Speed Cam Causes Copper's Crash

[Stuart_J]

From Yesterdays Pistonhead news

SPEED CAM CAUSES COPPER'S CRASH

PC hit 91mph in a 30, braked and lost control

A Gatso (not on the A6)A speed camera caused a traffic police officer to crash, according to the Lancashire Evening Post, and the officer subsequently admitted, and was convicted of, driving without due care and attention.

PC Scott Warburton was driving at 91mph in a 30mph limit on the A6 Scotforth Road at Lancaster. He spotted a speed camera, braked sharply and lost control of the vehicle. The Ford Galaxy was fitted with an incident data recorder that recorded a peak speed of 91 miles per hour some 10 seconds before the accident, the local magistrates court heard.

The prosecutor told the court: "Upon seeing a speed camera he braked sharply, lost control and hit two signs on the central reservation. He came to a halt on the northbound carriageway. He was not responding to a code one incident and the blue lights were not in use."

The officer admitted the offence by post so magistrates adjourned his case for two weeks so he could appear before them.

Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed road safety campaign, said: "It is so important that we focus on the real causes of road danger. Obvious answers and knee jerk policies will not save lives.

"For the causes of this and every crash we must look inside the mind of the driver. Safety is about skills and attitudes rather than rules and regulations -- so much so that it is quite impossible to prevent such crashes with regulation.

"Cases like this distort road safety objectives and damage the Police / public relationship. They strongly tend to raise the wrong issues. The right road safety issue arising from this case is that people must drive with an appropriate sense of responsibility, but I fear that there will be loud and ignorant baying for further regulation."

SafeSpeed posited the following claims and the truth:

He shouldn't be allowed to drive so fast: true. But the measure of 'too fast' is not that his numerical speed was high, but that he lost control and crashed.

Police officers should be restricted to driving at the speed limit: false. We need Police officers to attend incidents as quickly as safely possible. It is frequently safe for properly trained drivers to exceed the speed limits by wild margins.

Speed cameras prevent bad driving and high speed crashes: false. The evidence of this case is entirely the opposite.

We need more regulation: False. We need better attitudes and better skills.

[Gwilo]

It is frequently safe for properly trained drivers to exceed the speed limits by wild margins.

yet they've still prosecuted jensen button and nigel mansell for speeding - two drivers who's car control abd hazard perception skills at high speeds is amongst the highest on the planet.....

Does this statement then mean that anyone who hold, oh i don't know, IAM status and racing license can exceed speed limits by 'wild margins"?

I didn't have a lot of time for the Safe Speed campaign lobby up till now. With such a poorly worded statement almost posing as apologist for tbh, a wreckless driver, I have even less time for them.

if the PC was responding to a call, the police/cps would probably over-rule the camera image anyway, and if he was actually trained in high speed car control why would he have braked so suddenly? I smell 3 day old mackerel.

[MarkyMarkD]

I agree with you, Gwilo.

The officer clearly had no legitimate reason to be driving at that speed. Whatever anyone says about their level of training etc. etc. nobody can safely drive at 91mph in a 30mph zone.

If he HAD been travelling to an incident, with blues & twos, at (say) 60mph then it would be a different matter - the case would never have gone to court as the police would have already let him off.

[Dr Zoidberg]

yet they've still prosecuted jensen button and nigel mansell for speeding - two drivers who's car control abd hazard perception skills at high speeds is amongst the highest on the planet.....

There is an important distinction between safe and necessary.

It may well be safe for some drivers to exceed the speed limit but it often isn't necessary , unlike emergency services who often have very good reasons to exceed the limit.

I'd also like to point out that track driving and fast road driving require different sets of skills.

F1 cars handle very differently and there are vastly more hazards on an A road than there are on silverstone.

[andy ellis]

Lets put it this way would would YOU get if this was you.......

And what will HE get......

[Dr Zoidberg]

"he" stands a very good chance of losing his job and pension which far outweighs the financial penalties a court will impose

[andy ellis]

So would I or any other driver that drives it for a profession

Just look at that other case recently of the copper on the M5 if I remember right, know its gone back to the court but lets be honest would YOU have got off on that excuse?

Also emergency drivers must only excead the speed limit when answering an emergency call and must have at least blues on. They are only allowed to go through red lights as per a give way junction. At all other times they are no different to you and I. What if a child had stepped out in front of him at 91mph??? It just dont bear thinking about. This was recklous driving of the highest order from a so called professional who should set an example to other road users. Personally I have no sympathy for "him" and if he loses his job etc then he only has himself to blame.

[fatbob]

Personally I have no sympathy for "him" and if he loses his job etc then he only has himself to blame.

Here, here! No "civilian" would get away with this why should he?

If you play silly beggars then get caught h

[Gwilo]

Dr Z - i take your point, but I'd still feel happie climbing into a car with mansell or button than officer dbble.

Since when did a Ford Galaxy become a high-speed response vehicle?

Yes, police do go through red lights when on an emergency call, but they DO slow down for them, and I've never seen them shoot through a 30 zone at over 90mph. If anyone knows Salford at all, you'll know that the Police routinely bring high-profile criminals and convicts down the Crescent in a big poilce motorcade. They don't hang about.

But they're not doing more than 60 at any given point.

And as for any notion of responded to an emergency to save a life, I think on balance there is more chance of them killing someone outright while travelling at that speed.

But as Andy has suggested/hinted at, it's increasingly one law for them and one for us....

[Dr Zoidberg]

Also emergency drivers must only excead the speed limit when answering an emergency call

Nope , when sticking to the limits would affect their ability to do their job they can break them , but must be able to justify it balancing the risk against the need to speed.

I'm not saying that in this case 91 in a 30 for a non emergency was right , but it is often fine for them to break the limit when it's not an emergency.

For example a car goes past them at 40 in a 30 and they want to pull it over.

It's not an emergency at all but they muct be allowed to do more than the other car to catch it and stop it as long as it is safe to do so

and must have at least blues on.

Nope ' date=' no such requirement is made in the road traffic act.

They may not even be in a vehicle with extra lights.

I've done 50+ in a 30 on my bike quite legally while off duty following a car full of armed robbers who had just raided a McDonalds.

It all went in my statement including the speeds involved and I was told that I had been perfectly justified given the roads involved , level of traffic and who I was following.

They are only allowed to go through red lights as per a give way junction.

Correct , and same for Stop signs.

[Stuart_J]

Nope ' date=' when sticking to the limits would affect their ability to do their job they can break them , but must be able to justify it balancing the risk against the need to speed.

I'm not saying that in this case 91 in a 30 for a non emergency was right , but it is often fine for them to break the limit when it's not an emergency.

For example a car goes past them at 40 in a 30 and they want to pull it over.

It's not an emergency at all but they muct be allowed to do more than the other car to catch it and stop it as long as it is safe to do so

Nope , no such requirement is made in the road traffic act.

They may not even be in a vehicle with extra lights.

I've done 50+ in a 30 on my bike quite legally while off duty following a car full of armed robbers who had just raided a McDonalds.

It all went in my statement including the speeds involved and I was told that I had been perfectly justified given the roads involved , level of traffic and who I was following.

Correct , and same for Stop signs.[/quote']

I have absolutely no problem with police cars exceeding the limit when they have justified cause, it would appear this guy clearly didnt, also a galaxy isnt exacty a vehicle designed for high speed driving.

Ok he braked hard for the camera & lost it, if the camera hadnt of been there he would I guess have carried on at a speed somewhat in excess of the limit, this guy seems to me based upon the report to have scant regard for others & is abusing his position.

He braked hard, lost control & trashed a few road signs + remodelled a galaxy (thats probably a plus).

30 limits are generally in built up areas, Speed cameras are "allegidly" at accident black spots (no need to debate that, we all know the answer)

So odds are a kid could have walked out in front of him, you can guess the rest of what I am going to say. So this guy might loose his job & pension, it could have been worse & been another family grieving

We have a brilliant & well respected Police force, driving standards are generally incredibly high & far better than most of us but the odd bad apple needs to be dealt with severly

[KaraK]

Speaking as someone who knows the road in question there is nowhere where it is a 30mph limit and could be considered "safe" to do 91mph in a Galaxy. He is very lucky that niether himself nor anyone else are dead. He really should be going to jail for a very long time.

[ScoobyChris]

Was he definitely TrafPol? Sounds a very amateur mistake considering how safely, observantly and "progressively" most of the ones I know drive!

Chris