Traffic Cops

[Bahco]

Anyone see that guy get one over the police on last nights episode of Traffic Cops on BBC1?

The police observed a male driver driving whilst using his mobile phone and pulled him over. They questioned him about mobile use whilst driving but he denied using it.

A search of his car produced no phone and it was stated that they had to let him go without charge as without the phone they had no evidence!

This was in spite of having been observed by 2 officers and film evidence.

They thought that he must have hidden the phone about his person but did not search him.. This begs the question of why he was not searched and did they not have sufficient evidence!

Anyone else see it and have any thoughts?

 

[LooPrEvil]

The copper did say he hadn't got the power to search the chap.

Surely concealing evidence is an offence in itself?

The chap never paid the ticket that he was issued with and the police did not even persue that offence.

The Police Compliants Commission should investigate.

 

[wotan]

In these police pursuit films, you still see some officers press the button on their shoulder mounted microphone / speaker, how is this any different to using a mobile phone?

Wotan

 

[linkyplumb]

Never mind him what about the ****ed up lorry driver, with a 44 tonne lorry in his hands

 

[Bahco]

Never mind him what about the p****d up lorry driver, with a 44 tonne lorry in his hands

Forgot about him.

He got only 18 months

 

[seco services]

Forgot about him.

He got only 18 months

But he'll never drive a lorry again

 

[Diyisfun]

arnt we all lucky then

 

[LooPrEvil]

Forgot about him.

He got only 18 months

But he'll never drive a lorry again

But maybe he will. The Irish lad wasn't bothered about driving a lorry with only a provisional licence.

 

[raebhoop]

I can't weigh up why in this country some kid can swipe a car, lead the cops a merry dance,nearly kill people, and take up the time and expense of a chopper...all for community service and a few quid.

The use of the helicopter alone should cost 'em a thousand, even if it takes 'em till doomsday to pay it.And a total ban until every penny is paid.

 

[joe-90]

It should be removed from their and their family's wages/benefits.

 

[LooPrEvil]

It should be removed from their benefit

YES, DEFINITELY

and their family's wages/benefits.

NO

 

[joe-90]

Why not?

 

[Paul_C]

Why not?

Because it's completely unjust to hold one person responsible for the actions of another. It would be like a modern-day equivalent of that old code of Hammurabi which contained such laws as saying that if a builder built a house which collapsed and killed the homeowner's son, then the builder's son should be put to death as a penalty.

 

[Paul_C]

In these police pursuit films, you still see some officers press the button on their shoulder mounted microphone / speaker, how is this any different to using a mobile phone?

From the common-sense point of view, there's little difference. From the legislative standpoint, however, the ban applies only to specific types of handheld equipment, namely units operating within the regular GSM/3G bands. So whether just a lapel switch, a handheld microphone, or a complete device, anything else isn't covered by the ban - Including taxi PMR, CB, amateur radio, police radio, etc.

So in other words, I could rig up a telephone handset (old MTS style) in the car, and if it's connected to, say, a VHF transceiver then it's still legal to drive along using that handset. But if I had exactly the same control head and handset connected to a GSM set, it's illegal.

It's another daft piece of badly written legislation which was not needed and which has now resulted in people being issued tickets for behavior which was not actually posing a threat to anyone.

 

[joinerjohn]

It should be removed from their benefit

YES, DEFINITELY

and their family's wages/benefits.

NO

All depends on the age of the miscreant. Parents should be held responsible for the behaviour of their little brats, up to the age of 16. Under that age (and believe me there's quite a lot of joyriding youths under that age) the parents should also shoulder the responsibility. "Oooh our Tommy would never do that." isn't an excuse. Neither is "I didn't know where our Jimmy was at 2 in the morning."
Parents should have a moral and social responsibility to rear their offspring, to know right from wrong. However, that's for another thread methinks.