Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Covid

Mumsnet doesn't verify the qualifications of users. If you have medical concerns, please consult a healthcare professional.

Original poster

Spoken to by the police

288 replies

Foldinthecheese · 20/04/2020 22:07

This morning my husband and I took our three children on a long walk/scoot to a local park that is probably two miles away. We had seen the recent police guidance that said stopping for a snack during a long period of exercise is allowed, so we packed some crisps, fruit and our water bottles, intending to have them in the park before heading back home. We have twin DSes, four, and a one year old DD.

While sitting in the park (in a green space, far from any paths, with no one nearby) two police officers approached and said we needed to move on because what we were doing was against guidelines and someone had called to report us. It wasn’t a problem to leave, but I was a little annoyed by the situation. I mentioned the guidelines regarding a snack during long exercise and they seemed unaware of this, and asked to see it on my phone. They then said that it was an issue of public perception, which I understand, but I’m not sure why that would impact the legality of our actions. One officer suggested that we should have gone to a park closer to our house, but the space isn’t really comparable and it’s more of a play park: lots of equipment that is currently covered in caution tape.

I don’t know really why I’m writing this, except I feel frustrated. We’ve followed all the guidelines for the past month and it’s annoying that the police seem unaware of the guidance that has been made publicly available that says what we did was acceptable. It was also just really nice to go slightly further than the one mile radius around our house and enjoy seeing the flowers in the park, and it feels like it put a dampener on the morning.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
6
sanealaddin · 21/04/2020 08:55

It's about perception. You say you were just sitting on the grass for a snack. But others may see a family unpacking their fruit, crisps and drinks and see that as a picnic. And see that as their cue to do the same.

You can look at what you are doing in isolation, or you can look at the bigger picture. If one family has a picnic, others do the same, and very quickly a quiet space can become busy. Actions have consequences- it would be awful for those families living in flats with no outdoor space if parks were closed.

On the face of it you can think what you did was ok. But at this time, it just wasn't necessary or fair. Have a shorter scoot and give them a snack on the go if they need it.

10storeylovesong · 21/04/2020 08:56

So you're still presuming that they had time to sit down, get out their food, a passer by spot them, conclude that they were in fact sitting down and eating, walk round the park, find a police officer, have a discussion, the police officer walk over and the family still be sat there eating (clearly not in the process of packing away, else the conversation wouldn't have been had). All in 10 minutes. I still don't buy it.

Aesopfable · 21/04/2020 09:01

It's about perception.

No it isn’t. We do not prosecute people based on perception of whether someone may break some rules that the police have made up. It would be a very scary world if that happened.

SnowsInWater · 21/04/2020 09:04

There is no way that you were only there for ten minutes if somebody had time to report you and the police had time to arrive. Also, we all know it's rough with little kids but seriously, maybe this is the time to teach kids that they don't need a bag of crisps to give them enough energy to make it home. YABU.

Dragonsanddinosaurs · 21/04/2020 09:05

How were the police meant to know whether what you were doing was reasonable without speaking to you? The guidelines say various things may be reasonable, obviously depending on the individual circumstances. Surely the police are allowed to speak to you, and point out you should move on. It doesn't sound like they were rude.

sanealaddin · 21/04/2020 09:12

Aesopfable. I'm absolutely not saying we should prosecute based on perception. Of course not. But I do believe it's true to say that if others perceive that something is ok then they may choose to do it.

Blackbear19 · 21/04/2020 09:18

Your picnics sound shit.😂

I'd have a bet the police were already in the park, and some busybody has said something to them. Bored out their minds policing the empty swings, they thought they better be seen to do something.

A park not to far from me had the mounted police in it at the weekend. So yes the police are definitely patrolling parks.

RufustheLanglovingreindeer · 21/04/2020 09:25

Excellent post ellanwood

RufustheLanglovingreindeer · 21/04/2020 09:28

I agree completely with the ‘your picnics are shit’

And with respect to the police turning up within the 10 minutes, I absolutely believe this is possible if both the reporter and police were in the park

Similar happened to me years ago and the ‘incident’ the police had spoken to me about was probably around about 10 minutes. I was unlucky they were in the vicinity

(I say unlucky...they couldn’t say or do anything as I hadn’t done anything wrong)

Original poster
Foldinthecheese · 21/04/2020 09:33

The ten minutes thing is classic Mumsnet: desperate to catch me out over the length of time we were there rather than considering the bigger picture. Short of providing time stamped evidence, I can’t prove how long we were there. It was about ten minutes. If you think what we did was wrong, would it have been okay if it had been five minutes? Were we more wrong if it was fifteen minutes? We had a short break of about ten minutes and were finishing up when the police approached.

OP posts:
primeexampleof · 21/04/2020 09:37

For the love of... STAY HOME!

RufustheLanglovingreindeer · 21/04/2020 09:40

For the love of.......stop saying stay home

You are allowed to leave your home!

sauvignonblancplz · 21/04/2020 09:41

It was also just really nice to go slightly further than the one mile radius around our house and enjoy seeing the flowers in the park, and it feels like it put a dampener on the morning

I just don’t understand why people post AIBU - you’re annoyed at the police who are key workers in a crap position- yet they accepted your response, they weren’t rude or mean. You and a discussion - end of.

Surely you can understand that if everyone did as you did social distancing would fall apart? Or can you not understand that?

You’re concerned that your morning was dampened by this discussion when it couldn’t be made clearer that police are out and about and may question your activity to make sure you are adhering to guidelines.

People are dying.
Most people agree with you. Let it go now. Go out and enjoy your long walk and find more flowers. I’d say a few families saw you yesterday and thought they might do the same thing. Good luck.

10storeylovesong · 21/04/2020 09:43

The thing is, it's not just classic MN tripping you up about 10 mins. It's every person's excuse / reason that you speak to. I watched a family on the field at the back of my house playing cricket for well over an hour. I didn't report them - was too busy playing in the garden with my own children and there was no one else around - common sense prevails. However, someone called the police. They later posted an indignant post on our local Facebook about how they had stopped for 10 mins on their daily walk to knock a ball around. It's always 10 minutes!

There are about 60-70 houses surrounding that field. If every household had decided they were going to do the same thing, it would very quickly have become impossible to social distance. And who is in the right or wrong there - who has to move first?

Yes, there should be common sense. Yes, it's difficult and children need exercise (an parents need a minute to reblance their minds!). But it can very easily be abused, and very quickly descend into the scenes we saw on the parks and beaches at the beginning of lockdown.

The guidelines state it 'may be reasonable'. Not that it always is. Not that you should do it. Not that it can't be done. It's deliberately vague to allow for the numerous different scenarios that may happen. But without the police speaking to you, how do they ascertain whether it is or isn't reasonable? I struggle to see anything in your post that suggests the police were heavy handed or rude? Or anything at all that would prevent a quick explanation and getting on with your day?

Gruffawoah · 21/04/2020 09:47

There are about 60-70 houses surrounding that field. If every household had decided they were going to do the same thing, it would very quickly have become impossible to social distance.

But presumably this didn't happen did it? If they were out there playing for an hour, and no one else went out to play then I am not sure if that argument rings true. Perhaps they don't have a garden? So they cannot play in it like you can in yours.

Original poster
Foldinthecheese · 21/04/2020 09:55

I haven’t said anything negative about the police. I have said that it was frustrating that the situation occurred and that the police were unaware of the guidelines. I also said that we had a pleasant conversation.

OP posts:
Aesopfable · 21/04/2020 10:17

Why shouldn’t they play cricket as exercise?

LolaDarkdestroyer · 21/04/2020 10:18

Yabu I'm sure lots of families would love to take their kids on a picnic...but wait they can't as they are following the fucking rules. But you are special aren't you.

fourpeasinapod · 21/04/2020 10:23

YANBU.

There is no set duration of time that you’re meant to go out for then go back home. You could stay our For 3 hours and you wouldn’t have broken the rules.

I don’t see what problem there is if you weren’t around anybody else except your family.

Sounds like a busy body somewhere

Spied · 21/04/2020 10:26

My worry is what would happen if we all decided to drive to the same park,have a leisurely wander and then sit having our snacks?

Dowser · 21/04/2020 10:28

Aesop..quote..you are correct
Just to be clear: the guidance changed to comply with the law. Police can only enforce the law not guidance (unless it is statutory guidance, which this is not)

I don’t know why the joysuckers are having such a hard time understanding this and in gods holy name how on earth Is having two little ones walk two Miles not considered exercise. My ten year olds have hyper mobile joints and would struggle with this .

I love seeing all the families out together and if they are eating ice cream all the better .
We want to look back on this time and think it was awful but at least there were some joyful moments.

fourpeasinapod · 21/04/2020 10:29

Yeah tbf @Spied is correct. Whilst your situation seems harmless OP, you have to see the other side.

If everyone started having a little snack on their walk then social distancing would be out the window

Aesopfable · 21/04/2020 10:31

When we exercise we walk to a playing field. These fields are surrounded by scores of houses Everytime we go there are groups appropriately spaced in household groups exercising by playing football, running games, cycling, flying kites, hitting tennis balls back and forth, sitting watching toddlers toddle, scooting etc. Or standing a few metres apart chatting having accidentally met someone they know. Everyone is improving their mental and physical health. No one is spreading the virus as everyone keeps an appropriate distance (normally 10s of metres apart). Amongst the people there are many health workers and doctors. The ‘risky bit’ is walking along the roads to get there as you are constantly stepping out into the road to avoid other people, not at the fields themselves. It seems we are very lucky not to have overzealous police patrolling (though they do spot a couple with their families on the field when they are off duty). It is never crowded or particularly busy as if it were people would simply go elsewhere. Everyone is very well aware of the danger of the virus but also very well aware that a household playing football away from other people is not a risk. And most especially not a risk compared to walking along crowded footpaths round their homes.

Dowser · 21/04/2020 10:38

Jeez prime example.....what a joy sucker you are.

primeexampleof Tue 21-Apr-20 08:08:52
Don't understand why you had to stop to have a picnic. What's wrong with an apple, banana etc whilst walking

Perhaps those little children just needed a rest

ErrolTheDragon · 21/04/2020 10:41

My worry is what would happen if we all decided to drive to the same park,have a leisurely wander and then sit having our snacks?

Isn't it obvious? If you get there and there are too many people to allow for appropriate distancing, then if you've driven there then you drive home again. If you've got there under your own steam then you'd have to eat your snack on the hoof if there's not room to sit, and those sitting do so for as short a time as possible.

It's really not that difficult.