Filming consent on 24 Hours in Custody

[MumOfOneAllAlone]

I'm watching the most entertaining episode from last week, I think, which involves some drug dealers and their lawyer

The lawyer is on tiktok and presumably is fine with representing the obviously guilty

There's a woman who seems to have spent the money from her dad's house sale on drugs (still halfway through) and it's got me wondering how they get consent to film the police interviews etc?

Do your rights become waived in such a circumstance?

I'm not sure, but I certainly wouldn't agree to be on TV given the choice, if I'd stolen from my uncle, so maybe they don't get the choice.

The episode about the guy who caught tooled up scroats entering his property, chasing them in 4 by 4, them on stolen motorbike then him knocking them of bike was thought provoking but also very sad.

Sounds like he should get a medal, they got what they deserved.

I wondered about this a few episodes ago, when they told the mother of the drug dealer, that her daughter was dead. It was very intrusive.

I hope they do consent. You shouldn't be showing this stuff on TV for entertainment purposes unless you have consent. Some of these people are extremely vulnerable. If I were ever arrested I wouldn't want it paraded about for all to see. It's embarrassing. I think there's a big difference between an open justice system with court cases viewable by the public and reported on and names if convict red offenders published, and this.

There has been a huge slippery slope re privacy in recent years with social media and this type of programme. It's weird that we have such tight DP laws, but this sort of thing is ok at least on social media. I think laws need to catch up with technology and give individuals a right to not be plastered all over the internet forever (or TV) unless they want to be.

https://www.radiotimes.com/tv/documentaries/24-hours-in-police-custody-behind-the-scenes-of-the-fly-on-the-wall-documentary/

It seems many people give consent. They can only show footage without consent if it is deemed to be in the public interest. It would never be in the public interest to use footage without consent of victims, witnesses, police, lawyers, family, suspects who weren’t charged or found guilty, and not necessarily even if the person were found guilty. Quite a few of the episodes have short interviews by the TV crew with the perpetrator when they are in the cell, as well as the remote cameras. No one can force you to answer questions from a journalist so it seems many of the subjects are more than happy to talk.

She's a teaching assistant isn't she, or was, I doubt she is now. Surely she wouldn't want all the parents watching this. I was amazed how quickly she caved and admitted everything, although she prob realised there was no getting out of it.

That solicitor is a vile, arrogant prick and I don't like the fact he's given a platform on this programme.

But what are the rights of the suspects? From the outset, as Ford has said, most of those being interviewed in the police station have already given their consent. And that consent can’t be withdrawn once agreed

well that seems problematic given how many are drunk/recovering/under the influence when they are brought in.

The solicitor! He's on tiktok with criminals advising people to go to him when they're in trouble! I had to laugh because he is so shameless and disgusting

She seemed so vulnerable and clearly a drug addict. It was interesting that they didn't show what her punishment was for stealing (unless they did and I didn't see it)

She was in court last week and got a two year suspended prison sentence. So basically got away with it. And we have to pay for her uncle's care home.

I've wondered this before, surely they need consent before putting it on tv. But I can't imagine why anyone would want there dirty laundry aired in public.
The worst I've ever seen is the episode where a step dad murdered a little baby and the baby's mum wouldn't admit to him doing it. The episode about the little boy who was found murdered in the 90s was a hard watch too. His name was Ricky Neave.
Me and my husband had a discussion about it afterwards and agreed it would be a good idea to just put everyone in the countries dna on to a police data base and then just start doing that from birth.

I agree tbh. Sounds radical but there are so many evil people out there. That sounds like an awful episode 😕

Ohh wow. How awful that the uncle won't get his money back and he didn't get his new chair

I never saw it, but googled

https://www.hertfordshiremercury.co.uk/news/hertfordshire-news/dad-held-herts-prison-appeared-7892880?int_source=amp_continue_reading&int_medium=amp&int_campaign=continue_reading_button#amp-readmore-target

Insane that he was punished with prison and the boys got suspended sentences

Which calls into question her ability to consent even if she did.