Prisoner lands police officer in trouble after reporting him for driving at 140mph

Police officer reported for speeding by prisoner he was transporting

Police officer reported for speeding by prisoner he was transporting

First published in News
Last updated
Darlington and Stockton Times: Photograph of the Author Exclusive by , Regional Chief Reporter

A POLICE officer has been disciplined for driving at speeds of up to 140 mph - after being reported by the criminal he was transporting.

The police constable was driving the prisoner from Leeds back to Darlington when it is claimed he drove a marked police car at up to twice the legal limit.

It is understood the PC was reported by his passenger when the pair arrived at the custody suite at Darlington police station.

According to a source, the officer and the criminal during the 70-mile journey the pair discussed  the powerful BMW's performance.

The source said: “The conversation turned to the vehicle they were travelling in. Apparently the prisoner asked how fast it would go and the officer said something along the lines of ‘I’ll show you’ or ‘let’s see’.

“As soon as they got back to Darlington the prisoner proceeded to tell the officer at the custody desk just how fast they had been going on.”

Superintendent Darren Ellis, head of professional standards and legal services at Durham Constabulary, said the force had taken the allegation “very seriously”.

He added: “We are aware of this complaint, which concerns an allegation of a marked police vehicle being driven at an excess, and inappropriate, speed whilst transporting a prisoner back from Leeds into our force area.

“There were no other reports from members of the public reporting the police vehicle being driven at high speed, or dangerously.

“The PC in question has been moved permanently from roads policing duties, has been handed a formal sanction under the police misconduct procedures and is subject to an action plan concerning risk management and decision making.”

Supt Ellis said the officer’s licence has been suspended, including removing his pursuit capabilities.

The PC will also have to go through a driving school reassessment before returning to full operational duties.

The make and model of the speeding police car is not known. However, Durham Constabulary uses BMW 330D, 530D, X3 and X5 vehicles all capable of 140mph.

The law allows police, ambulance and fire service drivers to exceed the speed limit - but only in emergencies.

Comments (23)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:49am Fri 24 Jan 14

Homshaw1 says...

140 mph That is stupid. If it is true he should be prosecuted..
140 mph That is stupid. If it is true he should be prosecuted.. Homshaw1
  • Score: 17

10:56am Fri 24 Jan 14

Lionel1 says...

Brilliant, that Copper must feel like a right t*t, appears that he was the one being taken for a ride...
Brilliant, that Copper must feel like a right t*t, appears that he was the one being taken for a ride... Lionel1
  • Score: 26

11:08am Fri 24 Jan 14

greenfinger says...

He put the prisoners, his own and other roads users in extreme danger. He should be sacked if it was proven to be true. All he needed to do was answer the question, not prove the point. The officer could have easily said over 140 mph but we're not doing it today.
He put the prisoners, his own and other roads users in extreme danger. He should be sacked if it was proven to be true. All he needed to do was answer the question, not prove the point. The officer could have easily said over 140 mph but we're not doing it today. greenfinger
  • Score: 15

11:10am Fri 24 Jan 14

olim says...

According to this article, they are only going by the Prisoner's word.
“There were no other reports from members of the public reporting the police vehicle being driven at high speed, or dangerously."
No mention of any camera evidence, or any other proof. So how can they take the action they have done?
According to this article, they are only going by the Prisoner's word. “There were no other reports from members of the public reporting the police vehicle being driven at high speed, or dangerously." No mention of any camera evidence, or any other proof. So how can they take the action they have done? olim
  • Score: 8

11:30am Fri 24 Jan 14

hasanopinion says...

stupid is as stupid does.
stupid is as stupid does. hasanopinion
  • Score: 0

11:35am Fri 24 Jan 14

hasanopinion says...

olim wrote:
According to this article, they are only going by the Prisoner's word.
“There were no other reports from members of the public reporting the police vehicle being driven at high speed, or dangerously."
No mention of any camera evidence, or any other proof. So how can they take the action they have done?
all police vehicles have cameras in for the protection of the police as well as the passengers. just because there was no mention of camera evidence does not mean there isn't any, also i have no doubt they will have all their vehicles tracked and will be able to find out speeds from an on board circuit system.
[quote][p][bold]olim[/bold] wrote: According to this article, they are only going by the Prisoner's word. “There were no other reports from members of the public reporting the police vehicle being driven at high speed, or dangerously." No mention of any camera evidence, or any other proof. So how can they take the action they have done?[/p][/quote]all police vehicles have cameras in for the protection of the police as well as the passengers. just because there was no mention of camera evidence does not mean there isn't any, also i have no doubt they will have all their vehicles tracked and will be able to find out speeds from an on board circuit system. hasanopinion
  • Score: 19

11:35am Fri 24 Jan 14

hasanopinion says...

olim wrote:
According to this article, they are only going by the Prisoner's word.
“There were no other reports from members of the public reporting the police vehicle being driven at high speed, or dangerously."
No mention of any camera evidence, or any other proof. So how can they take the action they have done?
all police vehicles have cameras in for the protection of the police as well as the passengers. just because there was no mention of camera evidence does not mean there isn't any, also i have no doubt they will have all their vehicles tracked and will be able to find out speeds from an on board circuit system.
[quote][p][bold]olim[/bold] wrote: According to this article, they are only going by the Prisoner's word. “There were no other reports from members of the public reporting the police vehicle being driven at high speed, or dangerously." No mention of any camera evidence, or any other proof. So how can they take the action they have done?[/p][/quote]all police vehicles have cameras in for the protection of the police as well as the passengers. just because there was no mention of camera evidence does not mean there isn't any, also i have no doubt they will have all their vehicles tracked and will be able to find out speeds from an on board circuit system. hasanopinion
  • Score: 8

12:16pm Fri 24 Jan 14

Jackaranda says...

"The law allows police, ambulance and fire service drivers to exceed the speed limit - but only in emergencies."

Which members of the public are going to ring 999 and say there's a Police car doing over a ton? If an unmarked Police car saw this vehicle breaking the law would they stop it and "ello ello ello, may I 'ave your autograph Mr Vettel as I am reportin' you for speeding, I 'ave to caution you, blah blah? Of course not, there's no one to police the Police, and they have only sanctioned this officer because of political correctness, in the dark days the prisoner would have been slapped by the desk Sergeant and then given a good uppin' in the cells.
"The law allows police, ambulance and fire service drivers to exceed the speed limit - but only in emergencies." Which members of the public are going to ring 999 and say there's a Police car doing over a ton? If an unmarked Police car saw this vehicle breaking the law would they stop it and "ello ello ello, may I 'ave your autograph Mr Vettel as I am reportin' you for speeding, I 'ave to caution you, blah blah? Of course not, there's no one to police the Police, and they have only sanctioned this officer because of political correctness, in the dark days the prisoner would have been slapped by the desk Sergeant and then given a good uppin' in the cells. Jackaranda
  • Score: 2

12:29pm Fri 24 Jan 14

MSG says...

Silly policeman. The prisoner got him hook line and sinker. The police officer should have been named for all to see as his punishment .

Big brother can work out how fast they went - track your phone time /location at Leeds, your phone / location time at Darlo, work out the average speed like the cameras, if over 70 mph you were speeding !!
Silly policeman. The prisoner got him hook line and sinker. The police officer should have been named for all to see as his punishment . Big brother can work out how fast they went - track your phone time /location at Leeds, your phone / location time at Darlo, work out the average speed like the cameras, if over 70 mph you were speeding !! MSG
  • Score: 9

1:22pm Fri 24 Jan 14

OldBiddyFrom Barney says...

It makes me very angry how fast police cars go up the Bowes Road onto the A66. I know sometimes they are going to a genuine incident on that horrible road but quite often I am sure they are just racing each other to the Scotch Corner Hotel and Back.
It makes me very angry how fast police cars go up the Bowes Road onto the A66. I know sometimes they are going to a genuine incident on that horrible road but quite often I am sure they are just racing each other to the Scotch Corner Hotel and Back. OldBiddyFrom Barney
  • Score: -1

3:12pm Fri 24 Jan 14

ArthurSparknottle says...

I am quite certain that Durham Police can track how fast that car was going. Failure to prosecute the driver demonstrates the usual corruption which riddles the police - one law for us, another for them. No one questions the need in EMERGENCY for police to safely exceed speed limits, but a policeman who is not responding to an emergency is in EXACTLY the same position as I am. Whereas I would be banned for a number of years and possibly imprisoned for dangerous driving, were I to do as he did, he just gets a slap on the wrist. is there any surprise that the public have increasing contempt for the way police integrity is so low?
I am quite certain that Durham Police can track how fast that car was going. Failure to prosecute the driver demonstrates the usual corruption which riddles the police - one law for us, another for them. No one questions the need in EMERGENCY for police to safely exceed speed limits, but a policeman who is not responding to an emergency is in EXACTLY the same position as I am. Whereas I would be banned for a number of years and possibly imprisoned for dangerous driving, were I to do as he did, he just gets a slap on the wrist. is there any surprise that the public have increasing contempt for the way police integrity is so low? ArthurSparknottle
  • Score: 11

3:41pm Fri 24 Jan 14

Living in the real world says...

Police vehicles are fitted with data recorders, a 'black box' so the allegations made will have been investigated and the officer being removed from post and disciplined is the outcome. An officer who has had thousands of pounds spent on him/her training them to advanced standard.

Rather than call for his public execution I would question WHY Durham police wish to send this for the attention of the media?

It doesn't inspire public reassurance, surely they should be highlighting good practice and results as opposed to their own misdemeanour's?
Police vehicles are fitted with data recorders, a 'black box' so the allegations made will have been investigated and the officer being removed from post and disciplined is the outcome. An officer who has had thousands of pounds spent on him/her training them to advanced standard. Rather than call for his public execution I would question WHY Durham police wish to send this for the attention of the media? It doesn't inspire public reassurance, surely they should be highlighting good practice and results as opposed to their own misdemeanour's? Living in the real world
  • Score: 5

8:12pm Fri 24 Jan 14

SS says...

Muppet!
Muppet! SS
  • Score: 3

8:46pm Fri 24 Jan 14

sweetyonamission says...

Should have used a tranny van with a cage in the back...this vehicle and driver should not have been used for this purpose. There was no danger at all to the public. The fault here lies with resource management as much as the hubris of that particular driver. Durham county needs these vehicles on the county roads. They were not purchased for this type of work.
Should have used a tranny van with a cage in the back...this vehicle and driver should not have been used for this purpose. There was no danger at all to the public. The fault here lies with resource management as much as the hubris of that particular driver. Durham county needs these vehicles on the county roads. They were not purchased for this type of work. sweetyonamission
  • Score: 4

10:21pm Fri 24 Jan 14

calumannabel says...

I am not certain that the passenger can be labelled 'criminal'. If he was a serving prisoner he would not be escorted in a police vehicle which suggests he was being brought for questioning. Now last time I looked you were innocent till proven guilty in the UK ( although that's a laugh with most juries)which means this man's status can only be 'arrested' or 'detained' NOT criminal. The police officer however has committed a criminal act and should be treated appropriately which is by a court. As for the statement that no one reported a police vehicle being driven at excess speed - I wouldn't like to be the person that did - they'd have 12 points on their licence before you can say 'bent chief constable'!
I am not certain that the passenger can be labelled 'criminal'. If he was a serving prisoner he would not be escorted in a police vehicle which suggests he was being brought for questioning. Now last time I looked you were innocent till proven guilty in the UK ( although that's a laugh with most juries)which means this man's status can only be 'arrested' or 'detained' NOT criminal. The police officer however has committed a criminal act and should be treated appropriately which is by a court. As for the statement that no one reported a police vehicle being driven at excess speed - I wouldn't like to be the person that did - they'd have 12 points on their licence before you can say 'bent chief constable'! calumannabel
  • Score: 10

5:05pm Sat 25 Jan 14

Lifetime Townie says...

