Being detained & your rights?
Discussion
R1 Dave said:
You don't need any qualification to deal with defects which are 'obvious' such as bald tyres etc. You could argue it doesn't need any 'examination' as they're clear to see!
This is my understanding, I'll accept it isn't my particular area of expertise so I could be incorrect.
I'm not sure that's correct. Under the RTA it has to be an authorised officer or an examiner. The Chief Constable of a given constabulary can appoint Traffic Officers to be authorised officers following training. A "normal" PC who's not authorised cannot examine a car. This is my understanding, I'll accept it isn't my particular area of expertise so I could be incorrect.
Not to a full VE level they can't but if you're stopped for a broken tail light are you suggesting a non VE trained officer can't issue a ticket because they're not authorised to use their eyes? Likewise a tyre that you can clearly see the cord sticking out of?
The other option is they seize the car for a VE to look over it at a later date which is rather less convenient.
The other option is they seize the car for a VE to look over it at a later date which is rather less convenient.
Is it still the case the police need a reason to stop and search you. I was watching an episode of police camera action the other night and the officer stopped someone (later turned out had done nothing wrong), the PC basically said under the RTA section 163 (I think it was 163 it's a few weeks ago now) anybody operating a motor vehicle could be stopped without reason to have thier vehicle and documentation checked.
I was always under the impression they needed a reason (easily fabricated though, excessive braking while approaching an island for me about 20 years ago in a corsa gsi at 2 am)
I was always under the impression they needed a reason (easily fabricated though, excessive braking while approaching an island for me about 20 years ago in a corsa gsi at 2 am)
Markbarry1977 said:
Is it still the case the police need a reason to stop and search you. I was watching an episode of police camera action the other night and the officer stopped someone (later turned out had done nothing wrong), the PC basically said under the RTA section 163 (I think it was 163 it's a few weeks ago now) anybody operating a motor vehicle could be stopped without reason to have thier vehicle and documentation checked.
I was always under the impression they needed a reason (easily fabricated though, excessive braking while approaching an island for me about 20 years ago in a corsa gsi at 2 am)
He's right. The police can stop a motor vehicle without reason. But to search it they need to have a reason, which includes suspicion. I was always under the impression they needed a reason (easily fabricated though, excessive braking while approaching an island for me about 20 years ago in a corsa gsi at 2 am)
R1 Dave said:
Not to a full VE level they can't but if you're stopped for a broken tail light are you suggesting a non VE trained officer can't issue a ticket because they're not authorised to use their eyes? Likewise a tyre that you can clearly see the cord sticking out of?
The other option is they seize the car for a VE to look over it at a later date which is rather less convenient.
That would make sense but I can't find the law that gives those rights to a PC that's not been authorised. Perhaps it's outside of the RTA. The other option is they seize the car for a VE to look over it at a later date which is rather less convenient.
Alpinestars said:
R1 Dave said:
Not to a full VE level they can't but if you're stopped for a broken tail light are you suggesting a non VE trained officer can't issue a ticket because they're not authorised to use their eyes? Likewise a tyre that you can clearly see the cord sticking out of?
The other option is they seize the car for a VE to look over it at a later date which is rather less convenient.
That would make sense but I can't find the law that gives those rights to a PC that's not been authorised. Perhaps it's outside of the RTA. The other option is they seize the car for a VE to look over it at a later date which is rather less convenient.
Greendubber said:
Alpinestars said:
R1 Dave said:
Not to a full VE level they can't but if you're stopped for a broken tail light are you suggesting a non VE trained officer can't issue a ticket because they're not authorised to use their eyes? Likewise a tyre that you can clearly see the cord sticking out of?
The other option is they seize the car for a VE to look over it at a later date which is rather less convenient.
That would make sense but I can't find the law that gives those rights to a PC that's not been authorised. Perhaps it's outside of the RTA. The other option is they seize the car for a VE to look over it at a later date which is rather less convenient.
S67 Testing of condition of vehicles on roads.
(1)An authorised examiner may test a motor vehicle on a road for the purpose of—
( a )ascertaining whether the following requirements, namely—
(i)the construction and use requirements, and
(ii)the requirement that the condition of the vehicle is not such that its use on a road would involve a danger of injury to any person,are complied with as respects the vehicle.
(4)The following persons may act as authorised examiners for the purposes of this section [F5and section 67A of this Act]—
F6(a). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(b)a person appointed as an examiner under section F766Aof this Act,
(c)a person appointed to examine and inspect public carriages for the purposes of the M1Metropolitan Public Carriage Act 1869,
(d)a person appointed to act for the purposes of this section by the Secretary of State,
(e)a constable authorised so to act by or on behalf of a chief officer of police,
[F10(ea)a person appointed by a chief officer of police in England or Wales (other than the Commissioner of Police for the City of London) to act, under the directions of that chief officer, for the purposes of this section, and]
(f)a person appointed by the police authority F11... [F12in Scotland, or by the Common Council of the City of London,] to act, under the directions of the chief officer of police, for the purposes of this section.
(5)A person mentioned in subsection (4)(a) to (d) [F13, (ea)] and (f) must produce his authority to act for the purposes of this section if required to do so.
This is how the Derbyshire Police Chief Constable confers those powers. They are only conferred to specific officers and staff, and those that are not authorised can only inspect a vehicle with the owners consent.
Investigation of Construction and Use and Associated Offences at the Roadside
Authority
The power to test and inspect vehicles is conferred upon authorised Examiners by Section 67(1) of the Road Traffic Act 1988. The Chief Constable so authorises officers who have successfully completed a Traffic Patrol course. Police Staff employees may also be so authorised by the Chief Constable.
Conditional on the co-operation of the driver and/or owner, police officers who are not specifically authorised under the Road Traffic Act may visually inspect a vehicle at the roadside and deal with any offences disclosed as the circumstances dictate. However, they should restrict their actions to a level appropriate to their knowledge of both the legislation
Alpinestars said:
Markbarry1977 said:
Vaud said:
Bigends said:
Not sure about the holding the keys to ransom bit
The officer had reasonable grounds to hold on to the keys until checks could be made?Given so many places don't pursue bikes, it's not unreasonable?
The Mad Monk said:
Alpinestars said:
Markbarry1977 said:
Vaud said:
Bigends said:
Not sure about the holding the keys to ransom bit
The officer had reasonable grounds to hold on to the keys until checks could be made?Given so many places don't pursue bikes, it's not unreasonable?
Vaud said:
Alpinestars said:
They can't demand you hand your keys over just for a traffic stop. Their powers are limited to, stopping you, asking your name, address and some circumstance, date of birth.
But they can ask and you can voluntarily surrender?Alpinestars said:
Greendubber said:
Alpinestars said:
R1 Dave said:
Not to a full VE level they can't but if you're stopped for a broken tail light are you suggesting a non VE trained officer can't issue a ticket because they're not authorised to use their eyes? Likewise a tyre that you can clearly see the cord sticking out of?
The other option is they seize the car for a VE to look over it at a later date which is rather less convenient.
That would make sense but I can't find the law that gives those rights to a PC that's not been authorised. Perhaps it's outside of the RTA. The other option is they seize the car for a VE to look over it at a later date which is rather less convenient.
S67 Testing of condition of vehicles on roads.
(1)An authorised examiner may test a motor vehicle on a road for the purpose of—
( a )ascertaining whether the following requirements, namely—
(i)the construction and use requirements, and
(ii)the requirement that the condition of the vehicle is not such that its use on a road would involve a danger of injury to any person,are complied with as respects the vehicle.
(4)The following persons may act as authorised examiners for the purposes of this section [F5and section 67A of this Act]—
F6(a). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(b)a person appointed as an examiner under section F766Aof this Act,
(c)a person appointed to examine and inspect public carriages for the purposes of the M1Metropolitan Public Carriage Act 1869,
(d)a person appointed to act for the purposes of this section by the Secretary of State,
(e)a constable authorised so to act by or on behalf of a chief officer of police,
[F10(ea)a person appointed by a chief officer of police in England or Wales (other than the Commissioner of Police for the City of London) to act, under the directions of that chief officer, for the purposes of this section, and]
(f)a person appointed by the police authority F11... [F12in Scotland, or by the Common Council of the City of London,] to act, under the directions of the chief officer of police, for the purposes of this section.
(5)A person mentioned in subsection (4)(a) to (d) [F13, (ea)] and (f) must produce his authority to act for the purposes of this section if required to do so.
This is how the Derbyshire Police Chief Constable confers those powers. They are only conferred to specific officers and staff, and those that are not authorised can only inspect a vehicle with the owners consent.
Investigation of Construction and Use and Associated Offences at the Roadside
Authority
The power to test and inspect vehicles is conferred upon authorised Examiners by Section 67(1) of the Road Traffic Act 1988. The Chief Constable so authorises officers who have successfully completed a Traffic Patrol course. Police Staff employees may also be so authorised by the Chief Constable.
Conditional on the co-operation of the driver and/or owner, police officers who are not specifically authorised under the Road Traffic Act may visually inspect a vehicle at the roadside and deal with any offences disclosed as the circumstances dictate. However, they should restrict their actions to a level appropriate to their knowledge of both the legislation
To stop someone and report for an obvious defect (tyre, bulb, broken windscreen) does not require an examiner, so any officer can deal with it in a way they see fit.
Greendubber said:
Alpinestars said:
Greendubber said:
Alpinestars said:
R1 Dave said:
Not to a full VE level they can't but if you're stopped for a broken tail light are you suggesting a non VE trained officer can't issue a ticket because they're not authorised to use their eyes? Likewise a tyre that you can clearly see the cord sticking out of?
The other option is they seize the car for a VE to look over it at a later date which is rather less convenient.
That would make sense but I can't find the law that gives those rights to a PC that's not been authorised. Perhaps it's outside of the RTA. The other option is they seize the car for a VE to look over it at a later date which is rather less convenient.
S67 Testing of condition of vehicles on roads.
(1)An authorised examiner may test a motor vehicle on a road for the purpose of—
( a )ascertaining whether the following requirements, namely—
(i)the construction and use requirements, and
(ii)the requirement that the condition of the vehicle is not such that its use on a road would involve a danger of injury to any person,are complied with as respects the vehicle.
(4)The following persons may act as authorised examiners for the purposes of this section [F5and section 67A of this Act]—
F6(a). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(b)a person appointed as an examiner under section F766Aof this Act,
(c)a person appointed to examine and inspect public carriages for the purposes of the M1Metropolitan Public Carriage Act 1869,
(d)a person appointed to act for the purposes of this section by the Secretary of State,
(e)a constable authorised so to act by or on behalf of a chief officer of police,
[F10(ea)a person appointed by a chief officer of police in England or Wales (other than the Commissioner of Police for the City of London) to act, under the directions of that chief officer, for the purposes of this section, and]
(f)a person appointed by the police authority F11... [F12in Scotland, or by the Common Council of the City of London,] to act, under the directions of the chief officer of police, for the purposes of this section.
(5)A person mentioned in subsection (4)(a) to (d) [F13, (ea)] and (f) must produce his authority to act for the purposes of this section if required to do so.
This is how the Derbyshire Police Chief Constable confers those powers. They are only conferred to specific officers and staff, and those that are not authorised can only inspect a vehicle with the owners consent.
Investigation of Construction and Use and Associated Offences at the Roadside
Authority
The power to test and inspect vehicles is conferred upon authorised Examiners by Section 67(1) of the Road Traffic Act 1988. The Chief Constable so authorises officers who have successfully completed a Traffic Patrol course. Police Staff employees may also be so authorised by the Chief Constable.
Conditional on the co-operation of the driver and/or owner, police officers who are not specifically authorised under the Road Traffic Act may visually inspect a vehicle at the roadside and deal with any offences disclosed as the circumstances dictate. However, they should restrict their actions to a level appropriate to their knowledge of both the legislation
To stop someone and report for an obvious defect (tyre, bulb, broken windscreen) does not require an examiner, so any officer can deal with it in a way they see fit.
I'm not saying it doesn't exist, but it's not in the RTA, and it begs the question why police force Chief Constables appoint such people, and prohibit any other officer from an examination unless the driver/owner consents.
As you know from the PC Savage thread, I don't do hearsay or PC plod says. PC's obtain their power through law. So you'd have to point to a law that says what you're asserting.
Alpinestars said:
Greendubber said:
Alpinestars said:
Greendubber said:
Alpinestars said:
R1 Dave said:
Not to a full VE level they can't but if you're stopped for a broken tail light are you suggesting a non VE trained officer can't issue a ticket because they're not authorised to use their eyes? Likewise a tyre that you can clearly see the cord sticking out of?
The other option is they seize the car for a VE to look over it at a later date which is rather less convenient.
That would make sense but I can't find the law that gives those rights to a PC that's not been authorised. Perhaps it's outside of the RTA. The other option is they seize the car for a VE to look over it at a later date which is rather less convenient.
S67 Testing of condition of vehicles on roads.
(1)An authorised examiner may test a motor vehicle on a road for the purpose of—
( a )ascertaining whether the following requirements, namely—
(i)the construction and use requirements, and
(ii)the requirement that the condition of the vehicle is not such that its use on a road would involve a danger of injury to any person,are complied with as respects the vehicle.
(4)The following persons may act as authorised examiners for the purposes of this section [F5and section 67A of this Act]—
F6(a). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(b)a person appointed as an examiner under section F766Aof this Act,
(c)a person appointed to examine and inspect public carriages for the purposes of the M1Metropolitan Public Carriage Act 1869,
(d)a person appointed to act for the purposes of this section by the Secretary of State,
(e)a constable authorised so to act by or on behalf of a chief officer of police,
[F10(ea)a person appointed by a chief officer of police in England or Wales (other than the Commissioner of Police for the City of London) to act, under the directions of that chief officer, for the purposes of this section, and]
(f)a person appointed by the police authority F11... [F12in Scotland, or by the Common Council of the City of London,] to act, under the directions of the chief officer of police, for the purposes of this section.
(5)A person mentioned in subsection (4)(a) to (d) [F13, (ea)] and (f) must produce his authority to act for the purposes of this section if required to do so.
This is how the Derbyshire Police Chief Constable confers those powers. They are only conferred to specific officers and staff, and those that are not authorised can only inspect a vehicle with the owners consent.
Investigation of Construction and Use and Associated Offences at the Roadside
Authority
The power to test and inspect vehicles is conferred upon authorised Examiners by Section 67(1) of the Road Traffic Act 1988. The Chief Constable so authorises officers who have successfully completed a Traffic Patrol course. Police Staff employees may also be so authorised by the Chief Constable.
Conditional on the co-operation of the driver and/or owner, police officers who are not specifically authorised under the Road Traffic Act may visually inspect a vehicle at the roadside and deal with any offences disclosed as the circumstances dictate. However, they should restrict their actions to a level appropriate to their knowledge of both the legislation
To stop someone and report for an obvious defect (tyre, bulb, broken windscreen) does not require an examiner, so any officer can deal with it in a way they see fit.
I'm not saying it doesn't exist, but it's not in the RTA, and it begs the question why police force Chief Constables appoint such people, and prohibit any other officer from an examination unless the driver/owner consents.
As you know from the PC Savage thread, I don't do hearsay or PC plod says. PC's obtain their power through law. So you'd have to point to a law that says what you're asserting.
Greendubber said:
Alpinestars said:
Greendubber said:
Alpinestars said:
Greendubber said:
Alpinestars said:
R1 Dave said:
Not to a full VE level they can't but if you're stopped for a broken tail light are you suggesting a non VE trained officer can't issue a ticket because they're not authorised to use their eyes? Likewise a tyre that you can clearly see the cord sticking out of?
The other option is they seize the car for a VE to look over it at a later date which is rather less convenient.
That would make sense but I can't find the law that gives those rights to a PC that's not been authorised. Perhaps it's outside of the RTA. The other option is they seize the car for a VE to look over it at a later date which is rather less convenient.
S67 Testing of condition of vehicles on roads.
(1)An authorised examiner may test a motor vehicle on a road for the purpose of—
( a )ascertaining whether the following requirements, namely—
(i)the construction and use requirements, and
(ii)the requirement that the condition of the vehicle is not such that its use on a road would involve a danger of injury to any person,are complied with as respects the vehicle.
(4)The following persons may act as authorised examiners for the purposes of this section [F5and section 67A of this Act]—
F6(a). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(b)a person appointed as an examiner under section F766Aof this Act,
(c)a person appointed to examine and inspect public carriages for the purposes of the M1Metropolitan Public Carriage Act 1869,
(d)a person appointed to act for the purposes of this section by the Secretary of State,
(e)a constable authorised so to act by or on behalf of a chief officer of police,
[F10(ea)a person appointed by a chief officer of police in England or Wales (other than the Commissioner of Police for the City of London) to act, under the directions of that chief officer, for the purposes of this section, and]
(f)a person appointed by the police authority F11... [F12in Scotland, or by the Common Council of the City of London,] to act, under the directions of the chief officer of police, for the purposes of this section.
