Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Wed Aug 12, 2026 22:44

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Jan 17, 2008 23:13 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Mon Mar 08, 2004 21:41
Posts: 3608
Location: North West
Of course.. stories like these do not help the police or the police version of the dreaded WHITE VAN DRIVER TWILIGHT ZONE. "der durr de darrr durrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr!"

MEN today wrote:
Drink-drive cop faces sack
Brian Lashley
17/ 1/2008

A POLICE officer is facing the sack after being found guilty of drink-driving in a police van responding to an emergency call.

Pc Alan Graham, 31, drove the Ford Transit at speeds above the legal limit, with blue lights flashing and siren blaring before clipping a parked car.

The night before, he downed eight pints of lager and overslept the following day, arriving an hour late for the start of his shift. He pleaded not guilty to driving with excess alcohol, but was convicted at Stockport Magistrates' Court.

Graham, from Ashton under Lyne, was banned from driving for 12 months, fined £365 and ordered to pay £363 costs.

The ban will be cut to nine months if he completes a drink-driving rehabilitation course.

Ish Sheikh, defending, said only in exceptional circumstances can a police officer expect to keep his job after such a conviction - and it was inevitable that Graham would lose his. Graham was suspended from driving and given restricted duties after being charged. He will now be investigated by the Professional Standards Branch of Greater Manchester Police.

He was arrested last May after being called to a domestic incident in Failsworth with colleague Sgt Andrew Williams.

Graham clipped the wing mirror of a parked car and Sgt Williams said he was duty-bound to report this and take a breath specimen. When the breath-test proved positive, Sgt Williams arrested Graham and both men wept.

Mr Sheikh said the test was carried out unlawfully - the collision was `trivial' and there was no evidence of damage, so it should not have been deemed a collision and the test should never have been requested.

He said Graham should have had two urine tests at Chadderton police station, with the first one discarded, but that did not happen. He said the work of the officer who did the tests was `shoddy and unreliable'.

Magistrates' chairman Brian Chiles told Graham: "You are a police officer and you know what the outcome of drink-driving could be. There was a risk to other road users."

A GMP spokeswoman said: "The officer will remain on restricted duties, an investigation by the Professional Standards Branch will begin, and disciplinary procedures will follow."




Yesterday the MEN headlined this case on the front page. The police officer

Quote:

wept when the test proved positive when his van clipped the other car



It then emerged that he had down 8 pints of stong lager :banghead: BEFORE getting behind the wheel.. ]


Oh :censore: me...,.. IG tells me the rookies are trained to know these basics For :censored: :censored: f :censored: umteen K;s sake :banghead:


OK so he got to the domestic without killing his colleague or others... but he had the incident on the way back .. and his partner and pal had to do the breath test and they

Quote:

both cried when it came positive



OK.. I have compassion for trauma.. but some things really TEST me here and this is ONE of them. This IDIOT arrests others with relish for speeding.. and other offences .. INCLUDING driving whilst drunk... drugged .. tired at the wheel. None of which I condone. I WANT these types arrested after all.


BUT.


I expect the arresting officer to be legal.. sober .. PROFESSIONAL all the same. I am not demanding the unreasonable here.


. They claim they pay my wages. WELL>.. I PAY theirs and like everyone else up and down the country I expect the same things of police officers as the general public are entitled to expect fotokld rom me and others who are paid for by the public purses - as a medic consultant lurgy wally employed by the NHS and thus with some basic requirements from those funding me here.. as does my wife who may be employed by one of those horrid pharmaceutical efforts .. but she still has to be sure the stuff she designs does as it says on the label :wink:

His Sergeant partner told the court the test was positive and was


yesterday's headliner frontpage wrote:
"emotionally upset as gave evidence against his partner"


He had to arrest and caution his pal and colleague. I do empathise in that this cannot have been easy on him all the same. But the officer was supposedly trained and knew the rules. He had no darned right to place his colleague in danger any more than the public at large here.


He does arrest or did arrest others for a lot less after all. :furious:

He let everyone down.. besides himself.

The officer though.. to be FAIR to him.. he CONFIRMS a post made by me on this site back in 2004. and on the PH site.. and input by In Gear.

Quote:

Pc Graham told the court that he had drunl 7 pints of lager on :listenup: an empty stomach at 4 pm the day before and had not eaten at all




Look.. I told you then. I told the PH crowd too.


JUST


:listenup: :soapbox:

do not ever drink on empty stomach and avoid fizzy drinks too

I went into all the medical science at some length behind my posts at the time. Just google it all up .. I posted the same on here as on PH at the time and Widly and In Gear have backed .. along with all the Swiss all over the internet here :wink:


]Pere the paper .. he downed his last pint around midnight :roll:

He was one hour late for his shift but

[quote]

felt OK [/i]


Like ALL the morning after convicted :roll:


He IS a trafpol.. He IS SUPPOSED TO KNOW ALL THIS :popcorn:

He clipped a wing mirror of a parked car. The owner was not bothered and did not press charges or complain per the report as given here.

But his colleague and superior had to follow procedures all the same.


Urine samples confirmed the booze level in the system.



I do not ever condone driving under any influence. A uniform does not maketh an expert either. He was and is a normal average human who does not understand what any substance does to a body. NOR DOE DICK BRAINSTORM .. either given his thoughts on drug usage. :roll:


I do.. my wife does.. and we say :nono: .. respect body.. quaff with refinement and appreciation and with food. Drugs are medicine :wink:


I put the question mark in the header as I think this officer was stupidly naive and not trained enough to judge anyone either.

Whicg=h latter statement of mine raises the unpalatable questions . .

I want more cops. I want PROPERLY trained ones and not ever EVER "on the substandard cheap!" :banghead:


I also want an end to paperwork so that police can get on oth their job of arresting nasty types .. and I can get on with curing people.

_________________
If you want to get to heaven - you have to raise a little hell!

Smilies are contagious
They are just like the flu
We use our smilies on YOU today
Now Good Causes are smiling too!

KEEP SMILING
It makes folk wonder just what you REALLY got up to last night!

Smily to penny.. penny to pound
safespeed prospers-smiles all round! !

But the real message? SMILE.. GO ON ! DO IT! and the world will smile with you!
Enjoy life! You only have the one bite at it.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2008 13:08 
Offline
Police Officer
Police Officer

Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 22:37
Posts: 279
Location: Warrington
Mad Moggie,
This person is not a TO but a van driver as i think you put it next to popcorn eater. Although it doesnt matter what he drives he was supposed to be going to assist the public,not (possibly) cause carnage on the way.
Yes,he knew the consequences and yes, he should have known that there was a possiblity of him being over the limit,therefore should have self tested himself,then of course what does he do if positive then as he probably drove to work ?.
Whatever happens then he can only blame his self not anyone else,as I am sure that when he has caught someone else for something,he would have said at sometime to them " WELL YOU HAVE ONLY YOURSELF TO BLAME ".
Stephen


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2008 17:16 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 10:30
Posts: 2053
Location: South Wales (Roving all UK)
Of course he should be sacked


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 18, 2008 20:49 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 01:42
Posts: 686
The "morning after" (and even the "afternoon after" if you've drunk enough) is a really "fuzzy" area which catches a lot of people out. But it shouldn't have caught out a Police officer. Why didn't he tell his colleagues about his drinking the night before and offer to take a breathalyser test BEFORE he got behind the wheel of the Transit? Fear of disciplinary action for coming into work hung over?

I imagine a major part of the PSB invesigation will be looking at why he felt he couldn't bring the matter to the attention of his colleagues before taking the keys. If it was a case of "I didn't think" or "I couldn't be bothered" then yes, he should lose his job.

_________________
“For every complex problem, there is a solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.” - H. L. Mencken


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 16:41 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2004 23:42
Posts: 3820
Stephen wrote:
Mad Moggie,
This person is not a TO but a van driver as i think you put it next to popcorn eater. Although it doesnt matter what he drives he was supposed to be going to assist the public,not (possibly) cause carnage on the way.
Yes,he knew the consequences and yes, he should have known that there was a possiblity of him being over the limit,therefore should have self tested himself,then of course what does he do if positive then as he probably drove to work ?.
Whatever happens then he can only blame his self not anyone else,as I am sure that when he has caught someone else for something,he would have said at sometime to them " WELL YOU HAVE ONLY YOURSELF TO BLAME ".
Stephen


Indeed a dilemma as even if he took a bus to work - he's still drunk on duty as well.. which is also in breach of the rules. :popcorn:


But .. police are like any other human being and a uniform does not change this. Like umpteen out there - he just did not realise just how that extra pint can affect the next morning.


Should he be sacked? In theory - perhaps he could be and even should be - but maybe the disciplinary will take other facotrs such as work record to date, any mitigating circumstances just as any other employer would and should .. and maybe find a desk job alternative.

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!


Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 19:14 
Offline
Life Member
Life Member
User avatar

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 15:00
Posts: 1109
Location: Can't see.
Credit where it's due though, it'd have been easy to "cover up"... I wonder if he knew he was under the influence?

The breath test is pretty inconsistent too, years ago I had one which gave me a green light one morning after, after what was a heavier night than the one described above.

_________________
Fear is a weapon of mass distraction


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 20:37 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 23:09
Posts: 6737
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
In Gear wrote:
Should he be sacked? In theory - perhaps he could be and even should be - but maybe the disciplinary will take other facotrs such as work record to date, any mitigating circumstances just as any other employer would and should .. and maybe find a desk job alternative.

There is a long history of what appears to be inconsistency over police treatment of convicted drink-drivers.

For example, in 2000, the widow of a twice-commended policeman who hanged himself after being forced to resign because of a drink-driving conviction was reported to be considering taking his former employers to court alleging they had applied double standards in their treatment of him. Carrie Ellis said she felt her husband Richard had been unfairly treated by Hertfordshire Police who had allowed six other officers convicted of the offence in the past four years to keep their jobs.

I would say the police need to be crystal clear about which offences merit automatic dismissal regardless of circumstances, and which don't.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Jan 19, 2008 22:27 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2004 23:42
Posts: 3820
PeterE wrote:
In Gear wrote:
Should he be sacked? In theory - perhaps he could be and even should be - but maybe the disciplinary will take other facotrs such as work record to date, any mitigating circumstances just as any other employer would and should .. and maybe find a desk job alternative.

There is a long history of what appears to be inconsistency over police treatment of convicted drink-drivers.

For example, in 2000, the widow of a twice-commended policeman who hanged himself after being forced to resign because of a drink-driving conviction was reported to be considering taking his former employers to court alleging they had applied double standards in their treatment of him. Carrie Ellis said she felt her husband Richard had been unfairly treated by Hertfordshire Police who had allowed six other officers convicted of the offence in the past four years to keep their jobs.

I would say the police need to be crystal clear about which offences merit automatic dismissal regardless of circumstances, and which don't.



It's difficult and I do not know the exact details of this case you mention. Sometimes individuals feel so wretched about "shortcomings" that they really do .. to be tactful lest Mrs Ellis or others like her hit on this thread.. "extreme acts in total depressed despair" and I concede some others may also feel their lives have "ended and nothing to live for" and may do or attempt likewise. I think these to be cires for help and am always saddened if this cry for help went unheeded of the help was to late for them/ :(
:(



No one .. police, judge.. politician or even member of the Royal Family can claim "perfection".


I do admit to enjoying a decent beer, single malt, aged wine and even a young press of a decent vintage. I do so in moderation and usually with a meal eaten with family at set table.

But we do have a drink/drug culture and police officers can be just as easily tempted as anyone .. from the chav to the elderly fart with gout .. if you like.


But.. if the officer has potential.. has a decent character record .. but made innocently daft decision as in "hung over.. but still feeling lucid.. (Mellanby setting in maybe .. but still illegal) or misjudged the impact of a night out with pals.. then as a caring employer - we should take all facts into account and provide a decent PR to explain to hard critics out there. I think it is the critiscm of "alleged double standards" which can influence some outcomes too to be honest.

I will hope that this officer has sufficient remorse/mitigation/explanation ot keep employment. If it does not work out well for him.. I will wish only good luck for his future and hope he has learned from a very bad experience.

Yes.. he should have known better.. but he is still a mere human being who made the same mistake as countless others who are not police officers. He will always live with regrets .. as most of those others of decently otherwise characters will

Yes .. stupid to drive if still potentially illegal.

But :scratchchin: Unless like me and the Swiss family - you only drink if you know you will not be driving for at least 20 hours .. and you drink a skinful without realising.. a lot of others could be in the same situation as this officer.

My advice.. drink elder flower presse or similar. Refined quaff on the palate.. Nice tasting,. refreshing and safe

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!


Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Jan 25, 2008 23:52 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Fri Mar 18, 2005 21:15
Posts: 699
Location: Belfast
:gatso2: Belfast Telegraph, Thursday January 24, 2008.

Two cops suspended over drink driving rap


By Brian Hutton

Two police officers have been suspended from duty after being caught for alleged drink driving during the Christmas and New year crackdown in Northern Ireland, it emerged last night.

They were among more than 600 motorists who failed breath tests in the road safety campaign, police confirmed.

The revelation follows controversy over the force's decision not to sack Constable Geraldine Donnelly - who appeared in an anti-drink drive television ad - after she pleaded guilty to being over the limit last year.

The PSNI refused to disclose any further details about the two officers charged over Christmas, including their rank, where and when the alleged offences occurred and the alcohol breathalyser readings.

It is understood they were off-duty at the time they were pulled over.

Assistant Chief Constable Roy Toner said: "They have been suspended and will, following their respective court appearances, be subjected to internal discipline procedures."

The PSNI came under criticism last year for not firing Constable Donnelly, who was edited out of a television campaign warning of the dangers of driving under the influence, after she was fined £120 and banned from driving for 12 months.

Deputy Chief Constable Paul Leighton said the incident preceded his warning in May 2006 that any officer caught breaking the law would be sacked or forced to resign.


Different force, similar problem, I think. :no: :stop: :drink2: :steering:

_________________
Anyone who tells you that nothing is impossible has never bathed in a saucer of water.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Fri Feb 08, 2008 23:34 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 31, 2006 14:48
Posts: 244
Location: Warrington ex Sandgrounder[Southport]
I take the same view as "In Gear" in what should happen is that his record as a serving officer should be taken in to account before deciding on dismissal etc.

The courts have found him guilty of the offence so why should his employers act as executioner as well, surely he should be allowed to remain in a positon in a desk job or even out on foot patrol as all the money spent on training etc. will be wasted all for a transgression which many people do on a daily basis and the majority don.t lose their living for.

Just put yourself in his position as was said he turns up for a shift and takes said breath test and fails (as it appears he would have done) the dilemma is then that the officer who took the test has to either a) report a colleague or b) turn a blind eye and say nothing not a very nice position to be in with a workmate or fellow officer in this case.

Then there is the scenario as has been said by "In Gear" that he has (possibly) committed an offence by driving to work while under the influence of alcohol so again what do you do arrest him for drink driving?

I always thought that you had to commit a moving traffic offence to be breath tested which other than coming to work it appears he hasn,t done.

_________________
"There But For The Grace of God Go I"

"He Who Ain,t Made Mistakes Ain,t Made Anything"

Spannernut


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
PostPosted: Sat Feb 09, 2008 00:32 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 23:09
Posts: 6737
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
Stormin wrote:
I take the same view as "In Gear" in what should happen is that his record as a serving officer should be taken in to account before deciding on dismissal etc.

I agree with this - but some in the BRAKE lobby may see it as inconsistent.

Stormin wrote:
I always thought that you had to commit a moving traffic offence to be breath tested which other than coming to work it appears he hasn,t done.

No, a breath test can be required if you have been involved in an accident (which this guy had been) or if a police officer has reasonable grounds for suspicion that you may have been drinking.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 11 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 211 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.063s | 12 Queries | GZIP : Off ]