- This topic has 12 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated 17 years, 8 months ago by
.
- Posts
Incredibly a copper who clocked himself @ 159 in a 3.2 Vectra (!) on the M54, and was also clocked at 84mph in 30 mph has been judged Not Guilty today because he was “testing” the newly delivered pursuit vehicle!!
I am Ferkin’ speechless!!!
Donate – Or Imperial Data will have you sorted!159mph speeding charge Pc cleared
A police constable who reached 159mph on a motorway has been cleared of speeding and dangerous driving.
Pc Mark Milton, 38, from Telford, Shropshire, was recorded by the patrol car’s video camera on the M54 in 2003, Ludlow Magistrates’ Court heard.District Judge Bruce Morgan acquitted him after calling the constable the “creme de la creme” of police drivers.
Pc Milton is trained in advanced driving and was “familiarising” himself with a new car, the court was told.
‘Lack of policy’
The officer, who is trained in the use of firearms, was recorded travelling at 159mph on the motorway near Telford in the early hours of 5 December 2003.
In reaching his verdict, Mr Morgan noted that two police officers who gave evidence for the prosecution, including West Mercia Police’s senior driving instructor, had declined to classify the defendant’s driving as dangerous.
We don’t believe 159mph can ever be justified on public roads
Kevin Clinton, RospaBut he added: “I can’t help but see the irony that those that brought this prosecution are those very people who have purchased cars that go at this speed and paid for him (the defendant) to go to learn to drive at these speeds.”
The magistrate also expressed deep concern at West Mercia Constabulary’s “total lack of policy” on when and where police drivers should practise driving at very high speeds.
But speaking after the case, a police spokesman said the force was to clarify the guidance issued to advanced drivers.
Referring to the prosecution brought against Mr Milton, the spokesman said: “Members of our own staff identified that an offence may have taken place and began an investigation.
“The Crown Prosecution Service determined that a prosecution was appropriate.”
The Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (Rospa) said it was ed that such a speed was not regarded as dangerous by the court.
Kevin Clinton, head of road safety, said: “Police are governed by health and safety laws just the same as any other employer.
“We don’t believe 159mph can ever be justified on public roads.
‘Honing skills’
“Even in emergencies we consider that driving at 100mph or more is too dangerous.”
But the Police Federation defended the driving of Pc Milton, who is also known to have travelled at 120mph in a 60mph zone and at more than 60mph in a 30mph zone.
Speaking on the steps of the court, Insp Keith Howes, said: “Pc Milton was driving in accordance with his training, honing his skills while possible and testing the vehicle’s capabilities so that if he was required on an urgent call he would be driving safely.”
The court heard the roads on which Pc Milton drove were deserted at the time of the patrol and that driving conditions were good.
Story from BBC NEWS
LOVE IS GIVING SOMEONE THE ABILITY TO DESTROY YOU, THEN TRUSTING THEM NOT TO.
Life should NOT be a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in an attractive and well preserved body, But rather to skid in sideways, chocolate in one hand, vacuum in the other, body thoroughly used up, totally worn out and screaming…….WOO HOO, there goes another engine!
Anyone can drive at that speed on a motorway and consider them selves safe drivers but I bet that copper could`nt handle a supersports bike round the twisties at 130+.What a total copout.The things you do to get a video of yourself to show your sad bent mates.
Take it easy out there
3.2 Vectra SRi is good for mid to high 140’s officially. Given a good run at a high speed run, it might able to squeeze low 150’s.
Does make you wonder about the accuracy of their gear!
Donate – Or Imperial Data will have you sorted!Why did he have the video on record,me thinks this was to show his workmates the footage back at the station.
Take it easy out there
This is common practice for police forces when they obtain new vehicles, albeit it is never publicised, (well not normally) maybe the copper who spilled the beans is actually on our side.
The worrying thing in this case is how does he test his new firearms?
PS
By the look of this coppers face, (photo in the tabloids) I bet he’s a right blastard when he pulls you…
Best Regards
Stuart XV16
Please note that some of the comments and articles posted may not represent my views or the views of The Bike Forum and its moderators.
“The normally careful and competent actions of a reasonable individual should be considered legal.”Rumour has it that his collegues think he’s a tosser and reported his lawbreaking after watching the video.
Be seen and be Safe!
UPDATE:
The Crown Procescution Service (CPS), are to appeal against the courts Not Guilty verdict.
Good for them! Hope they nail him. He should be taken off traffic at the very least and banned from driving for 12 months.
Donate – Or Imperial Data will have you sorted!This copper is back in court next week and has to prove he was on police business. Hmmm
BTW Vauxhall have just launched a new Vectra VXR that can pull 161mph!
Look in the Forest if you want to find treesAQUITTAL OVERTURNED!
Safespeed Press release…
According to a PA News Snap, PC Mark Milton’s acquittal was overturned today at the High Court.
Paul Smith, founder of the Safe Speed road safety campaign (www.safespeed.org.uk) said: “This decision will do untold damage to Policing and police response driving. No one will no where they stand. Training will suffer. Police officers will have even more to worry about when they are attempting to respond to emergencies.”
Apparently it will go back to Magistrates?
“Although Mark Milton’s case appears extreme, there will be deadly knock-on effects across the board.”
Now there’s an irony. A spokesman for safe speed, condoning speeding. seems there is one law for some and another for the rest of us. Testing his new toy could be done on a race track, abandoned aerodrome, etc… Somewhere that it won’t cause a danger to others.
Policeman wins legal bid over 159mph driving convictionBack to Communities
Publisher: Ian Morgan
Published: 16/03/2007 – 16:29:27 PM Printable version
Send to a friendPC Mark Milton. Photo: PA A police officer “with unusual driving skills” today won his High Court bid to overturn his conviction for dangerous driving after reaching speeds of up to 159mph in an unmarked patrol car.
Pc Mark Milton, of Telford, Shropshire – described as the “creme de la creme” of police drivers – was found guilty last August following his second trial for the offence after the High Court overturned his original acquittal.
District Judge Peter Wallis, sitting at Ludlow Magistrates’ Court, found him guilty after ruling that his expertise as a Grade 1 advanced police driver was “irrelevant” to whether or not his driving was dangerous.
But today Lady Justice Smith and Mr Justice Gross, sitting at London’s High Court, said the district judge had “misdirected himself”.
They sent the case back to him to decide whether “Pc Milton’s unusual driving skills were such as to make a crucial difference to the dangerousness of his driving”.
Lady Justice Smith said: “It seems to me that this matter is of considerable importance to both sides of the dispute.”
Lady Justice Smith described how the case had given rise to prolonged litigation.
At Pc Milton’s first trial, District Judge Bruce Morgan acquitted him of dangerous driving and speeding charges in April 2005.
The judge referred to him as the “creme de la creme” of police drivers and found that his vehicle was being driven “for police purposes”.
In reaching his verdict, Judge Morgan noted that two police officers who gave evidence for the prosecution, including West Mercia Police’s senior driving instructor, had declined to classify the defendant’s driving as dangerous.
A re-trial was ordered before Judge Wallis when the High Court ruled that Judge Morgan had misdirected himself.
Pc Milton’s second trial at Ludlow Magistrates’ Court was shown footage taken from the camera fitted to a West Mercia Police Vauxhall Vectra.
Milton, 40, was seen travelling at more than 100mph on A-roads and up to 159mph on the M54 during the early hours of December 5, 2003.
Finding him guilty of dangerous driving, Judge Wallis told Milton: “Your driving falls far beneath the standards expected of a careful and competent driver.
“In all circumstances I am satisfied to the criminal standard of proof that you are guilty of dangerous driving.”
But the judge granted him an absolute discharge, saying: “He (Milton) has suffered quite a lot in the last two and a half years.”
Pc Milton claimed he was only “honing his skills” as he was trained to do.
He also claimed that the readings shown on the tape, which fluctuated wildly, were not accurate.
At the High Court today, Lady Justice Smith said Judge Wallis had applied a “wholly objective” test to decide whether Pc Milton’s driving had been dangerous – wrongly relying on a Government White Paper which had preceded a 1991 amendment to the 1988 Road Traffic Act.
Judge Wallis was “led into error” because Parliament or the Government had withdrawn proposals in the White Paper in favour of the wholly objective test.
Instead, the new legislation directed courts to take into account “any circumstances known to have been within the knowledge of the accused”.
Lady Justice Smith said the case “well illustrates the danger of referring to background material such as a White Paper”.
She said: “It seems to me the fact that the driver is a Grade 1 advanced police driver is a circumstance to which regard must be had.”
Ordering Judge Wallis to reconsider the case, she said a court might find that the driving “was thoroughly dangerous regardless of the skill of the individual driver”.
On the other hand, a court might conclude that what might be dangerous driving “for a driver of ordinary skill” might not be for “a man of exceptional skill”.
The judge said she was “unimpressed” by the argument that her ruling could “open the floodgates” for drivers to claim the ability to drive safely at speed in dangerous driving cases.
It would only be relevant in cases involving the extremes “of special skill” and “almost complete lack of experience”.
The fact that a driver had driven for 30 years without an accident “will not be relevant”.
Lady Justice Smith said: “It follows that, for the reasons I have given, I would allow this appeal.
“The district judge misdirected himself in concluding that Pc Milton’s unusual driving skills were irrelevant to the issue of dangerousness of his driving on this occasion.”
Mr Justice Gross said he agreed, adding: “Just as consumption of alcohol may result in the objective conclusion that driving was dangerous when otherwise it might not have been, so exceptional driving qualifications – whether the driver is a police officer or ‘civilian’ matters not – may mean that a manoeuvre otherwise dangerous might objectively not warrant the same conclusion.”
Later, Andy White, chairman of the West Mercia Police Federation, said the case of Pc Milton had already had an impact on the training of police drivers up and down the country.
He said: “Whilst the quashing of the conviction is welcome, we are not out of the woods yet.
“The case first came to light three and a half years ago, but now it still has to go back for another decision to be made.
“Three and a half years ago officers up and down the country were doing exactly what Mark Milton was doing, and they were authorised to do it.
“But the case has led to a lot of forces reviewing their policy and no officer being allowed to travel over 120mph.”
Mr White said that he himself had trained to Class 1 advanced driver standard and driven at 138mph “whenever it was safe to do so”.
He said: “Somebody clearly thought that what Mark was doing was dangerous, yet he, like other officers up and down the country, was trained to drive at speed in a vehicle capable of doing these speeds.”
Copyright Press Association 2007
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.