GreenShed wrote:
In Gear wrote:
...But we prosecute more for inconsiderate up to dangerous here than elsewhere and less for speeding?
But this is still "hands-on police area"
We do allow for some fair discretion up to a set point which we believe to be fair and fairly generous but will explain to each driver the reason for any decision and each get a strongly worded message designed to educate whatever the decision made at the time. By the way .. we certainly do not let off "extremes" as such behaviour could not be justified.. but our teams out there make a fair minded/objective report all the same
Written reports follow this same fair and honestly made objectivity
and may even help the offender mitigate himself and come away with a fine/points but no ban on occasions.
Are you sure you are a senior Durham Officer as what you have said here does not reflect their published Speed Enforcement Policy, see here:
http://www.durham.police.uk/durhamc/central_deps/operations/scu.phpDurham Constabulary Website wrote:
Some offenders caught speeding by the Safety Camera exceeding the speed limit may be offered the option to take part in the Speed Awareness diversionary scheme. This will give drivers the option to avoid formal court action. It does however require the driver to attend a course that highlights the dangers of excess speed. It is hoped that the scheme will educate drivers as to dangers posed by excess speed and further reduce casualties by increasing people's awareness of the issue.
As well as the Safety Camera, Roads Policing Officers carry out speed enforcement and a range of other enforcement checks together with driver education options in an effort to reduce road casualties. At the present time if you are stopped for a speeding offence by a Patrol Officer, you will not be offered the option to attend a Speed Awareness Course as an alternative to formal prosecution.
You are not at all in step with what is shown to be their activities.
I think you will find that I posted up this same link in the"Help/Being Prosecuted" or in this section about 2 months ago in answer to someone asking about SAC v DIS courses.
I am posting from the point of view of Trafpol and not our van. If you are copped by the officer - you do NOT get offered a SAC - but our officers may consider offering a DIS if they think the driver will benefit from this.
Our officers are like any other police officer in that they can use some discretion. I have never posted that our officers offer SAC - only DIS.
As I have said in my private message to you - I am not going to rise to your baiting with ad homimem attacks nor have any of my post contradicted our policy despite your attempt to twist that way. Furthrmore - the late Paul Smith had all my personal details back in April 2004 when I joined in the discussions. I am certainly not giving personal details to a person who joined in Oct 2008 - has made 29 posts to date and whose identity is unknown anyway.
It's perfectly obvious that I was leaving the van out of the equation and concentrating on RPU discretion as the OP was speaking about his concerns over
Pratnerrship's opener to the thread wrote:
Some days ago I am driving along the motorway when suddenly come to a mass of cars.
It's just a traffic enforcement car driving along at about 60-65 odd, and yet no-one is in front and there is a huge stack of cars behind it. Scattered over all 3 lanes.
It is a bit difficult to believe that about 15 people have less sense than I do, but there they were, all stacked up behind the car, afraid to go past.
And yet it was doing under the limit.
which has nowt to do with our van or any van.
The teams in the van will enforce to a similar level of tolerance and SAC's are offered to a set cut off of 10%+ 3-4 as is case elsewhere. As said - my post was not addressing the Van aspect but the RPU aspect which is what the opening poster is on about. We have one van - operated by RPU. Rest of our enforement - via marked/unmarked. Kindly do not twist our policy to your own subjective view. My response was on topic - addressing traffic patrol discretion v enforcement and in keeping with the original post.
But carry on with your ad homimem remarks if you like. You are only showing yourself up and not me.
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
Members
