159mph Pc's acquittal challenged
Discussion
From BBC news website:
159mph Pc's acquittal challenged
A court's refusal to convict a police constable who reached 159mph on a motorway of speeding and dangerous driving is being challenged.
Pc Mark Milton, 38, from Telford, Shropshire, was recorded by the patrol car's video camera on the M54 in 2003.
District Judge Bruce Morgan cleared him after hearing he was "familiarising" himself with a new car.
But the Director of Public Prosecutions is asking the High Court to set aside that decision.
In the original hearing at Ludlow Magistrates' Court Judge Morgan said Pc Milton, who was trained in advanced driving, was the "creme de la creme" of police drivers.
'Lack of policy'
The district judge took into account the fact that two police officers, including West Mercia Police's senior driving instructor, who gave evidence for the prosecution, had declined to classify the defendant's driving as dangerous.
He said: "I can't help but see the irony that those that brought this prosecution are those very people who have purchased cars that go at this speed and paid for him (the defendant) to go to learn to drive at these speeds."
The judge also expressed concern at West Mercia Police's "total lack of policy" on when and where police drivers should practise driving at very high speeds.
Later a police spokesman said the force was to clarify the guidance issued to advanced drivers.
The Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents said it was shocked that such a speed was not regarded as dangerous by the court.
But the Police Federation defended the driving of Pc Milton.
159mph Pc's acquittal challenged
A court's refusal to convict a police constable who reached 159mph on a motorway of speeding and dangerous driving is being challenged.
Pc Mark Milton, 38, from Telford, Shropshire, was recorded by the patrol car's video camera on the M54 in 2003.
District Judge Bruce Morgan cleared him after hearing he was "familiarising" himself with a new car.
But the Director of Public Prosecutions is asking the High Court to set aside that decision.
In the original hearing at Ludlow Magistrates' Court Judge Morgan said Pc Milton, who was trained in advanced driving, was the "creme de la creme" of police drivers.
'Lack of policy'
The district judge took into account the fact that two police officers, including West Mercia Police's senior driving instructor, who gave evidence for the prosecution, had declined to classify the defendant's driving as dangerous.
He said: "I can't help but see the irony that those that brought this prosecution are those very people who have purchased cars that go at this speed and paid for him (the defendant) to go to learn to drive at these speeds."
The judge also expressed concern at West Mercia Police's "total lack of policy" on when and where police drivers should practise driving at very high speeds.
Later a police spokesman said the force was to clarify the guidance issued to advanced drivers.
The Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents said it was shocked that such a speed was not regarded as dangerous by the court.
But the Police Federation defended the driving of Pc Milton.
pcwilson said:
The Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents said it was shocked that such a speed was not regarded as dangerous by the court.
^ These jokers again
. Someone should tell them moaning too much and being scared of everything is also dangerous (I am sure these character types have shorter life expectancy). The appeal is today; we'll have to see what happens. Maybe the anti-speed lobby will have got to them?
Russell
GregE240 said:You might change your tune on this guy if he stops you for speeding and gives you a sanctimonious chat before inviting you to take 3 points and pay £60.
Marvellous - this is OUR money they're spending trying to nail this poor bugger.
Bloody do gooder w*nkers, the lot of 'em.
why wasn't this dealt with by his bosses? If they felt he did wrong, discipline him and thats that. Why on earth take a copper to court for something as trivial as this when at best a slapped wrist was called for.
Managers scared to manage - see it all the time. One person takes the mick, so instead of coming down on them, make daft rules for everyone else.
I personally don't think trying out a patrol car on an empty motorway at high speed is at all dangerous - much safer than sticking a cash machine on a bridge
Feel better now!
Managers scared to manage - see it all the time. One person takes the mick, so instead of coming down on them, make daft rules for everyone else.
I personally don't think trying out a patrol car on an empty motorway at high speed is at all dangerous - much safer than sticking a cash machine on a bridge
Feel better now!
GregE240 said:
Marvellous - this is OUR money they're spending trying to nail this poor bugger.
Bloody do gooder w*nkers, the lot of 'em.
Yep. The PC brigade are baying for his blood. His bosses clearly don't want to set a precedent where Officers are no longer allowed to use their discretion to make progress. The two factions are at war.
The "do gooder w*nkers" are determined to win. Even to the extent that if it gets dismissed again this time they will just keep on trying - and
whether or not that's fair or even legal. "Do Gooder Wankers" in government are the scariest people alive today in my view. They've been allowed far too much power. They need it taking away. Soon.
Zod said:I doubt it mate.
Marvellous - this is OUR money they're spending trying to nail this poor bugger.
Bloody do gooder w*nkers, the lot of 'em.
If he was some little Hitler in his camera van nabbing me for being 6mph over the limit, maybe. But on both occasions I've been pulled over (M6 and A38 in Birmingham), the TrafPol I've dealt with have been good as gold, really nice blokes.
Zod said:
Marvellous - this is OUR money they're spending trying to nail this poor bugger.
Bloody do gooder w*nkers, the lot of 'em.
I remember reading in ther paper when this all happened that the copper in question was really a bit of a cock, and "enjoyed" going out with his speed gun and nabbing motorists..and was very much a part of the speed kills mantra..
Even said (in a roundabout way) his dad had been nicked recently by a speed camera and was against them...
I really have a problem knowing what side to be on here. On the one hand, to damn him to prosecution is to agree that driving at that speed is dangerous. On the other, to let him off leaves me feeling bitter in the knowledge that if that had been an advanced driver who wasn't in the force, he would not have had that much sympathy. If it had been me, I definitely would have had the book thrown at me. Tricky fish.....
However, if he was a 'Speed Kills' cock, then it's settled....BURN HIM AT ONCE!
>> Edited by jezzaaa on Tuesday 31st January 11:03
However, if he was a 'Speed Kills' cock, then it's settled....BURN HIM AT ONCE!
>> Edited by jezzaaa on Tuesday 31st January 11:03
zumbruk said:
Surely this is covered by double jeopardy?
The rules on double jeopardy have been changed recently, although IANAL and couldn't tell you how in detail.
I wouldnt have thought this was a double jeopardy situation. If either side believe that the concept or the procedure of the trial was at fault they can ask for an appeal. Whether it is accepted and it goes to trial again is another matter.
zumbruk said:
Surely this is covered by double jeopardy?
The rules on double jeopardy have been changed recently, although IANAL and couldn't tell you how in detail.
It is no longer in existance according to this:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4406129.stm
jezzaaa said:
I really have a problem knowing what side to be on here. On the one hand, to damn him to prosecution is to agree that driving at that speed is dangerous. On the other, to let him off leaves me feeling bitter in the knowledge that if that had been an advanced driver who wasn't in the force, he would not have had that much sympathy. If it had been me, I definitely would have had the book thrown at me. Tricky fish.....
However, if he was a 'Speed Kills' cock, then it's settled....BURN HIM AT ONCE!
>> Edited by jezzaaa on Tuesday 31st January 11:03
it does kind of go against the current anti speeding message, where all speeding is percieved to be bad.
to take a simplistic view of it, they say he's trained to dive at that speed so its ok, so if a proffesional racing driver was stopped doing the same speed, would he have been treated the same?
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff