![]() |
Re: This one's going down
Quote:
Maybe this is reason enough for all traffic cars to be double manned. At that speed the stopping distance go up exponentially A car travelling a 40MPH can stop in 90 feet but a car travelling at 94MPH will take a further 700+ feet to stop so the is no way that you can stop in time on that type of road especially when unsighted in those conditions. |
Re: This one's going down
Quote:
---------- Post added at 11:21 ---------- Previous post was at 11:16 ---------- Quote:
|
Re: This one's going down
Quote:
well in the ideal world that would happen but out here in the real world the police have to take risks both with there own lives and the publics because the criminals don't care about either and thanks to the massive ammount of training our police get loss of life and injury are kept to a absolute minimum I'ts very easy for us to sit back and pull apart a certain incident and making judgements with the benefit of hindsight but out there in the real world it's totally different |
Re: This one's going down
Quote:
If he then started to drive erratically would you keep on following him? And on a side note what do you think happens with stolen cars? Do you think they get parked up on a side road for a bit or do they get used in committing more serious crimes. If you don't want the Police to drive fast anywhere then please tell them, write to your MP demanding the Volvos, BMWs and Evos get replaced with smart cars, preferably with mattresses strapped to the front just in case. Either that or pay people to walk about in front of them with a red flag. :dozey: ---------- Post added at 11:28 ---------- Previous post was at 11:27 ---------- Quote:
|
Re: This one's going down
Quote:
---------- Post added at 13:24 ---------- Previous post was at 13:18 ---------- Quote:
Are you suggesting that I do not have the right to have an opinion, because I am not a police officer? Has anything that I have written here contradicted the ACPO guidelines on pursuits? What are the guidelines police officers have to follow when driving at speeds in excess of the prescribed limits? |
Re: This one's going down
Quote:
as was proved in this case guidlines are only guidelines and when they work every thing is ok but if things go wrong then they can be changed at a moments notice to put all the blame on one individual (perhaps a bit of a cynicle stance but thats the way i see it) |
Re: This one's going down
Quote:
Of course they get it wrong but this case had quite a bit if evidence didnt it. Including a video of the who event. Cant get better than that. The court got to see this evidence I believe and arguements made from the beak but on the face of the evidence he was found guilty. Its almost as good as actually seeing the event for yourself ---------- Post added at 14:35 ---------- Previous post was at 14:30 ---------- Quote:
If he did his job properly A: he wouldnt have been found guilty and B:someone may be alive today that isnt. As for colateral damage ,which I think you are inferring this death was is not acceptable on the streets of the UK. To counter your what if its your car arguement what if it was your wife or daughter ...... ---------- Post added at 14:36 ---------- Previous post was at 14:35 ---------- Quote:
yes its what makes the basement section of this forum interesting isnt it ;) |
Re: This one's going down
Quote:
This the UK not Chile or Brazil where such actions are acceptable. Are we supposed to accept that because a Police officer has been issued with a warrant card that he can go out and kill innocent people in the course of carrying out his duty and then be let off with a pat on the back. I dearly hope that this country never turns into that kind of Police state were the citizens are classed as 2nd rate and therefore it becomes acceptable for them to be killed by the people who are supposedly there to uphold the law. ----------------------------- Flyboy the ANPR pinged that the was some kind of traffic offence that had been perpetrated by the driver being pursued, not a life of death warrant in any case. The driver saw the incident in his rear view mirror and stopped and when questioned it was found that the warrant was invalid and out of date. So a chase that should not have been instigated led to the death of a innocent 16 year girl because off incompetence by the police force for not keeping their system updated. Also if you look at the video you will see that when Hayley the victim comes into view the is no time to brake from that ridiculously high speed as it would take around 800 feet to stop on a straight dry road, she never ever stood a chance and that is why he was jailed. The protection of the public should be of paramount importance not the possibility of a feeling someones collar. I have no doubt that many similar tragedies will happen if this kind of policing is allowed to continue. |
Re: This one's going down
Quote:
|
Re: This one's going down
It was a incorrectly pinged car and the driver was making no effort to escape which raises the question about why was such excessive speed was used in the first place.
Driving well in excess of the speed limit at well over 90MPH the is absolutely no way that the driver can be in complete control of his vehicle on that type of road as he does not know what is around the next bend. |
Re: This one's going down
Quote:
the police driver was trying to catch up with car which was out of sight the car might well have proved to have been stolen and inside there may well have been criminals the officer doesn't know this at the time only hindsight proved otherwise ,it could quite easily have been the other way round given the area and most often is this has been stated soooo many times in this thread |
Re: This one's going down
Quote:
But first and foremost this was not a chase and he was alone so if the were other people on board that car he had no back up so his use of excessive speed once again comes into question. If he had radioed for assistance he would have been told not to pursue but try to keep in contact if possible. Remember in that video he came to a T - junction and turned left and after a few seconds he decided that he had gone the wrong way, next he turned around and proceeded towards the incident area and then for reasons only known to him he accelerated up to speed far in excess of what would be thought prudent given the the surroundings and the type of road. This road was a single carraigeway with crossings and houses in close proximity to the road plus it was neither straight nor level so obviously unsighted as to what may be around the next bend, yet he continued to accelerate and around the next corner we catch a glimpse of his victim starting to cross the road oblivious to the oncoming speeding car that showed no blue lights or even a siren to warn of his approach. If she had heard a siren then she may not have attempted to cross at that moment and survived his passing at such a speed. |
Re: This one's going down
Quote:
with all respect Moldova all of your above points have been explained and knowing the road and the area as well as i do i feel that the officer was justified somewhat in what he did others feel different as did the judge it is a argument that is going to go back and forth forever ,i have nothing new to add to my side of the argument |
Re: This one's going down
The is never an excuse for taking a life unnecessarily as in this case as he travelled at a totally unrealistic speed for the type of road he was on and therefore rightly was prosecuted and jailed for killing a young girl.
You may live in the area but I very much doubt that even you would drive at such a speed on that very same stretch of road because you know it is not a sensible thing to do because of the type of road. |
Re: This one's going down
Quote:
He was travelling that speed to catch up with what he thought at the time was a stolen car. He may have known that road very well and thought the speed he was doing was within his limits to catch up with the *potential* criminal. Unfortunately for him a ****ed up schoolgirl decided at the same time to cross the road. Why don't you just come out and say what you mean, that cops should not chase crims, because as far as i have seen you have evaded most of Dereks questions? Otherwise feel free to go around in circles. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 03:28. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
All Posts and Content are © Cable Forum