Board logo

Royal Perogative
DorsetStrider - 18/5/08 at 04:29 PM

Just seen THIS and a thought occures to me...

If no action is taken against the officers or the driver of the Audi would this give people caught on speed camera a possible defence?

phoenix70 - 18/5/08 at 05:02 PM

reading between the line in this story, this guy pulled out between Prince Harry's car and his security guards, no wonder his security gave him an angry gesture. If anyone was put at risk, you could say it was Prince Harry, being seperated from his security for however long it was.

And how come he couldn't pull back into the middle lane, surely he could have fitted back into the space he just came out of.

He was probably worried that he might get done for speeding, so he decided to make a complaint of his own.

scootz - 18/5/08 at 05:04 PM

No action will be taken against them, and as you are probably not a PPO, then you will gain no defence from it should you wish to drive in a similar manner.

Hope this answers your question.

theconrodkid - 18/5/08 at 05:12 PM

unless you are a royal/mp/very rich be prepared to be raped by gordo and his merry men

DorsetStrider - 18/5/08 at 06:56 PM

I wasn't suggesting anyone drive in this manor...

I was simply asking if this would be a precedent to quote in court if no action is taken against either the driver of the Audi (assuming the report is correct they were breaking the law driving at over 100MPH) or the driver of the landy who I assume was doing a similar speed.

Or is this yet another case of 1 rule for them another for everyone else.

[Edited on 18/5/08 by DorsetStrider]

phoenix70 - 18/5/08 at 07:38 PM

suppose the first problem, it that guys word against them and they could say they were on official police business and thats why they were going fast.

rusty nuts - 18/5/08 at 07:50 PM

Perhaps the prince should have traveled by chopper!

omega 24 v6 - 18/5/08 at 08:11 PM

quote:

Perhaps the prince should have traveled by chopper!

Cmon the issue here is "perhaps the prince should have travelled within the speed limits" also why did the following coppers not "book him" for speeding etc etc
Seems to me it's ALWAYS one rule for them and another for us (royalty or the police read it how you want)
If the complainer had been driving at that speed in that manner then the cops would have pulled him for a few offences at least.

oldtimer - 18/5/08 at 08:11 PM

You would have thought that the death of his mother whilst being driven in a speeding vehicle on the public road might just have taught him something.

JoelP - 18/5/08 at 08:14 PM

its just incredibly naive by whoever organises his transport. If he wants to get from A to B in a discrete manner, he should drive at 80mph in a mondeo, not 100. Its not like he is short of time! As said, if 100 is wrong for us its wrong for him. However, only his own driver should be prosecuted. The security guys have to do whatever is necessary to do their job, and if that includes speeding then so be it.

scootz - 18/5/08 at 08:54 PM

The guy can only say that the Audi was going at speed... but unless he has the relevant equipment, he cannot say what that speed was - so no story.

If a random car gets in between the lead car and the back-up, then the back-up will make their presence known and get you to shift - standard practice, so again, no story there.

Sounds like the convoy has been traveling at a bit of speed and Mr Man has pulled out into the tight gap without noticing the big Range Rover following at close quarters.

He's then objected to the big motor that's probably flashing at him to GTF and has begun to play the "I'll slow you up mate" game. He's then had a panic when the blue lights have come on under the grill and realised he has been a bit of an arse.

He's now playing the 'attack is the best form of defence' game should there be any repercussions from the Old Bill and also getting his 15 minutes worth.

The bottom line... no story here. Just another case of our ridiculously celeb obsessed media looking for non-stories to tart up for the tabloid-masses.

scootz - 18/5/08 at 08:58 PM

.... and

omega 24 v6 - 18/5/08 at 09:59 PM

quote:

If a random car gets in between the lead car and the back-up, then the back-up will make their presence known and get you to shift - standard practice, so again, no story there.


Sorry BUT if the security are following, and allowing a SAFE gap as they should, and then someone rightly or wrongly fills that gap, then it does not give them the right to tailgate and flash lights. And sorry but if they are security and coppers then it's still their duty to uphold the law and speeding is against the law. The are probably even in contact with the car in front so they could at least have a chat and say slow down. As already said when he dykes it and it's paris all over again then there WILL be a story but someone else will most likely be to blame.

theconrodkid - 19/5/08 at 06:35 AM

the question is why was the audi going over the speed limit and not getting a tug,if you are afraid of being shot at/kidnapped then drive a discrete car at a discrete speed,audi driver was speeding and using his phone,thats got to be worth a few points?

scootz - 19/5/08 at 07:26 AM

There are many reasons why the Audi may have been going at 'speed'. But... at what speed? How do any of us know what speed it was going at... just because some random bloke 'thinks' it was going fast, then we all take his word as gospel???

When an heir to the throne is traveling in convoy (especially one who has just served overseas and is flavour of the month), then the convoy WILL be traveling very closely (closer that most can imagine, but crucially - as they are trained to do).

If this guy has pulled out into the gap that I suspect was there, then he's not checked his mirrors. A major factor in most motorway / dual-carriageway collisions.

I'm guessing the Range Rover would have had to stand on it's nose.