This is the moment an anti-masker was kicked out of Sainsbury’s for refusing to wear a face covering or show proof of a medical exemption.
Footage shows the unnamed shopper arguing with Kent Police officers and claiming they could not ask her to show proof of her ‘disability’.
She asked the two officers ‘are you doctors?’ before producing a sheet of paper printed at home that she wrongly believed proved her point and saying ‘I’ll be taking you to court’.
A female officer replied ‘see you in court then’ as she and a colleague led her out into the car park.
It comes as a senior police officer criticised the government for its approach to enforcing lockdown rules, saying that ministers had been giving ‘damaging’ mixed messages.
Footage shows the unnamed shopper arguing with Kent Police officers (pictured) and claiming they could not ask her to show proof of her ‘disability’
Martin Hewitt, the head of the National Police Chiefs’ Council, said working with government had been ‘pretty challenging’ and ‘at times tense and difficult’.
In a speech to the London College of Policing in December, he said: ‘We’ve pushed really hard, not always successfully, to get consistent messaging and management of expectations out of government,’ he said.
How ministers added to confusion over the lockdown rules
May 10 (Sunday) – Number 10 says the lockdown is being eased but people will not be allowed to meet more than one person from outside their household outdoors.
11 (Monday) – Dominic Raab says people can meet their parents in the park, contradicting No10’s stance.
Later that day – No10 reiterates that you can only meet one person outside.
Nov 2 – Michael Gove tells constituents they will be allowed to play golf and tennis during lockdown.
2 – He apologises and confirms he was wrong.
2 – Robert Jenrick says Gove was wrong to say people could still play golf and tennis, but then himself wrongly suggests you can meet with your family outside even if you do not live with them.
‘It’s been very damaging to our efforts where you’ve got different government ministers saying different things, answering questions and giving a slightly different perception.’
Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and Robert Jenrick have all been forced to admit to getting the rules wrong in TV interviews.
The footage from Sainsbury’s follows a supermarket clampdown on people not wearing face coverings by banning them all together unless they can prove they are exempt.
Despite apparently not having proof of the exemption, the woman brandishes a piece of paper which she says explains the law on providing it.
The female police officer replies that she doesn’t need to see something she has printed out at home.
The officers then explain the store manager does not want to serve her, before marching her out of the supermarket.
On the way out, the woman says that she is being discriminated against, that the officers are liable of a fine of up to £9,000, and that she will be taking them to court.
The female police officer simply replies that she looks forward to seeing her there.
The woman then asks to record their badge numbers, which the officers calmly agree to, before finally walking away.
The self-proclaimed ‘anti-masker’ now appears to have made per Twitter account private.
Although there is no legal requirement for people to carry a badge to prove they are medically exempt, police are entitled to ask for proof and can ask someone to leave or fine them if this isn’t provided.
NPCC chief Martin Hewitt criticised the government in a speech he gave before the third national lockdown.
He referred to the ‘challenge’ of enforcing different rules as they constantly changed with the course of the pandemic.
Martin Hewitt, the head of the National Police Chiefs’ Council, said working with government had been ‘pretty challenging’ and ‘at times tense and difficult’
Lockdown law: Police CAN fine you or ask you to leave
The self-proclaimed anti-masker in the Sainsbury’s video claimed police were not allowed to ask her ‘disability’ so could not force her to leave.
The gov.uk website says police can take measures if members of the public do not comply with the face covering law without a valid exemption’.
On the same page it also says – according to the law – those with an age, health or disability reason for not wearing a face covering do not ‘routinely need to show any written evidence of this’.
However, guidance on enforcement puts an onus on people claiming a medical exemption to prove this when challenged by police, meaning that officers can ask them to leave or fine them if they fail to do so.
He said the police had asked the government to make these changes ‘as clear and unambiguous as they could be’ but had sometimes delayed enforcing new rules until they had the specific guidance.
‘On some occasions, we did not start policing a new regulation, until we had got the guidance out,’ he explained.
The police chief also spoke of the need for all enforcement not to be ‘lumped’ onto officers.
‘Local authorities have enforcement powers, licencing authorities have enforcement powers, the people who run shops, pubs and restaurants all have a responsibility that the regulations are followed,’ he said.
Mr Hewitt said the relationship between police and ministers had been ‘pretty challenging throughout’.
In November, communities secretary Mr Jenrick wrongly suggested families could go for walks outdoors, while Mr Gove incorrectly stated that people could play golf and tennis.
Meanwhile, in September Mr Johnson admitted he ‘misspoke’ when explaining rules for the North East lockdown.
A Home Office spokesman said: ‘We have a strong relationship with the NPCC, and police chiefs around the country, and have been in constant contact with them throughout.
‘We have worked in conjunction with them to ensure the guidance is clear in a necessarily fast moving and complex environment.’
MailOnline has contacted Kent Police for comment on the Sainsbury’s video. It is not clear when or where the video was filmed.
In the video, a female officer (pictured) said ‘see you in court then’ as she and a colleague led her out into the car park
The attendees of a gender reveal party and people watching a football at a friend’s house were among those issued with fines with weekend for breaching lockdown rules.
Police in Swansea were called to a gender reveal part in Townhill on Sunday which was attended by a number of households.
On the same day, police issued four fixed penalty notices to people at an address in the Mount Pleasant area of the city who had met to watch a football match.
On Saturday, eight people were fined after they were caught meeting at a shed converted into a bar.
Meanwhile, a student who embarked on a lockdown-breaching 150-mile journey ‘for a change of scenery’ had his car seized after he stopped in the middle lane of the M62 when police pulled him over.
The driver – who had only a provisional licence – travelled from Preston, Lancashire, to Sheffield to pick up a friend before the pair set off to Liverpool.
They were spotted going 88mph in the third lane of the M62.
He slowed down when he noticed a North West Motorway Police traffic car behind him – but stayed in the third lane for two junctions.
The driver eventually ground to a halt in the middle of the M62 – which the force said ‘certainly caused a panic moment’.
A student who embarked on a lockdown-breaching 150-mile journey ‘for a change of scenery’ had his car (pictured) seized after he stopped in the middle lane of the M62 when police pulled him over
Once the car pulled into the hard shoulder, police found it had two bald tyres – when the rubber of a tyre is so worn down it has little tread left.
The man – who has not been named – was reported for excess speed, inconsiderate driving, having two bald tyres, driving otherwise than in accordance with a licence and for breaching Covid restrictions, the force said.
Under the rules of England’s third nation-wide lockdown, Britons are only allowed to travel outside of their local area for essential reasons.
These include travelling for work or for medical care.
Police also wrote the driver up for having no insurance, as any policy he had would have been invalidated by his escapades, and his car was seized.