No, I don't mean out of focus, I do mean Gaussian blur just of faces, though fairly subtle.
Using a camera is less obvious, and you could go back through recordings, stepping to motion events ...
It could be dodgy covering another property - you just tell the police it is incidental if they ask and it is not a deliberate attempt to view just their property, the road however is a different matter, it is a public place.
I remember something very similar a couple of years ago. The bus did the same manouver and hit a parked car on the opposide side of the road parked in a bus stop, ISTR it was the parking lane cameras that caught that one on CCTV. I cannot find the link to it ATM.
Can you get a cite for that?
Because the best I can find is:
which suggests it might be a case of harassment. But for that, you've have to be deliberately and provably targeting the other property, and not merely have it incidentally feature in your picture.
All things said and done, it would be unsociable to obviously point a camera over another's property without consent, but the legal position looks like a minefield as opposed to a dead given.
Unlike the USA where "illegally" obtained evidence can be ruled out in court the CPS can use it in court.
A business has to comply with the data protection act and can't look into others property without permission. they can look at public places as much as they like just as a photographer can take photos in a public place.
Individuals don't have to comply with the data protection act but its advisable not to point your cameras into other people property.
Probably not but some debate about publishing.
Found it
Looks very similar. From reading some of the comments, it seems the driver was not at fault - the throttle stuck open.
Similar thing at Crystal Palace last week
A better link
Or unwrapped
And just yesterday in Coventry:
Except this time two are dead and another critical.
I find it very difficult to believe that bus drivers have suddenly(?) taken to flooring the throttle and driving uncontrolled into things/people.
Pretty obvious to me that some very close examination of throttle potentiometers and/or the firmware controlling the engine needs to be urgently carried out. Perhaps some makes/models of bus also need to withdrawn from service until a cause is found.
You seem to be jumping to the conclusion that the bus did it all by itself. However no information has been forthcoming so far about the likely cause.
Whilst I don't imagine that the driver did it deliberatively, what if he had collapsed at the wheel, with his foot jammed on the throttle - like the bin lorry driver in Scotland?
The first of these in this thread certainly didn't do that (the one where the guy got biffed into the fence). When the bus stops, you see the driver getting up from the driving seat and moving towards the door of the bus.
Which if the driver had be carted off to hospital after suffering some form of collapse would normally be mentioned. Either as quote from the emergency services or from witness's.
Quite and any mention of the other drivers condition, apart from the Coventry one were he was hurt in the ensuing crash, is conspicious by it's abscence.
Where are the proper journalists when you need one? The ones that smell a story and start digging rather than just regurgitate any Press Release that passes over their desk.
I don't think there's a differnce who's who's being filmed and why and whether or not you put it on youtube.
you point the camera down.
Yes I know, that's why you need to make sure your CCTV isn;t looking into someone's house or garden.
Well if you're setting up a camera to catch crooks or wrong doings you really need to make sure you're doing nothing wrong.
What? Like The Bill credits used to be? A shot of feet?
which suggests it might be a case of harassment. But for that, you've
You said: "...you can't record what happenes on another property."
Which is not exactly true.
There being a difference of directly and substantially targetting someone's property which would form the basis of harassment - and -
capturing part of someone's property incidentally whilst covering your own, which is pretty much impossible to avoid unless your camera has full masking capabilities (and how would the neighbour know if this was active or not?).
Well nothing is exactly true here.
yes and that's what you have to make sure you're not doing.
This is the differnce between a council/police CCTV and a home CCTV. Then it comes down to wether or not you have a right to put it on youtube.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.