bet he doesnt lose his licence, twat
28-03-2013, 03:39 PM
#1
PassionFord Post Troll
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: in front of you and winning
Posts: 3,366
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
bet he doesnt lose his licence, twat
PC Mark Milton 'crashed into traffic island at 92mph' 
FROM THE BBC NEWS WEBSITE
have you heard about this one
PC Mark Milton 'crashed into traffic island at 92mph'
A police officer was driving at speeds of up to 108mph moments before he crashed his patrol car in a Shropshire village, a court has heard.
PC Mark Milton, 46, from Pendrel Close in Market Drayton, said he was chasing a suspected stolen car on the A442 in Cold Hatton, which has a 40mph limit.
Worcester Crown Court heard the car was travelling at 92mph when it crashed into a traffic island in October 2011.
No other vehicle was involved in the crash. He denies dangerous driving.
The BMW patrol car suffered a shredded tyre and broken suspension strut when it struck the island on 26 October.
Nobody was injured in the crash although the driver's airbag did deploy, the court heard.
'Grossly excessive'
Prosecutor Pat Sullivan told the jury the car's data recorder showed that its average speed leading up to the crash was between 98mph and 99mph, and it had reached a maximum speed of 108mph.
Mr Sullivan told the court: "The Crown's case is that this is grossly excessive speeding - so grossly excessive that it amounts to dangerous driving."
Mr Sullivan said Mr Milton, who is based in Shrewsbury, contacted his supervisor by radio several minutes after the collision claiming to have hit a kerb.
A colleague attended the scene and after they examined the roadway, they realised the car had struck the island.
The court heard from Sgt Ed Bates, who received a call from Mr Milton on his radio to report substantial damage to the BMW.
He said he visited the "pitch black" scene and that Mr Milton said he had "clipped" a kerb after being dazzled by the headlights of an oncoming car.
His colleague seemed shocked and upset after the collision, he said.
The trial continues.
have you heard about this one
PC Mark Milton 'crashed into traffic island at 92mph'
A police officer was driving at speeds of up to 108mph moments before he crashed his patrol car in a Shropshire village, a court has heard.
PC Mark Milton, 46, from Pendrel Close in Market Drayton, said he was chasing a suspected stolen car on the A442 in Cold Hatton, which has a 40mph limit.
Worcester Crown Court heard the car was travelling at 92mph when it crashed into a traffic island in October 2011.
No other vehicle was involved in the crash. He denies dangerous driving.
The BMW patrol car suffered a shredded tyre and broken suspension strut when it struck the island on 26 October.
Nobody was injured in the crash although the driver's airbag did deploy, the court heard.
'Grossly excessive'
Prosecutor Pat Sullivan told the jury the car's data recorder showed that its average speed leading up to the crash was between 98mph and 99mph, and it had reached a maximum speed of 108mph.
Mr Sullivan told the court: "The Crown's case is that this is grossly excessive speeding - so grossly excessive that it amounts to dangerous driving."
Mr Sullivan said Mr Milton, who is based in Shrewsbury, contacted his supervisor by radio several minutes after the collision claiming to have hit a kerb.
A colleague attended the scene and after they examined the roadway, they realised the car had struck the island.
The court heard from Sgt Ed Bates, who received a call from Mr Milton on his radio to report substantial damage to the BMW.
He said he visited the "pitch black" scene and that Mr Milton said he had "clipped" a kerb after being dazzled by the headlights of an oncoming car.
His colleague seemed shocked and upset after the collision, he said.
The trial continues.
28-03-2013, 04:13 PM
#3
Advanced PassionFord User
No mention of the speed of the car he was chasing, and also the fact it was in a 40 limit actually means nothing about other conditions and how safe a speed it was.
Also the story seems a tad biased, probably from someone who believes all car thieves should be allowed to just get away with it.
Also the story seems a tad biased, probably from someone who believes all car thieves should be allowed to just get away with it.
28-03-2013, 05:23 PM
#4
No mention of the speed of the car he was chasing, and also the fact it was in a 40 limit actually means nothing about other conditions and how safe a speed it was.
Also the story seems a tad biased, probably from someone who believes all car thieves should be allowed to just get away with it.
Also the story seems a tad biased, probably from someone who believes all car thieves should be allowed to just get away with it.
They don't clear just any old copper to drive like that. He knocked a curb in the dead of night at near enough 100mph.
He's just unlucky, not a criminal.
28-03-2013, 05:25 PM
#5
And in response to the OP, course he won't lose his licence, he's a copper on official police duty and blues and twos. He is allowed to drive as quick as he can/needs too.
You a cop hater or something? Wanna see a man lose his job for curbing a car?
You a cop hater or something? Wanna see a man lose his job for curbing a car?
28-03-2013, 05:58 PM
#6
Professional Waffler
If he was spanking about for the Hell of it then he should have the book thrown at him. If, however, he was pursuing a stolen vehicle it's bloody ludicrous him even being in court. If it was your car that he was pursuing I trust you wouldn't want him to be sticking to the limit as you can be certain the thieving fucktard won't.
28-03-2013, 06:31 PM
#7
Part of the Furniture
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Scotland
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"The Crown's case is that this is grossly excessive speeding - so grossly excessive that it amounts to dangerous driving"
That's the only important part of the article there.
These guys have to make a judgement call as to what is safe and I think in a lot of cases although everyone hates to see folk getting away with stolen cars the speeds required to chase them are far too dangerous, and 108 mph though a village even at night would seem to come into that category imo.
That's the only important part of the article there.
These guys have to make a judgement call as to what is safe and I think in a lot of cases although everyone hates to see folk getting away with stolen cars the speeds required to chase them are far too dangerous, and 108 mph though a village even at night would seem to come into that category imo.
Last edited by pedroS2RST; 28-03-2013 at 06:32 PM.
Trending Topics
28-03-2013, 07:14 PM
#8
Professional Waffler
I would far prefer to take the judgement over what is safe or not from an experienced driver who was there than a legal person sat behind a desk miles away who can probably barely cope with putting fuel in their own car.
28-03-2013, 08:09 PM
#9
PassionFord Post Whore!!
Presumably the car thief has not been caught or prosecuted for the theft or the speeding/dangerous driving? Until he appears in court, it is laughable that a serving cop is in court for doing the actual job he is paid to do, just because it went slightly awry.
28-03-2013, 10:15 PM
#11
Part of the Furniture
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Scotland
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just because he is pursuing someone driving dangerously doesn't give him the right to do the same. He can't do what he likes, even in the name of upholding the law.
The prosecution seem to be arguing the situation did not merit such high speeds. Is driving at 108mph through a village ever really justified? It's obviously been too fast because he's come a cropper.
But the guy is human after all and everyone makes mistakes. The difference is Joe Public would not get away with it, and he probably will.
The prosecution seem to be arguing the situation did not merit such high speeds. Is driving at 108mph through a village ever really justified? It's obviously been too fast because he's come a cropper.
But the guy is human after all and everyone makes mistakes. The difference is Joe Public would not get away with it, and he probably will.
28-03-2013, 10:59 PM
#13
Too many posts.. I need a life!!
29-03-2013, 10:11 AM
#14
No mention of the speed of the car he was chasing, and also the fact it was in a 40 limit actually means nothing about other conditions and how safe a speed it was.
Also the story seems a tad biased, probably from someone who believes all car thieves should be allowed to just get away with it.
Also the story seems a tad biased, probably from someone who believes all car thieves should be allowed to just get away with it.
So from that, there can be no justification for such speeds. Police cars have radios for a reason. So they can relay such information to other cars, other areas, helicopter etc etc. As much as I'd like to see every car thief ( and many MP's and other government workers involved in stealing money from us ) die a slow painful death, will a solo cop car driving at 100mph in a built up area, ie a 40 zone actually catch a stolen car ?
I rather think not.
29-03-2013, 12:29 PM
#16
Advanced PassionFord User
Has anyone seen this road? The fact that it's a 40 and not a 30 or 20 would make me think it may be a wide open main road, not a densely built up area.
29-03-2013, 12:41 PM
#17
There are multiple junctions along it's length and multiple properties
Dont know how much the demographics have changed or where the actual 40 is though.
Either way, it was a 40 and he hit a traffic island. Usually traffic islands can be at pedestrian crossings etc.
29-03-2013, 08:07 PM
#19
PassionFord Post Whore!!
Also, before they are turned loose to exceed those arbitrary limits(mostly set by the council, not the government), traffic cops have had to pass tests for aptitude and attitude, and are then trained for months to drive safely at speeds far beyond anything most civilians would dream of trying.
Having been in a traffic car on a run, I'd put nearly all Class One drivers up against pretty much anyone on here and feel safer with the cop doing the driving.
29-03-2013, 08:45 PM
#21
Virgin
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dunno, but it seems Joe Average clings to there licence everytime they step in a car as if your pulled for any reason you will be done for something. I was pulled by the cops just for having a modded car. I was tootling at 30 mph minding my own business. over 45mins the traffic cop who was 100% a total bastard spent poking around the car and I ended up with a fine and points for the battery not being secure. I had charged it up two days before and just forgot to clamp it down.
Jonny Cocknocker copper piles his car at 90mph..... he should loose his licence. Not his job as cops have feet and have been known to be able to walk but defo his licence.
Jonny Cocknocker copper piles his car at 90mph..... he should loose his licence. Not his job as cops have feet and have been known to be able to walk but defo his licence.
29-03-2013, 09:07 PM
#23
Dunno, but it seems Joe Average clings to there licence everytime they step in a car as if your pulled for any reason you will be done for something. I was pulled by the cops just for having a modded car. I was tootling at 30 mph minding my own business. over 45mins the traffic cop who was 100% a total bastard spent poking around the car and I ended up with a fine and points for the battery not being secure. I had charged it up two days before and just forgot to clamp it down.
Jonny Cocknocker copper piles his car at 90mph..... he should loose his licence. Not his job as cops have feet and have been known to be able to walk but defo his licence.
Jonny Cocknocker copper piles his car at 90mph..... he should loose his licence. Not his job as cops have feet and have been known to be able to walk but defo his licence.
The majority of PF are coming across as cop hating morons. At best tarring all coppers with the same brush after one bad experience, and at worse hating all coppers because they did there job and you got busted for something that was against the law.
Still, nice to see a few decent people sticking up for our police service.
Let me ask you this, same road, same time of day, same driver, same accident. But instead of a stolen car chase, he was racing to the seen of a child/teenager being attacked/abducted or whatever. You wouldn't think twice about it being 100% justified.
29-03-2013, 09:26 PM
#25
Virgin
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: Nottingham
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Licence or no licence a copper can't serve with a conviction.
The majority of PF are coming across as cop hating morons. At best tarring all coppers with the same brush after one bad experience, and at worse hating all coppers because they did there job and you got busted for something that was against the law.
Still, nice to see a few decent people sticking up for our police service.
Let me ask you this, same road, same time of day, same driver, same accident. But instead of a stolen car chase, he was racing to the seen of a child/teenager being attacked/abducted or whatever. You wouldn't think twice about it being 100% justified.
The majority of PF are coming across as cop hating morons. At best tarring all coppers with the same brush after one bad experience, and at worse hating all coppers because they did there job and you got busted for something that was against the law.
Still, nice to see a few decent people sticking up for our police service.
Let me ask you this, same road, same time of day, same driver, same accident. But instead of a stolen car chase, he was racing to the seen of a child/teenager being attacked/abducted or whatever. You wouldn't think twice about it being 100% justified.
Ask your self same road, same time of day, same driver, same accident. But instead of a stolen car chase, he was racing to the seen of a child/teenager being attacked/abducted or whatever and he piled his car into and wipe out a family car, I doubt very much any one would be sucking his balls. His only saving grace that it wasn't car that he hit.
29-03-2013, 09:55 PM
#26
They deem 70 the maximum speed for motorways and we know they are wrong about that!
Also, before they are turned loose to exceed those arbitrary limits(mostly set by the council, not the government), traffic cops have had to pass tests for aptitude and attitude, and are then trained for months to drive safely at speeds far beyond anything most civilians would dream of trying.
Having been in a traffic car on a run, I'd put nearly all Class One drivers up against pretty much anyone on here and feel safer with the cop doing the driving.
Also, before they are turned loose to exceed those arbitrary limits(mostly set by the council, not the government), traffic cops have had to pass tests for aptitude and attitude, and are then trained for months to drive safely at speeds far beyond anything most civilians would dream of trying.
Having been in a traffic car on a run, I'd put nearly all Class One drivers up against pretty much anyone on here and feel safer with the cop doing the driving.
As for the police training. I know some cops....really, to say they are trained to a high level is a bit of an exaggeration. They might go out and drive like lunatics for a bit, but that's about it.
Of course as everyone knows, passing a test and getting a certificate means nothing in terms of actual ability or competence.
29-03-2013, 10:03 PM
#27
Licence or no licence a copper can't serve with a conviction.
The majority of PF are coming across as cop hating morons. At best tarring all coppers with the same brush after one bad experience, and at worse hating all coppers because they did there job and you got busted for something that was against the law.
Still, nice to see a few decent people sticking up for our police service.
Let me ask you this, same road, same time of day, same driver, same accident. But instead of a stolen car chase, he was racing to the seen of a child/teenager being attacked/abducted or whatever. You wouldn't think twice about it being 100% justified.
The majority of PF are coming across as cop hating morons. At best tarring all coppers with the same brush after one bad experience, and at worse hating all coppers because they did there job and you got busted for something that was against the law.
Still, nice to see a few decent people sticking up for our police service.
Let me ask you this, same road, same time of day, same driver, same accident. But instead of a stolen car chase, he was racing to the seen of a child/teenager being attacked/abducted or whatever. You wouldn't think twice about it being 100% justified.
A hatred of cops with some sort of complex, or orders to victimise motorists, yet ignore real criminals. A hatred of those who cannot, or will not use common sense with it comes to such things too.
As for using other scenarios to justify incompetent and dangerous driving ? get real. Just YOU try and sue the excuse that you were rushing to some sort of emergency, even on a totally empty road at 3am in absolute safety....but getting nabbed doing 10mph over the limit. Do you think the cop will say, "no bother...dead on mate, you work away"
Like fuck, the cunt would have your license because it's an easy hit for him.
29-03-2013, 10:20 PM
#28
As for using other scenarios to justify incompetent and dangerous driving ? get real. Just YOU try and sue the excuse that you were rushing to some sort of emergency, even on a totally empty road at 3am in absolute safety....but getting nabbed doing 10mph over the limit. Do you think the cop will say, "no bother...dead on mate, you work away"
Like fuck, the cunt would have your license because it's an easy hit for him.
Of course he would and he'd be bang on, because I do not have permission by law to disregard the rules of the road for any reason, and I have not had the government approved training to be provided the authority to do so.
So comparing me speeding because I think I should be allowed too to a copper speeding under blues and twos on duty is fucking ludicrous.
As for the vendetta against the normal motorist. As some one who has a job that involves driving here, there and everywhere 7 days a week, 50k miles a year minimum for the last 7 years, I've yet to encounter this vendetta. But I'll keep an eye out.
Police powers, particularly regarding driving, are a balance of risk. As cold as it sounds. The potential for accidents, and even as someone has previously said the remote, but real, chance of injuries/fatalities of innocent 3rd parties, is massively outweighed by and justified by the benefit of such powers.
Last edited by the_frozen_one; 29-03-2013 at 10:22 PM. Reason: Grammar
29-03-2013, 10:28 PM
#29
Of course he would and he'd be bang on, because I do not have permission by law to disregard the rules of the road for any reason, and I have not had the government approved training to be provided the authority to do so.
So comparing me speeding because I think I should be allowed too to a copper speeding under blues and twos on duty is fucking ludicrous.
As for the vendetta against the normal motorist. As some one who has a job that involves driving here, there and everywhere 7 days a week, 50k miles a year minimum for the last 7 years, I've yet to encounter this vendetta. But I'll keep an eye out.
Police powers, particularly regarding driving, are a balance of risk. As cold as it sounds. The potential for accidents, and even as someone has previously said the remote, but real, chance of injuries/fatalities of innocent 3rd parties, is massively outweighed by and justified by the benefit of such powers.
So comparing me speeding because I think I should be allowed too to a copper speeding under blues and twos on duty is fucking ludicrous.
As for the vendetta against the normal motorist. As some one who has a job that involves driving here, there and everywhere 7 days a week, 50k miles a year minimum for the last 7 years, I've yet to encounter this vendetta. But I'll keep an eye out.
Police powers, particularly regarding driving, are a balance of risk. As cold as it sounds. The potential for accidents, and even as someone has previously said the remote, but real, chance of injuries/fatalities of innocent 3rd parties, is massively outweighed by and justified by the benefit of such powers.
The law may have minor exemptions to allow them to drive outside the law. However, when it does go tits up for them, they absolutely have to answer to the full rigour of the law for their fuck up, and should be penalised just as heavily as any normal motorist. If not more so.
If they crash with all their high level training, clearly it is showing a huge level of incompetence which is another matter to be looked at.
29-03-2013, 10:43 PM
#30
So you drive 50k a year, and have never seen a speed camera ? WOW.
The law may have minor exemptions to allow them to drive outside the law. However, when it does go tits up for them, they absolutely have to answer to the full rigour of the law for their fuck up, and should be penalised just as heavily as any normal motorist. If not more so.
If they crash with all their high level training, clearly it is showing a huge level of incompetence which is another matter to be looked at.
The law may have minor exemptions to allow them to drive outside the law. However, when it does go tits up for them, they absolutely have to answer to the full rigour of the law for their fuck up, and should be penalised just as heavily as any normal motorist. If not more so.
If they crash with all their high level training, clearly it is showing a huge level of incompetence which is another matter to be looked at.
The exemptions aren't exactly minor, and they should 100% not be crucified like a PF member would on a willy waving joyride in their cossie in the same set of circumstances. If they make a mistake, and crash, which can happen to anyone. Although clearly policeman aren't allowed to make mistakes in your opinion? Then yes an internal review, potential retraining, and or suspension/loss of pursuit licence should be looked into. But to try him for dangerous driving, a potential career ending conviction is grossly unfair. How can you even think that a pursuit authorised police officer should only be treated as such until he makes a mistake, and he's then instantly treated as a Saturday night racer? Regardless of his legal authority to do what he was doing.
29-03-2013, 10:55 PM
#31
As for you're claims about lenient cameras. Wasnt there a thread here the other day with members getting done for 32 in a 30 ?
Lenient my arse.
If the general public arent allowed to make mistakes, then of course those there who should be setting an example arent either.
And Ive already stated....is 100mph chase necessary ? No. Do police cars not have radios ? Central command who can task other cars to the area, helicopters ? various cameras, ANPR all over the place ?
Is a high speed chase the only option available to them ? I rather doubt it. Everyone has to carry out risk assessments in their line of work...and if they make a balls, they have to answer fully for their mistakes.
The police should be no exception.
Dont place them on a high horse and try and make then un-answerable for their mistakes, which could have cost lives. Just because he didnt kill or injure someone in this instance...who says he wont next time ?
Lenient my arse.
If the general public arent allowed to make mistakes, then of course those there who should be setting an example arent either.
And Ive already stated....is 100mph chase necessary ? No. Do police cars not have radios ? Central command who can task other cars to the area, helicopters ? various cameras, ANPR all over the place ?
Is a high speed chase the only option available to them ? I rather doubt it. Everyone has to carry out risk assessments in their line of work...and if they make a balls, they have to answer fully for their mistakes.
The police should be no exception.
Dont place them on a high horse and try and make then un-answerable for their mistakes, which could have cost lives. Just because he didnt kill or injure someone in this instance...who says he wont next time ?
29-03-2013, 11:09 PM
#32
PassionFord Post Whore!!
Against the background of cuts we are seeing in most areas of public spending, including the police, it is quite touching that you think a cop can radio ahead and whistle up more traffic cars to head the bad guys off at the pass. It was even funnier when you mentioned helicopters!
Large parts of the country only have one or two traffic cars covering hundreds of miles of roads, and even fewer on duty at night, and (I'm guessing here, so prove me wrong) most forces probably don't even HAVE air cover.
Whether you like it or not, the emergency services are employed to do things the rest of don't want to do or aren't capable of doing. We can't employ people to do these things, train them and give them the tools, then tell them they can't do what we're paying them to do.
Someone could be killed by any one of us any time we get in our car. We might not do anything wrong, it could be a mechanical failure, or a momentary distraction, or the pedestrian could be the one at fault.
This guy made a mistake which damaged his car. Police cars are damaged in pursuits somewhere across the country every week, maybe even every day. Shit happens. Nobody was hurt or died. Find something else to stress about.
Or imagine you make a mistake at your work. No-one is hurt but you cost your boss some money. Your mistake could have hurt/killed someone but it didn't. Maybe you forgot to put a guide on a machine, or you didn't have a banksman guide you into a loading dock which is against your employers H&S rules, or you wired the plug on the photocopier wrong. Should you be prosecuted, fired and lose your chosen career - even made almost unemployable? Of course you shouldn't.
Large parts of the country only have one or two traffic cars covering hundreds of miles of roads, and even fewer on duty at night, and (I'm guessing here, so prove me wrong) most forces probably don't even HAVE air cover.
Whether you like it or not, the emergency services are employed to do things the rest of don't want to do or aren't capable of doing. We can't employ people to do these things, train them and give them the tools, then tell them they can't do what we're paying them to do.
Someone could be killed by any one of us any time we get in our car. We might not do anything wrong, it could be a mechanical failure, or a momentary distraction, or the pedestrian could be the one at fault.
This guy made a mistake which damaged his car. Police cars are damaged in pursuits somewhere across the country every week, maybe even every day. Shit happens. Nobody was hurt or died. Find something else to stress about.
Or imagine you make a mistake at your work. No-one is hurt but you cost your boss some money. Your mistake could have hurt/killed someone but it didn't. Maybe you forgot to put a guide on a machine, or you didn't have a banksman guide you into a loading dock which is against your employers H&S rules, or you wired the plug on the photocopier wrong. Should you be prosecuted, fired and lose your chosen career - even made almost unemployable? Of course you shouldn't.
29-03-2013, 11:19 PM
#33
Are all of the above safety breaches sackable offences ?....very likely they are.
Anti speeding laws are there to punish people who have caused no harm. They havent hurt or inconvenienced anyone, they havent damaged property or their vehicles....yet they still get punished. Some might even lose their license over it which in turn could lose them their job.
For the above, the police absolutely will prosecute, they do prosecute and I'm sure people have lost their jobs.
I agree they shouldnt....but the police/law dont.
So the law feels such an approach is fine...If they treat us like that, then they only deserve the same in return.
There is nothing unreasonable about that.
I only stress over injustice, as should any right thinking person. it happens far too often to good honest people who have never caused any harm to anyone.
Anti speeding laws are there to punish people who have caused no harm. They havent hurt or inconvenienced anyone, they havent damaged property or their vehicles....yet they still get punished. Some might even lose their license over it which in turn could lose them their job.
I agree they shouldnt....but the police/law dont.
So the law feels such an approach is fine...If they treat us like that, then they only deserve the same in return.
There is nothing unreasonable about that.
I only stress over injustice, as should any right thinking person. it happens far too often to good honest people who have never caused any harm to anyone.
29-03-2013, 11:37 PM
#35
The only thing everyone can be grateful for, is that he didnt kill anyone.
Far too often people who cause accidents do not get prosecuted, when people who dont cause accidents do get prosecuted. Now where is the sense or justice in that ?
Our legal system is fucking mental.
30-03-2013, 12:19 AM
#36
I see no injustice in someone driving 100mph and crashing and getting prosecuted for it. Especially one who should be setting an example.
The only thing everyone can be grateful for, is that he didnt kill anyone.
Far too often people who cause accidents do not get prosecuted, when people who dont cause accidents do get prosecuted. Now where is the sense or justice in that ?
Our legal system is fucking mental.
The only thing everyone can be grateful for, is that he didnt kill anyone.
Far too often people who cause accidents do not get prosecuted, when people who dont cause accidents do get prosecuted. Now where is the sense or justice in that ?
Our legal system is fucking mental.
Using your point of view in another situation, an armed officer kills a sucide bombing terrorist in a busy shopping centre, then is trialled for murder. Acceptable? No
30-03-2013, 09:54 AM
#37
I see no injustice in someone driving 100mph and crashing and getting prosecuted for it. Especially one who should be setting an example.
The only thing everyone can be grateful for, is that he didnt kill anyone.
Far too often people who cause accidents do not get prosecuted, when people who dont cause accidents do get prosecuted. Now where is the sense or justice in that ?
Our legal system is fucking mental.
The only thing everyone can be grateful for, is that he didnt kill anyone.
Far too often people who cause accidents do not get prosecuted, when people who dont cause accidents do get prosecuted. Now where is the sense or justice in that ?
Our legal system is fucking mental.
He was on duty under lights in a police vehicle, he wasn't doing it on his own time in his own personal car. He is isn't subject to the same rules during an official police pursuit.
Using your point of view in another situation, an armed officer kills a sucide bombing terrorist in a busy shopping centre, then is trialled for murder. Acceptable? No
Using your point of view in another situation, an armed officer kills a sucide bombing terrorist in a busy shopping centre, then is trialled for murder. Acceptable? No
you are saying that someone responding to a 999 call is the same as an armed response officer shooting dead a suicide bomber, which is like saying howard webb should be giving out on a cricket match because they all fall under the category of old trafford
i've been on a police driver training course (all be it in 2008) and the one thing that was emphasised time and time and time again is that you should be able to stop in your visible spectrum, or, to use more common words, don't drive faster than you can stop
he was obviously driving way too fast and when the other vehicle came along he was not able to stop in the distance he left himself and so crashed, that is all that counts here, not that he was ken block in his day job
30-03-2013, 10:00 AM
#38
you have to remember this isnt the first time hes got clocked at 159mph for no reason aswell a while back.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/s...re/4559173.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/s...re/4559173.stm
30-03-2013, 10:21 AM
#39
you have to remember this isnt the first time hes got clocked at 159mph for no reason aswell a while back.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/s...re/4559173.stm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/s...re/4559173.stm
30-03-2013, 10:43 AM
#40
PassionFord Post Troll
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: in front of you and winning
Posts: 3,366
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
being a police officer seems to give you a licence to drive at unsafe speeds in built up areas, i know they need to catch criminals, but members of the public are made to feel like the lowest of the low for minor speeding offences, yet some police drivers can drive like they are in hot pursuit 