Speeding Chief Constable

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4027545.stm


Police chief car caught at 97 mph
A chief constable has been criticised after his car was reportedly
caught speeding at nearly 100 mph on the M1.

Derbyshire Chief Constable David Coleman, a staunch anti-speeding
campaigner, was being driven by a chauffeur when the vehicle was stopped.

Traffic officers in Hertfordshire reportedly clocked the car doing 97mph
as Mr Coleman returned from London.

Derbyshire Police confirmed a car carrying the chief had been stopped
for a "road traffic offence".

Safety cameras

"This is a serious speeding offence and one for which someone could
expect an outright ban," said an RAC spokesman.

"Even though the chief constable wasn't driving, we expect public
figures to set a good example.

"They are the ones involved in promoting road safety and to be involved
in a speeding offence clearly doesn't send a positive message to the
public."

The police chief was returning to his county after an engagement in
London at the time of the incident.

Mr Coleman's force was one of the first in the country to create a
Safety Camera Partnership.

It uses police, court and local authority resources to install extra
speed cameras in an attempt to reduce road deaths.

Tough stance

On Friday the team exhibited a stand at Birmingham's National Exhibition
Centre, displaying a motorbike badly damaged in a collision to shock car
users.

However, the chief constable's tough stance has incensed some motorists,
with one man convicted of repeated attacks on local speed cameras.

A Derbyshire Police spokeswoman said: "The car was driven by a member of
Derbyshire Police staff and the passenger was the chief constable.

"The matter is now being dealt with by Hertfordshire Police."

Tony Raven wrote:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4027545.stm


Police chief car caught at 97 mph
A chief constable has been criticised after his car was reportedly
caught speeding at nearly 100 mph on the M1.

Derbyshire Chief Constable David Coleman, a staunch anti-speeding
campaigner, was being driven by a chauffeur when the vehicle was stopped.

Traffic officers in Hertfordshire reportedly clocked the car doing 97mph
as Mr Coleman returned from London.

Derbyshire Police confirmed a car carrying the chief had been stopped
for a "road traffic offence".

Safety cameras

"This is a serious speeding offence and one for which someone could
expect an outright ban," said an RAC spokesman.

"Even though the chief constable wasn't driving, we expect public
figures to set a good example.

"They are the ones involved in promoting road safety and to be involved
in a speeding offence clearly doesn't send a positive message to the
public."

The police chief was returning to his county after an engagement in
London at the time of the incident.

Mr Coleman's force was one of the first in the country to create a
Safety Camera Partnership.

It uses police, court and local authority resources to install extra
speed cameras in an attempt to reduce road deaths.

Tough stance

On Friday the team exhibited a stand at Birmingham's National Exhibition
Centre, displaying a motorbike badly damaged in a collision to shock car
users.

However, the chief constable's tough stance has incensed some motorists,
with one man convicted of repeated attacks on local speed cameras.

A Derbyshire Police spokeswoman said: "The car was driven by a member of
Derbyshire Police staff and the passenger was the chief constable.

"The matter is now being dealt with by Hertfordshire Police."

Since he was not driving and may well have been in the back seat of the
vehicle I can't see it's down to him to control the driver.
When I had my first driving lesson from my father he had to slow me down
from the 80mph I was doing across the downs.
Big cars, like a Daimler which I was driving then and response cars like
I drive now, do not feel as if they are moving that quickly when in fact
they are going very fast. Given that this was probably very late at
night or early morning there would be a corresponding lack of traffic to
alert the CC to the speed of the vehicle assuming he was paying any
attention and not dozing in the back, or talking to someone in the back,
or working...
I think it's just a case of having a dig because they, the media,
can...without much relevance to the actual events.

My father also said "It's no good leaning over in the seat to turn
corners, it's not a bicycle" I sort of scared him a bit so he paid for
driving lessons

Sniper8052

On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 11:09:43 GMT, "Sniper8052(L96A1)"
wrote in message
:

Since he was not driving and may well have been in the back seat of the
vehicle I can't see it's down to him to control the driver.

ISTR that Jack Straw was in a similar position when Home Secretary.
The answer in my view is that the driver should be disciplined and the
passenger should make a public apology, and if it can be shown that
the passenger was colluding (e.g. "get a move on, we're late for X
event") they should also be disciplined.

Any police driver caught speeding on duty should be disciplined. We
don't want criminals employed by the police. And yes that explicitly
includes the police driver who got off a speeding ticket because the
enforcement warning had the wrong colour border - there is absolutely
no suggestion that he was unaware of the limit.

Also: cut off their goolies.

Guy
--
May contain traces of irony. Contents liable to settle after posting.
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk

88% of helmet statistics are made up, 65% of them at Washington University

"Just zis Guy, you know?" typed

Also: cut off their goolies.

'Tough on Testosterone, tough on the _causes_ of testosterone...

--
Helen D. Vecht:
Edgware.

Sniper8052(L96A1) wrote:

Since he was not driving and may well have been in the back seat of the
vehicle I can't see it's down to him to control the driver.


He's the Chief Constable - you know the guy in control of his police
force which includes his driver. If his own staff can so flagrantly
break the law right in front of his nose and him either not notice or
not do anything about it then he shouldn't be in the job.

What would you think in an analogous situation if the bank staff were
stealing money from your bank account and the bank manager had a) not
told them it would not be tolerated and b) turned a blind eye when they
did steal.

I can accept that he can't control every constable in a car but when its
his driver and his car with him in it, sorry the buck stops with him.

Tony

On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 13:37:37 +0000, Tony Raven
wrote:

Sniper8052(L96A1) wrote:

Since he was not driving and may well have been in the back seat of the
vehicle I can't see it's down to him to control the driver.


He's the Chief Constable - you know the guy in control of his police
force which includes his driver. If his own staff can so flagrantly
break the law right in front of his nose and him either not notice or
not do anything about it then he shouldn't be in the job.

What would you think in an analogous situation if the bank staff were
stealing money from your bank account and the bank manager had a) not
told them it would not be tolerated and b) turned a blind eye when they
did steal.

I can accept that he can't control every constable in a car but when its
his driver and his car with him in it, sorry the buck stops with him.

Let's first ascertain that the poor guy wasn't asleep in the back when
it happened.

The driver was clearly an arse. But the CC is someone who has gone out
of his way to take a stance against speeding - a stance that is
frequently pilloried by much of the press. I'd like a bit more
evidence that he was culpable before I join the Daily Mail in gloating
at this.

" [Not Responding] " wrote in message
...
On Sat, 20 Nov 2004 13:37:37 +0000, Tony Raven
wrote:

Sniper8052(L96A1) wrote:

Since he was not driving and may well have been in the back seat of the
vehicle I can't see it's down to him to control the driver.


He's the Chief Constable - you know the guy in control of his police
force which includes his driver. If his own staff can so flagrantly
break the law right in front of his nose and him either not notice or
not do anything about it then he shouldn't be in the job.

What would you think in an analogous situation if the bank staff were
stealing money from your bank account and the bank manager had a) not
told them it would not be tolerated and b) turned a blind eye when they
did steal.

I can accept that he can't control every constable in a car but when its
his driver and his car with him in it, sorry the buck stops with him.

Let's first ascertain that the poor guy wasn't asleep in the back when
it happened.

The driver was clearly an arse.

Hang on a minute - whilst the driver was clearly breaking the law, was he
actually doing anything dangerous by travelling at 97 mph? Remember he was
on a motorway, so its not beyond the realms of possibility that 97mph wasn't
excessively fast for the circumstances IMV.

But the CC is someone who has gone out
of his way to take a stance against speeding - a stance that is
frequently pilloried by much of the press. I'd like a bit more
evidence that he was culpable before I join the Daily Mail in gloating
at this.

[Not Responding] wrote:

The driver was clearly an arse. But the CC is someone who has gone out
of his way to take a stance against speeding - a stance that is
frequently pilloried by much of the press. I'd like a bit more
evidence that he was culpable before I join the Daily Mail in gloating
at this.

He is culpable because he was the Chief Constable and the buck stops
with him the more so if the transgressors are working right next to him
under his command.

conspiracy theory
The only reason I would give him some slack was if it was similar to
Allan Green, the DPP, being caught kerb crawling with his police minder
soon after he had initiated the prosecution of police officers over the
Birmingham Six affair (a prosecution his successor quickly dropped).
/conspiracy theory

Tony

Just zis Guy, you know? opined the following...
We don't want criminals employed by the police.

There are a number of potential sarcastic comments to make here but this
sums up my feelings on the matter.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3996693.stm

The quotes which form the last two paragraphs are quite telling. As is
the fact that despite a verdict of unlawful killing, they are still
deciding whether to press charges against the officers in question.

Jon

Nathaniel Porter wrote:


Hang on a minute - whilst the driver was clearly breaking the law, was he
actually doing anything dangerous by travelling at 97 mph? Remember he was
on a motorway, so its not beyond the realms of possibility that 97mph wasn't
excessively fast for the circumstances IMV.


???? checks, no I didn't accidentally cross post to uk.tosspots ????

Ah, you are Paul Smith and ICMFP

Tony