Traffic Cops on BBC rant

[BigLepton]

Did he not say you shouldn't ride on the wrong side of the road to get better vision on a bend as it's due care and attention?

[Derek Smith]

Tuscan Rat said:

Watching tonight, which I would like to point out I don't normally do I am pissed off with Theakston's narrating.

The Africa Twin accident. Yes, it appears he was going to fast, the skid mark evidence is clear. No argument there.

However to say you should not drive on the wrong side of the road to gain better vision as that’s without due care is just st...

This is one of the best ways to improve your vision, just ask any advanced driver. However, you do this at a safe speed.

I to would have been on the wrong side of the road, at an appropriate speed to be able to stop within the distance I can see to be clear, there fore I would have gained vision of the horses at an earlier stage so I could adjust my speed, get over and pass safely.

I did a driving course by the Mets. Part of it included sighting at bends and if I had failed to 'take a look' into a corner by crossing the centre of the road to increase the angle I would have been sent back to my force with a 'fail'. I was told the same thing when I transferred to Sussex on their driving course - the damned horse was mentioned then - and I've done it ever since.

When I was in charge of the driving school in Sussex I took out one of my instructors and was criticised by her for failing to 'take a look' into a corner. Everyone's a critic.

To cross the road for no reason could be considered as due care.

[Sheriff JWPepper]

Del Boy, were you watching? Did you enjoy the discretion shown to the motorcyclist's moody registration plate?

[F i F]

Didn't watch it this time, but from memory when it was first aired.

Wasn't there a discrepancy between one witness evidence as to off-siding and the narration rant about this from Theakston? Or did I dream it?

Clear he was going far too fast, thoug I suspect the bit about off-siding is a beeb arse covering excercise. eg maybe one of the bib mentioned about off siding to gain vision but that bit ended up on editing suite floor with a beeb ill informed comment added in.

Just guessing without any information but hey this is PH you know. Speculation Matters

[rfn]

I would suggest that being on the wrong side of the road going around a blind bend is DWDCA. That's what I took from what the Traffic Cop said.

[mmm-five]

There was also the BIB who insisted the old geezer in the RangeRover had overtaken on double solid lines at the junction where the BIB was parked. It wasn't until the replay came on that it show both overtakes on dashed 'virtual' central reservations.

Still stupid to overtake at a junction though - I wonder what he did for the PCJ charge!

[Battenburg Bob]

He crossed solid whites. Where's the issue?

Edited by Battenburg Bob on Monday 5th January 22:17

[mmm-five]

Battenburg Bob said:

He crossed solid whites. Where's the issue?

Edited by Battenburg Bob on Monday 5th January 22:17

The issue is the fact that the replay showed there were no double white lines at the junction - and that's what the BIB was telling him he did wrong.

However, I do realise the editing may show one thing when the BIB is actually talking about another.

[Isoproturon1]

Battenburg Bob said:

He crossed solid whites. Where's the issue?

Edited by Battenburg Bob on Monday 5th January 22:17

Correct; I know that junction well and it is definitely unbroken. The broken lines were where the police vehicle was following and the driver made another overtake (legal).

[gazza_3]

Did anybody else feel a bit sorry for the young chap, in the very nice Lupo GTI?

[TankRizzo]

gazza_3 said:

Did anybody else feel a bit sorry for the young chap, in the very nice Lupo GTI?

He gambled and lost...if you want to test your car out, be prepared for the consequences if you get caught.

[Nano2nd]

gazza_3 said:

Did anybody else feel a bit sorry for the young chap, in the very nice Lupo GTI?

i felt sorry for him driving a lupo if thats what you mean?

seriously though, i thought he got off quite lightly with a 42 day ban... 124mph, into the low evening sun, after driving less than a year, i don't think he can complain too much.

[turbomachine]

124mph in the lupo, he was very close to the top speed of 127mph according to this http://www.carenthusiast.com/reviews.html?mode=art...

Still he got off very lightly indeed.

[GC8]

Battenburg Bob said:

He crossed solid whites. Where's the issue?

Edited by Battenburg Bob on Monday 5th January 22:17

The only witness; the other party stated clearly that he wasnt over the line. When he braked the bike (at 500kg - 600kg according to the chuff of a police officer; they actually weigh a bit over 200kgs) sat up and he then crossed the line; having a crash!

The traffic officer decided, before talking rubbish about the bike, that he crossed the line to sight the corner, but this was refuted by the witness.

[WildCat]

Isoproturon1 said:

Battenburg Bob said:

He crossed solid whites. Where's the issue?

Edited by Battenburg Bob on Monday 5th January 22:17

Correct; I know that junction well and it is definitely unbroken. The broken lines were where the police vehicle was following and the driver made another overtake (legal).

They certainly looked like solid whites to me. Even if hatches are between them - they are still solid double whites which mean "NO OVERTAKE".

He claimed he had not noticed these when pulled. But the end narration said he was not prosecuted as he got jailed for PCOJ on another matter..

[mrmr96]

GC8 said:

Battenburg Bob said:

He crossed solid whites. Where's the issue?

Edited by Battenburg Bob on Monday 5th January 22:17

The only witness; the other party stated clearly that he wasnt over the line. When he braked the bike (at 500kg - 600kg according to the chuff of a police officer; they actually weigh a bit over 200kgs) sat up and he then crossed the line; having a crash!

The traffic officer decided, before talking rubbish about the bike, that he crossed the line to sight the corner, but this was refuted by the witness.

Bob's talking about the Range Rover overtake.
GC8's talking about the bike hitting the horse.

With regards to the bike and horse, did the skid mark not begin on the correct side of the road?

[WildCat]

Tuscan Rat said:

Watching tonight, which I would like to point out I don't normally do I am pissed off with Theakston's narrating.

The Africa Twin accident. Yes, it appears he was going to fast, the skid mark evidence is clear. No argument there.

However to say you should not drive on the wrong side of the road to gain better vision as that’s without due care is just st...

This is one of the best ways to improve your vision, just ask any advanced driver. However, you do this at a safe speed.

I to would have been on the wrong side of the road, at an appropriate speed to be able to stop within the distance I can see to be clear, there fore I would have gained vision of the horses at an earlier stage so I could adjust my speed, get over and pass safely.

You would still have to be assessing the limit point und it depend on the tupe of bend as to how you position yourself to get a right good look .

For a right hand in the the UK .. you would be towards the left to get a good view of what lie ahead - you would have to take any parked cars or junctions into consideration too.

For a left hand bend -[ you would be more central to get a good view - und even then you would be considering on-coming traffic.. how yur position would be interpreted by another road user as everything we do out there can be misinterpreted in communication by another .. we have to ask ourselves in each evaluation of our drives - how whatever we did affected the other road user und if we think we could do it better necxt time

Then you plan how to reduce the tightness of the bend without compromising smoothness or braking when in the corner


But for the ultimate post to memorise - Ian (iaha) on safespeed's "Improve Driving" section around 2005.) That ist the essential guide from a policeman who know what he talk about. I would urge all to seek out that post .. und learn from it.

[WildCat]

mrmr96 said:

GC8 said:

Battenburg Bob said:

He crossed solid whites. Where's the issue?

Edited by Battenburg Bob on Monday 5th January 22:17

The only witness; the other party stated clearly that he wasnt over the line. When he braked the bike (at 500kg - 600kg according to the chuff of a police officer; they actually weigh a bit over 200kgs) sat up and he then crossed the line; having a crash!

The traffic officer decided, before talking rubbish about the bike, that he crossed the line to sight the corner, but this was refuted by the witness.

Bob's talking about the Range Rover overtake.
GC8's talking about the bike hitting the horse.

With regards to the bike and horse, did the skid mark not begin on the correct side of the road?

Perhaps .. but he should still have been easing off into the bend to "straighten it"... the whole point of positioning to get a view ist to get a view und then plan the speed .. und the safety margin .. which has to be split-second immediate. He still made an error which led to the crash.

[Strangely Brown]

WildCat said:

They certainly looked like solid whites to me. Even if hatches are between them - they are still solid double whites which mean "NO OVERTAKE".

Do they?

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

[F i F]

mrmr96 said:

GC8 said:

Battenburg Bob said:

He crossed solid whites. Where's the issue?

Edited by Battenburg Bob on Monday 5th January 22:17

The only witness; the other party stated clearly that he wasnt over the line. When he braked the bike (at 500kg - 600kg according to the chuff of a police officer; they actually weigh a bit over 200kgs) sat up and he then crossed the line; having a crash!

The traffic officer decided, before talking rubbish about the bike, that he crossed the line to sight the corner, but this was refuted by the witness.

Bob's talking about the Range Rover overtake.
GC8's talking about the bike hitting the horse.

With regards to the bike and horse, did the skid mark not begin on the correct side of the road?

That's how I recall it, could never rationalise the evidence, skid mark starting on correct side and the witness statement with of anti off-siding narration etc.

Mind you folks prime time TV is the wrong place to promote crossing the centre to have a peek considering the numpties who would be watching.

Was this the episode with the rather surly RR owner made to remove illegal tints?