Stan’s motorway driving tips

I am not, nor have I ever been, a traffic officer.

I would consider myself to be a competent and careful driver (Does this sound familiar? OK – I’ve pinched it from the Road Traffic Act, so sue me)

I do sometimes wonder whether the Highway Code has gone out of print, because more and more people seem to be doing exactly what they like on the roads. I use the motorways a lot, so I would just like to give a few tips to help smooth the flow of traffic and make life easier for everyone.

1 – That dotted white line at the end of the slip road as you join the motorway has a special meaning. It means “GIVE WAY” to traffic already on the motorway. Putting on your indicators does not suddenly create a gap that is safe for you to enter. Don’t rely on people in Lane 1 moving over or slowing down to let you in. It just might not be possible. One day you’ll cut up a 40 tonne lorry and see what happens!

2 – Once on the motorway, as with joining, your indicators cannot magically create space. Put them on to let people know you want to move out, but don’t assume that just because they are on you can go. This also applies to those of you who start to manoeuvre and THEN start indicating as an afterthought.

3 – When it is dark and throwing down with rain, you won’t be any safer just because you can read the small print on the dealer sticker of the car in front. Yes, you will know when they start braking, but by the time you react, you may find that sticker is plastered across your face.

4 – Lorry drivers – Most of you are limited to 56mph. This means that when you are overtaking another lorry travelling at 56mph, it takes forever to get past. On two lane motorways, look in your rear view mirror and see the long, long line of cars that are also limited to 56mph because you were too stupid to realise you couldn’t get past another truck!

5 – Hard shoulders are very dangerous places to be. This does not mean that it is safer to read your map, newspaper, meeting notes or text messages whilst barrelling down Lane 3 at 90mph. Some entrepreneurs have created little areas of tranquillity where you can stop and read for up to two hours without being charged for it. They make up for this free car parking concession by charging you a fiver for a cup of warm water and milk with a few bits of an old tea bag thrown in.

6 – Coming to the junction you want to leave at? The Highways Agency have very thoughtfully provided huge blue signs with junction numbers and destinations on them to give you a bit of a clue. To make things even simpler, they have put more than one sign up for each junction. You’ll get at least a mile’s warning of an impending junction, then another one with half a mile to go and then finally another one at the junction. Unless you are Mr Magoo, these signs will be visible long before you reach them, so why do you leave it to the very last minute to cut across three lanes of traffic to make your exit?

If you lot can think of any more, please leave a comment. Let’s make the roads safer, because safety cameras can’t do it all on their own!

© Stan Still 2006 – if you want to copy my stuff, it would be polite to ask first!

What an absolute shower*

Another edict from the IPCC

They believe that riot policing is too confrontational and forces should consider using water cannon to disperse the baying mobs.

This isn’t suggested in order to protect the officers who have to stand their ground in the face of overwhelming numbers of hyped up protesters. Oh no, this is to prevent complaints of “heavy handed policing”.

Sorry, but if I’m in the front line (OK behind the front line – privilege of rank) and you and your mates are trying to get past me, you are going to feel the back of my shield and serve you right. All of the people who made these complaints would have had ample opportunity to leave the area, but chose to get close enough to the source of trouble to get face to face with the business end of a baton. I hope each and every complainant was arrested and charged with violent disorder!

Compare the figures – 60 police officers injured, while only few protesters received injuries. The hooligans were using missiles, which are indiscriminate in the damage they cause. The police officers were using batons, which can be targeted at the people causing most trouble. I suspect that some of the injured “citizens” were victims of friendly fire!

What difference would a water cannon make? For a start, they cost an absolute fortune and would spend most of their time in the garage. No force, not even the Met, could afford to pay for sufficient vehicles on the off-chance that they may be used at some point in the future. Secondly, who would put their elbow in the tank to make sure that the water was warm enough to prevent those poor protesters from getting frostbite? Despite the fact that they behave like a pack of hyenas, they still have human rights you know. Unlike the police officers who have to maintain order, for hours on end, with no food, drink or toilet breaks. In fact, setting off one of these contraptions in full view of a line of full-bladdered bobbies could be construed as a form of torture.

Yet another hare-brained idea from an “organisation” that dare to comment on police tactics when they have little or no knowledge of what goes on in real life.

*Apologies to Terry-Thomas

© Stan Still 2006 – if you want to copy my stuff, it would be polite to ask first!

Round and round we go

There’s nothing new in policing, so how do aspiring Chief Constables prove their worth?

Re-organisation, or Force Review, or Restructuring, or whatever trendy phrase that comes to mind.

Anyone who has been in the job for any length of time will know what happens when a new chief lands. They all know that boundaries will move slightly, one or two little squads will be formed, one or two others will have their name changed and the different parts of the force will be renamed. If, like me, you have seen off four or five chief constables in various forces, you will recognise the weary e-mails that come out to sell this new vision to the masses.

Leicestershire Constabulary are currently in the throes of a shake-up, as reported in the local paper.

The story explains how the force is reducing from four policing areas to three, in order to provide a service that meets the needs of local people. It doesn’t say which local people want to be able to travel further to see a police officer, but there must be some out there! One reader comments that this force had three Divisions less than 14 years ago, before they broadened out into five Areas. These areas were then condensed to four, before yet another shrinkage to three. So in this relatively short space of time, the wheel has gone full circle.

What we don’t get to hear is the explanation from the senior officers who implemented the previous changes, so they can tell us what was so wrong with the system that it needed a complete overhaul (three times).

The cynics amongst you will of course say that the senior management were tinkering in order to provide evidence for their portfolios. I couldn’t possibly comment, other than to say that despite all the changes that are made in force structures, the humble PC still ends up getting the blame for not getting to the job on time. This was ever so – regardless of how the mountain is constructed, shit still rolls downhill and gathers at the feet of the bobby on patrol. I fail to see how the changes under way in Leicestershire can make any difference.

Don’t feel I’m picking on this particular force – it is going on across the policing community all the time. It costs a fortune and achieves nothing!

© Stan Still 2006 – if you want to copy my stuff, it would be polite to ask first!

Muppet! Update

Remember this post?

The muppet has been identified as Andrew Gardiner and he has been sentenced to 120 days for the theft of this camera.

That means he’ll be out by Christmas.

Keep your trees locked up!

© Stan Still 2006 – if you want to copy my stuff, it would be polite to ask first!

A victory for common sense

There is still hope out there. Despite a number of forces using performance targets as a stick to beat officers into arresting anything that moves, there are still some officers who can remember what discretion is and how to use it to good effect.

This story appeared in the Shropshire Star recently. The officer concerned could just as easily (and quite lawfully) have taken the man in question to a police station and done all the processing that this entails, but chose instead to take the much more proportionate route of taking the old guy out of the way and then de-arresting him when the situation had resolved itself.

Take note you student officers – just because you have the power, there is no need to use it. Sometimes there is another way!

© Stan Still 2006 – if you want to copy my stuff, it would be polite to ask first!

A comparison

A man who was sentenced to a Community Order for attacking his mother went out and raped a woman in an alleyway within hours of leaving court. Thanks to the intervention of a number of passers-by, this monster was detained, arrested, charged and put before the courts (again)

He was found guilty and sentenced to life, with a recommendation that he serves at least six years – this approximates to the lifespan of the average chicken – is there any significance?

On the same day, a man is found guilty of producing extra strong cannabis and is sentenced to five years in prison. Now we all know that he will only serve half this sentence, but assuming he misbehaves in prison, he could end up serving about the same length of time as the rapist.

Now don’t get me wrong, the drug dealer deserves to be sent down for a long time, but why on earth does a man who effectively ruins the life of a completely innocent woman get sent down for only six years?

Recently, there were complaints that a very small percentage of rape cases result in a conviction, yet here we are, with a rapist banged to rights and he gets a measly six year tariff. If he apologises and does all the right things, he could be out in time to go to the Olympics in London. How must the victim feel about this?

I hope the CPS appeal the sentence – it doesn’t come anywhere near reflecting the seriousness of the offence and does nothing to improve the regard in which the justice system is held by victims of sexual offences.

PS – The lads who helped detain this rapist deserve recognition – the judge awarded them £200 each out of public funds. How many others would have done the same? Good on you guys!

© Stan Still 2006 – if you want to copy my stuff, it would be polite to ask first!

Sign the pledge

Those of you who subscribe to the Police Oracle forums may have noticed this thread relating to DC Stephen Oake, who died saving his colleagues from a knife wielding suspect.

There is now an online petition site, set up by the government, to allow people to start and sign petitions to the prime minister. It is a triumph of hope over expectation to think that this self-centred bunch will pay attention to the wishes of the voting public, but if you don’t ask, you don’t get.

If you wish to support the petition, follow this link.

There are loads of other petitions you may be interested in – including ones to do away with ID cards and repealing the ban on hunting. Tell ‘em what you think.

© Stan Still 2006 – if you want to copy my stuff, it would be polite to ask first!

No victim, no crime?

You may have read this story about a female teacher who was accused of having sexual relations with one of her pupils.

The teacher concerned has been found not guilty.

During the trial, evidence was introduced that the boy in question had filmed the teacher performing oral sex on him in a classroom. (For those of you non-police readers, oral sex is usually described as a “sex act” or “lewd act” in the papers. We all know what they mean, so why can’t they just come out with it?)

Anyway, the jury accepted the teacher’s explanation that she performed the act due to the fact that the boy was holding a screwdriver to the back of her head. Something that couldn’t be seen on the mobile phone video footage that the boy’s parents saw and ran to the police with.

Now, thanks to the Sexual Offences Act 2003, someone who forces their penis into another person’s mouth is committing rape. The teacher has decided that she does not want to take the matter further and has not made a complaint.

The CPS have said “that as Mrs Poole had not made a formal complaint about the incident they had not pursued a prosecution against the teenager.“

Now I’m sure that Mrs Poole has her reasons, but I can’t help but wonder why the CPS are being so reluctant to proceed. In other cases, the CPS would proceed without the support of the victim. I just wonder why they feel disinclined to do so in this instance?

As an aside, I hope that the local constabulary have recorded this as a crime. They should you know, the rules say so.

© Stan Still 2006 – if you want to copy my stuff, it would be polite to ask first!

To Blog or not to Blog

There was an article in last week’s Police Review, written by a serving Inspector, regarding the ethics of police blogging.

I hope that the editors won’t mind me copying the article, because it makes interesting reading, both for my blogging colleagues and members of the public.

What are your views?

It occurred to me recently that writing in Police Review would be a wonderful opportunity to emulate the officer who produces the now-famous ‘Policeman’s Blog’.

However, I immediately realised this was not a sensible option. As I write this column in my own name, my photo appears on the page and my byline identifies my employer, I am aware my bosses read this piece, so I have to behave myself.

I wonder if it is right for serving police officers to publish their ‘blogs’ under a cloak of anonymity. Does the public really want to know the reality of policing today, as portrayed by the bloggers? For whose benefit are the blogs written anyway?

As long as there is only general detail in a blog, and places and people cannot be identified, then it can be argued that no direct harm is done. But I believe it is when the public start reading, and believing, the various police blogs that there is a possibility of harm.

A significant part of our role is to fight the fear of crime, counteracting in a calm and measured way the headlines of the popular press that would have their readers believe that the country is being overrun by paedophiles, rapists, terrorists and murderers.

Our reassurances, as long as they remain credible, bring matters back into proportion and thereby improve the quality of life for the general public. It is not particularly helpful in this respect to write that ‘only three officers are available to cover a borough of a 100,000 residents’, to quote one blog.

Even if it is right, is the public any better off for knowing? There might be a case for raising issues of inefficiency, shortage of resources or poor management where these exist, but the public domain is not an effective place to do so.

A trawl of police blogs suggests the main causes of discontent are bureaucracy, the performance and target culture and a lack of apparent support from the Crown Prosecution Service and the courts.

Acronyms and jargon abound in many of the blogs and much of what is written requires some inside knowledge of policing to be fully appreciated. I am tempted to conclude, therefore, that most such blogs are written for a police audience and are primarily there to enable the writer to let off steam without fear of adverse consequences.

In an earlier article, I wrote that driving humour and cynicism underground does not by itself improve morale and that another outlet will be found. Perhaps anonymous blogs provide this safety valve for the opinions of jaded and frustrated officers.

However, I agree that airing such views in an appropriate forum is necessary, but washing our dirty linen in public is not the answer.

Insp Simon Hepworth works for West Yorkshire Police. These views are his own, not those of his force

© Stan Still 2006 – if you want to copy my stuff, it would be polite to ask first!

Election fever?

Why is it that the BBC and other media organisations are bombarding us with news of the American presidential elections?

Do they think the people of this country really care?

Let’s face it, when 40% of the electorate of this country can’t even be bothered to walk round the corner to vote in our own elections, what possible interest could they have in events in the US?

Unless of course it is one of your mates who is up for election and you might end up getting a very lucrative career move out of it – mentioning no names!

© Stan Still 2006 – if you want to copy my stuff, it would be polite to ask first!