Got away with speeding :-)
Discussion
Twas on the M25 "making swift progress" yesterday when I had the obigatory blue lights in my rear view mirror. Pulled over at a safe place and was "invited to join PC plod and his friend for a chat".
Turned out the video hadn't managed to get my speed, don't know whether this is due to incompetence or the system. But they said "we were doing over 120 to catch you up". As I only had an indicated 98/100 on the speedo I thought this to be a little strange.
I asked if they would like to put 120 in their notebook, knowing full well the Mags would throw that out with no video and the top speed in the manual of 94.
I asked if there was an issue with my driving, apart from the speed, to which they said it was fine. They confirmed I was indicating in time, using lane technique correctly etc. We spoke about the number of others hogging the middle lane, fog lights etc.
They also didn't have a copy of the PACE manual in the car, and didn't fancy the hassle of getting it.
Hence a warning to "slow down in the future sonny" and a producer thingy.
Result.
Turned out the video hadn't managed to get my speed, don't know whether this is due to incompetence or the system. But they said "we were doing over 120 to catch you up". As I only had an indicated 98/100 on the speedo I thought this to be a little strange.
I asked if they would like to put 120 in their notebook, knowing full well the Mags would throw that out with no video and the top speed in the manual of 94.
I asked if there was an issue with my driving, apart from the speed, to which they said it was fine. They confirmed I was indicating in time, using lane technique correctly etc. We spoke about the number of others hogging the middle lane, fog lights etc.
They also didn't have a copy of the PACE manual in the car, and didn't fancy the hassle of getting it.
Hence a warning to "slow down in the future sonny" and a producer thingy.
Result.
M25 Trafpol said:Always curious that BiB come out with this kind of statement. It doesn't matter a monkey's munter if they were doing over 120 mph to catch you up - what if they'd chosen 150 mph? So what? It's not clear that this was the minimum speed necessary to catch you up, i.e. you were doing over 119 mph.
we were doing over 120 to catch you up
The fact that they wanted to catch you up in a reasonable space of time and distance puts their speed comfortably in excess of yours, and utterly meaningless. Whatever other merits this 'stop' has going for it, this aspect is just plain nonsensical.
mcflurry said:
They also didn't have a copy of the PACE manual in the car, and didn't fancy the hassle of getting it.
Eh?
What has that got to do with it until your detention has been authorised at a Police Station?
They do not have to carry a copy of PACE, nor are you entitled to have access to it until you are arrested and your detention authorised.
In future, I suggest you take your own copy in case they call your bluff
Mcflurry said:
Hence a warning to "slow down in the future sonny" and a producer thingy.
Result.
I am thinking it was a result. If you had tried the sort of tactic with me about PACE etc, you may well have had to explain to a magistrate what you were doing, as my colleague and myself would have estimated your speed over a specific distance to be in excess of the limit and corroborated that with the speedo!!!!
>> Edited by gone on Sunday 28th November 18:02
gone said:
If you had tried the sort of tactic with me about PACE etc, you may well have had to explain to a magistrate what you were doing, as my colleague and myself would have estimated your speed over a specific distance to be in excess of the limit and corroborated that with the speedo!!!!
>> Edited by gone on Sunday 28th November 18:02
For goodness sake is it really necessary to be so petty?
Its hard to tell from your post, but I hope you're taking this as a second chance and not just feeling cocky because you 'got away' with it or managed to bluff your way out of trouble. Sometimes it is safe to do that sort of speed, but even when safe it's well above the speed I'd want to be seen by any BiB, my feeling is anyone regularly doing that sort of speed is on borrowed time.
ca092003 said:
If you had tried the sort of tactic with me about PACE etc, you may well have had to explain to a magistrate what you were doing, as my colleague and myself would have estimated your speed over a specific distance to be in excess of the limit and corroborated that with the speedo!!!!
>> Edited by gone on Sunday 28th November 18:02
For goodness sake is it really necessary to be so petty?
How could u be so unthoughtfull, My god man have u gone insane!
Remember--- think of the children ----
A child could have been playing on the M25 for gods sake!
GreenV8S said:
Its hard to tell from your post, but I hope you're taking this as a second chance and not just feeling cocky because you 'got away' with it or managed to bluff your way out of trouble. Sometimes it is safe to do that sort of speed, but even when safe it's well above the speed I'd want to be seen by any BiB, my feeling is anyone regularly doing that sort of speed is on borrowed time.
Oh steady on Peter. If Mike is telling a straight story it was probably only about 95 mph, nothing to get too excited about if the conditions were decent.
I must say some people on here sound less petrolheaded than I am, and I drive a diesel car!
Best wishes all,
Dave - on borrowed time.
I wonder that if you had taken the 'so sorry ... will never do it again(sob)' approach, whether you would have gotten away with it?
Just wondered what the best approach to getting let off with a tellin off would be.
If it had been me I would have been done there and then no matter what I did. Must have a one of those faces that Cops hate.
Just wondered what the best approach to getting let off with a tellin off would be.
If it had been me I would have been done there and then no matter what I did. Must have a one of those faces that Cops hate.
Excellent result.
NO reading is why you "got away" with it, and keeping a cool head / being polite. Good man. Hope you don't get spotted in future.
Gone: was that really neccessary to write that? the chap was only posting a reasonable text for our entertainment.
Chill, have a 
and relax. Good fella.
NO reading is why you "got away" with it, and keeping a cool head / being polite. Good man. Hope you don't get spotted in future.
Gone: was that really neccessary to write that? the chap was only posting a reasonable text for our entertainment.
Chill, have a and relax. Good fella.gone said:
Eh? What has that got to do with it until your detention has been authorised at a Police Station? They do not have to carry a copy of PACE, nor are you entitled to have access to it until you are arrested and your detention authorised.
IIRC the PePiPoo site which has otherwise sound legal content, would disagree with part of this. Yes, their legal input says that cars don't have to carry copies of PACE, but no, if you say you don't understand a verbal notice of intention to prosecute or any similr caution you are entitled to see PACE and the officers must get one (somehow). More on this please. Edited to add, can't find the statement after a quick scan over at PePiPoo, did find this though and there's enough worrying material there for now...
>> Edited by turbobloke on Monday 29th November 11:06
turbobloke said:
Eh? What has that got to do with it until your detention has been authorised at a Police Station? They do not have to carry a copy of PACE, nor are you entitled to have access to it until you are arrested and your detention authorised.
IIRC the PePiPoo site which has otherwise sound legal content, would disagree with part of this. Yes, their legal input says that cars don't have to carry copies of PACE, but no, if you say you don't understand a verbal notice of intention to prosecute or any similr caution you are entitled to see PACE and the officers must get one (somehow). More on this please. Edited to add, can't find the statement after a quick scan over at PePiPoo, did find this though and there's enough worrying material there for now...
>> Edited by turbobloke on Monday 29th November 11:06
I was in company with a friend who tried this approach (he was on 9 points already, nothing to lose by trying everything).
Did the 'dont understand the caution' bit and asked for something in writing to explain it, but BiB refused to provide anything stating that he didnt have to. Friend refused to sign anything as a result, still got prosecuted though and got to 11 points with a fine, thanks to him selling the sports car he was caught in and buying a slow vw bus in order to curb the habit. North Wales.
TripleS said:
probably only about 95 mph, nothing to get too excited about if the conditions were decent.
Do you really believe that 95+ is an acceptable speed? I don't dispute that there are times and places where this sort of speed could be achieved safely, and it could well be that this was one of them, but IMO it's well past the point where I would expect the BiB to turn a blind eye. The chances of encountering BiB or cameras may be low, but if you do encounter any I would expect to be in serious trouble and only a few MPH away from a probably ban. Personally, that isn't a risk I'm prepared to take which is why 95 mph is well outside my 'comfort zone'.
ca092003 said:
If you had tried the sort of tactic with me about PACE etc, you may well have had to explain to a magistrate what you were doing, as my colleague and myself would have estimated your speed over a specific distance to be in excess of the limit and corroborated that with the speedo!!!!
>> Edited by gone on Sunday 28th November 18:02
For goodness sake is it really necessary to be so petty?
Depend on the circumstances.
Sometimes I am afraid that it is!
Comments by people that think they know the law to intimidate or change the outcome of an interaction start to make my decision making process work against them
!gone said:Perjury is OK for you then, while a possibly safe 95 mph isn't; yep good call...
If you had tried the sort of tactic with me about PACE etc, you may well have had to explain to a magistrate what you were doing, as my colleague and myself would have estimated your speed over a specific distance to be in excess of the limit and corroborated that with the speedo!!!!>> Edited by gone on Sunday 28th November 18:02
turbobloke said:
IIRC the PePiPoo site which has otherwise sound legal content, would disagree with part of this. Yes, their legal input says that cars don't have to carry copies of PACE, but no, if you say you don't understand a verbal notice of intention to prosecute or any similr caution you are entitled to see PACE and the officers must get one (somehow). More on this please. Edited to add, can't find the statement after a quick scan over at PePiPoo, did find this though and there's enough worrying material there for now...
>> Edited by turbobloke on Monday 29th November 11:06
All PACE says is that the warning should be explained in plain langauge so the person does understand it. That is not difficult!
Example Bib give warning formula or Caution
Subject, "Me not understandy"
PACE states bib must say something like
" You have done something bad/wrong/against the law. It is my job to tell the courts about this. I must give you chance to say something to help me and the court understand why you did this thing. You do not have to tell me anything if you don't want to. This bad thing will be written about by me to someone in charge of the law. They will decide on my behalf whether you must go and see another person in a big red coat and wearing a silly rug, unfortunately this will not be St Nicholas, Father Christmas or Santa Claus. If this happens the man in the red coat and the silly rug may send you to a small disgusting place without much of a view where you will have to piss in a bucket and be careful about dropping any soap in the shower. On the other hand the man in the red coat may take some of your free money that the kind British working man puts into your account every other Friday. I hope this is now more clear to you and I will allow you to continue from this point reflecting on the valuable advice I have just given you"
There is no requirement for Police to carry PACE Codes of Practice or to show them to someone who is to be reported for an offence.
The requirement to show Code of Practice only comes after arrest AND detention is authorised
Pepipoo is misleading you
!gone said:Now I wish I'd got back to this thread before lunch, indigestion and the rest...are you serious? I can see the smiley but it doesn't wash when taken with the earlier comment. How is a MoP seeking to have their rights under the law enacted intimidating to a BiB, and if the MoP is wrong surely an explanation is the way forward rather than a vindictive bout of petty police corruption?
Comments by people that think they know the law to intimidate or change the outcome of an interaction start to make my decision making process work against them
If this BiB response is ever tried, I sincerely hope that the MoP has a GPS system coupled to video logging away, and can demonstrate in Court that the BiB is a liar and perverting the course of justice / committing perjury. Sure they may incriminate themselves on a minor speeding charge but well worth it IMO. The only sad thing is that the evidence would normally be disclosed before any full hearing could take place, and we'd be left hoping for a prosecution rather than getting one for sure. Some lame BiB-investigating-the-BiB whitewash and the slapped wrist that would surely follow would not be sufficient redress.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff