'Van cuts up police car and gets pulled over.'

'Van cuts up police car and gets pulled over.'

Author
Discussion

Osinjak

Original Poster:

5,453 posts

120 months

Thursday 19th February 2015
quotequote all
Or does it?

Bit of an old one this (2013) that I found in an idle moment. I thought it was a legit move on the van's part, he was ahead already and Mr Polis decides to accelerate going through the junction and is 'forced' back. Subsequently gets pulled although I can't unequivocally say that it was for a dodgy manoeuvre, may have had some checks over the wireless and found other reasons to pull.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=icopwLTYII4&sp...

WilliamWoollard

2,339 posts

192 months

Thursday 19th February 2015
quotequote all
The van changed lanes with out signalling or (presumably) checking it was safe. Not sure how you can say it was a legitimate move.

Osinjak

Original Poster:

5,453 posts

120 months

Thursday 19th February 2015
quotequote all
Just looked like an everyday thing to me. Van was marginally in front at the lights, pulls forward and seems to actually get in front of polis before he gets across, he pulls across and polis looks like he begins to accelerate as he does so. Yeah, he could have indicated I suppose but it didn't strike me as particularly unreasonable, I see this sort of stuff every day.

Eclassy

1,201 posts

121 months

Thursday 19th February 2015
quotequote all
Terrible driving and it wasnt by the one who earns his keep.

Mound Dawg

1,915 posts

173 months

Thursday 19th February 2015
quotequote all
Seems to me that two lanes turned into one, the traffic in front merges in turn but the Police car tries to squirt past the van despite being behind it at the merge point. I think the van driver was probably surprised by this.

Assuming the Police driver was familiar with the junction (may not have been) what he tried to do was a bit clumsy.

Pints

18,444 posts

193 months

Thursday 19th February 2015
quotequote all
Merge in turn seems to not apply to marked police cars.

Martin_M

2,071 posts

226 months

Thursday 19th February 2015
quotequote all
Bad driving by both imo. The police officer should have anticipated what the van was going to do - maybe he did and deliberately accelerated. Clearly the van driver didn't check it was safe to move right.

Bigends

5,412 posts

127 months

Thursday 19th February 2015
quotequote all
Martin_M said:
Bad driving by both imo. The police officer should have anticipated what the van was going to do - maybe he did and deliberately accelerated. Clearly the van driver didn't check it was safe to move right.
The van driver had no option but to move over in order to clear the cyclist and the bus lane.

carinaman

21,214 posts

171 months

Thursday 19th February 2015
quotequote all
Obviously trespassed on a piece of the road belonging to the police officer.

Mk3Spitfire

2,921 posts

127 months

Thursday 19th February 2015
quotequote all
Pretty much a non event. The police car would however have been in a perfect position to see if the van driver was on his phone. This might have been why he didn't indicate/failed to look properly, and would be a much more likely reason to pull him over.
Otherwise, I can't see it was worth pulling him over really. I've seen a lot worse. Far from brilliant driving from either.
It clearly made the motorcyclis's day, anyway.

George111

6,930 posts

250 months

Thursday 19th February 2015
quotequote all
Van pulled into a gap left by plod . . . plod then gets the hump and tries to accelerate into it . . . van driver is fine plod needs a driving lesson.

Blakewater

4,303 posts

156 months

Thursday 19th February 2015
quotequote all
Indicating isn't always obligatory, something often taught by police driving instructors. It should have been obvious that the van driver would want to move out to avoid the cyclist and avoid going in the bus lane. Good driving is about observation, anticipation and cooperation. Allowing people to change lanes and move round hazards on the road without forcing them to brake excessively helps keep everyone happy and safe and keep the traffic flowing smoothly. The police officer wouldn't have had to slow as much to allow the van driver to go first as the van driver would to allow the police officer to go first, plus the police officer has the advantage of a better view of the van than the van driver has of the police officer.

Retroman

961 posts

132 months

Thursday 19th February 2015
quotequote all
Bigends said:
The van driver had no option but to move over in order to clear the cyclist and the bus lane.
Is stopping not an option?

Bigends

5,412 posts

127 months

Thursday 19th February 2015
quotequote all
Retroman said:
Bigends said:
The van driver had no option but to move over in order to clear the cyclist and the bus lane.
Is stopping not an option?
.and have the motorbike up his backside - he'd have been really impressed.

roofer

5,136 posts

210 months

Thursday 19th February 2015
quotequote all
Don't think that would of happened of it was Trafpol ? Copper was a nob in this instance.

Ian Geary

4,462 posts

191 months

Thursday 19th February 2015
quotequote all
Mk3Spitfire said:
.. The police car would however have been in a perfect position to see if the van driver was on his phone. This might have been why he didn't indicate/failed to look properly, and would be a much more likely reason to pull him over...
Maybe a coincidence, but this is second time in 15 minutes on SP&L tonight where an entirely imaginary set of events has been put forward as a reason to defend the police's behavior, or rebut what appears to be a valid criticism of them.

Its almost as if the Police have been conditioned to see the world in a "we're right, everyone else is wrong" way, and then just invent reasons to support this view afterwards.


Worrying, given the authority they've been trusted with.

Still, at least there is the efficient and proactive IPCC to turn to...

Ian

Mk3Spitfire

2,921 posts

127 months

Thursday 19th February 2015
quotequote all
Ian Geary said:
Maybe a coincidence, but this is second time in 15 minutes on SP&L tonight where an entirely imaginary set of events has been put forward as a reason to defend the police's behavior, or rebut what appears to be a valid criticism of them.

Its almost as if the Police have been conditioned to see the world in a "we're right, everyone else is wrong" way, and then just invent reasons to support this view afterwards.


Worrying, given the authority they've been trusted with.

Still, at least there is the efficient and proactive IPCC to turn to...

Ian
If you look really carefully, you'll see that I didn't excuse the driving at all. I was suggesting a reason the police might have pulled him over, given that personally i didn't think it warranted being pulled.
But whatever suits you...

richs2891

895 posts

252 months

Thursday 19th February 2015
quotequote all
Certainly looks like "I am the Law" accelerated and closed the gap, creating the situation to me.
Where he though the van driver was going to go I don't know.


panholio

1,078 posts

147 months

Thursday 19th February 2015
quotequote all
Silly driving by the police officer. Clearly deliberately accelerated.

I consistently see bad driving by marked police cars. The number of times I have seen them fail to indicate off roundabouts in my local area beggars belief.

carinaman

21,214 posts

171 months

Thursday 19th February 2015
quotequote all
Ian Geary said:
Maybe a coincidence, but this is second time in 15 minutes on SP&L tonight where an entirely imaginary set of events has been put forward as a reason to defend the police's behavior, or rebut what appears to be a valid criticism of them.

Its almost as if the Police have been conditioned to see the world in a "we're right, everyone else is wrong" way, and then just invent reasons to support this view afterwards.


Worrying, given the authority they've been trusted with.

Still, at least there is the efficient and proactive IPCC to turn to...

Ian
I am not sure I believe this:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-31525040

Police cuts, or the unification of the Scottish constabularies meant they didn't keep any people with IT knowledge that were fully versed in the importance of back ups?

Perhaps the scenario put forward seems more plausible if delivered in a Scottish accent?

Remember 'if you've done nothing wrong you have nothing to hide'.

And there were people getting concerned about officers routinely being armed in Scotland? 'Oooops, someone pressed delete. My bad.'