Bluie

Have to say i think it is complete bollox why he got away with it.

Judges statement is more like whos ar$e he is creaming

Jerome

All I can say on this, is that the copper must be in the same lodge as the judge.

Spoon

It's never done me any harm in the past, great stretch, T4's love it!

2 lanes are plenty anyway. 3's being greedy unless you have a bike after you needing all 3 on the curvy bits.

Chris5-0

Why sack him? Why wish that on anyone, you don't go on about sacking other workers when they get caught speeding? Why here?

One rule for one and one for us? It's true! An ordinary member of the public gets involved in a scuffle with no previous criminal convictions and will receive a caution, a cop does it and he will be charged, convicted AND sacked because we shouldn't do that sort of thing.

Do i think he should have been speeding? I don't know the full facts, as neither, it seems, do many on this thread, have we decided how fast he was going yey? 60 in a 30m 86 in a 30? Odd how the numbers are so precise, could it be journalistic licence?

Not defending him, if he was silly enough to do these speeds when not responding to a job then i believe he should be held to account. Not my (or the forces) fault he got off is it, its the judge, or are you all seriously suggesting there is some kind of funny business here, brown envelopes changing hands etc? If you are then you are a more foolish bunch than previously thought. Do you think it's finished with there? His forces complaints and discipline department will no doubt now be all over this and what they can do will make a ban look easy. You really do not know much about what we do do you? Many here read the papers and jump on the nearest bandsing by in order to take the moral high ground cus you were done doing 45 in a 30 and got 3 points!

If he is an advanced and pursuit trained driver then these speeds are nothing for him, advanced drivers will drive these speeds everyday as part of their duties. And do you really think you are told everything that goes on in police work? I can think of reasons why he would be doing what he was doing and in no way would i be allowed to tell you all what it was.

Is it so abhorrent to some here that we are able to do things others cannot on the roads? Do you resent it that much? Or would you prefer us to be castrated by procedure and unable to do our job, you think crime is bad now imagine what would happen then.

May as well be whistling in the wind here i know but when Daily Sport esque threads start appearing on here shouting for blood its annoys me (and no doubt others who work tirelessly behind the scenes trying to keep you and your loved ones safe without so much as a thank you!)

Rant over, flame suit on!!!!!!

captain ted

Another vote for David Wallis here.

On the Police driving course, you are told to drive as fast as you can and are exempt from speed limits.

This then makes you a better driver at low speeds.

Like with everything in life, the more you do things, the better you get.

Imagine watching your car speed away in front of your eyes with a police car following.
You would then be glad that the copper had been practicing on quiet roads in the middle of the night instead of finding a layby to kip in.

ITS WHAT THEY DO!

bluto22b

Right sonny, and what if I was to step into the road from the footpath whilst you were hurtling along at this speed? Yes thats right, one splattered Bluto all over your bonnet and windscreen.

NO EXCUSES

craig5

84 in a 30 he's lucky in does not live in n-wales my wife has had a ticket for doing 33 mph and got hit with a 60 pound fine and 3 points

Tim-Grove

You can’t blame people for saying sack him as he’s most probably handed out speeding tickets for a hell of a lot less than the speed he was travailing at. And the thing is, if he’s a traffic cop it’s his job to promote safe driving and make sure the pubic adhere to driving laws, not recklessly break the very laws he is employed to enforce. So really it should be a sackable offence. If I was caught fiddling my electricity meter I would get the sack and lose my pension, where as Jo public would probably get a slap on the wrists and be made to pay the outstanding amount back.

cookstar

iTrader: (6)

If it is in the wee hours of the morning, i have always said the onus is on the pedestrian to LOOK before crossing a road. People should take a little bit more responsability for their own actions AS WELL as blaming others.

Not condoning stupid speeds in stupid places, just dont like blanket blame on drivers.

Redkop

Shropshire Star Report and Full Story from last night

mart360

basically its V V to you all,,,,

the judge is hardly going to do anything, as it would publically undermine the bib.. now we cant have that now can we!!!

all it does is make joe public less likley to support them in the event that they need any assistance.

dont get me wrong, i,m not anti bib, but for all then spin they put on judgement tact - diplomacy and creating relationships/ partnerships, i wouldnt let them loose in modern business!!!

agreed, they take on elements of society that none of us would like to meet, but some of them forget that there are many ordinary people out there who arnt statistics, have real needs and fears, and want support when needed, not targets, cameras, graded incedents. stations that close at 6pm..

unfortunatly its not the rank and file,s fault, its the upper echelons, with there targets and agendas.. that forgets one very important point.....

we pay your wages!!!!

it wont be long before we have elected chief constables, who get ther jobs on performance and achievement... and wont that shake a few branches...


M

ThrustSSC

At the end of the day, he was only doing what he was trained to do, in accordance with his force's procedures. He took advantage of both of those, and who among us wouldn't have done the same in the circumstances?

My gripe is that his force's procedures let him do that on his first time out in a new car, of a type he has not driven before, on the public road, with someone else in the vehicle, at night. He should have tested its limits solo, on a track, in daylight, before risking finding the limits at an 'inappropriate moment' resulting in likely fatalities.

It is to the credit of some of his colleagues that this prosecution was brought. It is a matter of personal opinion as to whether he should have been convicted. IMHO it is beyond doubt that the force's procedures and training are fundamentally flawed in such an obvious way that the blame should be borne all the way up to the top. I shall be writing to this officer's Chief Constable this evening calling for his/her resignation, and I encourage you to do the same!

By the way, ThrustSSC (I was a member of the team) does 772mph with sufficient safety in the right place - on the Black Rock Desert, Nevada, not the M54!

stockcar

know the local force policy on driver training (get a few traffic bods and their cars in for service!!)..................
there opinion when training is to obey all roundels at ALL times, however when a national speed limit is entered then drive at a speed the conditions allow.............basically flat out if its "safe"..............none of this 84 in a 30 crap!!!

Edmondo

Personally - 84 in a 30 - should be well prosecuted but empty motorway at 3am....As long as the conditions were right then no problem...BUT IT SHOULD WORK BOTH WAYS

BuRR

SPIAL?

Danny B

Never mind "what if", the fact is no one got hurt and all the poor bloke wanted to do was test out his car on a quiet stretch of road whilst 99% of the public and other road users were tucked up in bed.
I *really* cannot see amything wrong with it whatsoever, anyone would think he did this during the rush hour.

RB170

I can't say I'm surprised by Chris5-0's reaction to this thread but Chris what else do you expect ? Do you want us to say "No way!! let him get away with it" when a lot of us have been crimilised because we were 5 mph over the speed limit

Even you have to say that from an outsiders view point this looks more than a little suspicious and the fact that he may be an advanced driver should be taken into consideration but that shouldn't mean that he gets away scott free. Even if he does get punished by an internal investigation he's still not going to be classed as a criminal is he.

And ofcourse we don't know much about what you do, I work in IT for a bank do you know much about what I do? I'm pretty sure though that if the guy was doing this for some other reason than having a jolly we wouldn't even have heard about it.

To say the Police get little or no thanks is bollocks the problem is that they appear to spend more time making sure I or my wife, who is an advanced pursuit driver and recently got 3 points for doing 74 on the M4, do not stray over the speed limit than actually investigating and resolvong real crimes.
This may not be the case but from the posts on this bbs and my own personal experience it would appear that it is.

Now please don't misunderstand me I'm not anti police infact I have several members of my family in the force it's just that the priorities are all wrong I mean when was the last time anyone saw a Bobby on the beat ?

^Qwerty^

I don't have issue with the speeds he was doing; no doubt he made the call that it was safe to do so under the conditions.

Just wish the same courtesy was applied to the general public!

I will continue to drive as I always have done, and at speeds that ‘I’ think are suitable for the conditions. One day, no doubt I’ll get zapped by a Scamera Van, rather than get pulled over by a traffic plod, who on all but one occasion have been complimentary about my driving or riding; that day is likely to be the day I get banned.

Bar the one occasion mentioned above (he needed help with his interpersonal skills, so I got arsey), I have nothing but admiration for the driving or riding skills displayed by the majority of traffic police. If you spend time with some of them (i.e. IAM or RoSPA training) you’ll know what I mean.

Also, I’d be inclined to file this little story away, so when you do get caught doing 110-120mph on a deserted motorway in the middle of the night, there is a vague hope that it might help your cause.

For those that have done silly speeds, you’ll know there is a vast difference between 120mph and 160mph

Suresh

Not sure about that. From the evidence presented and accepted in court today I would suggest a copper in such a situation should enter a plea that they were testing their self-defence skills...

Suresh

P.S. On the whole I'm a big fan of the police, but not when they take the p1ss like in this case.

Mr Sympathy

If police feel the need to test the outright capabilities of their cars they do it like responsible drivers here do, they go to a track day or airfield and test it to the limit where the risk of injury is greatly lessened.

Anyone who takes risks in pursuit of their legitimate course of work accepts those risks and the penalties that go with it but message is from this guy in this case is tick a few boxes and that doesnt apply.

He was lucky, the public he endangered were lucky, at 60 mph (VASCAR calibrated) in a 30mph zone we should be thankful to his tyre suppliers for not burning out not for his idioitic mindless extravagance being not caught out.

The magistrate who presided over this case should be removed and it should be taken to a jury trial. Remember this he now knows the capability of the car in the dark, dry deserted roads of Telford, the M54 and Shropshire at night should any crime happen then. He will of course be totally clueless should other cars be around, if it rains, if the sun comes up or if he strays outside the area, now was the risk worth it?

BuRR

Hey - don't blame us all for this guy's actions!

I've not driven a police car in 4 years!!!!!!

I do, however, sometimes drive down this private road a lot of people on here tend to "play" on..... maybe this police officer should have tested his Vectra out on there? He would have been a "good lad" then and would have had more support maybe?

I don't have an opinion on this. I'm sure I got zapped @ 36 in a 30 last weekend. If anything, I'm more pissed off about that.

p1doc

so if a professional rally/formula 1 driver had a new car and tested it with a friend in the passenger seat that would be ok as well i somehow think that driverwould be banned immediately,huge fine and likely a jail sentence but if you are a policeman not on a call you can blast along at whatever speedyou want double standards i think no matter how you look at it.if he had clipped someone at 84 in a 30 the pedestrian would not have had a chance to move at those speeds

martin

Stueyb

But the fact is that in that capacity, he was to all effects a "normal" advanced road user. Now say I had extensive training to the same level and I got caught, would I be let off as being the "creme de la creme" by some duffer of a judge who was prob more bothered about what was for tea?. End of the day its the old boys club coming out to play , plain and simple. Hell if i did that id prolly end up sharing a cell with big bubba the *** rapist. He was a civilian and should actually have been treated as one, which he obviously wasn't. It does go to show one rule for them, one for us, the plebs that actually pony up to buy our cars rather than rag the **** out of someone elses and pay the police to speed all day, be rude and drink lots of tea.

Mr.M

Advanced driver or not. At 159 mph a blow out of a tyre could have caused a serious if not fatal accident. At those sort of speeds no amount of experience or qualifications could predict the behavior of a car.

I see it as completely irresponsible of the mag not to have given him a ban.

He is a disgrace to the police force. full stop!

Vegescoob

Imo, yes he was capable of driving at these speeds, even in 30 limits.
As are many, not just Police drivers.
The important question, as discussed on a previous thread, is why was he prosecuted?
What you all should focus on is the fact that he was found not guilty by a Magistrate.
So those who brought the prosecution have egg on their faces and the public, certainly those here, are bewildered.
The "Establishment", as evidenced by the Home Secretary's speech today to the Police Federation are concerned to keep the Police "on side", fearing that in the not to distant future they will need the maximum support from the Police.

Mr.M

I suggest that those who feel strongly regarding the behavior of this officer whilst performing his civil duties should email the Independant Police Complaints Commission.

enquiries@ipcc.gsi.gov.uk

http://www.ipcc.gov.uk/index/contact_us.htm

Mungo

The "highly trained" driver defence is a bit of a daft one for the police to use. Surely the WRC drivers can use that in future when they get done in South Wales?

dpb

cant see why he had to be doing 86 in a 30 at night with no call........plain outrageous

hades

stockcar - I was under the impression (but may be wrong) that your comment constitutes police policy in most/all areas - i.e. suitably trained drivers can speed (conditions, circumstances etc permitting) in 60/70 limits, but not in 30s/40s etc - unless responding to emergencies. If this is the case, and the guy was on duty, high speed on an empty motorway within police policy is fair game, 84 in a 30 without good reason is massively outside policy as well as illegal, and so should be dealt with the same as anyone else committing a similar offence.

jjones

you damn well know that people who come here boasting of tales, such as this, get told in no uncertain terms they are ****wits.

every generation that passes has less and less respect for the police. i wonder why.