View Full Version : 159mph Policeman back in court
Red ones
22-08-06, 05:01 AM
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/shropshire/5271480.stm
Nuff said
At high speed it goes fast...nice experiment
soulrider
22-08-06, 08:45 AM
lol i hope he gets done for it, 159mph is one hell of a way to test going fast.
I think he should be done for dangerous driving and have his license revoked to see how it feels. if it was one of us doing that we wouldnt even get a chance at court, would be massive ban and considerable fine.
chazzyb
22-08-06, 08:56 AM
Hah, you can tell just by looking at him - guilty! :P
Just goes to show that the old bill dont have std vectras. Thats the perfomance of the VXR, which was only released to the general public recently!! Still trying to work out, if it was the camera on board his own car?
Bet he was gutted he didn't get 160 mph :lol:
seriously though, 91 in a 30 - what's the point practising that - don't they give before that?
Random quote from the internet "total stopping time jumps to 10.6 seconds and 533 feet. As a basis of comparison, this is roughly the same distance — actually, a little further — as the same vehicle coming to a complete stop from 90 mph on dry pavement, "
Viney - yes "on board video"
W**kers.
Yay! Lee swearing bloke is back.
Carry on!
Peter Henry
22-08-06, 09:57 AM
If a Policeman can't flout the law and enjoy a bit of pedal to the floor shenanigans then who can? What is the UK coming to? :?
Red ones
22-08-06, 11:14 AM
"He also claimed the speed recorded by the on-board camera was different to the actual speed of the car."
Odd how it is not indicative of the actual speed of the vehicle unless he is following you
Captain Nemo
22-08-06, 11:17 AM
i hope they hang him, oh wait thats not allowed........yet
he should be sacked anyway, if he was stupid enough to leave the tape in the car after hooning araound he deserves all he gets, which will probably be let off
"He also claimed the speed recorded by the on-board camera was different to the actual speed of the car."
Nice to know once again the police can use yet one rule for them and another for us! :lol:
W**kers.
See, a speeding thread always brings out the Duck ;)
Ceri JC
22-08-06, 11:25 AM
He said in the statement, which was read out in court, he had taken an advanced driving course and the reason for his high-speed driving was to practise the skills he had learnt.
I knew my pass plus would come in handy one day. I'll repeat this verbatim when I'm in court next month for speeding in a cage, I'm sure they'll agree... :lol:
Seriously though, I'll say the same as I did the first time this came up; It's only "training" or familiarisation if your boss sanctions it (and consequently they are prepared to take the flack for this sort of thing). You can't just speed when you feel like it and after you get caught claim it was training; otherwise it's a green card for all police officers to speed when they please. If he had just got the car, he should of gone to his senior officer, said, "look, I've got a new car, I need to see what I can do in it, can I test its limits tonight?" and only then with a letter from the senior officer, stating the timeframe this "training" was allowed in, actually done it. When he then got busted, he could have wave the letter and if he had had an accident, it'd be egg on the senior officer's face.
Personally, I have far more of a problem with him 90 in a 30 than I do with 160 on an empty motorway, even though the latter is a bigger gap in speed from the legal limit for that road. I'd say (depending on the 30 of course; there are 30s that are barriered dual carriageways with no pavement on them) in most 30s, even the most proficient driver could not sustain 90 for any length of time without having an accident, even if they were factors beyond your control (pedestrians walking out, cars pulling into your path, etc.).
lol i hope he gets done for it, 159mph is one hell of a way to test going fast.
I think he should be done for dangerous driving and have his license revoked to see how it feels. if it was one of us doing that we wouldnt even get a chance at court, would be massive ban and considerable fine.
Not always so. 156mph biker is case in point. Something daft like a £500 fine and 3 month ban IIRC.
Interesting perspective on this thread. So all who are critical NEVER speed? Because I really wouldnt be getting so judgemental if you do. In fact in my mind the law is being equitable - hes being charged just as any one of us would be.
The fact he got off last time was probably unfair. I doubt he will again and will face the prospect of losing his job - a damn site worse punishment than most of us would face. :P :?
21QUEST
22-08-06, 11:37 AM
Hopefully , he'll get let off again :thumbsup:
Cheers
Ben
You know, I just can't be arsed to go through this whole argument yet again. I mean how many threads/times do we need to dicuss it?
.
Spiderman
22-08-06, 01:03 PM
You know, I just can't arsed to go through this whole argument yet again. I mean how many threads/times do we need to dicuss it?
.
I guess until the law changes and coppers get hanged for breaking laws they normaly persecute others with ;)
You know, I just can't be arsed to go through this whole argument yet again. I mean how many threads/times do we need to dicuss it?
.
So what about new members to the forum who weren't around for the old debates? Are they not allowed to voice an opinion simply because they werent here when it was first and subsequently aired?
I reckon the forum would die a death if no repetition of subjects was "allowed" as new members raise them or join in a discussion they havent previously participated in.
And as said before, if you dont want to participate, ignore the thread.
But if absolutely no old stuff were allowed, or repetitions, on that basis Cuffys post count would suffer as none of his jokes would be allowed. :wink: :P :lol:
Spiderman
22-08-06, 04:00 PM
You know, I just can't be arsed to go through this whole argument yet again. I mean how many threads/times do we need to dicuss it?
.
So what about new members to the forum who weren't around for the old debates? Are they not allowed to voice an opinion simply because they werent here when it was first and subsequently aired?
I reckon the forum would die a death if no repetition of subjects was "allowed" as new members raise them or join in a discussion they havent previously participated in.
And as said before, if you dont want to participate, ignore the thread.
But if absolutely no old stuff were allowed, or repetitions, on that basis Cuffys post count would suffer as none of his jokes would be allowed. :wink: :P :lol:
I was worried where this was going but you finished it so well Lyn. :lol:
tinpants
22-08-06, 05:59 PM
You know, I just can't arsed to go through this whole argument yet again. I mean how many threads/times do we need to dicuss it?
.
I guess until the law changes and coppers get hanged for breaking laws they normaly persecute others with ;)
Shouldn't that be prosecute? Oh no, hang on, you are right. Silly me!!
Biker Biggles
22-08-06, 06:42 PM
I reckon he could now claim he won't get a fair trial after all the publicity the first time.Bear in mind that everyone and his dog expressed an opinion last time including some very influential people.This will influence the outcome of the new trial as the magistrates won't want to upset the mob.That's why I disagree with the "double jeopardy" law we have now,except perhaps for very serious crimes where there is substantial new evidence.Speeding does'nt meet that criteria on either count IMHO.
The fact he got off last time was probably unfair. I doubt he will again and will face the prospect of losing his job - a damn site worse punishment than most of us would face. :P :?
If I was to get caught speeding again I would loose my job as there is no way the public transport would get me there in time. I would be my own fault to, and it would be no where near 159 mph (on a SV lol). If he wants to 'familiarise' himself then he should do it on a training track. As for 91 in a 30... well I'm disgusted, and If I new anyone who did that I'd be calling them more then just names.
In fact the last time I got done for speeding the magistrate went for me hammer and tong, I just got away without a ban. And that was after I overtook a lorry on a clear A road and pulled back in to the speed limit, then got flashed. Then argued that they couldn't take a reading from shadows on the road and rubbish.
If I was to get caught speeding again I would loose my job as there is no way the public transport would get me there in time. I would be my own fault to, and it would be no where near 159 mph (on a SV lol). If he wants to 'familiarise' himself then he should do it on a training track. As for 91 in a 30... well I'm disgusted, and If I new anyone who did that I'd be calling them more then just names.
In fact the last time I got done for speeding the magistrate went for me hammer and tong, I just got away without a ban. And that was after I overtook a lorry on a clear A road and pulled back in to the speed limit, then got flashed. Then argued that they couldn't take a reading from shadows on the road and rubbish.
I suspect you wouldnt have been looking at losing your job on the second NIP though would you? The fact youre in that position is after how many times caught, 3 or 4? This is his second from what I gather.
