Kennydies Posted November 24, 2006 Share Posted November 24, 2006 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/south_yorkshire/6179632.stm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M13KYF Posted November 24, 2006 Share Posted November 24, 2006 typical Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie_350z Posted November 24, 2006 Share Posted November 24, 2006 It doesn't say why he got off? Isn't it an open and shut case - he was driving, he was caught by the camera + a witness - case closed? He had no mitigating circumstances - but that doesn't help us normal people either. So how? There has to be a reason. I particularly like this: "But the South Yorkshire officer denied speeding in his marked police Land Rover and has cleared after a day-long trial." Denied speeding though the evidence showed he was? Isn't that perjury? That sucks AND blows. The law is an ASS! I bet he was on his mobile phone too, that's why he missed the camera!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beavis Posted November 24, 2006 Share Posted November 24, 2006 Does my F*****G head in. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kennydies Posted November 24, 2006 Author Share Posted November 24, 2006 I wonder what would happend if we used the "the road was clear", "driving appropriately for the conditions", " I am a policeman" grrrr Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie_350z Posted November 24, 2006 Share Posted November 24, 2006 I'm sending an email to the Rotherham Command Team to register my disgust!! rotherhamcommandteam@southyorks.pnn.police.uk Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chesterfield Posted November 24, 2006 Share Posted November 24, 2006 What a total surprise. And the police wonder why more and more people have completely lost confidence in the police. If there is no fine at the end of a crime, then they arent bothered. Look at that police/car show on the beeb the other night. Lady uses a bus lane to overtake when there is zero traffic around, an she gets a £30 fine. Same time a copper finds a bloke with 2 kilo of weed under the drivers seat, and no charges are brought due to lack of evidence as to who it belonged to. If the crime you committ carries no fine, then its just not bothered with anymore. Im still waiting for a police officer to justify to me the use of forward facing cameras, which have no effect against motorcycles, yet motorcyclists are the single "most at risk of death" group on the roads. Wheres the "safety" in that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie_350z Posted November 24, 2006 Share Posted November 24, 2006 Us law abiding cash cows are an easy target Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Quads Posted November 24, 2006 Share Posted November 24, 2006 If there is no fine at the end of a crime, then they arent bothered. Look at that police/car show on the beeb the other night. Lady uses a bus lane to overtake when there is zero traffic around, an she gets a £30 fine. Same time a copper finds a bloke with 2 kilo of weed under the drivers seat, and no charges are brought due to lack of evidence as to who it belonged to. Yup that really shocked me - they found all that and there is nothing they could do about it. I do wonder how he got off - its the judge/jurers that let him off so I would be very interested in knowing why? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chesterfield Posted November 24, 2006 Share Posted November 24, 2006 Actually I dont think it got to court, as there was not enough evidence to bring charges. Isnt the fact that its in the car with him enough evidence? Its just one example of how distorted our legal system has become, unfortunately its the system and not those who work within it. But in the case of the speeding policemen, they should be sacked with immediate effect. They are supposed to uphold the law, and doing 48 in a 40 would have seen any one of us with a fine and points, regardless of excuses. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Quads Posted November 24, 2006 Share Posted November 24, 2006 Sorry - my second comment was in referance to the police officer. It does go to show what a joke of a system it is as he has no defence. His ecuss of answering to a call can so easily be thrown out due to a) Not calling it in No blues c) Not taking the quickest route. OK maybe 1 of these would be OK but the fact he did all 3 shows he was doing nothing of the sort. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ir_fuel Posted November 24, 2006 Share Posted November 24, 2006 Eh, Is it me or does this just not make sense? If you read the story it is one contradiction after another (like going to an accident and then deciding to go to take-away, but the takeaway was ordered BEFORE he left? Denial of speeding but being caugh on camera. Driving to an emergency accident yet no siren/lights ?) I mean, come on. Do they really think we are that naive? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Quads Posted November 24, 2006 Share Posted November 24, 2006 I think he is claiming. He placed an order for Chinese He started to drive to Chinese He responded to a support call He was caught speeding on route to call He decided there was enough attendance Carried onto Chinese The truth is He placed an order for Chinese He started to drive to Chinese He was caught speeding Carried onto Chinese Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chesterfield Posted November 24, 2006 Share Posted November 24, 2006 I mean, come on. Do they really think we are that naive? Nope, they probably know that we are not that naive, just that they know nothing will be done about it, and after a week it will all be forgotten. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sl114 Posted November 24, 2006 Share Posted November 24, 2006 Isnt the law there for everyone? What if Prince Charles was caught speeding? Will he get let off too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie_350z Posted November 24, 2006 Share Posted November 24, 2006 I wonder what Ming has to say on this issue... where is that scoundrel... probably down the chinese... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie_350z Posted November 28, 2006 Share Posted November 28, 2006 Here's the reply I got from SYP (who Ming works for too I reckon!): Mr Chambers As Staff Officer to the Chief Constable, I deal with certain matters on his behlaf. In response to your recent email to South Yorkshire Police. Can I make it absolutely clear that South Yorkshire Police brought this prosecution. We will continue to prosecute police drivers where the evidence suggests that they have failed to comply with the law. It is for the courts to decide the outcome but the public should be in no doubt of South Yorkshire Police’s determination to ensure that our officers observe the law just like everybody else. There is certainly not one law for the police and one for everyone else. Thank you for your comments. I've asked her to answer my original question, which she didn't, which was: After reading the news article I cannot understand why PC Akrill was cleared and am writing to you in the hope that you can clarify how someone caught by a speed camera and a witness can deny that they were speeding and be cleared? Would a member of the public also have been cleared? Perhaps she'll answer the question this time... but I'm not hopeful because I think the answer is "that's up to the courts". But like a dog with a bone, I'll be contacting the court next! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Quads Posted November 28, 2006 Share Posted November 28, 2006 Its fair enough what she is saying. Its not really the police we should be going at - similar to the guy doing 160 - he went to court and it was the court that let him off. Its the judge / jurers that we should be asking the questions to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie_350z Posted November 28, 2006 Share Posted November 28, 2006 So how do I find out what the court didn't do properly... mebbe write to the Clerk of the court? I do want to find out! SYP appear to be doing a good job of disciplining this guy, I agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob_Quads Posted November 28, 2006 Share Posted November 28, 2006 Somewhere on the CJS you will probably find the right person to speak to - http://www.cjsonline.gov.uk/the_cjs/index.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie_350z Posted December 8, 2006 Share Posted December 8, 2006 Email to CJS duly sent. I will update you when I get a response. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zzzz... Posted December 10, 2006 Share Posted December 10, 2006 You guys obviously don't understand ... For traffic offences the police require: -them getting a photo of a vehicle (privately owned, not state funded...) -them being unable to recognise the driver, or have enough evidence to prosecute... -them sending a letter to the owner of the car asking him to do their job...and identify the culprit. -easy money and no hassle. this case was to simple and clear cut... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Emperor Ming Posted December 10, 2006 Share Posted December 10, 2006 Hi Guys Pariah/scoundrel here Just found this thread and thought I better say something otherwise Stevie would decide I was guilty of every crime since Hiroshima!! Facts 1. The police vehicle triggered the camera and a prosecution was commenced. 2. There was sufficient evidence to place this matter before the courts. (Knowing the legal system and some of the CPS personnel like I do I am slightly surprised but in the fairness of justice pleased that this is the case.). 3. There was a trial. (To reach crown court on a motoring matter there must have been a Magistrates Court trial first as it is not something that automatically goes to Crown Court) 4. A JURY of 12 good and true citizens decided that the offence was not committed!! 5. Mr HUGHES - a fair boss i have to say - has decided to pursue the discipline side of things. 6. Officers do not use their blue lights and sirens constantly on a journey to an incident. They are only effective if used at traffic build ups or to bring the police vehicle to the attention of other road users. 6. If an incident is serious then the air space is at a premium and often officers will respond of their own volition and it may take several minutes if it happens at all before the officer can confirm his response to the incident. Thoughts Do I think that cases like this harm the police - public relationship. DEFINATELY YES Do members of the public get off things like this day in and day out with excuses ten times more ludicrous than this? YES YES and YES!!!! Do I THINK he was going to the incident and then returned to his collection of his chinese. Almost certainly not!! Therein though is the problem. For a conviction to hold up in court it has to be proved BEYOND ALL REASONABLE DOUBT!!!!!!!!!!! If there is any REASONABLE doubt then it is not proved.. The only question here is 'Is the officers explanation possible and therefor reasonable??' Stevie You can get a transcript of the court case for a fee but it might not be released until after the date of any appeal. Lastly You would not believe how many times people contact me and ask how to get off with speeding offences/parking tickets/minor criminal matters as if there is some magic formula that the police keep for themselves. 99% of all officers take thier speeding tickets on the chin and just get on with life!! ming the Helpful/rascal/pariah/whipping boy/evil one/saviour/drug fighter Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevie_350z Posted December 10, 2006 Share Posted December 10, 2006 Mingster - just one clarification... what does this mean: Hi Guys2. There was sufficient evidence to place this matter before the courts. (Knowing the legal system and some of the CPS personnel like I do I am slightly surprised but in the fairness of justice pleased that this is the case.). Cheers Steve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
captint Posted December 10, 2006 Share Posted December 10, 2006 Ming, if you get 12 points do you loose your job? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.