Luxury transport to travel in a traffic car for a prisoner why couldn't he travel in a van? Got an answer Chief constable?
Luxury transport to travel in a traffic car for a prisoner why couldn't he travel in a van? Got an answer Chief constable? Lifetime Townie
  • Score: 2

5:32pm Sat 25 Jan 14

jane1.r says...

Ron Hogg you know what you have to do ,protect life and property ,not his job.sack him
Ron Hogg you know what you have to do ,protect life and property ,not his job.sack him jane1.r
  • Score: 2

12:51pm Sun 26 Jan 14

tomtopper says...

calumannabel wrote:
I am not certain that the passenger can be labelled 'criminal'. If he was a serving prisoner he would not be escorted in a police vehicle which suggests he was being brought for questioning. Now last time I looked you were innocent till proven guilty in the UK ( although that's a laugh with most juries)which means this man's status can only be 'arrested' or 'detained' NOT criminal. The police officer however has committed a criminal act and should be treated appropriately which is by a court. As for the statement that no one reported a police vehicle being driven at excess speed - I wouldn't like to be the person that did - they'd have 12 points on their licence before you can say 'bent chief constable'!
"Now last time I looked you were innocent till proven guilty in the UK "

You then state the police officer has committed a criminal act.. Does he fall outside the jurisdiction of being innocent until proven guilty then???

To me it's all a little out of proportion.. Fair enough if he was in his own vehicle but he was in a 'marked' vehicle (all pre-driving checks done before shift), and probably give the vehicle a short burst on the newly widened A1 at an appropriate time..

Bear in mind these speeds and higher are done daily in pursuit training on single carriageway roads, using the flashing equipment only when necessary, (i.e in presence of other road users) .. This is relatively safe for a number of reasons.. Those who disagree do not understand the degree of training given..

The class 1 trained UK traffic police used to be classed as the best drivers in the world with an unbelievable hazard awareness...
I'm not that sure about the current bunch to be honest, as they did dumb down the standard a while back and watching some of these police interceptor programs, the current bunch seem to think they're in their own movie or something ..

Either way, I still think its out of proportion
[quote][p][bold]calumannabel[/bold] wrote: I am not certain that the passenger can be labelled 'criminal'. If he was a serving prisoner he would not be escorted in a police vehicle which suggests he was being brought for questioning. Now last time I looked you were innocent till proven guilty in the UK ( although that's a laugh with most juries)which means this man's status can only be 'arrested' or 'detained' NOT criminal. The police officer however has committed a criminal act and should be treated appropriately which is by a court. As for the statement that no one reported a police vehicle being driven at excess speed - I wouldn't like to be the person that did - they'd have 12 points on their licence before you can say 'bent chief constable'![/p][/quote]"Now last time I looked you were innocent till proven guilty in the UK " You then state the police officer has committed a criminal act.. Does he fall outside the jurisdiction of being innocent until proven guilty then??? To me it's all a little out of proportion.. Fair enough if he was in his own vehicle but he was in a 'marked' vehicle (all pre-driving checks done before shift), and probably give the vehicle a short burst on the newly widened A1 at an appropriate time.. Bear in mind these speeds and higher are done daily in pursuit training on single carriageway roads, using the flashing equipment only when necessary, (i.e in presence of other road users) .. This is relatively safe for a number of reasons.. Those who disagree do not understand the degree of training given.. The class 1 trained UK traffic police used to be classed as the best drivers in the world with an unbelievable hazard awareness... I'm not that sure about the current bunch to be honest, as they did dumb down the standard a while back and watching some of these police interceptor programs, the current bunch seem to think they're in their own movie or something .. Either way, I still think its out of proportion tomtopper
  • Score: 0

4:25pm Sun 26 Jan 14

calumannabel says...

tomtopper wrote:
calumannabel wrote:
I am not certain that the passenger can be labelled 'criminal'. If he was a serving prisoner he would not be escorted in a police vehicle which suggests he was being brought for questioning. Now last time I looked you were innocent till proven guilty in the UK ( although that's a laugh with most juries)which means this man's status can only be 'arrested' or 'detained' NOT criminal. The police officer however has committed a criminal act and should be treated appropriately which is by a court. As for the statement that no one reported a police vehicle being driven at excess speed - I wouldn't like to be the person that did - they'd have 12 points on their licence before you can say 'bent chief constable'!
"Now last time I looked you were innocent till proven guilty in the UK "

You then state the police officer has committed a criminal act.. Does he fall outside the jurisdiction of being innocent until proven guilty then???

To me it's all a little out of proportion.. Fair enough if he was in his own vehicle but he was in a 'marked' vehicle (all pre-driving checks done before shift), and probably give the vehicle a short burst on the newly widened A1 at an appropriate time..

Bear in mind these speeds and higher are done daily in pursuit training on single carriageway roads, using the flashing equipment only when necessary, (i.e in presence of other road users) .. This is relatively safe for a number of reasons.. Those who disagree do not understand the degree of training given..

The class 1 trained UK traffic police used to be classed as the best drivers in the world with an unbelievable hazard awareness...
I'm not that sure about the current bunch to be honest, as they did dumb down the standard a while back and watching some of these police interceptor programs, the current bunch seem to think they're in their own movie or something ..

Either way, I still think its out of proportion
He's obviously not innocent as he has been censured by his superiors - it is just that he hasn't been tried by the conventional court process - which is a great pity. The evidence was irrefutable so I make no apology for the quote that he has committed a criminal act as he's been found guilty on compelling evidence. The way you have jumped to his defence suggests you are an ex police driver or employee and of course you always stick together. Remember the A1 is not blessed totally with slip roads - imagine if this clown approached the junction at Kirkby Fleetham at 140 mph while someone was pulling out to cross the carriageway and head north. Driver training must surely involve a degree of decision making - this driver was clearly deficient and should not be allowed behind a wheel.
[quote][p][bold]tomtopper[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]calumannabel[/bold] wrote: I am not certain that the passenger can be labelled 'criminal'. If he was a serving prisoner he would not be escorted in a police vehicle which suggests he was being brought for questioning. Now last time I looked you were innocent till proven guilty in the UK ( although that's a laugh with most juries)which means this man's status can only be 'arrested' or 'detained' NOT criminal. The police officer however has committed a criminal act and should be treated appropriately which is by a court. As for the statement that no one reported a police vehicle being driven at excess speed - I wouldn't like to be the person that did - they'd have 12 points on their licence before you can say 'bent chief constable'![/p][/quote]"Now last time I looked you were innocent till proven guilty in the UK " You then state the police officer has committed a criminal act.. Does he fall outside the jurisdiction of being innocent until proven guilty then??? To me it's all a little out of proportion.. Fair enough if he was in his own vehicle but he was in a 'marked' vehicle (all pre-driving checks done before shift), and probably give the vehicle a short burst on the newly widened A1 at an appropriate time.. Bear in mind these speeds and higher are done daily in pursuit training on single carriageway roads, using the flashing equipment only when necessary, (i.e in presence of other road users) .. This is relatively safe for a number of reasons.. Those who disagree do not understand the degree of training given.. The class 1 trained UK traffic police used to be classed as the best drivers in the world with an unbelievable hazard awareness... I'm not that sure about the current bunch to be honest, as they did dumb down the standard a while back and watching some of these police interceptor programs, the current bunch seem to think they're in their own movie or something .. Either way, I still think its out of proportion[/p][/quote]He's obviously not innocent as he has been censured by his superiors - it is just that he hasn't been tried by the conventional court process - which is a great pity. The evidence was irrefutable so I make no apology for the quote that he has committed a criminal act as he's been found guilty on compelling evidence. The way you have jumped to his defence suggests you are an ex police driver or employee and of course you always stick together. Remember the A1 is not blessed totally with slip roads - imagine if this clown approached the junction at Kirkby Fleetham at 140 mph while someone was pulling out to cross the carriageway and head north. Driver training must surely involve a degree of decision making - this driver was clearly deficient and should not be allowed behind a wheel. calumannabel
  • Score: 1

12:20pm Mon 27 Jan 14

jackjones13 says...

I'm not normally one for second chances but if you google this officer the only other thing that comes up is a Northern Echo story in 2008 telling of how he saved a colleagues life, couple this with his apparently exemplary work history as stated on the news...
I'm not normally one for second chances but if you google this officer the only other thing that comes up is a Northern Echo story in 2008 telling of how he saved a colleagues life, couple this with his apparently exemplary work history as stated on the news... jackjones13
  • Score: 3

12:43pm Mon 27 Jan 14

cushybutterfield says...

Calumannabel ................ Well hit me with a 'wet lettuce leaf' if I am wrong, another armchair so called 'legal expert'. Generally speaking, If someone has already been ****convicted of crime (and/or has previous convictions) and en route to 'Prison or another Court, Police Station' , the word 'criminal' is surely apt and right.. If the 'passenger criminal cap fits'..., .wear it'. ***How dare you infer a Chief Constable is' bent' followed by '12 points on thier licence claptrap-clown remark'. so lets have the maxim *****proved innocent until guilty applied immediately in the........ 'CC Case'****. so where is your proof re 12 points on licence etc ?.....legal-eye...**
** From 'also' MSG lilly white's remarks obviously 'he or she' has never driven say for example 31 miles per hour in a 3O mph zone, 'beam me up again scottie, 'could economical with the truth apply and well be 'resurrected' here .. ********** '*********** **********Old Biddy from Barney', what a negative pathetic assumption, i.e. ' Police cars apparently racing' each other. Have you been watching too many Hollywood Police movies ?. It is not '*****rocket science to 'work out ' and determine that Police cars often...******* 'Go and drive' fast to 'numerous 'life and death situations' (and you and/or your family seriously),... may well welcome the**** 'fast appearance' of a Police Car one day in an *****emergency situation. Quite frankly The negative (some political) 'Anti-Police' inference comments on this subject **beggers all belief and basic general ......... 'law-backing' common sense. So will ?.....some of you negative 'armchair punter critics' (political and oterwise), all be complaining if ******Police, *****Ambulance '******Fire Engines' are driving at a fast speed and, 'en route to a Family fire or Bomb alert. Yes 'common sense' has certainly died with a number of so called 'legal eagle know-alls people' in the medevial 'North East' of England.............
.............I also suggest that the legal eagles, carry out voluntary public duty by arming themselves with 'Note Book and Pad' and camera to record the speed of all ****** known Members of Parliament and 'local Councillors' who may drive at ******31 mph and *****or above in a ****3O mph zone, if this does not surfice then take a brisk drive or walk down to you 'certain pubs' (a minority of) and club ' car park', top heavy with cars where a minority of 'drink and drive'. .
Calumannabel ................ Well hit me with a 'wet lettuce leaf' if I am wrong, another armchair so called 'legal expert'. Generally speaking, If someone has already been ****convicted of crime (and/or has previous convictions) and en route to 'Prison or another Court, Police Station' , the word 'criminal' is surely apt and right.. If the 'passenger criminal cap fits'..., .wear it'. ***How dare you infer a Chief Constable is' bent' followed by '12 points on thier licence claptrap-clown remark'. so lets have the maxim *****proved innocent until guilty applied immediately in the........ 'CC Case'****. so where is your proof re 12 points on licence etc ?.....legal-eye...** ** From 'also' MSG lilly white's remarks obviously 'he or she' has never driven say for example 31 miles per hour in a 3O mph zone, 'beam me up again scottie, 'could economical with the truth apply and well be 'resurrected' here .. ********** '*********** **********Old Biddy from Barney', what a negative pathetic assumption, i.e. ' Police cars apparently racing' each other. Have you been watching too many Hollywood Police movies ?. It is not '*****rocket science to 'work out ' and determine that Police cars often...******* 'Go and drive' fast to 'numerous 'life and death situations' (and you and/or your family seriously),... may well welcome the**** 'fast appearance' of a Police Car one day in an *****emergency situation. Quite frankly The negative (some political) 'Anti-Police' inference comments on this subject **beggers all belief and basic general ......... 'law-backing' common sense. So will ?.....some of you negative 'armchair punter critics' (political and oterwise), all be complaining if ******Police, *****Ambulance '******Fire Engines' are driving at a fast speed and, 'en route to a Family fire or Bomb alert. Yes 'common sense' has certainly died with a number of so called 'legal eagle know-alls people' in the medevial 'North East' of England............. .............I also suggest that the legal eagles, carry out voluntary public duty by arming themselves with 'Note Book and Pad' and camera to record the speed of all ****** known Members of Parliament and 'local Councillors' who may drive at ******31 mph and *****or above in a ****3O mph zone, if this does not surfice then take a brisk drive or walk down to you 'certain pubs' (a minority of) and club ' car park', top heavy with cars where a minority of 'drink and drive'. . cushybutterfield
  • Score: -1

11:07pm Mon 27 Jan 14

tomtopper says...

calumannabel wrote:
tomtopper wrote:
calumannabel wrote:
I am not certain that the passenger can be labelled 'criminal'. If he was a serving prisoner he would not be escorted in a police vehicle which suggests he was being brought for questioning. Now last time I looked you were innocent till proven guilty in the UK ( although that's a laugh with most juries)which means this man's status can only be 'arrested' or 'detained' NOT criminal. The police officer however has committed a criminal act and should be treated appropriately which is by a court. As for the statement that no one reported a police vehicle being driven at excess speed - I wouldn't like to be the person that did - they'd have 12 points on their licence before you can say 'bent chief constable'!
"Now last time I looked you were innocent till proven guilty in the UK "

You then state the police officer has committed a criminal act.. Does he fall outside the jurisdiction of being innocent until proven guilty then???

To me it's all a little out of proportion.. Fair enough if he was in his own vehicle but he was in a 'marked' vehicle (all pre-driving checks done before shift), and probably give the vehicle a short burst on the newly widened A1 at an appropriate time..

Bear in mind these speeds and higher are done daily in pursuit training on single carriageway roads, using the flashing equipment only when necessary, (i.e in presence of other road users) .. This is relatively safe for a number of reasons.. Those who disagree do not understand the degree of training given..

The class 1 trained UK traffic police used to be classed as the best drivers in the world with an unbelievable hazard awareness...
I'm not that sure about the current bunch to be honest, as they did dumb down the standard a while back and watching some of these police interceptor programs, the current bunch seem to think they're in their own movie or something ..

Either way, I still think its out of proportion
He's obviously not innocent as he has been censured by his superiors - it is just that he hasn't been tried by the conventional court process - which is a great pity. The evidence was irrefutable so I make no apology for the quote that he has committed a criminal act as he's been found guilty on compelling evidence. The way you have jumped to his defence suggests you are an ex police driver or employee and of course you always stick together. Remember the A1 is not blessed totally with slip roads - imagine if this clown approached the junction at Kirkby Fleetham at 140 mph while someone was pulling out to cross the carriageway and head north. Driver training must surely involve a degree of decision making - this driver was clearly deficient and should not be allowed behind a wheel.
Load of rubbish.. What compelling evidence? some scroat's accusation?

Irrespective, I know that if he did do 140 then it would've been on the motorway section, not the dual carriageway section of the A1 and the traffic would have been light, and it would have been a short burst.. Quite safe considering speeds on German Autobahns by non advanced drivers, especially in a marked traffic car that would've had all its tyres, lights brakes etc checked/inspected prior to engaging duty that day..

You sound like one those sensationalist BRAKE clowns who don't grasp that it's all about conditions not speed..
[quote][p][bold]calumannabel[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]tomtopper[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]calumannabel[/bold] wrote: I am not certain that the passenger can be labelled 'criminal'. If he was a serving prisoner he would not be escorted in a police vehicle which suggests he was being brought for questioning. Now last time I looked you were innocent till proven guilty in the UK ( although that's a laugh with most juries)which means this man's status can only be 'arrested' or 'detained' NOT criminal. The police officer however has committed a criminal act and should be treated appropriately which is by a court. As for the statement that no one reported a police vehicle being driven at excess speed - I wouldn't like to be the person that did - they'd have 12 points on their licence before you can say 'bent chief constable'![/p][/quote]"Now last time I looked you were innocent till proven guilty in the UK " You then state the police officer has committed a criminal act.. Does he fall outside the jurisdiction of being innocent until proven guilty then??? To me it's all a little out of proportion.. Fair enough if he was in his own vehicle but he was in a 'marked' vehicle (all pre-driving checks done before shift), and probably give the vehicle a short burst on the newly widened A1 at an appropriate time.. Bear in mind these speeds and higher are done daily in pursuit training on single carriageway roads, using the flashing equipment only when necessary, (i.e in presence of other road users) .. This is relatively safe for a number of reasons.. Those who disagree do not understand the degree of training given.. The class 1 trained UK traffic police used to be classed as the best drivers in the world with an unbelievable hazard awareness... I'm not that sure about the current bunch to be honest, as they did dumb down the standard a while back and watching some of these police interceptor programs, the current bunch seem to think they're in their own movie or something .. Either way, I still think its out of proportion[/p][/quote]He's obviously not innocent as he has been censured by his superiors - it is just that he hasn't been tried by the conventional court process - which is a great pity. The evidence was irrefutable so I make no apology for the quote that he has committed a criminal act as he's been found guilty on compelling evidence. The way you have jumped to his defence suggests you are an ex police driver or employee and of course you always stick together. Remember the A1 is not blessed totally with slip roads - imagine if this clown approached the junction at Kirkby Fleetham at 140 mph while someone was pulling out to cross the carriageway and head north. Driver training must surely involve a degree of decision making - this driver was clearly deficient and should not be allowed behind a wheel.[/p][/quote]Load of rubbish.. What compelling evidence? some scroat's accusation? Irrespective, I know that if he did do 140 then it would've been on the motorway section, not the dual carriageway section of the A1 and the traffic would have been light, and it would have been a short burst.. Quite safe considering speeds on German Autobahns by non advanced drivers, especially in a marked traffic car that would've had all its tyres, lights brakes etc checked/inspected prior to engaging duty that day.. You sound like one those sensationalist BRAKE clowns who don't grasp that it's all about conditions not speed.. tomtopper
  • Score: 2

5:15pm Wed 29 Jan 14

pestguard1 says...

All these comment and only one person has mentioned other drivers being in danger ........it only takes another driver to pull out , or overtake another vehicle and this so called experienced copper could have caused a fatality............
...prosecute him to the fullest extent , and remove his driving licence.............
no excuses.
All these comment and only one person has mentioned other drivers being in danger ........it only takes another driver to pull out , or overtake another vehicle and this so called experienced copper could have caused a fatality............ ...prosecute him to the fullest extent , and remove his driving licence............. no excuses. pestguard1
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree