RE: Speedcam nabs 'dangerous driver'
Discussion
Ywet another pathetic, meaningless statement from a scamera partnership. The quality of the employess of theses partnerships seems to be close to the lowest of standards. The government embody the worst of the communist state with their lust for total power, with the nazi party with their disregard for laws and human rights
Pah, V sign. I just drive past at 50% of the speed limit, *just* to make sure.
If they are there, then it is clearly an accident blackspot, and they'd obviously only operate at times of high risk, so best to be safe than sorry! Afterall, it's the limit, not a target
Suppose this could also be seen as taking the piss, but you've got the valid above excuse
Dave
If they are there, then it is clearly an accident blackspot, and they'd obviously only operate at times of high risk, so best to be safe than sorry! Afterall, it's the limit, not a target
Suppose this could also be seen as taking the piss, but you've got the valid above excuse
Dave
Right...
So it's dangerous to momentarily take both hands off the wheel, is it?
Watched a programme about traffic police a while ago, in Cheshire, I think. Lone plod pilot was chasing someone round a residential area with one hand on his collar microphone, and one hand on the wheel, for a lengthy period.
In moving his steering hand about the wheel, that hand was out of contact with the wheel for a considerable time.
Now this is defined as a criminal act, such use of police comms must stop.
Eh, Mr Darling....?
That programme might be repeated tonight, I see Traffic Cops looks at Cheshire police in this episode.
Are our resident plods going to fight this one....?
So it's dangerous to momentarily take both hands off the wheel, is it?
Watched a programme about traffic police a while ago, in Cheshire, I think. Lone plod pilot was chasing someone round a residential area with one hand on his collar microphone, and one hand on the wheel, for a lengthy period.
In moving his steering hand about the wheel, that hand was out of contact with the wheel for a considerable time.
Now this is defined as a criminal act, such use of police comms must stop.
Eh, Mr Darling....?
That programme might be repeated tonight, I see Traffic Cops looks at Cheshire police in this episode.
Are our resident plods going to fight this one....?
jezzaaa said:
Clearly this thread doesn't need another 'this is a mad response' post, but I just can't believe they have charged and successfully prosecuted him for dangerous driving. It's not just a traffic offense either, so this guy will now have a criminal record. And a years ban with a retest.....which is way more than you'd get for doing 100mph on a motorway. I think this is ridiculous and the guy should appeal. I thought dangerous driving was supposed to be really hard to convict, and involves proof of driving way below the expected standard over some distance????
I think the police/CPS/SCP will have done themselves no favours with this, in terms of public support/respect. Absolutely absurd.
Spot on!
I am about to post about a trial for the same offence in the same area in Scotland.
The Fiscal is an incompetent, totally misguided fool.
Unbelievable abuse of power!
"Case vindicates scameras, say police"
Oh for goodness sake of course it doesn't! Incidences such as this only serve to ruin the fragile relationship between the general public and police force, as well as the case for cameras in certain areas such as black spots and outside schools etc. Cameras will never reduce the number of dangerous drivers on our roads or the yearly deathtoll for that matter, the only thing they have been proved to do is reduce speed (although whether their presence actually improves road safety is debatable).
How many more times will the police waste taxpayers money in pathetic circumstance such as these, there's been so many:
1. Woman chased by helicopter for eating an apple
2. Man fined for warning other driver regarding speed cameras
3. Rally drivers fined and penalised for speeding
Stephen
Oh for goodness sake of course it doesn't! Incidences such as this only serve to ruin the fragile relationship between the general public and police force, as well as the case for cameras in certain areas such as black spots and outside schools etc. Cameras will never reduce the number of dangerous drivers on our roads or the yearly deathtoll for that matter, the only thing they have been proved to do is reduce speed (although whether their presence actually improves road safety is debatable).
How many more times will the police waste taxpayers money in pathetic circumstance such as these, there's been so many:
1. Woman chased by helicopter for eating an apple
2. Man fined for warning other driver regarding speed cameras
3. Rally drivers fined and penalised for speeding
Stephen
Ref my thoughts about police drivers removing their hands from the wheel (earlier post), I'm going to put the question to Fife's Chief Constable, via their website email....
www.fife.police.uk/Contact/email.php
I guess some of you might like to discuss with him the value of police/public relations and related matters.....
Let's not get abusive, though.....that lets him off the hook and he'll dismiss your views with contempt....
www.fife.police.uk/Contact/email.php
I guess some of you might like to discuss with him the value of police/public relations and related matters.....
Let's not get abusive, though.....that lets him off the hook and he'll dismiss your views with contempt....
OUTLAW-1 said:
hes best bet would have have been park up his car legaly, walk up scammer and punch there lights out.
punishment probly a 100 quid fine at local magisttraits court
pluss endless satisfaction.
>> Edited by OUTLAW-1 on Thursday 12th January 11:13
yeah and he gets to keep his licence!
[quote]
Dangerous Driving - Sean Toehill
Wednesday 11th January, 2006
Following the appearance at Cupar Sheriff Court yesterday (09/01/2006) when Mr Toehill was convicted of dangerous driving and was disqualified for one year, fined £90 and was ordered to resit his driving test.
Chief Inspector Joe Swanston, Fife's Road Policing said " “This case clearly illustrates that Safety Cameras robustly enforce other aspects of inappropriate driver behaviour in addition to speeding offences. This young driver was clearly showing off to his friends when he chose to put himself, his four passengers and other road users at risk by taking his hands off the wheel”.
“This is yet another case that shows that safety cameras are not a revenue generator but in fact a tactical additional road safety option.
Please slow down and drive to the appropriate speed for the class of road and driving conditions. Remember our cameras will be watching out for you”.
[/quote] from Fife police website
>> Edited by renny on Thursday 12th January 16:15
Dangerous Driving - Sean Toehill
Wednesday 11th January, 2006
Following the appearance at Cupar Sheriff Court yesterday (09/01/2006) when Mr Toehill was convicted of dangerous driving and was disqualified for one year, fined £90 and was ordered to resit his driving test.
Chief Inspector Joe Swanston, Fife's Road Policing said " “This case clearly illustrates that Safety Cameras robustly enforce other aspects of inappropriate driver behaviour in addition to speeding offences. This young driver was clearly showing off to his friends when he chose to put himself, his four passengers and other road users at risk by taking his hands off the wheel”.
“This is yet another case that shows that safety cameras are not a revenue generator but in fact a tactical additional road safety option.
Please slow down and drive to the appropriate speed for the class of road and driving conditions. Remember our cameras will be watching out for you”.
[/quote] from Fife police website
>> Edited by renny on Thursday 12th January 16:15
me, Winston Churchill would have been in the dock almost weekly if he were still alive today 
Duncanreally said:
hes best bet would have have been park up his car legaly, walk up scammer and punch there lights out.
punishment probly a 100 quid fine at local magisttraits court
pluss endless satisfaction.
>> Edited by OUTLAW-1 on Thursday 12th January 11:13
yeah and he gets to keep his licence!
Errr......no.
Anti social behaviour legislation allows them to snatch your driving licence for....err... "anti social behaviour"
Remember the elderly guy who stood on the side of the road with a sign about the talivan further on?
Banned from driving, he was......
So, if magistrates deem your behaviour to be anti social, they can deprive you of your personal mobility. Best bet is to stand still.....and stop breathing, just to be on the safe side.
ninjaboy said:
I wish someone would try and help this chap get his lisence back, if this is all it takes to lose your license then their should be alot of worried people about total lack of proffesionalism from the police and courts
Yep but you can’t take the Mick out of the plod like that they don’t have the sense of humour for it, if they were doing the same for all the abusive little toe rags in our streets then maybe they could justify this…
Just had a look at the newspaper report an someone needs a severe bollo*****g for this getting to court and the Chief Constable of Fife Police is the prime candidate. The lad, an idiot but not really a criminal was driving at 22mph in a 40mph limit. So where did the photo/video evidence come from? It is my understanding that the highway robber has to form an opinion that the vehicle was exceeding the speed limit before checking the speed. Now either he is incompetant in his judgement to think someone driving at half the speed limit is speeding or as we all know he videoed all the traffic and found the footage of the misguided youth and saw his a**e because he didn't get any money from him for speeding. If it is the latter, then the evidence should have been inadmisable. Further if that is proven all the speeding fines collected by this incompetant moron, certainly on this session and possibly on examination of his previous evidence were dubious should be returned and all convictions quashed.. I would love to see the face of Mr smarta**e Chief Constable if that happened. This country is becoming a joke but sadly it is not very funny. Who is paying the costs for cases like this to go through the legal system? The self same people who are being criminalised by a money making system in the name of safety.
Some well heeled legal eagle should appeal this stupidity and if the appeal is succesful ask for all speeding conviction evidence to be reviewed, at the law abiding tax payers expense, and any widespread abuse should result in all convictions for speeding by scamersvan be unsound and all fines refunded, all points removed and any valid compensation for unsound conviction and its consequences paid.
If there is any other reason why the scameras**t could have the evidence on which this idiot but not criminal was convicted other than they were videoing all traffic so that they could leisurely select speeders over a coffee back at the nick I would love to hear it.
Some well heeled legal eagle should appeal this stupidity and if the appeal is succesful ask for all speeding conviction evidence to be reviewed, at the law abiding tax payers expense, and any widespread abuse should result in all convictions for speeding by scamersvan be unsound and all fines refunded, all points removed and any valid compensation for unsound conviction and its consequences paid.
If there is any other reason why the scameras**t could have the evidence on which this idiot but not criminal was convicted other than they were videoing all traffic so that they could leisurely select speeders over a coffee back at the nick I would love to hear it.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff