a small town, traffice police and a nice little earner

torontoboy45

my home town's a nice place; a diversity of shops, good cafe's and restaurants, a vibrant nightlife......and a confusing traffic system.

the high st. (although it's known by another name) is busy even at this time of yr. it's not pedestrianised but only open to public transport, taxi's and delivery vehicles in both directions. signage advises motorists to this effect. there are zebra crossings at both ends.

one saturday back in november I walked up the high st. and noticed a gaggle of police officers and CSO's standing outside our branch of debenhams. this 'long arm of the law' was on a jolly, pulling in private motorists and issuing fixed penalties for the transgression.
I stood alongside and feigned disinterest. within just 10mins they'd nailed 6! 'what speed!' I thought. 'what efficiency! in another life these guys must have worked for a PPC'.

and then I forgot about it.

until a month ago. same time.same day.same location.same police excercise.

'yes, dearie' said the woman in a nearby tobacconists. 'always 12 till 2 on a saturday. they're always catching someone!'

I walked to the south end zebra crossing - which is bang next to the signage - and went to cross. a private vehicle stopped for me. I tapped his window. 'wrong way, man. unless you want a fine'.
'didn't notice the sign, mate. I was looking out for the zebra crossing'.

was I commiting an offence by informing the driver? was I obstructing plod in the course of his duties?

(I only ask because I was reminded of the town's finest being reduced to revenue collectors by a slightly similar thread over on the 'discuss house prices' board).

Stigy

I read somewhere, not sure if it was here or not, that a motorist was hauled to the Magistrates' Court for "flashing" his headlights to advise oncoming motorists of a speed trap ahead....There was obviosly an alleged offence, could this be tarred with the same brush?

robredz

torontoboy45 wrote: »

my home town's a nice place; a diversity of shops, good cafe's and restaurants, a vibrant nightlife......and a confusing traffic system.

the high st. (although it's known by another name) is busy even at this time of yr. it's not pedestrianised but only open to public transport, taxi's and delivery vehicles in both directions. signage advises motorists to this effect. there are zebra crossings at both ends.

one saturday back in november I walked up the high st. and noticed a gaggle of police officers and CSO's standing outside our branch of debenhams. this 'long arm of the law' was on a jolly, pulling in private motorists and issuing fixed penalties for the transgression.
I stood alongside and feigned disinterest. within just 10mins they'd nailed 6! 'what speed!' I thought. 'what efficiency! in another life these guys must have worked for a PPC'.

and then I forgot about it.

until a month ago. same time.same day.same location.same police excercise.

'yes, dearie' said the woman in a nearby tobacconists. 'always 12 till 2 on a saturday. they're always catching someone!'

I walked to the south end zebra crossing - which is bang next to the signage - and went to cross. a private vehicle stopped for me. I tapped his window. 'wrong way, man. unless you want a fine'.
'didn't notice the sign, mate. I was looking out for the zebra crossing'.

was I commiting an offence by informing the driver? was I obstructing plod in the course of his duties?

(I only ask because I was reminded of the town's finest being reduced to revenue collectors by a slightly similar thread over on the 'discuss house prices' board).

If plod saw you they would likely do you for obstruction , like the man done for flashing headlights at other road users to warn about a speed trap. depends really what mood they are in.

see this:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1343959/Driver-flashed-headlights-warn-motorists-speed-trap-fined.html

torontoboy45

robredz wrote: »

If plod saw you they would likely do you for obstruction , like the man done for flashing headlights at other road users to warn about a speed trap. depends really what mood they are in.

see this:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1343959/Driver-flashed-headlights-warn-motorists-speed-trap-fined.html

this was my thinking.

I'll forgive myself for believing that plod's primary role is to prevent any transgression of the law('come along now sir, we can't have you doing that now, can we'),instead of acting after the event and helping out with his pension deficit.

already I'm beginning to feel as silly as the bint who won the last 'I'm a celeb, get me out of here'.

peter_the_piper

Maybe the next course of action is to ask council for the tro for the area to see if they have actually proscribed anything. Surprised to see police doing the pulling, are they not decriminilised?

bargepole

Stigy wrote: »

I read somewhere, not sure if it was here or not, that a motorist was hauled to the Magistrates' Court for "flashing" his headlights to advise oncoming motorists of a speed trap ahead....There was obviosly an alleged offence, could this be tarred with the same brush?

The "flasher" case was reported in the Daily Mail, however the victim is apparently going to appeal to a proper Crown Court, instead of the kangaroo Magistrates' sham trials.

If he gets the proper advice, he should easily get the conviction quashed on appeal, since there are already precedents for this sort of thing, where Judges have ruled that the police must prove that oncoming drivers were exceeding the speed limit. Without any evidence of that, there can be no conviction for perverting the course of justice or of obstructing a police officer.

robredz

bargepole wrote: »

The "flasher" case was reported in the Daily Mail, however the victim is apparently going to appeal to a proper Crown Court, instead of the kangaroo Magistrates' sham trials.

If he gets the proper advice, he should easily get the conviction quashed on appeal, since there are already precedents for this sort of thing, where Judges have ruled that the police must prove that oncoming drivers were exceeding the speed limit. Without any evidence of that, there can be no conviction for perverting the course of justice or of obstructing a police officer.

The problem is there is no precedent as such beyond a Crown Court to take this forward, so if he wins, plod could go to the appeal court and it could go all the way to the new Supreme court, where plod will argue they are god period.

bargepole

robredz wrote: »

The problem is there is no precedent as such beyond a Crown Court to take this forward, so if he wins, plod could go to the appeal court and it could go all the way to the new Supreme court, where plod will argue they are god period.

No, this has already been to the High Court (Director of Public Prosecutions v Glendenning, Neutral Citation Number: [2005] EWHC 2333 (Admin) CO/5312/2005), where the CPS were appealaing against a failure to convict for warning oncoming drivers, after the original Magistrates' conviction was overturned in the Crown Court.

This ruling does create a binding precedent, leaving Mr Plod and his CPS cronies with severely egg-stained faces.

peter_the_piper

Toronto can you clarify the situation on my point 5. Are police entitled to do what the council normally does? Is it criminalised parking? Has anyone checked the TRO for the area? Am I wasting my time with this line of enquirey?

molerat

It is not parking, they are being pulled for entering a prohibited / restricted road (so an RTA offence ?).

peter_the_piper

Not always, hence the query. Its not like a no entry, which is an absolute, they have to get permission to close off roads to certain vehicles. This is usually enforced by CEO's and CCTV.