Skip to content

Discuss This Ban and fine for rider who argued 156mph wasn’t dangerous General news

You are in... Forums > Discuss This > General news > Ban and fine for rider who argued 156mph wasn’t dangerous

This is a discussion topic

This discussion topic is linked to an article on this site. You can navigate to the article by clicking on the article name in the first post.

Go to most recent reply




Steve Farrell  says:

Ban and fine for rider who argued 156mph wasn’t dangerous

A motorcyclist has been banned from driving after arguing unsuccessfully that speeding at 156mph did not constitute dangerous driving. Peter Clarke, 44, was filmed at the high speed on his Suzuki GSX-R1000 on the A1M in Cambridgeshire last year by an officer on an unmarked Honda Fireblade. Clarke was followed for eight minutes and was also seen undertaking other vehicles. Clarke,...

Reply to this Topic  
  • Posted 3 years ago (01 March 2012 09:31)

Post a message in General news

Fields marked with an asterisk * are required


Please note. You cannot submit more than 4000 characters as a message.

Upload image(s) from your computer (up to 3 images)


Terms of use

Use of our community areas and forums is subject to important terms of use. By joining our community and using the features you agree to be bound by these terms. See terms of use below. 



Sep 09

Posts: 20

vstrombandit says:


It drive's me nuts when people drive in the middle lane for no reason, but I don't think think that is actually an offence, unless they are going slow enough to cause an obstruction. We have maxium speeds and should have minium speeds - I once undertook a pr&t doing 40 in lane 3!!. Saying that, I saw a Surrey unmarked car pulling a numpty over on the M3 who travelling at 50 in lane 2 and causing a snarl up / wave effect in traffic behind. Surprisngly, it was a middle aged bloke and was driving a BMW 5 series, suited and booted... "under the influence" me thinks...

To MartinZ's comments - speeding at the speed he was going is dangerous and he needed to be stopped. If a car had pulled out on him and killed him (a very high probability). then the road would have have been shut for hours, costing emergency services loads of dosh and holding up hundreds of vehicles. The traffic cop deals with what he / she saw. One problem is that the number of traffic cops has been slashed nationaly, despite a big increase in road users and the number of uninsured / cr%p drivers

Reply to this Topic


Sep 11

Posts: 11

MartinZ says:

@ vstrombandit

Lane hogging: CD20 Driving without reasonable consideration for other road users, 3-9 points. The problem is that too many drivers do it hence it is easier for road bandints to pick up on a few who dare to undertake and acuse them of careless driving.

Reply to this Topic


Sep 10

Posts: 1323

SatNavSteve says:

Believe it or not!.........

I believe the minimum speed limit on the motorway in this country is 26mph unless anyone would like to correct me. How stupid is that? Maybe its time for a new law of obstructing a lane when its possible to move to the inside lane.

Reply to this Topic


Sep 11

Posts: 11

MartinZ says:


We do not need more laws, we need police to enforce those laws that improve our lives. CD20 covers hogging lane but it is ignored by police.

Reply to this Topic


Jul 08

Posts: 190

zephyrdave says:


Here's the thing, riding like a twat (and yea I include excessive speeding here however safe you think you're being) gets seen by other people. Other people who are off duty chief constables, judges, councillors, heads of transport policy for councils, normal members of the public who next week are on jury duty. They see one biker being a numpty and assume that's what we're all like and that generally we get what we deserve hence we get a crap deal in court, from councils, from the cops etc etc. What you do one day really does effect someone else the next when you're in a minority group.

If you're getting pulled over for having a small plate then perhaps the copper doing it spent yesterday dealing with a fatal where a rider ploughed himself into a dry stone wall being an idiot or maybe three bikers all having a good time together riding 'enthusiastically' put him on his arse in a ditch while he was out cycling on his day off.

As for 'knowing the road' - yea you can know the road, but you can't know who or what's on it every time you ride it from a group of cyclists to a broken down tractor or just a large nail waiting to pop your tyre or a patch of diesel.

This guy was on a bike he'd owned 3 days and was clearly just giving it the beans to see what it would do. Road traffic cops are paid to deal with guys like this, they do not have anything better to do. Pays your money, takes your choice, accept the consequences if it goes wrong or you get caught.

Reply to this Topic


Oct 10

Posts: 306

Cyclonite says:

To be fair

What I saw in the video doesn't look all that dangerous. having owned the bike for 3 days does make the rider a little irresponsible. What i have a real problem with is the police bike following him, by all means use unmarked vehicles but don't have them drive illegally. Police vehicles are supposed to use lights and sirens to warn other traffic when they are driving dangerously, if the police rider didn't then he's just as guilty as the rider.

Reply to this Topic


Jun 11

Posts: 6

rolodojo says:

Watch the Video again

Whether this is all of the video or not I do not know but in this clip the only bike that reaches 156 mph is the police bike, yes our man is still speeding but doesn't look to me like much over a ton, the cars around him are not travelling at much diferent speeds. we all know most people cruise a motorway - car or bike at 90+ when no plod is about. This appears to be sensationalised and I would personally say plod biker should be charged with DD for accelerating to 156mph to chase peter clarke down much quicker than was needed. I am not saying peter clarke is in the right he broke the law and deserves what he got but is he being made out to be more of a villian than he actually is, would a car driver of got the same sentence? did plod choose to chase him purely cos he was a biker and ignore the other speeding car drivers?

Reply to this Topic


Aug 02

Posts: 3

ajwi11iamson says:

Any Excuse?

Having read a number of replies to the post, I find it hard to believe that anybody has an ounce of sympathy for Mr Clarke.  Can we believe that the posted speed of 156 mph was the maximum speed that was reached?  Or is that just the highest that was recorded?  Does Mr Clarke have a Racing License?  Does Mr Clarke have membership to any of the Advanced motoring associations?  If not, then why are so many of the posts a vailed defence of his ridiculous reasonings.  Mr Clarke was 'in control' of a machine that he owned for 3 days?  Are we deluded?  Look at the back pages of this institution and you'll see professional racers who struggle with the control of a machine in a controlled environment.  There is a difference between speeding in a built up area, and on the open highway/ motorway.  However, that is why the Police in the UK have a discressionary power to education offenders.  Can anyone offer a valid form of education for Mr Clarke, who remains defiant and ignorant to his offence?  I suspect not. Is it any wonder that various agencies seem to have the attitude of phasing out motorcycling in an attempt to save us from ourselves. With any luck we won't be twisting the throttle on that attitude.

Reply to this Topic

Compare Insurance

Save money by comparing quotes. It's quick and easy

Motorcycles for sale


It's only £13.99 to advertise your motorcycle on MCN

Sell your Motorcycle

Motorcycle pricing tool

New! Find used bike prices