Dave Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 Look at the sumg face on the fecker... how can driving at 159mph be any different for him than any other member of the public Sky news [ QUOTE ] PC Milton had been given an absolute discharge for the offence. [/ QUOTE ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decked Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 Hummmm, well I hope they are as nice to me as they were to him if I ever get caught! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cruiser647 Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 One rule for some............. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stooH Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 Surely that sets a precedent, so if we all go and have some fantastic advanced driving course and then get nabbed breaking the speed of sound we can then say 'hey! in the case of crown vs pc milton he was just practising having been on a course recently.' Excellent. Not that I condone speeding... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S3Rob Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 I don't think that's saying he's been cleared is it? It just says that he's won the appeal against the nature of his sentence and he will now have to be retried on different guidelines. If he is eventually cleared then surely it rewrites the law by saying as long as you are trained to a sufficiently high standard the speed limits don't apply. So any racing driver or off duty policeman etc could go as fast as they like apparently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris_B Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 [ QUOTE ] They sent the case back to him to decide whether "PC Milton's unusual driving skills were such as to make a crucial difference to the dangerousness of his driving". [/ QUOTE ] So, I can get referred back to court for another go round if my unusual driving skills make a crucial difference, eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PinkPrincess Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 Coppers are the worst, bent as heck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sitas3 Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 [ QUOTE ] I don't think that's saying he's been cleared is it? It just says that he's won the appeal against the nature of his sentence and he will now have to be retried on different guidelines. [/ QUOTE ] that's my take on this also - It has been sent back to the court in Ludlow. What's disturbing about this case is the way in which West Mercia police are fully supportive about what he's done including senior officers saying that that is what they are expected to do in order to be accustomed to their cars. What's wrong with an airfield etc and more importantly what would have been the outcome if he'd have stacked it into another car and killed someone? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cruiser647 Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 [ QUOTE ] Coppers are the worst, bent as heck [/ QUOTE ] A few days back, a Chief Constable was fined £60 and got 3 points on his licence for using his mobile whilst driving in his private car, so at least somethings are sticking! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PinkPrincess Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 yeah but thats less likely to cause a problem than someone going 150mph.. But yes you are right its good that they seem to be charging them for doing wrong in certain areas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mook Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 [ QUOTE ] Coppers are the worst, bent as heck [/ QUOTE ] Nothing like making a generalist statement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mook Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 The armed response officer, claimed he was honing his skills following an advanced driving course. I'll have to book an advance training course now, then carry a gun, just in case I'm ever travelling on the M54, then... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PinkPrincess Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 I didnt mean it in a completely nasty way, just all the ones weve come across are bent lol.... Including Bretts dad was lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mook Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 Maybe you should get out and meet more police officers, then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PinkPrincess Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 Not people i wanna be bumping into lol.. had too many encounters so far... mainly over our number plate, and my attitude lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mook Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 [ QUOTE ] and my attitude [/ QUOTE ] I wonder why... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PinkPrincess Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 Only because I was defensive about our car lol... heclaimed we had no insurance and was going to take our car off us... Nice for them to do that... We had a baby in the back... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mook Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 So are you saying you didn't have insurance on the car and the police officer had a problem with that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Decked Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 [ QUOTE ] So are you saying you didn't have insurance on the car and the police officer had a problem with that? [/ QUOTE ] Doh.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarmac_Terrorist Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 No matter how good your driving skills are, 159mph in a Vectra is definitely dangerous - bad enough at 80mph The fact he's the law doesn't particularly bother me in terms of the outcome of the case. If the road conditions were totally clear then I'm happy to assume that the correct decision was made on his case. He was (by enlarge) only a danger to himself in those conditions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jpullen Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 Several different things you need to consider here, firstly he was a police officer using the car for a police purpose therefore he was exempt from speed limits. That also applies in just the same way for an ambulance or a vehicle being used for ambulannce purpose. The court(s) were all satisfied he was using it for a police purpose. He holds a police qualification to drive which has no equivalent in civilan driving and is so well regarded in other countries that some come here for there training. As to wheather his speed at that time was 'dangerous', well that is subjective and a normal test would be if the normal person in the street would feel it fell well below what is expected of a normal driver. That would take into account all road conditions and the vehicle but not the quality of the driver. In fact the same test applies to a provisional licence holder. Now you might argue in this case that because of his driving skills in this case it was not dangerous. Having said all that I have held a Class 1 Police driving qualification since 1986 and I would not feel comfortable at those speeds. There are to many unknown factors even on a motorway that you percieve as clear. At that speed you will struggle to miss debris even if you see it and when you come across the car on the hard shoulder with driver recovering the contents of his briefcase that he left on the roof at the last service station which is now in lane 3 you will both get a big shock. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mook Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 Good post Jim You an officer of the law, by any chance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted March 16, 2007 Author Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 [ QUOTE ] Good post Jim You an officer of the law, by any chance? [/ QUOTE ] Inspector Jim Boy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drpellypo Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 The precedent here, if applicable, will pertain to a police officer, in a police vehicle. Not a police officer in his own car. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shark_90 Posted March 16, 2007 Report Share Posted March 16, 2007 [ QUOTE ] Several different things you need to consider here, firstly he was a police officer using the car for a police purpose therefore he was exempt from speed limits. [/ QUOTE ] That's not quite the case though, is it? He took it out for a blast on his own, not on Police business, and he recorded it to show his mates how fast he'd gone. It's like saying someone in the Army can go around firing guns just because they are trained to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now