necessary.

There have been occasions where I have asked members of the public to stop taking photographs of accident scenes for the reasons stated in previous posts.

[ChrisPage]

Ask yourself some questions instead

- why do you think its right that instead of attending to the incident the marshal instead had to stop to get an inconsiderate crash-spotter to move on.

- what possible reason did you have for filming/photographing? Beyond getting some gore to show your mates in the pub?

- if you can see why 'some' people should be stopped, why can't you see why 'all' people should be stopped. Should the marshal take one look at your face and see you are 'better' than other crash-spotters? Is is not possible they need to just stop everyone as a crash doesn't really leave much time to research your impecable credentials on their iPhone?

- if you have a TV background, what intention did you have for such voyeuristic snaps? You know well the value of them.

If you want to be a snapper at the races, get accredited and get on with it. But don't expect people to think you are hard done by because you were stopped from taking voyeuristic snaps of a potentially fatal situation.

[bella]

as a spectator, non-marshal and occasional media person, it's nothing to do with media value, it's morals. in the end so few people are shocked by anything nowadays they don't know the difference between something happening in front of their eyes and something happening on the tv with actors wearing makeup and pretend dead people.

from a media perspective, it's also about what's newsworthy. if you're daft enough to think that the aftermath rather than the accident itself is newsworthy then you should question your profession. if you're recording in the hope of a negligence case, you may want to apply for a job with the daily mail.

regarding accredited media recording the accident and aftermath, i can only echo what everyone else says. actually, i think there's a far greater internal turmoil for the photographer or tv cameraman involved - these are friends and colleagues involved rather than just anonymous people inside a car. knowing you should record the event, even if you don't watch whilst you're doing it or delete all evidence from your equipment after handing it over to someone without viewing the shots yourself is a pretty unpleasent thing for anyone to have to do.

i stand with the marshal involved here, and think it's pretty sad that anyone doesn't know when they should stop recording the event.

[Al Weyman]

I think once you get into a race car on the track you are fair game to any photographer, I would have no problem with being filmed, prehaps the fear was it may help in a future litigation case if something went wrong during the extraction from the car and maybe thats why they wanted to stop the filming which on the face of it was understandable as there are too many ambulance chasers around already without picking on a volunteer force doing their level best. having said that all being well and looks in his case it was I am sure the film would have made excellent training videos.

[JimW]

Originally Posted by Mildrop

As long as the member of the public paid to get into the event and is stood in an area open to the public then he is doing no wrong.

You clearly have not read the conditions under which you are permitted to be on the private property in exchange for purchasing (or being given) a ticket.

Regards

Jim

[ChrisPage]

Originally Posted by Al Weyman

I think once you get into a race car on the track you are fair game to any photographer.

I see that point in principle, not sure I agree, but can certainly see the point of view - its a classic 'matter-of-opinion' one I think.

However, on a practical level marshals don't need a crowd of gawkers trying to get disaster snaps, for whatever purpose. I can see the training benefits for marshals of film/photos, but then that just becomes a handy excuse for anyone wanting to get in on it - and official/accredited snappers are far better placed to do that anyway.

We all surely can see the local news' view - interest in local race event crash? Nil. Interest in gory pictures/footage of crash at local race track? Way-hay!

[Steve Milward]

Originally Posted by JimW

You clearly have not read the conditions under which you are permitted to be on the private property in exchange for purchasing (or being given) a ticket.

Regards

Jim

I have Jim hence why I stated 2 posts later

Unless specifically stated on the ticket stub that was given back to the spectator he can take as many photo's as he or she likes.

[JimW]

And one of those is to obey the instructions given by officials. And don't think that the organiser's expectations of you end with the 20 or so words on any ticket stub.

Regards

Jim