Pulled over by Police but what could he actually do?
Discussion
VonSenger said:
Precisely. Not black and white as some on here would have you assume. He'd have little chance of making this stick and he knew it. In my 39 years of life, I've witnessed many a bobby willy waving at almost every opportunity, robots.
I'm off for dinner now, mummies made me bangers and mash with alphabet spaghetti. Bye.
I see you have met the resident lawyers and experts who refuse to allow others express themselves on a public forum because of their claimed knowledge and experience.I'm off for dinner now, mummies made me bangers and mash with alphabet spaghetti. Bye.
Have fun!
Wow, didn't expect this many replies!
So it seems on the face of it no one is 100% sure, however if he really wanted a battle he could have issued a ticket - what speed would he issue it at? Depending what speed he put I might have contended it.
The case law quoted doesn't stack up. It is suggesting someone driving at 40 in a 30, that's some margin over and seems to be the point of the case law - 'It would be a very considerable error if the speedometer was as much out as that' Not 75 in a 70, or even 80!
I don't see how he could issue an S59 either.
I thought also with a calibrated speedo you had to be followed for at least 2/10ths of a mile or is it 3? That never happened.
He was nice enough and I have no issue with him pulling me over. I certainly won't sneak past another L200 in a hurry - I'll be more subtle!!
I did once get stopped by an unmarked BMW on the M6. I was doing between 95 and 98 and he recorded it for a good mile; we watched it back and I thought I was screwed. He said he'd call it 95 as I was being polite and had my licence - He then said, oh forget it, just slow down and let me go with a warning.
I'd rather get pulled than nabbed by a Van with a gun. I got done at 89 on 60 dual carriageway a good few years ago - 6 points and £480 - Harsh!!!!
So it seems on the face of it no one is 100% sure, however if he really wanted a battle he could have issued a ticket - what speed would he issue it at? Depending what speed he put I might have contended it.
The case law quoted doesn't stack up. It is suggesting someone driving at 40 in a 30, that's some margin over and seems to be the point of the case law - 'It would be a very considerable error if the speedometer was as much out as that' Not 75 in a 70, or even 80!
I don't see how he could issue an S59 either.
I thought also with a calibrated speedo you had to be followed for at least 2/10ths of a mile or is it 3? That never happened.
He was nice enough and I have no issue with him pulling me over. I certainly won't sneak past another L200 in a hurry - I'll be more subtle!!
I did once get stopped by an unmarked BMW on the M6. I was doing between 95 and 98 and he recorded it for a good mile; we watched it back and I thought I was screwed. He said he'd call it 95 as I was being polite and had my licence - He then said, oh forget it, just slow down and let me go with a warning.
I'd rather get pulled than nabbed by a Van with a gun. I got done at 89 on 60 dual carriageway a good few years ago - 6 points and £480 - Harsh!!!!
There's a big difference between posting an opinion about hateing cops vs posting totally wrong legal information as fact.
If you post something that's not up for opinion, like police policy then if you are wrong someone will correct you. Take it with good grace.
Arguing opinions and interpretations is all very well.
But arguing or taking offence when a fact is corrected is a bit of a waste of time.
As for speeding.
Don't do it past police cars.
If you do, and you get a b
king, just accept it.
It's just someone doing their job.
If you post something that's not up for opinion, like police policy then if you are wrong someone will correct you. Take it with good grace.
Arguing opinions and interpretations is all very well.
But arguing or taking offence when a fact is corrected is a bit of a waste of time.
As for speeding.
Don't do it past police cars.
If you do, and you get a b
king, just accept it.It's just someone doing their job.
jimbop1 said:
Elroy Blue said:
jimbop1 said:
Elroy Blue said:
jimbop1 said:
I didn't say 'has' to drive. I'm sure they are taught/told to try and stay at 60ish or 80ish to help with the flow of traffic. Common sense really.
No they're not. They drive at speeds that are required at the time. Edited by jimbop1 on Monday 21st July 22:54
VonSenger said:
sounds like this d1ck had the hump because you didn't "obey" him. You didn't rise to it and let him believe he was master. In reality, sweet FA he could do but why go through the hassle of testing it. Good approach. Another reason why the NSL needs raising.
I appreciate the police and what they do, but not d1cks like this chap. Had a similar problem with a moron when I parked on a completely empty road, albeit double yellow at midnight. Because he was sitting in his car and I didn't "respect him" it was an issue.
I say, bully victim at school getting his own back.
I guess you'd rather automated speeding fines by way of more cameras or GPS tracking?I appreciate the police and what they do, but not d1cks like this chap. Had a similar problem with a moron when I parked on a completely empty road, albeit double yellow at midnight. Because he was sitting in his car and I didn't "respect him" it was an issue.
I say, bully victim at school getting his own back.
After all, what the OP received was good old-fashioned policing by way of a warning. Isn't this what PH'ers want?
Your comment about the NSL just shows how far out of reality you are.
XDA said:
Elroy Blue said:
jimbop1 said:
I didn't say 'has' to drive. I'm sure they are taught/told to try and stay at 60ish or 80ish to help with the flow of traffic. Common sense really.
No they're not. They drive at speeds that are required at the time. http://www.suffolk.police.uk/aboutus/yourrighttoin...
Page 11 (Section 8.7)
When patrolling multi carriageways Roads Policing or Tactical Firearms Unit officers will drive at the safest speed given the prevailing conditions. This will allow vehicles to overtake within the speed limits and encourage good traffic flow;
Edited by XDA on Tuesday 22 July 00:41
Edited by XDA on Tuesday 22 July 00:44
it doesn;t mean if you've got somewhere to go , that isn't an emergency call you've got to travel at under the speed limit - BiB are also trusted to re-priortise based on what they are seeing...
a firend of mine is a HATO, their instructiosn are similar - if driving around generally or just transiting between places drive to allow (unobservant) people to pass if they are going to an incident they will drive at (ahem) the spped limit ...
I've not read this topic at all, but if it helps, my understanding for speeding without fancy gadgets and stuff, needs to be witnessed by two officers.
If they are both in the Police vehicle, and using the info available, form the opinion that the driver is/was speeding, then a prosecution can be formed, but only upon the evidence of TWO police officers.
Even then, it's liable to go to court, both officers will probably be questioned extensively and it'll be the court decision.
Although, I could be wrong, and all of the above could be bks. 
If they are both in the Police vehicle, and using the info available, form the opinion that the driver is/was speeding, then a prosecution can be formed, but only upon the evidence of TWO police officers.
Even then, it's liable to go to court, both officers will probably be questioned extensively and it'll be the court decision.
Although, I could be wrong, and all of the above could be b
ks. I was once stopped in similar circumstances in Wales. Dual carriageway heading from Valleys I was pacing a panda who was making progress then slowed down. As it happened even at a slower speed I caught him up and ended up next to him as the limit reduced to 50. I was a few mpghover (no more than 5) which he took exception to.
He decided that I was doing more than 60. I think my actual words were "I disagree, but I'm certainly not going to argue with you officer", which he seemed to accept. He then made an excellent point about whether it was really a good idea to overtake a marked police car at any speed above the limit. I had to agree that in hindsight it was probably not!
Came away with a producer, which was pretty much done to inconvenience as he'd done the basic checks, car was only one year old and company owned. Still his right to do so, so I'm certainly not complaining.
I'm wary of marked cars now.
He decided that I was doing more than 60. I think my actual words were "I disagree, but I'm certainly not going to argue with you officer", which he seemed to accept. He then made an excellent point about whether it was really a good idea to overtake a marked police car at any speed above the limit. I had to agree that in hindsight it was probably not!
Came away with a producer, which was pretty much done to inconvenience as he'd done the basic checks, car was only one year old and company owned. Still his right to do so, so I'm certainly not complaining.
I'm wary of marked cars now.
Edited by surveyor on Tuesday 22 July 12:41
un1corn said:
I've not read this topic at all, but if it helps, my understanding for speeding without fancy gadgets and stuff, needs to be witnessed by two officers.
If they are both in the Police vehicle, and using the info available, form the opinion that the driver is/was speeding, then a prosecution can be formed, but only upon the evidence of TWO police officers.
Even then, it's liable to go to court, both officers will probably be questioned extensively and it'll be the court decision.
Although, I could be wrong, and all of the above could be bks.
Lol you need to read the thread If they are both in the Police vehicle, and using the info available, form the opinion that the driver is/was speeding, then a prosecution can be formed, but only upon the evidence of TWO police officers.
Even then, it's liable to go to court, both officers will probably be questioned extensively and it'll be the court decision.
Although, I could be wrong, and all of the above could be b
ks. 
Eclassy said:
I see you have met the resident lawyers and experts who refuse to allow others express themselves on a public forum because of their claimed knowledge and experience.
Point to a post where someone has "refused" others to express their opinion. You won't because you can't. If people post things which are wrong (you're frequently in that group), then expect to be corrected. That's not "refusing to allow someone". By definition we can't refuse him, anyway. Great wording.
woodyTVR said:
So it seems on the face of it no one is 100% sure
Naturally, because we don't know the full circumstances. It's likely 'something' could have been done had the officer not been satisfied with a VW. Phil Dicky said:
I seem to remember e guide lines for motorway officers was somewhere a round 60mph as the cruising speed to avoid traffic boxing behind them.
As for the OP you passed the attitude test and so got off with a warning, what I used to do more often than not.
This sort of thing annoys me. The officer assumes some sort of arbitrary right to make life easy / hard for people, based on the officers subjective view of your attitude. As for the OP you passed the attitude test and so got off with a warning, what I used to do more often than not.
Either someone’s actions warrant dealing with, or they don’t. The extent to which they bow and curtail to the officers ‘authority’ shouldn’t come in to it.
Jonathan27 said:
Phil Dicky said:
I seem to remember e guide lines for motorway officers was somewhere a round 60mph as the cruising speed to avoid traffic boxing behind them.
As for the OP you passed the attitude test and so got off with a warning, what I used to do more often than not.
This sort of thing annoys me. The officer assumes some sort of arbitrary right to make life easy / hard for people, based on the officers subjective view of your attitude. As for the OP you passed the attitude test and so got off with a warning, what I used to do more often than not.
Either someone’s actions warrant dealing with, or they don’t. The extent to which they bow and curtail to the officers ‘authority’ shouldn’t come in to it.
The aim of a stop is to help reduce future risk. If that can be achieved by words alone then great. If you're met by someone who won't listen, won't accept that they presented any risk, then you've not achieved the aim and need to consider alternative means.
mph1977 said:
XDA said:
Elroy Blue said:
jimbop1 said:
I didn't say 'has' to drive. I'm sure they are taught/told to try and stay at 60ish or 80ish to help with the flow of traffic. Common sense really.
No they're not. They drive at speeds that are required at the time. http://www.suffolk.police.uk/aboutus/yourrighttoin...
Page 11 (Section 8.7)
When patrolling multi carriageways Roads Policing or Tactical Firearms Unit officers will drive at the safest speed given the prevailing conditions. This will allow vehicles to overtake within the speed limits and encourage good traffic flow;
Edited by XDA on Tuesday 22 July 00:41
Edited by XDA on Tuesday 22 July 00:44
it doesn;t mean if you've got somewhere to go , that isn't an emergency call you've got to travel at under the speed limit - BiB are also trusted to re-priortise based on what they are seeing...
a firend of mine is a HATO, their instructiosn are similar - if driving around generally or just transiting between places drive to allow (unobservant) people to pass if they are going to an incident they will drive at (ahem) the spped limit ...
I don't expect the police to drive below the speed limit when they have somewhere to be, irrespective of whether it's an emergency or not.
I read Elroy Blues posts to indicate that there is no policy on what speed an officer should drive at when he's not responding to anything and just on general patrol etc.
In Scotland, the marked police cars patrol the motorways at about 65 mph (at a guess) and I've passed them at 10% of the speed limit without issue umpteen times? I've even flashed one out on the two lane section of the M74 and got a thumbs up in return as I overtook them.
XDA said:
You've missed the point entirely.
I don't expect the police to drive below the speed limit when they have somewhere to be, irrespective of whether it's an emergency or not.
I read Elroy Blues posts to indicate that there is no policy on what speed an officer should drive at when he's not responding to anything and just on general patrol etc.
In Scotland, the marked police cars patrol the motorways at about 65 mph (at a guess) and I've passed them at 10% of the speed limit without issue umpteen times? I've even flashed one out on the two lane section of the M74 and got a thumbs up in return as I overtook them.
There's no set rule in my force and we're not taught to drive at 50mph on a motorway, however most will do when just patrolling. I rarely drive at 50 on the motorway, as I no longer patrol it, but I'm using it to get to places, I will usually travel at a fraction over so that I'm not holding up the free flowing traffic, however I don't do this on roads where I know the speed vans work, as they love sticking on coppers!I don't expect the police to drive below the speed limit when they have somewhere to be, irrespective of whether it's an emergency or not.
I read Elroy Blues posts to indicate that there is no policy on what speed an officer should drive at when he's not responding to anything and just on general patrol etc.
In Scotland, the marked police cars patrol the motorways at about 65 mph (at a guess) and I've passed them at 10% of the speed limit without issue umpteen times? I've even flashed one out on the two lane section of the M74 and got a thumbs up in return as I overtook them.
One recently received a ticket for doing just that.
woodyTVR said:
Wow, didn't expect this many replies!
I did once get stopped by an unmarked BMW on the M6. I was doing between 95 and 98 and he recorded it for a good mile; we watched it back and I thought I was screwed. He said he'd call it 95 as I was being polite and had my licence - He then said, oh forget it, just slow down and let me go with a warning.
I got done at 89 on 60 dual carriageway a good few years ago - 6 points and £480 - Harsh!!!!
So without sounding too sanctimonious you have been pulled over for speeding 3 times - prosecuted once - and left off by the skin of your teeth twice.I did once get stopped by an unmarked BMW on the M6. I was doing between 95 and 98 and he recorded it for a good mile; we watched it back and I thought I was screwed. He said he'd call it 95 as I was being polite and had my licence - He then said, oh forget it, just slow down and let me go with a warning.
I got done at 89 on 60 dual carriageway a good few years ago - 6 points and £480 - Harsh!!!!
Is the 4th time not far away I wonder, and will you be as lucky with being let off?
Being pulled over by an L200 ROFL
FuryExocet said:
Lol you need to read the thread
Yeah, I was going to.I scanned a few posts and all I could see was petty arguments and general dick waving as is usual on this website, rather than informed discussion between adults. It was enough to make me avoid degrading my brain further by reading the whole thread.
Oh well.
Generally sounds like your experience wasn't that bad at all, not compared with some of the strange rants I've had to endure from officers.
One point that stands out that pisses me off is the officer's comment along the lines of "we had to do 85mph to catch you up" SO WHAT, they could have done 71 and caught you up but it would have taken longer.
One point that stands out that pisses me off is the officer's comment along the lines of "we had to do 85mph to catch you up" SO WHAT, they could have done 71 and caught you up but it would have taken longer.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff