Police stop ‘too careful’ driver
Discussion
www.rochdaleobserver.co.uk/news/index/articles/article_id=10526.html
Police stop ‘too careful’ driver
BUSINESSMAN John Walkden was astonished to find himself stopped by police while driving through Whitworth.
But that was nothing compared to the shock he felt when told the reason why. He was, the officer simply said, driving too carefully!
Mr Walkden had been carrying out business in Bacup last Saturday and was heading for the M62 when he was pulled over in Market Street.
He knew he hadn’t had a drink and had been careful to observe the speed limit.
Mr Walkden said: “I was being so careful to stick to the speed limit because of all the speed cameras on that road."
“I had seen a car behind me and thought it was a taxi. Then the lights started flashing and I realised it was a police car."
“When I asked why I had been stopped I was told it was because I had been driving so correctly. She even thanked me for being so careful."
“I’ve been burgled recently and my business has been broken into, so this made me feel very indignant."
“The officer asked me my name, if I owned the car and if I had any proof of identity. Then she asked me if I had been drinking and I said I had drunk a cup of tea about 20 minutes before.”
The officer breathalysed Mr Walkden, of Bolton, and after the test proved negative, she let him drive away.
He said: “I’ve been to Bacup police station to complain and they were quite apologetic, explaining it was someone new in the job.”
Inspector David Sheppard said: “The police have the power to stop any vehicle and this was a routine stop. We’ve had a lot of cars stolen in the area recently and some drivers of stolen cars stick to the speed limit to avoid detection."
“I’m sure the majority of car drivers would welcome the action we’ve taken.”
Police stop ‘too careful’ driver
BUSINESSMAN John Walkden was astonished to find himself stopped by police while driving through Whitworth.
But that was nothing compared to the shock he felt when told the reason why. He was, the officer simply said, driving too carefully!
Mr Walkden had been carrying out business in Bacup last Saturday and was heading for the M62 when he was pulled over in Market Street.
He knew he hadn’t had a drink and had been careful to observe the speed limit.
Mr Walkden said: “I was being so careful to stick to the speed limit because of all the speed cameras on that road."
“I had seen a car behind me and thought it was a taxi. Then the lights started flashing and I realised it was a police car."
“When I asked why I had been stopped I was told it was because I had been driving so correctly. She even thanked me for being so careful."
“I’ve been burgled recently and my business has been broken into, so this made me feel very indignant."
“The officer asked me my name, if I owned the car and if I had any proof of identity. Then she asked me if I had been drinking and I said I had drunk a cup of tea about 20 minutes before.”
The officer breathalysed Mr Walkden, of Bolton, and after the test proved negative, she let him drive away.
He said: “I’ve been to Bacup police station to complain and they were quite apologetic, explaining it was someone new in the job.”
Inspector David Sheppard said: “The police have the power to stop any vehicle and this was a routine stop. We’ve had a lot of cars stolen in the area recently and some drivers of stolen cars stick to the speed limit to avoid detection."
“I’m sure the majority of car drivers would welcome the action we’ve taken.”
We’ve had a lot of cars stolen in the area recently and some drivers of stolen cars stick to the speed limit to avoid detection."
Had to laugh at that. The fact that the vast majority of the public speed, makes people who stay within the limits stick out like sore thumbs.
Mind you stealing a car is hardly as serious as the hineous crime of speeding over the limit by a few mph
Had to laugh at that. The fact that the vast majority of the public speed, makes people who stay within the limits stick out like sore thumbs.
Mind you stealing a car is hardly as serious as the hineous crime of speeding over the limit by a few mph
rospa said:
It would seem to me that the PC had no power to request a breath specimen. Any BiB's able to offer an opinion?
She could only have administered or requested a breath specimen under three sets of circumstances.
1. He had committed a moving traffic offence (he clearly had not)
2. She suspected he had alcohol in his body (He may have done even if she could not smell it)
3. He had been driving or in charge of the vehicle involved in an accident (it clearly had not).
'2.' above is the one she would have fallen back on because of the careful nature of his driving. That should really have been backed up by other signs such as smelling alcohol on his breath, the way his speech may have been slurred and whether he was able to stand properly without aid!
If she had a severe cold affecting her sense of smell, he was sitting in the car and she was unable to hear him properly because of cattarh in her ears, then she may well be able to get away with the fact she breath tested him under the circumstances in the article
As posted in another thread, the following tale demonstrates that the story above is not an isolated case.
In the Motoring section of the Daily Telegraph (17 Apr 2--4), there is a 2/3 page article by Martin Churchill. It contains a report that he was once followed by a police car and stopped - to make sure he was wearing his seat-belt - and then asked why he was driving within the speed limit. The reason was that he had nine points on his licence.
It is stories such as these that demonstrate the ridiculous state of affairs brought on by people like Brunsturmfurher, Williams, Jamieson, Blunderkit and the (now demonstrably lying) Scammera Partnerships, that predisposes (some) BiB to assume that someone driving within the speed limit is committing some other offence!
Pah!
Streaky
In the Motoring section of the Daily Telegraph (17 Apr 2--4), there is a 2/3 page article by Martin Churchill. It contains a report that he was once followed by a police car and stopped - to make sure he was wearing his seat-belt - and then asked why he was driving within the speed limit. The reason was that he had nine points on his licence.
It is stories such as these that demonstrate the ridiculous state of affairs brought on by people like Brunsturmfurher, Williams, Jamieson, Blunderkit and the (now demonstrably lying) Scammera Partnerships, that predisposes (some) BiB to assume that someone driving within the speed limit is committing some other offence!
Pah!
Streaky
It all seems perfectly reasonable to me. Now that people have realised that, with a bit of observation, there is no need to get caught, drivers are being hassled to speed again to get the revenue figures up.
They're a devious crew aren't they.
If you were to get stopped for this, would a valid defence to a future speeding offence be that "I'm sure the officer who stopped me last week/month/etc. was telling me off for keeping to the speed limit. Are you saying that I misunderstood?"
.
They're a devious crew aren't they
. If you were to get stopped for this, would a valid defence to a future speeding offence be that "I'm sure the officer who stopped me last week/month/etc. was telling me off for keeping to the speed limit. Are you saying that I misunderstood?"
.Twice been stopped driving a rally car off event / between stages. Both times after no moving / vehicle / documentation offences evident it was admitted that the stop was because I was driving legally and that didn't fit the profile.
On both occasions no complaints about attitude or procedure.
Personally speaking if stops based on profiling result in more bad guys getting to meet the custody officer then I'm all for it.
Maybe that is an unpopular view in some quarters but FWIW that is my 2p.
FiF
On both occasions no complaints about attitude or procedure.
Personally speaking if stops based on profiling result in more bad guys getting to meet the custody officer then I'm all for it.
Maybe that is an unpopular view in some quarters but FWIW that is my 2p.
FiF
I dont quite understand why people are so averse to being stopped routinely? If he were being persecuted and stopped regularly, fair enough, but they suspected something was amiss so stopped him to be sure. I read somewhere that more people are caught drink driving due to driving more carefully than are caught for driving like nutters. If he'd been stopped and it had transpired that he had no insurance, everyone would be applauding the Plods actions?
Surely this kind of thing is exactly what we all want? More real policemen and less autonomous grey boxes?
Surely this kind of thing is exactly what we all want? More real policemen and less autonomous grey boxes?
gone said:
It would seem to me that the PC had no power to request a breath specimen. Any BiB's able to offer an opinion?
She could only have administered or requested a breath specimen under three sets of circumstances.
1. He had committed a moving traffic offence (he clearly had not)
2. She suspected he had alcohol in his body (He may have done even if she could not smell it)
3. He had been driving or in charge of the vehicle involved in an accident (it clearly had not).
'2.' above is the one she would have fallen back on because of the careful nature of his driving. That should really have been backed up by other signs such as smelling alcohol on his breath, the way his speech may have been slurred and whether he was able to stand properly without aid!
If she had a severe cold affecting her sense of smell, he was sitting in the car and she was unable to hear him properly because of cattarh in her ears, then she may well be able to get away with the fact she breath tested him under the circumstances in the article
Now my sister finds this interesting and has asked me to ask! She had stopped in lay-by after hard day at work (which involved a cow in labour and some cow pat
). It was, unfortunately, chucking out time down at t' local "Woolpack", and BiB pulled in behind her. At first - she though it was nice friendly gesture to check out "damsel in distress", but apparently he very aggressively asked her whether or not the car was hers, and if she had been drinking. (Well, she did reek of disinfectant with traces of rather pungent odour! ) So in view of this - why was she breathalysed? (Was negative of course!) She was not overly offended by the breath test request - but was not at all impressed by his manner and attitude at the time - though does concede that she looked "a bit of a mess" and was wearing memmorable perfume at the time!
(As if anyone would roll about in cow pat and douse themselves with dinfectant to hide fact of having had some amber nectar! )On any friday or saturday night you can always tell the people that have probably been drinking as they do tend to stick to the speed limits at these times than any other.
The same thing happens around christmas time.
If I was BiB I would stop them all, as slow drivers are a menace on the roads
The same thing happens around christmas time.
If I was BiB I would stop them all, as slow drivers are a menace on the roads
Mad Dave said:
I dont quite understand why people are so averse to being stopped routinely? If he were being persecuted and stopped regularly, fair enough, but they suspected something was amiss so stopped him to be sure. I read somewhere that more people are caught drink driving due to driving more carefully than are caught for driving like nutters. If he'd been stopped and it had transpired that he had no insurance, everyone would be applauding the Plods actions?
Surely this kind of thing is exactly what we all want? More real policemen and less autonomous grey boxes?
Yes it is what we want, but people are averse to being stopped , i think because of the diminishing respect for plod , due to obsession of persecution for minor speeding offences even though the scamera partnerships are the root cause of it.
LOL You may well be right, but i do find it amusing that every topic usually has a line somewhere "its all the fault of speed cameras". Whilst they are indeed a bane of society, we cant really blame them for EVERYTHING!?
"little Johnny just tripped and scraped his knee - bloody speed cameras!"
"little Johnny just tripped and scraped his knee - bloody speed cameras!"
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff