|
Nope. It'll be a cold day in hell before you see my ugly mug on telly. This was put together using stuff left on the cutting room floor from the last episode.
|
|
a hence the "special" tag.
|
|
|
|
"Don't know about anyone else but I wouldn't stop for two strangers in hi-vis holding up a sign written in felt tip pen saying 'follow me'."
Neither would I. But I might if they were driving a marked police car with the blue light box on the roof ;-)
|
I can guarantee that I would NOT stop for anyone on the motorway, but would happily proceed to the next services/exit
MD
|
|
|
|
Did anyone spot Jasper Carrot's twin brother?
|
>>Jasper Carrot's twin brother?
>>
I thought he was very good. He had it off even down to the accent! He wasn't spouting Labour Party claptrap - that's how you could tell he was an imitation.
|
Usual examples of motorway drivers oblivious to flashing blue lights and sirens coming up behind them, plus Jamie Theakston's reference to the "fast lane".
|
speeding Doctor - I could not trust him enough to be his patient.
uninsured Frenchman - at least he didn't pretend that he could not speak English.
missing Driver presumed drunk - "sober" enough to lock up a written off car!
confused Polish driver - never seen in Britain again?
car "thieves" - no deterrent sentence given.
cannabis growing illegal immigrants Chinese - taking a pink fluffy dice on the Mway - wonder if they will ever get deported?
Edited by Webmaster on 27/03/2008 at 19:38
|
at least he didn't pretend that he could not speak English
Pretended to be insured and not disqualified though !
|
The Doctor - he was a shining (NOT) example to his profession. NOT.
Very caring (NOT) about the "child on board" to have a sticker saying so, and then not strapping the little girl in to her seat.
Very honest (NOT) in asking the Police to conspire with him to say he was doing less than the actual 101 mph.
|
A common denominator in all these fly on the wall motorway cop programmes is that the offenders get away with the lightest of punishments. How can you give a driving ban or points to someone who drives without a license in the first place. A slap on the wrist for most offences.
The Frenchman used the old trick of insurance for a month, taxing the car then cancelling the insurance. Why don't the insurance companies only allow six months minimum payment or yearly insurance. That way it would cover the tax and insurance problem.
As for the foreign drivers highlighted, confiscate their lorries. That would hit their bosses, possibly their jobs as well, before they abscond back home.
As for the doctor, 6 points, he should have had a ban. He was too arrogant for his own good and not much of a father seeing as he put his kid at risk.
|
Very honest (NOT) in asking the Police to conspire with him to say he was doing less than the actual 101 mph.
I thought the programme was being a bit hard on him for that - I think it was an off the cuff remark, which if he'd thought about for 1 second before opening his mouth he wouldn't have said. It didn't sound like a serious suggestion - obviously if it was, then fair enough.
Probably deserved it for the other stuff anyway though.
|
If he is really a doctor this should see him struck off - most professional bodies take a very strong line on members perverting the course of justice.
As a patient how could you trust him now!
|
I was surprised the Doc didn't get booked for the unrestrained child, and he probably got a letter from work to get him off an automatic ban, but interesting that the others on the program effectively either got off or got very minor penalties yet the fully insured and taxed Doc, who was simply driving at a speed greater than some arbitrary number, got fined £600 & 6 points.
Hmm, who was the loser on that programme then?
|
simply driving at a speed greater than some arbitrary number got fined £600 & 6 points.
was driving far faster than the traffic warranted IMO
I have no problem with high speeds on emptyish roads but there was a fair amount of other traffic around.
To claim as soon as the policeman opened his door that he was on an emergency call with his wife and child in the back did not create a good impression, wonder what other lies he told to keep his licence. I would feel safer with him not on the road.
|
was driving far faster than the traffic warranted IMO
It looked OK to me - if it was busy he wouldn't have been able to get to that speed.
I think the speeding was the least of his offences - he should have been done for the child, in my opinion that's ridiculous, and his profession makes that ommission worse.
He should be struck-off for attempting is use his profession to evade prosecution.
The "can we say it was under 100?" I can live with - just part of the banter that I'm sure happens in every similar situation. Bit stupid of him to say it on camera though.
|
I thought the doctor was a bit stupid to appear on camera at all without his face blanked out.
I quite enjoy these cops programmes but can't help wondering if it's a good use of expensive resources for several cops in two or three cars to hammer up the motorway in pursuit of some kid in a stolen car who then gets a community service order.
It's not really gangbusters, is it?
|
if it was busy he wouldn't have been able to get to that speed.
so if i can get up to 100mph it's safe???
|
In the cases where drivers in lane 3 fail to notice and move over for police vehicles using blue lights, they are clearly driving without due care and attention, since they never use their mirrors; one also moved from lane 2 to 3 dangerously close in front of the patrol car.
Is any action ever taken, perhaps in the form of a warning letter, to point out to these people the error of their ways?
Traffic wardens can now stick drivers with £60 fines for alleged parking infringements which, on the face of it, present less of a hazard.
|
so if i can get up to 100mph it's safe???
There was no suggestion he was driving dangerously, or even aggressively.
Just looked like both Doc and the Police were breezing along.
I would have thought 101MPH from a speedo would be hard to make stick - to accurately fix the speed it would require the distance between the two cars to remain constant, which is unlikely. So, thinking about it, they may well have not done him for that exact speed anyway, hence he didn't get banned.
|
Their equipment was probably properly calibrated, AFAIR they followed him for half a mile so they could probably have verified the speed if required.
I guess I just don't like people who try to lie their way out of a situation.
Difficult to tell traffic from a tv program but it looked too busy for 100mph to me.
As I said I have no objection in principle to 100mph if people want to risk their licence that's their problem.
But given that we saw on the same programme a car pull out on one of the traffic cars with blue lights going whose fault would it be if someone pulls out to lane 3 at 70 to overtake a slower car when the car in lane 3 is approaching at 100 mph, that's what can make it dangerous in my view.
|
I'd be very surprised if he didn't try every trick at his disposal to get off the ban - a letter from work sounds plausible.
Can't really see what his profession has to do with it - "I'm a fisherman late for work" wouldn't get you any sympathy. And since when did Doctors take their wives and children to work anyway?
Just because he happens to be from a particular trade doesn't make him any less of an idiot, and I really don't think he should be given any leniency either.
If you need to drive to do your job (i.e. get to hospital) then you should be a whole lot more careful about not abusing your driving licence.
|
If you need to drive to do your job (i.e. get to hospital) then you should be a whole lot more careful about not abusing your driving licence.
Agree with all that, but there were others on that programme who didn't even have driving licences and they effectively (or actually in some cases) got away with it.
|
Can't really see what his profession has to do with it
I guess if he was actually driving to save someone's life, the policeman might look at it (rightly or wrongly) more from a safety point of view than a strictly legal one. Eg. if it had been on an empty motorway, with no one else in the vehicle, then the policeman might have offered to escort him to the hospital rather than book him.
|
If he was a doctor who regularly needed to get to patients quickly he would have a green flashing light on the car - as asked for by the traffic cop. He didn't have one, so no excuse.
If he really was going to a patient he could have seen a solicitor and argued his case in court. The hospital would have provided evidence to this effect for him to use in defence.
TBH the whole story appeared dodgy to me - even down to him being a doctor.
|
>>If he really was going to a patient he could have seen a solicitor and argued his case in court. The hospital would have provided evidence to this effect for him to use in defence.
Yes, but I think they'd have some Health and Safety stuff to answer for if their terms and conditions of work directly led to him having to break the law in the normal conduct of his duties.
What next? Air traffic controllers dashing to the office? Parking attendants rushing into town to ensure the arterial roads are kept clear? Train engineers getting to the shed to fix train brakes? There are a lot of people with important jobs, they just don't seem to use it as a reason to break the law!
|
|
Richard and Judy were escorted off a jammed motorway a few years ago (using a "works only" exit) by the Police as they were going to be late for their TV programme.
|
|
Be interesting to know what sort of a doctor he was. I cannot imagine any doctor who has spent any part of his/her career dealing with the human aftermath of an accident or brain injured children putting their own child at such risk.
|
Be interesting to know what sort of a doctor he was. I cannot imagine any doctor who has spent any part of his/her career dealing with the human aftermath of an accident or brain injured children putting their own child at such risk.
There was an item on our local TV news the other day about the genetic risks of Asian people marrying cousins and a Doctor being interviewed was horrified by the suggestion that he might be prevented from marrying his cousin.
|
>> the genetic risks of Asian people marrying cousins and a Doctor being interviewed was horrified by the suggestion that he might be prevented from marrying his cousin.
I believe it is a fact that the genetic risks associated with marrying a first cousin applies to all races - not just Asians.
|
These programs are very biased, - yes theres "idiots" in all walks of life, but unless theres cameras there, you never see them.
Also on these "programs" you rarely ever see the police pull anyone over and congratulate them on ther superb driving styles! - good job really, or i would never have got anywhere on time! ;-)
Billy
|
I believe it is a fact that the genetic risks associated with marrying a first cousin applies to all races - not just Asians.
Right - but not all races consider it to be desireable for cousins to marry, and one would expect a Doctor to think it less desireable than the average person.
The context here is that others are surprised that a Doctor would allow a child to stand on the back seat of a car.
|
"I quite enjoy these cops programmes but can't help wondering if it's a good use of expensive resources for several cops in two or three cars to hammer up the motorway in pursuit of some kid in a stolen car who then gets a community service order."
Believe it or not........we actually do a bit more than that. As for the penalty, blame the court.
|
>>mlcBelieve it or not........we actually do a bit more than that.
>>
I think this weeks programme covered that very well.
A very sad task carried out very well in really difficult circumstances.
There were also examples of trying to resolve things simply .
>>As for the penalty, blame the court.
>>
It would appear that some of these individuals do not respond to anything the courts throw at them.
|
|
|
|
