Speeding On The M4 In Wiltshire !!!!

quote:

Originally posted by Steve G:

quote:

Originally posted by Nime:
I believe the officer was also driving at high speed in a built up area where the obligatory 30mph was (presumably) only for public consumption?

84mph in a 30mph limit.

Since the case was raised the force he works for have issued clearer instructions that officers should never break speed limits when familiarising themselves with vehicles or during unofficial training. Supposedly they've also said that officers should never exceed 120mph under any circumstances.

It surprised me how he initially got away with the excuse in the first place.
Imagine the scenario, youre in a ferari, after winning the lottery , you take it for a spin along the m6 at 1.00 in the morning, you put your foot down, eventually getting over 100mph, you are eventually stopped in your tracks by a bobby, you say to him, " I was just seeing how fast it would go "
Would your particular case got to a retrial? I do not think so.

quote:

Originally posted by andy c:
Nime,

It is quite correct that this case be re-opened, but under what circumstances would you allow an officer to find out what the max capability is of a vehicle, in order that this knowledge be available in case of a pursuit etc?

And before you bite my head off, I am not being defensive of this officers actions etc etc.

andy c!

How about a simulator?
It is imo a very poor excuse, I am still of the opinion that laws are only there to keep the common fella in check, for your bobby, people in power they can be bent to suit the circumstances.
Another thorn in my side are these high speed pursuits? what is the justifiable need for them?
apart from handing out kangaroo style justice when the car taking twoc smashes into a wall or lampost?

quote:

Originally posted by Steve G:

quote:

Originally posted by Nime:
Remember that the police themselves prosecuted him. Senior police officers are pursuing the matter again after a judge fumbled the ball.

Indeed, and this is what Daily Mail readers like Mick are missing. This prick was shopped by his colleagues after he showed them his home movie when playing with the new toy. I have friends who are fairly senior police officers and the word they're getting is that this was no one-off incident.

You only have to look at the guy to see he must have history, just that this time he has been unlucky!

quote:

Another thorn in my side are these high speed pursuits? what is the justifiable need for them?

I would suppose it depends upon the offence for which the occupants of the vehicle in question are required to answer for, wouldn't it? It would also depend upon what incident the police were responding to, wouldn't it?

Or perhaps there is no need to get to anything quickly?

andy c!

PS - befrore you come back with a retort please note my previous post re very stringent policies being in place re getting to jobs quickly/pursuits in my part of the world.

Andy c, this is no knee jerk response, if it is a genuine reason that the patrol car is on it's way to a life or death incident then fair enough, but tell me, how many are life and death? the vast amount of police drivers caught for speeding without valid excuse is increasing, and when it comes to the dealing with these drivers very few are prosecuted, indeed more get away with not even a caution which is wrong, I am sorry but if the police want the public to work with them that is not the way to go, it causes divisions, it causes anti police attitude, you know? i have heard guys say that if a bobby was lying on the floor having his or her head kicked in these people would do nothing but walk on by, because they say they are not better or worse than the civi.
On the subject of high speed pursuits, there is no justification for them, that is my opinion, it does not solve a thing, the problem has to be solved at source, ie giving these kids something to do, no it is not a do gooder response but a sensible one.
The insurance company pay up in the end if a vehicle is stolen, why kill someone for taking that vehicle? and also create more anti police attitude? im sorry but pursuits are an own goal imo.
Around my area we are lucky to see a bobby, yet they can assign three in cars with these camera safe vans, makes my blood boil.
On the subject of speed cameras the cover has been well and truly blown, they are not in place for safety they are for revenue for the police.
The other week in my local paper were two seperate stories that vindicated my reasoning on speed cameras.
One was with regard to one speed camera that was positioned in the path of a bus lane, it was thought that this camera was causing people to dangerously switch lanes because they thought the cameras were enforcing the bus lane.
The council came up with this solution, we can move the camera, now I thought that cameras were put in these places because there was a history of death or injury, so why move the camera?
Second instance, our local paper wanted to have the figures from the camera safety group regarding the amount of people caught speeding at each camera, the group refused, giving the reason that this could lead to people calculating where the " EMPTY " cameras were.
The paper is having to use the freedom of information act to get this information, so where is the point of witholding it? Also and more important, if these cameras are in place for safety reasons, imo they should all have film in, otherwise the reasoning is lost.
It then creates the " they're only used to make money " attitude, which to be honest, I would agree with, because they change people's behaviour for the distance the cameras are effective, but once through the camera zone the foot goes down.
To change peoples attitude to speed technology has to take a part, it cannot be impossible to create a system by which a car will only travel at the speed limit set for that particular area, I am thinking sat nav type systems that are linked in with the car engine.
A manufacturer has to be brought to book also, why create cars in the first place that can exceed 70 mph? should the manufacturers not be punished too? more revenue for the government, why have'nt they spotted the potential on this one? oh and also incase they forgot the REAL reason, it will save lives.

Life is so unfair!

Until you become a policeman...?

Contrary to what people may think I have no issues regarding enforcement so long as it is seen to be universal in consequence if you break it, sometimes the enforcers are no morally better than the joe public, which is my whole point, but they are favoured when it comes to when they are dealt with for breaking the law.
The case of the police driver who was caught speeding under direction from the superior officer that he was taking to a meeting, the only reason he was caught was because there had been a rta in the area, and their car was identified as being in the area at the time, and they were found to have been exceeding the limit, not because they were going to a life or death situation, but because the officer in charge was late for a meeting, I am sorry but this is totally out of order.
It is said " the law is an ass " I would agree, furthermore it only applies to a select few.