One rule for one.....

[Freakuk]

Just curious about this one...

On leaving work a few days ago, I'm walking to the train and have to cross a busy 6 lane road (3 in either direction).

A police car drives by but at a set of traffic lights performs a u-turn onto the other carriageway, however on said traffic lights there is a no u-turn sign, are the boys in blue exempt from this?

There we no blues and two's and certainly weren't in a hurry.

[largespiced]

All in my view of course, but the Police are so stretched I always feel for them whenever something like this comes up. If its not stopped you carrying on with your day, and they get somewhere slightly faster so they can move onto the next job a little faster, then who does it harm?

[Monkeylegend]

Whats to say they weren't on a job that meant turning off their lights in order to remain low profile.

And I don't mean the chip shop run

[V8RX7]

largespiced said:

If its not stopped you carrying on with your day, and they get somewhere slightly faster so they can move onto the next job a little faster, then who does it harm?

^^^ This

Although I'd suggest the same applies if I did it and it wouldn't be accepted by most Police Officers

[Graveworm]

Like most things no right turn, No entry, one way systems, bus lanes etc it will depend on the TRO but all will say something very similar to "No person shall cause or permit any vehicle (Other than a vehicle being used for Ambulance, Fire Brigade or Police purposes) to undertake a U-Turn manoeuvre at any time on the length of road as set out .."

So it really is one rule for one (Three) often they also include council vehicles, and no need for it to even be a hindrance to comply. They still may be subject to discipline.

Edited by Graveworm on Friday 8th February 09:56

[anonymous-user]

largespiced said:

All in my view of course, but the Police are so stretched I always feel for them whenever something like this comes up. If its not stopped you carrying on with your day, and they get somewhere slightly faster so they can move onto the next job a little faster, then who does it harm?

Totally agree.

Plus, they don't put blues and twos on unless they need to. Even on emergencies. It causes its own problems - distraction for road users, panic behaviour , etc, so you really can't tell if they are on a call or not.

[Freakuk]

I guess from my perspective years ago I did the same, although on a huge junction with no traffic in either direction (so caused no harm to anyone), but low and behold a copper saw me pulled me over, in the back of their car and ended up £60 worse off.

[Monkeylegend]

Freakuk said:

I guess from my perspective years ago I did the same, although on a huge junction with no traffic in either direction (so caused no harm to anyone), but low and behold a copper saw me pulled me over, in the back of their car and ended up £60 worse off.

But presumably you were not on police business and you don't know if they were.

[TwistingMyMelon]

Have a word with yourself, if this is all you have to worry about think yourself lucky

[Bigends]

Saw this yesterday - a much more extreme example granted. If the OP were to complain about the U turn and the officer couldnt justify it then they could be in trouble
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6674347/P...

[LosingGrip]

Bigends said:

Saw this yesterday - a much more extreme example granted. If the OP were to complain about the U turn and the officer couldnt justify it then they could be in trouble
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6674347/P...

I'd say he was more in trouble for lying/perverting than the actual offence.

OP - Police (not sure about fire/ambo) have three exemptions. The speed limit, red lights (treat as give way/only if its safe) and keep left/right signs. If the driver can justify doing a u-turn where it says not to, and its safe, its fine. If they can't justify it (same as the other three) and/or they cause a crash, they are a bit stuck.

They also don't need to have lights/sirens on. It's down to the driver to decide if its needed. Again they have to justify it if it goes wrong.

[covboy]

Then again this is just bad driving (may not have been a Police Officer at the wheel though ) https://www.birminghammail.co.uk/black-country/wat...

[singlecoil]

Bigends said:

Saw this yesterday - a much more extreme example granted. If the OP were to complain about the U turn and the officer couldnt justify it then they could be in trouble
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6674347/P...

Jailed for PCoJ, not for misusing his blue lights.

[Bigends]

singlecoil said:

Bigends said:

Saw this yesterday - a much more extreme example granted. If the OP were to complain about the U turn and the officer couldnt justify it then they could be in trouble
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6674347/P...

Jailed for PCoJ, not for misusing his blue lights.

Jailed for lying about using them

[singlecoil]

Bigends said:

singlecoil said:

Bigends said:

Saw this yesterday - a much more extreme example granted. If the OP were to complain about the U turn and the officer couldnt justify it then they could be in trouble
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6674347/P...

Jailed for PCoJ, not for misusing his blue lights.

Jailed for lying about using them

Was that supposed to be a correction? AFAIK lying isn't a criminal offence unless you do it in court under oath, in which case it becomes PCoJ.

[macushla]

Freakuk said:

I guess from my perspective years ago I did the same, although on a huge junction with no traffic in either direction (so caused no harm to anyone), but low and behold a copper saw me pulled me over, in the back of their car and ended up £60 worse off.

“No traffic in either direction”. Well apart from the presumably liveried police car that you didn’t see.

[Graveworm]

LosingGrip said:

I'd say he was more in trouble for lying/perverting than the actual offence.

OP - Police (not sure about fire/ambo) have three exemptions. The speed limit, red lights (treat as give way/only if its safe) and keep left/right signs. If the driver can justify doing a u-turn where it says not to, and its safe, its fine. If they can't justify it (same as the other three) and/or they cause a crash, they are a bit stuck.

They also don't need to have lights/sirens on. It's down to the driver to decide if its needed. Again they have to justify it if it goes wrong.

They have those statutory exemptions. They also have stopping on zig zags, double whites etc but also have many that arise from TROs no U turn being one. In theory the TRO exemptions are absolute i.e they have the same right to use a bus lane as a bus and no need to justify its use. In practice they don't, usually with local guidance, as it is not professional and causes confusion and resentment.
Speeding and red light only apply where "Observance of the prohibition .. would be likely to hinder the use of that vehicle for the purpose for which it is being used" In the case of speed additionally require the driver to have been trained to drive at high speed.

Edited by Graveworm on Friday 8th February 12:02

[Graveworm]

singlecoil said:

Was that supposed to be a correction? AFAIK lying isn't a criminal offence unless you do it in court under oath, in which case it becomes PCoJ.

No need to lie in court under oath for PCoJ just need to do it in order to pervert the course of justice. So as soon as he said I ran the red light because ... which was a lie, to avoid the consequences, the offence was complete. Lying under oath is also perjury.

[Bigends]

Graveworm said:

singlecoil said:

Was that supposed to be a correction? AFAIK lying isn't a criminal offence unless you do it in court under oath, in which case it becomes PCoJ.

No need to lie in court under oath for PCoJ just need to do it in order to pervert the course of justice. So as soon as he said I ran the red light because ... which was a lie, to avoid the consequences, the offence was complete. Lying under oath is also perjury.

Agreed - by denying it was him running the lights he's also then inferring it must have been another officer on duty in the area that day that ran the
lights , directing the course of justice away from himself and potentially getting another in trouble.

[HantsRat]

I don't get this 'One rule for them' malarkey.

It's actually true, we have many rules/laws which only apply to Police Officers so yes there is 'one rule for us.... etc'

No one on here will know why the officer did the turn, they may have been deployed to a job. You don't need lights and sirens to claim exemptions.