Reap what you sow?

[Derek Smith]

Officer in the case of police office denotes the person holds the 'office' of constable. This goes for all ranks in the police service. Every police officer from PC to Chief Constable is a constable. Those with the title of Commissioner do not hold the office of constable.

PCCs do not hold the office of constable so are civilians. All police officers I know of who have anything to do with them regard them as a waste of space. The one for my force stated that she knew nothing about police work and this would bring a fresh impetus to policing due to her running a successful business for some years. To the question: 'Would you employ a CEO for your business who had no idea what it was all about.

She said something like: 'I am an end user of the police service.' The question: 'Would you employ customer as CEO' could not be put as she had something more important to do.

[Ken Figenus]

Ohh please. Trivia.

The 'speeding Tzar' Chief Con Meredydd Hughes (chairman of roads policing for ACPO) getting nicked for 90 in a 60 on an A road in N Wales was something to get excited about - sheer utter hypocrisy...!

http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/speed...

Runs SAC's now he resigned - brand RSS http://www.roadsafetysupport.co.uk/

Nice little earner: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1145581/Bo...

Its true - honest - https://www.linkedin.com/in/meredydd-hughes-cbe-qp...

Seriously, you couldnt make it up...

[drf765]

Mill Wheel said:

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!

The PCC didn't need to do any of those things. I wonder why he thinks he needed to.
The IPCC! They will simply say "nothing to do with us, thanks."
He is an ordinary person who has been caught speeding and like anyone else has done a speed awareness course. In his position he is best to be open about it but he doesn't have to do anything else.

[drf765]

JNW1 said:

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....

North Yorks issue speeding penalties for 29 in a 30. There, my rumour is just as valid and supported by evidence as yours is.

[2 sMoKiN bArReLs]

Galations 6 v 7

[Rovinghawk]

Derek Smith said:

PCCs do not hold the office of constable so are civilians.

I thought all police are civilians.

[JNW1]

drf765 said:

JNW1 said:

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....

North Yorks issue speeding penalties for 29 in a 30. There, my rumour is just as valid and supported by evidence as yours is.

To be honest I'm not sure I believe someone was actually prosecuted for 31mph in a 30 but the point I was trying to make was there appears to be a move away from following the ACPO guidelines and instead adopting a more strict letter of the law approach to speeding. Assuming you can read and understand English I expect you realised that but nevertheless thanks for your contribution.......

[Cat]

Rovinghawk said:

I thought all police are civilians.

Plenty of dictionaries define the word civilian similarly to "a person not in the armed services or a member of the police force".

Cat

[drf765]

JNW1 said:

To be honest I'm not sure I believe someone was actually prosecuted for 31mph in a 30 but the point I was trying to make was there appears to be a move away from following the ACPO guidelines and instead adopting a more strict letter of the law approach to speeding. Assuming you can read and understand English I expect you realised that but nevertheless thanks for your contribution.......

You have no evidence that a prosecution has been made at 31,32,33 or 34 in a 30 limit. You have no evidence of a move from the national speed enforcement guidance.
I can tell you why you have none. There haven't been any routine prosecutions at thos speeds and the police have not begun issuing prosecutions below the guidance.
The only likely variation is increasing th thresholds not lowering them.
Maybe you should stop making stuff up.

[4rephill]

iandc said:

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.....

If you're driving correctly then you should be glancing at your speedometer on a regular basis to ensure you're not speeding!

When I learnt to drive I was taught to spend the majority of My time looking out of windscreen (naturally), but on a regular basis, check with quick glances My speedometer, rear view mirror and side mirrors, to be fully aware of what is going on around Me.

The routine I was taught was:

Look through the windscreen whilst driving.
Quickly glance at the speedometer and then look out the windscreen again.
Quickly glance at the rear view mirror and then look out the windscreen again.
Quickly glance at the speedometer and then look out the windscreen again.
Quickly glance at the side mirror and then look out the windscreen again.
Quickly glance at the speedometer and then look out the windscreen again.
Quickly glance at the rear view mirror and then look out the windscreen again.
Quickly glance at the speedometer and then look out the windscreen again etc., etc.,etc.

By doing this routine I have never accidentally exceeded the speed limit - When I exceed a speed limit I am fully aware of it!

[Mill Wheel]

drf765 said:

Mill Wheel said:

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!

The PCC didn't need to do any of those things. I wonder why he thinks he needed to.
The IPCC! They will simply say "nothing to do with us, thanks."
He is an ordinary person who has been caught speeding and like anyone else has done a speed awareness course. In his position he is best to be open about it but he doesn't have to do anything else.

Perhaps the previous whistleblowing from Police employees regarding his predecessors use of a chauffeur driven vehicle, and the subsequent threats of prosecution of them may have had something to do with his over enthusiastic display of reporting?
The media were baying for blood after that incident, despite the vehicle being booked by a member of his staff, and not the PCC himself!

[drf765]

Mill Wheel said:

drf765 said:

Mill Wheel said:

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!

The PCC didn't need to do any of those things. I wonder why he thinks he needed to.
The IPCC! They will simply say "nothing to do with us, thanks."
He is an ordinary person who has been caught speeding and like anyone else has done a speed awareness course. In his position he is best to be open about it but he doesn't have to do anything else.

Perhaps the previous whistleblowing from Police employees regarding his predecessors use of a chauffeur driven vehicle, and the subsequent threats of prosecution of them may have had something to do with his over enthusiastic display of reporting?
The media were baying for blood after that incident, despite the vehicle being booked by a member of his staff, and not the PCC himself!

Let's say he kept quiet about his speeding conviction/penalty. He is entitled to.
Now let's say someone blew the whistle on him. So what?
At the very worst he would be slightly embarrassed, no more than that.
Now because of his completely daft actions he has someone like you posting up on the Internet that he has done something heinous when he hasn't.

[Sheepshanks]

4rephill said:

The routine I was taught was:

Look through the windscreen whilst driving.
Quickly glance at the speedometer and then look out the windscreen again.
Quickly glance at the rear view mirror and then look out the windscreen again.
Quickly glance at the speedometer and then look out the windscreen again.
Quickly glance at the side mirror and then look out the windscreen again.
Quickly glance at the speedometer and then look out the windscreen again.
Quickly glance at the rear view mirror and then look out the windscreen again.
Quickly glance at the speedometer and then look out the windscreen again etc., etc.,etc.

By doing this routine I have never accidentally exceeded the speed limit - When I exceed a speed limit I am fully aware of it!

Dear God. Autonomous cars can't come soon enough for some drivers.

[drf765]

Sheepshanks said:

4rephill said:

The routine I was taught was:

Look through the windscreen whilst driving.
Quickly glance at the speedometer and then look out the windscreen again.
Quickly glance at the rear view mirror and then look out the windscreen again.
Quickly glance at the speedometer and then look out the windscreen again.
Quickly glance at the side mirror and then look out the windscreen again.
Quickly glance at the speedometer and then look out the windscreen again.
Quickly glance at the rear view mirror and then look out the windscreen again.
Quickly glance at the speedometer and then look out the windscreen again etc., etc.,etc.

By doing this routine I have never accidentally exceeded the speed limit - When I exceed a speed limit I am fully aware of it!

Dear God. Autonomous cars can't come soon enough for some drivers.

While it looks tedious when written down it is describing what the driver should be doing.

[Sheepshanks]

drf765 said:

While it looks tedious when written down it is describing what the driver should be doing.

I'm imagining people driving along with this routine running in their brains!

If someone needs to look at the speedo that much they shouldn't be driving.

[Ken Figenus]

Clearly its bedtime

[iandc]

Ken Figenus said:

Clearly its bedtime

Don't forget to quickly check the bedside light then back to the bedspread and no speeding in bed now!!

[JNW1]

drf765 said:

JNW1 said:

To be honest I'm not sure I believe someone was actually prosecuted for 31mph in a 30 but the point I was trying to make was there appears to be a move away from following the ACPO guidelines and instead adopting a more strict letter of the law approach to speeding. Assuming you can read and understand English I expect you realised that but nevertheless thanks for your contribution.......

You have no evidence that a prosecution has been made at 31,32,33 or 34 in a 30 limit. You have no evidence of a move from the national speed enforcement guidance.
I can tell you why you have none. There haven't been any routine prosecutions at thos speeds and the police have not begun issuing prosecutions below the guidance.
The only likely variation is increasing th thresholds not lowering them.
Maybe you should stop making stuff up.

You're right, I have no documented evidence, only comments from people who have received NIP's; of course they could all be making it up but I'm not sure why they would?

However, you seem very certain in your view there's been no lowering of the thresholds and are actually suggesting that if anything the reverse is true; therefore, what evidence do you have for that particular assertion? If you're a serving officer in the North Yorkshire Police Force and are telling me there's been no change in policy - and that the ACPO guidelines still apply - I'm happy to stand corrected!

[ackbullchang]

drf765 said:

...I can tell you why you have none. There haven't been any routine prosecutions at thos speeds and the police have not begun issuing prosecutions below the guidance....Maybe you should stop making stuff up.

How far back are we going here? I got a NIP for 34 in a 30 in either 2002 or 2003 from a non fixed camera. I took £60 fine and 3 points rather than a speed awareness course. I can tell you exactly where it was; just off the M65 Brierfield, near Burnley, Lancashire. I know the exact car I was driving at the time because it was the only car I had at Uni. Unfortunately many will call baloney because I can't produce evidence of the paperwork. I assure you though, it did happen. It was the 1st and only speeding ticket I've had.

[Pete317]

What's all the fuss about anyway?
There's less than fk-all difference between 34 and 35mph anyway