Visit to Police Station. Advice please...
Discussion
The flip side is that my local police were brilliant when I was burgled last year; professional, courteous and genuine - couldn't fault them.
As variomatic says, there will be rotten apples in there as in any profession. The problem is that the ramifications of those bad apples' actions for members of public can have far-reaching consequences when emotion and abuse of power come into play.
As variomatic says, there will be rotten apples in there as in any profession. The problem is that the ramifications of those bad apples' actions for members of public can have far-reaching consequences when emotion and abuse of power come into play.
EskimoArapaho said:
Got to admit that I thought an s59 required the transgression to be observed by a policeman/woman, it requiring a trained mind to form an opinion. It's a bit alarming to find out that Joe Public's opinion is all that's needed.
S59RTA said:
A constable in uniform shall also have the powers set out in subsection (3) where he has reasonable grounds for believing that a motor vehicle has been used on any occasion in a manner falling within subsection (1).
A credible witness is enough.Variomatic said:
I'm not aware of anyone on PH who claims that sort of thing never happens at all. Of course it does because no screening system is perfect so you'll always get some bad eggs.
On the other hand, there are several people on here who keep insisting that sort of thing is the norm for policing, which it absolutely is NOT.
As for the "BMW case above", even on the face of the (undoubtedly slanted) Daily Wail report, the guy deserved to be pulled up. Sounding a horn like that is, in and of itself, an aggressive act - it's there to warn of danger, not to rebuke people.
Saying it's "instinctive for a train driver who doesn't have a brake" is absolute bull - if that was the case he would still have been sounding his horn as he plowed into the back of them having released the dead-mans handle / steering wheel as his instincts had been trained to do.
He was doing what far too many drivers to and allowing his annoyance at their (perfectly reasonable in the circumstances) driving get the better of him in an aggressive way.
It's only a shame they didn't think to go for one of the more appropriate charges I suggested above.
Or, they could simply have given him a ticking off and let him go, rather than dragging the matter to court which has the potential to ruin his life.On the other hand, there are several people on here who keep insisting that sort of thing is the norm for policing, which it absolutely is NOT.
As for the "BMW case above", even on the face of the (undoubtedly slanted) Daily Wail report, the guy deserved to be pulled up. Sounding a horn like that is, in and of itself, an aggressive act - it's there to warn of danger, not to rebuke people.
Saying it's "instinctive for a train driver who doesn't have a brake" is absolute bull - if that was the case he would still have been sounding his horn as he plowed into the back of them having released the dead-mans handle / steering wheel as his instincts had been trained to do.
He was doing what far too many drivers to and allowing his annoyance at their (perfectly reasonable in the circumstances) driving get the better of him in an aggressive way.
It's only a shame they didn't think to go for one of the more appropriate charges I suggested above.
The police seem happy enough to do this in burglary and assault cases, why not motoring matters?
Bigends said:
V8LM said:
A credible witness is enough.
Designed for a group of neighbours/residents giving evidence of nuisance behaviour rather than road traffic offences.Thinking about the horn tooting BMW driving Train Driver case, the campaign against speeding has sought to make it as socially unacceptable as drink driving. It's about changing attitudes, behaviour and possibly pursuance of a political agenda.
If police officers don't face any comeback for making false allegations and statements that get as far as being dropped by the CPS as the evidence doesn't stack up, what will make officers that make such accusations alter their behaviour?
If police officers don't face any comeback for making false allegations and statements that get as far as being dropped by the CPS as the evidence doesn't stack up, what will make officers that make such accusations alter their behaviour?
Mk3Spitfire said:
What are you talking about?
Minor assaults and theft - they often just "speak to" the perpetrator and drop the matter.Ask any shop owner who loses thousands of pounds to shoplifters. Waste of time apprehending them, the police aren't remotely interested. Hence why they all participate in "civil recovery schemes" to get these people taken to court privately.
The police as a whole are failing to protect us as a society. They are picking and choosing the laws they wish to enforce, and additionally (as in the S59 situation) they are abusing powers they have been given to suit their own agenda.
carinaman said:
Thinking about the horn tooting BMW driving Train Driver case, the campaign against speeding has sought to make it as socially unacceptable as drink driving. It's about changing attitudes, behaviour and possibly pursuance of a political agenda.
If police officers don't face any comeback for making false allegations and statements that get as far as being dropped by the CPS as the evidence doesn't stack up, what will make officers that make such accusations alter their behaviour?
Nothing will, because it is abundantly clear that it is seen within the police as being acceptable behaviour. Otherwise, when their senior officers become aware of such behaviour, they'd do something about it. Instead, it is swept under the carpet.If police officers don't face any comeback for making false allegations and statements that get as far as being dropped by the CPS as the evidence doesn't stack up, what will make officers that make such accusations alter their behaviour?
zarjaz1991 said:
Or, they could simply have given him a ticking off and let him go, rather than dragging the matter to court which has the potential to ruin his life.
The police seem happy enough to do this in burglary and assault cases, why not motoring matters?
They could have, but we have no idea how he reacted to them speaking to him other than his / the Wail's version. He could have been standing there, physically calm (so cctv wouldn't show anything) while telling them to fThe police seem happy enough to do this in burglary and assault cases, why not motoring matters?
k off before he ran them over for all we know. We DO know that after the PC went to have a word her partner deemed it necessary at some point to join her, which does suggest he wasn't taking his b
king like a good little miscreant.As for burglaries and assaults not going to court, you'll find tat if there's evidence then that's generally down the the CPS, not the police, who are an entirely different organisation staffed by lawyers not policemen. But don't let that ruin your stereotypes, eh?
Edited by Variomatic on Monday 29th December 11:53
zarjaz1991 said:
Minor assaults and theft - they often just "speak to" the perpetrator and drop the matter.
Ask any shop owner who loses thousands of pounds to shoplifters. Waste of time apprehending them, the police aren't remotely interested. Hence why they all participate in "civil recovery schemes" to get these people taken to court privately.
The police as a whole are failing to protect us as a society. They are picking and choosing the laws they wish to enforce, and additionally (as in the S59 situation) they are abusing powers they have been given to suit their own agenda.
Strange. Just yesterday I dealt with a shoplifter. Detained by a well known store. Arrested and searched and found to be in possession of stolen items from other shops. Colleagues attended, visited other shops (unaware they were victims) and informed them. Goods returned. Shoplifter charged to court. Any allegation of an offence has to be dealt with. There are less sever disposal methods such as YRD etc, but all are outcomed. Police are duty bound to record and investigate. Assaults possibly even more so, even when there is no complaint forthcoming from the IP. Ask any shop owner who loses thousands of pounds to shoplifters. Waste of time apprehending them, the police aren't remotely interested. Hence why they all participate in "civil recovery schemes" to get these people taken to court privately.
The police as a whole are failing to protect us as a society. They are picking and choosing the laws they wish to enforce, and additionally (as in the S59 situation) they are abusing powers they have been given to suit their own agenda.
Bigends would be all over them if they failed to record, and supervisors all over them if they failed to investigate.
Only time they won't is when there is clear evidence that the crime has not been committed.
zarjaz1991 said:
That case is not dissimilar to what happened to me, in terms of procedure.
I was hauled to court for doing a U turn in a pelican crossing. Due care and attention charge. Only one problem....my U turn was actually several hundred yards further down the road and in a perfectly safe position. I was being "punished" by a group of officers for successfully having one of their colleagues reprimanded following a complaint.
My case went to court but was thrown out at that stage, at which point the officer who had been due to give evidence against me, threatened me in the corridor outside the court.
This officer was presumably quite prepared to perjure himself in court to give false evidence about the location of the U turn. I never did find out why the case was dropped, perhaps he chickened out at the last minute, I don't know.
According to many on PH, this sort of behaviour, and the behaviour in the BMW case above, simply doesn't occur in the police service at all.
Following my experiences I will never, ever trust the police again. Some if them are little more than criminals in uniform. I appreciate that many are not like that, but as an ordinary member of the public, I have absolutely no way of telling which are which, and they have infinitely more powers to enforce their will on me than I do.
So,the only reason it went anywhere is because you were being snotty and righteous when pulled. Yes that officer shouldn't have lied but I bet if I was pulled and I had listened and been polite I would have been let go and nothing else done or said.I was hauled to court for doing a U turn in a pelican crossing. Due care and attention charge. Only one problem....my U turn was actually several hundred yards further down the road and in a perfectly safe position. I was being "punished" by a group of officers for successfully having one of their colleagues reprimanded following a complaint.
My case went to court but was thrown out at that stage, at which point the officer who had been due to give evidence against me, threatened me in the corridor outside the court.
This officer was presumably quite prepared to perjure himself in court to give false evidence about the location of the U turn. I never did find out why the case was dropped, perhaps he chickened out at the last minute, I don't know.
According to many on PH, this sort of behaviour, and the behaviour in the BMW case above, simply doesn't occur in the police service at all.
Following my experiences I will never, ever trust the police again. Some if them are little more than criminals in uniform. I appreciate that many are not like that, but as an ordinary member of the public, I have absolutely no way of telling which are which, and they have infinitely more powers to enforce their will on me than I do.
So now because of that incident, every time you are pulled or deal with the police you will go straight on the offensive. Leading to them not wanting to help you, doing you anything they can (because of you being a snotty a
hole) and the cycle begins again of you coming on here and saying police are st and they are all out to get you etc. Etc. Eclassy. Etc.How about you learn from this, most police are good, most work bloody hard, next time you're pulled respond politely when spoken too and you will be sent on your way.
Variomatic said:
As for the "BMW case above", even on the face of the (undoubtedly slanted) Daily Wail report, the guy deserved to be pulled up. Sounding a horn like that is, in and of itself, an aggressive act - it's there to warn of danger, not to rebuke people.
He was doing what far too many drivers to and allowing his annoyance at their (perfectly reasonable in the circumstances) driving get the better of him in an aggressive way.
It's only a shame they didn't think to go for one of the more appropriate charges I suggested above.
Arrested and charged for beeping your horn is a complete misuse/abuse of power. A ticket at most if you encounterban overzealous copper. If the BMW man had been smart and got out his camera and started recording, I am sure he wouldnt have had this much trouble. He was doing what far too many drivers to and allowing his annoyance at their (perfectly reasonable in the circumstances) driving get the better of him in an aggressive way.
It's only a shame they didn't think to go for one of the more appropriate charges I suggested above.
The same clowns who tell us the man in the BMW committed an aggressive crime of beeping his horn and deserved to be arrested and hauled before the courts, and the OP deserved an s59 for not respecting the remembrance day procession are the same ones who told me the man in the picture below committed no crime as he only wanted a chat.
Eclassy said:
Arrested and charged for beeping your horn is a complete misuse/abuse of power. A ticket at most if you encounterban overzealous copper. If the BMW man had been smart and got out his camera and started recording, I am sure he wouldnt have had this much trouble.
The same clowns who tell us the man in the BMW committed an aggressive crime of beeping his horn and deserved to be arrested and hauled before the courts, and the OP deserved an s59 for not respecting the remembrance day procession are the same ones who told me the man in the picture below committed no crime as he only wanted a chat.
The same ones? Well at least they're keeping busy.The same clowns who tell us the man in the BMW committed an aggressive crime of beeping his horn and deserved to be arrested and hauled before the courts, and the OP deserved an s59 for not respecting the remembrance day procession are the same ones who told me the man in the picture below committed no crime as he only wanted a chat.
Eclassy said:
Arrested and charged for beeping your horn is a complete misuse/abuse of power. A ticket at most if you encounterban overzealous copper.
And if he refused the fixed penalty? Then you go to court. Besides which, a FP is at the discretion of the officer at the time - be enough of an asshole and you can find yourself straight into court.Eclassy said:
The same clowns who tell us the man in the BMW committed an aggressive crime of beeping his horn and deserved to be arrested and hauled before the courts, and the OP deserved an s59 for not respecting the remembrance day procession are the same ones who told me the man in the picture below committed no crime as he only wanted a chat.
The man in the BMW very likely did deserve to face a penalty. Whether that should have been a caution / bking, an FP or court depends entirely on his attitude to the fact that he'd brken the law - which he had done by sounding the horn of a presumably stationary (after sharp braking from low speed and not hitting the van that stopped in front of him) vehicle.The Op, from his version, probably didn't deserve a S59 notice but if, for any reason, pressure was brought to deal with it that way then the law (NOT made by the police) doesn't allow for any way to avoid it. That's a failure of the legislation, which I'm ashamed to say was created by a labour government, not a failure of the police.
As for your picture, I have absolutely no idea what your'e wibbling about with that one.
Eclassy said:
ZarZar you will never win with this lot. In their world there is no police corruption and abuse of power.
Where has anyone said that? Please feel free to quote someone on here. Eclassy said:
They are never objective and gang up on anyone who doesnt give a glowing tribute of the police.
There's a world of difference between people having legitimate concerns and bad experiences vs people who make sweeping, incorrect statements. What appears to be happening is those with real world experience are providing you with a more realistic reality, one in which you disagree with so you frame it as "ganging-up" rather than accepting your own views may need adjusting.
It's easy to put others into the wrong to protect your own views and ego.
Eclassy said:
The same clowns who tell us the man in the BMW committed an aggressive crime of beeping his horn and deserved to be arrested and hauled before the courts, and the OP deserved an s59 for not respecting the remembrance day procession are the same ones who told me the man in the picture below committed no crime as he only wanted a chat.
This again? This is why you're so agenda-driven. You can't accept your total non-event isn't a crime. Ironically you're critical of action of minor incidents, and in the same sentence think something should have occurred with yours. Which is it?
Variomatic said:
As for your picture, I have absolutely no idea what your'e wibbling about with that one.
Basically, he got in a dispute with someone and then drove after him. The someone stopped, approached his car and knocked on his window, which was filmed. Eclassy reported this to the police and who said there were no crime committed. He came on to the forum with that video looking for people to tell him what he wanted to hear. Since he was told it didn't appear to be a crime, he frequently mentions about 50 anti-police experiences / anecdotes he conveniently has on-tap, coincidentally usually relating to each specific topic, directly involving him and / or and "friends". 
La Liga said:
Basically, he got in a dispute with someone, drove after him. The someone stopped, approached his car and knocked on the window, which was filmed. Eclassy reported this to the police and decided not to treat it as a major incident and retained some sort of perspective.
You are not unlike the police I have met. It seems a prerequisite of the job is being able to misrepresent and outrightly lie. The true story goes something like
I went to a property to film a person carrying out illegal activity to use as evidence in an upcoming court case.
Person took offence and attempted to enter my car and threatned me with a metal bar.
I drove off and person jumped in their car and drove after me, jumping a red light and driving in a bus lane to get ahead of me
I pick up camera amd start filming
Person then blocks me off by parking across the main road thereby causing me and those travelling behind me to come to a halt and also blocking traffic travelling in the opposite direction
Person jumps out of car, marches menacingly towards me and starts banging on my window until he realises he is being recorded
Person drives off and goes around roundabout to get behind me and tries to swipe me off the road at traffic lights ahead (this also caught on camera).
The police on here tell us beeping your horn at police is aggressive and worth getting arrested, locked up and charged for but the encounter I (a civillian) had with the miscreant was a non event. Double standards?
Eclassy said:
Person took offence and attempted to enter my car and threatned me with a metal bar.
Prove it beyond reasonable doubt. All the filming you apparently did, yet didn't capture the only part which sounds like a crime. Eclassy said:
Person then blocks me off by parking across the main road thereby causing me and those travelling behind me to come to a halt and also blocking traffic travelling in the opposite direction
Person jumps out of car, marches menacingly towards me and starts banging on my window until he realises he is being recorded
This is apparently someone who, "marches menacingly": http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=3c2_1399488205Person jumps out of car, marches menacingly towards me and starts banging on my window until he realises he is being recorded
I think people can use your description and apply their own conclusions to what sort of 'firmness' and perspective you have.
The same person who had no qualms threatening you with a metal bar, chasing after you and stopping you, magically calms down enough to tap on the window and ask you to open it.
Eclassy said:
Person drives off and goes around roundabout to get behind me and tries to swipe me off the road at traffic lights ahead (this also caught on camera).
Yet you chose not to upload that part, but the other part, which shows nothing. Eclassy said:
The police on here tell us beeping your horn at police is aggressive and worth getting arrested, locked up and charged for but the encounter I (a civillian) had with the miscreant was a non event. Double standards?
And what was the outcome of the "beeping horn" incident? That's right, NFA. If corroborative police evidence can't make something stick, what chance do you think you have in a criminal court? Perhaps all the above did occur, but with your inconsistencies over the account, I doubt it. But even if it did, do you not think there are regularly incidents which occur to people which have no chance of being proven? Think about it from the other side. It sounds like your word against his, with video evidence of him approaching you in a calm manner and asking you to open your window.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff