Police target driving loopholes

#2
I heard that they will train officers to effect a watertight case against the offenders. This is an effort to cut the waste of resources when the cases get thrown out on a technicality!
 
#3
good there not talking about picking on innocent motorists
re couples if the car was clocked over the limit and they can't or won't remember do them both
man utd refused to say who was driving one of there cars over the speed limit
grrr.
its the law don't like it don't break it simple
 
#4
So the Police are making a special effort to enforce the law - why didn't they do the job correctly in the first place. If they did, then the law is at fault so what's the point ?
 
#5
bound to happen, exploit a loophole, and eventually it will be closed
 
#8
I'd love to know how many hundreds of thousands of pounds of our money, and how many hundreds of personnel it is costing the police to target the dozen motorists who legally wriggle out of these speeding fines.

It's not like they have anything better to do I suppose.
 
#9
Warrior_Poet said:
Enforcing the law?......

Shame they ain't so keen on enforcing it against the real crimninals....
Well said....when are they going to get their priorities right and stop picking on the soft targets :evil:
 
#11
Awol said:
I'd love to know how many hundreds of thousands of pounds of our money, and how many hundreds of personnel it is costing the police to target the dozen motorists who legally wriggle out of these speeding fines.

It's not like they have anything better to do I suppose.
I personally would be most greatful if the money spent, was focussed purely on the celebs in their souped up cars doing 100+ on the motorway claiming they thought they were being chased, and then hire a sleazy lawyer and get of scott free.

Make an example of them!
 
#12
fuku said:
If there are "legal" loopholes, how are the police going to create a water-tight case against motorists without changing the law?
It's loop holes like making sure the speed camera was calibrated that day, the correct procedure was adhered to, the paperwork filled out properly etc etc.

simple little things, that can be used to wriggle out...
 
#13
Agent_Smith said:
fuku said:
If there are "legal" loopholes, how are the police going to create a water-tight case against motorists without changing the law?
It's loop holes like making sure the speed camera was calibrated that day, the correct procedure was adhered to, the paperwork filled out properly etc etc.

simple little things, that can be used to wriggle out...
Tough.

If the police are happy to enthusiastically prosecute have-a-go grannies who stand up against little sh1tes, because it is the letter of the law that 'must be upheld', not the spirit of the law, then they should be prepared to take it on the chin when people use the letter of the law to wriggle out of speeding fines.
 
#15
Awol said:
Tough.

If the police are happy to enthusiastically prosecute have-a-go grannies who stand up against little sh1tes, because it is the letter of the law that 'must be upheld', not the spirit of the law, then they should be prepared to take it on the chin when people use the letter of the law to wriggle out of speeding fines.
Agreed. The 'Establishment' and especially the judicial arm of the state lost the right to expect so-called fair play from us from the moment they chose to ignore the man on the Clapham omnibus.
 
#16
I never thought I would feel bad towards the police.

They are very dissapointing the way the senior officers appear to have lost the plot and are now just enforcers for labour policy.

Please don't get me goimg about the legal, I nearly said profession.
 
#18
Wouldn't it be easier just to slot the scumbag lawyers who exploit these loopholes?

And the thicko magistrates & judges who agree to these legal technicalities?
 
#19
purple_foot said:
And the thicko magistrates & judges who agree to these legal technicalities?
As Awol pointed out, the spirit of the law is no longer - it's all to do with the letter of the law. Due to our separation of powers, bills are drafted for Parliament's scrutiny and if Parliament so votes, these bills are passed as Law. The judicial branch of government then interprets those laws in Court. Bearing in mind Parliament is comprised of a massive number of legal <ahem> brains, it never ceases to amaze me that seemingly straightforward laws can be so broadly interpreted by the judiciary and in many cases, the Government ends up being chastised by the courts for their interpretations of their own policies!
 
#20
purple_foot said:
Wouldn't it be easier just to slot the scumbag lawyers who exploit these loopholes?

And the thicko magistrates & judges who agree to these legal technicalities?
It's a tough one to call.

Yes, what they do ain't pretty, nor does is seem very moral. But it is the fact that defence lawyers make sure that the prosecution does their job correctly that keeps any sense of 'justice'.

If you were innocent of a crime and your lawyer didn't make enough of an effort to disprove the prosecution, I think you'd be pretty upset, not to mention buggered.
 

New Posts

Latest Threads