| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
m3tiko 
Really Senior Member II
Joined: 29-May-2005
Location: Braveheart Country..aka Pai
Status: Offline
Points: 1483
|
 Posted: 22-January-2006 at 18:04 |
|
So Livvy....what about the traffic cops doing what they do on the motorways? (Warp 9 speeds) Are you justifying their actions or is it because no speed cameras to catch them? Who's gonna clock them there? themselves?
I'm sure this a common practice not just up north but everywhere
|
 335d evolve 354bhp/742nm....M3 SEE YA!!
|
 |
|
Sponsored Links
|
|
|
livvy
Really Senior Member II
Joined: 12-November-2005
Status: Offline
Points: 745
|
Posted: 22-January-2006 at 18:13 |
 m3tiko wrote:
So Livvy....what about the traffic cops doing what they do on the motorways? (Warp 9 speeds) Are you justifying their actions or is it because no speed cameras to catch them? Who's gonna clock them there? themselves?
I'm sure this a common practice not just up north but everywhere |
It is difficult for you to know when they are using a legitimate exemption or not, because they don't have to use blue lights when using the exemptions. Also where you talk of them returning to base at speed, is it also a training base ? Because Police have an exemption from the speed limit for official training purposes. Where an officer is questioned about their use of exemptions they should be able to display that it is lawfully being used. Where there is no lawful reason to back up the use of the exemption then it is my view that they should be observing the limit like everyone else. The difficulty for us as the public driving in our cars observing the Police car driving at higher speeds, is that we are not aware of what purpose may be, we just observe them going faster than the limit. As I say, wherever they set off cameras they wil be sent a NIP & have to formally account for their use of the exemption. No exemption can then lead to prosecutions as does happen. And yes Police officers who have seen other officers speeding without a lawful exemption, have reported them & they have been prosecuted & convicted.
Edited by livvy
|
|
My views expressed are just that.
Mine & mine alone.
|
|
m3tiko
Really Senior Member II
Joined: 29-May-2005
Location: Braveheart Country..aka Pai
Status: Offline
Points: 1483
|
Posted: 22-January-2006 at 18:23 |
|
I see the point you're trying to make...and yes it could possibly be for training purposes. But I know this is not a training exercise, it's just the police exercising their powers.
Oh yeah...the depot is not for training AFAIK.
|
335d evolve 354bhp/742nm....M3 SEE YA!!
|
|
jamsieboi
Really Senior Member I
Joined: 04-January-2006
Location: York
Status: Offline
Points: 309
|
Posted: 22-January-2006 at 21:43 |
just been reading this topic.... took a while. the only thing i have to say on it and it might have already been said if the police are travelling at excessive speeds down the motorway without any sirens or lights are they not potentially a risk to other drivers for instance if you pull into the fast lane there is a high possibility that you may have miss judged there speed. this resulting in a potential collision.
also i have no problem with marked or unmarked cars, i understand there purpose and i am well aware of the risks should i break the rules. my problem is with jumped up police officers that insist on inspecting every inch of my car should i not reply to them "yes sir, no sir" all respect has gone!!!
|
|
|
|
livvy
Really Senior Member II
Joined: 12-November-2005
Status: Offline
Points: 745
|
Posted: 23-January-2006 at 01:35 |
jamsieboi wrote:
just been reading this topic.... took a while. the only thing i have to say on it and it might have already been said if the police are travelling at excessive speeds down the motorway without any sirens or lights are they not potentially a risk to other drivers for instance if you pull into the fast lane there is a high possibility that you may have miss judged there speed. this resulting in a potential collision.
also i have no problem with marked or unmarked cars, i understand there purpose and i am well aware of the risks should i break the rules. my problem is with jumped up police officers that insist on inspecting every inch of my car should i not reply to them "yes sir, no sir" all respect has gone!!! |
Any Police officer travelling at speed has to consider & plan for the potential adverse movement of other vehicles within their driving plans. The blue lights & two tones (whether on or not) or their exemptions from speed, do not absolve them of that responsibility. If they are going to travel at higher speeds without using the blue lights & two tones they would also need to display (if questioned) the sound operational need behind that decision. Their speed of course doesn't absolve any lane changer from first checking it is safe to do so as a legal requirement, but as said there is an onus on the Police driver to always consider & plan for the misjudegement of it by others.
Edited by livvy
|
|
My views expressed are just that.
Mine & mine alone.
|
|
Peter Fenwick
Bavarian-Board Contributor
Joined: 27-August-2003
Location: Lost somewhere in time...
Status: Offline
Points: 6484
|
Posted: 23-January-2006 at 05:08 |
dutch wrote:
In my experience with a clean licence & 104mph on a motorway (without any other adverse conditions) you are unlikely to get banned in most cases.
depending on where you live and your profession,!!
|
My sisters ex was caught doing over 100 on a dual carridgeway at 2 in the morning. He had no prior convictions, not even a police caution and he got a 30 day ban plus a £500 fine and a load of points when he got his license back. The ban would have been longer but he would have lost his job.
|
|
Entering an age of Austerity and now driving a Focus Diesel.
|
|
Peter Fenwick
Bavarian-Board Contributor
Joined: 27-August-2003
Location: Lost somewhere in time...
Status: Offline
Points: 6484
|
Posted: 23-January-2006 at 05:13 |
A mate of mine knows a guy who rides a powerful bike. Biker was out one day with a friend who happens to be a copper. They both get pulled by the Police doing over 90mph on a 60 road. They were about to get the book thrown at them until friend shows his warrant card and they are sent on their way. Now i don't have so much of a problem with the speed, it's the fact that in some cases the Police are getting away with things that we would be punished for.
|
|
Entering an age of Austerity and now driving a Focus Diesel.
|
|
livvy
Really Senior Member II
Joined: 12-November-2005
Status: Offline
Points: 745
|
Posted: 23-January-2006 at 10:41 |
Peter Fenwick wrote:
dutch wrote:
In my experience with a clean licence & 104mph on a motorway (without any other adverse conditions) you are unlikely to get banned in most cases.
depending on where you live and your profession,!!
|
My sisters ex was caught doing over 100 on a dual carridgeway at 2 in the morning. He had no prior convictions, not even a police caution and he got a 30 day ban plus a £500 fine and a load of points when he got his license back. The ban would have been longer but he would have lost his job. |
We've already covered this. Just look at motoring forums all over the internet & you will see many many cases of people doing in excess of 100 & not getting banned. On one of the many Traffic Police programmes that seem to be all the rage at the momment on TV a biker (not Police) was caught doing something like 120mph with a kid on the back of the bike. His punishment was 6 points and a fine.
|
|
My views expressed are just that.
Mine & mine alone.
|
|
livvy
Really Senior Member II
Joined: 12-November-2005
Status: Offline
Points: 745
|
Posted: 23-January-2006 at 10:43 |
Peter Fenwick wrote:
A mate of mine knows a guy who rides a powerful bike. Biker was out one day with a friend who happens to be a copper. They both get pulled by the Police doing over 90mph on a 60 road. They were about to get the book thrown at them until friend shows his warrant card and they are sent on their way. Now i don't have so much of a problem with the speed, it's the fact that in some cases the Police are getting away with things that we would be punished for.
|
Undoubtedly things like that will happen sometimes, because there are bad apples in all walks of life. But it's foolish on the part of the officer (they could lose their job) & it is most definitely wrong. We can of course also cite many cases where Police officers are prosecuted by their colleagues, including as was said earlier, even the head of GMP road policing.
Edited by livvy
|
|
My views expressed are just that.
Mine & mine alone.
|
|
Rhys
Moderator Group
Coffee addict...
Joined: 02-February-2003
Location: from the Latin locÄtiÅ
Status: Offline
Points: 10053
|
Posted: 23-January-2006 at 12:29 |
livvy wrote:
Peter Fenwick wrote:
A mate of mine knows a guy who rides a powerful bike. Biker was out one day with a friend who happens to be a copper. They both get pulled by the Police doing over 90mph on a 60 road. They were about to get the book thrown at them until friend shows his warrant card and they are sent on their way. Now i don't have so much of a problem with the speed, it's the fact that in some cases the Police are getting away with things that we would be punished for. |
Undoubtedly things like that will happen sometimes, because there are bad apples in all walks of life. But it's foolish on the part of the officer (they could lose their job) & it is most definitely wrong.We can of course also cite many cases where Police officers are prosecuted by their colleagues, including as was said earlier, even the head of GMP road policing. |
I've heard cases like this before, group of bikes traveling well over the limit, some 2up - followed by a jam rag (can't catch up) café up the road - all bikes lined up, riders munching away, jam rag driver says '..these your bikes lads?' one says hang on a mo - produces warrent card.. 'trainng excersize'.. 'Oh, ok.. nice bikes btw.' and drives off.
A couple of them were police, the rest weren't
|
|
V reg Rustbucket Merc C220 Cdi estate
J Reg Saab 900i 16v
'63 Ford Anglia 105e deluxe
R reg Honda PC50 moped..
No BMW as yet...
|
|
dutch
Really Senior Member I
Joined: 17-December-2005
Location: lakeside Essex
Status: Offline
Points: 438
|
Posted: 23-January-2006 at 16:55 |
|
local police driver caught and got off a large speeding fine because he had just taken delivery of his new v70 volvo and had to find out "what it was capeable of" im sure the courts would let me off if i came out with that ol chesnut. i'm sure you've already covered this somewhere livvy but if police want respect they have to earn it and be treated the same when found at fault.
|
|
e39,1200 bandit
cooper S, Z3 topazbleu
|
|
livvy
Really Senior Member II
Joined: 12-November-2005
Status: Offline
Points: 745
|
Posted: 23-January-2006 at 17:11 |
dutch wrote:
local police driver caught and got off a large speeding fine because he had just taken delivery of his new v70 volvo and had to find out "what it was capeable of" im sure the courts would let me off if i came out with that ol chesnut. i'm sure you've already covered this somewhere livvy but if police want respect they have to earn it and be treated the same when found at fault. |
You are not talking about the Milton case are you ? That wasn't a v70.
|
|
My views expressed are just that.
Mine & mine alone.
|
|
dutch
Really Senior Member I
Joined: 17-December-2005
Location: lakeside Essex
Status: Offline
Points: 438
|
Posted: 23-January-2006 at 17:14 |
|
irelevant livvy he still got off scot free.
|
|
e39,1200 bandit
cooper S, Z3 topazbleu
|
|
livvy
Really Senior Member II
Joined: 12-November-2005
Status: Offline
Points: 745
|
Posted: 23-January-2006 at 17:16 |
dutch wrote:
irelevant livvy he still got off scot free. |
Who did ? Milton ? That's because he was found not guilty at court. His colleagues shopped him , his colleagues prosecuted him, the CPS prosecuted him, the court aquitted him, the CPS have appealed, the appeal awaits.
Edited by livvy
|
|
My views expressed are just that.
Mine & mine alone.
|
|
dutch
Really Senior Member I
Joined: 17-December-2005
Location: lakeside Essex
Status: Offline
Points: 438
|
Posted: 23-January-2006 at 17:29 |
As well as reaching a speed of 159mph, Milton also managed to do 120 in a 60mph zone and 60 in a 30mph zone.
On seeing the film, these law-enforcing guys were perturbed enough by Milton's extra-curricular speeding to enquire of the Crown Prosecution Service as to whether Milton should be prosecuted. The CPS said he should be. He was. This week however, as we say, he walked free.
Milton's defence was that he was 'familiarising' himself with a new patrol car. He is after all a specialist police driver and needs to 'familiarise' himself with new vehicles. Of course he does. But surely, if Milton was officially familiarising himself with the car, then it would have been exactly that: official. Which means that his colleagues would never in a million years have sought to prosecute him.
Milton's lawyer, David Twigg, could not care less. He told Ludlow magistrates court that his client was not 'a recalcitrant schoolboy or even a rookie recruit driving for kicks or to impress a newly-acquired female companion.' He added that he 'should not need a note from teacher' to practise his driving.
perhaps a one off could be wrong!
|
|
e39,1200 bandit
cooper S, Z3 topazbleu
|
|
Nigel
Moderator Group
Joined: 09-November-2002
Status: Offline
Points: 6941
|
Posted: 23-January-2006 at 17:30 |
livvy wrote:
Peter Fenwick wrote:
A mate of mine knows a guy who rides a powerful bike. Biker was out one day with a friend who happens to be a copper. They both get pulled by the Police doing over 90mph on a 60 road. They were about to get the book thrown at them until friend shows his warrant card and they are sent on their way. Now i don't have so much of a problem with the speed, it's the fact that in some cases the Police are getting away with things that we would be punished for.
|
Undoubtedly things like that will happen sometimes, because there are bad apples in all walks of life. But it's foolish on the part of the officer (they could lose their job) & it is most definitely wrong.
We can of course also cite many cases where Police officers are prosecuted by their colleagues, including as was said earlier, even the head of GMP road policing.
|
If it matters, as far as I'm aware, the GMP bloke was done by west mids scamera partnership...talivan on a bridge, not a police patrol......not that having served with them I believe a traffic patrol would have acted any differently, because I don't believe they would.
A traffic patrol would still have reported him.
|
|
Best Wishes
Nigel
|
|
Nigel
Moderator Group
Joined: 09-November-2002
Status: Offline
Points: 6941
|
Posted: 23-January-2006 at 17:38 |
PC Mark Milton did not break the law...i'm afraid.
He would break West Mercia guidelines if it were to happen again
|
|
Best Wishes
Nigel
|
|
livvy
Really Senior Member II
Joined: 12-November-2005
Status: Offline
Points: 745
|
Posted: 23-January-2006 at 17:46 |
dutch wrote:
As well as reaching a speed of 159mph, Milton also managed to do 120 in a 60mph zone and 60 in a 30mph zone.
On seeing the film, these law-enforcing guys were perturbed enough by Milton's extra-curricular speeding to enquire of the Crown Prosecution Service as to whether Milton should be prosecuted. The CPS said he should be. He was. This week however, as we say, he walked free.
Milton's defence was that he was 'familiarising' himself with a new patrol car. He is after all a specialist police driver and needs to 'familiarise' himself with new vehicles. Of course he does. But surely, if Milton was officially familiarising himself with the car, then it would have been exactly that: official. Which means that his colleagues would never in a million years have sought to prosecute him.
Milton's lawyer, David Twigg, could not care less. He told Ludlow magistrates court that his client was not 'a recalcitrant schoolboy or even a rookie recruit driving for kicks or to impress a newly-acquired female companion.' He added that he 'should not need a note from teacher' to practise his driving.
perhaps a one off could be wrong! |
I have never said that I agreed with what he did. He was rightly prosecuted in my opinion. However he got off at the original court hearing with claiming a police purpose in that he was training. The difficulty is that a Police purpose was never defined in the statute. What is defined, from stated cases, is that training is a Police purpose. He said he was training by self familiarising with it, I say he wasn't. His colleagues say he wasn't. The CPS say he wasn't. To my mind training could only be done in the presence of another, someone qualified to instruct/assess/test that activity. What it hinged on at court was that the judge asked what the force's driving regulations said about self familiarising. The force had to admit that they didn't specifically mention that in the regs. The judge then ruled that because the regs didn't forbid it, that he was entitled to believe it was OK. The regs have since been amended to specifically forbid such behaviour along with a few other little loop holes that they thought others might be able to use in similar situations. An appeal was lodged by the CPS (I don't know on what grounds though.) You can't blame the Police for what he did & the fact that he got off. He got off on a loophole just as many of the public do as well. Without being able to prosecute him for excess speed, that means you have to look at other offences & there wasn't sufficient evidence to prosecute for them.
|
|
My views expressed are just that.
Mine & mine alone.
|
|
spokey
Bavarian-Board Contributor
Offensive and obnoxious tub of lard
Joined: 02-March-2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 1948
|
Posted: 23-January-2006 at 17:52 |
|
I wonder how many of his colleagues he has alienated now, by forcing
the closure of such a nice little loophole. I'm sure that if he hadn't
been so utterly beyond the pale, he would not have gone to court and
that little loophole would still be there for rank and file coppers
"familiarising" themselves with their cars.
I'm willing to put down a fiver that most people would like to indulge
in a bit of self-familiarisation with their cars, but we don't have the
loophole to start off with, do we? It is kind of one rule for us...
|
Ciao,
Spokey
|
|
livvy
Really Senior Member II
Joined: 12-November-2005
Status: Offline
Points: 745
|
Posted: 23-January-2006 at 17:56 |
spokey wrote:
I wonder how many of his colleagues he has alienated now, by forcing
the closure of such a nice little loophole. I'm sure that if he hadn't
been so utterly beyond the pale, he would not have gone to court and
that little loophole would still be there for rank and file coppers
"familiarising" themselves with their cars.
I'm willing to put down a fiver that most people would like to indulge
in a bit of self-familiarisation with their cars, but we don't have the
loophole to start off with, do we? It is kind of one rule for us...
|
Of course there is one rule for them & another for us.......in so much that the Police have an exemption from the speed limit & the public don't. I don't think his colleagues thought of it as a loophole. I think they were all aware that self familiarising was not training & never considered it was such. That is why they prosecuted him in the belief that nobody was going to wear that lame excuse. But they weren't banking on the ruling that happened.
|
|
My views expressed are just that.
Mine & mine alone.
|
|
WARNING! Unmarked Subaru on M23