View Single Post
Old 3rd Oct 2006, 00:20
  #305 (permalink)  
brassmonkey
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 5
Brain fade

I think your obvious cynicism and dislike for the police is shining through - you must have been going really fast to be that vociferous.

However you are missing most fundamental point here - it was the police who brought about the initial prosecution against this particular 159 mph police officer. And the 105 mph. And every other police officer reported for speeding. How is that one rule for one etc...?

On the point of the murder of that chap in London, without knowing the full picture it is hard to judge what was going on. Rather than believe the stories in the media designed to sell papers, why not wait for the IPCC investigation. You can hypothesise all you like but that gets us nowhere. The IPCC are truly independent and will not let any issue lie - if the police are blameworthy, they will get the blame!!

On a previous posting of yours regarding giving false details to the police, the offence that you are advocating is called perverting the course of justice and will carry a custodial sentence if found guilty. Recently a haulier in Wiltshire recieved 4 weeks in prison - not long you say - but long enough for you never to fly professionally again (assuming your profile is accurate...?)

The police aren't judge and jury; they didn't sentence PC speedy - it was a member of the independent judiciary. How many times have you heard of members of the public being brought to trial and after the peddling of type of dog and bull story, the magistrate / jury / judge believe it resulting in an acquital, or as per the norm, a disproportionately lenient sentence being passed. We have all seen news reports with tragic consequences when these habitual offenders who should be behind bars get behind the wheel of a car. Police fault too I suppose?

Would you or I have been banned? Who knows? The difficulty for everyone who wants to see transparent justice (police included believe it or not) is that there are so many variables including what side of bed or which planet the magistrates come from!

Is 159 mph safe? Subjective. Is 159 mph speeding? Definitely! Can I drive that fast? No! Would I drive that fast? No. Would I expect to get prosecuted at those speeds? Its a fair bet! Would I moan like a spoilt brat for getting caught? No chance - take it on the chin my son and get over it!

Is speeding an absolute offence? Yes - whether you, me, the naughty speeding cops or anyone else likes it!! If you get caught speeding, you will get prosecuted. Simple as that. Its the same here, Europe, America, Canada and many other places. Its not rocket science.

Beethoven

Discretion is still within the remit of the police officer, however in these accountable times it is arguably good practice to record when and why you use discretion as a matter of routine. It is enshrined within the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. The sanction of arrest should only be as a last resort. The Human Rights Act, with which you will be familiar, has an underlying principle that states that any action must be lawful, proportionate and necessary. Good on you for standing your ground by the way. Guidelines after all are only guidelines. I have found that reminding the supervisory officer that they still have a power of arrest works very well. It is a subjective belief which you do not have to share on the basis of arbitarily chasing PI's. Also on another point, it is within the custody sergeants' remit to refuse to authorise the detention, so a gentle reminder of that little nugget is nice too!! Generally they don't want to be shown up by another supervisor.

It is those type of clowns, plus the sanctimonious and condescending traffic officers who give everyone else doing their bit a bad name. Mind you there are some who you can never please and will never see eye to eye with the cops, eh BF
brassmonkey is offline