Anorak News | Fracking Hell: The Police V Dr Steven Peers Puts Belligerent Coppers In The Frame (Video)

Fracking Hell: The Police V Dr Steven Peers Puts Belligerent Coppers In The Frame (Video)

by | 6th, February 2014



AH, the police. They like filming us but what when we film them? Fresh from the Mark Duggan stop and search killing (all stop; little search) and the Andrew Mitchell farce, the police are filmed arresting a man for being Non-Compliant Whilst Walking.

This incident was taped at the anti-fracking protest on Barton Moss Road, Irlam, Salford on 14/1/14. The man with the camera is Dr Steven Peers, an Electronic Engineer. On Linked In we learn that his interests are “Electronics, Jiu Jitsu, Aquaponics”.


dr steven peers



The officer telling Peers he can smell booze on his breath is Sgt David Kehoe.

There are a few moments in his tape that stand out:

* The man with the camera does say he has had a couple of drinks. But says they were tea.

* The officer moves another man on, implying that “mithering”an officer is an offence.

* The second officer addressing Peers says police have seen the man driving. And that is key. The police can detain you if they saw you driving and then suspect you of having had had a drink before or during that journey. Did the first officer see him driving? He seems to know the man, calling him Steven and asking him if he arrived in his blue Mercedes. But did this officer actually see him driving his car? He has to have done so in order to demand a breath test.

Dr Peers says he had not arrived at ‘Camp Barton’ in his car because he had stayed there the night before. So. Did the officer see him drive up?

The Government has advice on “Being stopped by the police while driving: your rights”.

The police can also give you an on-the-spot fixed penalty notice for many minor offences and make you take a breath test in certain circumstances.


The police can stop you at any time and ask you to take a breath test (‘breathalyse’ you) if:

they think you’ve been drinking
you’ve committed a traffic offence
you’ve been involved in a road traffic accident
If you refuse to take a breath test, or fail to supply a sample of breath and don’t have a ‘reasonable excuse’, you can be arrested. A reasonable excuse could be a genuine physical or mental condition stopping you from giving a sample.

The breath test gives a result straight away. If it shows you’re not over the drink drive limit, you must be allowed to go.

If you fail the breath test, you’ll be taken to a police station and given 2 more breath tests. If they’re positive, you may be charged.

If you fail a breath test you can’t drive your car until you’re sober. You can ask someone else to collect your car for you.

But what about if you not near your car and show no signs of being about to get in it and drive the thing?





The website Ask The Police tells us:

Q678: Can I be arrested if I am sat in my car drunk (over the permitted limit), but not driving?

Yes, there is an offence of being in charge of a mechanically propelled vehicle whilst being over the permitted limit. Each case would be judged on it’s own merits but the officers would be looking at

whether you had the keys for the vehicle,
were you in the vehicle at the time
what were you doing at the time
whether there was anyone else in or near the vehicle
what evidence is there that you were intending to drive the vehicle.

But this chap’s not in his car. It’s quite possible that if he had a drink after parking. He shows no signs of being about to get in his car.




The video is called “Officer framing citizen on camera”. That’s a serious charge.

On Storyleak, Mikael Thalen says:

After ignoring the journalist’s requests to know whether or not he has been arrested, the officer goes on to illegally detain the man, pushing him to take a roadside breathalyzer test.

That’s wrong. It is not illegal to detain someone you suspect of have drunk driven. You just have to have seen them. And we can’t be sure if the officer did.



This actually came to court. YouTuber Steve Spy writes of the trial at Manchester and Salford Magistrates’ Court.

Transcript of court case 28/1/14: 

Usher – “can you stand at the end”
Freeman – “I claim common law jurisdiction, I do not consent and I wave the benefits”
Magistrate – “Can you repeat that”
Freeman – “I claim common law jurisdiction, I do not consent and I wave the benefits”
Magistrate (to other two magistrates) – “I don’t think we have had that before”
Clerk – “Are you Steven Spy?”
Freeman – “I am Steven of the family Spy”
Clerk – ” Are you Steven Spy?”
Freeman – “I am Steven of the family Spy”
Clerk – “Where do you live?”
Freeman – “I live on the land”
Clerk – “Can you confirm your date of birth”
Freeman – “I believe that would be hearsay evidence, your honour”
Clerk – “If you honour is satisfied we have identified the defendant, we can
Prosecution – “The prosecution is not satisfied that there is sufficient evidence to substantiate the charge, therefore we withdraw the case”
Clerk – ” Do you understand that the prosecution is withdrawing its case”
Freeman – “No I do not understand, but I do comprehend”
Magistrate – “Whether you understand or comprehend, the prosecution is withdrawing its case, so the case is dismissed and you are free to go”
Freeman – “Thank you, your honour”.




A complaint was made:

A police complaint was made online on 3rd February 2014 using GMP online form. This was ignored by GMP and a formal police complaint was attempted at Newton Heath police station today at 2pm. Log 940 5/2/14. The civilian worker ECO 66653 Elley claimed that getting an Inspector down was “not the way it is done”. He said the procedure was for an Inspector from Swinton would call. An Inspector Windsor from Swinton police station phoned and filled in a complaint form. I have also emailed the complaints section at so that there is a further record of the complaint. GMP has a history of ignoring complaints. Make sure there is a record of your complaint. They have 21 days to deal with the complaint before formal litigation is started.




Dr Peers tells the MEN:

“It was a ridiculous, trumped-up charge. He wanted me arrested to take my video camera away. He told blatant lies. He was perverting the course of justice. I was shocked that he would do that on camera. When officers go well beyond the course of their duties and fabricate evidence, they should be removed. You’ve got to have some standards in the police.”




He tells Mancunian Matters:

“This incident came after 2 months of me filming police brutality towards the thoroughly peaceful protest against fracking on Barton Moss. I would describe the police activity throughout the protest as extremely violent. As a basic Human Right, the police attitude has to change. They should be there to help the public not the Corporations damaging the environment for profit.”

More top PR from the Boys In Blue…

Posted: 6th, February 2014 | In: Reviews Comments (9) | TrackBack | Permalink