One rule for them another for us.......

We've seen this before… :roll:

Testing the car on public roads at 160mph, don't the police have private facilities for that? Are pursuit officers supposed to test their own cars, do they also do the servicing, are they trying to say he posed no danger to members of the public :?  

Perhaps next time joe public is stoppeed they should say 'I was just testing the car'

Rant over

I agree, i have no respect for our police force. Imagine if one of us had been caught doing that speed… jail for sure!!
He should have been treated the same way any of us would have… they think they are above the law  :x

Must admit that news article got up my nose a bit (for want of a stronger expression, but can't type it on here!)

The simple fact of the matter is he was driving at those speeds for no other reason that nis own enjoyment, i mean it's utter c**p he was testing the car, you can see it now " hey boys we got this new one in, lets see what it can do"  really wound me up when I heard it on the news earlier.

Mike.

what a joke, i cant see them letting any one else off……..sorry officer i was just testing my new boost controller  - honest -

also note the way they are proud of his twice the limit jaunts in a 60 and 30 mph zone  

Does anybody know what he was driving at 159mph?

I agree with you all. It is one rule for us and one for them. On Jerry Vine show on Rad 2 this afty, someone phoned (anomous) in to say that a mate of his is a copper and he has used his warrant card three times to get off speeding fines/penalty.

Mind you if they the police bought out a "plain" (assume white) new GTI and we got our hands on it (if we were traffic cops), doubt it would be doing 70 on the M62  

PD150

It was a 3.0ltr Vectra !

DISGUSTING abuse of the law. No wonder why people have no respect for the police anymore. I really got wound-up when I heard that on the news earlier. Testing the car ?  What a load of *******s. Creme-de-la-creme of drivers ?  Try using that one yourself when you're next pulled over. You're not allowed to say you're a better driver than the next bloke if you're a 'mere mortal' citizen
A collegue at work had to attend a 'speed awareness' course (?80 at his expense - points and fine if he didn't accept) for the dispicable crime of 36mph in a 30mph zone one Sunday afternoon. Balance this against more than twice the legal limit and walking away.
If this 'course' that police drivers go on is so good that they're then safe to drive at 160mph, then why not make it available to all drivers ?
Being in the Police seems to be entry to a select club. Milkmen probably get their milk for free. If you work in an engineering firm, you can probably make parts free. If you're in the Police looks like you can break the law and walk free.
Nuff said …………..
Mark

I remember a couple of years ago three policemen killing themselves in a MK1 Sierra Cosworth.It was reported at first that they were of duty, then that they were comming back from a call then by ten in the morning it had changed to a high speed chase. It really does seem like one rule for them….Ive had more than my fair share of rule hungry police making my life a misery (like having to RE-MOT my old CL because the brake light fuse had blown!)only last night i was pulled over at two in the morning (for a 'routine' check).Perhaps driving a bright yellow CL doesnt help,but i pride myself on keeping my cars roadworthy and resent the fact that the police see you as an easy target.If someone could clarify the legal situation as regards being stopped, i would be most greatfull  uch:

boogaloo said

If someone could clarify the legal situation as regards being stopped, i would be most greatfull  uch:

 afew years back when i bought my impreza i went through a stage of being pulled over by the law 2 or 3 times a week on one occaision i was sitting at some traffic lights on a 4 lane road i was in the outside lane at the front waiting for the lights to change, i noticed a police car opposite and thought nothing of it, as the light when green i moved away gently so not to provoke him, before i knew it he crossed the lanes in front of me blocking my path i had to brake hard and move left so not to crash with his car…….so we ended up blocking half of the duel carriage way just to 'check over' my car and give me a producer. i got his number and made a complaint at the police hq it turns out that they had put my car on the pnc (their computer network) so would pull me every time they saw me. after this i haven't been pulled since  

boogaloo said

If someone could clarify the legal situation as regards being stopped, i would be most greatfull  uch:

Had two cars to date, both Mk1's and not yet been pulled by the law!! I suppose so many things could matter depending on whether or not you actually get pulled. Doing 160mph is one good reason but hey it's OK if your the fuzz cause you can get away with it right!!! :?

It makes me laugh to think that the camera that caught him was the one aboard the car    Smart guy  
sure he wasn't  a Volvo driver before joining the force!! couldn't resist sorry!!!

Wo Wo Wo. If I woz a copper and they just sent me a new jag and it was 2am in the morning and I was drivin on the motorway. I know what speed I'd be doin. We all like to speed and get away with it if possible, he has so well done :mrgreen:

the fact is he DIDN'T get away with it.. he was cought! and the court let him off because he's a copper!

it is totally wrong!

The big picture is that a legal precedent has been set here. Motorway police can from now onwards drive at 160mph under the excuse of 'testing the car'. Basically they can make a mockery of the law they are paid to enforce and for 'non-operational' matters (ie, not responding to an incident, etc)

I totally agree that the police need to test and familiarise themselves with new equipment. However they should do it in an organised manner on a track or airfield under supervision of a trained expert, then perhaps progress on to the public highway.

Just setting off in an unfamiliar car and doing 160mph is just death and destruction waiting to happen.

And yes I?m still hacked off with being done for doing 61 on a dual carriage way in daylight and good conditions by a van parked behind a bush. Once you accept its got nothing to do with road safety and everything to do with raising cash it all makes sense.
 

I also agree its a complete farce.

The Police are doing themselves no favours by allowing this to go unpunished (should surely be some disciplibary action involved even if he has managed to wangle out of it in court?).

No wonder people lose respect for the law when incidents like this happen. The law should be seen to be applied equally, no matter whether you are Joe Public, a police officer, a major league celebrity or a member of the royal family…… sadly cases like this just prove that is blatently not the case….

The most disappointing aspect of the whole sorry mess though is that now a legal precedent has been set, so this case can be used as a "get-off" in future by members of the force who get caught  :roll: .

I think publicity wise the stink on this one is going to haunt them for a long time…..

Chris

84mph in a 30mph zone is excessive, even in a 40mph. He shouldn't have been doing those speeds in those areas because the risk of someone stepping out in front of him is greatly increased.

159mph on the motorway at night at 2am, when it was deserted MAY be appropriate on its own to assess the NEW car but not as the norm.

Put yourself in his or any of his collegues possition, its 2am, an Impretza or in the old days Cosworth is reported stolen. Its sighted and drives off, a chase/follow/pursuit begins. What would the owner of the car want?
A. The thieves to be caught?
B. His car back?
C. The police officer to call off the pursuit when the speeds reached 100mph?

The decision that the police officer has to make when following the stolen car must always include the publics', the stolen cars' occupants and that of his and his collegues SAFETY. Whether the risk to all is too great (and to call off the pursuit), the capabilities of the vehicle (ie is it designed for the task, a 1.4 Astra wouldn't be on a motorway at high speeds) and if other alternatives are available (helicopter, summons if the occupants have been identified). The stress under pursuit situations is great enough without wondering if the car is up to the job and only finding out when a live incident occurrs might not be the best time!

I my opinion, if the car is new, and the article didn't say how new it was, then to drive within the cars' capabilities, the officers would have to know its speed limit. I do not advocate these speeds on a nightly basis but I can see a point to what he was doing, ON THE MOTORWAY.

I would suspect that a good number of people who have posted objections have been caught speeding and it sticks in your throat….I have and it does mine! But I bet you've got away with it a lot more often!!

We don't know what the officers previous record of driving was, maybe he did this kind of thing every time he was a night turn. If this was his first drive in the new car I can understand his thought process but as I said HIGH SPEEDS ARE FOR THE MOTORWAY!!!

To answer an earlier question, a police officer in uniform may stop any vehicle on a road to check its or the drivers' documentation. No offences need to have been committed by the driver.

Cheers Dano (no hate mail please!! :wink: )

Dano, point taken, but its my understanding in this case that there was no chase, no crime in progress - he was just speeding pure and simple, although he alleges it was "to test the capabilities of the car".

This is unacceptable imho. The Police probably have easier access than anyone to private tracks or airfields for this kind of testing and thats where it should be done.

As a previous poster mentioned the 159mph on the motorway is not the most alarming part of the incident, more the excessive speed in build up areas. I don't care how well trained the driver is, no-one can stop in time if a kid or someone comes out from behind a parked car in a built up area at the kind of speeds he was doing. A pedestrian getting hit at anything over 30 is unlikely to survive, at the speeds he was supposedly doing its almost certain he would have killed anyone he hit.

Aern't Police drivers supposed to use their considerable training and experience to know when to call of a chase where speeds reach the level where other lives are at risk? I would certainly hope so. Where is the benefit in catching a criminal if the cost is the loss of even one life in the process?

I still feel his behaviour was irresponsible and in this case a serious error in judgement on the part of the law has been made in not handing out any punishment whatsoever.

Chris

Agreed, 84mph in a 30mph isn't acceptable, full stop and had there been a pursuit in progress then the Incident Manager, usually in the Control Room may well have advised a termination. In this instance no live incident was ongoing and therefore no knew of the speeds until the footage was checked (who actually checked it anyway and why??).

There may be some disiplinary matters for the officer 'in house' such as re-testing/ re-course/removal of classification but that remains to be seen (or not as the case may be!).

This could go on for ever with the fors and againsts…I for one can see both sides but admit that the officers' home Force hasn't come out too well!

Anyone seen Clarksons' comments in The Sun??   Nice Tash!!

Cheers Dano

I bet the footabe was "checked" in the police tea room with everyone gathered round going "look at this" and the tape was probably left in the machine when the cheif walked in...