CPS appealing in 159mph Pc case
Discussion
willmcc said:
.....With none of these things "high speed training" becomes simply a hoon down the motorway.
Except that it is practice!
If you do not practice your craft, you cannot expect to maintain the level of achievements already obtained.
There is formal training and their is practice.
Practice can be self critical and therefore he was training himself!
To talk about pre agreed goals is useless because this was never asked or even touched upon during the case. I expect Milton had pre-arranged goals but will anyone ever know them?
I doubt it
>> Edited by gone on Tuesday 14th June 12:02
I think the main contention is that while Joe public generally drive at a suitable, and more often, illegal speed and get points and fines for being 10 mph or less over a posted limit, - given by the Police, then the Police (who in my opinion, need to practice on the roads as well) take the PI55 by then doing the 85 in a 30, 159 in a 70 get off with it, when it seems difficult to comprehend it is remotly safe.
Even if the bloke peeked at 85 and 159, when we peek at nowhere near these speeds, licences are revoked and jobs lost.
Speed kills ... but not when a policeman's involved of course. Or a politician who needs to get to a meeting.
Even if the bloke peeked at 85 and 159, when we peek at nowhere near these speeds, licences are revoked and jobs lost.
Speed kills ... but not when a policeman's involved of course. Or a politician who needs to get to a meeting.
reanimate said:
I think the main contention is that while Joe public generally drive at a suitable, and more often, illegal speed and get points and fines for being 10 mph or less over a posted limit, - given by the Police, then the Police (who in my opinion, need to practice on the roads as well) take the PI55 by then doing the 85 in a 30, 159 in a 70 get off with it, when it seems difficult to comprehend it is remotly safe.
Even if the bloke peeked at 85 and 159, when we peek at nowhere near these speeds, licences are revoked and jobs lost.
Speed kills ... but not when a policeman's involved of course. Or a politician who needs to get to a meeting.
You have short memories.
Only a couple of months ago, everyone was extolling the virtues of a 160mph thrash down the M25 by a Porsche driver who was able to exploit the failures in British law adequately exposed by the legal expert employed to do so!!!
It works the same for everyone!
Don't lose sight on reality
Had Milton been convicted, do you not think there would have been serious consequences for him?
I do not see the CPS appealing against the decision of the court in the 160mph Porsche driver!!!
I think it's the whole two-face/double standards that are getting most people's goat here.
If PC speedy just was honest enough to put his hand up and say... "I was just having a hoon. It was bloody good fun and I might even have learned something. But the reason I went that fast was because I could"...then he (and the system) would be viewed much more sympathetically by many PH'ers.
If PC speedy just was honest enough to put his hand up and say... "I was just having a hoon. It was bloody good fun and I might even have learned something. But the reason I went that fast was because I could"...then he (and the system) would be viewed much more sympathetically by many PH'ers.
gone said:
Only a couple of months ago, everyone was extolling the virtues of a 160mph thrash down the M25 by a Porsche driver who was able to exploit the failures in British law adequately exposed by the legal expert employed to do so!!!
Most of us can't afford fancy lawyers.
As for it being the same for everyone, pull the other one. The porker owner got off with it because of a loophole in the law, not by saying it was ok for him to do that speed because he was keeping his eye in.
I'm with Gone.
Putting the whole speed debate aside as I'm sure that we all have similar opinions on that, there are no double standards here - or at least there shouldn't be.
Accept that you are restricted to the various applied speed limits and that fully trained and qualified police drivers are not - it's as simple as that. If you want to have a go then become a police driver!
Putting the whole speed debate aside as I'm sure that we all have similar opinions on that, there are no double standards here - or at least there shouldn't be.
Accept that you are restricted to the various applied speed limits and that fully trained and qualified police drivers are not - it's as simple as that. If you want to have a go then become a police driver!
ICSD said:
I'm with Gone.
Accept that you are restricted to the various applied speed limits and that fully trained and qualified police drivers are not - it's as simple as that. If you want to have a go then become a police driver!
As the judge said: not having a clearly delineated policy of the circumstances in which it is and is not ok for a police driver to hoon around in an umarked car at speeds of up to 85 mph in a 30 limit amounts to negligence on the part of the local police authority.
The police have enough accidents in their cars without the need to raise the odds in this way.
If the guy want to keep his eye in at high speed driving where there are kids, dogs, cyclists, and pedestrians, at least do it in a clearly marked car with some kind of audible and visual warning.
It's dangerous enough out there without having unmarked cars flying around for no apparent reason IMO.
tallbloke said:
I'm with Gone.
Accept that you are restricted to the various applied speed limits and that fully trained and qualified police drivers are not - it's as simple as that. If you want to have a go then become a police driver!
As the judge said: not having a clearly delineated policy of the circumstances in which it is and is not ok for a police driver to hoon around in an umarked car at speeds of up to 85 mph in a 30 limit amounts to negligence on the part of the local police authority.
The police have enough accidents in their cars without the need to raise the odds in this way.
If the guy want to keep his eye in at high speed driving where there are kids, dogs, cyclists, and pedestrians, at least do it in a clearly marked car with some kind of audible and visual warning.
It's dangerous enough out there without having unmarked cars flying around for no apparent reason IMO.
When and where did he do this and were there kids, dogs, cyclists, and pedestrians in the vicinity? We all know that there are places where just because it's a 30 doesn't mean that it should be.
Also, perhaps they should delineate a policy - that would be very interesting.
ICSD said:
at least do it in a clearly marked car with some kind of audible and visual warning.
We all know that there are places where just because it's a 30 doesn't mean that it should be.
I accept that and wonder if you'd like to comment on the bit of my post none of the police community on this thread seems to want to address regarding reducing the risks to members of the public of keeping your eye in as a trained police driver doing 85 in a 30 in an urban area.
After all, the usual excuse of not wanting to alert the perps to your prescence doesn't really hold water in this case does it?
tallbloke said:
tallbloke said:
at least do it in a clearly marked car with some kind of audible and visual warning.
We all know that there are places where just because it's a 30 doesn't mean that it should be.
I accept that and wonder if you'd like to comment on the bit of my post none of the police community on this thread seems to want to address regarding reducing the risks to members of the public of keeping your eye in as a trained police driver doing 85 in a 30 in an urban area.
After all, the usual excuse of not wanting to alert the perps to your prescence doesn't really hold water in this case does it?
I take your point but I assume that such a car was not available to him at the time plus I seem to remember that he was specifically testing/practicing with one particular car.
I can see here that there is little point in this thread as Gone and his friends will argue to the holt thast it's OK, (to the point where black = white).
nobody has yet explaind in calm logical terms at what point it's nessesary to do 80+ in a 30 limit, or how this can possibly be described as safe.
then couple this with what the need to do this operationally is?
so, you do you high speed persuit, and (on the rare ocassion) actually catch some twoker or the like, what's the point? they will already have wrecked the car (and god knows what else) and if you actually get them to court, they might get the wrists slapped (unlike joe public done for 38 in a 30 etc).
Have the ever considered why the twoker does it in the first place? maybe is a sport to them to see if they can race you guys?
nobody has yet explaind in calm logical terms at what point it's nessesary to do 80+ in a 30 limit, or how this can possibly be described as safe.
then couple this with what the need to do this operationally is?
so, you do you high speed persuit, and (on the rare ocassion) actually catch some twoker or the like, what's the point? they will already have wrecked the car (and god knows what else) and if you actually get them to court, they might get the wrists slapped (unlike joe public done for 38 in a 30 etc).
Have the ever considered why the twoker does it in the first place? maybe is a sport to them to see if they can race you guys?
scuffham said:
nobody has yet explaind in calm logical terms at what point it's nessesary to do 80+ in a 30 limit, or how this can possibly be described as safe.
gone said:
That is where the whole thing falls down I am afraid!!!
To remain good at something, you need to practice regularly and to push yourself. However you need to do so with intelligent restraint. I am afraid that intelligent restraint was missing from PC Miltons account! No problem with the higher speeds, but would never put myself in a position I had to defend high speeds in restricted (red ringed) limits!
Taken from my post on the second page
scuffham said:
Have the ever considered why the twoker does it in the first place? maybe is a sport to them to see if they can race you guys?
BUT can you be sure until the vehicle is stopped that it is all a game or something more serious?
gone said:
To remain good at something, you need to practice regularly and to push yourself. However you need to do so with intelligent restraint. I am afraid that intelligent restraint was missing from PC Miltons account! No problem with the higher speeds, but would never put myself in a position I had to defend high speeds in restricted (red ringed) limits!
I think that is the essence of all this.
We keep saying here that we want more TrafPol, and I think we accept that they need to maintain their high standards, otherwise they become less effective, and more dangerous when on urgent business.
I'm sure they are open to criticism at times, but don't let's attack them unfairly.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
this get's back to the root of the issue here...
so what you are saying is that it's OK and safe for you to do 80+ in a 30 limit but not for us mere mortals?
only two ways to look at this:
1) the 30 limit is wrong and it's safe to do higher speeds in said 30 limit
2) you are all driving gods and we are not worthy......
now, whist I am the first to say that some posted limits are somewhat at odds with the road/risks, I personally can't think of a road with a 30 limit on it that's 'OK' for 80+Mph...
thus we get down to the point that you must all be driving gods... and will all due respect, that's bull.
whist I agree there are a lot of drivers on our roads that should be ashamed at their abilities, there are also a great many that drive many thousand miles safely etc. putting yourselves above us mere mortals is just plain hypocrisy, when you consider that you are the very same people that will cheerfully stand up in court and tell them that Mr. Bloggs was an accident waiting to happen for doing a couple of MPH over the limit and how you have never seen such bad/dangerous driving, etc, etc.
I sometimes wonder if you realise what effect this has on people like me who used to have respect for the Police from years back, only to have had this eroded to the point that I struggle to have *any* respect for the current Police force.
(and BTW, it’s very easy to point the finger else where and blame the politicians/CPO’s/Courts/etc. but at the end of the day, you are *all* responsible for the situation we have now.)
/Rant over!
>> Edited by scuffham on Thursday 16th June 08:41
so what you are saying is that it's OK and safe for you to do 80+ in a 30 limit but not for us mere mortals?
only two ways to look at this:
1) the 30 limit is wrong and it's safe to do higher speeds in said 30 limit
2) you are all driving gods and we are not worthy......
now, whist I am the first to say that some posted limits are somewhat at odds with the road/risks, I personally can't think of a road with a 30 limit on it that's 'OK' for 80+Mph...
thus we get down to the point that you must all be driving gods... and will all due respect, that's bull.
whist I agree there are a lot of drivers on our roads that should be ashamed at their abilities, there are also a great many that drive many thousand miles safely etc. putting yourselves above us mere mortals is just plain hypocrisy, when you consider that you are the very same people that will cheerfully stand up in court and tell them that Mr. Bloggs was an accident waiting to happen for doing a couple of MPH over the limit and how you have never seen such bad/dangerous driving, etc, etc.
I sometimes wonder if you realise what effect this has on people like me who used to have respect for the Police from years back, only to have had this eroded to the point that I struggle to have *any* respect for the current Police force.
(and BTW, it’s very easy to point the finger else where and blame the politicians/CPO’s/Courts/etc. but at the end of the day, you are *all* responsible for the situation we have now.)
/Rant over!
>> Edited by scuffham on Thursday 16th June 08:41
scuffham said:
so what you are saying is that it's OK and safe for you to do 80+ in a 30 limit but not for us mere mortals?
Are you purposefully ignoring my previous posts?
It is not safe to do 80mph in a restricted limit! It is not safe to do 80mph in some unrestricted limits either.
scuffham said:
only two ways to look at this:
1) the 30 limit is wrong and it's safe to do higher speeds in said 30 limit
2) you are all driving gods and we are not worthy......
scuffham said:
now, whist I am the first to say that some posted limits are somewhat at odds with the road/risks, I personally can't think of a road with a 30 limit on it that's 'OK' for 80+Mph...
Neither can I. Sometimes however it may be necessary!
scuffham said:
thus we get down to the point that you must all be driving gods... and will all due respect, that's bull.
That is just your opinion!
Driving ability varies even within the top class level.
You may have a racing permit which you struggled to achieve but manage to scrape a pass at a higher level. Others will p1ss all over you! It is no different with police training!
The difference is, to pass a class 1 police test, many hours of investment in road driver training are used both theory and practice. This is something that few who are not involved in policing issues have the privelege of attempting to find out! Many who do apply fall by the wayside on route to the required standard.
scuffham said:
whist I agree there are a lot of drivers on our roads that should be ashamed at their abilities, there are also a great many that drive many thousand miles safely etc.
That is not in dispute! However. there are legal exemptions for Police and force/ACPO policy for advanced trained officers on top. That is life! You have to accept that if the law allows a particular course of conduct, whether you agree or even like it or not is immaterial to the fact!
scuffham said:
putting yourselves above us mere mortals is just plain hypocrisy, when you consider that you are the very same people that will cheerfully stand up in court and tell them that Mr. Bloggs was an accident waiting to happen for doing a couple of MPH over the limit and how you have never seen such bad/dangerous driving, etc, etc.
That is very rarely the case and you know it. Any one prosecuted for a minor speeding offence has evidence given that they exceeded the posted limit and there was no defence unless they can produce one! Other evidence of likely consequences is purely hearsay and banned from the witness box under the rules of evidence!
scuffham said:
I sometimes wonder if you realise what effect this has on people like me ....
Perfectly! Do you still have a pram? even if its a fast one
scuffham said:
only to have had this eroded to the point that I struggle to have *any* respect for the current Police force.
Too bad! You and countless others who don't like any form of control if it happens to interfere with your own enjoyment or opinions and you happen to see someone else able to do what you want to do without problems
(well too many anyway) scuffham said:
(and BTW, it’s very easy to point the finger else where and blame the politicians/CPO’s/Courts/etc. but at the end of the day, you are *all* responsible for the situation we have now.)
/Rant over!
No. You are responsible for the situation we are in now because you (as a generic driver) refuse to slow down where *society* has decided you should and refuse to accept that some people have a right to expect that they can go about their daily lives safely without meeting Mr Racing Fandago coming the other way!
You can pick your toys up now
[/quote]
No. You are responsible for the situation we are in now because you (as a generic driver) refuse to slow down where *society* has decided you should and refuse to accept that some people have a right to expect that they can go about their daily lives safely without meeting Mr Racing Fandago coming the other way!
You can pick your toys up now[/quote]
You know, Gone, you may have a valid point there, possibly. It depends on your definition of *society*. Now if we note that the vast majority of people do actually break the speed limit on occasion, then it seems to me rather dificult to conclude that society has decided that it is wrong. Particulary when the road is clear, speed limit ridiculously low etc.
So for the purposes of clarity, could you provide a clear definition of *society*?
No. You are responsible for the situation we are in now because you (as a generic driver) refuse to slow down where *society* has decided you should and refuse to accept that some people have a right to expect that they can go about their daily lives safely without meeting Mr Racing Fandago coming the other way!
You can pick your toys up now
[/quote] You know, Gone, you may have a valid point there, possibly. It depends on your definition of *society*. Now if we note that the vast majority of people do actually break the speed limit on occasion, then it seems to me rather dificult to conclude that society has decided that it is wrong. Particulary when the road is clear, speed limit ridiculously low etc.
So for the purposes of clarity, could you provide a clear definition of *society*?
well said...
I think if you actually worked on the assumption that if 90% of dribers are doing something every day, then this carries more wieght that some abitory 'rule' if you get what I mean...
Back to Gones point. I should say that I am probably somewhat older than you think, I have held a licence for more than 20 years, I also hold several other catagories of licence other than just plain car, including an Int C race licence.
now, I am not about to tell you I am the best driver since sliced bread, there are plenty of pro-drivers better than I am, however, this is not about me, it's about you and your view that it's right that you can drive in a fashon that would lead to an instant ban for us mere mortals.
PS. I have a clean licence and have never been 'flashed' or other such speed trap.
I think if you actually worked on the assumption that if 90% of dribers are doing something every day, then this carries more wieght that some abitory 'rule' if you get what I mean...
Back to Gones point. I should say that I am probably somewhat older than you think, I have held a licence for more than 20 years, I also hold several other catagories of licence other than just plain car, including an Int C race licence.
now, I am not about to tell you I am the best driver since sliced bread, there are plenty of pro-drivers better than I am, however, this is not about me, it's about you and your view that it's right that you can drive in a fashon that would lead to an instant ban for us mere mortals.
PS. I have a clean licence and have never been 'flashed' or other such speed trap.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff