mega link
HUNDREDS OF POLICE LET OFF FOR SPEEDING
LAURA GRANT
09:00 - 27 December 2005
More than 300 Grampian Police officers were caught speeding while on duty, according to new figures.
Only one of the officers involved received a conditional offer of a fixed penalty. None of the others was prosecuted.
Police are exempt from prosecution if they speed while responding to an emergency, but the force said it would be too expensive to find out how many of its officers had been answering a 999 call at the time.
Politicians and campaign groups have called on the police to be more open about the figures.
The figures were revealed in a nationwide survey of speeding police officers in 2004 and 2005. Grampian's figures cover the period from September 2004 to September 2005. A total of 303 officers were caught speeding.
One further Grampian officer received a fixed penalty for speeding while on duty outside the force area.
Two Central Scotland Police officers were caught speeding while on duty in 2004. Neither was dealing with an emergency and both received fixed penalties, which were paid.
A total of 222 Tayside Police vehicles were caught speeding, of which 216 were exempt. Five drivers were issued with conditional fixed penalties and one was reported to the fiscal.
Four officers from Northern Constabulary were issued with conditional offers of a fixed-penalty fine and three points on their licence for speeding. Figures for the number of officers who were caught but did not face further action were not supplied.
No one from the force was available to comment on the figures yesterday.
Aberdeen councillor Kevin Stewart, who sits on the Joint Grampian Police Board, said: "Grampian Police should follow the same practices as other forces and provide a breakdown of these figures. Obviously, while officers are on duty and responding to calls, they may have to break the speed limit and one can understand that.
"However, if this is becoming a general thing, with officers speeding in neighbourhoods while they are not responding to calls, then I would be immensely concerned about this."
Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed campaign group, said it was important for the police to be seen to be open and honest about the figures.
"The problem is that the public wishes to receive some of the discretion that is afforded to the police," he said.
"There is this imbalance where the public got none and need more and the cops have it and need less. This is making people angry and it is a particular concerns because we need to preserver the police-public relationship."
The RAC Foundation claimed figures showed some forces were over-using exemption powers.
RAC spokesman Kevin Delaney, who was a police officer for 30 years, said: "Exemption rules are misunderstood by rank-and-file officers as giving them a carte blanche exemption from the speed limit when driving a police vehicle. That is clearly wrong."
==================================
There's also editorial comment:
mega link
A CASE OF DOUBLE STANDARDS?
09:00 - 27 December 2005
Police officers, as they go about their duties, often have to do so in a hurry. This does not mean they are above the law, which begs the question: Why do so many appear to get off scot free when they are caught speeding?
We are reminded constantly by forces up and down the country that speed is a major factor in fatal accidents. There are fixed cameras, mobile cameras, cameras mounted in the back of vans and the good old hand-held radar guns - each one designed to catch those who are not prepared to observe the legal limit.
Take Grampian as an example. Well over 300 cases of officers recorded breaking the law, and only one has to pay the penalty. The others are all explained away, presumably as being offences committed in the line of duty. One doubts very much that a similar logic could be applied to incidents in which the police were accused of assault or some other misdemeanour.
Of course people understand that police vehicles have to respond quickly, as do those of the ambulance and fire services. But the sheer number, again using Grampian as the case study, suggests it is one rule for the normal motorist and another for those who can hide behind a flashing blue light.
The police should practise what they preach. In most cases, it should be enough that they can run a red light or warn other vehicles to move out of the way and give them a clear path to the incident to which they are responding. No one would wish to see response times rise, but equally no one wishes to read about another serious or fatal accident, this time involving the emergency services.
Police drivers are trained to higher standard than the vast majority of other road users, but that is the crux of the matter. They cannot anticipate what the less-trained masses are going to do every time. If 10 cases in Grampian had led to fines or prosecutions, perhaps there would be less scepticism. But one? It simply does not ring true.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
Members