(5)A person mentioned in subsection (4)(a) to (d) [F13, (ea)] and (f) must produce his authority to act for the purposes of this section if required to do so.
This is how the Derbyshire Police Chief Constable confers those powers. They are only conferred to specific officers and staff, and those that are not authorised can only inspect a vehicle with the owners consent.
Investigation of Construction and Use and Associated Offences at the Roadside
Authority
The power to test and inspect vehicles is conferred upon authorised Examiners by Section 67(1) of the Road Traffic Act 1988. The Chief Constable so authorises officers who have successfully completed a Traffic Patrol course. Police Staff employees may also be so authorised by the Chief Constable.
Conditional on the co-operation of the driver and/or owner, police officers who are not specifically authorised under the Road Traffic Act may visually inspect a vehicle at the roadside and deal with any offences disclosed as the circumstances dictate. However, they should restrict their actions to a level appropriate to their knowledge of both the legislation
To stop someone and report for an obvious defect (tyre, bulb, broken windscreen) does not require an examiner, so any officer can deal with it in a way they see fit.
I'm not saying it doesn't exist, but it's not in the RTA, and it begs the question why police force Chief Constables appoint such people, and prohibit any other officer from an examination unless the driver/owner consents.
As you know from the PC Savage thread, I don't do hearsay or PC plod says. PC's obtain their power through law. So you'd have to point to a law that says what you're asserting.
Alpinestars said:
Greendubber said:
Alpinestars said:
Greendubber said:
Alpinestars said:
Greendubber said:
Alpinestars said:
R1 Dave said:
Not to a full VE level they can't but if you're stopped for a broken tail light are you suggesting a non VE trained officer can't issue a ticket because they're not authorised to use their eyes? Likewise a tyre that you can clearly see the cord sticking out of?
The other option is they seize the car for a VE to look over it at a later date which is rather less convenient.
That would make sense but I can't find the law that gives those rights to a PC that's not been authorised. Perhaps it's outside of the RTA. The other option is they seize the car for a VE to look over it at a later date which is rather less convenient.
S67 Testing of condition of vehicles on roads.
(1)An authorised examiner may test a motor vehicle on a road for the purpose of—
( a )ascertaining whether the following requirements, namely—
(i)the construction and use requirements, and
(ii)the requirement that the condition of the vehicle is not such that its use on a road would involve a danger of injury to any person,are complied with as respects the vehicle.
(4)The following persons may act as authorised examiners for the purposes of this section [F5and section 67A of this Act]—
F6(a). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
(b)a person appointed as an examiner under section F766Aof this Act,
(c)a person appointed to examine and inspect public carriages for the purposes of the M1Metropolitan Public Carriage Act 1869,
(d)a person appointed to act for the purposes of this section by the Secretary of State,
(e)a constable authorised so to act by or on behalf of a chief officer of police,
[F10(ea)a person appointed by a chief officer of police in England or Wales (other than the Commissioner of Police for the City of London) to act, under the directions of that chief officer, for the purposes of this section, and]
(f)a person appointed by the police authority F11... [F12in Scotland, or by the Common Council of the City of London,] to act, under the directions of the chief officer of police, for the purposes of this section.
(5)A person mentioned in subsection (4)(a) to (d) [F13, (ea)] and (f) must produce his authority to act for the purposes of this section if required to do so.
This is how the Derbyshire Police Chief Constable confers those powers. They are only conferred to specific officers and staff, and those that are not authorised can only inspect a vehicle with the owners consent.
Investigation of Construction and Use and Associated Offences at the Roadside
Authority
The power to test and inspect vehicles is conferred upon authorised Examiners by Section 67(1) of the Road Traffic Act 1988. The Chief Constable so authorises officers who have successfully completed a Traffic Patrol course. Police Staff employees may also be so authorised by the Chief Constable.
Conditional on the co-operation of the driver and/or owner, police officers who are not specifically authorised under the Road Traffic Act may visually inspect a vehicle at the roadside and deal with any offences disclosed as the circumstances dictate. However, they should restrict their actions to a level appropriate to their knowledge of both the legislation
To stop someone and report for an obvious defect (tyre, bulb, broken windscreen) does not require an examiner, so any officer can deal with it in a way they see fit.
I'm not saying it doesn't exist, but it's not in the RTA, and it begs the question why police force Chief Constables appoint such people, and prohibit any other officer from an examination unless the driver/owner consents.
As you know from the PC Savage thread, I don't do hearsay or PC plod says. PC's obtain their power through law. So you'd have to point to a law that says what you're asserting.
Chief Officers can appoint various different powers, hence why the role of PCSO carries different powers in different force areas, what powers they have comes down to that particular force Chief.
If an Officer stops a car and sees an obvious defect, they're not performing an examination, they're simply witnessing an offence. Similarly if an Officer witnesses an assault they don't need to be a medical professional to recognise the sight of blood! You don't need a particular authorisation in law to use your eyes. The legal bit is the power to issue a ticket/report/arrest etc and those powers are held in various different laws.
If an Officer stops a car and sees an obvious defect, they're not performing an examination, they're simply witnessing an offence. Similarly if an Officer witnesses an assault they don't need to be a medical professional to recognise the sight of blood! You don't need a particular authorisation in law to use your eyes. The legal bit is the power to issue a ticket/report/arrest etc and those powers are held in various different laws.
R1 Dave said:
Chief Officers can appoint various different powers, hence why the role of PCSO carries different powers in different force areas, what powers they have comes down to that particular force Chief.
If an Officer stops a car and sees an obvious defect, they're not performing an examination, they're simply witnessing an offence. Similarly if an Officer witnesses an assault they don't need to be a medical professional to recognise the sight of blood! You don't need a particular authorisation in law to use your eyes. The legal bit is the power to issue a ticket/report/arrest etc and those powers are held in various different laws.
Assaults were going to be my next point "but you're not authorised to state I cut his arm off with a sword, tell me in law now!"If an Officer stops a car and sees an obvious defect, they're not performing an examination, they're simply witnessing an offence. Similarly if an Officer witnesses an assault they don't need to be a medical professional to recognise the sight of blood! You don't need a particular authorisation in law to use your eyes. The legal bit is the power to issue a ticket/report/arrest etc and those powers are held in various different laws.
Greendubber said:
R1 Dave said:
Chief Officers can appoint various different powers, hence why the role of PCSO carries different powers in different force areas, what powers they have comes down to that particular force Chief.
If an Officer stops a car and sees an obvious defect, they're not performing an examination, they're simply witnessing an offence. Similarly if an Officer witnesses an assault they don't need to be a medical professional to recognise the sight of blood! You don't need a particular authorisation in law to use your eyes. The legal bit is the power to issue a ticket/report/arrest etc and those powers are held in various different laws.
Assaults were going to be my next point "but you're not authorised to state I cut his arm off with a sword, tell me in law now!"If an Officer stops a car and sees an obvious defect, they're not performing an examination, they're simply witnessing an offence. Similarly if an Officer witnesses an assault they don't need to be a medical professional to recognise the sight of blood! You don't need a particular authorisation in law to use your eyes. The legal bit is the power to issue a ticket/report/arrest etc and those powers are held in various different laws.
R1 Dave said:
Chief Officers can appoint various different powers, hence why the role of PCSO carries different powers in different force areas, what powers they have comes down to that particular force Chief.
If an Officer stops a car and sees an obvious defect, they're not performing an examination, they're simply witnessing an offence. Similarly if an Officer witnesses an assault they don't need to be a medical professional to recognise the sight of blood! You don't need a particular authorisation in law to use your eyes. The legal bit is the power to issue a ticket/report/arrest etc and those powers are held in various different laws.
The assault would be covered under S110 SOCPA. That's what gives a PC powers to stop an assault, and arrest. In fact, S110 gives us all the power to arrest in the case of an assault. If an Officer stops a car and sees an obvious defect, they're not performing an examination, they're simply witnessing an offence. Similarly if an Officer witnesses an assault they don't need to be a medical professional to recognise the sight of blood! You don't need a particular authorisation in law to use your eyes. The legal bit is the power to issue a ticket/report/arrest etc and those powers are held in various different laws.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff