Fined for blocking camera van |
Fined for blocking camera van |
Thu, 7 Mar 2019 - 15:11
Post
#1
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 65 Joined: 4 Dec 2009 Member No.: 34,185 |
Parked in front of camera van...
Charged with obstructing a police officer in the execution of their duty... Fined £86 plus costs and surcharge https://www.chroniclelive.co.uk/news/north-...arking-15924403 |
|
|
Advertisement |
Thu, 7 Mar 2019 - 15:11
Post
#
|
Advertise here! |
|
|
|
Thu, 7 Mar 2019 - 16:00
Post
#2
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 13,735 Joined: 22 Oct 2007 Member No.: 14,720 |
And...
-------------------- |
|
|
Thu, 7 Mar 2019 - 17:21
Post
#3
|
||||
Webmaster Group: Root Admin Posts: 8,205 Joined: 30 Mar 2003 From: Wokingham, UK Member No.: 2 |
Didn't attend court, which got him arrested, then pleaded guilty anyway. Probably advisedly since he'd have struggled to convince a court of an innocent motive in parking his van right behind the camera van, facing the wrong way, on double yellow lines with full time loading prohibitions.
-------------------- Regards,
Fredd __________________________________________________________________________
|
|||
|
||||
Thu, 7 Mar 2019 - 18:55
Post
#4
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,535 Joined: 16 Jan 2009 From: Up north Member No.: 25,505 |
was it actually a police officer in the van though?
-------------------- Bridges burnt, Rubicons crossed. Parthian shots delivered, but always with style
|
|
|
Thu, 7 Mar 2019 - 23:19
Post
#5
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
was it actually a police officer in the van though? Look I know people have their theories about how the money from speeding courses helps grease the wheels of justice and all that. But come on, do you really think it could have been a civvy in a van and they charged him with obstruct police anyway on the off-chance that he'd plead guilty? Still, if he'd asked for the initial details of the prosecution case he would have known for sure, instead he decided to do a runner. Not a smart chap. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Fri, 8 Mar 2019 - 02:06
Post
#6
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,198 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
I was assuming it was a real police officer and not a civvy, that would enable the police to get a win when in many cases it would be harder to prove an offence when obstructing an officer isn’t an option.
-------------------- There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!
S172's Rookies 1-0 Kent Council PCN's Rookies 1-0 Warwick Rookies 1-0 Birmingham PPC PCN's Rookies 10-0 PPC's |
|
|
Fri, 8 Mar 2019 - 09:29
Post
#7
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,864 Joined: 2 Aug 2016 Member No.: 86,040 |
If they were not a police offer would they be 'a person assisting an officer in the execution of their duty' ?
|
|
|
Fri, 8 Mar 2019 - 10:09
Post
#8
|
||||
Webmaster Group: Root Admin Posts: 8,205 Joined: 30 Mar 2003 From: Wokingham, UK Member No.: 2 |
I seem to remember a year or two back that the police line was something like the camera operators were exercising police powers authorised under the Police Reform Act, and that's where the obstruction came from. It was part of some publicity drive, so how much was FUD and how much real I don't know.
-------------------- Regards,
Fredd __________________________________________________________________________
|
|||
|
||||
Fri, 8 Mar 2019 - 11:40
Post
#9
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 33,610 Joined: 2 Apr 2008 From: Not in the UK Member No.: 18,483 |
If they were not a police offer would they be 'a person assisting an officer in the execution of their duty' ? I doubt it - the contemplation there is someone assisting an officer who is physically present at the scene. I seem to remember a year or two back that the police line was something like the camera operators were exercising police powers authorised under the Police Reform Act, and that's where the obstruction came from. It was part of some publicity drive, so how much was FUD and how much real I don't know. Begs the question of “what powers did they act under prior to the PRA?” and what section of that Act covers them. -------------------- Moderator
Any comments made do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon. No lawyer/client relationship should be assumed nor should any duty of care be owed. |
|
|
Fri, 8 Mar 2019 - 18:34
Post
#10
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,333 Joined: 28 Mar 2014 From: Corby Member No.: 69,758 |
I seem to remember a year or two back that the police line was something like the camera operators were exercising police powers authorised under the Police Reform Act, and that's where the obstruction came from. It was part of some publicity drive, so how much was FUD and how much real I don't know. There's two examples I can think of - s.46 Police Reform Act 2002 (which gets threatened sometimes), and the other example where an absolute nutter of a police officer managed to secure two convictions for s.303 Highways Act 1980 (work that one out) But from what I can figure out, there was a copper in the back of that van. This post has been edited by typefish: Fri, 8 Mar 2019 - 18:37 |
|
|
Sat, 9 Mar 2019 - 04:53
Post
#11
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,198 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
Just as an addenda this isn't just a fine (as per title) its a criminal conviction with implications for future employment, travel Visas (may become very relevant in 3 weeks) and so on.
-------------------- There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!
S172's Rookies 1-0 Kent Council PCN's Rookies 1-0 Warwick Rookies 1-0 Birmingham PPC PCN's Rookies 10-0 PPC's |
|
|
Sun, 10 Mar 2019 - 19:20
Post
#12
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,535 Joined: 16 Jan 2009 From: Up north Member No.: 25,505 |
was it actually a police officer in the van though? Look I know people have their theories about how the money from speeding courses helps grease the wheels of justice and all that. But come on, do you really think it could have been a civvy in a van and they charged him with obstruct police anyway on the off-chance that he'd plead guilty? Still, if he'd asked for the initial details of the prosecution case he would have known for sure, instead he decided to do a runner. Not a smart chap. I think you misunderstand. I am quite happy for anyone breaking the law to be hammered. No leeway no mercy, no remission for good behaviour, no let them out for any reason, no concurrent sentences, no oh it was only 31mph in a 30mph zone. Let the police do their job, with fewer restrictions. So where the money goes of little or no interest to me. But on the opposite side. The law enforcers, dont bend the rules. -------------------- Bridges burnt, Rubicons crossed. Parthian shots delivered, but always with style
|
|
|
Sun, 10 Mar 2019 - 19:21
Post
#13
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 38,006 Joined: 3 Dec 2010 Member No.: 42,618 |
I think you misunderstand. I am quite happy for anyone breaking the law to be hammered. No leeway no mercy, no remission for good behaviour, no let them out for any reason, no concurrent sentences, no oh it was only 31mph in a 30mph zone. The supreme court has said that doing 31 in a 30, if prosecuted, should result in an absolute discharge. -------------------- If you would like assistance with a penalty charge notice, please post a thread on https://www.ftla.uk/index.php
|
|
|
Sun, 10 Mar 2019 - 19:43
Post
#14
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 25,726 Joined: 28 Jun 2010 From: Area 51 Member No.: 38,559 |
...….I think you misunderstand. I am quite happy for anyone breaking the law to be hammered. No leeway no mercy, no remission for good behaviour, no let them out for any reason, no concurrent sentences, no oh it was only 31mph in a 30mph zone. Let the police do their job, with fewer restrictions. So where the money goes of little or no interest to me. But on the opposite side. The law enforcers, dont bend the rules. Personally I want them to bend the rules where sensible. And not to prosecute anyone where it is not needed, like 36 in a 30 on a quiet evening with little traffic. Hammer those who are hammering it, who tailgate, who undertake in unsafe manner, who use mobiles when driving, MLOC, in short those who are actually a danger on the road. Not some poor shmuck doing 80 on an empty motorway. Apply some common sense and discretion. As for the money side, yes, police forces (and councils enforcing PCNs) "have to" use it for traffic, road safety, can't simply stick it in the budget and use as they want. But if a police force knows they will get 20K (or 200K or whatever) that is 20K that they do not have to allocate from elsewhere. It's what councils do, plan on the revenue from PCNs, allocate that to traffic as they should and have that amount spare from more tradition sources to spend on schools or councillor jollies. |
|
|
Sun, 10 Mar 2019 - 20:25
Post
#15
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,535 Joined: 16 Jan 2009 From: Up north Member No.: 25,505 |
...….I think you misunderstand. I am quite happy for anyone breaking the law to be hammered. No leeway no mercy, no remission for good behaviour, no let them out for any reason, no concurrent sentences, no oh it was only 31mph in a 30mph zone. Let the police do their job, with fewer restrictions. So where the money goes of little or no interest to me. But on the opposite side. The law enforcers, dont bend the rules. Personally I want them to bend the rules where sensible. And not to prosecute anyone where it is not needed, like 36 in a 30 on a quiet evening with little traffic. Hammer those who are hammering it, who tailgate, who undertake in unsafe manner, who use mobiles when driving, MLOC, in short those who are actually a danger on the road. Not some poor shmuck doing 80 on an empty motorway. Apply some common sense and discretion. As for the money side, yes, police forces (and councils enforcing PCNs) "have to" use it for traffic, road safety, can't simply stick it in the budget and use as they want. But if a police force knows they will get 20K (or 200K or whatever) that is 20K that they do not have to allocate from elsewhere. It's what councils do, plan on the revenue from PCNs, allocate that to traffic as they should and have that amount spare from more tradition sources to spend on schools or councillor jollies. your definition of sensible is maybe not quite the same as others. Lets see how those falsely convicted of the murder of Carl Bridgewater would feel if bending rules was considered ok. The police no longer prosecute. Do keep up. There is now a Crown Prosecution Service The bottom line is the job of the Police is to PREVENT crime. They do that by having a force in uniform on the streets. They bring in suspects, they then deal with and then in conjunction with the CPS charge or not -------------------- Bridges burnt, Rubicons crossed. Parthian shots delivered, but always with style
|
|
|
Sun, 10 Mar 2019 - 20:55
Post
#16
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 25,726 Joined: 28 Jun 2010 From: Area 51 Member No.: 38,559 |
…….your definition of sensible is maybe not quite the same as others. Lets see how those falsely convicted of the murder of Carl Bridgewater would feel if bending rules was considered ok. The police no longer prosecute. Do keep up. There is now a Crown Prosecution Service The bottom line is the job of the Police is to PREVENT crime. They do that by having a force in uniform on the streets. They bring in suspects, they then deal with and then in conjunction with the CPS charge or not I'm talking about relatively minor crimes such as 36 in a 30 or 80 on an empty motorway and discretion being applied. Not simply applying a rule that says "thou shalt nick them" And whether or not you want to nit pick on who actually prosecutes, tis the Old Bill who process the paperwork etc, the CPS are not involved unless it gets beyond CoFP or is serious. Or if they are involved, tis just a rubber stamp. Wholesale use of cameras has generally brought down average speeds, long gone are the days when you could hit lane 3 at 90 plus in relative certainty that you would not be copped. And people know it. In that respect and by your yardstick, police are preventing crime by deploying cameras and churning out NIPs pour encourager les autres. It has worked, average speed has dropped. But I question what that has done for police relations or indeed for road safety. |
|
|
Mon, 11 Mar 2019 - 12:35
Post
#17
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 6,963 Joined: 19 Dec 2006 From: Near Calais Member No.: 9,683 |
I'd suggest it's done SFA for road safety, I've read the casualty figures are on the increase. From my view as a professional driver this is due to a drop in driving standards caused by number of things. The dumbing down on the driving test with more emphasis on the use of technology instead of practical driving; the increasing use of mobile devices when driving; the lack of police on the roads meaning the MLOC membership has greatly increased; and in London the increase in private hire cars driven by people from outside the UK whose knowledge of how the UK traffic system works is minimal.
As for "blocking" camera vans, I've parked in close vicinity to camera vans in the past. the occupant has usually moved on after a short while. |
|
|
Mon, 11 Mar 2019 - 13:23
Post
#18
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 56,198 Joined: 9 Sep 2003 From: Warwickshire Member No.: 317 |
Casualty figures aren’t on the increase, they did go up by 3% last year but have been consistent at between 1700 and 1800 a year for the last 7 years so not really dropping either. I happen to agree with your argument, so don’t devalue it with an obvious error (Erm that was easily checked). Cars are getting safer (for occupants and vulnerable users) with more enhanced safety features (such as AEB) so the rates should be coming down, the fact they aren’t suggests the driving is getting worse (that’s a superficial assumption, I don’t have the data for that).
https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/go...o-june-2018.pdf -------------------- There is no such thing as a law abiding motorist, just those who have been scammed and those yet to be scammed!
S172's Rookies 1-0 Kent Council PCN's Rookies 1-0 Warwick Rookies 1-0 Birmingham PPC PCN's Rookies 10-0 PPC's |
|
|
Mon, 11 Mar 2019 - 14:08
Post
#19
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 1,397 Joined: 12 Jun 2008 From: West Sussex Member No.: 20,304 |
. . . . . so the rates should be coming down, the fact they aren’t . . . . . Do you mean the numbers are not dropping? If so, as the number of cars on the road is still rising, surely the "rate" is effectively falling? I stress that I have done very little research other than a quick Google on how many cars there are on the road. |
|
|
Tue, 12 Mar 2019 - 20:48
Post
#20
|
|
Member Group: Members Posts: 6,963 Joined: 19 Dec 2006 From: Near Calais Member No.: 9,683 |
I agree with your line of thinking Rookie; I was right though, casualty figures have risen but have remained fairly static for a number of years.
|
|
|
Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: Friday, 29th March 2024 - 01:57 |