Blackburn soldier driving at 143mph escapes ban as he’s off to Afghanistan (From Lancashire Telegraph)
When news happens, text LT and your photos and videos to 80360. Or contact us by email or phone.
Blackburn soldier driving at 143mph escapes ban as he’s off to Afghanistan
9:56am Tuesday 27th April 2010 in News
LET OFF: Kameron Edmondson, who drove a Ford Focus ST like the one above at 143mph
A SOLDIER caught driving at 143mph has been allowed to keep his licence so he can train for a life-saving role in Afghanistan.
Royal Electrical and Mechanical Engineer Kameron Edmondson admitted going twice the speed limit on the M40 in his Ford Focus ST, believing he was being persued by a Subaru Impreza.
He said did not realise it was an unmarked police car.
But the judge’s decision to spare Edmondson has caused outrage among road safety campaigners and politicians, one claiming his actions were “as lethal as a speeding bullet”.
Edmondson, from Blackburn, had originally been charged with dangerous driving in July last year, but he denied this when he appeared before Warwickshire Crown Court.
Instead he pleaded guilty to speeding.
The court heard the 20-year-old is about to embark on a tour of Afghanistan in mid June, where he will be carrying out repair work to British vehicles damaged by roadside bombs.
Judge Marten Coates was told if he kept his licence, Edmondson’s training for Afghanistan would begin immeadiately.
Adam Western, defending, said: “He is described as a vital asset because of the work he did during his last tour of duty in Iraq, clearing up the damage caused to British vehicles by improvised explosive devices.”
Judge Coates told Edmondson: “You richly deserve to be disqualified because of this appalling behaviour on the motorway, which is what I was going to do.
“But taking you off the road for 56 days means you would not be trained to do a job not many people want to do.
“It is a matter of balancing two different public interests, and the saving of lives must be the more important.
"I must allow you to remain in the role you do, which is essential for our armed forces.”
Edmondson was fined £300 and ordered to pay £80 costs and a £15 surcharge, and had six points endorsed on his licence.
Following the sentence, road safety charities hit out saying that the decision “sends out the wrong message”.
Ellen Booth, of Brake, said: “At 143mph, that really is a dangerous level of speed and shows a lack of responsibility and consideration for other people’s lives.
“Judges should be taking this type of offence very seriously, and we’re very concerned that he has taken the soldier’s circumstances into consideration.”
A spokesman for the RAC Foundation said: “The courts have a duty to ensure that those who break that law are all treated equally, or else, quite understandably, members of the public will ask, ‘If he got away with it, why can’t I?’”
For speeds in excess of 100 mph, it is usual that the punishment starts at disqualification as opposed to penalty points.
However, the decision is at the discretion of the court and in certain circumstances, a disqualification can be avoided.
Paul English, Liberal Democrat parliamentary candidate for Blackburn, said that Edmondson’s actions were “as lethal as a speeding bullet”.
He said: “The rule of law should be equal to all, full stop.
“There should be no exceptions. It doesn’t matter if he’s a soldier, if you break the law, you should suffer the consequences. This sets a very bad example.
Michael Law-Riding, Conservative parliamentary candidate for Blackburn, said: “If you are driving at 143mph, then you should be banned - it’s the law of the land, and everyone should obey.”
But Justice Secretary Jack Staw said that the judge had made the right decision.
He said: “It seems to me that the judge has shown appropriate mercy for someone risking his life for the rest of us.”
A spokesman for the Ministry of Defence, said: “We would not comment on a decision made by a judge.
"It would be innappropriate.”
Comments(87)
caballo
says...
10:21am Tue 27 Apr 10
An ill judged remark Mr English, how many of our boys and girls in Afghanistan have been run over?
The Real Mr Angry
says...
10:27am Tue 27 Apr 10
This boy racer has offended before and was probably laughing at our judicial system as he left court. He should have been sent to prison for this offence, not rewarded with only a six month ban and a small fine!
Would the war in Afghanistan have to go on hold if this chav didn't turn up for duty? I think not! Did he put other road users at risk? Yes he did!
Lots of us have received three points and a £60 fine for going JUST over 30mph. Where is the justice??
It makes me soooo angry
porterman
says...
10:57am Tue 27 Apr 10
natlancs
says...
11:38am Tue 27 Apr 10
paperboy70
says...
11:46am Tue 27 Apr 10
BuckoTheMoose
says...
12:33pm Tue 27 Apr 10
And after all, he may have been driving at a ludicrus speed but he didnt do anyone any harm. (Not condoning, just saying)
midas
says...
12:42pm Tue 27 Apr 10
.
He is effectively serving a 6 month disqualification from driving in the UK (June - Dec)as he WILL BE IN AFGANISTAN! However whilst there he will be able to utilise the skills he has and the training he will receive over the next 2 months.
.
A proper and sensible judgement that only an ignoramus of the law could argue against. (and there are plenty of those on this site!)
Gaius Grossus
says...
1:32pm Tue 27 Apr 10
paperboy70 wrote:Totally agree. Maybe someone with legal trainig could explain why this could not happen. It is appropriate that he be allowed to train, but equally appropriate he suffers the correct punishment.
Let him keep his licence for use in Afghanistan but once he's back in UK it should be surrendered and the ban imposed.
Richard_Nelson
says...
1:37pm Tue 27 Apr 10
BuckoTheMoose
says...
1:54pm Tue 27 Apr 10
Richard_Nelson wrote:He didnt kill anyone did he, so that point is meaningless. Im sure the judge would not have been so lenient if that were the case. As it was not, we will never know.
Would the judge have been so lenient if he had killed someone? Its one rule for one and another for someone else. Whether he’s serving in Afghanistan or not, the fact is everyone in the armed forces, police and government should have the same rules applied to them. It’s a disgrace and the Judge should be stripped of his position for being so incompetent. If he needs his license for deployment then he should have had his car crushed, the max amount of points applied, so he knows that if he is ever caught speeding again he would lose his license permanently.
You cant have the same punishment accross the board, regardless of the circumstances and you cant punish someone as though they did something that they only "might" have done.
Each case needs to be judged on its own merits.
moggy669
says...
2:44pm Tue 27 Apr 10
midas
says...
3:38pm Tue 27 Apr 10
.
So,the point you make in your post, is, quite like yourself, irrelevent and useless! Chin up dimwit!
hasslem hasslem
says...
4:44pm Tue 27 Apr 10
.
if it is about getting from A - B then there is public transport, he could even possibly bum a lift off his mate.
.
i am prepared to concede that i may be wrong on this but if he needs to drive on MOD property - then surely this is, in effect, private property and would not consequently need his driving licence?
.
so he thought he was being chased by a suburu imprezza - simple, pull over and let them past. we all know how young lads behave (and a few old gits too) and they love a race. this kid has got away with an offence that most of the general public would be potentially looking at a custodial. afghanistan shouldn't come into it.
.
once again - jack "we would expect ronnie biggs to be dead within two weeks" straw has cocked up.
.
i never realised that the "help for heroes" charity meant stuff like this.
darwen sense
says...
4:52pm Tue 27 Apr 10
darwen sense
says...
4:53pm Tue 27 Apr 10
darwen sense
says...
4:53pm Tue 27 Apr 10
Joseph Yossarian
says...
5:08pm Tue 27 Apr 10
Thought not. Keyboard cowards.
The offspring
says...
5:35pm Tue 27 Apr 10
wrinkles
says...
5:37pm Tue 27 Apr 10
>>
persued
immeadiately
innappropriate
porterman
says...
5:42pm Tue 27 Apr 10
blackburn man
says...
5:50pm Tue 27 Apr 10
porterman
says...
5:55pm Tue 27 Apr 10
janeane
says...
6:08pm Tue 27 Apr 10
Mike Hock
says...
6:12pm Tue 27 Apr 10
.
It's time that people, in all walks of life, accepted responsibility for their actions whilst not under duress without blaming somebody else, or using their circumstances as excuse.
blackburn man
says...
6:19pm Tue 27 Apr 10
porterman wrote:complete plank what you on about if u read he sped of because he thought he was being chased and followed i think they should send u afgan and put u right in the middle of fire so u sh it yourself i hope one day all this backfires on u and u have to go fight for your country see how you like it better still stick you in a street surrounded by guns and carbombs you will sh it like you have eaten 500 laxatives u ****
Blackburn man you are a complete plank if he speeds off from 1 car what the fec is he going to Afghanistan for. the slightest bang he will be pooping his pants.
blackburn man
says...
6:23pm Tue 27 Apr 10
janeane wrote:i totally agree with you fcuk these lot hahaha
This is my fiance your all slating here.. he has NOT been charged before for you idiot who said that up there!! this has been going on for months now... and as for boy racer!!! he isnt he has responsibiltys on being a father to be and dutys to serve our country.. what the judge has given him is HIS choice not Kamerons!! and as the telegraph have heard now there is another side to every story which non of you will know untill its printed!! SO KEEP YOUR SAD LITTLE OPINIONS TO YOURSELF.. i dont see any of you signing up to go and fight to keep your country safe.. as for all these comments on him goin to afgan he has already been to iraq and helped fight there and did us all proud.. EVERYONE makes mistakes!!! even if some peoples are a little bigger.
porterman
says...
6:25pm Tue 27 Apr 10
blackburn man
says...
6:30pm Tue 27 Apr 10
porterman wrote:a few years ago a guy run over a girl and killed her he did not stop taking her for yards stuck in the tyre then sped off he got caught was not even supposed to be in this country cus he was not legal he got 3 months in prison and he had already served them bein in remand and then he got aloowed to stay in the country now that is a load of rubbish to the justice system but sum1 who is risking there life to save your life deserves justice dont you think?
Excuses for speeding thats all it was and he keeps his job and his licence where is the justice. If your kids dont go to school you get sent down,go twice the legal driving limit you get a slap on the wrist.
hasslem hasslem
says...
6:42pm Tue 27 Apr 10
143mph and he is not a boy racer. Driving a car that Jeremy Clarkson (who i despise) says should be called the Ford ASBO and is kitted out by Stella Artois.
.
Driving over 30mph above the speed limit can constitute an automatic ban. therefore, driving at 60 in a 30 can do the same. 143mph is 43mph above the motorway banning limit.
.
Being pursued - it doesnt say being pursued by terrorists. It is not a well known terror tactic of the Taleban to hop on a flight over here, buy or rent an imprezza and then chase random cars up and down the m40. It does't happen.
.
this lad has broken the law and has been let off because it would be bad pr to take his licence off him. afghanistan is a complete red herring, which has been used by his solicitor to get him off. question, why does he need his licence to do his training?
.
oh, and by the way the taleban have not bombed britain, america or anywhere else outside their own native land. oh and by the way the weapons that they are using against us include ones that we supplied them with when they were fighting another occupying force in the 1980s.
.
and before any of you make assumptions about my name. white, working class, anglo saxon, church of england.
porterman
says...
6:42pm Tue 27 Apr 10
king chong
says...
6:43pm Tue 27 Apr 10
Why did the pursuing officer either call a marked vehicle into the pursuit before speeds increased to such levels? Or why was his car not equipped with a blue light? The Police have no legal power to stop a car by flashing their headlights. A person is within their rights to flea from a situation in which they could meet harm.
Bad driving. Bad policing.
On the exceptional hardship theme - of course this is justified assuming his job within the forces involves driving. Had his job not required the driving element he would not have been granted exceptional hardship because he could have carried out his day-to-day tasks without it.
Fair do's Judge.
blackburn man
says...
6:46pm Tue 27 Apr 10
hasslem hasslem wrote:you dont kno the full story wait for it in telegraph im fed up of giving u all abuse i think they shud ship you all of to afgan you white working class anglo saxon church of england di ck
Blackburn man and the bloke's fiancee, 143mph and he is not a boy racer. Driving a car that Jeremy Clarkson (who i despise) says should be called the Ford ASBO and is kitted out by Stella Artois. . Driving over 30mph above the speed limit can constitute an automatic ban. therefore, driving at 60 in a 30 can do the same. 143mph is 43mph above the motorway banning limit. . Being pursued - it doesnt say being pursued by terrorists. It is not a well known terror tactic of the Taleban to hop on a flight over here, buy or rent an imprezza and then chase random cars up and down the m40. It does't happen. . this lad has broken the law and has been let off because it would be bad pr to take his licence off him. afghanistan is a complete red herring, which has been used by his solicitor to get him off. question, why does he need his licence to do his training? . oh, and by the way the taleban have not bombed britain, america or anywhere else outside their own native land. oh and by the way the weapons that they are using against us include ones that we supplied them with when they were fighting another occupying force in the 1980s. . and before any of you make assumptions about my name. white, working class, anglo saxon, church of england.
like you have never sped i dont care weather u went 80 in a 70 or 143 in a 70 speeding is speeding so why dont you get off here go get your di ldo and fcuk yourself
blackburn man
says...
6:49pm Tue 27 Apr 10
porterman wrote:untill you kno the full story we will keep it at that but i hope you apologise on the next story published
both cases were wrong but thats life these days what about the people who just speed over the limit by a few mph and get half the points and a £60 fine he was going way over the limit thats the point im making. there is speeding and there is takin the p!ss. As for the 2nd case thats jack straw for you.
porterman
says...
6:51pm Tue 27 Apr 10
cyberpaul
says...
7:08pm Tue 27 Apr 10
Let's have 20-30mph in built-up areas by all means, but everywhere else they are too low.
Motorways should have a limit of 120mph - perfectly safe on many rural motorways.
The 50mph limit on single-carriageway roads and 60mph on dual-carriageways is pathetic and just shows the contempt that politicans and the police have for motorists.
hasslem hasslem
says...
8:00pm Tue 27 Apr 10
blackburn man wrote:maybe i don't know the full story, but if you do please enlighten all of us and then perhaps we can re-assess the facts and change our judgement. come on blackburn man - tell us the full story.
hasslem hasslem wrote: Blackburn man and the bloke's fiancee, 143mph and he is not a boy racer. Driving a car that Jeremy Clarkson (who i despise) says should be called the Ford ASBO and is kitted out by Stella Artois. . Driving over 30mph above the speed limit can constitute an automatic ban. therefore, driving at 60 in a 30 can do the same. 143mph is 43mph above the motorway banning limit. . Being pursued - it doesnt say being pursued by terrorists. It is not a well known terror tactic of the Taleban to hop on a flight over here, buy or rent an imprezza and then chase random cars up and down the m40. It does't happen. . this lad has broken the law and has been let off because it would be bad pr to take his licence off him. afghanistan is a complete red herring, which has been used by his solicitor to get him off. question, why does he need his licence to do his training? . oh, and by the way the taleban have not bombed britain, america or anywhere else outside their own native land. oh and by the way the weapons that they are using against us include ones that we supplied them with when they were fighting another occupying force in the 1980s. . and before any of you make assumptions about my name. white, working class, anglo saxon, church of england.you dont kno the full story wait for it in telegraph im fed up of giving u all abuse i think they shud ship you all of to afgan you white working class anglo saxon church of england di ck like you have never sped i dont care weather u went 80 in a 70 or 143 in a 70 speeding is speeding so why dont you get off here go get your di ldo and fcuk yourself
.
i am sure that if there were other evidence it would have been presented in court, in order to justify a lenient punishment. the LThas not mentioned that there were reporting restrictions, which would indicate there were issues of national security.
.
very impressed by your argument which includes calling me a "d1ck", "d1ldo" and telling me to "fucx yourself". if that is being fed up of "giving you all abuse" then congratulations on your logical argument
.
in my response to you, i never resorted to personal insults to either you, the offender or his fiancee.
.
why should i be shipped out to afghanistan? what is the point of that? i never signed up - why should i have to fight in somebody else's unjustified war?
.
finally i have been done for speeding 35 in a 30 in 1998 and 89 in a 70 in 1990. i paid my fine and took my 3 points. i have had a clean licence for 10 years and - no, i do not speed now.
janeane
says...
8:03pm Tue 27 Apr 10
porterman
says...
8:55pm Tue 27 Apr 10
cybercop
says...
9:07pm Tue 27 Apr 10
janeane
says...
9:08pm Tue 27 Apr 10
happycyclist
says...
9:56pm Tue 27 Apr 10
janeane wrote:Well I'm sorry janeane, but he broke the law. He wasn't doing a couple of miles an hour over the speed limit, but 73mph over the speed limit! Being a soldier shouldn't exempt anyone from being treated in exactly the same way as anyone else if they break the law -and that's one of the reasons he's fighting in Afghanistan -to try and establish some law and order over there.
This is my fiance your all slating here.. he has NOT been charged before for you idiot who said that up there!! this has been going on for months now... and as for boy racer!!! he isnt he has responsibiltys on being a father to be and dutys to serve our country.. what the judge has given him is HIS choice not Kamerons!! and as the telegraph have heard now there is another side to every story which non of you will know untill its printed!! SO KEEP YOUR SAD LITTLE OPINIONS TO YOURSELF.. i dont see any of you signing up to go and fight to keep your country safe.. as for all these comments on him goin to afgan he has already been to iraq and helped fight there and did us all proud.. EVERYONE makes mistakes!!! even if some peoples are a little bigger.
I suggest you try your bleating on someone who has been a victim of a reckless motorist with no regard for other people's lives.
my two penneth
says...
9:59pm Tue 27 Apr 10
so, so wrong, being chased off what he thought was the police is no excuse, he should have slowed down and stopped!
hasslem hasslem
says...
10:18pm Tue 27 Apr 10
janeane wrote:what nonesense.
end of the day.. the truth will b printed very soon :) we dnt need to "enliten" you.. thats the newspapers job now :)
.
the newspaper is reporting court proceedings.
.
all this pathetic "you'll see" is banal rubbish. what have you got to hide?
.
is this man james bond. as isaid previously, if there was amatter of national security then there would have been reporting restrictions in court. there is no other excuse for travelling at twice the LEGAL speed limit. There is nothing else to know
janeane
says...
10:47pm Tue 27 Apr 10
De La Rosa
says...
11:03pm Tue 27 Apr 10
143mph vs. Afghanistan.
Whilst 143mph is excessive speeding - and regardless of the lads excuses it is wrong to go that fast. But, this lad is off to Afghanistan where his life is in constant danger. If someone told me I was off to Afghanistan i'd be crossing off everything on my list that i'd want to do before I die just in case the 5hit does indeed hit the fan.
Don't condone the speeding, but anyone brave enough to go out there and fight for this country, regardless of the politics behind it all, deserves to have the benefit of the doubt in my opinion.
Good luck for Afghanistan - heart goes out to all the lads and lasses out there!
MIKEOXLONGER
says...
11:45pm Tue 27 Apr 10
janeane wrote:You need to get a grip love and just have the fact that this has caused outrage amongst most decent law abiding motorists.
like i keep saying me and all his family know the truth.. the women who wrote this was NOT in court with him so she knows nothing.. im not bothered what you think of him hes a brilliant fiance, son and father and he is fighting for our country.. and nothing we ALL say on here is going to take away the fact he got 6 points and a fine.. so have fun coz non of your opinions matter as wats done is done
I appreciate that he's your fiancee and as such you are bound to defend him but you cannot defend the indefensible. A great father and fiancee he maybe but he's displayed a huge degree of sheer recklessness towards his responsibilities as a father and a fiancee in that his actions could have left your child without a dad and you without a partner not to mention cause the death or serious injury of others. People are entitled to their opinion when a story like this is put out into the public domain whether you like them or not.
I personally think he is doing a sterling job out there and I wish him all the best but you have to try and accept that just because of who he is and what he is doing he cannot hide under this umberella, after all there are many other people out there such as surgeons and fire fighters etc who also serve and protect the public in a fine manor but they quite rightly so wouldnt receive such leaniency.
Accountability and personal responsibility for ones actions is something that our society is sadly lacking, regardless of who you are or what you do.
MIKEOXLONGER
says...
11:51pm Tue 27 Apr 10
De La Rosa wrote:So then Mr De La Tossa would driving at that speed and recklessly endangering your life and those of other motorists around you and not showing any consideration for your responsibilities as a family man be on your list of things to do before you die? If so you crack on mate and if you miraculously survive you can add another important thing to your list. Avoiding picking up the soap in the showe at HMP Wymott while your doing ten years for causing death by dangerous driving.
Right... way I see it : 143mph vs. Afghanistan. Whilst 143mph is excessive speeding - and regardless of the lads excuses it is wrong to go that fast. But, this lad is off to Afghanistan where his life is in constant danger. If someone told me I was off to Afghanistan i'd be crossing off everything on my list that i'd want to do before I die just in case the 5hit does indeed hit the fan. Don't condone the speeding, but anyone brave enough to go out there and fight for this country, regardless of the politics behind it all, deserves to have the benefit of the doubt in my opinion. Good luck for Afghanistan - heart goes out to all the lads and lasses out there!
oscar70
says...
12:12am Wed 28 Apr 10
MIKEOXLONGER
says...
12:28am Wed 28 Apr 10
king chong wrote:King dong
Not condoning driving at that sort of speed on any public road, but this type of incident happens quite regularly involving unmarked cars. Why did the pursuing officer either call a marked vehicle into the pursuit before speeds increased to such levels? Or why was his car not equipped with a blue light? The Police have no legal power to stop a car by flashing their headlights. A person is within their rights to flea from a situation in which they could meet harm. Bad driving. Bad policing. On the exceptional hardship theme - of course this is justified assuming his job within the forces involves driving. Had his job not required the driving element he would not have been granted exceptional hardship because he could have carried out his day-to-day tasks without it. Fair do's Judge.
Just so you know, ALL modern unliveried Police motorway patrol vehicles are equipped with covert blue strobe slights and audiable warning instruments, although at that speed the later would be no use whatsoever.
In order to prosecute somebody for an offence of speeding it has to be shown that they have consistantly exceeded the speed limit over a certain distance for a certain amount of time this produces and average speed which is usually recorded on calibrated home office approved speed detection equipment corroborated by hard disc recording cameras. They followed him at these speeds in order to obtain EVIDENCE which is something that is required for any prosecution. Once they had obtained sufficient EVIDENCE their covert blue lights would have been activated therefore indicating a request to stop.
As for exceptional hardship maybe he should have though about all that before deciding to drive his car like it was nicked.
When the Police have put before the courts a driver travelling at 143 m.p.h I would love to know just how you have arrived at your opinion that it was 'bad Policing'?
Old Timer
says...
8:57am Wed 28 Apr 10
burner
says...
9:03am Wed 28 Apr 10
LancsLass
says...
9:50am Wed 28 Apr 10
harry
says...
10:16am Wed 28 Apr 10
kas1uk
says...
11:22am Wed 28 Apr 10
janeane
says...
11:45am Wed 28 Apr 10
janeane
says...
11:48am Wed 28 Apr 10
burner wrote:waster eh right ye soo hes out fighting for our country and for one mistake which the JUDGE made the decision on your slating him.. and no he wont struggle in civy life at all so get a life :).. also wer has "son" come into it?? dont have a bloody son.. once again this shows people LIKE YOU realy dont no how to get their facts right
Janeane, you would obviously think he is a brilliant partner and a father BUT, and get used to this, it is clear he has no regard for what is right or what is wrong and I too reckon he will struggle when he gets back on civvy street and you'll eventually be visiting a friend in prison who is yet another sh=t father to some poor, unfortunate child. He is a waster with little regard for the law and that's what his son will see too. You also tell others that their opinions don't matter - that reflects on your values too. Read today's nationals, see whose side they are on !!!!
RK
says...
12:47pm Wed 28 Apr 10
kennysimo
says...
1:06pm Wed 28 Apr 10
ricksh wrote:what a joke. I have a motorbike that will do 186mph so shall I ride this at the speed that this idiot did? I think that I would have the book thrown at me regardless of what I do or say. And this is from a soldier of 22 years service. The law should be the law end of story......
whether he is a soldier or not he should of been banned from driving. The judge in this case has made an error in his judgment
MIKEOXLONGER
says...
1:08pm Wed 28 Apr 10
janeane wrote:Oh well thats alright then if it wasnt rush hour and he didnt kill anybody!Maybe you should lobby parliment for a change in legislation so it wont be against the law to do 143 m.p.h as long as it isnt rush hour and you promise not to kill anybody.
i think ur all quite selfish :) end of the day he isnt a idiot whu does speeds like that.. yes he was in the wrong but it wasnt like he was speeding in rush hour traffic and he didnt kill anyone.. there all stupid what ifs.. like i keep saying your comments dont mean anything.. you lot dont know him for who he is or reasons behind anything.. your just reading one side of the story that was printed wrong in the first place.
And quite clearly he IS an idiot baecause he DOES do 'SPEEDS LIKE THAT'.
If you cannot see that then you are also an idiot. You need to wind your neck in and just accept that your wonderful family loving fiancee has been a complete d**khead.
youknowimright
says...
2:40pm Wed 28 Apr 10
king chong
says...
2:46pm Wed 28 Apr 10
MIKEOXLONGER wrote:King Dong? That's clever Cockslinger.
king chong wrote:King dong
Not condoning driving at that sort of speed on any public road, but this type of incident happens quite regularly involving unmarked cars. Why did the pursuing officer either call a marked vehicle into the pursuit before speeds increased to such levels? Or why was his car not equipped with a blue light? The Police have no legal power to stop a car by flashing their headlights. A person is within their rights to flea from a situation in which they could meet harm. Bad driving. Bad policing. On the exceptional hardship theme - of course this is justified assuming his job within the forces involves driving. Had his job not required the driving element he would not have been granted exceptional hardship because he could have carried out his day-to-day tasks without it. Fair do's Judge.
Just so you know, ALL modern unliveried Police motorway patrol vehicles are equipped with covert blue strobe slights and audiable warning instruments, although at that speed the later would be no use whatsoever.
In order to prosecute somebody for an offence of speeding it has to be shown that they have consistantly exceeded the speed limit over a certain distance for a certain amount of time this produces and average speed which is usually recorded on calibrated home office approved speed detection equipment corroborated by hard disc recording cameras. They followed him at these speeds in order to obtain EVIDENCE which is something that is required for any prosecution. Once they had obtained sufficient EVIDENCE their covert blue lights would have been activated therefore indicating a request to stop.
As for exceptional hardship maybe he should have though about all that before deciding to drive his car like it was nicked.
When the Police have put before the courts a driver travelling at 143 m.p.h I would love to know just how you have arrived at your opinion that it was 'bad Policing'?
Re: "Bad Policing" - Assuming the Police had a blue light fitted, surely had they employed this at say 100mph the Focus wouldn't have felt the need to increase speed to 143mph.
He pulls over at 100mph and this article doesn't even get published.
I fully understand the legislation surrounding prosecution of offences and the ACPO guidelines thanks.
At the end of the day, he shouldn't have driven so quickly but the Police should've handled this better.
The Courts have made their decision and its going to stand.
Good luck in Afghanistan. Slow down when you get back!
janeane
says...
3:05pm Wed 28 Apr 10
porterman
says...
3:53pm Wed 28 Apr 10
janeane
says...
4:41pm Wed 28 Apr 10
porterman
says...
5:13pm Wed 28 Apr 10
burner
says...
5:25pm Wed 28 Apr 10
porterman
says...
5:35pm Wed 28 Apr 10
burner
says...
5:54pm Wed 28 Apr 10
RK
says...
7:13pm Wed 28 Apr 10
harry
says...
8:11pm Wed 28 Apr 10
all i have to say is good luck girl you'l need it
stealer
says...
8:28pm Wed 28 Apr 10
The car would have had to be in collision to cause someone to be killed ! Likewise,the bullet,I think you
mean, would have to be aimed correctly and hit it's target to kill !
Your philosophy is understandable though !
In this case it seems that a large fine
ie. in keeping with what the offender can afford plus a suspended ban,would fit the crime ! The suspended ban could be imposed on return to the UK and completed in full
even allowing for further overseas posting(s).
Re the poster who wrote of 'cushy' behind the lines repair conditions,
Who repairs/recovers the broken down equipment at the sharp end ?
blackburn_girl
says...
8:59pm Wed 28 Apr 10
You go serve out there cos believe me i know people out there and half the **** they go through doesnt reach the papers which you seem to rely on so much for your facts! He needs his licence to do a job most people wouldnt do which involves risking his life daily whilst out there which im pretty sure you wouldnt be prepared to do! Yeah he was in the wrong for speeding but at the end of the day the judge looked at what is in peoples best interest and that is him going to serve this country which most of you wouldnt be prepared to do!
burner
says...
9:00pm Wed 28 Apr 10
anon 7
says...
10:21pm Wed 28 Apr 10
janeane
says...
10:36pm Wed 28 Apr 10
harry wrote:' crashing with the retarded girlfriend in the car ' ... how lovely are you, well does that mean his retarded unborn child is in this car to when he crashes?? your sick.. do you realy think i would get into a car knowin my life and my babys life was in danger?? NOOO dont think i would but once again you think you know everything about everything.. yes i admit he has broken the law and yes got of lightly but what can any of us do?? NOTHING!! its been done and dusted with, and yes he could of hurt someone.. fact is he didnt.. and would and will not be doing that speed again as he is away and doesnt even have his car anyway.. i also think people calling me a chav are very mature :) again coz you no me so well and u know who i am and everythin.. ill b sure to pop round ur house for a mad rave to blackout crew kitted up in my lacoste tracksuit and my gold chavy earrings .. get a grip... like i sed up there we all admit he has done wrong and yes people arnt going to be happy with what he got given.. i certainly wasnt when i found out as we had prepared him for jail and all sorts as we knew he had reali broken the law but the judge obviousli thought goin to afgan to help "recover vehicles" and keep his army mates safe in the vehicles they travel in was more inportant than to b banded for 56 days or wateva the newspaper wrote down.. so i would realy appreciate it now if you let it stand as it is coz nothing any of us say and do is going to change the outcome of this im afraid and calling me and his family and him isnt going to make you any better.. so please have the respect to leave it thanks :)
id have sure fire bet on this idiot crashing with the retarded girlfriend in the car as she really hasnt got the sense she was born with to get in a car with her idiot boyfriend who obviously thinks its ok to drive like an utter prat
all i have to say is good luck girl you'l need it
burner
says...
11:11pm Wed 28 Apr 10
.
but I must agree with exactly what you say, janeane; calling you a chav IS mature. Have fun reading all the words on your trackie-bottoms, that's as much as chavs can do.
janeane
says...
7:20am Thu 29 Apr 10
Nicco71
says...
9:57am Thu 29 Apr 10
janeane wrote:janeane, if you want people to "have the respect to leave it" it's probably best you don't gloat like this. You're fella made a big mistake, and so did the judge - just hope they BOTH learn from it. All the best with the little one when he/she arrives.
im happy he onli got 300 fine and 6 points.. least we get to drive round in his ford focus ST and ill b sure to give all u a wave :D
burner
says...
9:59am Thu 29 Apr 10
.
.
You are simply inexperience and naive and have fuelled foreigners perception of this country... that's the angle they are interested in. They haven't "got on with it " yet.
.
Seriously, you should have dignified yourself with silence. A more mature person would have kept their comments to themselves. Good on you for defending your guy but folk are laughing at you all over the world today. Take care and Good Luck. Enough,eh?
MIKEOXLONGER
says...
10:04am Thu 29 Apr 10
king chong wrote:Having had first hand experience of dealing with people travelling at these speeds on the Motorway I can confidently say that you know absolutely Jack about what guide lines and policies are adhered to.
MIKEOXLONGER wrote:King Dong? That's clever Cockslinger. Re: "Bad Policing" - Assuming the Police had a blue light fitted, surely had they employed this at say 100mph the Focus wouldn't have felt the need to increase speed to 143mph. He pulls over at 100mph and this article doesn't even get published. I fully understand the legislation surrounding prosecution of offences and the ACPO guidelines thanks. At the end of the day, he shouldn't have driven so quickly but the Police should've handled this better. The Courts have made their decision and its going to stand. Good luck in Afghanistan. Slow down when you get back!king chong wrote: Not condoning driving at that sort of speed on any public road, but this type of incident happens quite regularly involving unmarked cars. Why did the pursuing officer either call a marked vehicle into the pursuit before speeds increased to such levels? Or why was his car not equipped with a blue light? The Police have no legal power to stop a car by flashing their headlights. A person is within their rights to flea from a situation in which they could meet harm. Bad driving. Bad policing. On the exceptional hardship theme - of course this is justified assuming his job within the forces involves driving. Had his job not required the driving element he would not have been granted exceptional hardship because he could have carried out his day-to-day tasks without it. Fair do's Judge.King dong Just so you know, ALL modern unliveried Police motorway patrol vehicles are equipped with covert blue strobe slights and audiable warning instruments, although at that speed the later would be no use whatsoever. In order to prosecute somebody for an offence of speeding it has to be shown that they have consistantly exceeded the speed limit over a certain distance for a certain amount of time this produces and average speed which is usually recorded on calibrated home office approved speed detection equipment corroborated by hard disc recording cameras. They followed him at these speeds in order to obtain EVIDENCE which is something that is required for any prosecution. Once they had obtained sufficient EVIDENCE their covert blue lights would have been activated therefore indicating a request to stop. As for exceptional hardship maybe he should have though about all that before deciding to drive his car like it was nicked. When the Police have put before the courts a driver travelling at 143 m.p.h I would love to know just how you have arrived at your opinion that it was 'bad Policing'?
AccyLass
says...
11:10am Thu 29 Apr 10
He did wrong – FACT, and he has been given a punishment that not many people agree with.
What you don’t seem to realise is that by saying the stuff you are on here it is making this situation a whole lot worse for you, your unborn child and your fiancé.
YOU are keeping this case highlighted by your silly immature remarks – if you had not done that then this story would have been chip paper days ago.
You are a mother to be so please grow up and start behaving with a bit more maturity – i.e. stop writing silly illegible comments on here.
And for the record, I have very close family & friends who have served in Afghanistan, one of whom came home in a coffin, so I DO understand the risks your fiancé faces - for this reason, and in support of our soldiers currently serving out there, I once again respectfully ask you to let this story drop now please.
lwg76
says...
2:34pm Thu 29 Apr 10
Definitely entrapment. There is nothing worse than being stalked, yes stalked by an anonymous vehicle.
The police in this case should be fully investigated. Endangering the lives of the public like that, suspension, bans and dismissal are called for.
MIKEOXLONGER
says...
4:14pm Fri 30 Apr 10
lwg76 wrote:What a complete d*ckhead you are.
Wot about the police driver doing 143 mph as well. Definitely entrapment. There is nothing worse than being stalked, yes stalked by an anonymous vehicle. The police in this case should be fully investigated. Endangering the lives of the public like that, suspension, bans and dismissal are called for.
I dont really need to say anything else
Mo Lestor
says...
4:50pm Fri 30 Apr 10
MIKEOXLONGER wrote:KING MONG!!!!!
king chong wrote:Having had first hand experience of dealing with people travelling at these speeds on the Motorway I can confidently say that you know absolutely Jack about what guide lines and policies are adhered to.MIKEOXLONGER wrote:King Dong? That's clever Cockslinger. Re: "Bad Policing" - Assuming the Police had a blue light fitted, surely had they employed this at say 100mph the Focus wouldn't have felt the need to increase speed to 143mph. He pulls over at 100mph and this article doesn't even get published. I fully understand the legislation surrounding prosecution of offences and the ACPO guidelines thanks. At the end of the day, he shouldn't have driven so quickly but the Police should've handled this better. The Courts have made their decision and its going to stand. Good luck in Afghanistan. Slow down when you get back!king chong wrote: Not condoning driving at that sort of speed on any public road, but this type of incident happens quite regularly involving unmarked cars. Why did the pursuing officer either call a marked vehicle into the pursuit before speeds increased to such levels? Or why was his car not equipped with a blue light? The Police have no legal power to stop a car by flashing their headlights. A person is within their rights to flea from a situation in which they could meet harm. Bad driving. Bad policing. On the exceptional hardship theme - of course this is justified assuming his job within the forces involves driving. Had his job not required the driving element he would not have been granted exceptional hardship because he could have carried out his day-to-day tasks without it. Fair do's Judge.King dong Just so you know, ALL modern unliveried Police motorway patrol vehicles are equipped with covert blue strobe slights and audiable warning instruments, although at that speed the later would be no use whatsoever. In order to prosecute somebody for an offence of speeding it has to be shown that they have consistantly exceeded the speed limit over a certain distance for a certain amount of time this produces and average speed which is usually recorded on calibrated home office approved speed detection equipment corroborated by hard disc recording cameras. They followed him at these speeds in order to obtain EVIDENCE which is something that is required for any prosecution. Once they had obtained sufficient EVIDENCE their covert blue lights would have been activated therefore indicating a request to stop. As for exceptional hardship maybe he should have though about all that before deciding to drive his car like it was nicked. When the Police have put before the courts a driver travelling at 143 m.p.h I would love to know just how you have arrived at your opinion that it was 'bad Policing'?
.
.
Obviously another chav who believes everything is someon elses fault apart from their own.
.
He was doing 143 mph and thought he could get away with it. If his rear view mirror worked as well as his accelerator pedal he would have noticed another set of headlights keeping pace with him and slowed down.
.
Obviously not paying attention and driving beyond his abilities makes this very dangerous for everyone else on the road.
.
How you can blame or criticise the Police for any of this is beyond me?
I can only refer you back to my first statement.
kas1uk
says...
4:58pm Fri 30 Apr 10
Davidoff
says...
11:47pm Fri 30 Apr 10
janeane wrote:So, everyone who has commented is 'selfish?' How does that work, then? I think it's quite plain, regardless whether soldier, tinker or tailorman that speeding is speeding.
i think ur all quite selfish :) end of the day he isnt a idiot whu does speeds like that.. yes he was in the wrong but it wasnt like he was speeding in rush hour traffic and he didnt kill anyone.. there all stupid what ifs.. like i keep saying your comments dont mean anything.. you lot dont know him for who he is or reasons behind anything.. your just reading one side of the story that was printed wrong in the first place.
.
You are right - none of us know him nor may I perhaps wish to know him - but I think we know you now pretty much with your comments. I certainly do not wish to know you if I met you on the basis of your knee jerk 'he's my boyfriend and I will defend him til I die' rhetoric. Partnerships don't last forever, remember that. So when you finally ... whenever that is ... do part I expect you'll be yelling the opposite.
.
1) He was caught speeding
2) He was caught speeding
3) He was caught speeding
4) Which part of the above things do you not comprehend?
.
You chose to have this all in the public domain or maybe you don't understand how the newspapers and the media as a whole works? Right. Now it's in the public domain, and those who have shouted 'foul' have got what they wanted. So, now it's in the public ... which clearly that is what was wanted from the report ...
So now expect people to have views, opinions and arguments against speeding.
.
As to this 'truth' what's that? When will LET be reporting it?
ricksh says...
10:12am Tue 27 Apr 10