Does anyone know why, when a suspected criminal crashes his car whilst being followed by police, the matter is referred to the Police Complaints Authority?
This immediately suggests that the police have done something wrong, but what are they to do? Should they let a suspect escape because he chooses to drive at high speed?
Should not these cases be referred to a section with a different title, ?Investigations Unit? or whatever, but surely not complaints.
Whilst I have no time whatsoever for police who hide behind bushes trying to trap motorists who may be breaking a poorly set limit in safe circumstances with no danger to anyone, surely it impedes police chasing real criminals when they have in the back of their minds that they may lose their job for trying too hard to protect society from violent thugs.
|
Didn't you know, we want the Police to chase criminals at high-speed eventually catching them even if it means forcing them off the road. We want no-one to escape and will villify the police if they do.
However, we insist that nobody takes any risk, the police never disobey limits or signals and that nobody is ever hurt. Also, it musn't happen anywhere we can see it, hear about it or read about it.
Just a slight conflict, really.
|
|
|
Perhaps there's a direct link from the PCA - Police Complaints Authority to the PCA - Police Camera Action programme. I'm sure they get more money for the videos with crumpled metal.
Alwyn wrote:
>...surely it impedes police chasing real criminals when they have in the back of their minds that they may lose their job for trying too hard to protect society from violent thugs.
Yep, I'd agree with you, but I guess the law needs to be seen to be upheld, no good if the police are behaving improperly too. I just hope any investigations are kept internal, I'd hate to think that my taxes are going to fund the activities of the "Where there's blame, there's a claim" brigade.
Lee.
|
|
|
My guess is this is just an administrative formality - just like airline pilots who have to report every little thing that happens whether or not it is likely to occur again. That's the way patterns emerge and can be acted on. The lack of this kind of culture since the break up of British Rail is in my view the reason why the railways (especially the track and signalling) have deteriorated so rapidly after struggling on for decades. Exactly the same thing happened when BT ditched the old GPO codes of practice after privatization - in their case they ended up with 70 percent of phone boxes out of order. Anyway, I think it's good that the police have to justify their actions. You are right that "Complaints Authority" does sound too strong, but I wouldn't advocate yet another layer of bureaucracy, and I'm sure you wouldn't either.
Chris
|
|
|
What about the high speeds used to get to emergencies ? There have been numerous fatal accidents where a police/ambulance vehicles have crashed on the way to a Emergency.
My brother was involved in a accident with a ambulance just a few weeks ago. The Ambulance was going thru a red light on the wrong side of the road in wet conditions and simply hit my brothers car as he crossed the junction.
Apart from a minor neck injury thankfully he is ok. But the car !! complete write-off.
Perhaps these emergency vehicle drivers should have more specialist training.
|
Steve, or perhaps your brother should be aware that a green light isn't a license to just drive on regardless.
Callous as I may sound, surely your brother was aware of sirens/flashing lights etc?
As soon as I hear an emergency vehicle siren, I automatically look about to see where it is, whether it may be coming near my path, and where, if I have to, I can pull over, or stop.
|
|
From having been involved with the setting up of a complaints handling centre I can say that a well run centre can be an asset to the business it serves (in this case the police). It can provide useful feedback which can make a business run better and more efficiently and help it not to make the same mistake twice. A badly run centre is little more than a blamestorming exercise and only serves to annoy people and get their backs up. I would hope that the police complaints authority is focusing on making things better and it won't be able to do this without being properly informed of the incidents that occur.
|
|
|
|
Ian ..
The sirens were off,several witnesses have confirmed this. Surely its the responsibility of the ambulance crew to go thru red lights with caution not for other drivers to crossing the junction.
The fact that neither the Ambulance or my brother had time to even brake indicates the ambulance was going way too fast.
|
|
|
ALL emergency service dxriver have a duty of care, and its in the various road traffic acts, that if they run a red light they MUST exercise extreme care as they have to be able to justify their actions if there is an accident.
contrary to popular belief they are not above the law but do have certain exemptions, which does not give them carte balnche to drive at 60 thru red lights.
nor does a green light give any one else the right to proceed. as an IAM member, you are taught to look into a junction traffic lights or otherwise to judge if it is safe to cross the junction.
many emergency vehicles do not use the sirens enough though, try surviving a 10 tonne fire truck hitting you at 40 never mind 60.
i believe that if they trigger a speed camera they have to again justify theie actions and if they can't then they are treated like everyone else.......assuming they remember who was driving at the time!!!!
|
|
|
I'm sure that Red lights must be treated as Give Way junctions for Emergency Vehicles.
A copper once told me that if you are hit or you hit a Police car in a chase ( he had crashed into somebody himself despite sirens etc etc the car had pulled into his lane at traffic lights as he passed ) then you benefit immensely from compensation procedures - assuming your still in one piece of course.
Surprised that the sirens weren't on though - have you heard these new sirens that give you some idea of where the thing is coming from, I saw this on Tomorrows World first but have now heard it in action.
|
|
|
Alwyn
Many years ago the Police were heavily criticised because there was no other avenue for investigation against incidents involving the police, other than by the Police themselves.
Brought into being was the Police Complaints Authority which is an independant body and to who serious incidents involving the Police are referred to satisfy Joe Public that there is no 'cover up' or false practice.
A section of Joe Public does not like the Police to chase errant drivers in motor vehicles and because of their stupidity in not stopping or trying to out run the Police then often accidents happen and people get hurt. Many blame the Police in such incidents on the grounds that if they had not taken up the pursuit then the accident may well not have happened (so your car remains stolen or others are put at risk - catch 22 situation).
Having been on the end of a Police Accident Investigation myself then my God I can assure you they are more thorough than when dealing with Joe Public. Thankfully I was in the right.
DVD
|
|
|
|
May be worth visiting the PCA website......some interesting stuff there.
|
its a tonys cronies placemen quango guys
and they only investigate complaints of the police force concerns accepts "the compaint" as needing investigation
|
|
|
|
Dwight
I can corroborate your comments. Despite public perception complaints against Police are vigoursly investigated!
Andrew.
|
|
|
Seeing as Andrew has persuaded me to start posting again with the Comp licence thread I might as well continue on a roll.
I am sure Alwyn?s right in saying it smacks a bit strongly to use the Police Complaints Authority, but as usual there are some who raise the issue ?Sed quis custodiet ipsos custodes??
Personally I am more than happy with it being the PCA.
The police are trying to deal with some the issues raised on this site and elsewhere about pursuit situations, Some of the recommendations from the ACPO report of a few years ago are as below, If you want a full copy I can email it. It might even be on the ACPO website by now.
Recommendation No 3. Pursuits should be subject of vigorous control and only undertaken by trained personnel. Individuals should only engage in pursuits in suitably equipped vehicles and must continually consider the consequences of the pursuit
No 4. Individuals should only exercise legal driving exemptions, such as exceeding the speed limit, if they have received the appropriate driver training.
No 16 ????Where Forces utilise dog handlers to assist with resolution of pursuits they should be similarly trained
No 17 All pursuits must be conducted in accordance with the nationally agreed ACPO Pursuit Codes of Practice
No 19. All police vehicles that engage in pursuits and emergency response should be equipped with both sirens and emergency lights. Such equipment will be used in all appropriate circumstances
No. 20. Communication systems on vehicles being driven in pursuit and emergency response circumstances should be capable of operation in 'hands free' mode
No 29. Police vehicle accidents resulting in death or life threatening injury or where the circumstances may be a matter of public interest have normally been voluntarily referred to the PCA under Section 87 PACE Act 1984. Such openness is to be applauded and is recommended as good practice
No 30. Forces should be vigorous in the supervision and audit of police vehicle accidents. Reports should be examined to determine driver training needs, the suitability of vehicles used, the proper application of policies and procedures to control risks and the effectiveness of associated equipment such as sirens.
No 31. Notice should be taken of the document 'A Review of Serious Accidents Involving Police Pursuits and Emergency Response 1993 - 1995', ACPO Traffic Committee in consultation with the Police Complaints Authority. Forces should ensure that its recommendations have been considered for implementation.
No 33. Forces should retain details of police drivers' accident history within a system which enables high risk drivers to be identified for review.
But let's face it, really, which of us would do the job. There you are in your Armed Response Vehicle, summoned to let's say a post office raid. You are then the primary vehicle in a Tactical Pursuit And Containment situation with armed robbers, you have to try and catch them, stop them hitting a member of the public, stop yourself doing ditto, make sure that you are not accused of breaking any laws despite having God knows what chucked at you from the target vehicle and that you don?t do anything that you?ve not been trained for. All the time communicating with force control and the chopper *and * giving a commentary. At the back of your mind is when you do make a stop what next? Are those shooters real? Have they got one up the spout? Will they use them? If you do get into an armed confrontation and there is a shoot to stop will you be up on a murder charge after the automatic suspension and investigation. As I say it?s a wonder anyone is prepared to do it.
Having said all that from the *very narrow * perspective of the camera lens some of the bits in police camera action t'other night looked a shade sus in my ever so humble opinion.
Regds,
Stuart
|
come on they are badly trained, and badly managed...
idiot letting off a round at buck palace
even 13 year old army cadets have better firearms skills than the so called police experts
|
|
|
|
