This is mad

Surely testing of cars must be done in controled conditions

Hq would know this was going on / Planned it

You would not be on your own testing a car at that speed without it being authosised

arnt the police stoped from chasing criminals is speeds become excessive or dangrous by Hq why didnt he have prior permition

Unfortunatley the only place for the Police to 'Practice', is on public roads. What is the point in training to pursue, or to drive to a firearms job at full speed on an empty track?pointless. As usual, all the facts havent been told. I am led to beleive that he was driving in early hours of morning on quiet/empty roads, and whilst i do not know all facts, we are talkin about the best trained drivers on the road here. Whilst the speeds may have been excesive, it does no necessarily mean it was dangerous. Just my opinoin, i may be wrong :P

Dangermouse....don't happen to be plod do you???

Unfortunatley the only place for the Police to 'Practice', is on public roads. What is the point in training to pursue, or to drive to a firearms job at full speed on an empty track?pointless. As usual, all the facts havent been told. I am led to beleive that he was driving in early hours of morning on quiet/empty roads, and whilst i do not know all facts, we are talkin about the best trained drivers on the road here. Whilst the speeds may have been excesive, it does no necessarily mean it was dangerous. Just my opinoin, i may be wrong :P

:agree:

The speed limit and other restrictions can be exceeded when the vehicle is being used for Police Purposes. Police Purposes includes going to emergencies' date=' and for training. There's no legal requirement to use Blues and/or Twos, they are used purely as a warning device for the public for their and the officers safety.

At the end of the day in this case it was the fault of West Mercia not having a clear policy in force whereby the officer should declare to control that they're going to do high speed training runs.

150+mph is regularly exceeded by Advanced Drivers on training runs, as part of their original training or 'ongoing' training to ensure their skills are honed. Police Advanced Drivers have undergone a lengthy original course and are highly skilled drivers who are used to driving at these very high speeds and 3am on an empty motorway is an ideal time for them to ensure their skills are honed and that the vehicle their driving has the handling and capabilities that are required for their job (and as a Firearms Officer he could well find himself on one side of the County having to respond to a life or death call on the other side of the county due to the limited number of ARVs - I know if I was at the scene of a nutter pointing a gun at me or my colleagues I'd want to know there was an ARV en route at it's best possible speed!).

Most Forces have a policy whereby the driver calls up to control to inform them of his intention to do high speed training runs when they're not busy with other work, giving them location details etc. It's then logged to the computer and the officer is authorised by control to drive - this officially makes it 'police purposes' and clears the officer of any risk of prosecution in the way this officer has been. As I say though, his force didn't have a clear policy to this effect and as such he was prosecuted and some muppet at the CPS or wherever decided that his driving was dangerous - something his driver colleagues disagreed with in court. Had a proper policy been in place for him to inform control of his intentions then he either wouldn't have been in any trouble and none of us would ever have known about it, or he'd legitimately be in trouble.

At the end of the day it's the faillure of the police force that this ever went to court, and that some people are sceptical of whether he was actually training or just doing it for kicks - given his being cleared I personally feel I've got to agree that he was doing no wrong (well, there's gotta be somebody in the UK with a bit of faith in the justice system, hasnt there? )[/quote']

Well put

Unfortunatley the only place for the Police to 'Practice', is on public roads. What is the point in training to pursue, or to drive to a firearms job at full speed on an empty track?pointless. As usual, all the facts havent been told. I am led to beleive that he was driving in early hours of morning on quiet/empty roads, and whilst i do not know all facts, we are talkin about the best trained drivers on the road here. Whilst the speeds may have been excesive, it does no necessarily mean it was dangerous. Just my opinoin, i may be wrong :P

Yeah but if that was me on a deserted motorway at 3am, and a got pulled they would throw the book at me!!!

Yeah but if that was me on a deserted motorway at 3am, and a got pulled they would throw the book at me!!!

But you arent trained to do the speed... You would actually be doing it just for ****'s and giggles... :eek:

But you arent trained to do the speed... You would actually be doing it just for ****'s and giggles... :eek:

Yeah but thats all he was doing it for too.....................If it was a test run then it should have been conducted on a private road!

Yeah but thats all he was doing it for too.....................If it was a test run then it should have been conducted on a private road!

Why? He wouldn't be attending emergencies on private roads, so it would be a useless practice...

Rob.

qualified or not the bloke should be in prison. the police are not allowed to break any speed limits' date=' they are let off because of what they were doing.

anyone want to start a mob against the bloke? :mad:[/quote']

The Police are not allowed to break any speed limits??? Actually they are exempt from nearly everything except Dangerous and Careless (How would they get to calls/ catch people speeding.....)

Why? He wouldn't be attending emergencies on private roads' date=' so it would be a useless practice...

Rob.[/quote']

He says he was testing the cars capabilities, not testing his abilities! I agree that plod drivers must drive on public roads to gain experience of traffic avoidence blah blah blah!

But the road apparantly was deserted, it is completley un-acceptable that he got away with this!

I have a feeling that if it was in my force area he would have been straight to court as well, without a defence.

Where I work, Police are much more likley to get points than your average driver.....

But the road apparantly was deserted, it is completley un-acceptable that he got away with this!

Yes, he was testing how the car would behave ON THE ROAD. Public roads and private roads are very different in many ways - road surfaces, landscape, road width, etc. etc. Hence it's only the kind of test which can be done on the roads he'd be driving on in the event of an emergency...

Rob.

Unfortunatley the only place for the Police to 'Practice', is on public roads. What is the point in training to pursue, or to drive to a firearms job at full speed on an empty track?pointless. As usual, all the facts havent been told. I am led to beleive that he was driving in early hours of morning on quiet/empty roads, and whilst i do not know all facts, we are talkin about the best trained drivers on the road here. Whilst the speeds may have been excesive, it does no necessarily mean it was dangerous. Just my opinoin, i may be wrong :P

3am on the M54.

There are stretches of that road that would be safe enough to drive flat out when empty.

Dangermouse....don't happen to be plod do you???

Might be, how'd you guess?*

Yeah but if that was me on a deserted motorway at 3am, and a got pulled they would throw the book at me!!!

Because you're not a highly trained police driver with lawful excuse for exceeding the limit, and in any event to be fair he has had a lot of crap over it! Dont forget he's also got Police Disaplinary to go through now, which is "on the balance of probabilities" not "beyond a reasonable doubt" so he could yet lose his job technically, and his pension which goes with it.

Yeah but thats all he was doing it for too.....................If it was a test run then it should have been conducted on a private road!

The court disagrees with you, which is why they cleared him. The Magistrates cleared him and instead blasted his force for lacking clear policy. If they had thought he'd done it for giggles then he'd have been convicted as he wouldn't then have had lawful authority to be breaking the limit.

No clear policy = bad for police. Personally I'd be happy if you could club a few more round the ear a bit more often without worrying about some come back... /Edit : I meant poolice to scrags on the streets, not more police beat up, that would be bad. sorry

Ok, I don't mind he did this and got off "legally". Yes it's a gauler, but yes he will have to use it at some point.

What got me was his boss...as he sort of impiled he was testing it's capabilities as it was new. This I feel if it's new should be done on a airfield. What if there was a fault on it's first highspeed run, I think you see where I'm going...

I got a very clear "ding" in my head when he said it may need to be used safely later, impliing what he was doing wasn't as it was limit / testing.

Enough said, lucky untill he hits the board I guess.

No harm using his blues and twos or having a marked in front...but I guess thats one of those experince things that the next batch can consider

Tough job made tougher by mamby pamby rules...but stop trying to take my picture

Clear policy = bad for police. Personally I'd be happy if you could club a few more round the ear a bit more often without worrying about some come back...

What exactly do you mean by this?

Might be' date=' how'd you guess?*

Because you're not a highly trained police driver with lawful excuse for exceeding the limit, and in any event to be fair he has had a lot of crap over it! Dont forget he's also got Police Disaplinary to go through now, which is "on the balance of probabilities" not "beyond a reasonable doubt" so he could yet lose his job technically, and his pension which goes with it.

[/quote']

Actually I have taken and passed the IAM Advanced driving test but If I said that to an officer If I got stopped for doing that sort of speed I'd still get done!

I know we all speed and I would love to know how he got nearly 160Mph out of a vectra, but he was not not authourised.....thats the point!

If he loses his job then I would feel genuinely sorry for him but..........

Actually I have taken and passed the IAM Advanced driving test but If I said that to an officer If I got stopped for doing that sort of speed I'd still get done!

But there is legislation which details that you wouldn't be exempt from speed limits under these conditions while a police vehicle would...so yes, I guess it is a case of "one rule for us and one rule for them".

However, in his line of work, there would be a very strong case for him needing to do that speed - probably most of us on here probably wouldn't be able to justify the same...

I know we all speed and I would love to know how he got nearly 160Mph out of a vectra, but he was not not authourised.....thats the point!

I did wonder at the speed too...does make me wonder just how accurate the in car recording device is, or indeed if the car was as standard...

In terms of authorisation...no, he wasn't, but to the letter of the law he doesn't need to be. The judge decided that he was using the vehicle for legitimate police business, as such a speed limit exemption would be in place...

Rob.

Actually I have taken and passed the IAM Advanced driving test but If I said that to an officer If I got stopped for doing that sort of speed I'd still get done!

I know we all speed and I would love to know how he got nearly 160Mph out of a vectra' date=' but he was not not authourised.....thats the point!

If he loses his job then I would feel genuinely sorry for him but..........[/quote']

The IAM isn't anywhere close to the level of the police advanced driver course, but good on you for making the effort anyway - I keep meaning to do it myself but im lazy :(

I think he must have kept the foot very close to the floor for quite some time to get the speed

The fact he wasn't authorised is the crux of the debate - he wasnt authorised by a senior officer or a CAD operator because there wasnt a policy that he had to do that, from what i understand of the case doing training runs off their own back was common practice! Stupid, but fact :-/

Alas, that policy will come into effect very quickly im sure!

The beauty is that it was the people who 1) trained him to be a high speed ARV driver and 2) BOUGHT the car that he was driving (to do exactly what he was driving i.e. drive fast) that took him to court!

What a farce... Thats middle management for you.

That admittedly does make it rather stupid

Hopefully the lesson will be to make the policy in that particular police force a lot clearer

I'm pretty sure in Thames Valley area there are a fair bunch of officers who have had proper training, and similarly a fair bunch that have not had it (or if they have they're putting it to shame...)

I've seen some absolutely ace driving by the police here, and some where I felt close to reporting THEM to their superiors (not that would have made any difference, but hey).

Of course & as expected this was blown up by the media, and no doubt by me posting here I'm doing the same.

I'm still not convinced about the 30mph zone side of things, in the area where I live where there are 30 mph zones (excluding the 'artificial' ones on the A34 bits and the 40 mph ring road bits) for a reason (i.e. properly built up areas) I don't feel over 60mph is safe under any conditions, night, empty road, perfect vision.

Motorway - apart from the potential 'from slip-road to 3rd lane without looking' types you ought to be ok on a 3 (6?) lane motorway, not quite so sure about it otherwise either.

120 mph perhaps, but 150+ mph, that comes down to a probable speed difference of 70 mph with any traffic. That's a bigger difference then I'd trust my brakes with from those kinda starting speeds.

I hope the car involved had Brembos fitted...

Oh please???? You are surprised????

Just heard on the news today That A copper who was speeding in his fancy new unmarked car.....84mph in a 30' date=' 110 in a 60 and a whopping 159!!!! on the motorway, got off scot frickin' free.......

Not speeding your honour, just testing how quick our new car was....

Absolute Horse Cack! I am sooo p**sed Off!!!

Discuss.......[/quote']

Shropshire Police and 160mph on the M54 which if you didnt know is a rough surfaced dual carridgeway (cant really call it a motorway).

he said he was getting himself used to the new car.

i heard a superiror officer saying something like "the public would expect us to get to a scene or incident as quickly as possible so these speeds are often needed in responding".

the guy on ITV news last night went out in a Noble M400 to see what 160mph was like, the camera could hardly keep track of the car.

then the presenter turned round and said "these sorts of speeds should only be attempted by trained professionals"

WTF !!??

they shouldnt be tried by anyone on UK roads IMO.

i can understand the police need to get places quickly or need quick cars in a persuit, but i fail to see where 160mph is required.

i fail to see where 160mph is required.

Armed response units usually cover large areas and need to get where they're going quickly...

Rob.

like i said i can understand they need to get where they are going as quickly as possible but this guy isnt on the armed response unit and wasnt even responding to an incident...