Taxi Driver Online

Was about to ask if anyone filming something like this should be deemed not 'fit and proper'

However, there's quite a lot more to it than the headline and strapline suggest.

But quite a lot of bizarre details in this piece


Cabbie stripped of licence after filming police arresting 'incredibly intoxicated' woman

https://www.gazettelive.co.uk/news/tees ... g-34839418

Stockton Council's licensing committee had doubts about the motorist's conduct where he 'involved himself' in filming an arrest :: The driver said he 'felt compelled to record it'

A taxi driver lost his private hire licence after a council committee heard how he had filmed police officers as they arrested a woman over an alleged robbery.

The motorist videoed a police incident "involving an intoxicated female in relation to an alleged knifepoint robbery" earlier this year. His fitness to hold a hackney carriage and private hire licence, which he held since 2022, was called into question after he "involved himself" in the incident, say minutes of a Stockton Council licensing committee meeting.

The minutes state: "The committee heard that CCTV footage showed a female resisting arrest, and two police officers struggling to place the female into the rear of a police vehicle to detain her. Three police vehicles were present at the time."

CCTV footage showed the unnamed taxi driver's car arriving at the scene, then he "appeared to begin to film the police incident on his mobile telephone, exiting his vehicle whilst doing so". This led to "an animated exchange" between him and a police officer.

An officer said the female suspect was "incredibly intoxicated" and her trousers were coming down as she struggled while she was arrested over the alleged robbery in Hardwick, but she was not hurt. He questioned the appropriateness of filming a woman in that state, and said he tried to stand between her and the taxi driver "to protect her dignity".

After the police vehicle containing the woman left, the taxi driver knocked on another police vehicle window recording an exchange with an officer on his phone, say the minutes. He also recorded the surroundings, "appearing very annoyed", stepped in front of a police vehicle obstructing its path when an officer tried to drive away, shouted, pointed his finger at the officer, walked beside the vehicle and put his hand into it, the meeting heard in June.

'Error of judgment'

After a "firm conversation", the taxi driver put his hands in the air in an "apologetic manner" then got back into his cab and drove away, it was said. In a statement, a police officer said the taxi driver should not have been recording "a vulnerable female", and the officer claimed to have been called "obscene names".

Licensing officers and the driver's representative had an "extensive dialogue of over 25 emails" after the driver was contacted about the matter, including allegations to the council of "bias, procedural unfairness and inappropriate conduct by licensing officers". The outcome of the complaints was there was "no case to answer", councillors were told in the meeting, which was not open to the public.

In a complaint to Cleveland Police, the taxi driver said he started to record because he was concerned with what he was seeing, did not obstruct or interfere with officers' duties, did not drive while using his phone, lightly tapped on the window to get an officer's attention and denied swearing at the officer. He said the phone which made the recording was lost, but he recovered a 21-second clip which was shown to the committee.

He told the committee the woman was screaming and shouting and he "felt compelled to record this as he has a daughter, a wife and sisters". He apologised for his actions and "error of judgment", saying the footage was not shared anywhere and he had deleted it in a panic.

He did not dispute becoming annoyed, but questioned why he was not arrested if his behaviour was so poor. He stressed he was not a nuisance but a "community-spirited person".

The driver's representative described his conduct as a blip at most, a "low level, minor issue", where "he was driving to collect pots and pans for his food business when he saw the female being, in his opinion, manhandled by police officers". He argued the motorist should not be penalised for recording the incident.

A police community support officer (PCSO) said in a statement that the taxi driver previously "repeatedly involved himself in incidents that did not concern him" and "behaved aggressively or in a manner intended to challenge or disrupt police activity". The statement outlined other incidents in the previous two years.

They included stopping his taxi in the middle of the road stopping a police vehicle from passing, then pulling alongside officers and alleging he had recordings of a previous incident; filming officers as they dealt with a traffic offence, "causing a distraction and interfering with the safe handling of the situation"; and following officers to their vehicle, recording them and making repeated accusations after they issued him with a warning for "anti-social driving linked to inappropriate horn use while delivering food".

The driver's representative said his conduct was not criminal, his record on the roads was "impeccable", he had no mental, physical or sobriety issues, and had been a taxi driver for many years. He said the driver had been cooperative, had to provide for a child and brought five "powerful" character references to the licensing meeting, assuring councillors he would not involve himself in any more incidents.

However, the minutes conclude: "After much deliberation and consideration of the submissions, the committee members were not satisfied that they would allow people for whom they care to enter a vehicle with [the driver] alone due to their doubts arising from his conduct during the police incident. In the committee's view, the footage of [the driver's] conduct, compounded by a pattern of concerning behaviour, was a reasonable cause to revoke [his] licence."