'Needless Risks' In Police Chases - IPCC
Discussion
The subtext of that article seems to be that in a large number of cases the police car chasing causes the escaping criminal to stack it, and when they're on a motorbike that tends to pan out in the way high-speed bike crashes usually do.
Why are the statistics presented not split by innocent/criminal? That immediately sets my spin alarm ringing.
Why are the statistics presented not split by innocent/criminal? That immediately sets my spin alarm ringing.
Timberwolf said:
The subtext of that article seems to be that in a large number of cases the police car chasing causes the escaping criminal to stack it, and when they're on a motorbike that tends to pan out in the way high-speed bike crashes usually do.
Why are the statistics presented not split by innocent/criminal? That immediately sets my spin alarm ringing.
Oh good, more statistics...Why are the statistics presented not split by innocent/criminal? That immediately sets my spin alarm ringing.
Perhaps this is why there is so much paperwork to be filled out...
it means the BiB can't be out attempting to catch criminals
therefore there will be less chases..
I can see it now - sorry you can't chase a criminal until you have filled out form 123456.78.X
X = 1) in a panda car
2) in a traffic car
3) in a police van
4) on a motorbike
5) on a bicycle
6) on foot
7) in a helicopter
8) on a boat
9) in a 4x4
What do you mean you don't have any forms 123456.78.6 return to the station to requisition them using form 123.abc.4.5.6.6 fill out the form then you can start to chase the criminal - oh and every officer involved needs to complete one. :lol:
Arrrgh !
Simes.
it means the BiB can't be out attempting to catch criminals
therefore there will be less chases..
I can see it now - sorry you can't chase a criminal until you have filled out form 123456.78.X
X = 1) in a panda car
2) in a traffic car
3) in a police van
4) on a motorbike
5) on a bicycle
6) on foot
7) in a helicopter
8) on a boat
9) in a 4x4
What do you mean you don't have any forms 123456.78.6 return to the station to requisition them using form 123.abc.4.5.6.6 fill out the form then you can start to chase the criminal - oh and every officer involved needs to complete one. :lol:
Arrrgh !
Simes.
Simple fact is that if we want criminals caught the Police are going to have to chase them on occasions. On occasions that chase is going to go wrong and people are going to be hurt. Its a fact of life and we should accept it.
It doesn;t really matter how much training the Police have accidents will happen particularly as other members of the public are involved and their reactions are to an extent unpredictable.
However a certain element of accidents are going to happen and I think we have to accept it, especially if we want scrotes caught. Incidentially I have no concerns about those being chased being killed or injured. They should have stopped!
It doesn;t really matter how much training the Police have accidents will happen particularly as other members of the public are involved and their reactions are to an extent unpredictable.
However a certain element of accidents are going to happen and I think we have to accept it, especially if we want scrotes caught. Incidentially I have no concerns about those being chased being killed or injured. They should have stopped!
51mes said:
Perhaps this is why there is so much paperwork to be filled out...
it means the BiB can't be out attempting to catch criminals
therefore there will be less chases..
I can see it now - sorry you can't chase a criminal until you have filled out form 123456.78.X
X = 1) in a panda car
2) in a traffic car
3) in a police van
4) on a motorbike
5) on a bicycle
6) on foot
7) in a helicopter
8) on a boat
9) in a 4x4
What do you mean you don't have any forms 123456.78.6 return to the station to requisition them using form 123.abc.4.5.6.6 fill out the form then you can start to chase the criminal - oh and every officer involved needs to complete one. :lol:
Arrrgh !
Simes.
And you have to fill in the ethnicity of the crims being pursued to ensure that they are equal opportunity car thieves.it means the BiB can't be out attempting to catch criminals
therefore there will be less chases..
I can see it now - sorry you can't chase a criminal until you have filled out form 123456.78.X
X = 1) in a panda car
2) in a traffic car
3) in a police van
4) on a motorbike
5) on a bicycle
6) on foot
7) in a helicopter
8) on a boat
9) in a 4x4
What do you mean you don't have any forms 123456.78.6 return to the station to requisition them using form 123.abc.4.5.6.6 fill out the form then you can start to chase the criminal - oh and every officer involved needs to complete one. :lol:
Arrrgh !
Simes.
Oh FFS...lets give the police even MORE reasons not to catch criminals:-
"Nah Bert, can't chase him...we'd need to fill in forms 23A, 27C s.2, and 44A through D...and if the driver turns out to be ethnic or disabled then there's another 10 forms...we'd be stuck in the station all night!"
Useless half-wit senseless lentilist hand-wringing do-gooders!!!
"Nah Bert, can't chase him...we'd need to fill in forms 23A, 27C s.2, and 44A through D...and if the driver turns out to be ethnic or disabled then there's another 10 forms...we'd be stuck in the station all night!"
Useless half-wit senseless lentilist hand-wringing do-gooders!!!
You can make figures prove anything you like, If 50 people died in police pursuits in 2002 then the deaths went down and are now on the rise we need to know whether more pursuits are taking place, maybe police drivers are actually getting better, ie pursuits up 10%, deaths from pursuits up 5% this would mean an improvement.
Sorry but I don't know whether more pursuits do take place, can anyone enlighten us.
Sorry but I don't know whether more pursuits do take place, can anyone enlighten us.
Having heard this on the BBC News I thought PH will be full of
dammnation for Plod having the audacity to chase crims etc etc.
What a pleasant surprise, especially the wise words of Chris above ^^^^^
It amazes me that blame never seems to be apportioned to the wrongdoer these days, anybody but.
Plod is not sat beside the pursued egging him on and preventing him from using the brake and fetching the vehicle to a halt. But do they blame the pursued? Do they 'L'
Even old Aunty BBC got it wrong on the news report that Plod had pursued the car involved, intimating all the way in the M way crash. Reports I have read indicate that the chase was given up well before the slip road was reached that was taken to get onto the wrong carriageway.
As to chasing motor bikes I learnt early there is a time a place to do this if one didn't want to have egg on ones face with dilegent use of radio to get ahead of them. But those were they days when he had an abundance of traffic cars.
dvd
dammnation for Plod having the audacity to chase crims etc etc.
What a pleasant surprise, especially the wise words of Chris above ^^^^^
It amazes me that blame never seems to be apportioned to the wrongdoer these days, anybody but.
Plod is not sat beside the pursued egging him on and preventing him from using the brake and fetching the vehicle to a halt. But do they blame the pursued? Do they 'L'
Even old Aunty BBC got it wrong on the news report that Plod had pursued the car involved, intimating all the way in the M way crash. Reports I have read indicate that the chase was given up well before the slip road was reached that was taken to get onto the wrong carriageway.
As to chasing motor bikes I learnt early there is a time a place to do this if one didn't want to have egg on ones face with dilegent use of radio to get ahead of them. But those were they days when he had an abundance of traffic cars.
dvd
Yung Man said:
You can make figures prove anything you like, If 50 people died in police pursuits in 2002 then the deaths went down and are now on the rise we need to know whether more pursuits are taking place, maybe police drivers are actually getting better, ie pursuits up 10%, deaths from pursuits up 5% this would mean an improvement.
Sorry but I don't know whether more pursuits do take place, can anyone enlighten us.
The article says "11,000 - 18,000" pursuits/year. With that as the accuracy range, who knows what direction the number's going in!Sorry but I don't know whether more pursuits do take place, can anyone enlighten us.
To DVD, I think you'll find most of us support the ability of the police on the ground to do the right thing, take the right decisions at the time, etc. Yes of course on occasion this results in wrong decisions but that's human nature. Better to do something and occasionally get it wrong than to do nothing. Our gripe is with the system that prevents it as a result of having to appear PC.
Dwight VanDriver said:
It amazes me that blame never seems to be apportioned to the wrongdoer these days, anybody but.
That's one of the things that annoyed me about this news. Why not, "IPCC calls for tougher penalties on criminals who drive dangerously during police chases?"I'd rather lose my car because it gets hit during a chase than lose my car because a scrote has away with it and can't be chased.
Better still I'd rather not lose it at all, because said scrote is going to pull over the instant the blue lights go on, knowing that he's in serious shit if he doesn't.
I don't have much truck with the idea of, "poor Johnny, doing 130 on a stolen bike he's got no hope of controlling, it's not his fault."
- StreakyWhen I was control room inspector I had the responsibility for allowing pursuits to continue or to stop them. It was normally a fairly easy decision to make. Examples of reasons to abandon them were: a couple in a stolen MGB GT with a child in a cot on the rear seat: visbility <50 metres: offender in a bus driving through Worthing. So sometimes it's quite clear.
But I would always call off the pursuit if the only offence was that of stealing the car. The offender would, if caught, be unlikely to receive anything like a penalty and would never, ever be imprisoned. So why risk it was my feeling.
One of my criteria was whether the PC, or me come to that, was likely to be disciplined. Terrible really, but as an inspector I felt responsbility for the officers involved. And for myself.
But the problem is that officers are schooled not to let offenders escape for, if they do, the IPCC will leap into action and crucify them, with their decision being couched in rediculously judgemental terms. Unless, of course, the chap was driving a motor vehicle when they will remain quiet and only leap into critical mode when the escaping offender colmmits another offence.
What is most disturbing is the IPCC willingness to publish their findings the day after five people were killed following a pursuit, albeit one that had, quite rightly it appears, been abandoned. Despite the fact the the police let the car go, it still has to be reported to the IPCC. Fair hearing anyone?
And they criticise the judgement of the police who have to make their mind up in pressure situations and haven't got luxurious offices and plenty of time to discuss esoteric matters. Yet they still get their timing outrageously wrong.
But I would always call off the pursuit if the only offence was that of stealing the car. The offender would, if caught, be unlikely to receive anything like a penalty and would never, ever be imprisoned. So why risk it was my feeling.
One of my criteria was whether the PC, or me come to that, was likely to be disciplined. Terrible really, but as an inspector I felt responsbility for the officers involved. And for myself.
But the problem is that officers are schooled not to let offenders escape for, if they do, the IPCC will leap into action and crucify them, with their decision being couched in rediculously judgemental terms. Unless, of course, the chap was driving a motor vehicle when they will remain quiet and only leap into critical mode when the escaping offender colmmits another offence.
What is most disturbing is the IPCC willingness to publish their findings the day after five people were killed following a pursuit, albeit one that had, quite rightly it appears, been abandoned. Despite the fact the the police let the car go, it still has to be reported to the IPCC. Fair hearing anyone?
And they criticise the judgement of the police who have to make their mind up in pressure situations and haven't got luxurious offices and plenty of time to discuss esoteric matters. Yet they still get their timing outrageously wrong.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff