Dangerous driving policeman gets off free

Status
Not open for further replies.
it stinks one rule for them and another for joe public
i had a solicitor and a barrister for a year working on my case, going to magistrates court and then to a 4 day trial at crown court, i got 4 months in prison a two year ban and an extended retest and theory test.
i have seen and read numerous cases like this over the past 4 years and yes i have no respect for the corrupt police or justice system
 
  • Like
Reactions: ST4
terryuk said:
it stinks one rule for them and another for joe public
i had a solicitor and a barrister for a year working on my case, going to magistrates court and then to a 4 day trial at crown court, i got 4 months in prison a two year ban and an extended retest and theory test.
i have seen and read numerous cases like this over the past 4 years and yes i have no respect for the corrupt police or justice system
Click to expand...

I'm not being funny but you must have done something pretty bad to get such a punishment
 
terryuk said:
it stinks one rule for them and another for joe public
i had a solicitor and a barrister for a year working on my case, going to magistrates court and then to a 4 day trial at crown court, i got 4 months in prison a two year ban and an extended retest and theory test.
i have seen and read numerous cases like this over the past 4 years and yes i have no respect for the corrupt police or justice system
Click to expand...
Because Joe Public have a legitimate reason for driving on the wrong side of the road. :thinking:
 
MWHCVT said:
I'm not being funny but you must have done something pretty bad to get such a punishment
Click to expand...
no not at all i was made out to be the bad guy and they had to prosecute somebody, i dont really want to go in to it to much as it was the worst 3 years of my life and behind me now
 
nilagin said:
To be honest I'm not concerned how the police drive when they are on an emergency call, it's other motorists duty to move over and leave a clear path for them.
Click to expand...

I have to agree. Fire, Police, Ambulance... Blue lights, sirens and so on... just give way and let them get on with it. You never know when it's you that's going to need them.
They're not doing it for fun and they're often risking their own lives in the process.
 
terryuk said:
no not at all i was made out to be the bad guy and they had to prosecute somebody, i dont really want to go in to it to much as it was the worst 3 years of my life and behind me now
Click to expand...

And yet you try to make a point with vague references?
 
it stinks one rule for them and another for joe public
i had a solicitor and a barrister for a year working on my case, going to magistrates court and then to a 4 day trial at crown court, i got 4 months in prison a two year ban and an extended retest and theory test.
i have seen and read numerous cases like this over the past 4 years and yes i have no respect for the corrupt police or justice system
Click to expand...

As I said, different circumstances, different outcome. There is no point trying to compare whatever you did, with a press report of what someone else did. Special reasons, is open to everyone, not just police officers, so it isn't a case of one rule for them, and one for you.
 
bindex said:
I have to agree. Fire, Police, Ambulance... Blue lights, sirens and so on... just give way and let them get on with it. You never know when it's you that's going to need them.
They're not doing it for fun and they're often risking their own lives in the process.
Click to expand...

I agree with this.
If you're paying attention on the road you should be able to see then coming and get out of the way as soon as you're able.
 
canon_togger said:
I agree with this.
If you're paying attention on the road you should be able to see then coming and get out of the way as soon as you're able.
Click to expand...

Yes I was driving to work the other morning and had a car behind me
I noticed a fire engine coming up behind with his lights and siren going
I pulled over to let him past the dozy muppet in the car behind then overtook me and blocked the fire engine off at the junction!
 
Last edited:
LCPete said:
Yes I was driving to work the other morning and had a car behind me
I noticed a fire engine coming up behind with his lights and siren going
I pulled over to let him past the dozy muppet in the car behind then overtook me and blocked the fire engine off at the junction!
Click to expand...

Unfortunately not everyone is as observant as you and I on the roads ;)
 
I wonder if this thread would have even had been started if it had been a Paramedic car doing the same thing.
 
terryuk said:
it stinks one rule for them and another for joe public
i had a solicitor and a barrister for a year working on my case, going to magistrates court and then to a 4 day trial at crown court, i got 4 months in prison a two year ban and an extended retest and theory test.
i have seen and read numerous cases like this over the past 4 years and yes i have no respect for the corrupt police or justice system
Click to expand...

What did you actually do? 4 months in the clink is quite steep.
 
Guess the answer is dont drive/ride like a dick. And if you do dont get caught. We all break the limit at some point. You dont buy a fast bike/car to drive at 60 all the time. Let the police do their job. Its a difficult enough job and in general they are better trained than most of us.
 
ST4 said:
Driving the wrong side of a DCW just isn't on. Sorry. Its by but the grace of god he didn't murder someone else.
Click to expand...

At the very worst it would have been manslaughter , I don't think he was intending to kill as many of the public as he could GTA style
 
ST4 said:
138mph.
Click to expand...

In a previous thread where you mentioned 138mph, it was your mate who did it.

I hope there is one rule for police and one for us, otherwise we would all be f***ed.
 
ST4 said:
A disqualification and fine would be suitable for DD. Its what I got for something much less dangerous
Click to expand...

I thought you were done for doing over a ton on a motorway somewhere - hard to see how thats less dangerous than 60 (especially as your driving skill is probably substantially less than a pursuit trained cop, and your car is probably substantially less well suited to high speed than a police car)
 
Last edited:
big soft moose said:
I thought you were done for doing over a ton on a motorway somewhere - hard to see how thats less dangerous than 60 (especially as your driving skill is probably substantially less than a pursuit trained cop, and your car is probably substantially less well suited to high speed than a police car)
Click to expand...

Err distinct lack of traffic on a well sighted 3 lane motorway vs 60 on the wrong side one one... and you are saying a Mercedes c class is less suitable for high speed than a land rover...right....

All this about police drivers, lightning quick reactions and all that ;) pinch of salt mate
 
Last edited:
No big blue flashing light and siren on your merc though ;)

....and not so well sighted that you could see the police car.......
 
Tigger.ufo said:
No big blue flashing light and siren on your merc though ;)

....and not so well sighted that you could see the police car.......
Click to expand...

There was nothing to hit, it was very clear and quiet, 3 lanes.

The police car, if you must know, was parked in the service bay for the over head gantry on the M74 between 13 and 12. Its got a concrete wall behind it and it sits off the hard shoulder. I saw the policeman with the gun as I approached the gantry, as he was crouched behind the concrete wall, came up and my needle was on 140mph, so a 2mph overread is about right so 138mph reading was totally without question. The height of the wall concealled the police car until you passed it and saw it in your rear view. There was one lorry about 1 mi ahead, that was it.

The police said even if they said the driving wasn't dangerous, the fiscal would make it thus and explaining why 138mph isn't dangerous isn't worth the hassle, which is what the lawyer said.
 
What made you think it was ok for you do double the legal limit?

And don't bore us with empty road blah blah.
 
ST4 said:
There was nothing to hit, it was very clear and quiet, 3 lanes.

The police car, if you must know, was parked in the service bay for the over head gantry on the M74 between 13 and 12. Its got a concrete wall behind it and it sits off the hard shoulder. I saw the policeman with the gun as I approached the gantry, as he was crouched behind the concrete wall, came up and my needle was on 140mph, so a 2mph overread is about right so 138mph reading was totally without question. The height of the wall concealled the police car until you passed it and saw it in your rear view. There was one lorry about 1 mi ahead, that was it.

The police said even if they said the driving wasn't dangerous, the fiscal would make it thus and explaining why 138mph isn't dangerous isn't worth the hassle, which is what the lawyer said.
Click to expand...

The biggest problem here is that you still cannot accept that you were wrong it seems, your still trying to defend the indefensible, in many ways in can understand how you feel, hell I still feel a little aggrieved over my recent motoring conviction, the difference is between to two of us is however your allowing your anger/prejudice to cloud your opinion of what the officer has done when the reality is the difference between what you did and were convicted of and what the officer did is the difference of night and day...
 
ST4 said:
There was nothing to hit, it was very clear and quiet, 3 lanes.
Click to expand...

A deer could have ran across the road - you don't see it until it unfolds right in front of you. There could have been debris on the road that you wouldn't see until you hit it at that speed.
Just because there are no cars on the road doesn't mean to say there is nothing to hit.

The lorry that was a approx a mile up the road, so thats approx 5280feet @ 205 feet per second = 25 seconds give or take. if it hadn't of been for the police intervention would you have assumed the truck driver saw you coming or would you have wipped past him at a ton 40 and hope he didn't change lane and take you clean out?
 
ST4 said:
I saw the policeman with the gun as I approached the gantry
Click to expand...

....and had you been doing a sensible speed, that is all that would have happened.

However much you may feel that you were "safe" you are still completely and utterly in the wrong, and seeking to justify it only highlights that fact more.

The policeman has admitted to dangerous driving with the special circumstances detailed in the article that you linked to, and if I had been in the situation that he was attending I would be glad that he was getting there as quickly as possible.

The more you try to find fault with other incidents that are nothing like the circumstances of your conviction, the dafter it makes you look, I am afraid.

My Gran used to say to me " when you are in a hole, stop digging"! :D
 
viv1969 said:
And don't bore us with empty road blah blah.
Click to expand...

You mean the facts around the dangerous driving conviction. If you just see a speed, without circumstance or area/conditions, you are oblivious to the actual event.

Anyway, whether I was done for dangerous driving, speeding, whatever, really makes no difference to my views on the subject. I've seen some awful driving in traffic police cars, one drove at me down the DCW, one spun on a roundabout, they're not infallible but they like to think they are. One even missed someone pulling out of a junction and had to ram on the brakes, if he was obseriving the road, he'd have seen what was happening. BTW, I pled guilty to the dangerous driving part. I didn;t contest it, I accepted I am in the wrong.
 
ST4 said:
You mean the facts around the dangerous driving conviction. If you just see a speed, without circumstance or area/conditions, you are oblivious to the actual event.

Anyway, whether I was done for dangerous driving, speeding, whatever, really makes no difference to my views on the subject. I've seen some awful driving in traffic police cars, one drove at me down the DCW, one spun on a roundabout, they're not infallible but they like to think they are. One even missed someone pulling out of a junction and had to ram on the brakes, if he was obseriving the road, he'd have seen what was happening. BTW, I pled guilty to the dangerous driving part. I didn;t contest it, I accepted I am in the wrong.
Click to expand...

:banghead:
 
ST4 said:
You mean the facts around the dangerous driving conviction. If you just see a speed, without circumstance or area/conditions, you are oblivious to the actual event.

Anyway, whether I was done for dangerous driving, speeding, whatever, really makes no difference to my views on the subject. I've seen some awful driving in traffic police cars, one drove at me down the DCW, one spun on a roundabout, they're not infallible but they like to think they are. One even missed someone pulling out of a junction and had to ram on the brakes, if he was obseriving the road, he'd have seen what was happening. BTW, I pled guilty to the dangerous driving part. I didn;t contest it, I accepted I am in the wrong.
Click to expand...

Frankly, I gave up reading after the first paragraph.

You are unbelievable. The only FACT is that whether you like it or not. The maximum speed limit is 70mph.
If the road is empty of vehicles other than you, the maximum speed limit is 70mph.
If the weather is clear, dry and as close to perfect as possible, the maximum speed limit is 70mph.

Are you sensing a pattern yet Roger Ramjet?

My 10 year old sister was killed by an air headed dimwit much like yourself who was, like yourself, driving a penis extension with a high powered engine, and he too believed the LAW did not apply to him because of course he knew best, and was the finest driver born.

They say that speed kills but they're wrong. Brainless idiots like you kill when someone gives you a licence to get behind the wheel of a lethal weapon.

If it were left to me your licence would never be returned to you.

Mods...admin...my apologies.
Feel free to remove my post, but this lunatic needs facts knocked into him, and since I can't use actual bricks......
 
viv1969 said:
Frankly, I gave up reading after the first paragraph.

You are unbelievable. The only FACT is that whether you like it or not. The maximum speed limit is 70mph.
If the road is empty of vehicles other than you, the maximum speed limit is 70mph.
If the weather is clear, dry and as close to perfect as possible, the maximum speed limit is 70mph.

Are you sensing a pattern yet Roger Ramjet?

My 10 year old sister was killed by an air headed dimwit much like yourself who was, like yourself, driving a penis extension with a high powered engine, and he too believed the LAW did not apply to him because of course he knew best, and was the finest driver born.

They say that speed kills but they're wrong. Brainless idiots like you kill when someone gives you a licence to get behind the wheel of a lethal weapon.

If it were left to me your licence would never be returned to you.

Mods...admin...my apologies.
Feel free to remove my post, but this lunatic needs facts knocked into him, and since I can't use actual bricks......
Click to expand...

So because a speeding driver killed someone close and dear to you, they are all equally as bad. Its this hysterical speed is automatically dangerous that sees the relentless midde lane hogging, general lack of attention on the roads. Speed is an aggirvating factor. You make assumptions on my case based on something else entirely.

I recall that dog ownership thread where you said I was irrational as I didn't like dogs as I was attacked and they've attacked others, yet you defended the indefensible, dangerous dog ownership.

I'm not surprised you gave up on the 1st paragraph, you seem the sort that likes their own little world where nice cars are penis extentions...I totally get it.
 
Last edited:
Crikey, I need a drink!

More often than not I profoundly disagree with your views Ruth.

On this occasion however........
 
ST4 said:
So because a speeding driver killed someone close and dear to you, they are all equally as bad. Its this hysterical speed is automatically dangerous that sees the relentless midde lane hogging, general lack of attention on the roads. Speed is an aggirvating factor. You make assumptions on my case based on something else entirely.

I recall that dog ownership thread where you said I was irrational as I didn't like dogs as I was attacked and they've attacked others, yet you defended the indefensible, dangerous dog ownership.

I'm not surprised you gave up on the 1st paragraph, you seem the sort that likes their own little world where nice cars are penis extentions...I totally get it.
Click to expand...

Im going to type slowly so that you might understand.

The LEGAL SPEED LIMIT of 70mph is not part of anyone's small world. It's a fact. It's not fluid, it's not "except for....", and it applies as equally to you as it does to amyone else.

I understand you may wish to drive faster....but what makes you think you jave the right to do so. That you drove at twice that legal speed limit is not an assumptipn. It's a fact. You said so yourself.

Tell me...tell us all what makes you exempt and I will gladly listen.
 
Last edited:
I'd say that ruth has a fair point - thought at least the flying Scotsman has come clean about it being him instead of his imaginary friend (big white rabbits have more sense than to drive like that)

Ive lost a friend to someone driving like an utter weapons grade one too - the guy in that case was nearly twice over the drink drive limit in addition to causing death by dangerous driving (well over a ton at night hit Alex's motorbike in the rear , knocked him off, and didn't stop - when later stopped by the police had no clear recollection of what he'd done)

He got about 5 years but at his trial was still professing that 'you know accidents happen' and 'he didn't mean to do it' - well that's okay then - so long as you didn't intend to kill anyone lets all have a group hug and forget it. (the guy concerned can think himself very lucky that Alex rode with a front patch club rather than anything 'heavier')

My point here being that this could easily have been ST - okay you were sober, but at 138 mph do you really think you have time to react if you suddenly notice a bike travelling at 60 in front of you ?

oh and on the dogs thread - not really the same thing , you were arguing that all dogs should be banned because you were once attacked , the parallel here would be if Ruth wanted all drivers banned , but she isn't saying that - she's only saying that the irresponsible one who think breaking the speed limit makes them well 'ard should be more heavilly punished - just as we all agreed that irresponsible dog owners should be
 
ST4 said:
So because a speeding driver killed someone close and dear to you, they are all equally as bad. Its this hysterical speed is automatically dangerous that sees the relentless midde lane hogging, general lack of attention on the roads. Speed is an aggirvating factor. You make assumptions on my case based on something else entirely.
Click to expand...

OMG! Shock, horror! There are other people on the road doing things that are wrong!

.....so just how does that make 138mph more acceptable?

.....keep on digging.......



ST4 said:
I recall that dog ownership thread where you said I was irrational as I didn't like dogs as I was attacked and they've attacked others, yet you defended the indefensible, dangerous dog ownership.
Click to expand...

You must have been in an alternate universe then as I don't recall anyone defending dangerous dog ownership.


.
 
Last edited:
I'm suspecting either mental health issues or substance abuse here. Surely the sense of entitlement felt by the average car driver is not at play here?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top