Police officers not prosecuted
Discussion
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7130028.stm
The BBC are running a story on a number of cases where police have been speeding whilst on duty and not prosecuted (see above link). The story seems to indicate they were not involved in a response/chase so had no reason to speed.
If one of my staff speeds in the company pool car and we can't identify them, then I understand that I can pick up the points/ban the member of staff should be getting. Therefore we make damned sure we know who is driving the pool car at all times!
Does the same not apply to police?
The BBC are running a story on a number of cases where police have been speeding whilst on duty and not prosecuted (see above link). The story seems to indicate they were not involved in a response/chase so had no reason to speed.
If one of my staff speeds in the company pool car and we can't identify them, then I understand that I can pick up the points/ban the member of staff should be getting. Therefore we make damned sure we know who is driving the pool car at all times!
Does the same not apply to police?
I think it was Yorkshire Police who got caught by the BBC and Paxman, something like 0 out of 25 cases ( was quite some time ago )
The interview was quite comical, yet incredibly sad.
Paxman: Why were the officers not prosecuted?
Head of police : We were unable to identify them
Paxman: Are you trying to say you have no idea who was driving a police car at any given time?
Head : Of course, we have to keep strict logs.
Paxman : So why can't you identify the driver?
Head: The log has gone missing.....
Paxman did get stuck in about how this erodes confidence in the police, but you could see the copper just wanted to ride it out and hope tomorrow's news would drown it all.
The interview ended just as comically:
Pax: Would you give me your word that if this log, which has only ever gone missing when your officers speed, turns up, you will prosecute?
Head: Yes of course, although I will be unable to.
Pax: ???
Head: The cases have timed out.
The interview was quite comical, yet incredibly sad.
Paxman: Why were the officers not prosecuted?
Head of police : We were unable to identify them
Paxman: Are you trying to say you have no idea who was driving a police car at any given time?
Head : Of course, we have to keep strict logs.
Paxman : So why can't you identify the driver?
Head: The log has gone missing.....
Paxman did get stuck in about how this erodes confidence in the police, but you could see the copper just wanted to ride it out and hope tomorrow's news would drown it all.
The interview ended just as comically:
Pax: Would you give me your word that if this log, which has only ever gone missing when your officers speed, turns up, you will prosecute?
Head: Yes of course, although I will be unable to.
Pax: ???
Head: The cases have timed out.
edb49 said:
If one of my staff speeds in the company pool car and we can't identify them, then I understand that I can pick up the points/ban the member of staff should be getting.
The 'responsible person' within a company would only be awarded points if it could be proved that they were negligent or complicit with the driver not being named..s.172 RTA 1988 said:
(5) Where a body corporate is guilty of an offence under this section and the offence is proved to have been committed with the consent or connivance of, or to be attributable to neglect on the part of, a director, manager, secretary or other similar officer of the body corporate, or a person who was purporting to act in any such capacity, he, as well as the body corporate, is guilty of that offence and liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly.
edb49 said:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7130028.stm
The BBC are running a story on a number of cases where police have been speeding whilst on duty and not prosecuted (see above link). The story seems to indicate they were not involved in a response/chase so had no reason to speed.
If one of my staff speeds in the company pool car and we can't identify them, then I understand that I can pick up the points/ban the member of staff should be getting. Therefore we make damned sure we know who is driving the pool car at all times!
Does the same not apply to police?
"The pictures were released after South Yorkshire's chief constable, Meredydd Hughes, was banned from driving for speeding at 90mph in a 60mph zone."The BBC are running a story on a number of cases where police have been speeding whilst on duty and not prosecuted (see above link). The story seems to indicate they were not involved in a response/chase so had no reason to speed.
If one of my staff speeds in the company pool car and we can't identify them, then I understand that I can pick up the points/ban the member of staff should be getting. Therefore we make damned sure we know who is driving the pool car at all times!
Does the same not apply to police?
Would seem it does but only in high profile cases (Chief Inspector and above
)IMHO the owners of the cars of police officers shown on TV should be easy to trace and their COP should 'ground' those officers and relegate them to foot patrol in the interests of fostering public confidence in the service.
Long live the revolution!
Now this is the kind of crap that turned a good law respecting citizen like me against the police.
I have personal experience of an important piece of video evidence dissapearing out of police custody even though it was logged in and out of stores.
Evidence that was going to be used to prosecute me even though I was innocent suddenly dissapeared when I asked for a copy.
When the evidence doesn't suit them its .. oops we've lost it..how silly of us..
It doesn't wash its a crock of shit.
Takes us into the third world arena of public life corruption.
I have personal experience of an important piece of video evidence dissapearing out of police custody even though it was logged in and out of stores.
Evidence that was going to be used to prosecute me even though I was innocent suddenly dissapeared when I asked for a copy.
When the evidence doesn't suit them its .. oops we've lost it..how silly of us..
It doesn't wash its a crock of shit.
Takes us into the third world arena of public life corruption.
10 Pence Short said:
mark69sheer said:
I have personal experience of an important piece of video evidence dissapearing out of police custody even though it was logged in and out of stores.
Evidence that was going to be used to prosecute me even.
You are Unlucky Alf AICMFP. Evidence that was going to be used to prosecute me even.
I have to say that generally the CPS display an enthusiasm for prosecuting police officers that they do not have for anyone else.
Several 'no hope' assault cases spring to mind, let alone numerous traffic matters.
edited for speling
Several 'no hope' assault cases spring to mind, let alone numerous traffic matters.
edited for speling
Edited by Chrispy Porker on Thursday 6th December 10:29
said:
I'll save vonhosen the job of replying:
From the report you wouldn't know because they refused to 'fess up who was driving...Whatever happened to S172...vonhosen will have said:
How do you know they were not each using their vehicles for legitimate police purposes and thus exempt?
What evidence is there, that the drivers were police officers ?
In my force there are thousands of support staff authorised to drive marked and unmarked vehicles.
As in my post above, the fleet management don't even know who the car has been issued to on occasions.
Yet the assumption seems to be it must be police officers for some reason.
In my force there are thousands of support staff authorised to drive marked and unmarked vehicles.
As in my post above, the fleet management don't even know who the car has been issued to on occasions.
Yet the assumption seems to be it must be police officers for some reason.
Chrispy Porker said:
What evidence is there, that the drivers were police officers ?
In my force there are thousands of support staff authorised to drive marked and unmarked vehicles.
As in my post above, the fleet management don't even know who the car has been issued to on occasions.
Yet the assumption seems to be it must be police officers for some reason.
In my force there are thousands of support staff authorised to drive marked and unmarked vehicles.
As in my post above, the fleet management don't even know who the car has been issued to on occasions.
Yet the assumption seems to be it must be police officers for some reason.
you're sounding more like Von every day Chrispy..Chrispy Porker said:
I have to say that generally the CPS display an exuberance for prosecuting police officers that they do not have for anyone else.
Several 'no hope' assault cases spring to mind, let alone numerous traffic matters.
You are right and I am disengenious for attacking 'the front line' when in fact its the system that is rotten to the core.Several 'no hope' assault cases spring to mind, let alone numerous traffic matters.
However you do lose respect and faith when incedents such as these are brought to light.
Thanks to infiltration at the top by fast tracked party line following yes men and seat clingers like Ian Blair the police service isn't the idependent service it constitutionally should be.
The police are here to uphold the law and you can argue that as long as anyone is commiting an offence then its a 'fair cop'.
The problem is when the system becomes politicised by picking and choosing which laws to enforce. Obviously the creation of new laws doesn't help when their enforcement hides a political agenda.
I am a victim of ageism.
I was brought up to believe that you worked for what you got and that you obeyed the law and paid your taxes.
People who disobeyed the law were looked down upon.
Now i am likley to be arrested under any raft of 'isms' invented to criminalise proper conduct
The progarmme did say that in the cases of the driver not being able to be identified then the chief constable was held responsible for and was prosecuted in the cases, that could not identify the driver.
By the way there is no evidence to suggest that the vehicles were not being used for police purposes, and thats the reason that they were exceeding the speed limit,they dont have to display blues and twos, it's upto the individual driver. If these incidents were fixed speed or red light cameras, i would suggest that at the time of transgression then the appropriate emergency equipment would have been illuminated if fitted or the vehicle being slowed down whilst negotiating one of the above mentioned.
If they do not trace the driver at the time for whatever reason then they can not fully investigate it,I do accept however that the misplacing of the log book seems a tad more than suspicious. From the postings on here I would suggest that the majority of people on here would try the same tricks to evade prosecution if they could. If that is not the case then why such a fuss when people get prosecuted for exceeding the limit, after all we all are human,but some more honest than others.
Stefluc
By the way there is no evidence to suggest that the vehicles were not being used for police purposes, and thats the reason that they were exceeding the speed limit,they dont have to display blues and twos, it's upto the individual driver. If these incidents were fixed speed or red light cameras, i would suggest that at the time of transgression then the appropriate emergency equipment would have been illuminated if fitted or the vehicle being slowed down whilst negotiating one of the above mentioned.
If they do not trace the driver at the time for whatever reason then they can not fully investigate it,I do accept however that the misplacing of the log book seems a tad more than suspicious. From the postings on here I would suggest that the majority of people on here would try the same tricks to evade prosecution if they could. If that is not the case then why such a fuss when people get prosecuted for exceeding the limit, after all we all are human,but some more honest than others.
Stefluc
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff