Arrested today

Status
Not open for further replies.
I find this amusing...It's like
" I committed all these crimes and posted videos of myself committing crimes on the internet for the whole world to see and now I'm in trouble and I don't understand it"



Sent from my XT1254 using PhantomPilots mobile app
Or it might be "I didn't realise I was doing anything wrong and now I'm facing prosecution. Flights of the videos subject of the allegations are available to you so you might have an opportunity to avoid being in the same predicament".

The OP is, in my opinion, suffering an undue hammering here. Posting the experience is just as likely well intentioned as self serving (my take was he wanted to ensure others might not end up in the same position).

A lot of us could be in his position.

Perhaps if the PCSO is called to give evidence the OP could ask him in cross examination how his flying over crowds looking for counterfeit goods runners is in compliance with the regulations. Or at least comment on the perception it might give to drone enthusiasts about what is acceptable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JB63 and Neon Euc
This apparently are the rules U.K have to follow

Drone Owners: Don't fall foul of the law - Read the current legislation here

There are an increasing number of people purchasing drones and conducting flights that breach the Air Navigation Order 2016.

Locally we have been educating those who have committed minor offences across our South Warwickshire Policing area. However, with the Drone Code in place since 2015 we are still finding an increasing number of people either failing to educate themselves or simply ignoring the laws.

Chief Pilot of the UAV team, Andy Steventon has said,
"Unfortunately within the growing hobbyist community of drone pilots a small proportion are tarnishing the public reputation of responsible pilots by their reckless and illegal actions.

The Warwickshire and West Mercia drone trial that we've conducted over the last 12 months has shown how these devices can be used to protect people from harm and greatly assisting with the prevention, investigation and detection of crime.

I would encourage anybody who has a drone to familiarise themselves with the laws put in place so that they can responsibly enjoy the hobby."

The Air Navigation Order 2016 came into Force on 25th August 2016. Below are a number of points for drone owners to read up on. Breaches of any of these areas may result in a criminal investigation.

The Air Navigation Order 2016

CHAPTER 1. Article 240.
Endangering safety of an aircraft
A person must not recklessly or negligently act in a manner likely to endanger an aircraft, or any person in an aircraft.

CHAPTER 1. Article 241.
Endangering safety of any person or property
A person must not recklessly or negligently cause or permit an aircraft to endanger any person or property.

CHAPTER 4. Article 94.
Small unmanned aircraft

(2) The person in charge of a small unmanned aircraft may only fly the aircraft if reasonably satisfied that the flight can safely be made.

(3) The person in charge of a small unmanned aircraft must maintain direct, unaided visual contact with the aircraft sufficient to monitor its flight path in relation to other aircraft, persons, vehicles, vessels and structures for the purpose of avoiding collisions.

(4) The person in charge of a small unmanned aircraft which has a mass of more than 7kg excluding its fuel but including any articles or equipment installed in or attached to the aircraft at the commencement of its flight, must not fly the aircraft—

(a) in Class A, C, D or E airspace unless the permission of the appropriate air traffic control unit has been obtained;

(b) within an aerodrome traffic zone during the notified hours of watch of the air traffic control unit (if any) at that aerodrome unless the permission of any such air traffic control unit has been obtained; or

(c) at a height of more than 400 feet above the surface unless it is flying in airspace described in sub-paragraph (a) or (b) and in accordance with the requirements for that airspace.

(5) The person in charge of a small unmanned aircraft must not fly the aircraft for the purposes of commercial operations except in accordance with a permission granted by the CAA.

CHAPTER 4. Article 95.
Small unmanned surveillance aircraft

95. (1) The person in charge of a small unmanned surveillance aircraft must not fly the aircraft in any of the circumstances described in paragraph (2) except in accordance with a permission issued by the CAA.

(2) The circumstances referred to in paragraph (1) are—

(a) over or within 150 metres of any congested area;

(b) over or within 150 metres of an organised open-air assembly of more than 1,000 persons;

(c) within 50 metres of any vessel, vehicle or structure which is not under the control of the person in charge of the aircraft; or

(d) subject to paragraphs (3) and (4), within 50 metres of any person.

(3) Subject to paragraph (4), during take-off or landing, a small unmanned surveillance aircraft must not be flown within 30 metres of any person.

(4) Paragraphs (2)(d) and (3) do not apply to the person in charge of the small unmanned surveillance aircraft or a person under the control of the person in charge of the aircraft.

First person view (FPV) allows the operator to get a bird's eye view from the drone itself as it relays live footage from the on-board camera to either a handheld screen or special goggles. FPV does not allow you to fly beyond your 'unaided' visual line of sight or that of your competent observer.

"Congested area" in relation to a city, town or settlement, means any area which is substantially used for residential, industrial, commercial or recreational purposes.

"Small unmanned aircraft" means any unmanned aircraft, other than a balloon or a kite, having a mass of not more than 20kg without its fuel but including any articles or equipment installed in or attached to the aircraft at the commencement of its flight.

"A small unmanned surveillance aircraft" means a small unmanned aircraft which is equipped to undertake any form of surveillance or data acquisition.

"Direct unaided visual contact" means that the Remote Pilot is able to maintain direct, unaided (other than corrective lenses) visual contact with the Drone which is sufficient to monitor its flight path in relation to other aircraft, persons, vessels, vehicles and structures for the purpose of avoiding collisions. Within the UK this is normally accepted out to a maximum distance of 500 metres horizontally and 400 feet vertically from the Remote Pilot.

For full details of the Air Navigation order 2016 visit,

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2016/765/made

PC1681 Craig Purcell
Shipston Police Safer Neighbourhood Team


Those are straight up hilarious. If you live in the UK you might as well sell all your RC aircraft. Those also mean that 99% of Youtube drone footage shot in the UK is illegal. Unreal. Hope the US isn't headed in that direction.
 
Perhaps if the PCSO is called to give evidence the OP could ask him in cross examination how his flying over crowds looking for counterfeit goods runners is in compliance with the regulations. Or at least comment on the perception it might give to drone enthusiasts about what is acceptable.

This , there's no way his drone was in the sight of his own eyes.
 
I'm curious to see how they prove that he was flying the Phantom at the time it was recording....
 
I'm curious to see how they prove that he was flying the Phantom at the time it was recording....
With the circumstantial evidence, which is pretty solid.

Not saying I agree with any of this treatment of the fellow, just pointing out that a "smoking gun" is not necessary to win a case, it just makes it harder.
 
This , there's no way his drone was in the sight of his own eyes.
Are you suggesting the OP must have been flying out of VLOS or that the PCSO may need to in the conduct of supporting the planned police counterfeit goods operation?

The allegations (or at least certain of them) seem pretty clear now. Few of us would be in a position to say they haven't breached any of these guidelines at times.
 
Warning to all - (I have had a really bad day please don't give me any grief about this I just want to help/warn others).

I had the Police turn up at my house today with a search warrant. They took my drone, my phone, my pc and and memory cards + usb sticks they could find.

They took me to the police station and have interviewed me for just under 2 hours and have various avation charges against me because someone has made a complaint about my youtube videos.

I have been released on bail and will be going back 15th February. I know there are lots of videos on youtube not to dis-similar to mine and they are really trying to push everything they can at me.

You can view my channel here which contains the videos in question.
Aerial Videos with DJI Phantom 3 Standard - YouTube

I didn't intend to get in any trouble or cause any harm to anyone with my flying. I just love flying my drone and love the aerial photography. I just intend to warn people to be quite vigilant and I don't want anyone to be experiencing.

Post the link to the videos, you can fly a drone surley you can post a link.

Or are you still locked up?
https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1....=cc84ba898df0843658888f2bf536b205&oe=5900D5B8
 
Post the link to the videos, you can fly a drone surley you can post a link.

Or are you still locked up?
https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1....=cc84ba898df0843658888f2bf536b205&oe=5900D5B8

He set all of the videos to private for obvious reasons....and in a similar light, if you can post a link, can't you embed a photo?

|
|
|
V

16195244_1433601986652625_417083060793720471_n.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: jakobe75
He set all of the videos to private for obvious reasons....and in a similar light, if you can post a link, can't you embed a photo?

|
|
|
V

16195244_1433601986652625_417083060793720471_n.jpg

So why bother with videos if your not sharing them lol
 
So why bother with videos if your not sharing them lol

I'm sure he wasn't considering the wider ramifications of having them available publicly or that he may be prosecuted for having them up.

If he knew there was risk, I'm sure he wouldn't have posted them up. Like most of us, he just wanted to share
 
  • Like
Reactions: Neon Euc
I'm sure he wasn't considering the wider ramifications of having them available publicly or that he may be prosecuted for having them up.

If he knew there was risk, I'm sure he wouldn't have posted them up. Like most of us, he just wanted to share

Any news on him?
5ce7a5c5d4af2ff4993ba0b1b2dfaf3d.jpg
 
@Vzr1 I would imagine he is going to be flying below the radar for a while....and also not posting on the site very much

;)
 
@Vzr1 I would imagine he is going to be flying below the radar for a while....and also not posting on the site very much

;)
If it was me I'd have hired a lawyer by now. Any smart lawyer would tell you to stfu online I would think.
 
If it was me I'd have hired a lawyer by now. Any smart lawyer would tell you to stfu online I would think.

you can bet your Phantom and your extra battery on that
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vzr1
If it was me I'd have hired a lawyer by now. Any smart lawyer would tell you to stfu online I would think.

That was asked back on post #8.
 
The OP is being blamed buy people who haven't seen the videos. I saw them before they were removed and if you live in the UK you can tell what he has done wrong. He has flown in a town centre above the Royal Shakespeare theater within 50 meters also flown too close to Anne Hathaways cottage again owned by the Shakespeare trust. He flew above the clouds so height could be an issue and flew over 2k distance which is out of sight in anyone's books. I also think some if this was in a NFZ due to small airport. He has posted this to educate people and make them think. It's nothing sinister just poor judgement on where to fly, and someone reported him. Hence the investigation.

Sent from my SM-G935F using PhantomPilots mobile app
 
The OP is being blamed buy people who haven't seen the videos. I saw them before they were removed and if you live in the UK you can tell what he has done wrong. He has flown in a town centre above the Royal Shakespeare theater within 50 meters also flown too close to Anne Hathaways cottage again owned by the Shakespeare trust. He flew above the clouds so height could be an issue and flew over 2k distance which is out of sight in anyone's books. I also think some if this was in a NFZ due to small airport. He has posted this to educate people and make them think. It's nothing sinister just poor judgement on where to fly, and someone reported him. Hence the investigation.

Sent from my SM-G935F using PhantomPilots mobile app

Finally a post that is not just guessing on how / where the op was flying. Now everything makes more sense.

Couldn't you have posted this like 100 posts ago lol :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Recent Posts

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
143,099
Messages
1,467,634
Members
104,985
Latest member
DonT