Wrongly Given a Warning by the Police

Trebor16

Wig wrote: »

There's not much point coming to a forum board and lying about what happened to you today asking for advice on what to do next. Any advice you get is going to be useless. So unless you (as a reader and contributor to MSE) assume everyone is a troll, you have to believe everyone is telling the truth. To do otherwise makes no sense.

But the fact is people do lie on MSE. I know of one regular contributor to this forum who has made numerous false statements and claims about other members which are total rubbish, but he still persists with his nonsense.

gozaimasu

Personally I think this is a case of the police harrassing an innocent member of the public instead of being out catching the real criminals.

You should always take the name, station and badge number of any officer you speak to before anything else happens. That way you can make a complaint to their commanding officer and/or the IPCC.

OP, complain. We can't let the police get away with abusing people like that. You need to make them aware that officers can make mistakes like this and they should be using their eyes more.

They did, after all, forget to properly use their eyes when they tasered a blind guy in the back.

mgdavid

No-one else has mentioned it, so I'll say it:
in future best to drive with both hands on the steering wheel; apart from a quick scratch and the gent with a hearing aid I cannot think of a reason to drive with one hand held up to the side of the head...

Joe_Horner

mgdavid wrote: »

No-one else has mentioned it, so I'll say it:
in future best to drive with both hands on the steering wheel; apart from a quick scratch and the gent with a hearing aid I cannot think of a reason to drive with one hand held up to the side of the head...

Yeah, I was staying clear of the "they could've pulled you for DWDCA instead Guess they went for what they thought would be the easy option, but that's still no excuse for trying to intimidate a (false) confession out of someone *


* same caveat as before - assuming the OP's version is accurate and complete

photome

mgdavid wrote: »

No-one else has mentioned it, so I'll say it:
in future best to drive with both hands on the steering wheel; apart from a quick scratch and the gent with a hearing aid I cannot think of a reason to drive with one hand held up to the side of the head...

I had also thought that but kept quiet , until now of course

As to complaining to the police....forget it IMO

Sgt_Pepper_2

Joe_Horner wrote: »

Yeah, I was staying clear of the "they could've pulled you for DWDCA instead Guess they went for what they thought would be the easy option, but that's still no excuse for trying to intimidate a (false) confession out of someone *


* same caveat as before - assuming the OP's version is accurate and complete

No way is one hand on the wheel careless. How do you change gear?

luckwudaveit

In response to the last few posts, when the alleged offence took place I was sat at a set of traffic signals waiting for a green light. The police car passed me from behind, 2 lanes across to my right.

Joe_Horner

Sgt_Pepper wrote: »

No way is one hand on the wheel careless. How do you change gear?

Driving along with one hand resting against your head is considered to be not showing due care. I'm not saying that's right, but due care requires being in full control of the vehicle, which means both hands on the wheel except when necessary. Gear changing is necessary, resting your head isn't.

luckwudaveit wrote: »

In response to the last few posts, when the alleged offence took place I was sat at a set of traffic signals waiting for a green light. The police car passed me from behind, 2 lanes across to my right.

Fair one, luckw, and my post wasn't intended to suggest you were actually doing anything wrong. Simply that, given the apparent attitude of the constables involved, they would have been (just about) within the law to bring a DWDCA charge.

People have been charged with that for things like eating a chocolate bar while sitting stationary at lights because the law says you should be in full control at all times, which generally includes both hands on the wheel, regardless of whether or not the car's moving.

Any reasonable copper isn't going to bother too much with that, but (on face value) you weren't dealing with reasonable coppers

Sgt_Pepper_2

Joe_Horner wrote: »

Driving along with one hand resting against your head is considered to be not showing due care. I'm not saying that's right, but due care requires being in full control of the vehicle, which means both hands on the wheel except when necessary. Gear changing is necessary, resting your head isn't.



Fair one, luckw, and my post wasn't intended to suggest you were actually doing anything wrong. Simply that, given the apparent attitude of the constables involved, they would have been (just about) within the law to bring a DWDCA charge.

People have been charged with that for things like eating a chocolate bar while sitting stationary at lights because the law says you should be in full control at all times, which generally includes both hands on the wheel, regardless of whether or not the car's moving.

Any reasonable copper isn't going to bother too much with that, but (on face value) you weren't dealing with reasonable coppers

Considered to be by who?

Guys_Dad

Sgt_Pepper wrote: »

Considered to be by who?

By those that stop you, those that arrest you and those that fine you.

Just one example http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/4247086/Motorist-fined-and-given-penalty-points-for-eating-bread-at-wheel.html

You may not agree, and you may have a point. In fact, in this case, 3 of them.