On Wed, 14 May 2008 21:49:55 +0100, Les Invalides wrote:
> Martin Brown <|||newspam|||@nezumi.demon.co.uk> posted
>>That has always been my experience. But given this outcry I did wonder
>>what the legal position actually was and why the actual signing is not
>>supposed to be photographed. Is it a legal restriction (a bit like not
>>being allowed to say the exact invocation of the marriage ceremony at the
>>practice) or something else?
>
> Certainly the custom pre-dates the Data Protection Act even in its 1984
> version, so it can't be that.
>
> Very often these things are not allowed because, er, they're not allowed.
> 'Ere, we can't let you photograph that there register, or 'oo knows where
> it would all end. My father afore me never allowed that sort of thing, nor
> his father afore him. Etc etc.
I tried to video a friend's child being christened. I wasn't allowed - the
reason given was that it is a sacrament. I didn't bother to ask what that
is.
--
Phil Stovell, Hampshire, UK
|