pewe
|
| posted on 16/7/09 at 01:22 PM |
|
|
Plod making up the numbers...
Brother-in-law, older but highly competent driver, was pulled the other evening by plod on the grounds that someone had phoned in to say he was
"driving erratically".
Was thus required to take a breath test (negative) despite his saying he hadn't had a drink for a fortnight.
Also asked about insurance and driving licence which he was able to present at the road-side.
Let off with a "drive more carefully in future".
Talking to his colleagues two had been pulled and fined in the same force area, one for mobile phone use (despite being able to show he hadn't
made or received calls recently) and the other for incorrect number plate on a new and empty car trailer despite having put a fully legible temporary
one on the back.
I seem to recall someone on here falling foul of mobile phone use when scratching his ear.
Any other instances of similar pulls?
Are they trying to make up their numbers?
Cheers, Pewe 
|
|
|
|
|
Macbeast
|
| posted on 16/7/09 at 01:31 PM |
|
|
I wish the police round here ( North London ) would take more interest in driving offences. The number of drivers you see on mobile phones ( including
on roundabouts and when reverse parking ), going through red lights, dumping rubbish out of their windows onto the street, driving with dogs or babies
on their laps and, of course speeding, is just unbelievable.
Lack of enforcement makes a mockery of the laws.
|
|
|
Mr Whippy
|
| posted on 16/7/09 at 01:33 PM |
|
|
I'm sure the police could save many thousands on breath testers if they listened to every drunk driver who said they hadn’t drank anything 
Reading the list you haven’t actually got any that the police weren’t in their powers or right to pull over people for. Although I’m no fan in the
slightest of the police, at least they’re not just sitting in their cars doing nothing but eating donuts…
[Edited on 16/7/09 by Mr Whippy]
Fame is when your old car is plastered all over the internet
|
|
|
omega0684
|
| posted on 16/7/09 at 01:35 PM |
|
|
when i was about 19, i was driving on a duel carridgeway (40mph limit) & i was doing 40. came to break for and island and the guy in front of me
slammed his brakes on for no reason what so ever! i had to swerve out of the way to miss him and then carried on driving (i was raging in the car)
about 50 yards down the road, yes you guessed it, the blues and two's lit up my rear view mirror! i pulled over to be greated by 3 police
officers claiming that i nearly caused an accident! HOLD ON A SECOND MR PLOD, did you not see the idiot that just slammed his brakes on for no
reason!
after explaining my actions they let me go with a "drive more carefully sir"
Fu**in IDIOTS!
|
|
|
jammers27
|
| posted on 16/7/09 at 01:38 PM |
|
|
My Sister lives in east London they where sitting at traffic lights waiting in their new Honda civic when all of a sudden someone smashed into the
back of them at about 40MPH
i mean how do you hit a stationary car at that speed at traffic lights you shouldnt be in a car if you dont notice traffic lights on red and a
stationary car, the only saving grace was that a police car drove by as it happened and stopped they had seen the whole thing. didnt do anything to
the lads in the old ford escort that smashed into them though.
my sisters new car is a right off... thing is my girlfirends friend went into the back of someone in cambridge her fault she had a big fine and had to
take a driving course or they would take away her licence. ??????
how does that make sense ????
rant over
|
|
|
aerosam
|
| posted on 16/7/09 at 01:49 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Mr Whippy
Reading the list you haven’t actually got any that the police weren’t in their powers or right to pull over people for. Although I’m no fan in the
slightest of the police, at least they’re not just sitting in their cars doing nothing but eating donuts…
[Edited on 16/7/09 by Mr Whippy]
True...
however I would personally prefer that they were out catching burgalars, muggers, rapists, murderers, terrorists, drug dealers etc etc.
Why is the motorist ALWAYS their prime target? I think the title of this thread may be the answer.
Had enough of this dictatorship known as LCB. Gone elsewhere, not coming back. Kiss my ass ChrisW.
|
|
|
nitram38
|
| posted on 16/7/09 at 01:55 PM |
|
|
I have a T-EYE video recorder in my car.
Not only does it film ahead , it films inside the car with fisheye lenses. Also it is a GPS tracker so will show both speed and location on google
maps and has a 3 axis accelerometer.
It might seem like overkill, but since I lost a claim in 2005 because of a lying Red light jumper, I have used it everytime I drive.
2 weeks ago on my way to work at 4am I came across a set of lights which were stuck on red. I had waited 5 minutes so I carefully crossed over the
junction.
A car with one headlight out started following me.....it was a police car.
I was pulled over and asked why I had jumped a red light, but before the copper could say any more, I pointed to my camera and explained that our
conversation was being recorded and the situation with the lights which I can prove with my camera.
He asked for the usual ID etc then let me go. I pointed out his defective headlight!
I am pretty sure I escaped some points and a fine that morning.
To top it off, the same police car was in the same area the next morning with the headlight out.
Talk about double standards!
The good thing about the recorder is that in future, lies cannot be told about me, like using a mobile etc should I ever go to court again.
Linky to T-EYE website.
The cheapest seller is CPC-Farnell @ around £273
Link to youtube vid
[Edited on 16/7/2009 by nitram38]
|
|
|
Mr Whippy
|
| posted on 16/7/09 at 02:00 PM |
|
|
^ I like the sound of that gear alot  thanks for the linky
here's the linky to the shop site -
linky
[Edited on 16/7/09 by Mr Whippy]
Fame is when your old car is plastered all over the internet
|
|
|
nitram38
|
| posted on 16/7/09 at 02:02 PM |
|
|
It also helps with road ragers who quickly shut up when I point out the video camera.
Driving in london means at least 1 or 2 encounters with nutters every week.
|
|
|
Mr Whippy
|
| posted on 16/7/09 at 02:10 PM |
|
|
yeah I thought it would be fun to put them on You-tube also. I loved the camera's on the busses I drove, got me out a lot of sticky situations,
even caught out people making false statements to the police 
very wise fitting that to your car, well worth it
Fame is when your old car is plastered all over the internet
|
|
|
tegwin
|
| posted on 16/7/09 at 02:21 PM |
|
|
That looks pretty clever, I had been thinking that manufacturors should fit them as an option..
However, it would be all to easy to incriminate yourself if you are doing anything "silly"..
I wonder how admisable the information is in court..
And how much data can it actually record?
Ideally you would want to be able to keep a couple of months worth of data so that, if for example you get a speeding ticket you can check the video
to make sure you were actually doing the speed they claim etc
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Would the last person who leaves the country please switch off the lights and close the door!
www.verticalhorizonsmedia.tv
|
|
|
swanny
|
| posted on 16/7/09 at 02:26 PM |
|
|
me and two friends were out in one of the guys mums cavalier sri (dirty beige colour) when we were younger.
we got pulled over at about 7pm, the driver questioned, the car examined.
when we asked why he had stopped us he told us that there had been a report of a blue sri being stolen in the area.
ok, so you think we nicked a car, pulled off a convincing re spray (with authentic rust accents) and then decided to pop out for a drive while the
paint dried?
its no wonder people lose respect for the police with such garbage. i understand that there are lots of great coppers who do a brilliant job that i
wouldnt fancy, but the idiocy of this remark has stuck with me and the number of similarly pointless time wasting interventions they still seem to
make makes me think that the good ones are in a minority.
|
|
|
nitram38
|
| posted on 16/7/09 at 02:31 PM |
|
|
It records to SD card and saves short dated files. Once the card is full it starts to overwrite it. A bump or press button will save 1 minute before
the event and 2-3 minutes after (you can change amount) as it marks them so that they cannot be overwritten.
A 2GB card records about 2hrs.
If I have something happen, like a speedcam flash, I press the event button.
I then save these to my PC.
As to legality, you don't have to incriminate yourself by providing both views unless you want to.
|
|
|
alistairolsen
|
| posted on 16/7/09 at 02:36 PM |
|
|
Ive had the driving erattically thing before (3 hours in the inside lane of the M74 at 2 in the morning doing bang on an indicated 70. Not erratic int
he slightest.
Pulled because I was on the M3 in a car registered in scotland, they folowed me for 5 miles till another bike joined an then pulled me over
"youre a long way from home"
Since I lost my license on a trumped up DD charge I think those cameras would be very handy. Only issue is I used to use about 3 different cars
regularly. How waterproof are the cameras if you wanted them on a seven?
At least at home when the cops want a chat they just pull you over and tell you straight that they just want to know who the new car in town belongs
to, or where youre going or whatever.
|
|
|
nitram38
|
| posted on 16/7/09 at 02:39 PM |
|
|
Not waterproof but can be changed from car to car.
I use mine on my tintop daily and the MotaLeira to go to Newark
|
|
|
mistergrumpy
|
| posted on 16/7/09 at 04:08 PM |
|
|
I very almost kept out of this one until I read this:
quote:
Since I lost my license on a trumped up DD charge
Come on! How can it be trumped up? You either were or you weren't and the machine wouldn't have lied. Get over it, move on, don't do
it again.
|
|
|
nick205
|
| posted on 16/7/09 at 04:20 PM |
|
|
Interesting thread and the camera set-up looks very good indeed.
I was pulled over on the M3 one Xmas on my way home at 3am. Empty road, travelling on the inside lane at 70-75 mph I cam upto a car travelling slower
but determined to sit in the middle lane. Without speeding up I indicated moved to the outside lane, overtook indicated and pulled back into the
inside lane.
