Safe Speed Forums

So I'm on nights, it's midnight, a moonlit Saturday night, and I'm returning to town after assisting colleagues in the sticks. I join the motorway to see a Porsche hot tailing it down lane two, I guess he's way over 110 miles per hour. So I stick him on vascar, and 4 miles down the road I've caught up to 800 metres of him with him and he's still moving. I've passed one car in this 4 mile of motorway and I watch as he passes a second, he moves out to split lane two and three as he passes. I clock him at 120 mph but as soon as I do he starts to slow down gradually - no point in any heavy braking, he knows what he's done.

So he gets stopped, and checked out - no precons, he's in his own car, driving from Glasgow to London, no hurry, just enjoying his car and the conditions. He saw my lights about half a mile back and immediately started to slow down. He had taken an advanced driving course offered to him when he started buying high performance cars and has passed his IAM. He fully admitted the speed saying that his speedo has been hovering somewhere over 120 for the majority of the trip through Cumbria.

I relate the incident to my wife's uncle who is chairman of the bench of mags (not local), who says that they have a power to be somewhat discretionary, but must be seen to be consistent in their sentencing. He felt that 3 month ban would be quite likely, perhaps 6 months.

Now I'm sure that most would agree that the vehicle needed to be stopped (possible stolen etc.). I'm also sure that most would agree in the deployment of vascar in the circs.

But with the nature of the driving and the good conditions, many would feel that the likely punishment does not fit the crime, so what do we do?

This is a hypothetical situation, but I have dealt with similar.

I'm not going to tell you how I'd deal with it, but I'm interested in other's opinions.

_________________
Fixed ideas are like cramp, for instance in the foot, yet the best remedy is to step on them.

Ian

I voted for option B because I believe that's what SHOULD have happened given the conditions/circumstances.
However, given we're in the real world and things like your job security could come in to play do you really have the option of discretion once such a speed has been recorded on vascar? does it keep logs?

The motorway is unlit and dipped headlights aren't really good enough for much over 70mph. Assuming he dipped for the one car he passed, he may have been able to see by the lights of the other car for a while. But I definitely don't like the sound of 120 on dips.

But if he slowed a lot when he dipped I'd have been impressed enough to turn a blind eye.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

I share Paul's concern about lighting, but you did say it was a (bright?) moonlit night, so perhaps the visibility was OK.
Another option would be to pull alongside him and signal for him to slow down. I've seen BiBs do that (not to me) and it does have the desired effect.

Cheers
Peter

_________________
Only when ideology, prejudice and dogma are set aside does the truth emerge - Kepler

This sort of counts for two votes for option 2 since Mrs Gatsobait was reading over my shoulder and we both said the same thing. I don't think it's reasonable to just ignore someone doing a ton plus, even at that time of night. I'd expect trafplod to look into it, and for all the reasons Ian said in the OP. I would also think that you'd need to speak to the driver to get a handle on attitude/use of COAST etc. If the driver is either (a) arsey about being stopped or (b) unable to satisfy the BiB that s/he could handle the speed (as opposed to coincidentally giving the appearance of doing so) or (c) both, then they'd probably deserve a ticket. But for this to happen they still need to be tugged and spoken to. After all, attitude towards driving is also part of safe driving. I was with my mum once when she got pulled over and ticketed. She was speeding and went through a speed trap (this was in the pre-camera, two BiBs with hand held radar days) but wasn't really caning it. Unfortunately she wound the window down and said "Is this going to take long, I'm in a hurry" Not the right thing to say, as they'd probably hears that gag twice a week and were dog sick of it and suggested that mum wasn't taking it as seriously as she should have. They did the lecture, gave her the ticket, and added that she'd have been let off if she'd have kept her smart-arse remarks to herself. Oh mum, twenty years on and I still can't believe you did that.

Were I pulled over for high speed driving, even on an empty motorway at night, I would feel that I would need to earn the trafplod's discretionary treatment. IMO taking it for granted is a sure way of p ing the officer off and getting a ticket, which is why I always go to such efforts to suck up to 'em in here (you all know what I drive by now I hope ).

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

I have to vote 2 really, because as you said it might have been stolen, but I was very tempted by 4.

I will admit that in the right conditions, mood and change of location that it might be me we are talking about here. But only when visibility is good enough and traffic levels is very low. A significant amount of attention is applied to what the other traffic is doing, especially if another car appears to be matching speed or catching up.

Good post

I always wonder about things like this when I use to drive at triple digit speeds - the thought of "how much mercy will the piggy have on me?" is always in the back of the mind

I voted something else-

Pulling him over is a good idea because you never know what you might find out - drunk, uninsured, stolen etc?

He didn't waste your time, came clean - I think going through the normal legislation process would be harsh, but that's down to opinion and how dangerous you think his actions were for the conditions of the road. 120mph at night is a bit concerning and when driving in Germany I found it very hard to overtake vehicles while sustaining 120mph - simply because you fly past them too quickly, I always found myself easing off the accelerator to pass

A lecture and the giref of producing documents at a station would be the sort of mercy I would expect to be shown

_________________
My friends call me RuFFy

Don't like any of the options so I'm not voting for now...

How much discretion do you really have?

What if this person goes on to recount his story and someone makes a complaint? Or, far fetched but not implausible, the driver himself complained (OK unlikely but there are some strange people out there, mainly starting threads in the anonymous forum).

We hear of burglars and shoplifters being given an official warning (sometimes for more than the one offence). Do you have this option or similar?

Prosecuting for an in between speed is definately on dodgy ground. I think if you prosecute for something other than what your evidence says then the guys at Pepipoo might well rip your case apart.

With all the hype we are served about ANPR I'm suprised you needed to stop him.

Re: Pauls point about the motorway being unlit. This didn't immediately occur to me since I see so little unlit motorway these days and that I do see has enough traffic to give a good indication the road is clear without needing main beam, though 120 would be inappropriate due to the traffic levels.

Come to think of it I did recently drive down the M6 through Cumbria at nearly midnight on a Saturday night and it wasn't that quiet, not quiet enough to use main beam for more than three or four 10 to 20 second bursts. Of course I was sticking rigidly within the speed limit

I don't envy you at all in this situation.

If you just let him go and didn't even stop him, what would happen if he lost it on the next corner and took a full family car with him?

If you told him off and let him go he could very well tell his mates about it and you could be asked some very searching questions when a complaint against you is made.

I would probably have a different view on things if I put myself in his shoes rather than yours, so will just repeat - I don't envy you at all in this situation.

_________________
If you're right, did your heels in
If you're wrong, admit it!

Sink the scameraships
Give us back our Police Force

This is a hypothetical situation, and the inclusion of 'moonlit' night was to suggest satisfactory visibility. I agree I didn't make that very clear.


Vascar which we use does not keep logs, so no possible recrimination there.



Never tested it really, because we are trusted to apply discretion as we see fit. I have a feeling if I let off someone for that kind of speed and it got back to my bosses by way of complaint from another person caught speeding, I would have some questions to answer, although it would likely be a 'word in my shell like' about appropriate discretion.


Nothing official, although I have anecdotal evidence of forces which take notes of warnings for speed for their own records, perhaps for local speed problems.

_________________
Fixed ideas are like cramp, for instance in the foot, yet the best remedy is to step on them.

Ian

I'm fully with Paul here. Except in life/death situations (I have had one of these actually - another story), I do not fly-by, but invariably back off to overtake. Being able to add a lane (or a half-lane as the hypothetical Porsche driver chose to) allows a higher differential speed - perhaps 30 instead of 15. Either way, assuming the overtaken car was onmly at around 70, this will still require a degree of lift-off for safety.

As for lights, depending on the road bend, it may be possible without any dazzle to the overtaken vehicles to keep full beam for quite a lot of the time. If there is a gentle left-hand bend, eg, you can resume full beam in L3 as soon as you've got to the L1 vehicle's blind spot. You're sure that it is clear between you and the L1 vehicle and making use of the L1 vehicle's lights (on full beamI assume) until that point. Obviously if it is dead straight or a slight right-hand curve, one has to maintain dip until drawing level. The good driver in L1 will dip as you go full. In practice I've found this to be the case at night much more often than I would expect, vindicating that most drivers on motorways at that time of night are of high competence.

Paradoxically (or perhaps obviously), when on gentle right handers on a motorway, provided one's headlights are clean (no horrible sideways speculars) it is unnecessary to dip for oncoming traffic as they will not be dazzled. However, I religiously do so anyway, slowing down in the process to match my reduced visibility. Anyone care to hazard a guess why I do this (don't think too deeply, it is quite a selfish reason)?

So, to answer the question asked, assuming a thorough check of tyres etc reveals that the performance car is being kept in tip top condition and noting thorough observation in the few tens of seconds I was able to do so, including adequate deference to the drivers overtaken, I think I'd go for the warning.

Ah, now I see.

OK, still a little torn.

I'm not sure a stop is absolutely necesary. If the vehicle is stolen then the driver would have to have a lot of cool to slow down after realising BiB had taken an interest in him.

No insurance? Hmmmmm..... someone is pushing their luck but I can see it happening. I suppose the vehicle could have insurance but not for this driver (who is otherwise driving legitimately).

But even then, you have not even given the car he just overtook a second glance. What if that one isn't insured? Could be uninsured, untaxed, unroadworthy and driven by a drug dealing axe murderer.

Nobody ever said your job was easy...

The approaching car is on a left hander so you definitely want him to dip to avoid dazzling you. There's a better chance that he will if he sees you dip (or, conversely, a chance that he won't, as tit for tat, if you don't).

Correct

I voted not to stop him,

but in retrospect pull him and give him a dogging but don't ticket him.

Interventions are the key!!! (my personal hobby horse)

All you traf pols should be enouraged to stop and advise, record the intervention and move on. FPN's as a last resort.

Mark my words, there will be a direct relationship between increasing recorded interventions and decreasing accident stats.

That's god because I voted to stop but changed my mind to not stop.



But if the driving is deemed OK then why punish by stopping? As long as the other motorist is observant enough to slow down then pulling alongside and indicting disapproval (head shake, finger wag) could be enough. I have had this done to me and it's as effective as the roadside lecture.

Punishment should be seen to meet the real cost/risk of the crime is one of those principles of being British that we used to hold dear..

Was the speed inappropriate for the conditions?

If light and road conditions meant that he could safely drive at 120mph then what he was doing was a "misdemeanour" of a rule. So the punishment of 3 months+ ban would be dissproportionate.

Unfortunately that's not what the law says which is why Blair's Britain does not feel like the place I grew up in.

400 odd miles in a porsch at 70 - how often would you expect to get stopped on suspicion of a multitude of offences.

Now at 120 i agree with the stop -- could be guilty of any one or more offences.

Once vehivle proved legal and speed + experience/training arrived at with level of traffic ( almost empty motorway) -what was risk-----

Mechanical /tyre problems on deserted motorway only him to be involved.
Balance risk to him if driving at 70 , most probably less risk at 120 since more involved.

mY VOTE - pull him and if driver/car ok - lecture