Eight arrested over conspiracy to destroy Ulez cameras
A co-ordinated operation conducted by the force has seen six men and two women arrested on suspicion of conspiracy to commit criminal damage.
One of the men is also alleged to have been involved in threatening and harassing the team sent to repair a damaged camera.
The Met made the arrests at addresses in London, Windsor and on the Isle of Sheppey in the early hours of Wednesday.
The London arrests took place in Uxbridge, Ickenham, Northwood, Sutton and Eltham.
Those arrested remain in custody.
Searches are ongoing at the addresses but officers say they have already recovered items related to the alleged offending.
Superintendent Paul Thomas, of the Met's Roads and Transport Policing Command, said: 'There is a big difference between lawful protest and plotting to destroy or seriously damage property.
'Some may think of this sort of behaviour as a victimless crime, but when cameras are damaged or destroyed it creates dangerous hazards, risking collisions on the road in addition to disruption for motorists and residents.
'We take these offences very seriously and officers will continue working closely with Transport for London and other partners to identify and build a case against those responsible.
'Today's arrests are a significant development in what has been a long and complex investigation that is not yet over.
'I would appeal to anyone who has information about plans to target Ulez cameras to come forward.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
28 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
How watching facial recognition cameras help police pluck wanted criminals off the street made me realise only those with something to hide need fear them, writes DAVID JONES
Residents of London will doubtless be disturbed to learn that, as of last Tuesday, 11,000 wanted serious criminals were walking free on the capital's streets because they hadn't been tracked down and arrested. Rapists and robbers, ruthless gang members and drug dealers. Augmenting that alarming statistic, also at liberty are 5,000 convicted criminals considered sufficiently dangerous to have had their movements restricted by the courts: paedophiles, serial stalkers and the like. An unusually tall beanpole of a man who appears to be in his late 20s or early 30s, Ahmed (whose name has been changed) is in the former category. Legalities prevent me from revealing his alleged offences, but were he to be tried and found guilty he would face a lengthy jail sentence. Wandering nonchalantly past Shepherd's Bush market, in the vibrant heart of west London, in a T-shirt and shorts last Tuesday, the fear that he might be recognised and detained by a passing police officer appears to be the furthest thing from his mind. His air of complacency is understandable, for the Met's on-the-ground resources are overstretched, and on the hottest day of the year he seems to have melted into throngs of wilting shoppers and lunching office workers. Imagine, then, the look of disbelief that crosses Ahmed's deceptively gentle face when he is surrounded by half a dozen officers, who quickly confirm his wanted status, search and question him, then clap him in handcuffs. As he stands there, shaking his head from side to side, you can almost see his synapses pulsing. How on earth could they have found me, he seems to be fathoming. Have I been followed? Has someone grassed me up? He soon learns the truth. In policing, as in other walks of life, cutting-edge technology is increasingly replacing the need for plodding detective work, and as he sauntered along Uxbridge Road, he had been photographed by live facial recognition (LFR) cameras mounted on the pavement. Almost instantly, his picture was fed into a computer whose biometric software measured his facial features – eyes, nose, mouth – and positively matched his image with one of the above-mentioned 11,000 alleged criminals, named on a 'watchlist' drawn up that day by the Met. This triggered a bleep on the mobile phones of the team of ten officers stationed on the street, ready to make arrests. Meanwhile, in a nearby police van, a surveillance expert was assessing Ahmed's profile – name, date of birth, alleged offences, whether he posed a potential danger – and radioing this information to the team. She also watched him on a screen so she could direct the officers swiftly to him. It was an undeniably slick operation. According to one of the LFR team, on average it takes the Met 17.5 officer hours to track down a suspect by 'old school' policing methods; that is, of course, if they are caught at all. Yet, as I saw, Ahmed, a potential danger to the public, had been identified and held in a matter of seconds. First introduced experimentally in policing almost a decade ago, LFR is being relied on increasingly, not only by the Met, which has pioneered it along with South Wales Police, but by a mounting number of regional forces across the country. In addition to the streets, it has been deployed at major sporting events such as Six Nations rugby, football matches and F1 races, at pop concerts and even in busy seaside resorts, serving both as a deterrent to crime and a means of identifying and arresting culprits. In a landmark announcement this week, the Met revealed that LFR had led to more than 1,000 arrests in London (including more than 100 men accused of serious violence towards women and girls) since the start of 2024. Of these, 773 led to charges or cautions. And now Met Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley – who has hailed LFR as the most significant investigative advancement since DNA testing – is ready to take a quantum leap towards making it mainstream. Thus far, the force has deployed only mobile LFR units to crime hotspots, but this summer they will mount their first fixed cameras. Under a pilot scheme, they will be rigged up temporarily on a building (hopefully high enough to be beyond the reach of vandals, unlike many Ulez cameras) in central Croydon, an area plagued in recent years by knife crime. However, since it means thousands of ordinary citizens are being filmed without their knowledge as they go about their daily lives, and having their photos run through databases, there are inevitably strong concerns in some quarters. The more so because, as yet, there are no specific laws or regulations governing LFR. In deciding the rights and wrongs of its usage, the courts must turn to human rights, privacy and equality legislation. Decrying it as an intrusion on civil liberties that will have a 'chilling' and dystopian effect on society, pressure groups such as Big Brother Watch and Liberty are calling for an outright ban. They point to scientific studies which have shown that facial recognition technology can unfairly discriminate against black and Asian people, as well as transgender groups and even women. The reasons for this are complex, but broadly centre on algorithms which can make it more difficult for the system to distinguish between the facial features of people in those categories. In one grimly ironic case last year, Shaun Thompson, 39, a respected black community worker, was wrongly flagged up as a criminal after being filmed at London Bridge station. Distressingly held for 30 minutes under threat of arrest, Mr Thompson was actually returning home from Croydon after a voluntary anti-knife crime shift. He is now taking legal action. However, the likely accuracy of a LFR match is measured by a score, and independent experts say such mistakes are far more likely to occur when the threshold is set at, or below, 0.600 to include a greater number of people. Mindful of this, the Met uses a threshold of 0.640, which makes such mistakes rare. So much so that, as of last Tuesday, they say, only seven people had been misidentified this year. Against this, 1,042 alerts had proved to be accurate. Moreover, proponents counterbalance Mr Thompson's case with another, which shows how facial recognition cameras can be crucial in preventing crime as well as solving it. In May, paedophile David Cheneler, 73, who has served nine years for child-sex offences, appeared in court for breaching the conditions of an order banning him being alone with a minor. The court heard how LFR cameras filmed Cheneler walking hand-in-hand with a six-year-old girl, whom he had picked up from school 'as a favour' after befriending her mother. When police stopped him, they were a long way from her home and he was hiding a penknife in his belt, but he claimed they had mistakenly 'caught the wrong bus'. For breaching the order, he was jailed for two years. But among dozens of MPs and peers – from across the political spectrum – there remains much scepticism. Appalled to learn that Essex Police used it to monitor spectators at last year's Clacton Airshow, Nigel Farage criticised the force, remarking: 'I don't want to live in China. I don't want to be tracked wherever I go.' Other critics range from former Tory Cabinet minister David Davis to Lib Dem leader Sir Ed Davey and socialist Diane Abbott. Yet Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp – the MP for Croydon – is very much in favour. Labour's policing minister Dame Diana Johnson, for her part, has launched a consultation exercise and is expected to set out government plans for the cameras' use later this year. It was against this background, and one presumes in the interest of transparency, that the Met allowed me to observe LFR in action last Tuesday afternoon. I expected the cameras to be hidden from public view, but found them mounted on unmissably tall tripods perched on the pavement. As for the van containing all the gadgetry, that was pillar-box red and also stood out a mile, parked outside a busy Costa Coffee outlet on Uxbridge Road. Wouldn't a touch of subterfuge have been more advisable, given that passing criminals might just walk the other way, sharpish? 'People always ask me why we don't do this more covertly, but we can't,' replied the LFR team leader, a sergeant dressed down in shorts and shades. 'It would cause ructions. We've got so many people criticising this. They think we're up to all sorts of things. We operate in a way that causes minimum suspicion.' The Met has two LFR teams, deployed four times a week to hotspots identified from crime data. The rough average is five arrests per five-hour deployment. When the cameras start rolling, they capture the facial features of everyone who comes within their range – about 20 metres. These are then run through the watchlist. After the biometric software measures 28 facial features, including the head size, it converts this into digital data, like a human bar-code. Anyone whose features match those of someone on the watchlist to the 'threshold' degree of probability sets off the phone alert and is stopped. Traditional policing kicks in, and a decision must be made on whether to arrest them or simply make checks and send them on their way. Fugitives trying to evade detection by concealing their faces or wearing disguises should be warned. Recent experiments have proved the latest software capable of matching the facial characteristics of people in surgical masks. It can also link people with photographs taken decades ago, so the appearance of wrinkles and grey hair is no protection. (When I was invited to test the system by walking past the camera, it instantly threw up a rock-solid positive match with the grainy press picture I provided). Bedazzling though all this seems, we are only in the foothills of facial mapping technology. Already being trialled are infinitely more sensitive systems designed to assess people's state of mind. When terrorists can be intercepted simply by thinking about detonating a bomb, and would-be murderers can be arrested before drawing their weapon, we really will be in the realms of George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four. Except in a very beneficial way. Back in the here-and-now, another fear voiced by the anti-LFR lobby is that millions of innocent people are having their photos stashed, perhaps for some ulterior purpose. Nonsense, the LFR team leader insists. Pictures that don't match up are immediately deleted. Nor is LFR used to monitor climate change protesters and their ilk: another dark claim one hears. Such assurances cut no ice with Martin, a 50-year-old Shepherd's Bush musician, who finds it amusing to gurn grotesquely as he passes the camera. 'I'm a conspiracy theorist and I don't like the authoritarian nature of this,' he says. 'It's pushing us towards transhumanism and the idea that we all need so be controlled. People wouldn't have stood for it 20 years ago.' By 5pm on Tuesday, David had seen two wanted men taken into custody and five other dubious characters, among them a stalker and a risibly self-righteous sex offender warned Among more than half a dozen local people I spoke to, however, he was a lone protesting voice. Watching officers dashing to answer another alert – this one set off by a pallid, middle-aged suspect with a Germanic name – one woman let out a cheer. 'This is amazing! It makes me feel so much safer, having these cameras protecting us,' the 38-year-old Romanian told me, saying she had escaped an abusive husband with her daughter but feared being found and attacked. Glyn Llewelyn, 45, who manages an apartment block plagued by crack addicts, was similarly welcoming, as was software developer Mohammed Ukesh, 29 ('as long as they only use the cameras for crime, not tracking where you are'). All of which seemed to tally with recent opinion polls, showing around 85 per cent of the London public support the use of LFR. From all I saw, I'm with them. By 5pm on Tuesday, I had seen two wanted men taken into custody. Five other dubious characters, among them a stalker and a risibly self-righteous sex offender, had received sharp reminders that they were being watched. Before this technology existed, no-one would have known they were walking among us. So, be healthily suspicious of these very candid cameras if you must, and yes, let Parliament legislate sensibly on their appropriate use. But surely only those with secrets to hide should fear them? The rest of us should stop the Big Brother scaremongering and accept them as an ingenious Guardian Angel.
Daily Mirror
an hour ago
- Daily Mirror
Sister fights to save vulnerable Brit, 18, accused of smuggling meth to Japan
Sean Stephenson, 18, has been detained in Japan after allegedly being caught with over a kilo of meth - but his family insist he was groomed and coerced by British gang members An 18-year-old Londoner is being held in Japan after allegedly being caught with over a kilo of meth - in a case his sister claims was sparked by brutal exploitation by British gang members. Sean Stephenson, from Charlton in South East London, was diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) aged five and has a history of self-harm, suicide attempts, and learning difficulties. His family say he has a much lower mental age, no criminal history, and is extremely vulnerable - insisting he was groomed and coerced. Sean disappeared on Father's Day, telling his family he was going on a 'sightseeing trip' to Canada. But after an onward flight to Japan, he was arrested on June 21 with a locked suitcase allegedly containing more than a kilo of methamphetamine, MyLondon reports. His sister Ami Lee says Sean 'acted under pressure' from gang members who threatened to break his legs and harm his family. 'I have not eaten. I have not slept. I'm a nervous wreck,' 33-year-old Ms Lee told MyLondon, with just over a week until Sean faces a Tokyo judge. 'I am scared we are gonna get a call to say 'Your brother has taken his own life'. That is my biggest fear when he's innocent. I just want to get him home.' Ms Lee says Sean told her through his lawyer that he was followed to Heathrow Airport and threatened with violence if he didn't board the flight. She also claims he was threatened with a broken Smirnoff Ice bottle around two weeks before his arrest. Police were reportedly called to the June 10 incident, though Sean didn't press charges. 'He's not in a gang, he's very very vulnerable,' she said. 'He's quite a people pleaser. He would do anything to please people and make friends because Sean has got no friends. He's got nine nieces and nephews. He's more on their level. My sister is 18-years-old and she does not come around and play tag or it with people.' Sean's family have taken their concerns to both the Metropolitan Police and the National Crime Agency (NCA), but claim they've been sent from pillar to post and are still waiting for action. They are calling for a swift investigation, including CCTV from Heathrow and police records of the June 10 callout. Experts warn autistic teenagers are especially vulnerable to gang grooming due to their difficulty detecting lies and desire for social connection. Reacting to the response of both forces, Ms Lee said: 'Who is responsible? He has been groomed on UK soil. He could get free if we can prove he was followed to the airport. I would understand if my brother was a criminal. Do a background check then. He's a law-abiding citizen. He's never done anything wrong. We may never see my little brother again.'
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
BREAKING NEWS Arsenal break silence after Thomas Partey is charged with five counts of rape and one count of sexual assault just five days after leaving the club
Arsenal have broken their silence after former midfielder Thomas Partey was charged with five counts of rape and one count of sexual assault, just days after his contract at the Emirates expired. In a brief statement issued to the BBC, the club said: 'The player's contract ended on June 30. Due to ongoing legal proceedings the club is unable to comment on the case.' The 32-year-old Ghana international, who spent five seasons in north London, is accused of attacking three women between 2021 and 2022 following a three-year investigation by Scotland Yard. He is now due to appear at Westminster Magistrates' Court on August 5. Partey, who was signed by Arsenal for £45million from Atletico Madrid in 2020, denies all the charges against him. In a statement released through his lawyer Jenny Wiltshire of Hickman and Rose, Partey said he 'welcomes the opportunity to finally clear his name' and has 'fully cooperated with the police and CPS throughout their investigation'. The Crown Prosecution Service confirmed that the charges were authorised after it 'carefully reviewed a comprehensive file of evidence'. According to the Metropolitan Police, two counts of rape relate to one woman, three counts of rape relate to a second woman, and the sexual assault charge relates to a third woman. None of the alleged victims can be named for legal reasons. The investigation began in February 2022, with Partey first arrested in July of that year, though he was not publicly named at the time and continued to play for Arsenal while on bail. It has since emerged that he made over 50 appearances for the club during the period in which the investigation was ongoing. Detective Superintendent Andy Furphy, who is leading the investigation, said: 'Our priority remains providing support to the women who have come forward. We would ask anyone who has been impacted by this case, or anyone who has information, to speak with our team.' Partey left Arsenal last month following the expiry of his contract, with reports suggesting negotiations over a new deal had stalled weeks earlier. The midfielder has been training in Ghana as he looks for a new club and recently won the Ghana Footballer of the Year award. He made 167 appearances for Arsenal, scoring nine goals, and was part of the side that won the Community Shield in 2023. Despite injury setbacks, Partey returned to feature regularly last season as Mikel Arteta's side finished second in the Premier League and reached the Champions League semi-finals. In a recent interview discussing his future, Partey said his family would play a decisive role in where he plays next, explaining: 'I think the first thing is where are you happy and where do you feel at home… there are a lot of things where you have to look now with a family, where you want them to be happy.'
