Police999.com Discussion Forums
May 18, 2012, 01:09:10 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?

Login with username, password and session length
News: In order to see all of our Forums (we have over 30), you will need to register
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Traffic Officer in Court after Pursuit  (Read 938 times)
Ch00
Global Moderator
*
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 809



Awards
« Reply #15 on: January 26, 2012, 16:59:09 PM »

Apparently it 'just came to rest there'  Cheesy
apparently so.

Indeed
Logged

Police999.com ModTeam Together making the forum a safer place for all !!!!!!

Mod posts are in Green

www.iespell.com for all your spelling needs !!!
SgtAngel
Administrator
*
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 2718


WWW Awards
« Reply #16 on: January 26, 2012, 17:00:53 PM »

So it looks like the brave and highly trained 9am assassins got him.

Quote
Portsmouth police car chase 'put people at risk'

A highly trained police patrol officer involved in chasing a stolen van through Portsmouth put innocent people at risk, a court has been told.

PC James Holden denies one charge of dangerous driving brought following a review of the incident by senior colleagues within the Hampshire force.

Guildford Crown Court was told how he followed a stolen van in his police patrol vehicle in February last year.

The van crashed through a railway barrier in Cosham before being stopped.

PC Holden, from Fratton, did not cross the railway line and the stolen van was stopped by another police patrol on the other side.

Wrong way

The court heard that all police car pursuits are reviewed by senior officers and in PC Holden's case they judged he made a number of very serious errors, and that those errors put lives and properties at risk.

The jury was shown footage of the chase taken with a camera fitted inside PC Holden's vehicle.

It showed the stolen van being driven at speed, through several red lights and the wrong way along a section of dual carriageway.

The prosecution said PC Holden's training should have made him realise that the pursuit was becoming far too dangerous and he should have stopped it.

The trial continues.

Source: BBC News

If the red mist has firmly set in which appears to be what they are suggesting, why have they chosen to prosecute him rather than get him back for retraining? What was the tactical commander or the control room operator doing? Surely he (or his operator if he had one) were providing updates?
Logged

If a woman tells you she's twenty and looks sixteen, she's twelve. If she tells you she's twenty-six and looks twenty-six, she's damn near fourty


Police999.com ModTeam
SgtAngel
Administrator
*
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 2718


WWW Awards
« Reply #17 on: January 26, 2012, 17:01:49 PM »

You hinted at it Sgt Angel but my understanding is that blocking the exit would be a static road block and that requires a superintendents authority. You would struggle to get that in the split second it takes to make that decision.
H you could well be right. I thought that it was a tactic to be authorised by ACPO, but there are two elements to the block tactic. One is the placement of a vehicle (usually spontaneous) and the second is immoveable objects (usually planned). However I do know in the MPS that if you place a police vehicle in front of a vehicle failing to stop you will have a long period of contemplation before being able to get behind the wheel again. Tactical contact is another valid option providing drivers have received training. That is usually down to the driver to self authorise, but obviously they must be able to justify why.



So it looks like the brave and highly trained 9am assassins got him.

Quote
Portsmouth police car chase 'put people at risk'

A highly trained police patrol officer involved in chasing a stolen van through Portsmouth put innocent people at risk, a court has been told.

PC James Holden denies one charge of dangerous driving brought following a review of the incident by senior colleagues within the Hampshire force.

Guildford Crown Court was told how he followed a stolen van in his police patrol vehicle in February last year.

The van crashed through a railway barrier in Cosham before being stopped.

PC Holden, from Fratton, did not cross the railway line and the stolen van was stopped by another police patrol on the other side.

Wrong way

The court heard that all police car pursuits are reviewed by senior officers and in PC Holden's case they judged he made a number of very serious errors, and that those errors put lives and properties at risk.

The jury was shown footage of the chase taken with a camera fitted inside PC Holden's vehicle.

It showed the stolen van being driven at speed, through several red lights and the wrong way along a section of dual carriageway.

The prosecution said PC Holden's training should have made him realise that the pursuit was becoming far too dangerous and he should have stopped it.

The trial continues.

Source: BBC News

If the red mist has firmly set in which appears to be what they are suggesting, why have they chosen to prosecute him rather than get him back for retraining? What was the tactical commander or the control room operator doing? Surely he (or his operator if he had one) were providing updates on a rapidly developing pursuit?
« Last Edit: January 26, 2012, 20:03:43 PM by SgtAngel » Logged

If a woman tells you she's twenty and looks sixteen, she's twelve. If she tells you she's twenty-six and looks twenty-six, she's damn near fourty


Police999.com ModTeam
SgtAngel
Administrator
*
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 2718


WWW Awards
« Reply #18 on: February 02, 2012, 10:33:19 AM »

A POLICEMAN has been cleared of dangerous driving over his pursuit of a stolen vehicle.

After an hour and 10 minutes of deliberations a 12-strong jury found PC James Holden not guilty following a seven-day trial at Guildford Crown Court.

Qualified advanced driver PC Holden, 35, who works at Fratton Roads Policing Unit, had denied dangerous driving in relation to his pursuit of a stolen Renault Kangoo minivan being driven by a prolific offender through Portsmouth on February 6 last year.

PC Holden pursued the vehicle - which had been reported stolen during a house burglary in the Petetsfield area earlier that day - after spotting it at McDonalds at The Pompey Centre in Fratton.

The minivan went through red traffic lights, the wrong way round a roundabout and on the wrong side of a dual carriageway before smashing through level crossing barriers outside Cosham train station.

PC Holden, of Ryecroft, Titchfield, did not go through the barriers.

The minivan driver, Louis Bibby, 19, who was on bail at the time, was arrested nearby after abandoning the vehicle.

His woman passenger was also held.

Bibby, who has 145 previous convictions, later admitted a string of offences at Portsmouth Crown Court including dangerous driving, driving while disqualified and without insurance, aggravated vehicle taking causing damage and two counts of burglary with intent to steal.

He was sentenced to four years in a Young Offenders Institution.

In a statement, Hampshire Constabulary said: ‘Following the incident in Cosham on February 6, 2011, the circumstances of the pursuit were reviewed and the decision made by the Crown Prosecution Service to charge.

‘This was an individual and unique case, and the CPS independently reviewed the evidence in accordance with national prosecutor guidance, known as the Charging Standard, in reaching its decision to charge.

‘It is important that the justice system is transparent and that police officers are subject to the same scrutiny as members of the public.

‘Police officers do a difficult job often in very difficult circumstances and the people being pursued were caught as a result of this pursuit and convicted of burglary, vehicle theft and a number of other offences.

‘Every pursuit in force is reviewed by a specialist tactical advisor from the Roads Policing Unit and those that they feel have potential for organisational learning – both positive and adverse practice – are referred to the Pursuit Review Group.

‘This group includes the head of Driver Standards, a senior officer from the Force Control Room, and representatives from Hampshire Police Federation and the Professional Standards Department. In this case, the panel identified a potential misconduct offence and it was transferred to PSD for further review.

‘If we have concerns, we put those circumstances to the CPS to act as an independent arbiter of our actions. To ensure the complete independence of this process we can, as in this instance, refer it to a CPS office in another county.

‘Police officers involved in pursuits are subject to a high level of specialist training, adhering to national policy and codes of practice. Following the outcome of this case we will identify any organisational learning that comes out of it.’

Source (including a video so you can make your own mine up!:The News - Portsmouth.
 

Our faith in the court system is now restored. Shame on Hants and the CPS for putting this officer through the mill.
Logged

If a woman tells you she's twenty and looks sixteen, she's twelve. If she tells you she's twenty-six and looks twenty-six, she's damn near fourty


Police999.com ModTeam
GymRat
Site Staff
*
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1957



Awards
« Reply #19 on: February 02, 2012, 14:10:38 PM »

I wouldn't blame any officer who chucked his / her pursuit ticket back in their bosses face after this farce.

Lets just surrender law enforcement entirely, shall we?

LIke it or not, police officers can, under certain circumstances break the laws we enforce. Thats why we're trained to do what we do.
Logged

"W.W.S.D?"
Rusty99
Power Member
*
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 1288


Cheer up.....here is the GB Volley Ball Team!!!


Awards
« Reply #20 on: February 02, 2012, 20:56:20 PM »

Nice to read some of the comments written on the page, majority of the MOP's were pro.
Logged

There are three types of people, those that make things happen, those that watch things happen and those that wondered what happened!

If you can't see a light at the end of the tunnel, march down there and light it yourself.
JayDay
Top Member
*
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 355



Awards
« Reply #21 on: February 03, 2012, 14:09:12 PM »


‘This group includes the head of Driver Standards, a senior officer from the Force Control Room, and representatives from Hampshire Police Federation and the Professional Standards Department.

I would hazard a guess that none of this group have done anything more dangerous than drive a desk.
Logged

There are dangers in everything one does. But the greatest danger is doing nothing.
ultrabruce
Superintendent
*
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 227


Awards
« Reply #22 on: February 03, 2012, 15:07:24 PM »

145 convictions and when a copper chases him down he's the one who gets dragged through the courts?! Huh

I have often wondered about the 3 strikes rule that parts of America adopted in the 90's. Life imprisonment for 3 or more offences can sound harsh and I am no expert on sentencing and the relative merits of prison  compared to other forms of punishment but how about:

145 strikes gets you an express lane ticket to the electric chair?

145! FFS!
Logged
alan100million
Police Officers
*
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 286



Awards
« Reply #23 on: February 04, 2012, 02:35:03 AM »

Poor sod, another one for a commissioner post I feel. You could fill them all with cop that have been screwed over.
Logged
SgtAngel
Administrator
*
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 2718


WWW Awards
« Reply #24 on: February 08, 2012, 20:36:42 PM »

Taken from "minimum cover" blog
Quote
Following my previous post on the prosecution of PC James Holden regarding a pursuit in Portsmouth last February I have received the following statement from John Apter, Chairman of Hampshire Police Federation. It provides previously un-released details about the action taken by the Hampshire PRG, PSD and CPS in charging others involved in the incident alongside PC Holden. Thankfully these other officers avoided the trauma of Crown Court and trial by media. I would like to thank John for his willingness to bring this situation fully into focus and wish him and PC Holden the best during the review process to come.

Statement reads:

The case of PC James Holden has raised many questions, the main one being why was he ever prosecuted in the first place? This question along with many others will be put into the review which is being lead by Hampshire's DCC, Andy Marsh.

The passenger in the pursuit vehicle, the radio operator, was also prosecuted for aid and abets dangerous driving. This was mentioned in open court but not reported on. Fortunately, with thanks to our legal team, this was thrown out at the committal stage.

Having spoken at length with the DCC I am confident that the review will be a thorough and detailed one. I am also confident that the officers involved will now have their voices heard. I can't predict what the review will recommend, time will tell. But if, at the very least, some learning comes from this situation then we must take this as a positive.

The emotional impact on both officers has been dramatic. What has been of comfort to them has been the support from colleagues and members of the public. It is clear from the many phone calls, emails and letters we have received that the public do support us.

Through this blog I want to thank those of you who have sent messages of support, we read every one and it was that support which helped James Holden get through the past few weeks.

Thank you
John John Apter
Chairman
Hampshire Police Federation

Source: Minimum Cover

Just glad I'm not a Hantspol officer. I can't believe they even tried prosecuting the operator! FFS. I'd be handing in my permit all the while they are failing to support their drivers.
« Last Edit: February 08, 2012, 20:41:34 PM by SgtAngel » Logged

If a woman tells you she's twenty and looks sixteen, she's twelve. If she tells you she's twenty-six and looks twenty-six, she's damn near fourty


Police999.com ModTeam
busterbloodvessel
Global Moderator
*
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 5311



Awards
« Reply #25 on: February 08, 2012, 21:02:40 PM »

If they charged the operator with aid and abet, it's blatantly obvious that there's more to this than has been reported. What action did the operator take that made out the offence? Classic selective reporting.
Logged

TJF

Mod Posts in Green
SgtAngel
Administrator
*
Offline Offline

United Kingdom United Kingdom

Posts: 2718


WWW Awards
« Reply #26 on: February 08, 2012, 21:31:42 PM »

If they charged the operator with aid and abet, it's blatantly obvious that there's more to this than has been reported. What action did the operator take that made out the offence? Classic selective reporting.

No idea. The video of the pursuit was quite tame, so there must be something else behind all of this. As I said in an earlier post, this sounds like a training issue and not a prosecution.

Hopefully the review will be made public.
Logged

If a woman tells you she's twenty and looks sixteen, she's twelve. If she tells you she's twenty-six and looks twenty-six, she's damn near fourty


Police999.com ModTeam
Pages: 1 [2]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.10 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!