Another danger to society behind bars (forget knife crime!)
Discussion
The most astonishing thing about that article is that it says property prices in Dewsbury average £294,000.
Or do they mean the road this guy lives on ? It is a little ambiguous.
Either way, Dewsbury is a cesspit. Rolling hills ? Don't make me laugh.
I'm not surprised by the sentence though.
Muppet.
Or do they mean the road this guy lives on ? It is a little ambiguous.
Either way, Dewsbury is a cesspit. Rolling hills ? Don't make me laugh.
I'm not surprised by the sentence though.
Muppet.
Having recently seen in the news that the government are trying to get rid of sentences of less than 6 months then this can only go one of two ways eventually.
Either a big fine or 6 months.
Seems a bit of a shame to ruin someone’s life (loss of job/house/family break up) for what is a minor motoring offence (let’s not get in to the argument of its not motoring it’s a PCOJ conviction, yes your technically right but ultimately it’s a minor motoring offence in the grand scheme of things).
I mean it’s not like they go to any efforts for burglary, drugs etc most of the time.
No worries though this thread will follow the same route as all the other ones.
Either a big fine or 6 months.
Seems a bit of a shame to ruin someone’s life (loss of job/house/family break up) for what is a minor motoring offence (let’s not get in to the argument of its not motoring it’s a PCOJ conviction, yes your technically right but ultimately it’s a minor motoring offence in the grand scheme of things).
I mean it’s not like they go to any efforts for burglary, drugs etc most of the time.
No worries though this thread will follow the same route as all the other ones.
MB140 said:
Having recently seen in the news that the government are trying to get rid of sentences of less than 6 months then this can only go one of two ways eventually.
Either a big fine or 6 months.
Seems a bit of a shame to ruin someone’s life (loss of job/house/family break up) for what is a minor motoring offence (let’s not get in to the argument of its not motoring it’s a PCOJ conviction, yes your technically right but ultimately it’s a minor motoring offence in the grand scheme of things).
I mean it’s not like they go to any efforts for burglary, drugs etc most of the time.
No worries though this thread will follow the same route as all the other ones.
Seems pretty daft to risk ruining your own life by turning what is a minor regulatory matter into an offence that carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment &/or fine.Either a big fine or 6 months.
Seems a bit of a shame to ruin someone’s life (loss of job/house/family break up) for what is a minor motoring offence (let’s not get in to the argument of its not motoring it’s a PCOJ conviction, yes your technically right but ultimately it’s a minor motoring offence in the grand scheme of things).
I mean it’s not like they go to any efforts for burglary, drugs etc most of the time.
No worries though this thread will follow the same route as all the other ones.
It's his choice to choose how that goes & he chose poorly.
MB140 said:
Having recently seen in the news that the government are trying to get rid of sentences of less than 6 months then this can only go one of two ways eventually.
Either a big fine or 6 months.
Seems a bit of a shame to ruin someone’s life (loss of job/house/family break up) for what is a minor motoring offence (let’s not get in to the argument of its not motoring it’s a PCOJ conviction, yes your technically right but ultimately it’s a minor motoring offence in the grand scheme of things).
I mean it’s not like they go to any efforts for burglary, drugs etc most of the time.
No worries though this thread will follow the same route as all the other ones.
Yep you've set of off down the road of the similar threads with the same lack of understanding of the offence and the generic burglary/drugs comparison. I'm sure every available officer was working on this job.Either a big fine or 6 months.
Seems a bit of a shame to ruin someone’s life (loss of job/house/family break up) for what is a minor motoring offence (let’s not get in to the argument of its not motoring it’s a PCOJ conviction, yes your technically right but ultimately it’s a minor motoring offence in the grand scheme of things).
I mean it’s not like they go to any efforts for burglary, drugs etc most of the time.
No worries though this thread will follow the same route as all the other ones.
Good work, happened more quickly than I expected!
BertBert said:
Is it PCOJ because laser jammers are illegal, or is the very fact that it stops the reading PCOJ regardless of them being illegal, IYSWIM?
It would cover any act with the same outcome, eg. if you had some device which detected the laser and changed your number plate to a different one. (You'd also have a number plate offence in there too of course).The jammers are legal to make, sell and own, I think they are sold as "garage door openers" to avoid prosecution for an aiding/abetting type offence. I'm not sure if it'd be legal to have one fitted but switched off - some preparatory offence might apply but I think you'd actually have to use it.
Previously people have said that if you do "need" to use one, ensure it switches itself off after a few seconds so the operator can get a reading after you have braked, but I think the "E01" error is quite accurate so they'll still be looking at the video to see if it was a jammer. The other advice is to immediately remove it, but if the police know one was fitted I think they'd be turning the house over to find it, or find receipts etc.
Edited by Gareth79 on Monday 11th February 18:32
I expect to read the usual bunch of plod on here justifying the prosecution for PCOJ because they couldn’t get him for speeding. Bit like the one last year where they went dredging a river for the device the motorist disposed of in a river at the end of his garden to prove he had a jammer. In fairness giving the civilian operator the bird every time you drive past speeding probably does put him in the t
t catagory so to a certain extent I can see why.
It’s not justifiable in my opinion. There are more serious crimes going without investigation.
I’m not going to change my opinion/mind as I am a grumpy old stubborn git so don’t bother trying.
This is the end of my contribution to the thread but I look forward to vonhosen, greendubber and the rest of plod arguing how using a jammer is the crime of the century.
t catagory so to a certain extent I can see why. It’s not justifiable in my opinion. There are more serious crimes going without investigation.
I’m not going to change my opinion/mind as I am a grumpy old stubborn git so don’t bother trying.
This is the end of my contribution to the thread but I look forward to vonhosen, greendubber and the rest of plod arguing how using a jammer is the crime of the century.
MB140 said:
I expect to read the usual bunch of plod on here justifying the prosecution for PCOJ because they couldn’t get him for speeding. Bit like the one last year where they went dredging a river for the device the motorist disposed of in a river at the end of his garden to prove he had a jammer. In fairness giving the civilian operator the bird every time you drive past speeding probably does put him in the tt catagory so to a certain extent I can see why.
It’s not justifiable in my opinion. There are more serious crimes going without investigation.
I’m not going to change my opinion/mind as I am a grumpy old stubborn git so don’t bother trying.
This is the end of my contribution to the thread but I look forward to vonhosen, greendubber and the rest of plod arguing how using a jammer is the crime of the century.
It's not, hence he only got three months.t catagory so to a certain extent I can see why. It’s not justifiable in my opinion. There are more serious crimes going without investigation.
I’m not going to change my opinion/mind as I am a grumpy old stubborn git so don’t bother trying.
This is the end of my contribution to the thread but I look forward to vonhosen, greendubber and the rest of plod arguing how using a jammer is the crime of the century.
It's a big step up from doing 35 in a 30 though, which is what makes it so foolish.
MB140 said:
I expect to read the usual bunch of plod on here justifying the prosecution for PCOJ because they couldn’t get him for speeding. Bit like the one last year where they went dredging a river for the device the motorist disposed of in a river at the end of his garden to prove he had a jammer. In fairness giving the civilian operator the bird every time you drive past speeding probably does put him in the tt catagory so to a certain extent I can see why.
It’s not justifiable in my opinion. There are more serious crimes going without investigation.
I’m not going to change my opinion/mind as I am a grumpy old stubborn git so don’t bother trying.
This is the end of my contribution to the thread but I look forward to vonhosen, greendubber and the rest of plod arguing how using a jammer is the crime of the century.
No one has said it's a crime of the century. What has been pointed is that a stupid person got caught doing something stupid. It's a shame you drew a rather odd inference from our posts though so it probably is best you leave it there rather than making things up. t catagory so to a certain extent I can see why. It’s not justifiable in my opinion. There are more serious crimes going without investigation.
I’m not going to change my opinion/mind as I am a grumpy old stubborn git so don’t bother trying.
This is the end of my contribution to the thread but I look forward to vonhosen, greendubber and the rest of plod arguing how using a jammer is the crime of the century.
So in this case the Law has to assume he’s guilty of speeding ? If he wasn’t speeding then he’s not perverting the course of justice as there was no offence to hide from.
It’s seems wrong to use PTCJ , he’s offence was stopping some measuring his speed.
Does a burglar wearing gloves get done for PTCJ and by that logic could anyone wearing gloves get done.
I think it should be given it’s own offence , this is nicking people via the back door, a loophole in reverse as it where
It’s seems wrong to use PTCJ , he’s offence was stopping some measuring his speed.
Does a burglar wearing gloves get done for PTCJ and by that logic could anyone wearing gloves get done.
I think it should be given it’s own offence , this is nicking people via the back door, a loophole in reverse as it where
Edited by matjk on Monday 11th February 19:16
Kill two, off your tits on drugs, escape jail -
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1080715/car-cras...
trick a speed camera, 3 months.
Nothing wrong with that.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1080715/car-cras...
trick a speed camera, 3 months.
Nothing wrong with that.
Edited by Fermit and Sexy Sarah on Monday 11th February 20:49
Was only the other day I watched one of those police interceptors type programmes. Two scrotes driving wrong side of road, 70mph plus in residential areas etc, then abandoned the car whilst still moving. They caught the passenger, but driver got away and at the end of the programme they said no charges were brought against the passenger. I assume he said he didn’t know who the driver was etc, but how the hell is this not PTCOJ? By the same means couldn’t the driver of the car just say “bloody hell how did that get there, someone must of nicked my keys and fitted it without me knowing”
It certainly comes across as easy money from yet again another motorist. And while we are at it, lets make an example of him so other motorists don’t try to stop us boosting the coffers.
It certainly comes across as easy money from yet again another motorist. And while we are at it, lets make an example of him so other motorists don’t try to stop us boosting the coffers.
Fermit and Sexy Sarah said:
Kill two, off your tits and drugs, escape jail -
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1080715/car-cras...
trick a speed camera, 3 months.
Nothing wrong with that.
The hit and run driver who killed my nephew got 260 hours of unpaid work. https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1080715/car-cras...
trick a speed camera, 3 months.
Nothing wrong with that.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff