Police driver demonstrates the motorists' sense of entitlement

[MikeF]

Driving/ cycling in a way that stopped other vehicles overtaking might amount to inconsiderate driving/ cycling, depending on the circumstances. A forum search for <Telford> might be relevant.

For anybody who wants to plough through it, the current professional standards for police drivers are here:-

https://www.app.college.police.uk/app-c ... e-driving/

I remember the "Telford" case. The circumstances here are slightly different from that though and I think the officer is on an even weaker "footing".

However, police officers are regularly expected to attend immediate response calls to help the public or deal with ongoing road related incidents. To do so in line with duty, officers are required to extend their driving skills beyond that of a careful and competent driver. This implies that under non emergency driving they should be driving carefully and competently, which I think members of the public would expect.

[thirdcrank]

Briefly, I think the document to which I linked differentiates between what's legally and morally right. ie, although the drivers of emergency vehicles have statutory exemptions from some traffic legislation, it's only appropriate to rely on those exemptions when it's appropriate. Perhaps this is most clearly set out in the bit about parking.

Having said that, it's IMO a bit rich to put somebody in a car, tell them they must abide by all speed limits etc., then to send them to incidents which need a prompt response. I'm very much out-of-date and perhaps that doesn't happen any more. If it doesn't it suggests to me that the reduction in specialist policing may be greater than a simple headcount implies, because some people are presumably being counted as specialist traffic officers when they are driving incident response vehicles.

[blackbike]

ssssss.jpg (22.35 KiB) Viewed 4209 times

The above picture is from the government's Highway Code and shows how a motorist should overtake a cyclist on a deserted road with no parked cars.

The police driver in this matter, which took place on a road obstructed by many parked cars and with oncoming traffic, should have known of this photograph and of rule 163 of the Highway Code, and have concluded that he had no opportunity whatsoever to safely overtake the cyclist he chose to endanger and harass.

Retraining and a written warning would be my approach.

[MikeF]

Having said that, it's IMO a bit rich to put somebody in a car, tell them they must abide by all speed limits etc., then to send them to incidents which need a prompt response. I'm very much out-of-date and perhaps that doesn't happen any more. If it doesn't it suggests to me that the reduction in specialist policing may be greater than a simple headcount implies, because some people are presumably being counted as specialist traffic officers when they are driving incident response vehicles.

Yes I agree, but I have seen blue lights being used for prompt response incidents. I'm sure your knowledge is much better than mine though.

[thirdcrank]

... . Yes I agree, but I have seen blue lights being used for prompt response incidents. I'm sure your knowledge is much better than mine though.

My knowledge is twenty years past its sell-by date but as an ordinary panda car driver even longer ago, I've been sent to countless incidents which needed somebody there PDQ like personal attack alarms at banks. I suspect that the creation of the IPCC has highlighted this. That's why I'm suggesting (possibly on the Michael Mason thread) that the decline in the number of traffic policing specialists may greater than it appears because many will be driving what are really glorified panda cars.

I believe also that the IPCC has pushed for what I referred to as the morally right: ie there may be a legal exception but it may not be appropriate to use it. The daft thing is that if, say, speed limits are not enforced, a police car going to an emergency might be the only vehicle sticking to the limit. The alternative may be sending a vehicle with a fully-trained driver from miles away.

[NATURAL ANKLING]

Hi,
Sorry not read all the posts, but if that had been me I would treat the police car like any car and I would not be so submissive as to say excuse me , it would be a big sarcastic "Thanks", like the time a police car came out of a junction at police station, no lights so not emergency and attempted to join traffic on other side of road........he looked he saw then pulled right across my path and I nearly headbutted him through the open window, he of course did not look at me or comment at all whilst the car was blocking my side of road.

The only fault of rider was that he pushed between two cars at traffic lights, I no longer do this, I mean that I do not jump queue if my wait will be similar to the car drivers, I definitely do not squeeze between two cars at all, just waiting at lights tempts drivers to creep past me, overtake even If I am in middle of lane and lights are red.

Misuse of public money I.M.O.
You could like we have seen before that the police man was starting to retort without thinking...............then he gave up.............

[niggle]

Hi,
Sorry not read all the posts, but if that had been me I would treat the police car like any car and I would not be so submissive as to say excuse me , it would be a big sarcastic "Thanks", like the time a police car came out of a junction at police station, no lights so not emergency and attempted to join traffic on other side of road........he looked he saw then pulled right across my path and I nearly headbutted him through the open window, he of course did not look at me or comment at all whilst the car was blocking my side of road.

The only fault of rider was that he pushed between two cars at traffic lights, I no longer do this, I mean that I do not jump queue if my wait will be similar to the car drivers, I definitely do not squeeze between two cars at all, just waiting at lights tempts drivers to creep past me, overtake even If I am in middle of lane and lights are red.

Misuse of public money I.M.O.
You could like we have seen before that the police man was starting to retort without thinking...............then he gave up.............

Yes he did ride between two cars at the lights, but it was to access the advanced stop zone and set off in the right hand lane (exactly the sort of thing the ASZ is there for). If he had done it 'by the book' he would have to enter the ASZ by the little lead-in cycle lane to the left then move across the front of both cars, which increases the risk of crossing in front of a car just as it sets off as the lights change. If this was a 'fast' road rather than in a 20mph zone it would be prudent to stay behind the cars at the lights to avoid obstructing them, but in this case the cyclist was probably quicker away from the lights as well as able to ride at or very close to the speed limit so no real obstruction involved.

[reohn2]

Yes he did ride between two cars at the lights, but it was to access the advanced stop zone and set off in the right hand lane (exactly the sort of thing the ASZ is there for). If he had done it 'by the book' he would have to enter the ASZ by the little lead-in cycle lane to the left then move across the front of both cars, which increases the risk of crossing in front of a car just as it sets off as the lights change. If this was a 'fast' road rather than in a 20mph zone it would be prudent to stay behind the cars at the lights to avoid obstructing them, but in this case the cyclist was probably quicker away from the lights as well as able to ride at or very close to the speed limit so no real obstruction involved.

Exactly!
And having made the right turn according to his conversation with the police officer the cyclist was riding at or very near the 20 limit,so causing no obstruction to any other vehicle.
The bobby's complaint hinged around obstruction,I suspect as he didn't see any need for the cyclist to ride out of the door zone because he doesn't understand cycling road craft(as the moron didn't who threatened Jeremy Vine some time ago),but saw the cyclist as deliberately blocking their illegal over the speed limit progress.
Some motorists whether in uniform or not tend to see all cyclists as obstructions on their road,obstructions as they see it that at best a nuisance,and at worst shouldn't be there at all.
It's an erroneous belief by some that because they pay to use the roads and cyclist don't,cyclists are somehow illegitimate road users without rights so don't need to be shown any respect.
The worst of this incident is that it shows that some of the people who should be aware of cyclists needs and uphold cyclists rights as road users,clearly are as biased and prejudiced as some other moronic motorists.

[NATURAL ANKLING]

Hi,
My remarks about riding between cars was that -
It not in the highway code at all
It does annoy car drivers if you jump the queue even overtake whilst moving or stationary traffic so I avoid at all cost so the driver/s never have reason to point the finger at me?
EVEN if an advanced stop box exists, most drive into it like yellow boxes.
I stop in traffic and I stop with foot on kerb but no longer advance in traffic, I can wait and meanwhile there is no place for other road users to bash me, not because I am timid but because it invites a lot less stress...........

I see no obstruction at all by either if I remember correctly the vid? no one is held up.

Whats the hurry for the policeman?
I see no overtaking cars?

[thirdcrank]

as an ordinary panda car driver even longer ago, I've been sent to countless incidents which needed somebody there PDQ like personal attack alarms at banks

Here's something much more recent that started out as a run-of-the-mill example - many if not most personal attack alarms are accidental activations - but ended in tragedy:

On the afternoon of 18 November 2005, (PC's) Beshenivsky and Millburn responded to reports that an attack alarm had been activated at a travel agent on Morley Street in Bradford. Upon arrival the officers encountered three men who had robbed the agent of £5,405; two were armed with a gun, another with a knife. One of the gunmen fired at them immediately at point-blank range, fatally wounding Beshenivsky in the chest and also hitting Millburn in the chest, before all three men made a getaway in a convoy of cars.

Millburn had joined the force less than two years earlier; Beshenivsky had served only nine months in the force at the time of her death. (My emphasis)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of ... eshenivsky
I'm not trying to be melodramatic, but without the armed robbers, I believe that type of scenario is still common. Nor am I using this to explain the actions of the police officer here. I'm just trying to show things are not black and white.

[bigjim]

Having said that, it's IMO a bit rich to put somebody in a car, tell them they must abide by all speed limits etc., then to send them to incidents which need a prompt response. I'm very much out-of-date and perhaps that doesn't happen any more. If it doesn't it suggests to me that the reduction in specialist policing may be greater than a simple headcount implies, because some people are presumably being counted as specialist traffic officers when they are driving incident response vehicles.

Yes I agree, but I have seen blue lights being used for prompt response incidents. I'm sure your knowledge is much better than mine though.

My son is a response officer. As part of his training he completed a high speed driving course.

[MikeF]

Does anyone know whether the route where the incident occurred is now designated as Cycle Quietway 7? It's been planned as such for some time (a fact, I should have thought, the officer ought to have been aware of) and consultations closed well over a year ago. It's obviously a route used by many cyclists.

[reohn2]

as an ordinary panda car driver even longer ago, I've been sent to countless incidents which needed somebody there PDQ like personal attack alarms at banks

Here's something much more recent that started out as a run-of-the-mill example - many if not most personal attack alarms are accidental activations - but ended in tragedy:

On the afternoon of 18 November 2005, (PC's) Beshenivsky and Millburn responded to reports that an attack alarm had been activated at a travel agent on Morley Street in Bradford. Upon arrival the officers encountered three men who had robbed the agent of £5,405; two were armed with a gun, another with a knife. One of the gunmen fired at them immediately at point-blank range, fatally wounding Beshenivsky in the chest and also hitting Millburn in the chest, before all three men made a getaway in a convoy of cars.

Millburn had joined the force less than two years earlier; Beshenivsky had served only nine months in the force at the time of her death. (My emphasis)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of ... eshenivsky
I'm not trying to be melodramatic, but without the armed robbers, I believe that type of scenario is still common. Nor am I using this to explain the actions of the police officer here. I'm just trying to show things are not black and white.

I may be being a bit thick here but I'm struggling to see the connection with this thread,I understand that in some circumstances that police officers need to respond to emergency situations,and that they aren't all highly trained fast response drivers,but in the case of the OP there was nos need for the bobby to rush anywhere as the incident clearly shows.
I'm struggling to understand your point

[thirdcrank]

It's probably nothing to do with the OP and the discussion directly relating to it, but in my earlier attempts to offer some background material - the current guidelines for police driving standards - the matter of emergency driving came up.

I'm not going to read back through the thread, but I think I'd already suggested that there cannot have been an emergency involved here if the police officer had time en route to stop and pass the time of day with a cyclist.

I suppose the science of hindsight is worth mentioning. All manner of incidents might be dealt with differently if the result could be ascertained before sending anybody. Then we wouldn't need Department Y (Why did you do this? Why did you do that?) and everyone would live happily ever after.

[ChrisOntLancs]

Some motorists whether in uniform or not tend to see all cyclists as obstructions on their road,obstructions as they see it that at best a nuisance,and at worst shouldn't be there at all.

that's the nail on the head.

it's clear the officer is being 'that guy' because of the text book circular logic.