ADUK Archive

This seems a bad case of redmist.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/somerset/8107730.stm

I didn't realise there was a specific offence of "aiding and abetting dangerous driving". Does anyone know under what circumstances that would apply? To me it at least implies some sort of superior/supervisory role for the passenger. I would hope most of us would make it known to a driver if we ever felt uncomfortable as a passenger, but still

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.

As far as driving instuction is concerned. If a provisional licence holder commits an offence, then they can be prosecuted for that offence, and the accompanying person can be prosecuted for aiding and abetting.

As far as observing is concerned, I suppose there could be implications for observers, even though you remind the associate that they are deemed to be in control of the vehicle at all times during an observed run, and that the vehicle must be roadworthy and properly insured, and comply with all necessary documentation.

Nigel ADI
IAM trainee observer

It will be interesting to see the detail of the allegation when it eventually comes out. Simply disobeying orders would not make their driving dangerous, no more than if the pursuit had been authorized that would have made what they were doing any less "dangerous". It is the standard of driving that is subject to scrutiny and there is no legal exemption that allows an officer to drive "dangerously" regardless of what authority they do it under.

I suspect there is some evidence that the driving was dangerous and that the passenger (perhaps from the radio commentary) was involved in the decision making. To justify any charge of aiding and abetting they will need to show that the passenger did some act which involved them in the commission of the offence, or failed to do something that they were required to do, and this is the most likely because there is an expectation that a police officer will act to avert public danger.

No doubt it will all come out eventually.

If those officers received an order from a superior and disobeyed it then that is grave cause for concern - they may not have agreed with the order but that would be no excuse for ignoring it.

That sort of thing could be very serious if the order was 'do not fire'

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

Just about every offense of the statute book has allied offenses of "aiding and abetting", "causing or permitting" and "counseling or procuring". In road traffic law there are even specific offense codes for these.

Does anyone know under what circumstances that would apply? To me it at least implies some sort of superior/supervisory role for the passenger. I would hope most of us would make it known to a driver if we ever felt uncomfortable as a passenger, but still

It is normally applied where there is evidence that someone actively assisted in the commission of an offense without actually doing the deed. The classic example is someone storing equipment knowing that it was (or would be) used in a crime.

Generally the public is not expected to try to stop an offense in progress (for their own safety) so failing to prevent the commission of an offense is not usually "aiding and abetting". It may that in this case it was felt that as a police officer the passenger could have been reasonably expected to take action. Or it could be that there is evidence that the passenger actively encouraged the behavior of the driver.

Of course we don't have the full details of what happened so it is impossible to tell what basis there is for making the charge in this case so all we can do is speculate.

I suppose you could argue that if they were pursuing contrary to instructions, they had no more right to drive in that way than joe public and what they did amounts to racing on the highway?

Maybe there is the thought that their actions were responsible for the accident. We've already seen what happens to a civilian who gets involved in high speed interaction with another vehicle which then crashes.........

All you need to be booked for dangerous driving is a witness/s to say that an overtake was actaully racing your a dangerous driver.

It was on a recent police doc where a z4 and a new civic type r had alledgly had a race and the civic lost control and landed on someone house. A witness said they where racing and the z4 driver denied anything out of the ordnary even saying he didnt see the civic crash. After some digging they found his mobile phone was the one that made the 999 call opps with a fake name.

Basically the civic driver lost control as he crested a hill and the car lifted and the z4 had overtaken him!

Both drivers got banned for dd and fined, its worrying that if while out for a spirited run you over take someone who reacts and does something silly and crashes. All its takes a is a witness to say your racing and bang dd is a possible out come.

The court will have to have regard to the Police Officers' training when deciding whether or not the driving was dangerous so we need to be careful when comparing them with the rest of us. If the pursuit was called off for safety reasons then it will be interesting to see how the court deals with the remote assessment of danger compared with that of the officers in the car.

Yes I forget its a one rule for us and quite another for them, so they may get away with a wrist slap from the courts as its a balance between putting off professional officiers from carrying out pursuits.

I am led to believe by a headquarters source they where dc's in a non blue light audi a3 who took it upon them selfs to chase these teenagers despite being ordered to cancel the pursuit it is being described like the scene out of a american cop film. The driver is has a standard response but is not advanced nor pursuit management trained, TPAC etc they where is an unsuitable vehicle for that role.

When these teenagers crashed injuring some members of the public and causing damaged to vehicles and highway the driver set about giving two fo the occupants and old fashion beating and just nothing professional about them.

Thats from a officier working in avon and somerset headquarters as we have an office a couple of miles away.

Regardless of the courts decsion the internal displinary I am told will be brutal.

ROG wrote:If those officers received an order from a superior and disobeyed it then that is grave cause for concern - they may not have agreed with the order but that would be no excuse for ignoring it.

That sort of thing could be very serious if the order was 'do not fire'

Slight derail, but I don't think a senior officer can order them not to fire anymore than they can order them to fire. In a firearm incident a senior officer can direct the deployment (or not) of firearms officers, but not actually tell them how or when to use their weapons. Likewise in a pursuit situation they can order a pursuit to be abandoned, but not tell the officers how to drive their vehicles.

And by the way jb, it's not one rule for the police and another for the public. All that was said is that their level of training would be taken into consideration when deciding if their driving was dangerous. If you were ever to find yourself in the dock I'm sure you would like the court to consider your driving skills when deliberating on your fate.

Red Herring wrote:And by the way jb, it's not one rule for the police and another for the public. All that was said is that their level of training would be taken into consideration when deciding if their driving was dangerous. If you were ever to find yourself in the dock I'm sure you would like the court to consider your driving skills when deliberating on your fate.

Begs the question -

Should any advanced driver be treated more harshly than a non advanced driver if they do end up in court on a driving charge

I think the pc milton case proved that some judges have blinkers on with regard police advanced drivers and will often give them the benefit of doubt even if police driving experts state their driving was unsound. Unless as in the case of pc dougal you mo down and kill a teenager at 3 times the posted limit then it makes it hard for them to give you that benefit.

I don't think any civilian advanced driving accalades have any wait what so ever when it comes to civilian prosecutions. Although if anyone can offer a case where it has been a factor.

I had a sitaution where someone I used to work with was driving home the same route as me yesterday in his mgf tf160 and he decieded to have some fun with a white scooby. He rang me up later and asked why I bottled out of keeping up with them. I replied because he had www.f*ckthepolice.com stickers on each side of subaru leading to think he is a completed idiot and if he did something silly I didn't want to involved or accused of a driving offence such as dangerous driving because I had raced him or egged him on.

jbsportstech wrote:I don't think any civilian advanced driving accalades have any wait what so ever when it comes to civilian prosecutions. Although if anyone can offer a case where it has been a factor.

I'm wondering, as Rog mentions, if landing in court and holding an advanced driving qualification would go against you as you "should know better"? Were I to land in court, I'd certainly keep it quiet

Chris

ScoobyChris wrote:I'm wondering, as Rog mentions, if landing in court and holding an advanced driving qualification would go against you as you "should know better"? Were I to land in court, I'd certainly keep it quiet

Chris

I would imagine it depends on the type of offence. If it were something involving a lapse of concentration you might be able to mitigate the sentence by pleading that it was simply a momentary fall in the high standards which you set yourself. Conversely if it were something which could only have been a deliberate act then I think it might make the sentencing slightly harsher.

Regarding JB's earlier post, what kind of moron has f**kthe police written on their car? I mean, that's really going to help when you inevitably get stopped, isn't it?

regards
P.