|
Post by Parker on May 18, 2005 17:48:47 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by soupie on May 18, 2005 18:02:57 GMT 1
If you'd listened to the news carefully, you would have heard expert police officers stating that having watched the video of the events (recorded by the police officer himself don't forget!) that noone stated that the driving was dangerous. There would appear to be a lack of guidance from West Mercia headquarters about any policies for road testing new vehicles - which a driver has to do to know the capabilities of that particular vehicle. It doesn't give out a very good message, I agree, but the person hearing the case was an experienced District Judge, who had weighed up all the evidence very carefully, and came to what he was in no doubt was the correct verdict. There is one law for the police and one for others - but only in very special circumstances, of which this was one.
|
|
|
Post by Parker on May 18, 2005 18:24:19 GMT 1
Complete Bollox!! One of the charges was speeding. Correct me if I am wrong but last time I looked the limit on the M54 was 70mph. He had no lights on and no sirens sounding. He was doing 159mph. If thats not speeding then I eat my hat ( if I wore one!) At the end of the day, who says he is supposed to test a car to that extent anyway. Thats not his job. Have heard a senior traffic cop up north talking on this matter, who says that if a police car is on the road it is subject to the same laws as any other road user, unless they use blues and twos and are on an emergency! He was not.
|
|
|
Post by shrewforever on May 18, 2005 18:38:49 GMT 1
Did Rio go past him?
|
|
|
Post by Windsor Shrew on May 18, 2005 20:06:49 GMT 1
Makes my 6 week ban for doing 55 in a 30 look a tad harsh. I travel to Brum on the M54 everyday, I just know that if I should ever speed again there would be one of Her Majestys finest to make sure I was prosecuted. The law is an ass..... (unless of course your a copper in which case it's great)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2005 20:10:23 GMT 1
If you listen to the news, the Police as an organisation have been criticised. The individual though was not. Personally, I think that they got it the wrong way around, but there you go.
Did you get a 6 week ban for doing 55mph in a 30mph zone on a clean licence? That seems very harsh.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Plato on May 18, 2005 20:13:35 GMT 1
If you'd listened to the news carefully, you would have heard expert police officers stating that having watched the video of the events (recorded by the police officer himself don't forget!) that noone stated that the driving was dangerous. So if I drove my car down an empty M54 at night at 150mph, it'd be ok as long as I video taped it to show it wasnt dangerous? I dont think so somehow.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2005 20:30:00 GMT 1
So if I drove my car down an empty M54 at night at 150mph, it'd be ok as long as I video taped it to show it wasnt dangerous? Nope, because your employment doesn't require you to drive at high speeds. That's pretty simple.
|
|
|
Post by Jason Plato on May 18, 2005 20:46:20 GMT 1
The irony. ;D
|
|
|
Post by timgallon on May 18, 2005 21:14:48 GMT 1
This is the kind of situation that irates me about coppers. Like he didnt know he wasnt doing wrong. The M54 isint a fecking test track for police boy racers. Surley the car manual tells you how fast the car can go One rule for them one rule for the rest of us. Although i guess in the olden days this wouldnt have even gone to court. Good old judiciary, we can rely on them
|
|
|
Post by OldGit on May 18, 2005 21:39:39 GMT 1
How about this for a plea? "Your Honour, the reason I was travelling at 162mph along the M54 at 3 am was to ensure that I did not obstruct any West Mercia Policeman who felt the need to practice, from hammering the ass out of his patrol car. I realise that by only managing 148 up the hill approaching junction 7 I was putting the police at risk, but I ask the court to show mercy for the failing of my Fiat Punto 998cc to maintain a sensible speed when going uphill"
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 18, 2005 21:45:10 GMT 1
It was the Police force themselves who decided to prosecute this individual.
It was not the Police force that decided he was not guilty.
|
|
|
Post by Stevenelsonfanclub on May 19, 2005 8:47:36 GMT 1
Be interested to see laptop's take on this.
Here's mine off Buckschat:
"I'm afraid that this is just total e
Talk about double standards, another example of total hypocracy, why was this guy just not hit with a fixed penalty for the offence? Members of the public are given little in the way of reprisal for speeding offences, and yet this lunatic gets off scott free, despite being captured on the "calibrated" on-board computer. Talk about being caught bang to rights!
I was caught doing 46MPH in Sheffield on a dual carriageway that had just had the limit changed from 50MPH to 40 MPH (and was still 50MPH in the opposite direction) - my rights of appeal? - Nil!! The result?c- Fixed penalty, 3 points and £60 - I have no complaints about that, its the law!!
The fastest I have driven on UK roads is a "mere" 139MPH on the A55 Chester by-pass at 04:30 on Summer morning. However, I was fully aware of what I was doing and I too could point to mitigating circumstances, clear roads, testing out my new car's performance etc.
However, I was also aware that if I had been caught, I would have been banned from driving, possibly looking at stretch inside and could kiss goodbye to being insured on a high-powered car like the one I had at the time. At no point did I think, you know I think "I'll be able to blag my out of this one!"
I didn't have the same level of training as this fellow, which is not good, and I cannot defend that. However, having had such a lot of training of fast response, you would have thought that he would use better descretion in driving at high speeds.
Total pile of poo."
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on May 19, 2005 9:44:09 GMT 1
You managed to get away with doing 139m.p.h on the A55 of all places! This is the stretch of road that is the responsibility of the motorist's friend, Richard Brunstrom Chief Constable of North Wales. The man who wants all warning signs of speed cameras to be removed, the man who wants his officers to be able to hide behind trees to clock you. His iniquitous Arrive Alive vans sit on roads with ridiculous speed limits all day every day raising revenue. 12 points in 3 years is easily achievable in North Wales. p.s. if you want to experience the most ridiculous 30m.p.h speed limit ever imposed take the Mold road from the island by Wrexham football ground for about a mile or so. The limit beggars description! Needless to say Brunstrom's vans are in regular attendance there.
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on May 19, 2005 10:25:45 GMT 1
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on May 19, 2005 10:29:37 GMT 1
sorry...take the "t" out of ictnetwork.
|
|
|
Post by Worthingshrew on May 19, 2005 11:40:50 GMT 1
its just one more in a very long line of cases where policemen are treated differently from Joe Public. Either the Crown Prosecution Service don't press charges in cases involving coppers, or they present no evidence at court, or even when they are convicted they get lesser sentences, e,g. Chief Constables drink driving but getting no ban.
And they wonder why police have lost the respect of the public???
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on May 19, 2005 11:41:39 GMT 1
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2005 11:44:06 GMT 1
e,g. Chief Constables drink driving but getting no ban. When was that?
|
|
|
Post by llanymynech shrew on May 19, 2005 12:29:38 GMT 1
the one point i can`t get my head round is,why did this copper decide it was ok to do this.or if i was to head out onto the road in the early hours, would i be overtaken by every copper who drives doing the same thing?
|
|
|
Post by skinner on May 19, 2005 13:04:15 GMT 1
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2005 20:53:09 GMT 1
Ridiculous decision. What a lucky get
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2005 20:56:53 GMT 1
Definately a case of 1 rule for 1.... Anyone else see in the news about the police officer's racist slur on that young Kurdish lad?: news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/4563821.stmAll of it was recorded on a mobile phone. The police aren't having a good time of it at the moment
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on May 19, 2005 21:01:04 GMT 1
send that to the shroppy star this bloke needs dragging thru the dirt a little ;D
|
|
|
Post by blum on May 19, 2005 21:08:34 GMT 1
I got 6 points and a £125 fine for doing 98mph on the M54 at 6:30 on a sunday evening, it was feckin deserted apart from the git of a copper waiting behind a bush with a radar gun.. I wonder if it was the same one that decided to completely abuse his position.
|
|
|
Post by northwestman on May 20, 2005 7:40:25 GMT 1
Skinner..i suggest you tell your story to the Daily Mail a.s.a.p They are already running a story about this cop's 84 year old dad being done for driving at 38m.p.h. in a 30m.p.h. zone.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 20, 2005 11:33:13 GMT 1
I got 6 points and a £125 fine for doing 98mph on the M54 Quite right too.
|
|
|
Post by soupie on May 20, 2005 12:15:36 GMT 1
Gender: Posts: 441 Re: Speeding Cop gets off. « Reply #1 on: May 18th, 2005, 1:02pm » -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- If you'd listened to the news carefully, you would have heard expert police officers stating that having watched the video of the events (recorded by the police officer himself don't forget!) that noone stated that the driving was dangerous. There would appear to be a lack of guidance from West Mercia headquarters about any policies for road testing new vehicles - which a driver has to do to know the capabilities of that particular vehicle. It doesn't give out a very good message, I agree, but the person hearing the case was an experienced District Judge, who had weighed up all the evidence very carefully, and came to what he was in no doubt was the correct verdict. There is one law for the police and one for others - but only in very special circumstances, of which this was one. Complete Bollox!! At the end of the day, who says he is supposed to test a car to that extent anyway. Thats not his job. . Which part of my post exactly are you referring to? What I've said is all fact - what you've stated is your opinion. As many others on this Board have pointed out, because someone doesn't necessarily agree with your point of view doesn't mean to say that they are wrong. I said in my post that it doesn't send out a very good message, and West Merecia have responded already and have issued guidelines to stop this type of incident from happening again - or if it does happen, then there is little chance of the officer being acquitted. I stand by my original post therefore and say that in these circumstances, IN MY OPINION (deliberate use of capitals ), the correct verdict was reached. (Awaits backlash once again)
|
|
|
Post by GrizzlyShrew on May 20, 2005 12:50:38 GMT 1
Should be forced to risign his job I feel. Good piece in todays Star by Motoring Editor Sharon Walters & it ain't defending him.
|
|
|
Post by Pilch on May 20, 2005 12:57:45 GMT 1
if he was in a marked police car chasing a car on the m54 it would get called off long before it reached 159mph
and 130 on an A road and 80 in a built up area
he should have arranged with his manager frist before nipping out to break the limit
he should be sacked
|
|