Belatucadrus Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 Common sense reinstated well just this once.But Mr Milton's solicitor, David Twigg, said the ruling would have wide implications for the way police officers are trained.If it keeps idiots like this from feeling they have carte blanche to treat the public highway like the Nurburgring thank god for small mercies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andsome Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 I just couldn't believe it when he was let off at the trial. Thank goodness that there is some common sense left somewhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
r4may Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 I think he should have been banned from driving and a wacking great fine, just like any other motorist traveling at that speed.Testing a new car is NO excuse. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CurlyWhirly Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 I agree.Double standards and I don't expect it's the first time that a copper has got away with it either :angry: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Watchful Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 Good news. Common sense and justice prevailed in the end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thos Posted February 1, 2006 Report Share Posted February 1, 2006 Good news. Common sense and justice prevailed in the end.Hear Hear!150mph even on a clear road and over 80mph in a 30mph zone beggars belief.Thos. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belatucadrus Posted August 25, 2006 Author Report Share Posted August 25, 2006 Here we go again.Speeding PC discharged.Where one judge is capable of showing common sense in a clear open and shut case, it's depressingly easy to find a complete looney who'll find him guilty, but then let him off ! The Police Federation said they were "disappointed" with the verdict and would lodge an appeal. Yet another court case, which was entirely predictable and will no doubt cost the taxpayer an arm and a leg. Why is the judiciary so intent on letting this man flout the law and the police code of conduct. Are we looking at self employment for the bewigged crusties of this world ? The rule appears to be drive as fast as you like, during "testing" then find one of the many judges with chronic cerebral softening, or is it ossification ? Just avoid the speed cams. Gentlemen START YOUR ENGINES !Just don't be too surprised if you don't receive this kind of preferential treatment from the local beak. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catgate Posted August 25, 2006 Report Share Posted August 25, 2006 after describing him as the "creme de la creme" of police drivers. ...and yet he does not look like that, nor behave so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Besty Posted August 25, 2006 Report Share Posted August 25, 2006 Ok before i can make my comment was this at night were the roads crowded etc etc? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Belatucadrus Posted August 25, 2006 Author Report Share Posted August 25, 2006 Ok before i can make my comment was this at night were the roads crowded etc etc?You appear to be suggesting that the judgement call of some plod who fancies a burn up with a fast car supersedes both Law and the conduct guidelines laid down by his employers.The guidelines allow for officers to exceed limits, but never to drive at more than 120mph.He wasn't in hot pursuit and didn't break the applicable laws and regulations by a fraction, he shattered them. Thirty nine MPH above anything he could have possibly justified or been permitted. There are no safe conditions to do 159mph on a public highway and his belief that what he did was OK, despite all the contrary evidence would indicate his judgement is pretty worthless anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Besty Posted August 25, 2006 Report Share Posted August 25, 2006 It is better that the police officer knows the limitations of his car and if he has to push the car then so be it. What would be ideal is a disused airfield for police officers and security services etc to test their vehicles on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thos Posted August 25, 2006 Report Share Posted August 25, 2006 The fact is that he was guilty but discharged. Has there ever been a case where a motorist has been found guilty of driving at that dangerous speed on a public highway and yet discharged?I sense we haven't heard the last of this.Thos. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andsome Posted August 25, 2006 Report Share Posted August 25, 2006 He should be locked up. I don't give a damn what time of the day or night it was. Anyone driving on that motorway at that time could have glanced into the mirror, and seen him way back in the distance and pulled out to overtake, think it was safe to do so. Next instance this idiot could well have crashed into their rear end. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
catgate Posted August 25, 2006 Report Share Posted August 25, 2006 It seems to me that he has admitted his own negligence, folly and guilt by saying he was "getting used to the car". I should have thought that unless he was "used to the car" he should not have been driving even at the "permitted" 120m.p.h. on a motorway with other users. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andsome Posted August 25, 2006 Report Share Posted August 25, 2006 It seems to me that he has admitted his own negligence, folly and guilt by saying he was "getting used to the car". I should have thought that unless he was "used to the car" he should not have been driving even at the "permitted" 120m.p.h. on a motorway with other users.??????????????????????????????????????????????????? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dadyassa Posted August 25, 2006 Report Share Posted August 25, 2006 Why chase at all, just radio ahead and get the car followed when it passes by at a reasonable speed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djohn Posted August 25, 2006 Report Share Posted August 25, 2006 I think there is a lot more to this than we have been told. I can't really comment on it as I do not know the conditions under which he was testing the car. I can confirm they are superb drivers though as I used to train them! :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doug Posted August 25, 2006 Report Share Posted August 25, 2006 Didn't fully catch the news but I think he's been found guilty this time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Besty Posted August 26, 2006 Report Share Posted August 26, 2006 Im assuming this guy knew what he was doing alot more than you guys looking back on what he did and condoning it without even knowing all the facts. I basically got flamed for asking the facts before making my comment. At the end of the day this guy's job is to drive fast and safely. Young joyriders do it every day and they don't know what they are doing so I am personally happy that there are police officers able to drive quickly and proficiantly such as this man. P.s anyone know what sort of car it was im assuming either a evo or the mondeo st220 or some model like it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andsome Posted August 26, 2006 Report Share Posted August 26, 2006 Didn't fully catch the news but I think he's been found guilty this time.He was found guily and given a conditionable dischargeIm assuming this guy knew what he was doing alot more than you guys looking back on what he did and condoning it without even knowing all the facts. I basically got flamed for asking the facts before making my comment. At the end of the day this guy's job is to drive fast and safely. Young joyriders do it every day and they don't know what they are doing so I am personally happy that there are police officers able to drive quickly and proficiantly such as this man. P.s anyone know what sort of car it was im assuming either a evo or the mondeo st220 or some model like it?I think we all appreciate the fact that at times the police may need to drive fast. In this instance he was not in pursuit of a criminal. He was driving at a criminal speed on a public road. Tell me how would you feel if your family had been on that road, and the driver had looked in his/her mirror, seen him way behind and pulled out to overtake, and had that idiot pile into the back of them and kill them, would you think that that was OK? The whole point is that he was not on official duty driving as part of his job at that time. He should be disqualified and sacked, the same as anyone else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thos Posted August 26, 2006 Report Share Posted August 26, 2006 Im assuming this guy knew what he was doing alot more than you guys looking back on what he did and condoning it without even knowing all the facts. I basically got flamed for asking the facts before making my comment. At the end of the day this guy's job is to drive fast and safely. Young joyriders do it every day and they don't know what they are doing so I am personally happy that there are police officers able to drive quickly and proficiantly such as this man. P.s anyone know what sort of car it was im assuming either a evo or the mondeo st220 or some model like it?All of the facts are in the public domain. He has been found guilty and after all the hearings the judge decided he "has suffered enough" and gave him a conditional discharge.I disagree strongly and, for a change perhaps, think andsome is absolutely right. He should have a lengthy ban and stopped from police road duties for life. (Not andsome, the police officer)Thos. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rong Posted August 26, 2006 Report Share Posted August 26, 2006 I think it was a Vauxhall can't remember the model, but read somewhere it was on the limits of the car which makes it even worse Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djohn Posted August 26, 2006 Report Share Posted August 26, 2006 Difficult to answer this one. The car in front who pulls out to overtake is most likely to be the one at fault as the driver did not make correct observation, even allowing for the speed of the car coming from the rear at great speed. The car travelling at high speed with a class 1 police driver does not have an idiot at the wheel and he would have anticipated the actions of the driver in front of him to the extent he could allow for that drivers careless observation. I don't mean to sound flippant over this, but they are highly skilled drivers far ahead of the 'above average' motorist to the extent you just can't compare the two in the same breath. I think the media is also blowing this out of proportion and I'm sure that at the times he was driving at very high speed the roads were empty. I would think he slowed down quite some amount when other road traffic was in his ‘driving zone’. Don't forget most of the high speed shown as an average was not of the whole trip, but a portion of that driven on a clear motorway. 30 MPH zone! I'm sure many areas have one of these where a section of road is at the maximum national speed limit then dro[ps to 30 MPh for a couple of hundred yards then back to maximum allowed. We must stick to the speed limit and for good reason. Not because that section of road is dangerous to all drivers but because the traffic law must allow for the lowest common denominator, us the average motorist in the average car.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rong Posted August 26, 2006 Report Share Posted August 26, 2006 If you go to the safer roads web sight you will find that according to them it is worse or as bat driving fast at night and the time of day is not a legitimate reason to get away with speeding. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djohn Posted August 26, 2006 Report Share Posted August 26, 2006 Hello rong. :) I didn't mention time of day or night as I have not read much about this incident. Yes, it is far more dangerous to drive in poor lighting conditions than good ones, no matter what the time of day. I'm not defending what has happened, just trying to keep it in proportion. Some years back I took part in the disabled driver of the year comp for the whole of Britain. Came second in my section/area due to over confidence in the morning part of the test then due to not feeling well in the afternoon.There was no allowance for the fact I was disabled, or on medication. My afternoon driving test was a 3 hour course with one 10 minute stop. I had to drive to the same high standard as the chap examining me could drive. I’m mentioning this for one reason only. I was on a section of dual carriageway, maximum national speed limit and approaching a car in front travelling at a steady 65 MPH. I took my time overtaking as the road was clear apart from the car I was passing and I kept my needle on 75 MPH until I had passed and pulled back into lane 1.Yes, it was a 70 limit but I knew the class 1 driver at the side of me would expect me to exceed this limit to overtake. I was correct but underestimated his judgement as he felt I should have increased to 80/85 to clear the obstruction as quickly and safely as possible. Overtaking, even on a 2 or 3 lane carriageway is one of the most dangerous manoeuvres one can do, it should be completed in the quickest safest possible timeframe, while at all times driving with due care and consideration for other road users. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.