ADUK Archive

The High Court consideration of the PC Milton case doesn't preclude civilians from using additional driver training in their defence but it appears the standard would have to be 'exceptional'. Also the reasoning of the court appears to be that Police Advanced Drivers are trained to drive safely at grossly excessive speeds and an understanding of this training would assist the layperson in determining actual danger rather than having to make a less informed decision.

This use of 'advanced driving skills' can be distinguished from the question of whether the mere fact one has them is a mitigating or aggravating factor.

As far as disobeying an order is concerned my view is that this is an internal disciplinary matter for the Police - to some extent in the context of the officers being public servants and the expectations that go with it. It might be relevant to whether or not they were driving for a 'Police purpose' but as RH has pointed out it is of little or no relevance in deciding whether the actual driving was dangerous.

fungus wrote:Wasn't there a case a few months ago where a woman was jailed for aiding and abetting, after letting her companion drive whilst under the influence of drink.

ISTR it was the other way round - she was driving, after both had been drinking to excess, but he was both her employer and her boyfriend, and could be regarded as being in a position to exercise influence over her.

Yes if I had been exceeding a limit or doing something I knew to be unsound I wouldn't mentioned anything about advanced driving if I came to court as its you 'should know better'. I knew the magistrate who sentenced Nigel Maunsel for his 100mph M5 trip and in his mind it wasn't a question of whether it was unsafe and Munsel's motorsport career spoke for itself so safety wasn't the issue he broke the law plain and simple.

As has been said police advanced are trained at high speeds on public highway and thats not something that any of the civilian organisations can not officially provide.

As in the case of pc milton expert witness (Police Driving Instructor) says they feel the driving wasn't to safe but the original judge gave pc milton an easy ride merely because he didn't crash in my mind and so regardless of whether a police advanced instructor (A big difference to just a current advanced cert holder) says it was unsafe it is. Whether that judge would agree and argue that he didnt want to damage response driving as whole I don't know.

jont wrote:I didn't realise there was a specific offence of "aiding and abetting dangerous driving".

The Magistrate's Act creates the offences of aiding abetting counselling and procuring for all summary offences.

That covers most sorts of urging others to commit. The real test is whether its in the public interest to prosecute -- and where someone dies the public interest is baying for blood.