Justice was done - done for using a mobile while driving

[Darren]

No it wasn't me....

For the first time ever yesterday, I saw something which quite impressed me and caused me to say "well done local plod".

A woman turning left on a roundabout, had real trouble steering in her Suzuki Vitara, just after she came round off the roundabout, very quickly followed a Police Officer on a mountain bike, at speed, who actually caught her up and pulled her over.

I went about my business, and when on my way back past where she had been pulled, he was ticketing her.

The first time I know of, or have seen anyone that looked to be being done for using a mobile while driving. And also 10/10 to the officer for chasing her down!

Mind you, he wasn't wearing a Cycle helmet which doesn't put across a good image of road safety for young people out on their bikes at the moment in the sunshine. His colleague who was litterally pottering behind him, also wasn't wearing a helmet.

[James]

Maybe having pulled her over he realised she wasn't wearing a seatbelt and gave her a ticket for that instead!

[Prelude]

One scenario that annoyed me about 4 weeks ago was when I was driving home form work one day and it was school chucking out time (I'm usually finshed work by 1pm , so not used to school runs as such) and this woman in a car was taking a left-hand bend in a built up area (100 yrds from the school, kids everywhere) and she was on her mobile phone with a car full of kids to boot!! Dimwit!! Wish she had been seen by the cops and pulled over for it, but really no chance of that.

[James]

Not no chance, just little chance.

[Søren]

No it wasn't me....

For the first time ever yesterday, I saw something which quite impressed me and caused me to say "well done local plod".

A woman turning left on a roundabout, had real trouble steering in her Suzuki Vitara, just after she came round off the roundabout, very quickly followed a Police Officer on a mountain bike, at speed, who actually caught her up and pulled her over.

I went about my business, and when on my way back past where she had been pulled, he was ticketing her.

The first time I know of, or have seen anyone that looked to be being done for using a mobile while driving. And also 10/10 to the officer for chasing her down!

Mind you, he wasn't wearing a Cycle helmet which doesn't put across a good image of road safety for young people out on their bikes at the moment in the sunshine. His colleague who was litterally pottering behind him, also wasn't wearing a helmet.

Sounds like she should have been reported for 'due care'.

[Roadcraft]

Sounds like she should have been reported for 'due care'.

When was the last time you reported anyone for 'due care'?

Reason, I ask is that the CPS in my area will only take jobs that are a 'series of events'...ie: plural..or over some considerable distance..

Crap, but true..

[7db]

Last week.

[James]

About a year ago, for the same reasons mentioned.

[Søren]

Sounds like she should have been reported for 'due care'.

When was the last time you reported anyone for 'due care'?

By "due care" I mean the panoply of offence titles under S3 RTA

Last week, if that matters

And in the last 6 weeks I have recommended that three be prosecuted for it in my current role - two fatals and a serious life altering RTC.

Last week, reported a driver of an off road 'cherry picker' for driving on the road, the cradle on the extending arm from which he was driving was swinging alarmingly because of the coarseness of the hydraulic steering. Driver reported for Sec 3, along with numerous other offences.

Two months ago, driver moved into path of an overtaking vehicle causing a collision. Reported Sec 3
Two months ago, driver collidied with a cone on the motorway, falling asleep. Reported Sec 3.
Three months ago, driver drove into the corner of a wall of a village hall. No explanation offered. Reported and pleaded to Sec 3
Three months ago, white van man overtook HGV on blind summit. Reported Sec 3.
Three months ago. HGV came out of D/C lay-by causing vehicle to have to brake harshly to avoid collision. Reported Sec 3.
Three months ago. Driver on motorway on mobile phone at 70mph in fog. Reported Sec 3.
Four Months ago. Driver on mobile phone moved from one lane to other in an urban two lane one way system causing the car in that lane to brake. Reported Sec 3.
Four Months ago. Boy racer failed to negotiate a handbrake turn manoeuvre, stuffing his vehicle into a parked car on a car park. Reported for Sec 2, pleaded Sec 3 banned for 9 months and licence revoked.

Reason, I ask is that the CPS in my area will only take jobs that are a 'series of events'...ie: plural..or over some considerable distance..

Crap, but true..

I'm glad our CPS don't suffer the same malaise that yours seem to, Safety. I'd hate to think that they thought any of the above to be less serious than someone doing 79mph on a quiet motorway!

[Roadcraft]

And in the last 6 weeks I have recommended that three be prosecuted for it in my current role - two fatals and a serious life altering RTC.

Now that's a different subject...

Following a RTC there is good likelihood of a conviction...

but were talking about witnessing a single act..that hasn't led to a collision...ie: the mobile phone abuser..

[Roadcraft]

Last week.

You must let us know the outcome...

[Søren]

And in the last 6 weeks I have recommended that three be prosecuted for it in my current role - two fatals and a serious life altering RTC.

Now that's a different subject...

Following a RTC there is good likelihood of a conviction...

but were talking about witnessing a single act..that hasn't led to a collision...ie: the mobile phone abuser..

Did you read my post?

[7db]

Last week.

You must let us know the outcome...

NFA. Intel report only.

And a nice chat with the Sarge from the local Traffic garage, who took a few extra details in case he runs into my chap...

[Roadcraft]

And in the last 6 weeks I have recommended that three be prosecuted for it in my current role - two fatals and a serious life altering RTC.

Now that's a different subject...

Following a RTC there is good likelihood of a conviction...

but were talking about witnessing a single act..that hasn't led to a collision...ie: the mobile phone abuser..

Did you read my post?

I did, and i'm reporting what my finding are with my county's CPS..and the number of files that go NFA...

Like what 7bd has already said...

Are you aware of how many that you report for sect3 actually get to the court stage...? Or like me..do you only check up on the really unusual ones..?

[Søren]

If you see an offence of driving without due care an attention or careless driving, fulfilling the definition of the offence, what do you do? Do you ignore it, because you believe CPS won’t run it? If this is your chosen action, Where will that get us? We are potentially at risk of sidelining much more serious risk behaviours on the road, simply because they are harder to evidence, and this is a ridiculous situation, especially as we have the facility of unmarked cars and video at our disposal, if our word descriptions are not up to the job.

If you stop and simply warn the driver for something which you feel he should be reported for, then we are not letting the prosecution departments, the CPS and the statisticians know the level of the problem.

If a driver is having difficulty driving a car round a roundabout because they are on a mobile phone, then that is a Sec 3 RTA offence, because their driving has ‘departed from the standard of care and skill that in the particular circumstances of the case would have been expected by a careful and competent driver.’

Where there is evidence of unacceptable driving risk, we should be dealing with the actual offence. Whether CPS decide to run should not be a factor in our original decision making. We should be questioning via our supervision whether their negative decisions are correct. We should be discussing the matter with CPS face to face.

Do you not consider it ludicrous that we have cameras which cause more danger than they prevent, nabbing motorists for a safe 79 on a quiet motorway and obtaining a 90% plus level of prosecution despite the absence of risk. At the same time you have offences for which risk has been identified from a trained traffic officer which passes the ‘careless driving standard’ test, and you have some suit in an office telling you he is not prepared to run it.

Nationally, we bemoan the loss of numbers and loss of skill in Road Policing. But the tendency to capitulate on real risk offences with a shrug and a resignation frustrates the hell out of me, and is partially the cause of the lower tier of priority allocated to road policing over the last few years. Careless driving needs to be considered on its own merit, not linked to an RTC, not linked to level of injury, but linked solely to the substandard nature of the driving. We need to remind our supervisors and our prosecution departments of this. They are not paid well to have an easy life!

In Cumbria we have a traffic group which has largely retained its numbers over the last 10 years, and we have a strong leadership which sees the value of road policing related to risk and criminality. Most of our traffic bases are also contained in the same office block as our prosecution department and CPS, so we can and do discuss cases fairly in depth and on a regular basis. Our police prosecution decision maker and his depute are ex traffic, which also helps, and the head of CPS in Cumbria is refreshingly stubborn in his desire to see the more serious traffic offences prosecuted when serious injury or death has occurred.

So stop your drivers and interview them, gain and submit best evidence and discuss it with CPS and supervision. You can make a difference to the way they perceive things.

To answer your question, I’d expect about 50% of my RTC 'due cares' to go to driver improvement course, and the remaining 50% would be prosecuted.

Most of my non-RTC 'due cares' will either get a letter of caution or be prosecuted. (again probably 50:50). If it is believed that there is insufficient evidence to prosecute, the prosecution dept will discuss the matter with me to see if it can be firmed up in any way.