Speed cam causes copper's crash
PC hit 91mph in a 30, braked and lost control
A Gatso (not on the A6)
PC Scott Warburton was driving at 91mph in a 30mph limit on the A6 Scotforth Road at Lancaster. He spotted a speed camera, braked sharply and lost control of the vehicle. The Ford Galaxy was fitted with an incident data recorder that recorded a peak speed of 91 miles per hour some 10 seconds before the accident, the local magistrates court heard.
The prosecutor told the court: "Upon seeing a speed camera he braked sharply, lost control and hit two signs on the central reservation. He came to a halt on the northbound carriageway. He was not responding to a code one incident and the blue lights were not in use."
The officer admitted the offence by post so magistrates adjourned his case for two weeks so he could appear before them.
Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed road safety campaign, said: "It is so important that we focus on the real causes of road danger. Obvious answers and knee jerk policies will not save lives.
"For the causes of this and every crash we must look inside the mind of the driver. Safety is about skills and attitudes rather than rules and regulations -- so much so that it is quite impossible to prevent such crashes with regulation.
"Cases like this distort road safety objectives and damage the Police / public relationship. They strongly tend to raise the wrong issues. The right road safety issue arising from this case is that people must drive with an appropriate sense of responsibility, but I fear that there will be loud and ignorant baying for further regulation."
SafeSpeed posited the following claims and the truth:
- He shouldn't be allowed to drive so fast: true. But the measure of 'too fast' is not that his numerical speed was high, but that he lost control and crashed.
- Police officers should be restricted to driving at the speed limit: false. We need Police officers to attend incidents as quickly as safely possible. It is frequently safe for properly trained drivers to exceed the speed limits by wild margins.
- Speed cameras prevent bad driving and high speed crashes: false. The evidence of this case is entirely the opposite.
- We need more regulation: False. We need better attitudes and better skills.
Link
Picture courtesy www.speedcam.co.uk
"Safety is about skills and attitudes". Obviously this copper had neither then...Opps, I see a camera, shite Im going too fast, better brake... Crunch...
Bloody good job noone was hurt I say, very lucky indeed...
Mr F
>> Edited by Mr Freefall on Friday 19th May 11:33
And, unfortunately, the SafeSpeed comments really are a load of tosh.
We have laws. Speed limits are laws designed to protect all road users. Speed cameras enforce those laws, and even allow a degree of discretion.
The only valid argument would be that the speed limit is too low in the first place.
It is very frustrating.
yes very wild
at least he was doing it in a high performance vehicle designed for the job
M3 CSL
no wait a miniute he was in a galaxy people carrier
i am sure this is not a rapid response vehicle or even an area car
he was having a play and got caught
and as for highly trained? i dont beleive traffic officers use galaxys in any force so he is bog standard pc bloggs who should have know better and convicted people for less
i have seen the standard of police driving on the track they are useless
they are no longer taught to drive but follow rules there is no skill honning unless you are going for traffic status. they know what they are doing and talking about usually
but this was average pc bloggs and not to good as it seems.
if he was doing nothing wrong why did he slow for the speed camera????
rant over
Geneve said:How about the fact that they don't work? Do you read the evidence? The number of speed cameras on our roads has increased dramatically over the last 10 years but in that timescale the number of deaths on the road has hardly fallen, and increased at one point. The better question is, where is there a convincing argument that speed cameras DO work.
I'm not keen on Speed Cameras, but despite all the rhetoric and debate, I've never heard a convincing argument against them.
Geneve said:All of them? Maybe there was a typo (wild = wide) but the rest is spot on.
And, unfortunately, the SafeSpeed comments really are a load of tosh.
Geneve said:
We have laws. Speed limits are laws designed to protect all road users.
Past tense please. Once they were set using safety criteria, now they are set using political correctness.
Geneve said:No, that assumes speed limits can tell a driver what a safe speed is. No limit can do that. They can only tell drivers what a legal speed is.
The only valid argument would be that the speed limit is too low in the first place.
Geneve said:You mean like reading a post from someone who makes statements that suggest they are full of speed kills propaganda but otherwise have read very little on road safety research?
It is very frustrating.
Know what you mean.
And they give him Without Due Care and Attention? That charge is obviously inappropriate, because getting 91 out of a Galaxy takes a serious amount of attention!
It's interesting that one of the CPS examples of an offence that warrants a prosecution for dangerous driving is "Speed, which is highly inappropriate for the prevailing road or traffic conditions". If over THREE TIMES the limit isn't highly inappropriate, what is? Either three times the limit is highly inappropriate, or the limit is utter nonesense and b*ll*cks.
Besides which, it was my understanding the the Police aren't allowed to even exceed the speed limit unless they are responding to an emergency and they have sirens and lights active. I'll have to investigate that further.
Good to hear that they've started putting data-loggers in the cars now, about time, the police seem to behave as though they are a law unto themselves. Although were it not for the coincidence of this vehicle having one, I seriously doubt the guy would have even been repremanded.
If the impression has been given that I'm condoning this, that would be wrong, I'm just refusing to condemn it out of hand purely because of the arbitrary numbers involved. Talk about risk and danger, often regardless of speed, is usually appropriate. If this was inappropriate speed and dangerous because of that or for other reasons then that's a different matter to just being 'a speed'.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff