Warning motorists of police - flashing vs Waze
Warning motorists of police - flashing vs Waze
Author
Discussion

daddy cool

Original Poster:

4,107 posts

259 months

Tuesday 2nd October 2018
quotequote all
Just idle pondering the other day - apologies if this has been covered before...

As I understand it, its illegal for me to flash an oncoming motorist to warn them of a police officer around the corner ive just come from - right? (Or is that urban myth?)

If right, how is marking the police officers position on Waze different/legal?

chris4652009

1,572 posts

114 months

Tuesday 2nd October 2018
quotequote all
Because you are causing a distraction by flashing.............................

Steviesam

1,424 posts

164 months

Tuesday 2nd October 2018
quotequote all
Hardly anyone flashes anymore anyway.

Everyone is is a faux cop these days, and would report them as soon as look at them.

feef

5,209 posts

213 months

Tuesday 2nd October 2018
quotequote all
AIUI it's an urban myth.

I've seen claims that it constitutes 'perverting the course of justice' but when you read what is required for an indictment under that aspect of common law, I really can't see where it stands up

https://www.cps.gov.uk/legal-guidance/public-justi...

Labradorofperception

8,030 posts

121 months

Tuesday 2nd October 2018
quotequote all

It used to be Obstructing a Police Officer.

Seems illogical given they are not physically obstructing them, but i think there's a fair bit of caselaw on this, and not in the flashee's favour....

NikBartlett

703 posts

111 months

Tuesday 2nd October 2018
quotequote all
Does Waze contain details of the individual who updated the details of the speed trap ? Of course you would want to do the update hands free smile

andy_s

19,854 posts

289 months

Tuesday 2nd October 2018
quotequote all
It's a few years back but a guy was convicted of 'it' [can't remember the specific offence] and it was to do with his interfering in the duties of the police or some such, so probably marking it on a shared data base 'live' would probably attract the same - but again - details are vague; but it is out there.

This one is about 'Misuse of Headlights' as per HC - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2157763/D...

Ah - this is the chap - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1343959/D...

Edited by andy_s on Tuesday 2nd October 15:39

feef

5,209 posts

213 months

Tuesday 2nd October 2018
quotequote all
Labradorofperception said:
It used to be Obstructing a Police Officer.

Seems illogical given they are not physically obstructing them, but i think there's a fair bit of caselaw on this, and not in the flashee's favour....
It's not 'really' tho, as the officer is not stopped from carrying out their duty which is operating the apparatus and issuing the relevant paperwork when it registers an offence.

Add to that that camera vans, at least, are now operated by civilians so there's no officer to obstruct in the first place even if it was the case

BertBert

21,270 posts

241 months

Tuesday 2nd October 2018
quotequote all
It is obviously illegal to see a man robbing a bank and warn them that plod is round the corner so they hide the swag bag and get away with it.

That is supposedly the principle being applied

DT398

1,947 posts

178 months

Tuesday 2nd October 2018
quotequote all
Isn’t it more like seeing someone walking towards the bank (who my or may not be about to rob it) and telling them there’s a copper round the corner.

The motorists you are alerting coming towards you may not even be speeding. How do you know they are committing any offence?

vonhosen

40,597 posts

247 months

Tuesday 2nd October 2018
quotequote all
It's interfering in the process (by obstructing the constable in their duty).
For it to apply the Police have to have started the process of gathering evidence against somebody speeding & then the flasher interferes with that process of evidence gathering, by warning the offender so that they may suspend their offending temporarily to frustrate the collection of that evidence.

It doesn't apply if there is no evidence of anybody speeding or likely to speed.

http://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=/ew/c...

In the case quoted he was acquitted because the prosecution didn't provide evidence that somebody was speeding or likely to. If one of the officers had formed an opinion that one of the vehicles being warned was speeding prior to the warning being given then it would have been a different matter.

psi310398

11,075 posts

233 months

Tuesday 2nd October 2018
quotequote all
My Waze app simply advises that there are police in a certain place, not what they are doing. That is simply a statement of a fact and I can't see how it is obstructive per se.

JNW1

9,480 posts

224 months

Tuesday 2nd October 2018
quotequote all
Flashing oncoming vehicles to warn them of the presence of things like camera vans is fairly common around where I live; even if they were so inclined I can't imagine the police have the resources available to prevent it....

anonymous-user

84 months

Tuesday 2nd October 2018
quotequote all
SUrely it’s aiding and abetting in tax evasion? Or avoidance? Which is OK in my book.

Edited by anonymous-user on Tuesday 2nd October 17:21

vonhosen

40,597 posts

247 months

Tuesday 2nd October 2018
quotequote all
JNW1 said:
Flashing oncoming vehicles to warn them of the presence of things like camera vans is fairly common around where I live; even if they were so inclined I can't imagine the police have the resources available to prevent it....
They can't prevent it if people choose to do it (much like any other offending), they can only prosecute those who they have evidence against.

tybo

2,284 posts

247 months

Tuesday 2nd October 2018
quotequote all
JNW1 said:
Flashing oncoming vehicles to warn them of the presence of things like camera vans is fairly common around where I live; even if they were so inclined I can't imagine the police have the resources available to prevent it....
Same here.

Even got a flash from a couple of bus drivers last week.

Long may it continue beer

Kewy

1,464 posts

124 months

Tuesday 2nd October 2018
quotequote all
I need to look into this Waze. Is it pretty reliable in letting you know where speed cams or police are hiding doing their jobs? rolleyes

feef

5,209 posts

213 months

Tuesday 2nd October 2018
quotequote all
Kewy said:
I need to look into this Waze. Is it pretty reliable in letting you know where speed cams or police are hiding doing their jobs? rolleyes
it is...

it's crowd-sourced data and gamified such that drivers are encouraged to use the app to notify of hazards, whether that's a broken down vehicle, traffic jam or police (visible or hidden (yes both are options)). You get points for posting alerts, and more points if others give them a 'thumbs up'. You can also mark if a hazard isn't present which helps deter false alerts as well as notifying others when the hazard has moved on.

They were bought by Google a couple of years ago and I've now switched to that from Sygic for UK use. I still tend to use Sygic when abroad as it stores the maps locally rather than relying on data.

Terzo123

4,737 posts

238 months

Tuesday 2nd October 2018
quotequote all
Waze was excellent when I used it in Florida earlier this year. Alot of folk must use it over there as the warnings were numerous and accurate.

Derek Smith

49,829 posts

278 months

Tuesday 2nd October 2018
quotequote all
You may use your headlights to warn on you (your vehicle's) presence on a road. If you see a car close to the centre line of the road, then a flash, even if it is in the lee of a speed camera, is permissible.

It's always gone on. It's pathetic taking a driver to court for careless driving.

There were two cases, some years ago, on this subject. The first found that flashing was not obstruction. The second said there was because the driver flashed was exceeding the speed limit. So you can flash anyone under or at the speed limit without it being obstruction, so the police went another way.

Flashing of headlights is not careless driving.

Get a sense of proportion.