joescrivens
Suspended / Banned
- Messages
- 15,052
- Name
- Joe
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Your iphone can poo?
you mean yours can't?
there's an app for that
Your iphone can poo?
you mean yours can't?
there's an app for that
Catdaddy said:Yours might be faulty, Joe... some of its contents keep spilling into your forum posts!
Yours might be faulty, Joe... some of its contents keep spilling into your forum posts!
joescrivens said:...... some of the time. I'm like a broken clock
Joe is innocent, free the Stafford 1 and only.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.
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.
Didn't he win money for a claim on post traumatic stress or something like that?
Well, the various police forces have a long track record of settling cases and of being very generous with the settlements too...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
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.
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
The Gwent police even took them off operational duties.
The point is that he was driving like he stole the car and following a pursuit he was stopped and dealt with.
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?
"He was said to have kept within the speed limit" from the NBC
Would you say that was driving like he stole the car?
I'd say he sounds either a) arrogant or b) dangerously stupid.
I'm surprised his licence wasn't revoked....
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.
I'd say he sounds either a) arrogant or b) dangerously stupid.
I'm surprised his licence wasn't revoked....
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.
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.
I wonder if thoughts would be different had this guy killed someone, maybe a friend or family member on his little journey? .....
They would have been, but he didn't!
So, nimbyism in all it's greatness then. "It didn't affect me, so I don't care."
I dont care if your 18 or 80 your can still do damage behind the wheel of a car.
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.
I think both.
Still doesn't mean he needed so much smashy smashy
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?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!
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?Indeed. Just as everyone with a camera could be a paedophile!
Indeed. Just as everyone with a camera could be a paedophile!
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...
What? Are you gay then?Round and round we go.
In the words of Theo pathitis ... I'm out
joescrivens said:Round and round we go.
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.
Indeed. Just as everyone with a camera could be a paedophile!
09:16 4/2/12....makes note in diary........."I agree with Andy"..............
If you fail to stop for the police expect to have this happen its as simple as that what ever your age.