Motorcycle Forums

Plod

Look Plod are not there to help people just to try and rip the public off and raise detection figures.

I got done for speeding despite them having no evidence to prove it was me, all they had was a rear view of my bike.

I was once told by a plod biker that the reason they sometimes target motorists is its a crime that is beyond doubt you are caught and you have no way of proving your innocence.

Plod notmally come out in force towards the end of the month to bosst their crime figures and until someone at the top removes target for them we are all going to get screwed again and again

Section 172: "(2)Where the driver of a vehicle is alleged to be guilty of an offence to which this section applies [... blah blah]"

It seems to me that a resonable person would conclude that an allegation of guilt requires a specific offence, not "we'll decide later what you were guilty of once you've admitted to it".

I'm actually more concerned by the vagueness of the time and location.  It makes it very clear that they don't have evidence of a specific offence, and is also over-reaching.  If requiring information for a 3 hour period on an entire road isn't over-broad, then what would be?

@FellRaven

The only NIP I have ever gotten (err, so far....) was certainly dated and the keyword with NIPs is "issue".  That means "popped it in the mail", it does not mean that you get it within 14 days.  So one should always allow at least 21 days before you considering oneself clear of the last lapse in concentration with regards speed.

As to the whole "demanding names before the offence"...think it through.  The police think that some vehicle was doing something iffy.  Let's say driving without due care, just for the sake of argument.  So they look up the keeper and punt them a letter asking "Were you driving XZY 123 on dd/mm/yy?"

I do not believe you have admitted to any offence at this point if you say it was you.  That comes when you get the "Right, you nawty boy/girl..." paperwork.

If not, they punt the paperwork off to whomever you claim the driver was.

Upshot?  YOU do not get to know about what proceedings are being taken against SOMEONE ELSE.  Just like when any other crime is committed.  The police don't knock on the door and say "Were you walking home along Some Street at 0400?  Only someone committed XYZ against ABC, y'see".  No, first they try to figure out who the hell the suspects might be and the suspects get to find out.  You only get to know if it hits the press.  After all, the allegations could be unfounded.

Of course, I may be being unduly naive in trying to see through the anti-police, "Oh woe is us!" spin MCN puts on just about every story.

@FellRaven

Only one problem - there is no right to silence in the UK (it still exists in the USA I believe).
We have this lovely "You can keep your gob shut it you like, but if you don't tell us something you use in court; yer screwed."

I would be interesting to see what would happen if someone genuinely could not remember who was driving.  Although, to be honest, most bikers tend to be identifiable in the picture from wht they wear.  Oh, wait, you don't get to see the photographic evidence until you get to court, so even if wanted to help you couldn't!

I will admit I don't ency the police.  With the press the way they are, the cops can never win.  I can only go by personal experience, but in the contact I've had with them they've been fine.  You get arseholes in all walks of life, cops are no different (unfortunately).

maybe not a bad thing . .

I got forced off the road by a car driver who put his foot down and 'left the scene' but I was lucky enough for a wtness to capture half of the registartion and the make. The police contacted all the owners of similar vehicles in the area asking exactly this kind of non-comittal question in order to confirm who was driving in that place at that time - without confirming the (potential) offence.

In the event the *&%@# driver did acknowledged he was driving and is now due to be interviewed  . .with the outcome yet to be determined.  He will get the chance to argue his case without being pre-judged with a pre-determined offence (though I'm hoping they throw the book at him).

So it's not just bikes and it's not necesarily a bad process.