SPLASH CASE COST £20,000
Discussion
Sky News said:
SPLASH CASE COST £20,000
A driving instructor was put through a £20,000 prosecution after he sped through a puddle and splashed a police officer with water.
Tahir Mahmood claimed he apologised immediately after dousing Pc Anthony Ellison, but was later summoned to court and stood trial.
He faced the prospect of a £2,500 fine and the addition of points to his clean driving licence, before his acquittal this month.
Community leaders in Blackburn criticised the Crown Prosecution Service for proceeding with the case, which involved two court hearings and is believed to have cost £20,000.
The incident happened on November 29 last year, when Mr Mahmood was driving close to Ewood Park football ground.
It is understood that as he changed lanes near to the stadium, home to Blackburn Rovers, he passed through the puddle at speed.
Mr Mahmood, of Blackburn, was later stopped by a traffic officer and claimed in court that he offered an instant apology.
Seven months later, he was summoned to court on a charge of driving without consideration for other road users.
Although a witness claimed he had made no attempt to slow down as he raced through the pool of water, magistrates found him not guilty.
A CPS spokesman said: "We cannot confirm the cost of the case, but can confirm that our involvement began in June of this year."
www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-13189239,00.html
I was reading a newspaper report on this just now and was struck by the Sergeant's evidence. Apparently he described the splash as, "a tidal wave". Makes you wonder how much value one should attribute to other evidence he gives 
And in the same paper, there was a report on the team of seven officers policing (if that's a word one can use in this situation) a 'No right turn' order. A spokesperson for the 'service' intimated that people who ignored no right turn signs were also likely to drive without insurance and be involved in hit and run accidents. Clearly another graduate from the Brunstrumfurher school of idiotic thought!
Streaky
And in the same paper, there was a report on the team of seven officers policing (if that's a word one can use in this situation) a 'No right turn' order. A spokesperson for the 'service' intimated that people who ignored no right turn signs were also likely to drive without insurance and be involved in hit and run accidents. Clearly another graduate from the Brunstrumfurher school of idiotic thought!
Streaky
"Mail" carried this story and cited other incidents which in opinion of journalists (Jaya Narrain and Suzanne Finney) illustrate a worrying lack of clear decision making on part of criminal justice system:
These are:
Blackheath - seven officers hid behind some bushes
to ticket people making illegal right turns at a T- junction.
Darlington: Policeman used CS spray on blike toting a water pistol
Belgravia: discover that convicted burglar has been BiB for last 3 years.
Paper dedicates 2 page spread to this on page 12-13.
Lancs is responsible for prosecuting Mr Mahmood. According to Mr Mahmood (in paper
) - BiB were policing football match at Ewood. he changed lanes and accidentally splashed the BiB. CPS decided it was "in public interest" to prosecute for lack of consideration to other road users.
Interestingly - we had the thread on the police figures which alleges that Lancs is top of the cop parade for "crime solving and toppest BiB -ing." Paper alludes to some other figures which say that Lancashire has worst crime figures in country for 2002/2003 with increase of violent crime up by 47%
Lies, darned lies, statistics.....
Incidentally - I got drenched by passing car the other day. Annoying - and costume I was wearing at time is now destined for recycling bank...but bet I would have received short shrift by BiBs had I reported it. In any case - accident and foreseabble in wet weather... I should really have been more aware of likelihood of drenching at time
These are:
Blackheath - seven officers hid behind some bushes
to ticket people making illegal right turns at a T- junction. Darlington: Policeman used CS spray on blike toting a water pistol
Belgravia: discover that convicted burglar has been BiB for last 3 years.
Paper dedicates 2 page spread to this on page 12-13.
Lancs is responsible for prosecuting Mr Mahmood. According to Mr Mahmood (in paper
) - BiB were policing football match at Ewood. he changed lanes and accidentally splashed the BiB. CPS decided it was "in public interest" to prosecute for lack of consideration to other road users. Interestingly - we had the thread on the police figures which alleges that Lancs is top of the cop parade for "crime solving and toppest BiB -ing." Paper alludes to some other figures which say that Lancashire has worst crime figures in country for 2002/2003 with increase of violent crime up by 47%
Lies, darned lies, statistics.....
Incidentally - I got drenched by passing car the other day. Annoying - and costume I was wearing at time is now destined for recycling bank...but bet I would have received short shrift by BiBs had I reported it. In any case - accident and foreseabble in wet weather... I should really have been more aware of likelihood of drenching at time
Trawling through old SPL threads, I stumbled across this one and thought I'd post a comment:
My son was walking home from school yesterday following an afternoon of heavy rain.
As he approached a puddle which had formed alongside the kerb, a white Ford Focus steered into (yes, steered into) the puddle and covered him in mud, water and associated crap. No harm done aside from a whole heap of cleaning and one seriously peeved nipper.
The Focus ? A fully marked BiB patrol car with four laughing wa**kers inside. Real mature, guys. Real mature.
I could not and cannot see any point in pursuing this matter any further. Too much 'hassle' taking on the BiB, my son's word against theirs etc etc. This is enough to make me bloody angry. Reading this thread just makes it worse.
>> Edited by sotonS2 on Thursday 21st October 21:38
My son was walking home from school yesterday following an afternoon of heavy rain.
As he approached a puddle which had formed alongside the kerb, a white Ford Focus steered into (yes, steered into) the puddle and covered him in mud, water and associated crap. No harm done aside from a whole heap of cleaning and one seriously peeved nipper.
The Focus ? A fully marked BiB patrol car with four laughing wa**kers inside. Real mature, guys. Real mature.
I could not and cannot see any point in pursuing this matter any further. Too much 'hassle' taking on the BiB, my son's word against theirs etc etc. This is enough to make me bloody angry. Reading this thread just makes it worse.
>> Edited by sotonS2 on Thursday 21st October 21:38
Davel said:
How could it possibly be 'In the best in interests of the matter' to be tried?
Absolute waste of public money and even worse publicity for the powers that be.
If you walked into a Police Station and demanded someone be prosecuted for splashing you by driving through a puddle, would they prosecute ? Would they hell !
*This* is why the Police are rapidly earning the contempt of the public.
Not so much that this happens (a cop is a w*nker and the CPU screw up), but nothing happens as a result of it. Will the cop be disciplined ? Will the CPS officer be disciplined ?
Of course they won't.
A vehicle driving through a puddle and splashing a pedestrian in one of the example in case law of driving without reasonable consideration for other road users.
The driver will no doubt have done it on purpose and got caught.
We were discussing zero tolerance on another thread and this is an example.
If it was one of us or one of our loved ones, who the driver had splashed, we'd want action taken against the driver.
Wouldn't we?
I can't see a problem with it, I really can't...
Street
The driver will no doubt have done it on purpose and got caught.
We were discussing zero tolerance on another thread and this is an example.
If it was one of us or one of our loved ones, who the driver had splashed, we'd want action taken against the driver.
Wouldn't we?
I can't see a problem with it, I really can't...
Street
Streetcop said:
A vehicle driving through a puddle and splashing a pedestrian in one of the example in case law of driving without reasonable consideration for other road users.
The driver will no doubt have done it on purpose and got caught.
We were discussing zero tolerance on another thread and this is an example.
If it was one of us or one of our loved ones, who the driver had splashed, we'd want action taken against the driver.
Wouldn't we?
I can't see a problem with it, I really can't...
Street
Streetcop, your'e joking, right?! ;-(
How about the council fixes the road to reduce standing water or do you expect us to swerve to the right lane, or worse, into oncoming traffic, to avoid wetting a pedestrian?!
"The driver will no doubt have done it on purpose and got caught."
How's that, were you there then?!
"If it was one of us or one of our loved ones, who the driver had splashed, we'd want action taken against the driver."
A ridiculous suggestion and coming from a traffic cop too - this just confirms the prevailing attitude - and, after the driver apologised anyway!!!
My advice would be to avoid the kerb area in a downpour and watch for traffic (we all do this!)
On a lighter note - I recall driving along a road and seeing some kids beckoning me on to soak them - so I did - still awaiting the summons!!!
AMG Merc said:
Streetcop, your'e joking, right?! ;-(
Afraid not...deadly serious
AMG Merc said:
How about the council fixes the road to reduce standing water or do you expect us to swerve to the right lane, or worse, into oncoming traffic, to avoid wetting a pedestrian?!
Agree. The council should fix the road. As for this swerving business. I've covered 1000s of miles in my own vehicle and also police vehicles and never 'drenched' anyone by going through a puddle. If the water is so deep as to risk aquaplaning, then a reduced speed is required and therefor reduced splashing also occurs.
[quote AMG Merc]"The driver will no doubt have done it on purpose and got caught."
How's that, were you there then?![/quote]
No. I was also not there when we won the world cup, but I know it happened. Seriously, I am obviously presuming a lot...but the job I'm in does that to you...
[quote=AMC Merc]"If it was one of us or one of our loved ones, who the driver had splashed, we'd want action taken against the driver."
A ridiculous suggestion and coming from a traffic cop too - this just confirms the prevailing attitude - and, after the driver apologised anyway!!! [/quote]
I fail to see what is 'ridiculous' and your statement coming from a Member of the Public too -
The driver apologised when he was later stopped by Trafpol. Why didn't he apologise at the time, by stopping and speaking to the policeman. Or was he in fits of laughter, he couldn't stop..?
As for 'prevailing attitude'....expand on that statement please..
Street
Streetcop said:
As for 'prevailing attitude'....expand on that statement please..
Street
I was harking back to the thrust of the original thread - that the law in this country seems to focus far too much attention on car drivers - perhaps, over and above many other more useful civic duties and that, on reading your comments, you seem to fall into this camp (ie: wanting retribution for someone splashing your kinfolk!).
kurgis said:
Had a £200 suit ruined by a w*nker last week who went through at full tilt - no attempt to slow or swerve, and traffic wasn't heavy at all.
Going with Street on this, as the dry cleaners can't get it clean...
OK, OK, but what about this scenario: you're driving in heavy traffic in the inside lane, with a car following closely behind (maybe too close) and you see a puddle and a pedestrain lining up, say, 20 feet ahead of you - do you brake hard with the risk of being rear-ended just to save a pedestrian from some harmless H2O, or what?
Bananaman said:
AMG Merc said:
Streetcop, your'e joking, right?! ;-(
Afraid not...deadly serious
Sounds like your in your Perfect job Streetcop.........
It's no wounder even my 67 year old father has lost respect for the BiB....
No doubt the kind of person who phones the police complaining that 'bloody kids are standing on street corners' and wanting us to give em 'cat-o-nine-tails'...
Street
burwoodman said:
Exactly. Bunch of w*nkers. Amazed they didn't press for assault by water.
Makes me sick alright
Or attempted murder - the BIB could have drowned or caught a cold requiring 3 months off work for recovery!
I tend to agree that if you went to the police station with the registration number of a driver who had soaked you by driving through a puddle the BIBs would have a laugh and tell you to forget it.
This has clearly been a waste of public money IMO.
That's the price of justice..
My neighbour is a beat bobby who attended at a newsagent shop the other week where a juvenile had been caught stealing a can of 'Red Bull'..
The newsagent wanted to complain and therefor the 14 year old was arrested and taken to the nick.
From there, he was booked in to custody and his parents called to the nick. The bobby returns to the shop and takes a 4 page statement from the shopkeeper and then siezes the cctv tape for evidence.
He goes back to the nick, where the parents have requested a solicitor before interview.
While waiting the hour and a half for the solicitor, the bobby completes a number of sheets of paperwork to process the juvenile.
Then into interview, where the youth denies the offence, especially as the CCTV is of poor quality. On the advice of his solicitor the youth requests an ID parade and he is then bailed for this to take place.
2 weeks later the ID parade takes place...11 other youths, of similar age, build, looks take place and are each paid £10 for their services. The shopkeeper picks the youth out and the youth is then re-interviewed. He continues to deny the offence and is then charged with the offence and his fingerprints, photograph and DNA are taken before he is bailed to appear before the juvenile court.
The case is adjourned for social services reports and probation service recommendations...
And it's still on going...
price of the Red Bull (which was recovered by the shopkeeper before it was opened outside)...was 79p
The criminal justice system goes to the end of the line for any crime it would seem..
Street
My neighbour is a beat bobby who attended at a newsagent shop the other week where a juvenile had been caught stealing a can of 'Red Bull'..
The newsagent wanted to complain and therefor the 14 year old was arrested and taken to the nick.
From there, he was booked in to custody and his parents called to the nick. The bobby returns to the shop and takes a 4 page statement from the shopkeeper and then siezes the cctv tape for evidence.
He goes back to the nick, where the parents have requested a solicitor before interview.
While waiting the hour and a half for the solicitor, the bobby completes a number of sheets of paperwork to process the juvenile.
Then into interview, where the youth denies the offence, especially as the CCTV is of poor quality. On the advice of his solicitor the youth requests an ID parade and he is then bailed for this to take place.
2 weeks later the ID parade takes place...11 other youths, of similar age, build, looks take place and are each paid £10 for their services. The shopkeeper picks the youth out and the youth is then re-interviewed. He continues to deny the offence and is then charged with the offence and his fingerprints, photograph and DNA are taken before he is bailed to appear before the juvenile court.
The case is adjourned for social services reports and probation service recommendations...
And it's still on going...
price of the Red Bull (which was recovered by the shopkeeper before it was opened outside)...was 79p
The criminal justice system goes to the end of the line for any crime it would seem..
Street
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff