Mall security guard accuses shopper of being a paedophile for photographing his own son

Discuss

155 Responses to “Mall security guard accuses shopper of being a paedophile for photographing his own son”

  1. rogerg says:

    oh boy.

    the face on the train engine is a little creepy, though…

    • chgoliz says:

      “the face on the train engine is a little creepy, though…”

      It’s Jasper, from Thomas the Tank Engine.

      Geez, adults these days….

  2. David D. says:

    My vague understanding of amateur photography in the 21st century is that the majority of photos taken fall into three popular categories: buildings in vacation spots, one’s own children and naked selfpics. Honestly, why sell cameras in the UK at all?

    • COINOperatedBoy says:

      I thought the three uses of photography were child porn, terrorism planning and copyright infringement. Obviously we should just go ahead and ban cameras altogether. Anyawy, everybody knows that they steal your soul.

  3. farrellmcgovern says:

    It seems that paedophilia and terrorism are vying to be the next “communism” for the 21st century! I only hope that it doesn’t take a McCarthy like incident to snap us out of this insanity!

  4. mudpup says:

    A tourist would be foolish to even consider visiting the UK. From what I seen posted on the net you will be harassed maybe even arrested for visiting points of interest and taking pictures.

  5. lasttide says:

    Obviously the train is the real paedo, enticing children to “sit in him” and “ride.”

  6. Anonymous says:

    why does the train have an ‘old man’ face then?

  7. Anonymous says:

    Reactionary imbeciles with authority who get too much enjoyment using it.

    Pretty much the root of about 90% of problems with the government.

  8. GDBnNH says:

    Over twenty years ago, while living in Los Angeles, my British girlfriend and I went to see the Terry Gilliam film, “Brasil”. She commented to me that she could easily see the UK become the totalitarian state depicted in the movie. After reading this and other articles on modern day life in Britain, it looks as though Gilliam was truly a prophet.

  9. Anonymous says:

    And the witch hunt goes on.

  10. Anonymous says:

    If somebody did that to me I’d make a formal complaint to the police, demand their name and address and send them a letter informing them of intention to pursue criminal proceedings for incitement and giving false information to the police.

  11. Anonymous says:

    I think the security officer was right to accuse the child’s father of paedophilia. He should have informed the police and had him arrested and the child put into care.

    All photography of children should be outlawed and anyone found in possession of such images should be handed a minimum of 15 years.

    We should outlaw everything of a sexual nature and all live in fear of God.
    Praise the Lord!

  12. Ugly Canuck says:

    W r bng trnd t ccpt tht th mr pssssn f nfrmtn cn b srs crm: wth th crllrs tht sch pssssn ncssrly mpls bth vl ntnt t hrm thrs, nd th ncssty f hrsh physcl pnshmnt fr sch pssssn.

    “slm-strtgy”, wth lng tm frm.
    Ldng t “ttl nfrmtn wrnss & cntrl”, nc th tch systms r n plc nd rdy t rck. Prhps thy lrdy r, nd ths s why ctl pltcl chng s bcmng pprntly mpssbl n th S.

    n twnty r thrty yrs, fll-n bns n pssssng thr typs f nfrmtn cld bcm cmmnplc: fllwng th sm “lgc” whch ndrpns ths cntns sslt n ppl’s xstng lbrts, ths hrnssng f mrl trg t srv s n ngn f tyrnny.

    Jst lk th drg lws: vr tm thy hv bcm hrshr hrshr nd hrshr.

    • IronEdithKidd says:

      You can find the hyperbolic silver lining in any cloud, can’t you?

      (captcha: ethics strangulation)

      • polyorchnid octopunch says:

        That’s because he’s on this side of the pond, where we get to watch the nutjobs south of the border from spitting distance.

        It is quite the spectacle, let me tell you; c.f.- Pearlism and the four year old that got beaten to death by her religious nutjob parents. But… we should of course understand those people because they were motivated by religion, while a person taking a pic of their kid should automagically be treated like criminals.

    • Antinous / Moderator says:

      Canuck,

      This post is about photography in the UK, not about drug laws in the US.

      • wnoise says:

        Sure, but drawing an analogy between laws banning possessing information and those banning possessing drugs doesn’t seem to be derailing, or even that outlandish.

    • dculberson says:

      Non sequitur city!

  13. doubleshiny says:

    What is the shopping centre’s motive for installing brightly coloured rides?

    Who are they trying to attract? Children don’t have any money or make any large purchases – so why have the children’s ride?

    If you ask me, it’s all a bit suspicious…

  14. petewolf says:

    I’m originally from Sunderland (although currently at a bit of a distance), and I’ve got to say that as ridiculous as this is I’m not entirely surprised by it. Not to bad mouth my hometown too much, there are a bunch of lovely people there, but it is generally quite prone to the kind of hysterical scare-mongering perpetrated by much of the tabloid press.

    I think the most depressing thing about this is that the very same people who will talk up the pedophile threat to the point where it undermines our collective common sense are probably the same people who champion common sense in the context of ‘political correctness gone mad’.

  15. Phikus says:

    Next time, maybe wearing a bear suit will keep the security guards away.

  16. andygates says:

    #4, no, there’s no wave of paedo activity – but there is a wave of good old fashioned social panic. See “Satanic Panic” et al for a fine breakdown.

    The “Paedogeddon” flap does seem to be going on for longer than most. Probably because next to every paedogeddon story in the press is a shot of some hyper-sexualized kids.

    • Anonymous says:

      I’ve been thinking the same thing – that scholars say, 50 or 100 years from now will come to the conclusion that turn of the century UK was in the grips of a bona fide case of “mass hysteria”. And that it was particularly virulent in the police population.

  17. Anonymous says:

    article: “The PC also averred that the Bridges Shopping Centre is a hotbed of paedophile assaults.”
    – I think Kevin should make it a goal to make the shopping public aware that the police consider Bridges Shopping Centre to be a “hotbed” for “paedophile assaults”.
    Perhaps shoppers will reconsider whether they want to shop at such a place…

  18. Toplus says:

    Well, the reason for this is the same as that being in an airport having beard and dark skin makes you a terrorist.

  19. Anonymous says:

    I come from Sunderland and it isn’t a hotbed of paedophilia =/

  20. benher says:

    On the bright side, google images and flickr will be less clogged up with pictures of people’s child-spawn.. email inboxes will be free of baby updates from over-exuberant parents..

    A new era of peace shall dawn over the child-free Internet for all of us non-parent users!

  21. hpavc says:

    That mall guard is totally coming on to me through that picture, I should file a complaint.

  22. Anonymous says:

    A more serious issue is the reaction of the police in demanding that the photo be deleted.

    If the photo is criminal, then deleting it is itself a crime as you are destroying criminal evidence.

    If the photo is not criminal, then the police have no right to make any demands about its existence.

  23. Antiqueight says:

    So the guard believed the man was a paedophile but let him leave his sight while alone with the child?

    Cool!

  24. M says:

    For those who are interested, there’s a Stockholm Syndrome, UK Branch, meeting over at reddit.com in response to this post. Lots of people pointing out things like there are many more private surveillance cameras in the UK than public ones, so it’s not really as bad as we say (!), that all you suffer is being arrested–nothing really bad happens to you–and that Cory’s unjustifiably paranoid.

  25. Shodai says:

    The police state of Britain moves forward in its quest to rule by fear and crushing liberty in the name of “reducing pedophilia”.

  26. EH says:

    Regardless of any “more to the story” aspects with the security guard, I’d think the mall might be more concerned that the police department itself is spreading the rumor that the mall is a hotbed of pedophilia. Not a great tagline.

  27. rikkus says:

    Sent to the Bridges via their feedback form:

    I have visited the Bridges shopping centre on countless occasions.

    After reading the recent news article about a gentleman who took his young son to the centre, I am loath to return, in case I meet with the treatment which he experienced.

    The gentleman was approached by a man in security uniform, claiming to represent the centre. This man in uniform ordered the gentleman in question to stop taking pictures, stated that he required this due to mall policy and implied that the gentleman was a paedophile, of all things.

    Outside the centre, the gentleman found that the ‘security officer’ had called the police, as he was confronted by a police officer, who threatened him with arrest and (illegally) ordered him to destroy the picture he had taken of his own son.

    I seek assurance that either this ‘security officer’ is not in fact an employee of the Bridges, or that he will be dealt with in the most severe fashion, as harassment of the public and accusations such as this are surely not something with which the Bridges would wish to be associated.

    Please keep me informed as to how you are dealing with this terrible situation.

  28. demidan says:

    So,,,where do I post the pics of my little girl? I have pics of her on swing sets, and slides, at the beach oooh and a couple of real hot ones with shampoo mohawks.

  29. Anonymous says:

    How about a flash mob of children with their parents? And the parents just happen to be photographing their children at the same time?

  30. Matt Volatile says:

    Hold on… the mall (and the police?) were not happy with him taking photos of his son, because they thought he might be a paedophile – but they were perfectly happy for him to TAKE THE CHILD WITH HIM WHEN HE LEFT?

    If this story happened as reported, then things are much, much worse than I could possibly have imagined.

  31. Anonymous says:

    Is that Pete Townshend working a second job?

  32. SamSam says:

    Website is still down. You can try using the Coralized link:

    http://redirect.nyud.net/?url=http://www.shewan.co.uk/blog/?p=1088

    (It would be good if Cory put that up as well.)

  33. frankiefourfingers says:

    I’m definitely not co-managing a pub called free the paedos

  34. Anonymous says:

    Kevin,
    If you’re reading this, http://www.ipcc.gov.uk/, with an accusation that the officer exceeded their lawful authority in ordering you to delete photos. It’s a fairly simple process. Creating grief for officers that do this is a sure way to send a message.

  35. Anonymous says:

    Is there something in the water that is making the British people go slowly mad?

  36. phoomp says:

    Where do malls state their photography policy? If it’s so important, they should be posted as you enter the mall.

  37. Scary_UK says:

    @MGFarrely – There’s no more or less child abduction/pedophilia than there’s ever been, it’s the perception built up by the media over the last decade or so. The press’s ‘Peadogedden’ agenda does seem to have decreased over the last few years, maybe because the press got stung by the Shannon Matthews case where the mother arranged her to be abducted by her own uncle.

    Things came to a head about 10 years ago when a group of vigilantes in a town in Southern England started attacking the house of a pediatrician.

    There have been a couple of great parodies of the media’s attitude to pedophilia – search for ‘Monkey Dust Paedofinder general’ and ‘Brass Eye Peadophilia’

  38. Anonymous says:

    If the first thing that comes into the guards head when a picture is taken is “Paedophile”, maybe someone should be looking into the guards activities.

  39. netsharc says:

    “Infographic” time!

    Start with a picture of a man holding a camera to take a picture, draw a sign pointing to him (from above) that says “John”.

    Add a child, wearing a blue jumper so people can see s/he’s not nude, sign points to him saying “John’s son [daughter]“.

    Add mall background but don’t clutter the poster.

    Draw a sign from the bottom that points to John that says “According to Bridges Shopping Centre, taking pictures of your own fully-clothed child makes him a suspected paedophile*”.

    * add footnote to the full explanation in the footnote. Might as well quote that police line about the mall being a paedo-centre.

    Last step, print and paste all around said stupid mall…

  40. Anonymous says:

    I agree with #28. Taking pictures of your own son is a crime, but simply aledging to be his father and leaving with him in front of the guard and the police is ok??!

    oh, and make him delete the pictures in the mall, but let him go out and take pictures anywhere else?! completele insane!!

    Kudos for the post! I´m also going to send an email to The Bridges Shopping mall..

  41. Alethea says:

    I only moved away from Sunderland last year but this sort of behaviour is common from the pathetic security officers at the Bridges.

    A couple of years back they had a pirate ship outside of HMV (an obvious photo) and despite the hundreds of people taking photos on their phone I was swarmed by these muppets and goose-stepped out of the Bridges because I had an SLR (the devils tools).

    I would not shop there again, I suggest everyone leaves feedback and contacts the Sunderland Echo.

  42. Anonymous says:

    That photo is so sexy.

    (the mall cop)

  43. Anonymous says:

    Oh my even the Mall itself is a paedophile. They have a picture of children on their website. Someone please call the police to have the mall arrested. They have at least 3 stores that sell children clothes. Are they supporting the paedophiles by blatantly catering to their needs?

    http://www.thebridges-shopping.com/stores/atozofstores/index.aspx

  44. cymk says:

    “Bridges shopping centre is a hotbed of paedophile activity and sexual assaults happen there all of the time.”

    Then why the hell would you let kids come to the mall at all? If it is sooo dangerous then just ban all kids under 12. The perverts will go somewhere else.

    Or better yet, make parents actually pay attention to their kids instead of just dropping them off at the mall and ignoring them.

  45. ottocrat says:

    OK, enough is enough, time to write to my MP. Laugh if you will but questions asked in Parliament do make waves (as a civil servant, I had to prepare answers to them, and it makes legislators and policy makers aware that there is an issue – they may well not be).

    Has this been picked up by the UK press at all? I’d like to include a reference in my letter.

  46. Anonymous says:

    I was worried for a minute until I saw that this was in the UK…

  47. Anonymous says:

    Oh, and for the record the Police officer had no right to demand that the man delete the photo. Had the police officer insisted, that would have been a criminal act.

  48. Alethea says:

    Oh and why blank out the mall security guys face, Im sure we would all like to say hello!

  49. MrJM says:

    The “paedophilia threat” — like “the war on terror” — is a useful tool for law enforcement and petty tyrants alike.

    Just as any investigation of a person’s computer or his internet use can be justified in the interests of fighting “terrorism,” any irrational behavior or abuse can be retroactivly justified in the interests of combating “paedophilia.”

    Infringed a persons civil rights?
    “I thought he was a paedophile.”

    False arrest?
    “I though he might be a paedophile.”

    Shot a man?
    “He was taking pictures of a kid.”

    Civilized nations need to reestablish the principle that rights attach to the individual and are not determined or limited by the suspicions of law enforcement or security guard.

    Our rights remain the same, no matter what the mall cop imagines we might maybe be doing.

  50. angryhippo says:

    I think everyone is taking the wrong approach to this story. Since the security guard was upset that the customer took a photo of his own son because it’s a “hotbed of pedos” but yet let him *leave* with the child, he didn’t want the customer to advertise the fact it was a “hotbed”. The guard is in on the pedo hotbed!

  51. Anonymous says:

    There must be something in the water over in the UK. The whole country seems to be coming unhinged. To top it off, CCTV cameras are everywhere taking pictures of you, but you can’t take a photo of your son in a public place without being harassed by jackass rent-a-cops and local police. Get a grip Mother England!

  52. Anonymous says:

    What a stupid world!

    • Anonymous says:

      “What a stupid world”

      One reason I want off this planet. I’m kind of hoping the rest of the galaxy isn’t as insane/inane.

  53. Anonymous says:

    A note of irony: I seem to see at least one CCTV camera (and maybe two) in the background of the first picture. Naughty!

    BTW, what’s wrong with the guard’s legs? Did the camera move, or is he just going all wobbly?

  54. Anonymous says:

    We should ban photos and children, this is such a tragedy!

    17 year olds that have sex with other 17 real olds must be pedophilia too.

  55. elondaits says:

    The original article seems to be down at the moment, so I can’t check if there’s more data… but what I find weird about the story is that although the security guard allegedly took him for a pedophile he left him leave with the boy. Also, it doesn’t mention any attempt to find the “actual” parents of a boy who is too young to go around on his own.

    … So I’m thinking, even if these guys are awfully paranoid and incompetent I’m 95% sure that the there’s more to this story that we’re being told, and that it doesn’t do the guards justice.

    • freshacconci says:

      Wow, it took 37 comments to get to the obligatory “I’m sure there’s more to the story”.

      • Anonymous says:

        And 51 comments before someone figured out what it was… The ride is an illegal knock-off of a strongly protected corporate franchise character.

        The guards are just trying to protect sweet, loving shopping center owners from the evil, predatory copyright lawyers! They are copyfighters!

  56. Anonymous says:

    It is strange; a democracy that has decided the gov’t can put it’s cameras anywhere has apparently moved to making the taking of images an act only the gov’t perform.

  57. Anonymous says:

    Hi, I am starting a campaign to ban children from malls and swimming pools. Please join me. Pool’s definitely got to close.

  58. Anonymous says:

    hey, totally OT but thanks mr. doctorow for “Little Brother” – it’s one of my daughter’s favorite books and it has totally changed her worldview

  59. Karen C. says:

    My cousins in the UK have mentioned this pedophilia obsession that seems to be running high in the UK. I live in the US, and we have our own issues here of course; but my sister was living in London for a time, and she and my cousin, who lives outside of London, took their kids to a nice pool in the summer. My sister was snapping pics of the kids (wearing full bathing suits), and she was approached by a woman claiming to work at the pool. She was informed by this woman that she cannot take pictures of the children b/c she may be a pedophile. My sister protested that she was the mother/cousin to the children, and she was trying to capture a nice family moment/day. The woman threatened to take her camera or call the police. My sister decided not to press the issue, but when the woman left, our British cousin commented that such attitudes were becoming more prevalent. My observation is that the normally controlled Brits are being gripped by an irrational paranoia – of course, aren’t they also afraid of anyone wearing a hoodie? haha. Normally its the Americans that are paranoid, but I guess that’s being exported these days too!

    To Doubleshiny – LMAO…and by the same token, why have pools that attract children and allow them to wear skimpier clothing (i.e. bathing suits)? – pools must be banned!

    To Matt Volatile: You hit the REAL problem right on the head there!! Nice police/security work there guys!

    • tim says:

      Sheesh; they’d better not go to France then. Last time I was there we spent a day at a small town’s outdoor pool; most of the smaller kids were stark naked, a good half of the teen-ish aged girls were topless and a substantial fraction of the adult women were likewise exposing their sinful bodies to the gaze of Mrs Grundy.

  60. Anonymous says:

    Apparently no one has noticed that to the right of the customer kiosk in the picture of the guard there is an image of what appears to be another child. Also, over the right shoulder of the child on the train there appears to be yet another juvenile. It would appear that the child’s father is photographing other people’s children also. This may be a means for paedophiles to covertly take pictures of other people’s children. Very clever.

  61. kattw says:

    Well, you know the rule. Somebody, SOMEWHERE has a fetish for fully clothed children riding quarter operated train rides.

  62. LX says:

    Pedophiles are the new communists. Since most people are unable to distinguish between love and sex, Pedophiles are everybody, everywhere (with the exception of anybody, anywhere). Poof – there goes the presumption of innocence.

    Our society is sick. We need a remedy.

    Greetings, LX

  63. Anonymous says:

    The end result of all this UK pedo-mania is that the rest of the world will think the UK is filled with a high percentage of pedos. Which the “PedoFinder General” will love.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dC6iQwoXc-w&NR=1&feature=fvwp

  64. salsaman says:

    Why the black bar over the mall cop’s eyes?

    SHOW HIM!

  65. Anonymous says:

    You are beeing trained to blindly follow rules, and obey authorities in every situation no matter the letter of the law is in your favor.

    They just chose photographing because it is a good way to implement the training.

    By having obvously retarded rules with unproportional emphasis on upholding them,

    1. The police and guards are trained to uphold rules they dont believe in, or to doublethink into believing in order to be able to do their job without self loathing.

    2. And as mentioned the citizens are trained to obey and not to question.

    If someone told me this 5 years ago i would have laughed and asked if they are wearing a tinfoil hat.

    Im not laughing now.

    This is scary. And it’s been done several times in history with very good effect. I dont think I have to spell it out what kind of system / state this is a perfect base for.

  66. theleftstuff says:

    Surely the point is being missed here. The idea is not to tut-tut about how awful this is, but to make sure that this imbecile never repeats his behaviour. This means publishing a proper photograph, and getting his name. This can then be passed to the local media, who will discover they have an international celebrity on their back doorstep. The manager of the centre, or whatever he calls himself, can surely be identified very easily as well. The next step is to write to your Member of Parliament, citing this story and saying that you are worried now that the government has passed a law to stop parents photographing their children in shopping centres, and asking them to check with the Home Office. A dozen or so of these letters, to which a Minister will have to sign a reply, will start convulsions. It’s called deterrence.

  67. Anonymous says:

    Mall cops are frustrated people who couldn’t rate high enough for a real security job, like police. They’re a little “mad” with perceived power over people.

  68. gobo says:

    Methinks the cops doth protest too much.

  69. Anonymous says:

    Surely the best way to combat pædophilia is to require that all children wear burkas in public.

  70. cinemajay says:

    And I love how the mall cop is standing right in front of a big “Customer Service” sign. Priceless.

  71. phae says:

    I don’t think “Jasper” is a genuine Thomas the Tank Engine character. Perhaps they were more concerned with the intellectual property theft being recorded?

    In all seriousness, though, I have to concur with previous comments – what can you use a camera for these days?

    • chgoliz says:

      It’s been a while for my kids too, so I just *assumed* because I recognized the style.

      You are right: 15 seconds on Google was enough to show that this particular train character is a copy-cat design.

  72. Anonymous says:

    searching for “Bridges Shopping Centre” in google brings this article on the first page of results. Ha!
    Somebody should tell the management at Bridges Shopping Centre.

  73. yer_maw says:

    Do you think that guy really likes his job in the shopping centre?

    He is just doing what he is told. Unfortunatly, the powers that be tell staff to do things, but never adjust these in any way in response to real world situations. Do you think the guy wants to do this?

    This for example happens in supermarkets. Im originally from another country and im almost 30, yet get asked for ID to buy booze in the supermarket. They have been given a strict system because they dont want ot allow staff any possible leeway incase one of them messes up. How im supposed to have moved to england and got a decent job enough to buy over £100 of shopping at the age of 17, i dont know.

  74. Mitch says:

    So, what happens when a cop makes you delete a picture from your camera? Most of them use the FAT file system, which makes it very easy to undelete files. So, if you humor the pesky cop you can get your pictures back later, as long as you don’t write to that file system too much before you do the undelete.

    • darkmobius says:

      Because this is in the UK (don’t know about anywhere else), the policeman should not have even asked the guy to delete the photos. Noone is allowed to demand you delete photos without a court order. In fact I’m sure I remember reading somewhere that doing so falls under “assault”.

      • Mitch says:

        Ideally you shouldn’t have to delete your pictures when a cop says, but when it’s a choice between humoring the cop and going about your business, or disobeying the cop, getting arrested, and ultimately being vindicated by the court, some people would choose the more pragmatic path.

        • jungletek says:

          Ideally people should stand up for themselves, whether it’s convenient or not, because otherwise the ‘authorities’ realize that you will just bend over and take it.
          It’s people with attitudes like yours that are the true cause of erosion of freedom, IMHO of course…

      • Mitch says:

        Ideally you shouldn’t have to delete your pictures when a cop says, but when it’s a choice between humoring the cop and going about your business, or disobeying the cop, getting arrested, and ultimately being vindicated by the court, some people would choose the more pragmatic path.

  75. Anonymous says:

    Once you start defining photographing children as Paedo-crime, isn’t EVERYWHERE a “hotbed of paedo assaults”?

  76. Anonymous says:

    And Britain slides a bit further towards a shambling horror of a totalitarian police state…

    the police arresting you for taking pictures of your kids on an amusement ride…Amazing!

  77. Anonymous says:

    Has anyone considered the fact that maybe Kevin is a paedophile? Two people took one look at him and came to the same conclusion. On this side of the pond, we would just need 10 more for a hanging (although you seem to want to burn him–that is good, too).

    There is probably a police report somewhere that has him listed as a suspected paedophile. I am sure it will come up when he enrolls his kids in school.

    BTW, if you disagree with me then you are protecting a paedophile, which makes you one too. Go report yourself to the police.

    (And quit thinking those thoughts you are having, those are dangerous too. You really need to get off the internet. There are only paedophiles on the internet. Go read a book instead…No, not one of those books, they are dangerous, the other “approved” ones… Instead, don’t do anything. Just sit in your living room in the dark and wait for the police to show up. They will tell you how to behave.)

    • Mike says:

      Gee, how did you know? The only reason I’m reading this blog entry is OBVIOUSLY because I’m a pedophile hoping to read something interesting or see some cute young lad……..

  78. Anonymous says:

    Maybe if the mall didn’t provide paedo-bait they wouldn’t be so popular with the paedophiles..

    http://www.thebridges-shopping.com/customerservices/LittleShoppers/index.aspx

  79. Anonymous says:

    You guys are nuts. Almost every father I know has a dirty little habit of photographing his fully clothed son in public, then going home to furiously masturbate. This guy deserves jail time, just like every other dad.

  80. Anonymous says:

    Brilliant
    surely this means we’ve hit rock bottom? Hopefully no one brought some metaphorical dynamite…

  81. Anonymous says:

    did the police officer who ask him to delete his images was infact breaking the law by asking him to do this
    destroying evidence is a crime in its self

  82. Anonymous says:

    The only solution is for the masses to show up at the mall and take pictures till the mall gets tired of harassing them.

  83. jmrowland says:

    Oh, yeah. If you take a picture of a kid, you’re a paedophile. Everybody knows that. In fact, it’s your duty to turn yourself in.

  84. TPS Reports says:

    Why do I get the feeling that the only paedophilic activity going on at the Bridges Shopping Centre in Sunderland is the result of that security guard?

  85. Obscurer says:

    Guess what? I live in the UK, I’ve taken loads of pictures of my children, I’ve taken loads of pictures of building, and I’ve never been stopped by security or the police. I don’t know anyone who has. Which suggests that

    a) I and everyone I know has been very lucky, or

    b) While fear of paedophiles may well be exaggerated and blown out of all proportion (and some do people overreact), a fear of people being feared of paedophiles and overreacting is also exaggerated and also being totally blown out of all proportion.

    • Anonymous says:

      Did you happen to notice the list of similar stories listed under this story? Did you notice similar stories in the comments? And that is just on this site – who knows how many other similar stories there are? If neither you nor anyone you know has had lung cancer does that mean that lung cancer is an exaggerated problem? I dont think anyone is suggesting that this is an everyday occurrence, but it seems to be happening often enough to be a disturbing trend. A similar moral panic in the US in the 1980s destroyed a lot of peoples’ lives. That this happened at all is completely absurd.

  86. Anonymous says:

    I’m beginning to think that the world has lost its common sense. First British Airways declares 50% of the world’s population as pedophiles and now mall cops have decided that any father taking of picture of his children must also be one. When will the world return to sanity?

  87. Anonymous says:

    Pedophile, not paedophile, jeeze you brits, always acting like you invented the language or something.

  88. Anonymous says:

    As always, those who lust after power and use any pretense to exert such are among us, from the petty rent-a-cop on up the food chain, the only difference being the greater harm inflicted the higher up the chain one goes.

    This is absurdity writ large under the aegis of a thinking mind writ as small as the absurdity is large.

    WE are the only ones that can protect ourselves from such capos. Go to the mall personnel office and demand he be fired.

  89. Anonymous says:

    It’s obvious. The security guard is the real pedo and he’s projecting his pedophilia onto innocent parents a la Carl Jung…

    Stone HIM!

    The security guard, not Jung, he’s deaded already.

  90. Anonymous says:

    A lout in an ill-fitting suit is allowed to tell two parents that photographing their own child, fully-clothed and in a public space, is suspicious of child molestation? Send this oaf back to the dodgy council estate he crawled out of, and let him go back to pushing around kids on the playground – oh, wait, he was no doubt the estate whinger, and now he is getting his comeuppance by pushing around strangers with fake charges and fake authority. Lovely job, way to go!

  91. Tagishsimon says:

    I’ve tipped off the Sunderland Echo to the scandal of paedophilia in their area, and trust that they’ll run a story warning readers off this den of iniquity. Thanks BoingBoing!

  92. Anonymous says:

    Perhaps the headline should read “Police claim Bridges Shopping Centre is a hotbed of paedophile assaults.”

  93. Alethea says:

    Yer Maw I would like to agree with you but I can assure you that in this case you are wrong. The security guards at Sunderland Bridges are sad little creatures who abuse what little power they have frequently.

  94. ill lich says:

    What they really want is to stop the pedophiles from even thinking about children. Good Luck.

    It’s like just the notion of pedophilia is so distasteful that once it gets into your head you see it everywhere. Reminds of the Soviet Unions various purges: “he could be a spy! We should arrest him just to be safe.”

  95. Anonymous says:

    He should consider himself fortunate not to be from Brazil.

  96. Anonymous says:

    “Bridges Shopping Centre”

    Just thought I’d give the Google search a boost!

    This morning I read about a guy harassed by plod for photographing a street parade, and now this, what is wrong with this country.

    Laws brought in to protect us are being used against us, we’re being persecuted while terrorists and pedophiles go about their vile business undisturbed.

    Pete of Worcestershire

  97. Anonymous says:

    Maybe they still think that cameras steal your soul? LOL

    @RayZorback on twitter

  98. Anonymous says:

    Not only that, take me to court, let a judge and jury decide wether or not this image is pornographic in anyway shape or form, Oh wait, I deleted it.
    There goes your evidence.

  99. Bitgod says:

    When I read stories like this, I get so angry. I know I’d be in trouble if it was me, because I’d have gone off on the cop and/or rent-a-cop and they would have used that as an excuse.

  100. Anonymous says:

    The police officer had no right to demand he delete the photo, if nothing else he was destroying evidence.

  101. Anonymous says:

    Buh bye, jolly olde England. We hardly know ye.

  102. richard says:

    Back around 1968 I had to travel (briefly) in the Soviet Union. I remember clearly being held at the border while ALL my film was developed and the prints minutely examined to ensure that I was not photographing “sensitive subjects”. I also remember coming back to England and laughing about it: nobody could believe so much fuss.
    England, you were one of the freest countries in the world: what have they done to you?

  103. Anonymous says:

    I’m from Sunderland and this does not surprise me one little bit. The town seems to have a surplus of this type of idiot and the sunderland echo is little better – if they run the story i wouldn’t be surprised if Kevin is depicted as being totally in the wrong and the bridges/cops are just doing there jobs. I know there will be a lot of people in sunderland who will be thinking ‘no smoke without fire’ and will probably accuse kevin of also being a terrorist or something too! oh it’s a great place!

    (and if i’m wrong about you then speak out, people of sunderland)

  104. Anonymous says:

    I live in N.E. ENGLAND.

    I also visited “The Bridges”

    I was accused of “touching a child’s head” whilst passing him/her. I was then stopped in my car in ‘The Bridges’ roof top car park by 3 “Security Guards” whilst one then grabbed me by the neck, began heaving me about then threw me into the car whilst continuing to mal-handle/ punch me causing various dental injuries before calling the police and accusing me of also being a “PAEDOPHILE”. They actually had me “ARRESTED” for “PUBLIC DISORDER”.

    I have, via the County Court, obtained all pertinent CCTV/Video recordings concerning this MOST SERIOUS MIS-TREATMENT.as a perfectly well intended, perfectly innocent customer. There were NO GROUNDS for ANY charges against me and NO further action was taken against me.

    I returned 2 days later to try and confirm the existence of nearby CCTV, however was approached AGAIN by further “Security Guards” who AGAIN called the police, alleging AGAIN that I was a “paedophile”. They then attended, stopped me in my car, by the main road and demanded I DELETE ALL MY MOBILE TELEPHONE PICTURES (whilst surrounded by 4 police officers).

    THIS IS VERY SADLY A REFLECTION OF MODERN DAY ENGLAND !!!

    PHIL (ENGLAND)

    “THE BRIDGES” VISITOR
    (NO MORE!!!)

  105. tw15 says:

    A search in Google for “Bridges Shopping Centre” is now listing this post on Page 2. Will it make page 1?

    Will a search for the shopping centre in Google bring up before long: “Bridges shopping centre is a hotbed of paedophile activity and sexual assaults”?

  106. Mister N says:

    This story reminded me of Kafka’s stories. The scary part is this was real. The high level of ignorance, power tripping and fear is creating a social environment where human beings can’t interact on it.

    Jane’s Addiction mentioned it long ago: Idiots Rule!

  107. Michael Wolfendale says:

    I live and work in Sunderland, and this was posted on my birthday! Woo! God do I wish I had some children to antagonise the Bridges security with. Perhaps I’ll just loiter suspiciously instead.

  108. rosyatrandom says:

    “And I’m pretty sure that taking pictures of your kids having fun on rides isn’t a warning sign of paedophilia (I’m in big trouble if it is!).”

    Burn him!

  109. pretentious platypus says:

    Does “Bridges shopping centre” know the police apparently consider it a “a hotbed of paedophile activity and sexual assaults”? Are they happy with this being communicated to the public in this fashion?
    Kevin should probably ask them (and let them know their answers will be published).

  110. Anonymous says:

    I don’t understand why security guards in semi-public places like shopping malls have a problem with photography.

  111. bamberries says:

    But they photograph us on CCTV all the time.

    The Government are paedophiles. Burn them!

    • Anonymous says:

      Screw CCTV. Right this very moment there are strangers looking at our kids naked and it’s all government sanctioned. Of course we are sure they are not perverts because they are doing it for our own good. But god forbid you take a memento of your own kid having fun, you dirty pedophile.

  112. mgfarrelly says:

    I have to ask the rational minds of BB, is there really some massive wave of pedophilia in the UK?

    I read the Guardian, I have family in both England and Ireland, I’ve visited frequently, I’ve never gotten the sense that the whole nation has turned into something out of Cormac McCarthy’s “The Road”.

    Mind you, I don’t read the Daily Mail.

    Seriously, have the usual high-profile pedo cases (dreadful and heart-rending as they are) just driven the whole damn establishment insane?

    I cast no aspersions, as I live in a country where the laws have our sex offenders living safely under bridges like common trolls.

    • Hawley says:

      the adults in the UK are so grisly and vile that if you need to blow off some steam you are pretty much forced to seek out a child.

      while this may seem bewildering to foreigners, britons have been getting in on the act in increasing numbers over the years. in fact this form of stress discharge has become so popular in certain areas of the UK that the supply of sexy nippers has all but dried up. forcing people to import asian and african tykes to cater to demand.

    • Anonymous says:

      The madness has gone so far as to infect even the irrational nutjobs.

      I recall a chart from a David Ickes book, which details, aside from all the other nefarious activity our shapeshifting reptile alien illuminati overlords get up to, they still manage to find time to relax with a bit of Pedophilia. Or Paedophilia, as it’s practiced in the UK.

      It’s also well known that, unlike the rest of the world, UK Paedophiles are almost all exclusively clothed child fetishists, which makes child porn for that market very easy to produce, and near infinitely difficult to detect.

  113. Anonymous says:

    I’ve never been there and will never be there, but if that were how I was treated, I’d be sure to repeat the assertion, early and often, that that mall is a hotbed of pedophilia. I would think their customers would want to know that. He’d only be doing a public service by spreading the word.

  114. Anonymous says:

    umm….If the guy WAS a paedophile wouldn’t the photos constitute possible EVIDENCE? Would destruction of those records after you’ve been informed that you’re the target of a criminal investigation constitute a crime?

  115. sleze says:

    “Bridges shopping centre is a hotbed of paedophile activity and sexual assaults happen there all of the time.”

    Wow. I guess I would not shop there if my children were going to be assaulted there. I think if people discuss this enough, no one will shop at Bridges shopping centre.

  116. Pantograph says:

    Oh God! I clicked on your link and now I’m part of your sordid little internet pedo network. Damn you Doctorow!

  117. shadowfirebird says:

    What really bugs me about this sort of thing — above and beyond the absurd injustice and overbearing little-hitlerism of it — is that it’s a self-fulfilling prophecy.

    OF COURSE I am now going to go around looking sneaky and covert whenever I use a camera in public — I’m frightened of someone stopping me every time I take a picture!

  118. Helen Lovejoy says:

    Won’t somebody please think of the children?!

  119. Anonymous says:

    “The PC threatened to arrest Kevin “for creating a public disturbance” and ordered him to delete the photo of his son.”

    At which stage Kevin should have told the PC to go and f**k himself.

    Seriously, I having become a father recently myself and being professional photographer I am sick and tired of being hassled by wannabe homeland security agents.

  120. Anonymous says:

    Just as Chris Morris said…. Welcome to Paedogeddon!

  121. HornCologne says:

    Nobody stone the paedo until I blow this whistle! Even if he does say Jehova! Oh crap …

  122. HornCologne says:

    But seriously, I’m on board with mgfarelly (#4):

    Can someone please explain how taking photographs now automatically qualifies you for serious harassment in the UK? I mean, take a picture of a building in a public place and you’re a terrorist; take a picture of (your own) children and you’re a paedophile … huh?

    Paedos and terrorists take pictures with cameras … you have a camera … therefore … wait! I didn’t blow the whistle yet!

  123. Anonymous says:

    I got stopped for drinking apple juice in a clear plastic cup in Eastleigh, by 2 security guards in quick succession. When i finally managed to convince them that it was just juice, they left me with a warning “You watch that juice now”, for what? fermentation? The world has gone mad!!!

  124. Anonymous says:

    Get a grip Britain; this man is trying to take a photo of his kid!

  125. hbl says:

    It would appear from reading BoingBoing that in the UK if you use a camera in public then you are either a paedo or a terrorist. Which is patently ridiculous because practically every single person in the UK has a cameraphone in their pocket. And every single non-residential building (and a lot of residential buildings) have cameras affixed to their exteriors. And interiors. And see where this is going?

    It is my understanding of living in the UK that it is neither full of paedos or terrorists, but it is full of idiots. It’s only going to get worse too, because bahaviour like this will just lead to a massive brain-drain.

  126. Anonymous says:

    Please watch these films by volunteers at Worldwrite they are campaigning to stop police harrassing photographers and film crews who are legally filming within London.
    Watch the films at: http://www.worldbytes.org/programmes/013/013_004.html
    and:
    http://www.worldbytes.org/programmes/013/013_003.html

    Let us know your thoughts!

Leave a Reply