Safe Speed Forums • View topic - Was speed safety van wrongly parked?

View unanswered posts | View active topics

Board index » Discussion Forums » General Chat

All times are UTC [ DST ]

Was speed safety van wrongly parked?

Moderators: Moderators, Moderators

Page 2 of 3

[ 44 posts ]

Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Author

Message

RobinXe

Post subject: Re: Was speed safety van wrongly parked?

Posted: Wed Jul 27, 2011 19:24

Gold Member

Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 14:06
Posts: 3654
Location: Oxfordshire

GS, nobody suggested or alleged anywhere near what you're railing against, we asked the source of your image, your answer would seem to be: "I drew it", correct? You claim a higher understanding of all things police related, yet you will not state how you allegedly possess the knowledge. Given the prevalence of Walter Mittys online, why should we believe you're not another?

Now, knowing how you attempt to operate, I am not making any judgments on the accuracy of your diagram, I don't know and never claimed to. What I do know, as you have brought the issue up again, is that I can find no case where anyone has been convicted on the say-so of two (or more) speedwatch civvies, even with the involvement of a non-witnessing PC, though you claimed on another thread that such cases exist, and then fled (again) when asked to substantiate your wild claims.

So what we have is someone who posts anonymously online, claiming some kind of expert status, whilst often and repeatedly making claims that are demonstrably not true. Would you really expect us to take ANYTHING you say as gospel, without any citation of sources, corroboration or substantiation? (That was rhetorical by the way, we know you would, you constantly do!)

_________________
Regulation without education merely creates more criminals.

Top

GreenShed

Post subject: Re: Was speed safety van wrongly parked?

Posted: Wed Jul 27, 2011 19:26

User

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 13:03
Posts: 685

Steve wrote:

GreenShed wrote:

It is clear you and your play-mates know f***-all about the structure of the police and the staff thereof.

I have drawn the image because I happen to know what the structure is. It was given in good faith to help you see the structure and relationships within the police and the SCP's in respect of the enforcement personnel. In my experience, there are no SCP enforcement personnel and constabularies that do not fit into this basic structure. Some police may have no operators that are police officers and some may have no operators that are police staff (civilians), some have a mix of the 2 so the ellipse at the bottom can be as seen or will move the the left or the right as appropriate.

Before you criticise what has been supplied you should really make an attempt from time-to-time to accept that people other than you can supply original and accurate material.

The debate about needing police officers to operate speed enforcement devices has been held before. You seem to be of the opinion that a police officer is needed in a speeding prosecution. No police officer is needed; all that is required are 2 witnesses or one witness and the reading from a speed measuring device.

Confusion abounds about the requirement for a police constable; it appears it is here too. A Police Constable is only required to be in the process if a conditional offer of fixed penalty is to be offered in respect of a speeding offence. No Conditional Offer = No Police Officer required.

You can claim all you like that a police officer must have operated the device but there is no law that requires that. If you claim there is then please advise us all of the law that legislates that requirement.

As in the community speed watch debate; 2 witnesses, no police officer = good to go on the prosecution of the offence. The thing you cannot do in that case is make a conditional offer of a fixed penalty. You can however do so if you can convince a police constable that an offence has occurred, then a CoFP can be issued. There is still no police constable witness to the offence though so if it goes to court after refusal to accept the FPN the police officer involved in the CoFP is not a witness to the offence and need not be called. Why do I know this and why should you accept it? Pop down to your local magistrates' courts it is being completed every day.

The world does operate in accordance with rules, laws and procedures that have not been formulated, agreed or even known about on safespeed.org.uk/forum all you have to do is open your mind and you will experience it....oh!...and we all have the ability to be right as well as wrong; consider giving that a go as well.

Full marks to you for completely missing the point! Bonus points for your wanton evasion of mine!

I say again:

Steve wrote:

GreenShed wrote:

I think the point CO was making is that the police operate speed enforcement vehicles.

Always? What about vehicles single crewed by SCP staff?

And you answered this with an image you drew up, without any reference. Is that at all reasonable?

The reader could easily conclude you are making this up as you go alone. A reader with knowledge of your profession can reasonably conclude your delusions of grandeur are borne from your demonstrable, direct, strong and vested conflict of interest.

So anyway, when will you answer my original question, in the context of the thrust of this thread?

Ho Ho. I did wonder what technique you would use when you were shown to be in error or didn't know something. Evasion, yes that would have been my prediction.

I haven't evaded the question of the single crewed SCP van at all. It can be single crewed by a constable or a civilian as the diagram clearly shows. You have your answer but what the f*** was the point of your question?

Just for clarity, what is "your original question"?

...and if I answered it what's the point? You wouldn't accept it in any case.

Top

GreenShed

Post subject: Re: Was speed safety van wrongly parked?

Posted: Wed Jul 27, 2011 19:29

User

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 13:03
Posts: 685

camera operator wrote:

...

should be Chief Constable - deputy CC, Chief Supt, Ingear, area inspectors, duty sgts, constable, CPT, response, CID intel etc etc

civilian - non operational - HR, Fianance, Admin, IT, etc etc
civilian - operational PCSO, front desk clerk, jaolers, camera van operators, CCTV operators etc etc

They are all in the "Police Officers" ellipse but yes, they will be in there.

It can't be made with too many details, there's trouble understanding this one. Maybe it is too simple.

camera operator wrote:

SafeSpeedv2 wrote:

What is the definition between Police Officers and Police Staff ?

£20,000

Indeed!

Top

Steve

Post subject: Re: Was speed safety van wrongly parked?

Posted: Wed Jul 27, 2011 20:26

Friend of Safe Speed

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London

GreenShed wrote:

Steve wrote:

I know of one member of SCP staff who used police headed paper to send correspondence. :loco:

...I missed that bit. and after a full and detailed investigation wasting 10's or possibly even 100's £thousands it was found that the member of SCP staff who happened to be a senior member of police staff was indeed authorised to do just that. Now isn't that interesting.

And where did it say that in the letter? On what grounds was it authorised?

The reader could be forgiven for concluding that the letter was nothing short of a crude attempt of the author to pass off his position/himself as having authority to act as an official representative of the police service.

Regardless, Camera Partnership Manager is not 'police', no matter how deluded you are!
Before you try the obvious, I would like to point out that a permanently employed cleaner at a police station, being a police service employee, is not police.

GreenShed wrote:

Ho Ho. I did wonder what technique you would use when you were shown to be in error or didn't know something.

I was asking questions; this inherently suggests that I didn't know that particular something. So why need I evade?

GreenShed wrote:

I haven't evaded the question of the single crewed SCP van at all. It can be single crewed by a constable or a civilian as the diagram clearly shows.

Just to be clear on this: you have used your own unreferenced information, as unequivocal proof ?!?

Oh, and I knew already that, so how does that answer my question?

Contrary to your claim, you haven't answered my question. A simple yes or no would obviously suffice, so why are you taking such a long way around?

GreenShed wrote:

Just for clarity, what is "your original question"?

Given that I quoted your sentence in full and asked for confirmation, and that you have easy access to the rest of your post (for context), if you wanted clarification of what I'm asking, then does it not follow that your statement was somewhat ambiguous? Or do I really need to fully expand it out for you?

GreenShed wrote:

...and if I answered it what's the point? You wouldn't accept it in any case.

I can, and would, if given the reference for your sketch (that has already been requested several times). You have repeatedly evaded this crucial element.
It really does seem like you are squirming here ...

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Top

SafeSpeedv2

Post subject: Re: Was speed safety van wrongly parked?

Posted: Wed Jul 27, 2011 22:31

Site Admin

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 02:17
Posts: 7355
Location: Highlands

GreenShed wrote:

Steve wrote:

I know of one member of SCP staff who used police headed paper to send correspondence. :loco:

Really they spent that much Why !??? It only took a Chief Super to squash it which they did. And then you were told never to use Police headed notepaper ever again. How can you also be Police staff when only employed by the local SCP ?

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.

Top

GreenShed

Post subject: Re: Was speed safety van wrongly parked?

Posted: Wed Jul 27, 2011 23:18

User

Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 13:03
Posts: 685

SafeSpeedv2 wrote:

...Really they spent that much Why !???

It isn't cheap.

SafeSpeedv2 wrote:

It only took a Chief Super to squash it which they did.

Really? That's not correct.

SafeSpeedv2 wrote:

And then you were told never to use Police headed notepaper ever again.

Really? That's not correct.

SafeSpeedv2 wrote:

How can you also be Police staff when only employed by the local SCP ?

The SCP never employed anyone. The Camera Manager was a member of police staff and still is.

0/4. Not good.

Top

RobinXe

Post subject: Re: Was speed safety van wrongly parked?

Posted: Thu Jul 28, 2011 00:19

Gold Member

Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 14:06
Posts: 3654
Location: Oxfordshire

Lol, I'd hate to think what your scorecard reads!

You claim to have knowledge of the case cited, can you substantiate this?

_________________
Regulation without education merely creates more criminals.

Top

SafeSpeedv2

Post subject: Re: Was speed safety van wrongly parked?

Posted: Thu Jul 28, 2011 01:00

Site Admin

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 02:17
Posts: 7355
Location: Highlands

GreenShed wrote:

SafeSpeedv2 wrote:

...Really they spent that much Why !???

It isn't cheap.

Exactly what isn't - I am referring to 'the' letter which after rapid discussions between various 'heads' it all was squashed ... what letter are you talking about that justifies a "10K - 100K full and detailed investigation" (your words) ? Bearing in mind this was of your own making then it is you who cost the taxpayer this money in the first place.

GreenShed wrote:

SafeSpeedv2 wrote:

It only took a Chief Super to squash it which they did.

Really? That's not correct.

Well that is what I was told in detail. There is a letter which I could find at some point to prove precisely who and what rank (as I recall it was a Chief super - but it may have been a slightly different level but high up for sure) - it would take me some time to dig it up and it is hardly crucial considering all this was a while ago now!

GreenShed wrote:

SafeSpeedv2 wrote:

And then you were told never to use Police headed notepaper ever again.

Really? That's not correct.

Oh really ! I think not although I may not be being precisely word perfect here but the essence would be correct. OK then what do you say that you were told then?

GreenShed wrote:

SafeSpeedv2 wrote:

How can you also be Police staff when only employed by the local SCP ?

The SCP never employed anyone. The Camera Manager was a member of police staff and still is.

Ah OK I see where you are coming from ... the police staff = civis 'employed' for the SCP through the Police as then the SCP never 'employs' anyone (as it remains then Police, ambulance, fire brigade, Council), but the 'police do', so then you 'can' state 'police staff' and 'employed' by the police authority. As police staff can have preferences and privileges, but other whereas other civis still 'police staff' can't - that right ?
So OK then, you are a civi at the time in question (of the letter), employed through the 'police authority' as a manager for the SCP - or something incredibly close to that ... - about right ?
Of course if 'passing off' as a person of authority working 'for' the police is highly likely to imply to most members of the public that they hold the same or similar authority as a police officer, but this is not the case. So then is is diluting the authority of a police officer as well as try to provide privileges where in fact non exist ?

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.

Top

Steve

Post subject: Re: Was speed safety van wrongly parked?

Posted: Thu Jul 28, 2011 09:30

Friend of Safe Speed

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London

GreenShed wrote:

SafeSpeedv2 wrote:

How can you also be Police staff when only employed by the local SCP ?

The SCP never employed anyone. The Camera Manager was a member of police staff and still is.

"Steve previously wrote:

Before you try the obvious, I would like to point out that a permanently employed cleaner at a police station, being a police service employee, is not police.

Couldn't see the wood for the trees?

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Top

irrelevant

Post subject: Re: Was speed safety van wrongly parked?

Posted: Thu Jul 28, 2011 13:30

User

Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2011 12:47
Posts: 17

Onto the original topic of the speed van, I presume they do whatever they like doing. What is written in the guidelines is something that drivers 'cannot do', whilst it's 'must not' or 'shouldn't' for the police and the related. I don't think you can successfully win an argument with any authority over the rules that apply to them and they don't follow, in which case I presume the evidence collected by the camera would still be valid (I doubt anyone would rule in favour of the contrary). But, seriously, though, look at those examples (maybe you've seen them before) and make your own judgements as to how many of them actually follow the rules:

http://www.speedcam.co.uk/van.htm

_________________
"Just got back from a pleasure trip: I took my mother-in-law to the airport."
Henny Youngman

Top

camera operator

Post subject: Re: Was speed safety van wrongly parked?

Posted: Thu Jul 28, 2011 18:53

Camera Partnership Staff

Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 19:48
Posts: 1995

SafeSpeedv2 wrote:

some police staff have as much equality as Chief Supt level, just sit outside your local district station, those with body armour and CS spray and cuffs are police, those walking in in shirts or blouses are police staff (albeit you have non oprational. plain clothes officers as welll), not that difficult to understand

_________________
now retired

Top

Ernest Marsh

Post subject: Re: Was speed safety van wrongly parked?

Posted: Thu Jul 28, 2011 19:10

User

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 00:15
Posts: 5232
Location: Windermere

GreenShed wrote:

It's got ME puzzled...
Is THIS the CHEF Constable?

Looks like your graphic/spelling skills are like your knowledge of the law - you are certainly no expert... as you once admitted on Radio Cumbria in 2004! :whome:

A quick google turned up this post on a police forum:

Quote:

The normal police driving levels are Basic, Standard, Advanced – also known by some forces as Patrol, Response, Pursuit. The various pieces of road traffic legislation give Police, Fire and Ambulance various exemptions – speed limits, red traffic lights, and keep left/right bollards. There are no other exemptions.

Hampshire Guidance wrote:

3.52.1 Police staff who are authorised to drive Police vehicles will comply with road traffic legislation at all times. Exceptions to this policy may apply to certain specialist Police staff who have been specifically and separately assessed by the Head of Driver Training.

it goes on to say...

Quote:

3.56 Reversing Police Vehicles
3.56.1 Reversing carelessly is a common cause of damage to Police vehicles.
3.56.2 Whilst parking on Police property and in Police stations wherever practicable vehicles should be reverse parked in order to facilitate safe departure under Response conditions.
3.56.3 Where possible assistance should be sought to facilitate parking by another crewmember if present or by seeking the assistance of another colleague nearby.

Didn't stop one CSCP driver scraping past and damaging a liveried police vehicle at Penrith HQ!!

I saw a CSCP van exiting ASDA's car park in Kendal late one afternoon, and the level of observation was not what I would have expected - pulling out onto a roundabout in front of a vehicle already on the same, going straight ahead... and then having to break hard because the driver refused to yield!

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

Top

Ernest Marsh

Post subject: Re: Was speed safety van wrongly parked?

Posted: Thu Jul 28, 2011 19:29

User

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 00:15
Posts: 5232
Location: Windermere

SafeSpeedv2 wrote:

GreenShed wrote:

Steve wrote:

I know of one member of SCP staff who used police headed paper to send correspondence. :loco:

The reason it cost so much, was that so many people complained!

Official police response letter wrote:

I have overall responsibility in the Constabulary for complaints received from members of the public about the conduct of Police Officers and Police Staff. I am required to provide you with a full account of the investigation and to remind you of your right to appeal against the outcome of that investigation.

Your Complaint

That Mr Callaghan as manager of the Cumbria Safety Camera Partnership abused his authority by purporting to be acting on behalf of, and as an employee of, Cumbria Constabulary and that he was wrong to use the Cumbria Constabulary letterhead.

Investigation

An investigation has been conducted by the Employee Relations Department, based upon initial correspondence, formal statements and other documentation. Mr Callaghan was interviewed in accordance with Police Staff Disciplinary Policy.

Investigation Findings

Mr Callaghan is the manager of the Cumbria Safety Camera Partnership but is directly employed by Cumbria Constabulary. As such he is entitled to use Cumbria Constabulary resources, including the Constabulary’s headed letter paper to discharge his duties.

Mr Callaghan sent the letter you refer to in your complaint in the circumstances you describe only after it was amended and approved by Cumbria Constabulary Legal Services. The author of the letter is clearly indicated. In it he does not pursue or threaten legal action but asks that abusive comments be removed in line with the Webmaster’s (Mr Smith) posting rules governing his web site. It was useful that Mr Callaghan included information regarding relevant case law and the liabilities of site operators and those who host such sites. In view of the potential liability on the site hosts, he clearly copied the letter to Easily and EasyNet.

It is also clear that the letter, when read as a whole, does not oppose any freedom for persons to voice their opinions but does make objection only to abusive material.

I am satisfied that Mr Callaghan, as the Manager of the Cumbria Safety Camera Scheme Partnership and an employee of Cumbria Constabulary has not abused his authority and, therefore, your complaint is not upheld.

However, having reviewed the various Internet communications by Mr Callaghan and his contributions to web sites, I do not find these useful in terms of the aims and operations of the Cumbria Safety Camera Partnership and these contributions have ceased.

Now you know why Mr Callaghan had to resort to using different identities - his real one is "not usefull"

It is also worth noting that the cause of all this investigating - a post claiming that Mr Callaghan was a liar and a charlatan, have since proved to be correct, in that he lied in his Linkedin profile, AND lied to a PH poster whom he told, had merely to ask for photographs of his alleged offence to be shown them - when in fact on TWO separate occasions that I am aware of, victims asked to see the photographs in emails, that were refused in emails sent from Mr Callaghans account and bearing his name!

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

Top

SafeSpeedv2

Post subject: Re: Was speed safety van wrongly parked?

Posted: Fri Jul 29, 2011 04:55

Site Admin

Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 02:17
Posts: 7355
Location: Highlands

irrelevant

From the link that you gave which I am familiar with, and check from time to time, there is a distinct lack of signage for some of the van locations.

Greenshed, I can see that my former mention that you were told to not write on Police letterhead was wrong and for that I apologise. Thanks EM for posting that useful reminder of the circumstances.

_________________
Safe Speed for Intelligent Road Safety through proper research, experience & guidance.

Top

Ernest Marsh

Post subject: Re: Was speed safety van wrongly parked?

Posted: Fri Jul 29, 2011 08:50

User

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 00:15
Posts: 5232
Location: Windermere

If you were wondering what "amended and approved" means, I think it means they checked his spelling, and removed the expletives which he seems fond of using.

There is of course scientific comment on the character of such individuals who feel the need to resort to such language in their arguments if you look on the internet! :scratchchin:

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

Top

Ernest Marsh

Post subject: Re: Was speed safety van wrongly parked?

Posted: Fri Jul 29, 2011 20:17

User

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 00:15
Posts: 5232
Location: Windermere

Hasn't it gone strangely quiet in this thread - I do hope nothing has happened to Greenshed - there HAVE been a couple of accidents on the M6 of late :oops:

There was of course another aspect to MY complaint.
Threatening to report me to Railtrack for trespassing on a rail line, threatening to have the police visit me because my vehicle had green LED lights in the front grill... and of course threatening to take me to court over my use of the terms Liar and Charlatan in a post of which he was the subject. :sublurking:

This stemmed from Mr Callaghans use of statistics at Ings, in an attempt to justify the use of speed cameras there - and the subsequent RISE in KSIs there, despite CSCP claims at that time to be reducing accidents "at camera sites" - a claim also shown to be FALSE, when Kendalian made an FoI request for information from other camera sites! :surprise:

Can we REALLY believe ANYTHING he says here - or in court for that matter? :liar:

He clearly has a problem in telling the truth - instead bending it to suit HIS version of events! No wonder RSS makes use of his services - they must view Greenshed as a safe pair of hands to carry out their declared intention of "giving motorists a slap if they think they can buck the system".

Med Hughes may have done the job himself - but HIS credibility took a knock when he was caught exceeding the speed limit by no small amount! :drive1:

Oh, those threats I complain of... Mr Callaghan has been guilty of threats, but no action is to be taken as he clearly failed to carry them out. :whip:

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

Top

camera operator

Post subject: Re: Was speed safety van wrongly parked?

Posted: Fri Jul 29, 2011 23:15

Camera Partnership Staff

Joined: Tue Apr 26, 2005 19:48
Posts: 1995

Ernest Marsh wrote:

Hasn't it gone strangely quiet in this thread - I do hope nothing has happened to Greenshed - there HAVE been a couple of accidents on the M6 of late :oops:

i dont think Sc is responsible for Cumbria, as it isthe weekend only is saddos are here, how is fergl und the swiss

_________________
now retired

Top

Ernest Marsh

Post subject: Re: Was speed safety van wrongly parked?

Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2011 09:33

User

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 00:15
Posts: 5232
Location: Windermere

camera operator wrote:

Ernest Marsh wrote:

Hasn't it gone strangely quiet in this thread - I do hope nothing has happened to Greenshed - there HAVE been a couple of accidents on the M6 of late :oops:

i dont think Sc is responsible for Cumbria, as it isthe weekend only is saddos are here, how is fergl und the swiss

It is the weekend now... but nothing from Greenshed since Wednesday.

Perhaps he has been sharing his "expert" testimony elsewhere. :juggle:

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!

Top

Steve

Post subject: Re: Was speed safety van wrongly parked?

Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2011 10:57

Friend of Safe Speed

Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 10:16
Posts: 7986
Location: Moved to London

Interestingly, he has logged in since. So he must have seen the responses posed to him....

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Top

Pete317

Post subject: Re: Was speed safety van wrongly parked?

Posted: Sat Jul 30, 2011 11:04

Life Member

Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2004 13:50
Posts: 2643

...perhaps he's just embarrassed at his apparent inability to answer the many questions we've put to him.

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

Top

Page 2 of 3

[ 44 posts ]

Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next

Board index » Discussion Forums » General Chat

All times are UTC [ DST ]

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 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

Jump to: