Safe Speed Forums

I have used many machines in my line of duty and you learn far more about the machine when it is working to it's capacity than babying the thing.

Sorry, but the 'one rule for us, anothe rule for them' mentality ticks me off sometimes.

The reality is that rank and qualification does allow for different rules. If you can't get your head round that one then maybe we should scrap the driving test!

I think it bites particularly hard for two reasons:

1) The group with the different rules is also the group who are in charge of enforcement against the general public, and

2) We are constantly told that it's purely down to physics: the number of miles an hour is all that matters.

What I find particularly nauseating about this 159mph cop & his buddies trying to completely justify what he did as acceptable is quite simply this.

They cut us no slack at all. Absolutely no slack. Creap a few mph over the posted limit - safe or not (and for most people, just like the cop's claim, it's perfectly safe) and you get an invoice in the post for £60 + a quarter of the 'life of your licence' taken away.

So he was found guilty but "absolutely discharged". I'm sorry, but I really do have to ask who has been shagging who or who has been bunging who what?

I shouldn't have to accept or believe that a copper, just for being a copper can break the law to suit his whims (he has been convicted, remember) but goes completely unpunished.

And I know I have harped on about this - but at least we (the public) had him in court even though his connections to the local 'lodge' appear to have worked well with regard to the State's retribution.... Shame the same will never be able to be said about that 28 year old electrician, executed 'by accident' for getting on a train!

The whole thing stinks worse than the shit separation tanks at the sewerage outfall.

Me help the police in the future? Looks like they don't need any help from anyone else anyway - they are a complete law unto themselves!

Whilst I see this as a huge opportunity to kick the "speed kills" propoganda drivel in the nuts, this is above and beyond excessive.

I don't see any circumstances where 80mph in a 30, or 159mph in a 70 can ever be justified as a "safe speed" & I would hope we all condemn it outright.

No, I wouldn't (and I'm one of those SafeSpeed members who drives a bog-standard car and doesn't normally exceed limits by much at all)

159 mph is legal on German autobahns, and in another thread a police officer said he had occasionally done that kind of speed in pursuits. If done by a Class 1 police driver I would not necessarily say it was automatically dangerous.

Likewise there are plenty of 30s about that are big, wide roads with no adjoining properties - lots of those in Telford New Town where he was driving. In the context of a police pursuit it could be justified on many 30-limit roads. I have done 80 myself on a NSL dual carriageway that is now a 30.

_________________
"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

maybe we should do a foi request and ask what roads were "safe" for what speed? and then get those limits raised.

_________________
Speed limit sign radio interview. TV Snap Unhappy
“It has never been the rule in this country – I hope it never will be - that suspected criminal offences must automatically be the subject of prosecution” He added that there should be a prosecution: “wherever it appears that the offence or the circumstances of its commission is or are of such a character that a prosecution in respect thereof is required in the public interest”
This approach has been endorsed by Attorney General ever since 1951. CPS Code

I think if I were going to test out the characteristics of a car, I would have a colleague cruise up the road first at a respectable speed, to ensure the road was quiet and free of unexpected debris etc, and inform dispatch of my intentions.
As to whether it WAS dangerous, then only the video would tell.
The instructor seems to be saying not, while our sedate judge says it IS.

To put it another way, which COAST principles have been applied?

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

I am absolutely appalled that having been found guilty that he was not sentenced because he had already suffered enough.

You can bet that for the rest of us, even after a two year case, that we would not be shown any leniency in the sentence we would receive.

What is sauce for the goose should similarly be sauce for the gander. If it is ok for Mr Milton to break the law with grossly excessive speeding and not be punished, then the rest of us should expect to be similarly treated.

I don’t care how capable a driver Mark Milton may be, there are many other capable advanced drivers who could safely drive at higher speeds, but they are cut no slack at all and the police should obey the law like the rest of are expected to do.

If we are allowed absolutely no discretion, then likewise the police should similarly obey the letter of the law and similarly suffer the consequences when they do not.

It is an absolute scandal that he was allowed to walk away scot-free.

If you are talking about the speed alone (‘discretion’) then I reckon you got this backwards. We should instead be thankful that he got away ‘scot-free’ in the hope that the police will afford us some more slack.
However, the bloke was done for dangerous driving; it would be useful to know exactly why he was convicted for this before passing further comment.

There is an example of a 30mph dual carriageway near me where a driver can safely reach 80 - so long as the excess speed is scrubbed off before the fenced off section ends. This section: is straight but curved vertically so one can clearly see along the entire length of it; has a central reservation; has no junctions, pavements, buildings or any form of pedestrian access (the entire section is continuously fenced off) and deep grass embankments. This does not mean I actually do 80 along that stretch! Most drivers do 50.

If you hope for any discretion from the police when they are using a speed camera, or speed gun, then you are living in some other dream world.

Presumably further information will become available, but I feel there is more than sufficient information on which to come to a conclusion about the inequity of the justice system when it comes to the treatment of police officers who speed excessively, compared to the rest of us.

We should also consider that he has been paraded in public on every news channel and in every newspaper, and asociated with many kinds of blame and hate. That has undoubtedly been quite a severe 'punishment' for someone in his position.

It has also been suggested that the ongoing court cases are an attempt to clarify the law in such matters and are not specifically motivated by the need to apply justice to PC Milton.

I feel that these two factors provide some justfication for the absolute discharge. I don't know in my own mind if they provide sufficient justification.

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

Today's Daily Express editorial is quite clear about what it thinks.

"The fact is that even with a highly trained driver at the wheel, speeds such as this should not be seen outside of a Grand Prix circuit."

It would appear that the weight of opinion outside of this forum still tends to view such speeds as 'taking the piss' and warranting some sort of action against the driver.



Not quite. It is legal on some stretches, and those are a little better suited to the speed than the, effectively, dual carriageway M54!

We use tracks and even book the local airfields to get the "handling"

When we train on the public roads - and we have to as we will not be on track or an empty airfield - but out there sharing the road with members of the public who have a right to expect us to respond swiftly - buit not place them or oursleves in danger - but it means we still have to train alongside the public. When we do - roads and routes are given a full audit in advance .. and I usually get banged to rights when "fleeing from justice!"

_________________
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.

Anger at let-off for 159mph PC

By Martin Stote, Daily Express, Saturday, August 26, 2006, Page 46

(Swift Justice: PC Milton on duty – picture of him using a speed gun)

ROAD safety campaigners reacted with anger last night after a policeman convicted of driving at an "eyewatering" 159mph was given an absolute discharge.

One said: "We need to toughen up on dangerous drivers, not let them off. He should have been banned and ordered to re-take his advanced driving test."

PC Mark Milton, 40, had originally been acquitted by magistrates but their verdict was overturned by the High Court after an appeal by the Crown Prosecution Service.

Magistrates at Ludlow, Shropshire, who tried the original case yesterday convicted the officer but granted an absolute discharge because they said he had "suffered enough".

His acquittal in May last year also provoked widespread public anger because of the national police campaign against speeding motorists.

District Judge Peter Wallis told PC Milton, a Grade One police driver: "Police officers are subject to the same rules of driving as the rest of the population.

"The video recording shows that he overtakes other drivers with no advance warning. Such eyewatering speeds are inherently dangerous."

This week's hearing was told the officer's speed was clocked by the camera installed in his unmarked 3.2 litre Vauxhall Vectra GSI.

It recorded PC Milton regularly travelling at more than 100mph on A-roads around Telford and up to 159mph on the M54 during the early hours of December 5, 2003. There were later claims that the video readings were faulty.

PC Milton told the trial he knew the camera was recording. He had always been encouraged by his trainers to practice his high-speed driving skills.

Paul Smith, founder of the Safe-Speed campaign, said the ruling "smacked of a political judgment".

He said: "It is designed to minimise the harm to police driver training and the police-public relationship. It has something for everyone, except perhaps the principles of British justice."

Absurd

Mary Williams, chief executive of Brake, the road safety charity, said letting PC Milton go unpunished was "absurd."

She added: "There is no excuse for driving at killer speeds on a public highway. He endangered his own life and the lives of others.

"We need to be toughening up on dangerous drivers, not letting them off."

Jo Stagg, of the road safety group RoSPA, said the case showed that there was one law for the police and another for ordinary drivers.

She said the court's ruling sent the wrong message. "It implies that the process of prosecution and the finding of guilt are in themselves a sufficient response to the offence.

"Some motorists have been banned from driving, fined and have had points on their licence for driving at much lower speeds than the one heard in this case."

The case, which has dragged on for two-and-a-half years, remains in dispute because the Police Federation announced an appeal against the new verdict. They insist PC Milton's job and advanced driving skills should have exonerated him.

PC Milton, who has worked for West Mercia police for 12 years, faces an automatic disciplinary hearing which will be delayed until after the appeal.

OPINION: PAGE 14

Very few do blat around at those margins. Policy here is to "test per procedure" - which means you get permission and have audited the route first. PC Milton apparently had not done this - but each force will have a different take on procedures as well




No .. not necessarily dangerous and I have "tested my car" when on holiday on certiain German motorways and I admit that I have, in the past, driven in hot pursuiit of some thug at a speed which would make young Mary shudder in shock!


But again - we are back to how we manage these pursuits and the officer's professional judgement. Loads of time - we just call it off and get the aircraft out. He then directs us to location and we try to set up a safe trap before the village idiot kills someone.

If Miark was one of our team - bottom line - he'd be expected to get the feel of his new car on track first and get proper permission to test out on the road. Does not matter if he was just a mile or so at the speed and judged it "quiet". We'd still need to be sure of the safety elements.




Yep .. ..we do have training sessions on such roads. But the difference is - we do so with full monitoring, debriefs and feedbacks from all involved.

That's the reason why I accept the officer's skills and know the training and standards we are expected to reach. I have no doubt that his driving was safe and skilful. However, I have a bit of a problem with the apparent sloppiness of procedures wich led to this.

_________________
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.

Er.. the prats do that. We tend to - cough-
- apply discretion. cough!



I think they may have really known the guy was really safe and taken that into account. Besides - after appeal - he faces a disciplinary and those meetings are usually without the comfy chair, coffee and doughnuts




As said - internal disciplinaries are not pleasant. You need a thick skin cos if you think the "acid" at the roadside is a bit hard to take.. you ain;t had the roastings we can get for "being a bit nowty"

As for the tragic event in Stockwell.. if HSE was breached.. Met will still be brought to severest account over it. That's actually a more serious matter than you and the media interpret - and could cost those officers careers and reputations just the same.






Nope.... we are still bound by the same laws. This incident involved an officer speeding for very short distances in reality .... a few seconds and not miles. Can be appealed on basis perhaps that it did not quite meet the criteria of "dangerous" dangerous as it was not prolonged enough

_________________
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.

True.. when a policeman, teacher, lawyer or doctor makes a mistake (innocent or even deliberate) - media whip up a frenzy.

In some ways - he has been pre-judged before he even got to this trial. That's also wrong.

He could even appeal on that basis

_________________
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.

Not surprisingly given the double standards being applied!

Maybe if Joe Public could use "safe and skilled" as a defence then the media would have nothing to whip up! Unfortunately we're all "pre-judged" as guilty without any trial!