PC driver escapes dangerous driving punishment....surprise, surprise.
My days, it is practically unbelievable. The eyebrows raised in surprise will not hold that position for long when you consider a judge has once again dismissed a high profile case with mere words that ends with an offender leaving court free without sanction. Beggars belief.
Police officer Mark Milton had taken control of a new police vehicle, a Vauxhall Vectra 3.2, on the 5th December 2003. At 0300hrs he was on an A-road near the M54 in Shropshire before going onto the motorway itself, and when he returned to his base it was established by checking his on-board cameras that Pc Milton had reached speeds of 131 and then 159mph. The first speed was clocked on the A-road, the second on the motorway. A-road speed limits can vary but on average are 50mph, the motorway carries a 70mph limit, giving an idea of how much over the limit the officer was during casual driving and not in pursuit of an offending vehicle.
The Crown Prosecution Service found the PC had committed an offence and tried him, but he was acquitted after the trail judge heard Pc Milton was 'familiarising himself' with the vehicle, for it was his first time and he wanted to see how the vehicle would perform under pursuit conditions. The CPS appealed tot he High Court and it was found the trail judge had erred and the case was sent for retrial.
It came before District judge Peter Wallis at Ludlow Magistrates' Court, who saind the speeds were "eye-watering", found the Pc guilty of dangerous driving but said he had suffered enough during the past two and a half years of court proceedings. Therefore Pc Milton received an absolute discharge, which means a criminasl conviction is recorded but no punishment.Under the Crime and Disorder Act 1988 it is to be granted under exceptional circumstances.
West Mercia Police, responsible for the district, said they would appeal the discharge, and Pc Milton's lawyer stated an appeal will challenge the judge's opinion that the officer's advance driving skills were irrelevant.
Now, my take is why did he reach those speeds? Because he was familiarising himself with the vehicle. Then aren't the vehicles tested prior to being made available for duty? They are checked, I am not sure how often but they are, particularly if the driver has a concern or has been involved in a collison or pursuit. Additionally, if Pc Milton had to test the vehicle, why hasn't a senior officer come forward to say they had been aware of what Pc Milton intended to do and gave him permission to do so under certain conditions? Is this country aware of how many people have the mind or experience to do things without going through training or tests? That is why the officer's advanced driving skills are irrelevant, most can handle a vehicle at such speeds with little to no vehicles around at the same time. How many people own a vehicle that can reach speeds of 150-160mph and do so and are prosecuted if caught?
My understanding is that police vehicles in pursuit will call off from the chase if speeds reach 100-130mph for too long because of the danger to other road users. A police helicopter is called and can take over the pursuit from the safe distance above and ground units then follow the commentary from the 2nd man in the 'copter. Therefore there is little to no need for Pc Milton to test the vehicle at such speeds if police policy will forebade such speeds in the interest of public safety. Lawful authority or reasonable excuse are two phrases used when one adopts an approach that is deemed inappropriate or of major concern, and I doubt Pc Milton had either.
If an advanced driver had reached those speeds at the same time of night (which I expect was quoted to show the lack of vehicles on the road surfaces at the time), he or she would still be prosecuted and no doubt would be convicted of dangerous driving even with no other vehicle on the road for miles and miles. Judges are beginning to show a lack of public concern and common sense, and police officers continue to evade punishment for conduct unbecoming of a police officer. Same old same old, and it is partly why law enforcement continues to have a fluctuating popularity.
Police officer Mark Milton had taken control of a new police vehicle, a Vauxhall Vectra 3.2, on the 5th December 2003. At 0300hrs he was on an A-road near the M54 in Shropshire before going onto the motorway itself, and when he returned to his base it was established by checking his on-board cameras that Pc Milton had reached speeds of 131 and then 159mph. The first speed was clocked on the A-road, the second on the motorway. A-road speed limits can vary but on average are 50mph, the motorway carries a 70mph limit, giving an idea of how much over the limit the officer was during casual driving and not in pursuit of an offending vehicle.
The Crown Prosecution Service found the PC had committed an offence and tried him, but he was acquitted after the trail judge heard Pc Milton was 'familiarising himself' with the vehicle, for it was his first time and he wanted to see how the vehicle would perform under pursuit conditions. The CPS appealed tot he High Court and it was found the trail judge had erred and the case was sent for retrial.
It came before District judge Peter Wallis at Ludlow Magistrates' Court, who saind the speeds were "eye-watering", found the Pc guilty of dangerous driving but said he had suffered enough during the past two and a half years of court proceedings. Therefore Pc Milton received an absolute discharge, which means a criminasl conviction is recorded but no punishment.Under the Crime and Disorder Act 1988 it is to be granted under exceptional circumstances.
West Mercia Police, responsible for the district, said they would appeal the discharge, and Pc Milton's lawyer stated an appeal will challenge the judge's opinion that the officer's advance driving skills were irrelevant.
Now, my take is why did he reach those speeds? Because he was familiarising himself with the vehicle. Then aren't the vehicles tested prior to being made available for duty? They are checked, I am not sure how often but they are, particularly if the driver has a concern or has been involved in a collison or pursuit. Additionally, if Pc Milton had to test the vehicle, why hasn't a senior officer come forward to say they had been aware of what Pc Milton intended to do and gave him permission to do so under certain conditions? Is this country aware of how many people have the mind or experience to do things without going through training or tests? That is why the officer's advanced driving skills are irrelevant, most can handle a vehicle at such speeds with little to no vehicles around at the same time. How many people own a vehicle that can reach speeds of 150-160mph and do so and are prosecuted if caught?
My understanding is that police vehicles in pursuit will call off from the chase if speeds reach 100-130mph for too long because of the danger to other road users. A police helicopter is called and can take over the pursuit from the safe distance above and ground units then follow the commentary from the 2nd man in the 'copter. Therefore there is little to no need for Pc Milton to test the vehicle at such speeds if police policy will forebade such speeds in the interest of public safety. Lawful authority or reasonable excuse are two phrases used when one adopts an approach that is deemed inappropriate or of major concern, and I doubt Pc Milton had either.
If an advanced driver had reached those speeds at the same time of night (which I expect was quoted to show the lack of vehicles on the road surfaces at the time), he or she would still be prosecuted and no doubt would be convicted of dangerous driving even with no other vehicle on the road for miles and miles. Judges are beginning to show a lack of public concern and common sense, and police officers continue to evade punishment for conduct unbecoming of a police officer. Same old same old, and it is partly why law enforcement continues to have a fluctuating popularity.


0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home