Im not saying hes in the right - in fact he should be prosecuted. I just dont think people should get so sanctimonious when we have all done stupid things and done excessive speed at inappropriate times.
Biker Biggles
22-08-06, 10:08 PM
As I understand it he's being re-tried for the original offense.That would have been taboo until a couple of years ago,as they changed the law after the Steven Lawrence affair.Like all these changes ,they sell it to joe public with the extreme examples and then use their new found powers on relatively mimor issues like speeding.I'm not saying the copper was right,but he went to court and was found not guilty.How would we feel if that happened to us and then we got dragged back six months later when someone did'nt like the result?
Red ones
23-08-06, 04:49 AM
As I understand it he's being re-tried for the original offense.That would have been taboo until a couple of years ago,as they changed the law after the Steven Lawrence affair.Like all these changes ,they sell it to joe public with the extreme examples and then use their new found powers on relatively mimor issues like speeding.I'm not saying the copper was right,but he went to court and was found not guilty.How would we feel if that happened to us and then we got dragged back six months later when someone did'nt like the result?
He went to court, the judge made a mistake and the case was thrown out on the grounds that it was not legal. This is a retrial as the first one had no legal basis.
I reckon the forum would die a death if no repetition of subjects was "allowed" as new members raise them or join in a discussion they havent previously participated in.
But my point is, is that it's being discussed by all the peeps that discussed it last time. And the time before. Now if the thread had been started by a newbie...
And as said before, if you dont want to participate, ignore the thread.
(Walks off in a "whatever" huff, kicking a can along the street... :lol: )
.
I suspect you wouldnt have been looking at losing your job on the second NIP though would you? The fact youre in that position is after how many times caught, 3 or 4? This is his second from what I gather.
Im not saying hes in the right - in fact he should be prosecuted. I just dont think people should get so sanctimonious when we have all done stupid things and done excessive speed at inappropriate times.
It would be my third... if I was to be caught again... but then my second at 97.5 was very close to a ban. Its all down to the magistrate at the end of the day, mine didn't like bikers. And even though I argued the evidence was invalid he wouldn't accept it, plus I kinda folded up in court. As they suck me in a dock and behind a screen, I kind of went to bits. The magistrate walked all over me... Though I won't make those mistakes again...
DanAbnormal
23-08-06, 01:49 PM
Here is my view on it. I agree that we all are guilty of speeding. But for a Police Officer is caught doing 91 in a 30 and 160 down the motorway they should be hung drawn and quartered. They are in a position of law enforcement and should set an example to the masses. If he gets off it will only send out bad vibes to the rest of us and confirm that basically the law can do what the feck they like but we will get the book thrown at us for doing the same or less. I think he should lose his licence as would most other drivers commiting the same offence. I mean for example I was watching one of those police video shows where the commentator was rambling on about a driver doing 90 down an empty m-way at 4am and how he was faced with a 3 month ban. WTF!
Disagree. Police officers should be able to chase after the scum on our roads.
I hope he's acquitted.
Looks like he got away with it again, no fine, no bad :shock:
A police officer has been found guilty of dangerous driving after being clocked doing 159mph in an unmarked patrol car. However, PC Mark Milton, who had been cleared of speeding and dangerous driving last year, will face no punishment after being given an absolute discharge at his retrial. District Judge Peter Wallis ruled that he had suffered enough through two-and-a-half years of court proceedings.
Milton, of Telford, Shropshire, had initially been cleared of the charges last August.
But a High Court ruling overturned his acquittal and earlier this year ordered a retrial, which took place at Ludlow Magistrates Court this week.
The 38-year-old West Mercia Police traffic officer always denied the charges.
During the trial footage taken from the camera video fitted to a West Mercia Police Vauxhall Vectra was shown.
Milton was seen to be regularly travelling over 100mph on A-roads and up to 159mph on the M54 during the early hours of December 5, 2003.
But my point is, is that it's being discussed by all the peeps that discussed it last time. And the time before. Now if the thread had been started by a newbie...
But its not all the same people... admittedly some of the usual suspects are here but it is kind of different people.... :wink: :lol:
(Walks off in a "whatever" huff, kicking a can along the street... :lol: )
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Spiderman
25-08-06, 12:26 PM
Looks like he got away with it again, no fine, no bad :shock:
A police officer has been found guilty of dangerous driving after being clocked doing 159mph in an unmarked patrol car. However, PC Mark Milton, who had been cleared of speeding and dangerous driving last year, will face no punishment after being given an absolute discharge at his retrial. District Judge Peter Wallis ruled that he had suffered enough through two-and-a-half years of court proceedings.
Milton, of Telford, Shropshire, had initially been cleared of the charges last August.
But a High Court ruling overturned his acquittal and earlier this year ordered a retrial, which took place at Ludlow Magistrates Court this week.
The 38-year-old West Mercia Police traffic officer always denied the charges.
During the trial footage taken from the camera video fitted to a West Mercia Police Vauxhall Vectra was shown.
Milton was seen to be regularly travelling over 100mph on A-roads and up to 159mph on the M54 during the early hours of December 5, 2003.
What a suprise. :lol:
And Ed.... i think we all agree that coppers need to train and do this kind of thing so they are able to chase and catch the scum that need to be put away but the point is that this type of thing should be sanctioned and authorised.
If any Touring Car champ was caught doing the same thing i dont think his excuses would be listened to regardless of how competant he is as driver. So why should a cop be able to use the "I was just seeing what it could do" excuse
I remember clearly that the cops in Wales actualy gave the rally cars on the road tickets for speeding even tho they were only going from section to section and not racing at all but just driving at a speed suitable for the road.
CheekyLemon
25-08-06, 12:40 PM
I think it's because a Touring car driver drives for pleasure, whereas we need expert response car drivers to catch the muppets that are driving round with no qualifications etc in vehicles that are not roadworthy, or even theirs!. A track would be good, but that does not give a good idea of normal driving conditions.
I hope he gets away with a slap on the wrists and nothing else. And I also hope he doesn't do it again.
He made a mistake and I'm sure he is sorry.
Anyway, I didn't wanna get involved so I'm gonna shut up now. :D
wyrdness
25-08-06, 12:44 PM
Disagree. Police officers should be able to chase after the scum on our roads.
I would broadly agree with you, but would want them to have written permission from a senior officer before they carry out test drives on public roads at these speeds. If he just fancied seeing how fast it would go, without permission, then he's on shaky ground.
Spiderman
25-08-06, 01:07 PM
I think it's because a Touring car driver drives for pleasure, whereas we need expert response car drivers to catch the muppets that are driving round with no qualifications etc in vehicles that are not roadworthy, or even theirs!. A track would be good, but that does not give a good idea of normal driving conditions.
I hope he gets away with a slap on the wrists and nothing else. And I also hope he doesn't do it again.
He made a mistake and I'm sure he is sorry.
Anyway, I didn't wanna get involved so I'm gonna shut up now. :D
Being a little pedantic here.... but a Touring Car driver drives for a living not for pleasure. the reason i chose touring car driver as ooposed to F1 driver was so people would not say that F1 and road cars are so diffrent that my point is invalid. Touring Cars use road cars that are tricked up to a degree so they would be just as capable at speed behind the wheel of that cops car as he was if not more.
I think cops should set an example for society not just floor it when they feel like it and use "The Job" as their valid excuse.
Disagree. Police officers should be able to chase after the scum on our roads.
Agree completely. When (yes, we've had this conversation before folks) I come of my bike, I'd like to think that the emergency services (not just the Police) can use all available means to get to me, without putting themselves or anyone else in undue danger.
My brother works as a paramedic, and by & large, I have to say they do get cut quite a bit of slack. He drives a modified V70 by the way, not a great big brick. However, there have been times when he's been suspended through what I would call no fault of his own.
One time in particular, in winter, he was on his way to an accident in a Frontier (again, modified). He tells me he was going quite slowly due to weather conditions. Unfortunately, the car found some black ice, and decided it wanted to dance. He found himself spining (probably slowly) towards the pavement, where quite a few people were walking by on a night out. His reaction was to try & drive the car, whilst on the ice, in the hope it found grip before it found the pedestrians.
He found grip fortunately for the pedestrians. Unfortunately however, by avoiding the people, he pretty much chose to drive the car into a policecar. Result, he gets suspended, and the police officer apparently got a written warning for parking his car in the wrong place (WTF?!?! How does that work? :?: )
The reason he got this, I believe, was because the local press got hold of the story. "We must be seen to be treating our employee's harshly when it appears as if they don't follow training" kind of thing.
I'm glad this guy had a judge with a little common sense! Laws should be applied with common sense, multi-colour logic. Not just black & white. Next time, maybe the PC in question might think to either not do it (preferably) or just turn the camera off (if it can be).
My 2p well spent.
CheekyLemon
25-08-06, 01:35 PM
What I was trying to say was we can live without Touring Car drivers. Not really needed other than for pleasure.
Anywhoo, it was wrong to a degree, so nuff said from me. - Rhymes as well!
Heh, I'm a poet and I didn't think i was. Wait a minute, thats not how it goes......
tinpants
30-08-06, 06:39 PM
Disagree. Police officers should be able to chase after the scum on our roads.
Agree completely. When (yes, we've had this conversation before folks) I come of my bike, I'd like to think that the emergency services (not just the Police) can use all available means to get to me, without putting themselves or anyone else in undue danger.
My brother works as a paramedic, and by & large, I have to say they do get cut quite a bit of slack. He drives a modified V70 by the way, not a great big brick. However, there have been times when he's been suspended through what I would call no fault of his own.
One time in particular, in winter, he was on his way to an accident in a Frontier (again, modified). He tells me he was going quite slowly due to weather conditions. Unfortunately, the car found some black ice, and decided it wanted to dance. He found himself spining (probably slowly) towards the pavement, where quite a few people were walking by on a night out. His reaction was to try & drive the car, whilst on the ice, in the hope it found grip before it found the pedestrians.
He found grip fortunately for the pedestrians. Unfortunately however, by avoiding the people, he pretty much chose to drive the car into a policecar. Result, he gets suspended, and the police officer apparently got a written warning for parking his car in the wrong place (WTF?!?! How does that work? :?: )
The reason he got this, I believe, was because the local press got hold of the story. "We must be seen to be treating our employee's harshly when it appears as if they don't follow training" kind of thing.
I'm glad this guy had a judge with a little common sense! Laws should be applied with common sense, multi-colour logic. Not just black & white. Next time, maybe the PC in question might think to either not do it (preferably) or just turn the camera off (if it can be).
My 2p well spent.
Blimey! Which service does he work for then? How modded were these vehicles and can we have some in good ol' Gloucestershire? :twisted:
Sorry if this is a little late being posted but I've been away on my hols.
SoulKiss
30-08-06, 06:59 PM
But if absolutely no old stuff were allowed, or repetitions, on that basis Cuffys post count would suffer as none of his jokes would be allowed. :wink: :P :lol:
Only just caught this comment
Well said Lynw - I have been on boards where if you posted a duplicate question etc you got told that you should have searched for the topic, the new thread then being locked.
Suffice to say, I didn't hang around there for long
CheekyLemon
30-08-06, 07:51 PM
But if absolutely no old stuff were allowed, or repetitions, on that basis Cuffys post count would suffer as none of his jokes would be allowed. :wink: :P :lol:
Only just caught this comment
Well said Lynw - I have been on boards where if you posted a duplicate question etc you got told that you should have searched for the topic, the new thread then being locked.
Suffice to say, I didn't hang around there for long
That said though, when I search it has no relevance to the search string I entered. Maybe I should try using quoatation marks or something.
It simply lists every single thread, regardless of whether it contains what I am looking for or not. Blinkin computers! :roll:
vBulletin® , Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.