Reap what you sow?

[Mill Wheel]

http://www.timesandstar.co.uk/news/crime/Cumbrias-...

Cumbria's Police and Crime Commissioner has been caught speeding outside the county, and has reported himself to the Police and Crime Panel.

Is he obligated to do this if it isn't a criminal offence, AND he has opted to take a SAC to avoid the points and fine?

I'm guessing but perhaps after the whistle blowing from the county force after the last PCC that he felt he should come clean before the news leaked out from somewhere!

[Seesure]

What a complete waste of time and also public money... who honestly gives a damn...??

It truly shows how pathetic this country is becoming...why is there an insistence that we have to have panels to review everything?

They all have to be paid for out of the public purse one way or another !!!

[jith]

Dear god; 36 MPH!! What a wicked, dangerous, corrupt policeman he is, eh?

How utterly stupid and ridiculous are things going to get before someone with the balls to bring back common sense and put the PC idiots firmly in their place does so?

Mind you it's Cumbria, so that explains a great deal in terms of ludicrous enforcement.

J

[Greendubber]

Just ger rid of the pointless idiots.

[R8Steve]

I wonder if he'd have reported himself had he not been caught. I highly doubt it.

Seems totally pointless to me.

[Cat]

jith said:

What a wicked, dangerous, corrupt policeman he is, eh?

He's not a police officer he's an elected official.

Cat

[iandc]

R8Steve said:

I wonder if he'd have reported himself had he not been caught. I highly doubt it.

Seems totally pointless to me.

If he hadn't been caught it is likely he would not have known. It's not like he was doing twice the speed limit. I am sure most of us exceed the limit by a small margin and would not know unless officially told.

[R8Steve]

iandc said:

R8Steve said:

I wonder if he'd have reported himself had he not been caught. I highly doubt it.

Seems totally pointless to me.

If he hadn't been caught it is likely he would not have known. It's not like he was doing twice the speed limit. I am sure most of us exceed the limit by a small margin and would not know unless officially told.

My speedometer normally tells me, not on an official basis admittedly

[JNW1]

jith said:

Mind you it's Cumbria, so that explains a great deal in terms of ludicrous enforcement.
J

Sadly Cumbria's not alone though. I live in North Yorkshire and historically their approach to speeding was in line with the ACPO guidelines (so basically drivers had 10% plus 1mph of leeway). However, in recent weeks I understand they've moved towards a policy of zero tolerance and I know of people who've received a Notice of Intended Prosecution even though they were barely over the speed limit (31mph in a 30mph limit in one case). We've also seen a pronounced increase in the use of mobile camera vans and bikes over the last couple of years so when you combine that with this apparent change in policy it looks like a clear hardening of the line where speeding's concerned. Camera vans are often deployed on dual carriageways in the county and it always used to be the case that if you set your cruise control at an indicated 78mph you'd be fine - not any more though!

[R8Steve]

JNW1 said:

However, in recent weeks I understand they've moved towards a policy of zero tolerance and I know of people who've received a Notice of Intended Prosecution even though they were barely over the speed limit (31mph in a 30mph limit in one case).

That is a very brave thing to say in here!

The 31mph in a 30mph NIP is seen as mythical and many a custard call has been made on said notice. I'd imagine this time will be no different (although LoonR1 is no longer here).

[JNW1]

R8Steve said:

JNW1 said:

However, in recent weeks I understand they've moved towards a policy of zero tolerance and I know of people who've received a Notice of Intended Prosecution even though they were barely over the speed limit (31mph in a 30mph limit in one case).

That is a very brave thing to say in here!

The 31mph in a 30mph NIP is seen as mythical and many a custard call has been made on said notice. I'd imagine this time will be no different (although LoonR1 is no longer here).

To be fair I haven't seen any evidence of the 31mph in a 30 limit! However, I've heard from more than source that North Yorkshire Police seem to have changed their approach with several stories of people receiving NIP's which wouldn't have been issued had the force been prosecuting in line with the ACPO guidelines. Now all those people could be making it up but my feeling is there's probably no smoke without fire and hence I will be paying even closer attention to the speed limits, especially when I'm in areas where I know mobile cameras tend to operate. In some respects I actually have sympathy with enforcing a 30mph limit in town but I'm less than impressed at the possibility of getting prosecuted for doing 75mph on a relatively quiet stretch of dual carriageway; no safety issue whatsoever and just feels like blatant revenue raising to me....

[Boosted LS1]

Cat said:

jith said:

What a wicked, dangerous, corrupt policeman he is, eh?

He's not a police officer he's an elected official.

Cat

Are policemen officers? I don't think they are.

[R8Steve]

JNW1 said:

R8Steve said:

JNW1 said:

However, in recent weeks I understand they've moved towards a policy of zero tolerance and I know of people who've received a Notice of Intended Prosecution even though they were barely over the speed limit (31mph in a 30mph limit in one case).

That is a very brave thing to say in here!

The 31mph in a 30mph NIP is seen as mythical and many a custard call has been made on said notice. I'd imagine this time will be no different (although LoonR1 is no longer here).

To be fair I haven't seen any evidence of the 31mph in a 30 limit! However, I've heard from more than source that North Yorkshire Police seem to have changed their approach with several stories of people receiving NIP's which wouldn't have been issued had the force been prosecuting in line with the ACPO guidelines. Now all those people could be making it up but my feeling is there's probably no smoke without fire and hence I will be paying even closer attention to the speed limits, especially when I'm in areas where I know mobile cameras tend to operate. In some respects I actually have sympathy with enforcing a 30mph limit in town but I'm less than impressed at the possibility of getting prosecuted for doing 75mph on a relatively quiet stretch of dual carriageway; no safety issue whatsoever and just feels like blatant revenue raising to me....

Taking away the fixed penalty advice in the APCO guidelines (35mph for fixed penalty when education is not appropriate) it also states that the device tolerance allows for 32mph. "Where an officer decides to issue a summons or a fixed penalty notice in respect of offences committed at speeds lower than those set out in the table, he or she must consider the tolerances of the equipment used to corroborate their opinion. Police speed equipment are tested and approved to work with a maximum tolerance of +/-2mph up to 66mph, so it is possible to use these tolerances as a prosecution threshold."

By their own admission their equipment is not accurate to allow for a 31mph prosecution so i don't think anyone has been prosecuted for 31mph.

[Cat]

Boosted LS1 said:

Are policemen officers? I don't think they are.

Policemen and policewomen are police officers.

Cat

[JNW1]

R8Steve said:

JNW1 said:

R8Steve said:

JNW1 said:

However, in recent weeks I understand they've moved towards a policy of zero tolerance and I know of people who've received a Notice of Intended Prosecution even though they were barely over the speed limit (31mph in a 30mph limit in one case).

That is a very brave thing to say in here!

The 31mph in a 30mph NIP is seen as mythical and many a custard call has been made on said notice. I'd imagine this time will be no different (although LoonR1 is no longer here).

To be fair I haven't seen any evidence of the 31mph in a 30 limit! However, I've heard from more than source that North Yorkshire Police seem to have changed their approach with several stories of people receiving NIP's which wouldn't have been issued had the force been prosecuting in line with the ACPO guidelines. Now all those people could be making it up but my feeling is there's probably no smoke without fire and hence I will be paying even closer attention to the speed limits, especially when I'm in areas where I know mobile cameras tend to operate. In some respects I actually have sympathy with enforcing a 30mph limit in town but I'm less than impressed at the possibility of getting prosecuted for doing 75mph on a relatively quiet stretch of dual carriageway; no safety issue whatsoever and just feels like blatant revenue raising to me....

Taking away the fixed penalty advice in the APCO guidelines (35mph for fixed penalty when education is not appropriate) it also states that the device tolerance allows for 32mph. "Where an officer decides to issue a summons or a fixed penalty notice in respect of offences committed at speeds lower than those set out in the table, he or she must consider the tolerances of the equipment used to corroborate their opinion. Police speed equipment are tested and approved to work with a maximum tolerance of +/-2mph up to 66mph, so it is possible to use these tolerances as a prosecution threshold."

By their own admission their equipment is not accurate to allow for a 31mph prosecution so i don't think anyone has been prosecuted for 31mph.

You may well be right and it's entirely possible there's an element of Chinese Whisper with the 31mph and a 30 which was relayed to me! However, I still suspect the alleged change in approach (i.e. moving away from using the ACPO guidelines) is probably reality and if true that's likely to mean more prosecutions, SAC's, points and fines....

[PV7998]

Cat said:

Boosted LS1 said:

Are policemen officers? I don't think they are.

Policemen and policewomen are police officers.

Cat

Officers as in Private, Corporal, Captain?................maybe, maybe not.

However they all hold the Office of Constable which gives them additional legal powers that most citizens don't have.

[iandc]

R8Steve said:

My speedometer normally tells me, not on an official basis admittedly

Yes I have got one of those too. But I don't spend every moment I am driving checking it. You must be a fantastic driver if you have never exceeded the speed limit because you are always checking your speedo. Christ he was not exactly breaking the sound barrier was he!

[Cat]

PV7998 said:

Officers as in Private, Corporal, Captain?................maybe, maybe not.

THey are officers as in the dictionary definition of the term police officer.

Cat

[98elise]

PV7998 said:

Cat said:

Boosted LS1 said:

Are policemen officers? I don't think they are.

Policemen and policewomen are police officers.

Cat

Officers as in Private, Corporal, Captain?................maybe, maybe not.

However they all hold the Office of Constable which gives them additional legal powers that most citizens don't have.

Privates are not officers (commisioned or non comissioned)

[PV7998]

98elise said:

Privates are not officers (commisioned or non comissioned)

I know that.......it was drummed in to me for 5 years 103 days. Maybe a misleading choice of phrase - apologies