I remember the post from a couple of weeks back about that guy PC Wright, though this might amuse.... quote from

I would have loved to know what he had to say about it - his excuse would have made every right minded person want to poke his eyes out....
LOL
Mike

UNFORTUNATELY GUYS.....

he has done nothing wrong. these speeds are within the tolerences applied to you and I .

10% + 2 mph are the limits. Hence 35 in a 30
and 68 in a 60 limit and so on

Just goes to show that `News of the World ` is the cr*ppiest paper ever and I wouldn`t even wipe my ars* with it.

K

I saw the TV news slot.

Did you notice at the end of the feature he loads up his car and pulls off the verge onto the main road without signalling.

That is a traffic offence and we have the evidence!

Ed

Since when exactly has that been a traffic offence ???????????? They might teach you to do it for your test but otherwise.......


.....get a grip !

K

Kris

Due care and attention,I think.

Bet if you or I did it in a Scooby we'd get a ticket!

Ed

AFAIK It all depends on whether there was anyone behind him, or in front of him, you are effectively signalling to other road road users, if there aren't any you don't need to signal.

Kris,

I know of someone caught doing 33 in a 30. He argued the case in court under the grounds of what you said which I believed to be the case aswell. The magistrate through the book at him saying that the law is 30 and he was wasting police time by arguing the case but admitting to exceeding the limit. He increased the fine from 30 to 1000 pounds and the penalty from 3 to six points.

Justice eh.

Never heard of 10% + 2. Must vary from force to force. As I got done about 2 years ago on the M5, doing 78 mph!. I asked the officer if he was taking the piss, at which he replied -'its outside the tolerable limit of 10%'!
Its about time they raised the speed limits on motorways. Dont mind low limits in built up areas for public safety though.

I'm amazed that the government have not raised the limit - increasing the limit will mean that, when people can they will drive faster - the effect is increased fuel consumption - hence more tax revenue for the government - surely this will outweigh the revenue for driving over the limit (that is, I only see speeding fines as a revenue raiser - does not teach anyone a lesson if they think the law is pants!).

The lesson to be learnt is NEVER EVER admit to speeding!!!

It doesn't matter either way, whether he was within some supposed limits, or whther he signalled or not, he is still a Nazi with double standards. And he's fat. So there.

[This message has been edited by Geezer (edited 20-03-2000).]

I'm on a 'Better Driving' course in Basingrad run by Hampshire traffic police at the moment. I asked them about this guy and the News of the World article. They said a couple of things from which you can make your own mind up as to whether you want to believe it or not:

a) apparently (I didn't see the paper) the pictures are so grainy the driver could be anyone when he/she is speeding
b) on a road mentioned where he was speeding the NOTW described the road and speed limit on that road. There is NO road of the description in Basingrad.....

On the subject of indicating, there is no legal requirement to do so except to help other road users (or some such Highway Code tye phrase). I was out for a ride with said Hampshire Traffic Police yesterday (like an IAM observed drive with commentry - except that the policeman was commenting as he drove..) and there were many occasions he didn't indicate - and he told us why. I would normally have indicated on many of the occasions he didn't but I'm now rethinking.

Dave

PS: oh, and they also swear at the herberst who continually touch their brakes for no reason...

PPS: and on a more serious note, they constantly remind us of the % change of surviving an impact depending on your speed. Both in the course and in the traffic car yesterday when there was just 3 of us. The moral is - don't speed in built up areas!