can't remember whether or not i commented on the previous one. From what I can remember:
if a car IS stolen and the occupant IS someone who has just failed to pay for their petrol, then you'd want them out sharpish before they change their mind and drive off at speed, with or without you attached to their car. Having a fight on the side of a m/way isn't too sensible either. You dive in quickly and don't take any carp, standard practice.
If the person involved had been compliant right from the start, rather than balshy, it would have played out completely differently, because usually Mr Innocent is reasonable and Mr Oik isn't.
His own fault ultimately, combined with other angles e.g. petrol station providing incorrect information and PNC not being up to date.
|
Shown as part of a different episode, and discussed at length here? www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=59323&...f
(Or possibly the same episode as a straight repeat - I only got home as they were sorting the guy out with the cannabis in his car.)
Edited by PoloGirl on 26/01/2009 at 23:11
|
|
|
Up front I must say i am a police supporter and in my eyes they can mostly do no wrong
His own fault ultimately combined with other angles e.g. petrol station providing incorrect information and PNC not being up to date.
Tripe.
The cop on that one CAUSED the non compliance. His people skills were quite frankly rubbish and if i had been his seargant i would have had a word in his shell-like.
|
|
That other guy (PC Cotton) had ace people skills on the guy in the "stolen" hire car that took his clothes off.
|
His (female) colleague was completely at sea tho. Never seen anyone so bemused.
|
|
|
|
Tripe. The cop on that one CAUSED the non compliance. His people skills were quite frankly rubbish and if i had been his seargant i would have had a word in his shell-like.
I'm going to have to step back a bit, because I can't remember the in and outs of that episode. If it's the one i'm thinking of, my missus stated at the time that the young lad didn't do himself any favours at all.
My main point is a robust dive in quick in those circs ought to be the norm for the police. If you're saying the cop was unprofessional and rude, then fair enough.. maybe i'm thinking of a different episode or have forgotten bits.
|
|
|
|
'If the person involved had been compliant right from the start, rather than balshy, it would have played out completely differently, because usually Mr Innocent is reasonable and Mr Oik isn't.'
Or to put it another way, those that bow down before me will be treated better than those who don't.
|
|
On a different programme, the cops make the point that they know very little about the suspect before they stop them - who they are, what they have done, how they might react. It's easy with hindsight to say they were over the top - I often do - but when you think about the danger that they * might* be putting themselves in, given the unknowns, I don't think it's that surprising that they are a bit hyper sometimes.
|
|
|
Or to put it another way those that bow down before me will be treated better than those who don't.
that happens the world over... in all walks of life
|
I can pass any coppers attitude test, and talk and act my way out of any minor misdemeour - you dont have to be subservient to do it. Genuine, open honest and remourseful will do (I should get an oscar - I once talked my way out of a double whammy speeding and overtaking on unbroken hash lines and double whites.)
|
|
Depends on their mood. I thought I'd done it right some years back when I passed a multi coloured cop car at over 100. I knew they hadn't measured my mph. When I was eventually stopped I said all the right things in the right way (so I thought) but still ended up with a fixed penalty.
|
Smokie
Was that an indicated or true 100+ mph? At 97mph they have to send a driver to magistrates court as anything 27mph+ over a limit cannot be dealt with by fixed penalty. So even then you got away with it.
|
Indicated 100+. This was quite a few years ago mind, before current ACPO guidelines. I thought I was being strung up. There were two of them in the car, they hadn't measured my speed over a distance, so I thought I was OK. I listened politely to the long lecture etc and was expecting to be sent on my way when he said "ok, you have a choice. Either accept a fixed penalty or we will recommend court. And there are two of us, and one of you. Who do you think the mag will believe?".
So I took the ticket.
Since found out that if two officers have formed the opinion that you are speeding, that is generally enough, even without measurement.
(it was so long ago that thse 3 points had expired by the time I got clocked at 107, and those points have been expired for some years now. I'm obviously a serial offender...)
|
|
I only asked as clocked at 97mph sometime ago and went to court. 5 points and a fine for me. Long enough ago not to count.... but still on the photo/paper licence. In fact it was over 11 years ago.
|
|
|
|
Smokie
at indicated speeds of 100mph to talk your way into a fixed penalty is a result. be proud of that one.
|
I picked up a FP 3 points and £30 fine for 105.4mph in a 60 Dual-Carriageway about 4 years ago
A combination of right attitude on my part and a decent copper on their part. Had quite a good chat with the bloke.
Also walked away with a FP 3 points and £30 fine for an average 99mph on a motorway in a 1275cc "A" series Metro back in my very very early days. I think that was more to do with their astonishment & disbelief that one of BL's finest was capable of achieving those kind of speeds. What they failed to twig was that it was a "HLE" model which was the "economy" variety which had a particularlt long 4th gear and I'd mildly tweaked the engine.
|
|
|
|
Was that an indicated or true 100+ mph? At 97mph they have to send a driver to magistrates court as anything 27mph+ over a limit cannot be dealt with by fixed penalty. So even then you got away with it.
Yes it can. We use discretion. The vast majority of 100+mph incidents I deal with are by way of FPN (My boss has the record at 126mph). I only go down the court route if there is an aggravating factor.
|
|
|
|
|
The police are only human, its just a job and most people dont always perform perfectly at work. Give them a break.
|
The police are only human its just a job and most people dont always perform perfectly at work. Give them a break.
Not quite that simple, I'm afraid. The police do a very difficult job and it's not surprising they get stressed more than others ... but the powers they have mean that if they over-react then the consequences for the ordinary citizen are much worse than if a salesman or an accountant has had a bad day.
That power needs to be used wisely, even under stress. To the cop it may just be a job, but for someone taken away in handcuffs or otherwise given a hard time, police lacking restraint are a much more serious issue than other people getting it wrong.
It's a great pity that police seem to be increasingly reluctant to apologise for the times they use their powers over-zealously and that government seems to so determine to find ever-increasing ways of giving them more power over us.
|
|
|
I am sometimes shocked with the cops attitude on these programmes they never seem to get it right. Some are nice and human and let people off for minor offences when really they could have prosecuted. Yet some of them are quite nasty and down right rude.
Until the police know for sure they are dealing with they should not be so heavy handed.
One of my customers was stopped by the police for havingf out of date tax, he forgot and he was treated very badly and the police just would have anyway leeway.
Yet many years ago I was so drunk in London that being arrested for D&D would not have been undeserved yet the police just laughed at us northeners for getting stuck in Knigthsbridge when leaving the gig, when the hotel was only 300 yards from were we are standing in Bayswater :p I remember there was a lot of friendly banter, they probably just realised we were not threat :)
|
|
|
|
The fact that they would choose to act like they did with a TV camera filming their every move, indicates to me that they saw nothing wrong with their behaviour.... and it is that which worries me.
|
|
Actually is doesn't worry me for one simple reason, MrX, they have hours and hours of video footage for these programmes and only a tiny percentage is shown, of that tiny percentage they have to make it look good so it gets heavilly edited... "Reality" TV? No chance!
|
In general, I believe that cops do a near impossible job remarkably well, and on the whole I support them 100%. I have always been treated fairly by the police, and have not yet met "a bad one". However, I also know they do exist, and the attitude of some of them on these shows is unnecessarily inflammatory in my opinion.
That said, there are also other times in these shows when the professionalism and calm approach of cops in the face of extreme provocation by the some of dregs of humanity they encounter, is simply staggering. I couldn't do it!
|
Good grief, is this still going! For the original posters information. The episode you describe was heavily edited. The car was suspected stolen (we don't have a Jamie Theakston commentary in the car).
The officer is shown approaching the car and seizing the keys. It doesn't show the driver telling the Officer to pink fluffy dice off on the three times he's asked to step from the car. It also doesn't show the twenty minutes of torrid abuse he gave both cameraman and Officers (Calling BBC chap a pink fluffy dice Paedophile amongst other things).
Last nights programme showed the arrest of Security van robbers, with regular "and 50 miles south" showing arrest of cannabis users. This wasn't at the same time or even on the same day. Drink driver taken to 'Hopwood' Police station. There's no such place.
I work on that unit and refuse (like the majority of Officers on there) to have anything to do with the BBC. We have no control of the editing (the BBC spent 3 months with us) and incidents that take 1-2hrs are condensed to a few minutes. It's very easy to look a complete wally. (Particularly when you say you intend to 'arouse' the lorry driver)
Edited by Webmaster on 02/02/2009 at 00:07
|
|
I reckon cops, traffic and otherwise, do a tricky job with (mostly) dedication and humour - envy them not as they deal with some dodgy customers. A side issue, but a serious point for me is concern over the excess weight some of these 'uniforms' carry. Are they sitting in cars too much? Can't see some of them being any use in a chase that ended on foot. Wasn't a fireman in Scotland recently warned, and then sacked, over his extra pounds? Do police not have regular fitness checks, MLC or Westpig?
|
"A side issue but a serious point for me is concern over the excess weight some of these
'uniforms' carry."
Couldn't agree more. I'm all for a yearly fitness test (sure it will never happen though). I had one for many years when I was an ARV Officer and it didn't do me any harm. What's more worrying is that I'm fitter than a considerable number of the new recruits coming in.
I recognise that 12hr shifts on a motorway is not ideal for your health, but it's a personal decision to keep fit. What's more annoying is that when I take over from the few (and they are just a few), I have to spend a while looking for all the seat adjuster knobs, because they often 'pop' off under the strain.
|
>>Wasn't a fireman in Scotland recently warned and then sacked over his extra pounds? Do police not have regular fitness checks>> MLC or Westpig?
dreadful silnce....followed eventually by a slightly nervous cough...before a little look down to see if i can still see my shoes...
then... "You're completely right El Hacko"
|
|
|
|
|
that happens the world over... in all walks of life
That doesn't make it right - and I expect a darn sight better from the police
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
