Police Attempt to Cause Crash on A3 Sliproad

Reader G.P. reports:

Time: 20.35 Wednesday 16th September 2009
Place: A3 Southbound, Tolworth Tower
 
Whilst cycling home the other evening I came across this...

At first I thought someone had had the misfortune to break down in this dangerous spot, and the police car was simply acting as a shield from oncoming vehicles. It
wasn't until I got closer that I realised it was a mobile speed trap...

Vehicles joining the A3 were having to accelerate down the notoriously short slip road at Tolworth and undertake the parked police vehicle, which was also masking approaching traffic.You may notice from the pictures that no lights other than the brake lights were showing.

I'm still struggling to think of somewhere more daft to carry out this task!

H.J. adds, "It was at precisely this point on the congested 50mph limited A3, which has very narrow lanes, that an overtaking Tesco truck tore off my door mirror. I cannot imagine anything more stupid than the action of these two police officers. If they were going to set up a trap there, they should not have parked their car there."

Police response:

1. The role the officers were performing:
The officers concerned are members of the Metropolitan Police Traffic Operational
Command Unit. One of the main purposes of the Traffic Operational Command Unit is to
reduce collisions that result in serious injury or death. Inevitably, a large
percentage of such collisions within the Metropolitan Police District occur on the
main arterial routes through London. One of these arterial routes is the A3. One of
the main factors involved in causing such collisions is the speed at which vehicles
travel. Again, a speeding problem exists on the A3, with drivers regularly ignoring
the 50mph speed limit.
Traffic officers (as oppose to fixed or mobile cameras) have various options
available to them for dealing with speeding motorists. Only one of these precludes
the need to stop and speak with the motorist concerned: Visible presence. Sadly,
this is also the least effective option, as motorists tend to slow down (often
erratically and dangerously, with little regard for vehicles behinf them) when they
seee the police vehicle and then return to their original speed when the police
vehicle is no longer visible.
The more effective methods, such as verbal warnings and prosecution
options, available to the officers concerned, require them to actually stop the
vehicle. In order to do so, they need to be in a position to follow and catch up
with it. The officers therefore need to position their vehicle so they can a)
observe passing motorists and b) stop those motorists should they need to. This
brings me on to my second consideration in relation to this complaint.
 
2. The positioning of the police vehicle and its' illumination:
The A3 within the Metropolitan Police District is a tricky road to police. There is
no hard shoulder and there are no designated police parking ramps. Often the only
position from where officers can observe traffic and then make an attempt to stop
vehicles of interest without stopping on the actual carriage way is on on-slip
roads.
The officers concerned in this incident used this option, which is acceptable and
common practice for the purpose of speed enforcement. I have examined your
photographs and gathered the following:
- The police vehicle is parked fully on a hatched area and not in the carriageway.
- The police vehicle has all its' standard lights illuminated. Whereas I appreciate
that the flashing rear red lights would add slightly to the police vehicle's
visibility, they also reduce the speed enforcement to the option of visible presence
which, as discussed above, almost negates the whole purpose of the police vehicle
being there in the first place.
- The police vehicle is fully marked and equipped with a highly reflective
Battenberg pattern.
- The police officers are wearing highly reflective jackets, adding to the overall
visibility of the unit.
My conclusion on this point is therefore that the officers concerned have positioned
their vehicle in the safest place possible and made their vehicle and themselves as
visible as possible whilst still allowing themselves to perform their role. Overall,
their positioning is not dangerous and their purpose for being there is legitimate
(unlike parking to go bowling).
 
Based on this reasoning, I am of the opinion that this incident does not constitute
an allegation of a criminal offence or an allegation of a breach of the codes of
conduct. I therefore do not believe the officers have a complaint to answer. I will
mention the incident to the officers, but their actions do not require redress.

H.J.'s response to the police response:

"I think that's even worse. To embark on a pursuit from that point would have meant  joining very congested and very narrow lanes where any shock deviation by any driver could easily have resulted in a multiple crash. Better to station one officer on the slip road wall with a radio to radio ahead to a colleague parked on the hard shoulder after the next junction wherew the A3 widens out to Motorway standard and a pursuit would have been rerlatively much safer.."