Police Interceptors - confused ???

[aquatix]

Accidentally watched the first part of the Interceptors program tonight (after Freedomland film) and slightly confused. They chased a guy in an Audi for several miles at high speeds, all on camera, at least 3 police cars involved. Audi was also flashed by a Gatso at 115mph through a 30 zone before he finally gave up (and in possession of a knife). Waited to see what he got for it, but although he was charged with failure to stop, the CPS dropped charges .

Nothing for speeding, careless or dangerous driving, no ban, no points, fine or anything. Fair enough he didn't crash or kill anyone (but neither did Kevin Keegan for his 6 month ban) but WTF - am I missing something ? Surely with all that video evidence they could have charged him with something ?

Doesn't seem right, but do BiB on here have any idea why ?

[Ry_B]

He must have got charged for something surely? If a casual motorist did 35 past that same camera 4 times then they'd loose their license!

[jo'bo]

coz he had a knife therefore a real baddy, so they let him off, carry a machete and you get off with everything coz you get a decent solicitor paid for by the state

Edited by jo'bo on Friday 27th February 03:24

[Mill Wheel]

Did they clearly identify the driver after the stop?

[Dizeee]

Sounds normal.

CPS like the police are now a business. Figures, figures, figures.

Anything less than perfect and the case is dropped. CPS have a % of cases set forward VS cases convicted ratio. Only the best evidence, like a murder forensic stain, will be enough.

It means we all suffer.

Sorry. Truth is bitter. But, welcome to the UK.

To the OP the fail to stop is inarguable and video recorded but the evidential case for anything else has not been met by CPS. That is, they know an offence has been committed but they can't guarantee a conviction.


Figures, figures, figures....

[parapaul]

Was a penknife IIRC... But I thought exactly the same. Even if the CPS chose not to prosecute (which, for the love of god, they must have had enough evidence to), shirley the 100+ through the 30mph scamera should have landed him in some trouble?

[vonhosen]

aquatix said:

Accidentally watched the first part of the Interceptors program tonight (after Freedomland film) and slightly confused. They chased a guy in an Audi for several miles at high speeds, all on camera, at least 3 police cars involved. Audi was also flashed by a Gatso at 115mph through a 30 zone before he finally gave up (and in possession of a knife). Waited to see what he got for it, but although he was charged with failure to stop, the CPS dropped charges .

Nothing for speeding, careless or dangerous driving, no ban, no points, fine or anything. Fair enough he didn't crash or kill anyone (but neither did Kevin Keegan for his 6 month ban) but WTF - am I missing something ? Surely with all that video evidence they could have charged him with something ?

Doesn't seem right, but do BiB on here have any idea why ?

What if he had already been imprisoned prior to the trial for this for something far more serious, so rather than producing him & having a trial they just dropped it.

[aquatix]

vonhosen said:

What if he had already been imprisoned prior to the trial for this for something far more serious, so rather than producing him & having a trial they just dropped it.

Doesn't appear so. There were no outstanding warrants, he was the RK and held insurance. He was seen by one patrol car hurtling past them at over a ton, but the first car did not give chase - notified interceptors who waited further along then chased when he passed, still at mega speed. They lit him up and chased for several miles before he eventually gave up. 2 other BiB cars then arrived on scene a few minutes later.

His 'reason' was just "having a laugh" with plod (all on camera after he was dragged from car) - with no other reason for evading. All on film from both dash camera and film crew. At least 6 officers & 3 cars involved, so a lot of resources wasted on the cretin. Charged with failure to stop but CPS later dropped. Maybe some loophole on that charge but surely enough evidence to charge with other offences. Does not seem right to escape without ban or even points.

[stigmundfreud]

aquatix said:

Accidentally watched the first part of the Interceptors program tonight (after Freedomland film) and slightly confused. They chased a guy in an Audi for several miles at high speeds, all on camera, at least 3 police cars involved. Audi was also flashed by a Gatso at 115mph through a 30 zone before he finally gave up (and in possession of a knife). Waited to see what he got for it, but although he was charged with failure to stop, the CPS dropped charges .

Nothing for speeding, careless or dangerous driving, no ban, no points, fine or anything. Fair enough he didn't crash or kill anyone (but neither did Kevin Keegan for his 6 month ban) but WTF - am I missing something ? Surely with all that video evidence they could have charged him with something ?

Doesn't seem right, but do BiB on here have any idea why ?

So glad I am not alone, I want to know whether I can make an FOI request as that was beyond unbelievable.

[stigmundfreud]

Mill Wheel said:

Did they clearly identify the driver after the stop?

signle occupant and they had to drag him out of the drivers seat, the car wasnt stopped when they got him, the car slowed down all on film and they boxed him in.

115mph through a 30 zone caught on police film and GATSO

[aquatix]

Dizeee said:

To the OP the fail to stop is inarguable and video recorded but the evidential case for anything else has not been met by CPS. That is, they know an offence has been committed but they can't guarantee a conviction.

But surely if video evidence (and video of the video evidence being obtained), plus statements from 6 BiB is deemed insufficient, then how can anyone ever be prosecuted for anything ? Even the Gatso evidence provides further independent corroboration. He was followed through as it flashed at 115mph, up until he was stopped a few miles later. He could hardly claim he wasn't the driver !!

[liner33]

aquatix said:

Accidentally watched the first part of the Interceptors program tonight (after Freedomland film) and slightly confused. They chased a guy in an Audi for several miles at high speeds, all on camera, at least 3 police cars involved. Audi was also flashed by a Gatso at 115mph through a 30 zone before he finally gave up (and in possession of a knife). Waited to see what he got for it, but although he was charged with failure to stop, the CPS dropped charges .

Nothing for speeding, careless or dangerous driving, no ban, no points, fine or anything. Fair enough he didn't crash or kill anyone (but neither did Kevin Keegan for his 6 month ban) but WTF - am I missing something ? Surely with all that video evidence they could have charged him with something ?

Doesn't seem right, but do BiB on here have any idea why ?

You see this all the time , most crims dont seem to end up with close to the punishment your average punter would get for a speed camera nip for 36mph in a 30 limit. 6 cars and a police chopper chasing some unlicenced, uninsured chav all over the place when he finally crashes into some punters car you hear at the end of the show "he was banned for a further year (well the first ban clearly worked) recieved more points on his licence and was fined £100 and told to be a good boy for a year"!! Must make plod as angry as the law abinding public

As for the Ch5 show It was just an A3 yet the "interceptors" certainly seemed to make a meal of catching him there were points where if he had turned off he would have easily got away as the Scooby was a good distance back, matey only slowed when his brakes overheated

[mike oxard]

think it was an S3 and it was already doing about 70 odd when it flashed past the evo. so to be fair it had a good head start from a stationary evo.

but yeah total piss take that he walked away scott free.

if any normal person had done that it would have been bye bye license for a long long time

[robinhood21]

More injustice in tonight's show (well yesterday now). BIB chased and caught a BMW that had been stolen the night before by breaking in and steeling the keys to the car. All well and good one would have thought, but no, CPS dropped all charges because there was insufficient evidence to link the driver to the robbery. I don't know about you, but if I were BIB I would be incandescent with rage at such injustice.

[Battenburg Bob]

robinhood21 said:

if I were BIB I would be incandescent with rage at such injustice.

I've had stand up rows with CPS lawyers as they give their usual excuses. What they actually mean is "it's not a guilty plea and we're actually going to have to do some lawyer type work. Too difficult so we'll drop it"

And guess who has to tell the victims and gets the blame!

[thinfourth2]

Battenburg Bob said:

robinhood21 said:

if I were BIB I would be incandescent with rage at such injustice.

I've had stand up rows with CPS lawyers as they give their usual excuses. What they actually mean is "it's not a guilty plea and we're actually going to have to do some lawyer type work. Too difficult so we'll drop it"

And guess who has to tell the victims and gets the blame!

While i know that the CPS and plod are two different things

I feel you are part of the same thing, the justice system

Maybe you can see why i feel loathing towards all arms of our justice system

[Red Kite]

Battenburg Bob said:

robinhood21 said:

if I were BIB I would be incandescent with rage at such injustice.

I've had stand up rows with CPS lawyers as they give their usual excuses. What they actually mean is "it's not a guilty plea and we're actually going to have to do some lawyer type work. Too difficult so we'll drop it"

And guess who has to tell the victims and gets the blame!

CPS have their faults, but the above is a little harsh.
Fact is, being in posession of car today, is not evidence of being the burglar of the night before.

[Taita]

CPS are ime (limited) experiences, utter wkers. Had some jumped up little lecture me about no insurance in magistrates court.

Soon shut the pudgy fker up when I dropped a letter of indemnity on his desk. Must have missed the part where I get to take life lessons from the prosecution.

[robinhood21]

Red Kite said:

Fact is, being in posession of car today, is not evidence of being the burglar of the night before.

Oh, I fully understand that proving the burglary might be a tad difficult. But trying to evade capture, IE dangerous driving, endangering the life of a PO (when going for the arrest), no insurance, etc, and all caught on camera.
The old saying; 'not only must justice be done, but must be seen to be done' seems to be now obscured by the wrongful prosecution (in my eyes) of an easy target. EG, dropping a cigarette on the floor, or a granny clouting a thug around the ear for destroying a flower bed etc.
Worrying times ahead me thinks.

[Battenburg Bob]

Red Kite said:

Battenburg Bob said:

robinhood21 said:

if I were BIB I would be incandescent with rage at such injustice.

I've had stand up rows with CPS lawyers as they give their usual excuses. What they actually mean is "it's not a guilty plea and we're actually going to have to do some lawyer type work. Too difficult so we'll drop it"

And guess who has to tell the victims and gets the blame!

CPS have their faults, but the above is a little harsh.
Fact is, being in posession of car today, is not evidence of being the burglar of the night before.

Afraid I have to disagree. Justice in this country today is decided by bespectacled oafs, sat in pokey little offices around the country. They SHOULD be putting cases forward for COURTS to decide, not binning them because it might effect their stats.

Do a straw poll amongst Officers in any Police station in the country and I'll bet my years wages that the opinion of CPS will be overwhelmingly negative.