Ramp Monkey
One is tempted to assume from the title and tone of your post that yours is a rather clumsy attempt to stir-up another anti-RAF Police thread. I am glad to see that the majority of respondents have the maturity not to follow your lead.
Speeding and other traffic offences on Churchill Avenue at RAF Odiham have, for many years, been the subject of debate among the personnel serving at that Unit and their families.
Half of the complaints received by the Stn authorities in this matter, relate to dissatisfaction that the RAF Police are not doing enough to prevent speeding on the road. The other half are complaints that the RAF Police carry out too many speed prevention checks on the road. I think it would be fair to say the RAFP have struck the right balance.
The road is a public road and therefore under the control of the local authority and under the jurisdiction of the civil police. However, as Pub User rightly indicates, the RAFP have a long-standing agreement with the local Hampshire Police Sub-Divisional Commander that the RAFP may carry out speed prevention checks on that road.
Most RAF Police flts have an excellent liaison with the local civilian police, which includes formal and informal policing agreements. These include sharing criminal intelligence, conducting joint police patrols and other joint initiatives, all of which are perfectly lawful.
S H Monkey
Technically, the civi police could not 'do their own checks on RAF stns'. Or at least, they could, but they would be unable to report or prosecute under the Road Traffic Acts. Only1leftmate is correct. A road beyond the physical barrier of the main gate, within the bounds of a military unit is not 'a road to which the public have access' under the Road Traffic Acts. Offences under the Road Traffic Acts cannot therefore be committed on such roads.
But before you leap into your motor and tear around the Stn with abandon, please note that large tracts of the Road Traffic Acts are reproduced as station standing orders and are therefore offences for which you may be charged or warned.
Four 8's
Bull*%#t. Don't believe all you read in the papers (not even the big ones).
D-IFF_ident
You are on the right track. The various Home Office approved radar devices vary in the frequency with which they must be calibrated. Most are required to be returned to the manufacturer every few months for a major recalibration. The routine daily calibration check can be carried out by the operator of the device.
The Rules of Evidence require that evidence of speeding must be corroborated. In other words, a person cannot be convicted of speeding on the evidence of a lone eyewitness. However, the corroboration need not come from another person and can be provided by a device, such as a radar gun. A lone policeman using a properly calibrated Home Office approved device can therefore secure a conviction for speeding.
FJJP
The Service Police (including the RAF Police) have jurisdiction over all service personnel, not only anywhere in the UK, but anywhere in the world. (Dust off your MAFL).
The Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO), many years ago, produced a memorandum permitting the Service Police to use 'blues and twos' on the public highway, where this is necessary in the prevention of crime or in the interests of public safety.
Confucious
At least the quotes of your namesake were all his own material. The 'harder at school' snipe has been used SO many times on this forum, I admire you for having the nerve to use it yet again.
Al Titude
Ditto for the barrier snipe.
Well, Ladies and Gentlemen, I can only apologise for producing such a rambling and banal post. But, ask a silly question........