Warning motorists of police - flashing vs Waze
Discussion
Just idle pondering the other day - apologies if this has been covered before...
As I understand it, its illegal for me to flash an oncoming motorist to warn them of a police officer around the corner ive just come from - right? (Or is that urban myth?)
If right, how is marking the police officers position on Waze different/legal?
As I understand it, its illegal for me to flash an oncoming motorist to warn them of a police officer around the corner ive just come from - right? (Or is that urban myth?)
If right, how is marking the police officers position on Waze different/legal?
AIUI it's an urban myth.
I've seen claims that it constitutes 'perverting the course of justice' but when you read what is required for an indictment under that aspect of common law, I really can't see where it stands up
https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/public-justi...
I've seen claims that it constitutes 'perverting the course of justice' but when you read what is required for an indictment under that aspect of common law, I really can't see where it stands up
https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/public-justi...
It's a few years back but a guy was convicted of 'it' [can't remember the specific offence] and it was to do with his interfering in the duties of the police or some such, so probably marking it on a shared data base 'live' would probably attract the same - but again - details are vague; but it is out there.
This one is about 'Misuse of Headlights' as per HC - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2157763/D...
Ah - this is the chap - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1343959/D...
This one is about 'Misuse of Headlights' as per HC - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2157763/D...
Ah - this is the chap - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1343959/D...
Edited by andy_s on Tuesday 2nd October 15:39
Labradorofperception said:
It used to be Obstructing a Police Officer.
Seems illogical given they are not physically obstructing them, but i think there's a fair bit of caselaw on this, and not in the flashee's favour....
It's not 'really' tho, as the officer is not stopped from carrying out their duty which is operating the apparatus and issuing the relevant paperwork when it registers an offence. Seems illogical given they are not physically obstructing them, but i think there's a fair bit of caselaw on this, and not in the flashee's favour....
Add to that that camera vans, at least, are now operated by civilians so there's no officer to obstruct in the first place even if it was the case
It's interfering in the process (by obstructing the constable in their duty).
For it to apply the Police have to have started the process of gathering evidence against somebody speeding & then the flasher interferes with that process of evidence gathering, by warning the offender so that they may suspend their offending temporarily to frustrate the collection of that evidence.
It doesn't apply if there is no evidence of anybody speeding or likely to speed.
http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=/ew/c...
In the case quoted he was acquitted because the prosecution didn't provide evidence that somebody was speeding or likely to. If one of the officers had formed an opinion that one of the vehicles being warned was speeding prior to the warning being given then it would have been a different matter.
For it to apply the Police have to have started the process of gathering evidence against somebody speeding & then the flasher interferes with that process of evidence gathering, by warning the offender so that they may suspend their offending temporarily to frustrate the collection of that evidence.
It doesn't apply if there is no evidence of anybody speeding or likely to speed.
http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=/ew/c...
In the case quoted he was acquitted because the prosecution didn't provide evidence that somebody was speeding or likely to. If one of the officers had formed an opinion that one of the vehicles being warned was speeding prior to the warning being given then it would have been a different matter.
JNW1 said:
Flashing oncoming vehicles to warn them of the presence of things like camera vans is fairly common around where I live; even if they were so inclined I can't imagine the police have the resources available to prevent it....
They can't prevent it if people choose to do it (much like any other offending), they can only prosecute those who they have evidence against.JNW1 said:
Flashing oncoming vehicles to warn them of the presence of things like camera vans is fairly common around where I live; even if they were so inclined I can't imagine the police have the resources available to prevent it....
Same here.Even got a flash from a couple of bus drivers last week.
Long may it continue
Kewy said:
I need to look into this Waze. Is it pretty reliable in letting you know where speed cams or police are hiding doing their jobs? 
it is...it's crowd-sourced data and gamified such that drivers are encouraged to use the app to notify of hazards, whether that's a broken down vehicle, traffic jam or police (visible or hidden (yes both are options)). You get points for posting alerts, and more points if others give them a 'thumbs up'. You can also mark if a hazard isn't present which helps deter false alerts as well as notifying others when the hazard has moved on.
They were bought by Google a couple of years ago and I've now switched to that from Sygic for UK use. I still tend to use Sygic when abroad as it stores the maps locally rather than relying on data.
You may use your headlights to warn on you (your vehicle's) presence on a road. If you see a car close to the centre line of the road, then a flash, even if it is in the lee of a speed camera, is permissible.
It's always gone on. It's pathetic taking a driver to court for careless driving.
There were two cases, some years ago, on this subject. The first found that flashing was not obstruction. The second said there was because the driver flashed was exceeding the speed limit. So you can flash anyone under or at the speed limit without it being obstruction, so the police went another way.
Flashing of headlights is not careless driving.
Get a sense of proportion.
It's always gone on. It's pathetic taking a driver to court for careless driving.
There were two cases, some years ago, on this subject. The first found that flashing was not obstruction. The second said there was because the driver flashed was exceeding the speed limit. So you can flash anyone under or at the speed limit without it being obstruction, so the police went another way.
Flashing of headlights is not careless driving.
Get a sense of proportion.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff