Dangerous driving - follow up

Captain_Flack.

Jamie_Carter wrote: »

The report will still go onto the database for that vehicle. And this could well have a bearing if the car is stopped for similar offence, and help the officers decide if they should just give the driver a warning, or should take other action.

You don't just warn disqualified drivers.

Jamie_Carter

Captain_Flack. wrote: »

You don't just warn disqualified drivers.

I wasn't just talking about disqualified drivers. I was talking about reports of dangerous driving (or antisocial driving as they like to call it now).

Captain_Flack.

Jamie_Carter wrote: »

I wasn't just talking about disqualified drivers. I was talking about reports of dangerous driving (or antisocial driving as they like to call it now).

So why quote my post about disquals?

brat

Normally, an unverified report such as this will not cause the vehicle index to go on a database that's accessible to patrol officers.

What normally happens when a report such as this is received is that the person reporting is asked whether s/he is prepared to make a statement and potentially attend court to give evidence against the driver. The report of the manner of driving (if recent) is passed out either as an 'official' or 'unofficial' complaint. In both instances the vehicle will be looked for at the time, and stopped to see if there is any obvious explanation for the poor driving - drunk, drugged, unlicensed, tired, etc.

If the complaint is 'official' (less than 10% of such complaints become 'official'), a statement is taken from the complainant, the driver may be interviewed under caution either then or later, and be considered for prosecution. Supporting CCTV/witness evidence may be sought.

If the complaint is 'unofficial' and the driver is not stopped at the time, several forces operate a scheme whereby the registered keeper of the vehicle is sent an advisory letter.

cootuk

It's quite possible the vehicle is regularly in that area, and the local plods may keep an eye out.

I remember once reporting a dangerous driver and, when reported, the reg plate didn't tally with the vehicle - so you have a vehicle on false plates.
ANPR would just read a plate and check insurance/tax etc, but wouldn't register the vehicle difference.
Now the number plate could be flagged on their system as suspect.

Captain_Flack.

brat wrote: »

I see you're struggling with the 'why' part of my question.

Unsurprisingly.

Why?

Your general sweeping statement of what normally happens. What happens is as the op has experienced. He was listened to and that's the end of it.

You won't be able to give a single example of a prosecution for dangerous driving on the say so of one person calling into the help desk.

brat

Captain_Flack. wrote: »

You won't be able to give a single example of a prosecution for dangerous driving on the say so of one person calling into the help desk.

You're wrong

I recently built a case for dangerous driving against a male we found parked up on the hard shoulder facing the right way, because one witness had contacted us having seen the vehicle leave the motorway services the wrong way at night nearly crashing into him while doing so.

We have charged S2 from reports from off duty police officers, taxi drivers and on duty HATOs.

I've had several successful prosecutions for careless on one witness's evidence plus interview.

Last month I charged a lad with OPL and dangerous driving after a report of manner of driving from a member of the public. When I got behind, I'd seen enough to warrrant careless, but he failed to stop on request for a short time, during which he went through a pedestrian zone against the flow of traffic.

In early November I provided evidence to Crown Court for a S1. The public witness of the manner of driving prior to the collision was persuasive in raising the case from a high level death by careless.

The normal procedure I highlighted is how it works in our force, and in other forces I'm familiar with.

If you are familiar with a different system of working, then let us know, and let us know how you know. It's a better way than just hanging your curmudgeonly ignorance on the line for all to snigger at

Captain_Flack.

brat wrote: »

You're wrong

I recently built a case for dangerous driving against a male we found parked up on the hard shoulder facing the right way, because one witness had contacted us having seen the vehicle leave the motorway services the wrong way at night nearly crashing into him while doing so.

We have charged S2 from reports from off duty police officers, taxi drivers and on duty HATOs.

I've had several successful prosecutions for careless on one witness's evidence plus interview.

Last month I charged a lad with OPL and dangerous driving after a report of manner of driving from a member of the public. When I got behind, I'd seen enough to warrrant careless, but he failed to stop on request for a short time, during which he went through a pedestrian zone against the flow of traffic.

In early November I provided evidence to Crown Court for a S1. The public witness of the manner of driving prior to the collision was persuasive in raising the case from a high level death by careless.

The normal procedure I highlighted is how it works in our force, and in other forces I'm familiar with.

If you are familiar with a different system of working, then let us know, and let us know how you know. It's a better way than just hanging your curmudgeonly ignorance on the line for all to snigger at

None of the cases you have described were from a singe witness are they?

Your section 1 will have evidence from a forensic collision investigator and witnesses at the scene.

Your vehicle driven the wrong way was witnessed by hato and police.

brat

Captain_Flack. wrote: »

None of the cases you have described were from a singe witness are they?

Your section 1 will have evidence from a forensic collision investigator and witnesses at the scene.

Your vehicle driven the wrong way was witnessed by hato and police.

Erm no.

In respect of driving the wrong way down the motorway the evidence of the dangerous driving was witnessed by one person.

Each incident of dangerous driving to which I referred that have been witnessed by police, Hato, taxi drivers and others was witnessed by only one person.

I was the CI in the Sec1 case to which I refer, but the value of witnesses making contact, especially before the incident, was incredibly valuable evidence.


But we're getting well away from the point which is that the first post I made in this thread is absolutely accurate in respect of my experience within my own and other forces whose procedures I'm familiar with.

Captain_Flack.

brat wrote: »

Erm no.

In respect of driving the wrong way down the motorway the evidence of the dangerous driving was witnessed by one person.

Each incident of dangerous driving to which I referred that have been witnessed by police, Hato, taxi drivers and others was witnessed by only one person.

I was the CI in the Sec1 case to which I refer, but the value of witnesses making contact, especially before the incident, was incredibly valuable evidence.


But we're getting well away from the point which is that the first post I made in this thread is absolutely accurate in respect of my experience within my own and other forces whose procedures I'm familiar with.

So not your job at all, someone else built the prosecution case. Don't try and claim the credit for the work of others when all you did was a few measurements with a gps or scanner and some sums on the computer.