5,000 police cars speeding in Essex - no prosecutions

[Jonleeper]

I have no problem with the BiB in having an exemption from the normal traffic laws, they might be travelling to an incident where I required help. What I do think is interesting is that of all of the police forces only Essex had perfect officers! In all of the others there was at least one bad apple who just crept over the limit when he/she was not entitled. It does not ring true that every single one of the 5,269 offences recorded was legit. I just cannot belive that this is real and not a cover up. Even Bedfordshire had an incidence of 0.31% where BiB, and others using official cars, were found to be at fault. I am not saying that there should be a "quota" filled or any other criteria applied other than operational need, just that my experiance of human nature states that no section of the public is "whiter than white" and it just doesn't ring true that Essex police are.

[^Slider^]

simpo two said:

^Slider^ said: End of the day we have legal exemption, thats why there are not 5000 police drivers getting ticketed. Confirmation, then, that it's one rule for the police and another for the poor bloody people who pay them. I don't have a problem with Plod breaking speed limits when on a call, by which I mean blues and twos. However, at all other times, especially with the CRAP that's talked about 'speeding', they should be SETTING A BLOODY EXAMPLE, not taking the piss and thereby further alienating the public. If I catch Plod breaking the law, I'll have his reg number on his Chief Constables desk by return post. I didn't used to feel that way. Back in the 80's, the police were there to catch the bad guys and protect me. Now they're out to get ME by enforcing limits that privately they know to be ridiculous (as witnessed by your sentence above).

How do you know that each of the 5000 activations were not on blue light runs??

You say that we should set an example and not take the piss, i am assuming this again is with speeding so how can you say you dont have a problem on blue light runs with excess speed but at the same time we should set an example???

As you say it is one rule for us and one for you with regards to the exemptions we have, but we are no different when we are driving around non response and have no problem with being stuck on if i was unjustified.

There are alot of things we are alowed to do by law that you are not, thats the way it is because we would be unnable to do our jobs if we had to comply with the same rules.

If i get caught speeding on a blue light run im exempt if justified.
If i get caught speeding with no justification i get stuck on.

If i kick a door in or break a window because i suspect that someone may need help (saving life or limb) then i am exempt if justified.

If i kick a door in or smash a window and cant justify it i get done for criminal damage.

I dont get the as witnessed by your statement above comment please expand??

We are still there to catch the bad guys and believe it or not alot of us do the best we can do to still catch them, thats why the majority of us join the job, take the flack we do take the risks we do because at the end of the day there is nothing better than getting mateyboy off the streets who has broken into someones house, stolen someones car etc etc.

[^Slider^]

cuneus said:

Yes but in the meantime they are killing children (potentially) Sorry with the current mantra Plod should set an example . . end of Just how many Police accidents were on non emergency calls ?

You are forgetting that with using the excess speed exemption we also have blue lights and bloody loud sirons which you do not have when traveling at excess speed.

So would you rather us respond to immediate calls at the speed limit??

I dont know these stats but given the number who people who have accidents, i dont think police accidnt stats are that high in comparison.

[^Slider^]

MGBGT said:

I will not defend all of them, but please remember that 'Plod' works to the parameters set up by The Boy Tony and all of his totally anti-motorist dribbler side-kicks. In order to keep their jobs, they have to satisfy criteria set down by idiot politicians and Fascist Police Chiefs who are responding to the latest drivel uttered by the Nanny State. I would like to see a Top Gear program in which B.Liar and his cabinet are sent round the track in the 'reasonably-priced car', pursued by armed officers who have permission to shoot them if they can stop them, then we would truly see if 'Speed Kills'! (The officers in question being provided with a whaling harpoon for that lard-arse, Prescott). As in all life, there are some officers that are tts, but most are like the rest of us - taxed shitless and trying to put food in our family's mouths. Let's cut them a bit of slack, eh? >> Edited by MGBGT on Thursday 8th December 01:13

Thats true in any job, we are made up from members of the public and im sorry to admit we can sometimes get the worst but in alot of the cases we get the best. We are doing a job just as everyone else. I play by the rules set by law and higher ranking people.
I dont have to agree with them but i do work to them.

[eccles]

i agree with all your points slider, but i still cant believe that all of those 5000 activations were justified, as was said before, even if the prosecuted just one driver, at least then it shows they are looking at the cases, but not to prosecute any, looks distinctly fishy to me.

[^Slider^]

Jonleeper said:

I have no problem with the BiB in having an exemption from the normal traffic laws, they might be travelling to an incident where I required help. What I do think is interesting is that of all of the police forces only Essex had perfect officers! In all of the others there was at least one bad apple who just crept over the limit when he/she was not entitled. It does not ring true that every single one of the 5,269 offences recorded was legit. I just cannot belive that this is real and not a cover up. Even Bedfordshire had an incidence of 0.31% where BiB, and others using official cars, were found to be at fault. I am not saying that there should be a "quota" filled or any other criteria applied other than operational need, just that my experiance of human nature states that no section of the public is "whiter than white" and it just doesn't ring true that Essex police are.

I can understand what you mean and thats fair enough, i havent seen the reasons for the 5000 justifications and never will.

And neither will anyone here hence why my defence of police on immediate runs where there is justification, if there was no justification then i cant defend it and never will as where there is no exemption then treat us the same as the public.

[Jonleeper]

^Slider^ I agree, in my line of work I also get certain "exemptions" from time to time and they are very, very nessecary in order to save lives, it is just that I know of people who have used them incorrectly and got punished for it. I just cannot believe that there was no driver that was not "playing the game" and that can only be bad for the whole BiB community as it fosters the sort of "us and them" mentality seen in this thread. It is another examople of how the religious implimentation of an ill-thought out law is driving a wedge between the ordinary MOP and the BiB. This needs to be prevented at all costs as that relationship is essential for both sections of society.

Just my "tuppeny" worth.

[^Slider^]

I agree with your comments. As i have stated elsewhere on this site i think speed enforcement has gone too far and is no longer used as an educational tool.

With alot of road traffic stuff its about education, 40 in a 30 at 4am (conditons / traffic / location good) then suitable advice from me. Do it at wrong time / location / traffic conditions etc then expect to get a bit more. Cameras cannot tell this and punish rather than educate.

Im sure there are some that "play the game"
Same as alot of public do the same as well!
Me "turn your fog lights off mate, its not foggy and your dazzling drivers, take it as advice and keep them off unless needed or i will give you a ticket"
Them "im sorry i didnt realise they were on"
Me "no worries sir just bear in mind for the future"

10 mins later same car with fog lights on crewmate speaks to them
CM "are you aware your foglights are on"
them "no officer i didnt realise im sorry wont happen again"
Me "i spoke to you 10 mins earlier, heres your ticket"

Education to comply
Stuck on for playing the chance game.

Edited to add : 30 limits are there and will not change upwards in residential areas i cant say all 30 limits are justified as some are just reductions for reductions sake, but if they are there then they are enforceable by police or camera. If a camera is going to catch you its gonna catch us as well!

>> Edited by ^Slider^ on Thursday 8th December 10:11

[james_j]

The main point for me is that they were logged as exceeded the limit...without a problem.

[^Slider^]

james_j said:

The main point for me is that they were logged as exceeded the limit...without a problem.

Why is that a main point?

[slim_boy_fat]

BliarOut said:

^Slider^ said: I may be getting the wrong end of the stick here, if so i do apologise, i am taking this to read "why can plod get away with speeding when we cant" Nah, I think we are all just a bit concerned because apparently, 'Speed Kills'

Top marks, if speed on the roads is such an issue then maybe its not justifiable for the police to do it, even when on a shout.

The reality is that speeding is not unsafe in certain circumstances and should be treated as such.

60mph passed a school at 3.30pm, not a good. 80 mph on the glen coe road at 7.00am on a sunday morning, should be manditory!!!

[njwcat7]

Regardless of whether or not the 5000 'catches' were justified, it sends out the message that discretion is applied to the Police and not to the general public.

I'm also impressed by the Essex police force's ability to ensure that not one single driver ever exceeded the limit without complete justification, which is a fantastic example to set the public if only we could believe it .......

[esselte]

^Slider^ said:

james_j said: The main point for me is that they were logged as exceeded the limit...without a problem. Why is that a main point?

'cos police officers can speed past cameras 5000 times without incident.Doesn't this make the "speed kills" mantra out to be a bit of a lie? (If this is not what you meant James, then I apologise)

[Jonleeper]

njwcat7 said:

Regardless of whether or not the 5000 'catches' were justified, it sends out the message that discretion is applied to the Police and not to the general public. I'm also impressed by the Essex police force's ability to ensure that not one single driver ever exceeded the limit without complete justification, which is a fantastic example to set the public if only we could believe it .......

No I disagree, discretion SHOULD be applied to the BiB, they have a very particular set of circumstances to live and work within and need the ability to break the rules where nessecary. I agree that the use of an arbitrary single issue detection system (AKA scameras) are never the best method for detecting, let alone prosecuting, offences and the use of BiB on the roads detecting and usoing their judgement would be preferable. Even in these cases much more discretion and even complete impunity would still need to be applied to the BiB over a normal MOP.

As for the example its great isn't it????????????

[^Slider^]

njwcat7 said:

Regardless of whether or not the 5000 'catches' were justified, it sends out the message that discretion is applied to the Police and not to the general public. I'm also impressed by the Essex police force's ability to ensure that not one single driver ever exceeded the limit without complete justification, which is a fantastic example to set the public if only we could believe it .......

There is probably less discression applied to the police and if it wasnt justified then i would expect to get stuck on (in my force anyway)cant speak for essex

Besides discression doesnt come into it its a legal exemption for police, fire and ambulance. I wander if the same facts were requested from fire and ambulance and wether there would be such a response if 5000 ambulances were caught.

[Mr Freefall]

safespeed said:

The real problem is that the public needs some of the discretion afforded to the Police. If we were treated fairly, we wouldn't be pissed off about the Police being treated fairly and 'given the benefit of the doubt'.

Well said...

Discretion, but that does not make the numbers at all. Not on this site but on traffic-answers.com there are some residintial cops, and you should have read the post about loving to make the numbers up, and how on cloud 9 they were everytime they could issue a ticket, and the best time of the week for issueing tickets etc etc. No discrestion whatsoever, but number crunching and filling the quota.

Since the rumblings on here with a certain officer and his employer, said plod deleted nearly 2000 of his posts on that site...

If the 5000 were blue lights, then fair dooos, excepted, Plod are there to do a job, and 99% do it well. I have Plod in the familly, and we dont set a different table for them in the garage on Christmas Day, its a Job not your Life...

So glad I get the train to work now, sod driving, you have to watch your arse all the time. Best bet, SORN the car and get a pushbike.

Mr F

>> Edited by Mr Freefall on Thursday 8th December 11:30

[^Slider^]

esselte said:

^Slider^ said: james_j said: The main point for me is that they were logged as exceeded the limit...without a problem. Why is that a main point? 'cos police officers can speed past cameras 5000 times without incident.Doesn't this make the "speed kills" mantra out to be a bit of a lie? (If this is not what you meant James, then I apologise)

I wrote this earlier:

I know there has been a debate about the quality of police drivers in the past, but we are trained to drive on immediate, something the general public do not get trained in, you can have IAM training but that will never encompass immediate response.


And to the above post about ambulances and fire. They have the same exemptions too would there be a similar response if it was fire or ambulance???

[Jonleeper]

As an aside it is interesting that the exemption is rigorously applied to non emergency vehicles. I was travelling with a colleague last week who was on the last Op FRESCO as the CO’s (equivalent of Gold Command I believe) driver. On the way to an incident, whilst they were being escorted by a patrol car which was leading with blues and twos on, he got flashed, consequence 3 points and a £60 fine! The system (military) tried to help and was fobbed off by the scameras, and unfortunately the BiB, and the consequences of a court appearance for him, swerving NCO driving etc, meant that he could not risk taking it to court. This inflexibility is precisely why more BiB are required and less scameras. The police need the exemption and the public need intelegent enforcement of the law.

[^Slider^]

jamesson said:

njwcat7 - as a serving police officer, I can tell you that we DO cut the public some slack, it all depends on the circs. If you are seen to be speeding by a police officer - me for example - then I will take in to account whether or not your car is roadworthy, the weather, levels of traffic etc. and use my discretion as to whether or not you get a ticket. The problem with Gatsos is no discretion is available and please don't blame the police for installing those cameras, that comes from government guidelines which forces are obliged to follow. As for police breaking the speed limit, let me just say that I have yet to hear a single complaint from somebody who needed our help along the lines of "You got here too early"... Trust me when I say that my force sends out NIPs any time one of us goes through a speed (not safety) camera and it is checked against logs to see what kind of job we were on our way to. A shoplifter would come in as an immediate response but I would hardly be justified in putting on lights and sirens to get there. On the other hand, I would be criticised for NOT putting on lights and sirens to attend a violent domestic. A lot of the posts saying "why can they speed and we can't?" really do sound like sour grapes to me. If people want to put their foot down, they either accept the punishment if they get caught or they go to the track for a day, it's their choice.

I wander if the public really know how much discression they really get when driving considering the number of offences that can be found on a vehicle.

Ever been stopped and not given a producer. Thats discression too believe it or not.
Ever been told to put your seatbelt on, fix a tail light and not been given a ticket, thats discression too.

Even to the degree of not stopping someone for a minor offence, discression applied also!

[^Slider^]

Jonleeper said:

As an aside it is interesting that the exemption is rigorously applied to non emergency vehicles. I was travelling with a colleague last week who was on the last Op FRESCO as the CO’s (equivalent of Gold Command I believe) driver. On the way to an incident, whilst they were being escorted by a patrol car which was leading with blues and twos on, he got flashed, consequence 3 points and a £60 fine! The system (military) tried to help and was fobbed off by the scameras, and unfortunately the BiB, and the consequences of a court appearance for him, swerving NCO driving etc, meant that he could not risk taking it to court. This inflexibility is precisely why more BiB are required and less scameras. The police need the exemption and the public need intelegent enforcement of the law.

If we are refering to cameras id agree with cameras where appropriate and necessary and here's that word again, justifiable.

So in reality that would be less cameras and more BiB