The police really don't do themselves any favours with incidents like this.
tinyurl.com/dene8q
|
|
I was stopped for singing, on a motorbike. Ludicrous. "What were you doing waggling your head about like that?", etc. I was quite tempted to say I'd got a flea in my ear.
|
As ever with "news" articles in that particular publication, it's the readers' comments that are the most eye opening. Frightening to think these people are allowed to vote, although as Winston Churchill astutely noted, "the best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter".
|
|
|
I think this incident does merit attention.
We have only heard the motorist's side of the story, and I personally take a dim view of using a hands-free 'phone while driving, but the thing that astonishes me is that (according to the DT):
"The officer spent half an hour questioning his suspect before reluctantly allowing him to carry on his way.
However, he took another hour-and-a-half of Mr Saunders' time by ordering him to produce his licence and other documents at a police station."
The second bit seems OTT, but it is the first bit that really concerns me. Half an hour questioning him? Half an hour???
I think that Mr Saunders should have requested the officer's name and number. It sounds to me like this there is a prima facie case that this officer was abusing his power.
|
Merseyside Tunnel Police operate in pairs and I'll wager money on it that TWO officers where in the vehicle that stopped him. How could they possible tell from behind that the driver was ' laughing " . He could have been coughing. It looks like they have asked for an explanation as to why the drivers head has jerked and he has told them in all honesty that he was laughing.
Half an hour of on radio checks to establish ID via address details and then scars, distinguishing marks. Why no check on the documentation side there and then ?
Possible answer - He had committed no offence much to their annoyance so they devised their own punishment by making him produce at a police station.
|
|
We haven't been given any evidence that anyone was stopped at all, apart from what Mr Sanders has (reportedly) said.
|
|
|
|
|
in a couple of years time the guy will probably look back and have a quiet chuckle about it, if he dare!!
|
Not the best piece of journalism ever by the DT (at least the online version)
Story illustrated with a picture of a driver, obviously not the accused since the one in the picture has hair, in a left hand drive car probably not even in the UK judging by the one registration you can see.
As for the story itself so many things don't add up that it's laughable as a serious story.
Driver was obviously on a chatty call since he had got round to telling jokes, albeit hands free, we had a long thread on that here and nobody seemed to think that was a good idea.
"Half an hour questioning" and the most the guy was worried about was one on the colour of his hair when he is bald - serious gestapo type interrogation then.
Then the article mentions in consecutive sentences "ordered to produce his documents" at a police station which took an hour and a half and that he was late for an appointment.
He has 7 days to produce his documents at a time that suits him, more poor journalism.
Sounds to me like a lot being made of the supposed silly nature of the story ignoring any balance to it. Not worthy of the DT reporter or sub who edited it.
OK rant over :-)
|
Then the article mentions in consecutive sentences "ordered to produce his documents"
Article also states:
Superintendent Kevin Hagger of the Mersey Tunnels Police said: 'There is no record of the incident in the system so it seems the gentleman was just spoken to by the officer and the matter not taken any further.'
If police have no record, then presumably no-one is going to be waiting for his documents?
|
|
|
|
8 years ago when I last produced documents, took me the best part of an hour due to the queue at the desk and there only being one person behind counter, so that seems quite believable to me.
|
the point I was making was that the article implied a connection between doing this and him missing an appointment you don't choose to do it when you have an appointment close to that time.
As I said in my "producer" thread we have to do this soon so we'll see how long it takes. Hour and a half still sounds to be like a slight exaggeration to add a bit to the story.
The guy was obviously having a chat on his mobile, not concentrating on his driving and was probably stopped mainly for that. Playing up the stopped for laughing bit to get his 5 minutes of fame. How does something like this get to the press? You can bet it wasn't the police who passed the story to them.
|
|
Do mobile 'phones work in the Mersey tunnel?
|
|
Might not work in the tunnel itself but there is quite a long approach to and from the tunnel in question which is policed by the tunnel police.
|
|
|
|
You don't choose to do it when you have an appointment close to that time
As I read the DM article, the driver was on the way to his appointment, and the 30 mins. questioning at the roadside made him miss it - not the visit to the copshop. All rather petty and ridiculous; but as usual we don't know the full story.
|
From Wikipedia:
"The Mersey Tunnels Police is a small, specialised, private constabulary responsible for policing the Mersey Tunnels, Merseyside, England (between Liverpool and the Wirral). The constabulary is responsible to the Merseyside Passenger Transport Authority, and thus is a separate organisation from Merseyside Police, the local Home Office police force."
So it would appear that the Mersey Tunnels Police are not actually police officers. Not that the Daily Mail would ever bother letting a detail like that get in the way of a good rant. That's assuming they actually bother researching these stories to begin with.
|
That's a fascinating piece of information to have unearthed bagpuss.
But surely they must count as proper policemen, otherwise they could be charged with impersonation? You can't get away with wearing a police uniform and questioning people, just by claiming to be a private constabulary, surely?
|
|
Looks as if the policemen were just having a laugh.
|
But surely they must count as proper policemen otherwise they could be charged with impersonation?
There's a whole bunch of these separate "police" forces. There's a Port of Liverpool police too.
I think they hold the office of constable so have the same powers as the regular police, and I don't think their powers are limited just to the Tunnel (or Port) area.
There have been concerns raised about the competency of Mersey Tunnels Police and calls have been made to disband it.
|
When I was a member of the Manchester City Police, we were always made welcome by the Market Police and the Park Police in their offices in Smithfield Market and Piccadilly Gardens for a cuppa. The wore caps with the Manchester City coat of arms but a proper police uniform with numbers. The Manchester Docks Police wore helmets
I don't know what powers any of them had.' but they would all, like the cabbies, help the regular police if they could. All disbanded many years ago in favour of security firms.
I was heading for Birkenhead with a loaded transporter when an XJ6 in front of me cut out in the deepest part. After a minute with the traffic backing up behind me towards Liverpool, I nipped round him and put him on a tow rope. I pulled him up to the toll booths and left him there...was he pleased! It costs a bomb to get recovered from the tunnel.
Beware, Attempted chuckling may yet become an offence if this lot have their way.
Ted
|
Another thought: perhaps the plod have to share a canteen with the original Laughing Policeman and can't take another moment of hohohohohohohohohahahahaha...
I often laugh at the wheel when listening to radio comedy and sometimes at the lethal or idiotic antics of other drivers, but I have never been pulled for it. I don't mouth obscenities and gesticulate as much as I used to, but I still swear and mutter at the wheel whether alone (barmy) or accompanied (offensive).
I wouldn't be surprised if the plod concerned in this case felt the motorist had failed some sort of initial attitude test. One would have to converse with him and them to know for sure.
Edited by Lud on 05/03/2009 at 18:05
|
'Home Office' forces are the mainstay police forces, then there are the 'non Home Office' ones
examples of other 'non' ones are British Transport Police, Ministry of Defence Police, Atomic Agency...etc
i'd be willing to wager £100 of my hard earnt cash that this story has another side to it. I'm not suggesting the officer was 100% correct and maybe far from it...but.. the story as told will be a bit part...of that i'm certain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
