Posted By ian mcnally Here’s a good news link. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/...d/shropshire/4559173.stm I’d love to know what the consensus of opinion out there is. I’m sure the road conditions at the time were good and no doub’t the driver had carried out a full mechanical check before “testing”. I wonder what the judge would have concluded if a mechanical failure or blow out had occurred which sent the vehicle into other innocent road users resulting in serious injury or worse. I am no driving saint and would accept the penalty if I did overstep the mark be it by road camera or speed gun. I always thought the once over 100mph a ban was automatic. I would be interested to hear how many other of our boys/girls in blue (who I admit do a fantastic job most of the time) consider this decision sends an appropriate message to other would be test drivers? I was under the impression that special tracks should/would be used for such testing purposes? No doubt’ Mr J. Clarkson would be able to provide numerous reasons to defend the decision, although I must confess to be just a little mystified at the moment. Yours views will make interesting lunchtime reading? Mr kill joy of Sussex.

Posted By Lilian McCartney I was wondering what support he would have had from his boss if he had hit anybody? Would they have said he was acting on own initative and not accept responibislity for his actions? How about insurance and vicarious liablity?

Posted By bigwhistle Bring back the birch, stop all benefits, introduce National Service but never argue with a Copper!

Posted By Seth Pierce The phrase - One rule for one, one rule for the others - springs to mind. I was fined £60 and received three points for travelling at 32mph on a 30mph road. The nice policemen thought it justified to 'do' me as I had crossed the 40mph/30mph boundary at 2mph over the speed limit. Although I do understand the need for punishing dangerous driving I feel there are some members of the boys in blue that thrive on being complete t*ssers. The irony is I got let off with a warning for travelling at 85mph in a 50 mph zone (when I was alot younger) try and figure the logic there!!!

Posted By steve williamson Its not the 159 on the motorway that bothers me, even though that's far faster than Pierre Levegh would have been travelling in the 1950's at Le Mans when he managed to kill himself and 50+ others in the stand. Its the 84 in a 30 zone where there was every chance of a random drunk or badger in the middle of the road. That is unforgiveable.

Posted By Andy Petrie I notice another pie in the sky comment from RoSPA in this article. I take it that they consider that driving at 99mph would be safe in emergency circumstances? I'd like to know what Kevin Clinton's attitude would be if he was in the back of an ambulance having a heart attack. 'Excuse me huys, do you mind slowing down?' I doubt it very much.

Posted By Bev This has totally amazed me. The public roads are an uncontrollable environment; how did he know there was no oil or debris on the road. Or that a deer or dog or something wouldn't suddenly appear in the road from nowhere? Or a member of the public, broken down without lights? Amazing.

Posted By Charley Farley-Trelawney Then again if a 17 year old in a stolen super car was driving at 150mph on the motorway in the early hours and there was a chance of him killing many people with the reckless driving, I for one would be quite happy for a traffic driver to exceed the limit catch the person and totally eliminate the possibility of killing persons unnecessarily. I would like to think the police had a car fast enough to dissuade him/her from continuing, how, other than a rolling road does he know he can catch them and rolling roads are fine but they don't prove the handling. Just a thought! Charles

Posted By Charley Farley-Trelawney Certainly not Paul, but rolling roads excepted its the only place a traffic cop is ever going to to these sort of speeds. Surely you are not suggesting the car thief is going to be anywhere else other than the road when driving at crazy speeds, that need catching by trained police...oops been there sorry!

Posted By Paul Costelloe Charles - I did a motorway driving skills course at Silverstone, where such things as high speed emergency lane changing, skid control etc. can be practised. There are also many other circuits and vehicle test tracks around the country. The Motor Industry Research Association (MIRA) run some. These test centres are meant to represent actual road layouts and conditions but without the street furniture and members of the public wandering/driving around.

Posted By Charley Farley-Trelawney Paul You make an excellent point; it will however not substitute actual conditions than an officer of the law may be required to negotiate in a real life 160mph chase with real cars and real people involved. Interesting to note JC's comments of today and mentions in only the way he can, that he didn't believe it were actually true as he heatedly stated that a bl**dy Vectra could not possibly do 160mph! Not certain that bit is accurate as I would think the Police vehicles are re chipped and I am certain that if the old Lotus Carlton of years gone by was capable of 200mph plus then a Vectra must be capable of 160mph, anyway, drifting off track here a bit, (pun intended) I still stand by the fact he was declared innocent and safe (ish) As for anyone suggesting Fred Bloggs has been doing 100mph and faces a ban or points, he ain't no officer of the law, just like the rest of us who are not, we speed we get caught, we get prosecuted... strangely I consider that fair. Charles

Posted By Paul Costelloe nice one Paul

Posted By Chris Black An Edinburgh safety camera van was clocked driving at more than 10 MPH over the limit on a notoriously dangerous road by a member of the public . The whole thing was videoed by a passenger in the private car, the video showed road markings, speed signs and the M.O.P.s own speedo bang on the legal limit as the safety camera van sped away. Lothian and Border's chief constable grudgingly decided to look in to it and has had the video for six months without issuing any statement. a few months ago I passed my local police station en-route to a pizza shop. As I approached the station a marked car and van sped out, lights flashing, sirens blaring and headed off in the same direction as I was headed. Guess who was ordering pizza just ahead of me when i got to the shop?

Posted By Robert K Lewis Jez They must have been a bit tired that day and running slow as I have viewed their "antics" at various times and 150 is a bit low. Like most the "one law for one and another for the rest of you attitude" infuriates me but strangely I can see the force of the particular constable's argument. But I don't see why blues and twos should be used to get the supper in or avoid traffic light queues. The chief constables who prosecute speeding within the legal margins of error for a speedometer (+ or - 10% if I recollect correctly) are having the proverbial laugh at our expense. Then you see their chauffeurs let off for speeding because their boss had told him to do so after a tiring evening at a party. Bob

Posted By Bev A lot of you are saying - what if he was chasing a car thief etc. He wasn't. In his own words he was testing the car or himself or whatever. Correct me if I'm wrong, but when you test something there are two possible outcomes: pass and fail. What if something had failed? Surely at these speeds, in the dark, his headlights would not have illuminated far enough ahead to show if there was an obstacle in his way in time for him to take evasive action. His stopping distance must have been huge had a mechanical failure or puncture occured. If it is necessary in an emergency to speed then that is a decision that has to be made quickly on the spot and there is a difference. They do have other ways of catching offenders rather than just chasing behind them at speed.

Posted By Raymond Rapp A very popular thread indeed! It should be noted that this so-called police officer was 'shopped' by his own colleagues. It is laughable to suggest that he was 'familarising' himself with a new vehicle at such irresponsible speeds. Whether he is a competent driver or not should have no bearing on the matter. As for the judge... he should be removed from his position forthwith because he must be as batty as the driver! If I was caught speeding could I claim that I am a safe and responsible person just because I am a professional h&s practitioner? Regards Ray

Posted By Stuart Nagle Whilst generally I do not condone driving at excessive speed, my views initally were the same as many above on reading the headlines, namely "What another Police Officer getting away with it".... However, on reflection, and having read all the article and the justification for it, I have revised my view of the incident and agree to a greater extent that highly skilled police drivers, who are required to drive at very high speed in persuit or otherwise, do need to keep their skills honed. The method of practice is, as stated by the Judge, a matter of policy review for the police, but the time of day (early hours of the morning) and the fact that the road was all but deserted did not make for a high risk problem for other road users. It would appear however that the opportunity to drive at such speed for Police Officers is very limited, and as was stated in the article in the Daily Telegraph, there should be an 'off road' training area for such driving practice, but who is going to be able to pay for or provide such a facility? It would seem impractical given that high speed persuit drivers are not required to drive around in circles on a banked racing circuit, but persue criminals on the public highways and Motorways of the UK which vary greatly from merry go round racing circuits in conditions, layout, elevation and of course have other hazards such as road users on them as well..... Years ago and before all the hurah about speeding motorists and speed cameras, I recall regularly driving up and down the M1 in the early hours of the morning, past Newport Pagnell, and regularly being overtaken by Aston Martins being road tested at high speed by the Aston Martin test drivers. A practice that went on for many years without, to my knowledge a single accident or police intervention (the fact that at the time the police probably did not have cars capable of catching an Aston Martin may of course have something to do with it!!), but none the less I recall no complaints, no newspaper articles, no court cases, no Judges stating a test track must be provided etc etc.... So, no. In hindsight I agree that Police Officers should be permitted to practice their high speed driving, and a deserted (and little used by other standards) motorway in the early hours would seem as appropriate place as any..... Off soap box now.... Regards... Stuart

Posted By Paul Leadbetter Whatever our thoughts on this behaviour, clearly the PC's own colleagues believed he was out of order or the case wouldn't have gone to court in the first place. Although driving at such speeds is illegal, at least the motorway was clear of most other hazards. I am much more concerned about the report that he was doing 83 mph in a 30 mph area where anything could have happened (even in the early hours). Paul

Posted By NeilM Poyznts-Powell Stuart, I'm sorry but I am not prepared to be a potential hazard ("...other road user..."), for this boy racer in a blue uniform to run into. Driving at over 80mph through a built up residential area at any time of day or night, no matter how much experience or training you have can not be tolerated when there is no justification other than seeing what yoiur new toy can do (159mph on the motorway is right at the top of this cars speed, how many times in the past as he needed to go this fast in a pursuit, when the majority of cars will not get past 155mph). This police officer was caught bang to rights breaking the law and should suffer the same fate as any other private individual. His job title, training and experience are in my mind irrelevant, he broke a statutory speed limit. Rant over. Thanks, Neil

Posted By J Knight People have mentioned the idea that the police have to train to drive at speed to carry out pursuit. They don't you know, at least, I'm sure I read last year that because of the number of serious accidents involving high speed police chases the practice of hot pursuit would cease. The police instead should be relying on intelligence (e.g. helicopters) to block routes in advance, and on the use of devices to disable speeding cars and so on. So, not only was this twit driving recklessly, giving aid and comfort to every man-in-the-pub in the land, and acting with utter disregard for what he's supposed to uphold, he wasn't even undergoing necessary training. Just a boy with a new toy, and in my view in breach of his license. Only pedestrians, horse-riders and cyclists use roads by right, everybody else needs a license, this implies duties as well as rights; he should be stripped of his, John