My Brother is also a biker , well sort of gsxr 600 however some of the group he goes on blasts with are bike police and he tells me that there is no way he can get near them as they have all sorts of training and ride flat out when ever possible
discuss
- Thread starter BIG UN
- Start date
-
- Tags
- discuss
Anyone remember this...happened 'bout 2 miles from my house. No custodial sentence for this :jack
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/7511680.stm
No parity what so ever IMO :confused :rant
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/7511680.stm
No parity what so ever IMO :confused :rant
one rule for one one for another :jack that stinks at least that bloke got home to bed with out killing any one.bet he still on sik pay:angry
Joined Aug 2007
1K Posts | 0+
Brent Knoll, Somerset
You are talking complete rubbish.
Yes it's a tragic loss of life but he was tried by a crown court jury who are members of the public. What he did was wrong. No arguement there, and he should know better. (We all should). There are no seperate rules fool.
Joined Jul 2008
253 Posts | 0+
Somerset
One thing the media don't account fully for is what matey had been done for previously as that has a bearing on how badly you get your knuckles rapped by the magistrates. Well, for stuff like this anyway :roll
Being disqual for starters,doig 130 plus an extended highlight reel :biggrin whilst giving 17 plod-mobiles and the petrol pigeon the finger whilst proceeding to then show them a clean pair of heals and bugger off means he would have needed O J Simpsons lawyer and Paul Daniels to get away with that :eatcorn
Down this neck of the woods and from my experience the magistrates are as random as a dumb blonde, but one thing that always got them grumpy and staring over the tops of their bifocals was disqual and drink drivers being naughty boys again for the same thing, especially if they were still banned.
Of course expect plod to embelish the story with the usual ' tied up resources, danger to the public, cost to the taxpayer, lost revenue from 17 plods taken off tax disc dodgers duty etc etc' shenanigans and it looks even worse.
It's just the hypocrisy of some of the police and their post trial holier than thou attitude that grips my ****. Think gamekeeper turned poacher with that comment and it'll make more sense !
Being disqual for starters,doig 130 plus an extended highlight reel :biggrin whilst giving 17 plod-mobiles and the petrol pigeon the finger whilst proceeding to then show them a clean pair of heals and bugger off means he would have needed O J Simpsons lawyer and Paul Daniels to get away with that :eatcorn
Down this neck of the woods and from my experience the magistrates are as random as a dumb blonde, but one thing that always got them grumpy and staring over the tops of their bifocals was disqual and drink drivers being naughty boys again for the same thing, especially if they were still banned.
Of course expect plod to embelish the story with the usual ' tied up resources, danger to the public, cost to the taxpayer, lost revenue from 17 plods taken off tax disc dodgers duty etc etc' shenanigans and it looks even worse.
It's just the hypocrisy of some of the police and their post trial holier than thou attitude that grips my ****. Think gamekeeper turned poacher with that comment and it'll make more sense !
Last edited:
Joined Feb 2008
677 Posts | 0+
Kent
Hang on... public tried him right. Judge hands sentence down... This is SIC. That copper should be fired. They said he should know better being a policeman.... SO HE SHOULD GET A SENTENCE. Life for a life. End of. This cuntry makes me sic some times... GGGRRRRRRRRRRRRR:rant:rant:rant:rant:rant:rant:rant:rant:rant:rant:rant
Joined Apr 2008
1K Posts | 0+
Sunny Bournemouth
And if he wasn't a policeman and was a mate of yours?
Parity only comes into play as an argument for comparative sentencing when the circumstances are identical in a case, not when they are completely unrelated.
Bare with me here, but if you yourself crashed, lets say for arguments sake on a diesel spill on a roundabout and your bike slid across the road, mounted a kerb and struck a pedestrian and they died as a result, would you feel justice would be for you to go to prison? :dunno
Accidents happen, they do, it is a fact of life, be it on a bike or at home doing DIY (visit your local A&E if you'd like some evidence). Apportioning blame when a fatality is a by product of an accident, but not directly involved in the accident, will forever be a moot point as it very much depends on the circumstances. The law in general uses tests of reasonableness.
The guy in the chase video has to take responsibility for his actions and the potential consequences of those actions. His actions are a continual show of reckless endangerment to himself and the public, and with each moment he travels he is making a choice not to stop despite knowing full well that he is being followed by the police. I'd hazard a guess that if he had pulled over immediately, said his apologies and shown a degree of humility then he would of got a telling off and a ticket for a lower speed that he was actually doing. He hasn't been prosecuted and treated harshly for the speed, it is for his actions. Maybe the sentence is a little harsh, but if he wanted to behave like an ***** then he does deserve to be treated like one.
We all speed, we all in some peoples eyes ride in a reckless manner. But how many of us would actually try to out run the police?
Keep it sunny side up gents :thumbup
i wouldnt try and out run em,theyre highly trained,good riders.
i know id be pushing it riding flat out,taking chances,while the rozzer would be sat at a comfy distance waiting for me to lose the front end or a dumb woman in a car on her mobile to pull out on me again,like the last 2 weekends ffs.
if i speed,and it happens,i take that chance,if im unlucky enough to get caught,its my fault/problem.
a fair cop in other words,just hate the entrapment side of the police clamp downs,like the plain blue famous camera van hidden outside matlock everyweek.if they dont want us speeding in certain areas,just park a marked car in plain site at the roadside and everyone will slow down,simple as that,preventing speeding/alleged crashes from speeding.
ah but then,theyd lose there revenue from fines wouldnt they.
seems they dont mind us speeding as long as they can charge us for it ffs.
its crazy.
i know id be pushing it riding flat out,taking chances,while the rozzer would be sat at a comfy distance waiting for me to lose the front end or a dumb woman in a car on her mobile to pull out on me again,like the last 2 weekends ffs.
if i speed,and it happens,i take that chance,if im unlucky enough to get caught,its my fault/problem.
a fair cop in other words,just hate the entrapment side of the police clamp downs,like the plain blue famous camera van hidden outside matlock everyweek.if they dont want us speeding in certain areas,just park a marked car in plain site at the roadside and everyone will slow down,simple as that,preventing speeding/alleged crashes from speeding.
ah but then,theyd lose there revenue from fines wouldnt they.
seems they dont mind us speeding as long as they can charge us for it ffs.
its crazy.
Last edited:
Joined Mar 2008
3K Posts | 0+
Lincolnshire
:doug:doug:doug beach volleyball :doug:doug:doug
we all know what flicks doing :jack, :roll, :thumbup
we all know what flicks doing :jack, :roll, :thumbup
Some of the police (not all) do enjoy a life of double standards i.e do as i say and not as i do, i realised this when we had the pub, We had officers and CID use the pub most days and evenings, there was many a time they would have a skin full of booze and drive home, CID were the worst offenders of this, now i know for a fact there were 2 seperate occasions when one of the CID boys was pulled over and then let on his way with nothing said even tho it was quite clear he was over the limit, whatever job your in you all expect your work mates to cover your back from time to time but i found this action unforgivable, the copper let let him go and in my opinion should not be wearin the uniform as he had knowingly let a man over the drink drive limit carry on driving, thus causing possible harm to the general public he is ment to be protecting. i lost most of my respect for the police whilst in the pub trade :roll:roll
Joined Apr 2008
1K Posts | 0+
Sunny Bournemouth
You aren't wrong sir, a percentage of them are definately double standard tossers. A mate of mine managed a local live music pub for a few years, and the CID boys were always doing the whole drink drive thing. When I used to ask them what made it ok for them and not for others, the standard reply was that they were more "able" and in "control" :jack. They didn't like the next question of "are you suggesting you can disregard the laws that you are employed to respect and enforce because of your own judgement of what is right and wrong because of your perception of your own personal ability? Do you have your own laws that none of us know about?" :jack
Forgive my cynicism, but for one minute do people really believe that he was doing 33mph?? (in the text not the video), which funnily enough is the magic 10% over the speed limit.
Secondly how the hell did he get off with 'careless' driving - surely overtaking a row of 3 vehicles on a 'no-go' chevron area at speed (according to eye witnesses at the time) is dangerous driving. If he wasn't speeding then how did his bike travel over 50 yards.
Thirdly the vehicle wasn't even taxed at the time of the accident and hence forth not insured.
I'm sorry but I smell a rat with the CPS only persuing a charge of careless.
As for parity, well.... one guys out acting a **** doing 130mph with half of Wiltshire constabulary on his arse, ultimately does no one any harm and avoids immediate capture, gets 14 months in jail. Then the other guy is out doing probably 50/60 mph, no tax, overtaking in a dangerous place on a narrow road and kills someone as a result of his actions and gets slapped with £1000 fine, a careless driving charge and early retirement on the Costa Del Sol. Looking at the fundamentals to me there is no parity.
Then there's myself on the other hand, who at 18 years of age driving a MK1 Escort, has a race with some *** who ends up in a hedge as no result of mine and I got slapped with a Wreckless driving charge, despite hiring the best motoring law barrister this side of the Thames?
Secondly how the hell did he get off with 'careless' driving - surely overtaking a row of 3 vehicles on a 'no-go' chevron area at speed (according to eye witnesses at the time) is dangerous driving. If he wasn't speeding then how did his bike travel over 50 yards.
Thirdly the vehicle wasn't even taxed at the time of the accident and hence forth not insured.
I'm sorry but I smell a rat with the CPS only persuing a charge of careless.
As for parity, well.... one guys out acting a **** doing 130mph with half of Wiltshire constabulary on his arse, ultimately does no one any harm and avoids immediate capture, gets 14 months in jail. Then the other guy is out doing probably 50/60 mph, no tax, overtaking in a dangerous place on a narrow road and kills someone as a result of his actions and gets slapped with £1000 fine, a careless driving charge and early retirement on the Costa Del Sol. Looking at the fundamentals to me there is no parity.
Then there's myself on the other hand, who at 18 years of age driving a MK1 Escort, has a race with some *** who ends up in a hedge as no result of mine and I got slapped with a Wreckless driving charge, despite hiring the best motoring law barrister this side of the Thames?
Last edited:
Joined Apr 2008
1K Posts | 0+
Sunny Bournemouth
If you read the details of the case, the police expert estimated that he was travelling between 35-45mph. The police officer that crashed said he was doing no more than 33mph, which he will have been advised to do so by his solicitor for the precise reason you have stated.
He was tried by public jury. Quoted from one of the articles "Judge Elliot Knopf said if the jury could not find Mr Myerscough guilty on that charge they could look at driving without due care and attention." This is common place in trials.
Your comment of overtaking a row of 3 vehicles on a "no-go" chevron area I find a little strange as unless I have missed something in each of the articles, there was no "no-go" chevrons.
Take a faired motorcycle and fall off at 35mph and you'll find out how far it slides. Add to this the impact speed of the car and there is every likely hood that the initial speed was increased.
If the pedestrian had been crossing the road at the time then i'd suggest that there would not of been a moments hesitation that the death was caused by dangerous driving.
Not having road tax is not a reason for insurance to be declined.
All is possible, but the original charge brought in the case was causing death by dangerous driving. The public jury decided through hearing the entire case that this wasn't the correct charge.
Ultimately he didn't do anyone any harm, I agree. But then you'd be saying the same if the bike in the other incident hadn't slid and tragically killed a pedestrian. You could put one down to good luck despite bad judgement, the other to tragic bad luck as a result of bad judgement.
Let it go. Racing on the highway is an instant reckless driving charge, irrespective of the fact that you didn't go into a hedge.
I'm sorry tonym, i'm not having a go at you in the slightest, and can fully understand that this is an emotionally driven situation, but you can't have parity from completely different cases, accidents and circumstances. Yes the speeder was harshly dealt with, but behaving like an ***** as he did, i'd hazard a guess he didn't do himsel any favours in court either.
The people I feel for are the family that are left without a mother, a daughter or a sister. I hope they have found some way through their loss.
Keep it sunny side up gents :thumbup
If i ever get done for anything Caterpillar i want you as my defence lawyer, you convince me everytime mate :biggrin:thumbup:thumbup
Joined Aug 2007
1K Posts | 0+
Brent Knoll, Somerset
I love a healthy debate! Believe it or not most coppers are actually good people that want to help you! The position does sometimes get filled by the odd prick that can make life hard for a lot of peeps. I have had this with a right prick of a copper when I was in a fight a few years back. No need to go in to detail.
I have some friends in the police that ride bikes and if they were in an accident where someone lost their life they would be devastated. But they are good guys. I dont want to sound like I always stick up for the police but they do a good job and they are the guys we turn to when we get robbed or duffed up or whatever.
Also, if a copper ends up in court then they get a worse time than most due to the general dislike most british peeps have of our police. I am probably gonna get some **** from a few of you guys coz of my support for the police but I am a big boy and I think they do a good job.:thumbup
I have some friends in the police that ride bikes and if they were in an accident where someone lost their life they would be devastated. But they are good guys. I dont want to sound like I always stick up for the police but they do a good job and they are the guys we turn to when we get robbed or duffed up or whatever.
Also, if a copper ends up in court then they get a worse time than most due to the general dislike most british peeps have of our police. I am probably gonna get some **** from a few of you guys coz of my support for the police but I am a big boy and I think they do a good job.:thumbup
no need for the fool part as said the bloke doing a runner was daft far not stopping and could have done a lot of damage. but reading some of these storys from a jo public veiw it often look a little different
Joined Aug 2007
1K Posts | 0+
Brent Knoll, Somerset
No worries mucker. I dont think you are a fool. I just fired off at the post. It is a good debate tho and lets face it if we all agreed on every subject it would be bloody boring. You cant expect me to be married to one of the buggers and not stick up for them just a little!:devious