Next thing, that car in the middle lane comes waning up behind me with blue lights flashing.
Slightly puzzled I pull onto hard shoulder and proceed to be lectured by a very young police woman about how dangerous undertaking is and I could be
taken to court blah, blah
" where did you get that from I ask?"
"Don't argue with me or I'll give you a ticket now!"
"What for?"
"Undertaking a police car"
"I didn't"
"You did, do you want a ticket?"
"Can you prove I undertook you"
"Do you want a ticket"
Thinks.....I'm not going to win this on the roadside so I'll be quiet and see what happens"
"No"
"Right continue your journey safely and don't do it again"
At that point I took the opportunity to leave without a ticket. Never heard any more about it.
That sorry little incident seriously dented my faith in the police service for a long time 
|
|
|
nitram38
|
| posted on 16/7/09 at 05:40 PM |
|
|
I think if I had my T-EYE it would have heard a conversation along the lines:
"Issue me the ticket, I have the whole thing on video, including your comments, my actions, speed and gps position"
"See you in court"
|
|
|
robocog
|
| posted on 16/7/09 at 05:58 PM |
|
|
DD is ambiguous without the right code
(could mean Dangerous Driving? so down to an opinion rather than breath/blood test result)
and yes it can be trumped up in the eyes of the driver, as its only an opinion of what is considered dangerous, been there and paid the consequences
that were pretty massive (don't ask)
Motorists are a good target, and usually have money, unlike the scum that we would prefer they would concentrate man hours on
[Edited on 16/7/09 by robocog]
|
|
|
balidey
|
| posted on 16/7/09 at 06:03 PM |
|
|
I've had one 'bad' incedent with the police, but nothing too bad. Driving through small town at 1am on a weekday, no one about. I
was travelling at about 30 to 35. As there was no other cars about I was apexing corners, again only be a couple of feet, nothing too bad. After about
a mile a car with badly pointing headlight (ie dazzling from one side) followed me. I knew it can't have been police to have such a badly set up
set of headlights. Another mile later the blues came on. Yes, another police car with dodgy lights. i saw them a couple of nights later, still with
the dodgy lights.
Anyway, they said they have followed me at over 40mph through a built up area. I said I'm not arguing but I was not going that fast. I asked how
they had clocked me at that speed. They said they followed me at a set distance. yeah right, I was tacking a shorter distance round corners, for
them to 'keep up' meant them travelling faster, and how did they manage to keep an exact distance round corners, at night and not too
close? Anyway the female copper came out with....
'In a hurry are we sir?'
I said' No' 
Then looked over the car and said, have a nice evening, you can be on your way.
Morales of the story?
1: you may as well speed as they will do you for it any.
2: Dodgy lights are not an indication of a car NOT being a cop.
And I want one of those cameras. I could fill a couple of memory cards a day with the abuse and cutting up I experience each day
|
|
|
mistergrumpy
|
| posted on 16/7/09 at 06:44 PM |
|
|
Ah, I see DD, dangerous driving. I thought it was being referred to as drink driving. That makes more sense.
|
|
|
the_fbi
|
| posted on 16/7/09 at 09:56 PM |
|
|
nitram38: Interesting little box that is Just looking at its firmware update and its got an ARM cpu and runs Linux which is really interesting.
I've only however found an update for the firmware (to 1.80), not a full firmare and the manufacturer doesn't appear to list one either. I
don't suppose you know a website with the full firmware rather than an update?
Thanks
Chris
|
|
|
MikeR
|
| posted on 16/7/09 at 10:22 PM |
|
|
I'm under the impression that for house surveillance to be legal in court it has to do certain special things (watermark the images to prove
they're not tampered with).
Does the video do that? If not its good at shutting people up but possibly not admissible in court.
|
|
|
alistairolsen
|
| posted on 17/7/09 at 06:53 AM |
|
|
dangerous driving, 12 month ban, 400 fine, compulsory 70 minute resit, 5 years of mental insurance and yes, entirely subjective and evidence free.
|
|
|
nitram38
|
| posted on 17/7/09 at 07:19 AM |
|
|
About the firmware, as far as I know it is only available from the manufacturer's website. I have emailed them to change the way in which the
accelerometer is reported to see if they would change it to an accelerate/brake indicator. They said it was an interesting idea and may offer an
update.
As to time etc, the unit takes it's time clock from the gps sattelites and time and date stamps the video.
So unless you can get on a shuttle and reprogramme them................
Anyhow, if you do have a car accident, most claims are through a small claims court where the judge works on "probability". The video,
timestamped or not, would certainly tip the balance.
|
|
|
.JPG)
