Police chase

Status
Not open for further replies.
joescrivens said:
you mean yours can't?

there's an app for that
Click to expand...

Yours might be faulty, Joe... some of its contents keep spilling into your forum posts! ;):LOL:
 
Catdaddy said:
Yours might be faulty, Joe... some of its contents keep spilling into your forum posts! ;):LOL:
Click to expand...

it's not faulty, it's an in app purchase to remove that side effect. I'm too skint to pay for it though :)
 
joescrivens said:
...... some of the time. I'm like a broken clock

:D
Click to expand...

Did you insert an L in that sentence by mistake ? :D
 
Last edited:
Joe,

Just a few points - Often it is cheaper to just pay out someone rather than fight it. Often if you fight it it just makes matter worse in the eyes of certain members of the public who insists that the police should be mind readers with supernatural powers.

So it's ok to kill someone running them over on the wrong side of the road at 40 but not 60?

He was driving it like it was stolen, it's his own fault.
 
cowasaki said:
Joe,

Just a few points - Often it is cheaper to just pay out someone rather than fight it. Often if you fight it it just makes matter worse in the eyes of certain members of the public who insists that the police should be mind readers with supernatural powers.

So it's ok to kill someone running them over on the wrong side of the road at 40 but not 60?

He was driving it like it was stolen, it's his own fault.
Click to expand...
Joe is innocent, free the Stafford 1 and only.

Mr Mod Cowasaki, you have got it wrong about Joe calling me a jerk, you need to read the thread for it to make sense.
 
Yes, all sorted. If people reply reasonably with a good defence/explanation etc rather than kicking off as some people do then we will look at infractions etc. I took it that the insult was aimed at a fellow member and Joe explained that it wasn't. I accepted Joe explanation and reversed it.
 
cowasaki said:
Joe,

Just a few points - Often it is cheaper to just pay out someone rather than fight it. Often if you fight it it just makes matter worse in the eyes of certain members of the public who insists that the police should be mind readers with supernatural powers.

So it's ok to kill someone running them over on the wrong side of the road at 40 but not 60?

He was driving it like it was stolen, it's his own fault.
Click to expand...

back on topic (now my name is cleared and the rest of tp don't have to wear tshirts saying "Mr Scrivens is innocent" :LOL:)

the cost thing, surely if the police won the case then the old man would have to pay all their legal fees so it wouldn't actually have cost the police a penny?
 
Didn't he win money for a claim on post traumatic stress or something like that?
 
tiler65 said:
Didn't he win money for a claim on post traumatic stress or something like that?
Click to expand...

well they settled out of court, but if the police feel they did everything right then they could have fought the case that their actions were justified and wouldn't have had to pay their costs
 
joescrivens said:
well they settled out of court, but if the police feel they did everything right then they could have fought the case that their actions were justified and wouldn't have had to pay their costs
Click to expand...
Well, the various police forces have a long track record of settling cases and of being very generous with the settlements too...
Whether that's due to a lack of common sense, a lack of balls, an understanding of how gullible some Judges are or the knowledge that they will get caned for exhorbitant legal costs I don't know...

But what I do know is that people who never stand and fight always get bullied.
 
I don't know about you, but I think the driver doesn't look too dis-similar to this guy :shrug: . But, I'm sure we train our Police to a high enough standard to know that this driver was not secreting any sort of weapon out of view behind his illegally tinted windows.

This from the Met gives a bit of an insight into settling claims out of court.
 
Wookee said:
I don't know about you, but I think the driver doesn't look too dis-similar to this guy :shrug: . But, I'm sure we train our Police to a high enough standard to know that this driver was not secreting any sort of weapon out of view behind his illegally tinted windows.

This from the Met gives a bit of an insight into settling claims out of court.
Click to expand...

Just as they knew that David Bieber was unarmed until he shot PC Broadhurst dead?

If they thought he was a danger they would surely have handcuffed him - which has become routine since then - but the fact of the matter is, it's impossible to make decisions about people based on their age or appearance
 
joescrivens said:
well they settled out of court, but if the police feel they did everything right then they could have fought the case that their actions were justified and wouldn't have had to pay their costs
Click to expand...

It is to avoid dragging the story on further with "police fight little old man in court" etc.

Also what is the point in fighting said little old man and winning when the little old man has no money to pay the costs. Often it is just simpler in some cases to pay someone just to go away.

The point is that he was driving like he stole the car and following a pursuit he was stopped and dealt with. The police are not mind readers, they don't necessarily know what the person they are stopping is going to do (a person who has already put other peoples lives in danger). So they do something that is safe all round. Nobody was physically injured. If this was most countries he'd have had a gun pointed at him and in a lot of countries his tyres shot out.

It's like these do gooders who complain when someone gets shot who happened to be pointing a viable looking weapon at police. They go on about it not being loaded or being a replica. It's just the same, how are the police supposed to know that. Go up and ask and risk getting shot? If someone points a gun at the police they should get shot and if someone drives like the car is stolen they should be treated as if it is and they are a criminal who is happy to risk peoples lives.
 
Well, I definitely think the police went way over the top in their actions.

The Gwent police even took them off operational duties.

He wasn't charged with knocking down any policeman.

Lastly, I do like his account of things :)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-10879719
 
cowasaki said:
The point is that he was driving like he stole the car and following a pursuit he was stopped and dealt with.
Click to expand...

"He was said to have kept within the speed limit" from the NBC

Would you say that was driving like he stole the car?
 
Joe, 8 miles with the blue flashing lights on and he thought they were giving him an escort home....you have dug a hole Joe and there ain't no step ladder to get out.
 
joescrivens said:
"He was said to have kept within the speed limit" from the NBC

Would you say that was driving like he stole the car?
Click to expand...

I'd say he sounds either a) arrogant or b) dangerously stupid.

I'm surprised his licence wasn't revoked....
 
joescrivens said:
"He was said to have kept within the speed limit" from the NBC

Would you say that was driving like he stole the car?
Click to expand...

Other reports say he was doing 40 in a 30 whilst crossing a solid white line. That would be driving without due care and attention for a start.
 
Flash In The Pan said:
I'd say he sounds either a) arrogant or b) dangerously stupid.

I'm surprised his licence wasn't revoked....
Click to expand...

Did you know James Bond's Licence to Kill was going to be called Licence Revoked but it was changed at the last minute because Americans did not know what it meant.
 
tiler65 said:
Joe, 8 miles with the blue flashing lights on and he thought they were giving him an escort home....you have dug a hole Joe and there ain't no step ladder to get out.
Click to expand...

How so?

Not speeding isn't driving like he stole a car is all I said.

As above, I still think he is a jerk! Not you! Him :)

But the police used more force than needed and have essentially admitted so by buying him out. That's still my opinion. No need to dig out of any hole. (y)
 
cowasaki said:
Other reports say he was doing 40 in a 30 whilst crossing a solid white line. That would be driving without due care and attention for a start.
Click to expand...

Speeding wasn't one of his prosecutions so he clearly wasn't going over the limit, I'd say those reports are incorrect.

Also above it should have said BBC not NBC, stupid iPad autocorrect.
 
Then only thing the police did wrong was pay him a single penny of compensation. If you are going to fail to stop expect top be dealt with the same as anyone else in this situation. I dont care if your 18 or 80 your can still do damage behind the wheel of a car.
 
joescrivens said:
Speeding wasn't one of his prosecutions so he clearly wasn't going over the limit, I'd say those reports are incorrect.

Also above it should have said BBC not NBC, stupid iPad autocorrect.
Click to expand...

The CPS drop everything that is not going to increase the case. Failing to stop is a higher level so they would run with that, I bet they didn't go with the crossing the white line either.
 
OutLore said:
Yves Geza said:
OutLore said:
I wonder if thoughts would be different had this guy killed someone, maybe a friend or family member on his little journey? .....
Click to expand...

They would have been, but he didn't!
Click to expand...

So, nimbyism in all it's greatness then. "It didn't affect me, so I don't care."
Click to expand...

No one was hugely affected! No one was hugely damaged!

What happened was that low grade, ill disciplined police operatives overreacted to a minor provocation!



asphotographymk said:
I dont care if your 18 or 80 your can still do damage behind the wheel of a car.
Click to expand...

Indeed. Just as everyone with a camera could be a paedophile!
 
tiler65 said:
Did you know James Bond's Licence to Kill was going to be called Licence Revoked but it was changed at the last minute because Americans did not know what it meant.
Click to expand...

Yes, I did :nuts:

joescrivens said:
I think both.

Still doesn't mean he needed so much smashy smashy
Click to expand...

I beg to differ, he was obviously intent on not stopping and may well have attempted to drive off whilst the officers were trying to gain access to the car, with the very real risk to life that that may have resulted...
 
Yves Geza said:
No one was hugely affected! No one was hugely damaged!

What happened was that low grade, ill disciplined police operatives overreacted to a minor provocation!
Click to expand...
So why does anyone care if it didn't affect them? If thoughts on the matter are only different if it affects that person directly?


Yves Geza said:
Indeed. Just as everyone with a camera could be a paedophile!
Click to expand...
Yup they could (along with everyone without a camera could) - and if that person stood outside a school taking pics of the kids coming out, the police would have good grounds to have a word. If that person then ran off, and refused to stop and speak to them - what would happen? You think the police would (or should) just drop it, and go back to the station, or should they try to find that person?
Does the fact that they ran off when approached and refused to speak to them make them seem more or less likely to have something to hide?
 
Flash In The Pan said:
Yes, I did :nuts:



I beg to differ, he was obviously intent on not stopping and may well have attempted to drive off whilst the officers were trying to gain access to the car, with the very real risk to life that that may have resulted...
Click to expand...

Round and round we go.

In the words of Theo pathitis ... I'm out
 
asphotographymk said:
Then only thing the police did wrong was pay him a single penny of compensation. If you are going to fail to stop expect top be dealt with the same as anyone else in this situation. I dont care if your 18 or 80 your can still do damage behind the wheel of a car.
Click to expand...

09:16 4/2/12....makes note in diary........."I agree with Andy"..............:D
 
Yves Geza said:
Indeed. Just as everyone with a camera could be a paedophile!
Click to expand...

How is that in anyway the same? This guy failed to stop therefor had already broken the law. Someone with a camera has not.

If you fail to stop for the police expect to have this happen its as simple as that what ever your age.
 
They did seem a little enthusiastic at removing his keys,
(well that's what it looked like to me) I must admit.

asphotographymk said:
If you fail to stop for the police expect to have this happen its as simple as that what ever your age.
Click to expand...

I blame the parents myself :D
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top