Don't Admit You Were Speeding

[@steamhammer2k]

I need to get a dash cam and quick. I think that officer needs some glasses and some training. Now wonder there is miss trust, the police must be totally correct and objective.

[@ashley_neal]

Links in the description and use the code "ashley' 😂 👍

[@dafyddthomas7299]

Wouldn't work cammer lose his appeal on that he was speeding ( abeit bit over the limit) and inconsiderate driving - lane hogging

[@idonotwantahandle2]

Right to silence. That would be better than raised pitch and volume of voice. Try listening rather than being argumentative and giving police officer a reason to try to ensnare.

[@koncorde]

@@dafyddthomas7299 You could still file a complaint about copper lying in order to try and get him to admit to doing 20 over the speed limit.

[@clickrick]

@@ashley_neal Now why didn't you ever tell us about that before? 🤣

[@BlackBeltBarrister]

I don't like it when officers say that a driver has a bad attitude when all he was doing was (quite rightly) disagreeing with the officer's accusation of speeding at 70mph. This is what gives police a bad reputation.

[@ashley_neal]

Hi Dan. Thanks for your input and I agree. It feels as though the officer was trying to win an argument rather than do what he should've done.

[@BlackBeltBarrister]

@@ashley_neal Yes indeed - unnecessarily antagonistic. I suspect that it is because the officer was single crew and cannot convict him without corroborating evidence (or, of course, an admission!)

[@BadwolfFPV]

are the police allowed to do 60-70 in a 50 zone without flashing blues?

[@butztanx]

@@ashley_neal Indeed. Officer isn't there to argue and convince your viewer he's committed a crime. If the police officer is certain a crime has been committed, he should inform him of the crime and process accordingly. The reason he spends his time trying to convince him, is because he knows fine well there's nothing to answer for. Poor work, I hope the officer learns from this and does better.

[@RBTVN]

Aren't you the barrister who's been making videos defending Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, AKA Tommy Robinson? Nobody with any morals should have owt to do with you, least of all anyone from Liverpool. You've contributed to the fascist pogroms we've been seeing up and down the country this week. Shame on you.

[@FistOfFiori]

"I've got no reason to make it up" - But you did pal, he wasn't ANYWHERE near 70mph 🤨

[@theaikidoka]

The reason to make it up is then you can issue a citation, which you can't do otherwise.

[@Cohen.the.Worrier]

So he made it up without a reason then. Ok.

[@theaikidoka]

@@Cohen.the.Worrier Sorry, what? The reason is to be able to issue a ticket. Whether he did or didn't issue one is irrelevant, the justification for stopping the driver was the alleged speed.

[@thebeatmonkey9]

@@Cohen.the.Worrier "The reason to make it up is then you can issue a citation" "So he made it up without a reason then. Ok." ????? lmao

[@j.tann1970]

The officer has more reasons to lie than the driver! First he wants to be able to write a ticket. Second, he wants to keep the statistics up to keep his department funded thus able to keep his job. Both making him more likely to want to lie. The driver's only reason to lie is to not get that ticket!

[@ibs5080]

For a moment I thought the cammer was calling the police officer Sweetheart rather than one of his passengers

[@theaikidoka]

Me too, I thought he was going for a wind-up. Like, what's the officer going to do, complain that a person was calling him nice names?

[@leedorney]

😁

[@jfergs.3302]

Ditto :)

[@vulcanvoyager]

@@theaikidoka Me too!, although I wouldn't have blamed him one iota!

[@JustOneQuestion]

Oh haha I thought this was just some classic British banter between him and police lol

[@PeterCooperUK]

Stopping someone in the live lane of a dual carriageway seems more dangerous to me than anything else that happened in the clip.

[@RunicRhino22]

Especially so close to the roundabout

[@DaveSimonH]

4:18 - "So I'm lying?" yes officer, through your teeth.

[@racingblue4722]

How did the Copper do 70 and catch up with the bloke doing 70? 😂

[@TheVicar]

Imagination technology

[@Nodster]

That's easy...... Time travel!

[@davidhandley9007]

Perhaps the sat nav speed isn't accurate?

[@Nodster]

@@davidhandley9007 they usually are to within 1-3mph generally, mine is 2mph slower than actual speed. Not seen mine be higher than 2mph difference at 70 but there is an argument to be made that the difference will be greater with more speed.

[@davidhandley9007]

@@Nodster yes is they are actually working correctly. Could have easily been malfunctioning, and/or a cheap knock off like you get from temu that isn't accurate. People don't tend to just sit back and think for a minute, just because that's what he screen says the speed was, doesn't necessarily mean it's accurate.

[@smilerbob]

The officer knew the driver was speeding but without a radar in the vehicle needed the driver to confess. A common tactic is to give a speed that is over to which a driver will counter with the actual speed and at that point it is a confession of guilt. The cammer did well to stop at “I wasn’t doing 70” and not continue with “it was 55” (or likely 60 on the speedo)

[@wrightwoodwork]

Yeah never say you where going over

[@keith6400]

The line is "You were doing 70 mph" to which stupid drivers say "I was only doing 55 mph" (in a 50 limit) You are then incriminated.

[@dafyddthomas7299]

Don't admit the speed, Insist of seeing the evidence that cop shop has but main reason likely to be the driver lane hogging

[@angelofmalice0]

It’s a single police officer following for less than a mile with no speed reading equipment on his vehicle. He knew he would never be able to issue a citation.

[@royfontaine5526]

@@angelofmalice0I think they might be able to, based on “opinion” and also the fact they have a calibrated speedo.

[@gerryiles3925]

"We don't go around just making stuff up do we?" Well, yes, constable, you do. You are actually trained to do so for the purpose of getting information from people that they aren't obliged to give you.

[@jayross1781]

I got pulled over in the Birkenhead tunnel (30mph limit) and I was doing about 34mph. Police stopped me and said I was doing 42mph. I said I wasn't doing 42mph. He said you were because I had to do 42mph to catch up with you, so I replied with, and you did catch up with me, which suggests I wasn't doing 42mph. Needless to say he let me go. Don't ever pander to these head workers who will do anything to try and trip you up.

[@ruutjormun2262]

LOL

[@zxr250]

"So I'm lying?" Yes, officer. You are lying.

[@youknow6968]

The level of lying by the police officer is just shameless.

[@keith6400]

Never suggest a police officer is lying. You need to say at the scene or on court that they were mistaken in their assertion.

[@youknow6968]

@@keith6400 I wouldn't say it to their face, but I appreciate the reminder. I personally respect the police, as I've had positive experiences on the few occasions I've dealt with the police. Although I do have stories within my circle that makes you think, but there are bad apples everywhere.

[@15bit62]

I was under the impression that UK police are not allowed to lie.

[@ChrisBrown-px1oy]

​@@15bit62"Are not allowed to" doesn't equal "don't". We've been through this with prime ministers. Four incumbents after Tony Blair, that always rather silly convention lost all currency.

[@mihohobaba]

@@15bit62 You are very much mistaken. They absolutely are allowed to lie. In fact, they are trained to lie in order to extract a confession.

[@gordy4459]

"Its quite a dangerous road and we have a lot of accidents"....says the copper after stopping him in a live lane!....

[@MIEJ4]

It’s the new ELOR in Leeds, people regularly do 80mph even though its a 50 limit. Plus the many roundabouts lead people to stick in the right lane to turn right… in a mile🤦🏻‍♂️🤷🏻‍♂️

[@Sam-gf6ue]

@@MIEJ4 having a low speed limit on a fast open road like that and not putting permanent speed camera will lead to accidents.

[@malgf4145]

.... especially with BMWs doing 70 mph.

[@Jabarri74]

@@Sam-gf6ue It's not in a built up area why is the speed limit so low? Trying to copy Wales and make everyone drive at a snails pace?

[@commanchi7]

@@malgf4145 tends to be Audi's around these neck of the woods

[@MrJinxmaster1]

"I wasn't doing 70! I was only doing 55!" Is what the blighter wanted to hear.

[@Spacer-l3j]

Sorry but your viewer is a lane hogger. I don't sympathise with lane hoggers they have a rare syndrome of hypocrisy even though the police office was in wront as well this could've been avoided if he kept left unless overtaking. This is a massive issue in the UK i drive vans for a living and it is mind blowing the amount of people hogging lanes for no reason messing up the traffic and putting others at risk

[@chrism2279]

That's how they get you!

[@akmalali4510]

55 is still over so no need to admit it, they can’t prove the speed you was going unless the had a speed camera

[@TechBaffle]

Never thought if it like that. Pretty sneaky really!

[@davidyoung9561]

​@akmalali4510 and it has to be an average recorded speed over a certain distance.

[@lr5777]

Poor lane discipline, but the police officer's false claims about the cammer's speed are appalling.

[@Nooty01]

No reason for them to hog lane two either. Too many lane hoggers nowadays.

[@GooberProject]

this type of lane displine is the worst "but I was overtaking" yeah next year maybe

[@MajorLeagueGuitarist]

Exactly, both people here made mistakes. This guy immediately turns the conversation hostile when the officer is remaining calm. The officer shouldn’t have claimed he was driving 70 mph but this guy was hogging the outside lane.

[@Madmark50484]

“This section of road is dangerous” so you made it even more dangerous by unnecessarily pulling someone over in it and making an obstruction.

[@mrechelon7051]

Yes. I thought that. Stopping on the dual carriageway causes a bigger danger than doing 55 in a 50..on a sunny dry day with very little traffic. The copper lied several times.Simple. Disgraceful...

[@FF-pq2ex]

and opening the door into a car did he even look in mirror

[@robdevaney6518]

What a waste of time. 70mph? Joker police. And if you disagree it's called attitude

[@james-5560]

More to do with the lane hogging I think.

[@richardclarke9966]

I think his point is the false accusations. Discipline is one thing, but blatant lying and police bullying is more a factor here.

[@vulcanvoyager]

They use the word "ATTITUDE" as their version of the "RACE CARD!"

[@lizdavis-w9c]

He was speeding. Doing over 50mph, even though only by a few MPH is still speeding. He stayed in the outside lane all through the video, even though there were NO cars to overtake. The police officer was correct, and the driver was in the wrong. If he wasn't argumentative the officer would have let him off with just a talking to.

[@angelofmalice0]

Just another officer on an ego trip.

[@ricequackers]

An ex-cop dad of a friend's always told me to answer, "Yes, I know what speed I was going, do you?" Let them answer, and if they can't then they've got nothing.

[@dafyddthomas7299]

Agree - also ask to see the evidence of the speeding

[@raymondbenjamins5884]

That was what I was taught by an ex-cop as well (although in the Netherlands). You don't actually have to answer those questions. It's on them to prove you did something wrong.

[@davidhall7811]

Ive actually said this once (I actually wasnt speeding) and the officer didnt know what to say for a few minutes 🙂

[@___Rick___]

Exactly, because if you say 'no officer' then you could be liable to 'driving without due care & attention' charge.

[@clearmethod8412]

he allready said he thought he was doing 70

[@blxtothis]

Frankly “My Viewer” had no reason to remain in the outside lane when they were so far behind vehicles in the inside lane regardless of any road law interpretations, it’s a matter of common sense and potential safety.

[@incogneeto5624]

pretty sure it's said in the video that it's the only thing the viewer did wrong. I agree with you, but it's a minor inconvenience, and given the exact circumstances we see in the video with low traffic, I don't think it's a big issue - even if he has no reason to be there.

[@smellystinker4837]

It's not just common sense. It's highway code. This instructor(?) needs to refresh his own f&%king driving skills. Absolutely terrible form from him. The fact he didn't realise this would be a potential outcome is ridiculous.

[@Lostachilles]

One could argue that (assuming he were going right at the roundabout) he had every reason to be in the right lane as early preparation to avoid any unnecessary delay of traffic caused by trying to get into the right lane closer to the turn, which may not be safely doable without holding up traffic at that point. Police officer wouldn't know this, so it wouldn't be a satisfactory reason to pull him over until after seeing him go straight at the roundabout.

[@BlackBuck777]

Your viewer did a good job there. Must have been a slow day for the police officer, the roads at all times in the clip seemed very peaceful, no need to give anyone grief.

[@broshmosh]

"i've no reason to make stuff up do I? We don't go around making stuff up do we?" Evidence says... yes, actually, you do!! Whatever reason they had, they felt it appropriate to make up not one thing, but three! What a load of tosh.

[@BennyHarveyBigMan]

As an ex copper I can tell you exactly what happened here. The officers ego led to the stop, whether it be because the cammer failed to move left fast enough or if there was a hand signal while they were side by side. The officer was expecting a submissive, apologetic driver that he could give a verbal warning, feel powerful then drive away. The officer bluffed by saying 'There's only 2 ways I can deal with this, give advice or... (I assume he said give a fine)'. From what I can tell that's not a traffic car, so it's speedo won't be calibrated and it won't have the Cleartone system which measures speed over a certain distance (I think it was 1/10 of a mile but not sure), so giving a ticket for speeding would have been out of the question as he'd have had NO evidence. The cammer called his bluff and maintained that he wasn't doing the claimed speed, so the officer had to fall back on the lane discipline, which he *could* have given a fine for care and attention but with the approaching roundabout, junctions and dashcam would have been an interesting one to see brought to court. In the end the officer had no real choice but to 'decide' to just give words of advice and let them carry on their journey. Bit embarrassing really. As a side note, I've got to correct the misinformation Ash gives at the end of the video. The threshold for prosecution *IS* the speed limit. Forces have discretion and are completely within their power to prosecute for 31 in 30 if they decide to do so and have, for example, a roadside admission on camera i.e. 'I was only doing 31!'. This misunderstanding usually comes from speed cameras themselves, which are usually give the 10%+X threshold set by the individual force for sending out an automatic FPN. The best advice I can give is in line with what Ash ended with though, but I'd simply add 'Don't talk to the police without legal advice'.

[@misterg1157]

On top of what the officer alleged, he said: “It’s quite a dangerous road and we have a lot of accidents on this road” (5:53). Is that due to police cars stopping in lane 1 of a dual carriageway?

[@misterg1157]

⁠I assumed that the officer was intimidated by the dashcam and, but for that, he would probably have prosecuted the driver. The dashcam was therefore critical. The irony is that the dashcam provided evidence that he was speeding. I am surprised that Ashley said the driver hit 56 mph “for a split second” as if it therefore didn’t matter (1:09) - just the sort of thing blurted out by drivers, to be used as a confession.

[@contessa.adella]

No reason at all officer…apart from increasing your rap sheet and chasing a promotion. For all we know they hold a traffic stop leader board back at the station.

[@PJ-om2wq]

​@@BennyHarveyBigManI'm slightly autistic, but also not stupid, an experienced engineer, and know more about cars and mechanical things than 99% of the population. I'm utterly obsessed with all things automotive. The problem is that once my mind gets on a train of thought it's not coming off the tracks, and, if a police officer tried to B/S me like this one did I would not be able to get past it. I would literally argue with them all day because integrity and facts are just not negotiable in my mind. That's what autism does to you. So what would a policeman do with me? My fear is that I wouldn't handle it well.

[@christianweller4288]

The old “ I had to do 75 to catch up with you” nonsense. Very convenient of the police to not to understand the physics of acceleration. Motorcyclists will be very familiar with this one.

[@TheVicar]

The copper may still be in the early stages of his time dilation training

[@gordon861]

Yes, standard motorcycle acceleration, scalded cat up to the speed limit (keeping the front down), and then just sit at speed.

[@sideshowbobsfanclub]

Of course he had to go faster to catch up, otherwise he'd never never catch up - unless the laws of physics doesn't apply to mobile pig pens

[@kenbrown2808]

on the counterpoint, back in my youth (in the US) I had one state, "I was at 80 when I came off the ramp, and you were still pulling away." and yeah, if you're fracturing the law, save yourself trouble and own your bad judgement. if you place yourself above the law, it makes you no better than anyone else who wants to place themselves above the law.

[@71calex]

Theres a video on here somewhere of a police car pulling out in front of a cyclist in Richmond Pk and the cyclist says something and the cops give chase. One of them told the cyclist I had to do more than 30mph to catch up with you and you can just see the second officer inwardly facepalm.

[@Aeternum_]

Cammer definitely needed to get out of the outside lane, if it takes you a mile or 2 to complete an overtake then you're simply going too slow to warrant being in that lane at all.

[@RichO1701e]

100% correct, he's a lazy driver with bad habits.

[@jcskyknight2222]

@@RichO1701eHe would probably normally be going faster TBF…

[@RichO1701e]

@@jcskyknight2222 like I said, bad habits, speeding is a bad habit

[@JimboB-rh5td]

Although the police officer was totally out of order, if the driver had been in the left lane he would have never been pulled over

[@user-fq8tt2tm6q]

But Ashley said his driving and lane position was acceptable.... He's become a total tool

[@Duncan94]

A prime example of why so many everyday people don't like the police. This is a nothing stop and when the cop realises he's isn't going to get the better of the driver his ego kicks in.

[@barry5111]

Unfortunately the 10% plus allowance is discretionary and technically the bloke was speeding. However it's a shame that this officer's accusations could not be referred to police complaints. False accusations from a public servant like that is disgraceful.

[@User_cruiser24]

There speed wasn’t measured using a calibrated measuring device so it couldn’t be proven in court if it got to that stage.

[@positronundervolt4799]

Don't admit anything to police; right or wrong. All they need is a confession. They will do anything to get it, because it makes their job easy.

[@ThePlacehole]

Better still -- just don't say anything! They know the game, you don't. You can't win. Don't even say you don't have time to argue. If you're in a hurry, they'll use it against you. Go to a reputable law-oriented blog and learn a polite phrase to demand your rights appropriate to your country. They will not get angry, they are instructed to do the same.

[@gravemind6536]

Just say you want a solicitor and you will not comment unless you get one. They'll drop whatever petty thing they want to get you for because you've ensured it won't be worth their time.

[@___Rick___]

A colleague of mine was stopped and the policeman asked him 'do you know what speed you were doing sir?' to which he replied 'No officer' , and my colleague was then prosecuted for driving without due care and attention!

[@GazzaMac]

Correct. When I had an accident before, in interview they showed me a photo of the position of my car after the collision and said, "That was careless wasn't it!?" To which I answered no, it was just an accident. Fucker wasn't stitching me for careless driving

[@jvoric]

All he had to say was “be aware of your lane discipline, drive carefully, have a good day”!

[@Eric_Hunt194]

Ah, but that wouldn't give him a chance to stroke his... ego.

[@davem9204]

Exactly, as that's what the cammer was mainly doing wrong - poor lane discipline. OK, his dash cam suggested he might have crept over the 50 limit (such a low limit for a road like that), but not worth pulling over someone for, and certainly no where near a dangerous speed. Just a friendly word of advice about keeping left unless overtaking would have been best.

[@vadwvea7153]

His lane discipline was good though, he was gaining on the cars infront and was going to overtake them. The cop had actually 0 reason to stop him

[@06kellyjac]

I was flummoxed when he said 70... It's not good how often the police lie and then start getting sassy complaining you're now argumentative or agitated after they just purposely tried to make you that way.

[@dafyddthomas7299]

Should have cited the real reason - lane hogging by camera car and ticket him with 3 FPS + £100 - inconsiderate driving

[@gordon861]

@@dafyddthomas7299 Lane hogging might have been a case, but going through the junction where cars could have joined from the left was a valid defence to that charge. The next question would be if moving left as he approached the VW that was probably technically too close to the car in front, and then pulling straight back out would have been reasonable. If I had been the driver and got a ticket for 'careless driving' (lane hogging offence) I think I would be happy to defend the charge in court from the supplied video, you would also have access to the police dashcam. I would also be submitting this video into evidence as an independent interpretation of the event, perhaps Ashley needs to offer as an expert witness?

[@davidhandley9007]

Perhaps the dash cam speed isn't accurate.

[@gordon861]

@@davidhandley9007 Dashcam speed is taken from GPS satellites using doppler shift, it's probably as accurate as you will get short of a radar gun.

[@davidhandley9007]

@@gordon861 that's assuming that it was functioning correctly, all I am saying is that there's more than one explanation. Could be malfunctioning, or could even be a cheap temu knock off that doesn't work correctly. Doesn't necessarily mean the police man Was lying, as others have intimated.

[@arod9998]

This is a guy who sits in lane 2 of a 3 lane motorway when it’s completely EMPTY

[@John.AR.Activism]

Ikr, copper was lying to get a confession but at the same time, keep. to. the. left. fuckin ell xD

[@BlueJDev]

But if it's empty it's fair game and actually safer to be in the middle lane... So long as they move over if they spot cars approaching from the rear then it's a non issue... Although I guess in this case they likely wouldn't..

[@timboswell5130]

If it's completely empty then there's no harm. Lane hogging is when you sit in lane two/three to the detriment of other road users. In this case, by the time the officer caught up, the cam driver was close enough to the other vehicles to be able to overtake so had no reason to move over.

[@arod9998]

@@BlueJDevcool, well I will be undertaking you in lane 1

[@arod9998]

@@timboswell5130 cool, well I will be undertaking you in lane 1

[@fregus.]

There's a pervasive misunderstanding with police officers where they think if they have to break the speed limit to catch up, that means the person is speeding. No. If I'm doing the speed limit, and you're doing the speed limit, you'll never catch up. It doesn't matter that the cop was doing 70 to catch up, that means nothing. Incredible how trained people can make that mistake.

[@BlackStar2161]

Come now, you can't expect a pig to understand basic physics.

[@highdownmartin]

“We don’t go round making stuff up. “ Spits out tea! W⚓️

[@The_Leeroy]

i would have flipped it. "officer, i was doing the speed limit and you came up behind me without lights, meaning that if anyone was speeding, it was you"

[@steveemery4494]

They are allowed to go over the speed limit without lights/sirens if it's for a "policing reason" - in this case, catching up with a suspected speeder with be sufficient. However, my understanding is that a solo officer in a standard patrol car (ie, uncalibrated speedo) has zero submissible evidence unless you admit to the offence - which is clearly what he was aiming for

[@cia5602]

@@steveemery4494 In the USA this is called "pacing" and is a very old fashioned method of catching speeders. Nearly every patrol car in the USA has a vehicle mounted radar, therefore the "pacing" method would never be enough for it to go to court.

[@Gerishnakov]

​@@steveemery4494The officer must have been speeding before even noticing the cammer, how else did he even arrive on the scene in the first place?

[@SiCrewe]

I got stopped a few months ago, at 5am, on the way home after a night-shift. Cop car followed me for about 5 miles along a 60mph B-road, where I was doing around 40mph and then I turned onto an A-road and drove at around 50mph. Blue lights came on, I pulled into a layby and when the cop asked if I knew what speed I was doing I just said "Yes". He wandered off (presumably to check my details) and when he came back he told me he'd stopped me "because of the way you were driving". He explained that I was driving "slower than most traffic that uses these roads". I explained that I was on my way home, my wife doesn't get up until 7am so there's no reason to rush and I like to relax on the drive home after work. Cop tells me that I was "driving like somebody who's hoping to avoid attention from the police". 😕 I guess sometimes you just can't win.

[@nfc153]

I used to drive a regularly at night through countryside. I got stopped frequently, usually because it looked like I was "going a bit fast" or "driving suspiciously carefully". All they wanted to do was check I was sober - there was never any aggro but they have to give a reason, hence the vagueness. Stopping someone in a live lane to, basically, advise them on lane discipline and fish for a confession? That's a whole other thing. Yes, the cammer was speeding but a quick flash of the blue lights would have sorted that out. I would think being stationary in the lane there was more dangerous than the speed they were doing, but I'm not an expert.

[@ianmason.]

I permanently drive "like somebody who's hoping to avoid attention from the police". It's called obeying all the rules of the road. Implicitly any copper saying that to someone is inviting them to drive as badly as so many do to make themselves inconspicuous to the police, a direct opposite to the well know "chilling effect" of over zealous policing in other areas.

[@SiCrewe]

@@nfc153 Yep. The cop who stopped me wasn't malicious and, as you say, I suspect they just thought it was possible I might've been driving home after a night on the town... though I'd hope I wasn't driving like somebody who might've been drunk! Personally, I probably wouldn't have stopped on the side of a dual-carriageway like the driver in the video - especially where it's likely traffic would be using both lanes after exiting the roundabout. I HAVE had exactly the same thing as the driver in the video, after a car followed me very closely at night, dropped back and then accelerated right up to my bumper 2 or 3 times. Honestly, I DID assume it might be a cop but, upon reaching a roundabout, I carried some speed through and then accelerated briskly up to 60mph to create some space. Following car catches up, blue lights come on and cop says "I had to speed up to nearly 90mph to catch you". He then said "It looked like you were trying to run when you reached the roundabout" and I told him I was trying to create some space because it looked like HE was trying to drive into the back of me. I got the lecture about driving safely and I pointed out that if a wild animal had run onto the road, causing me to brake sharply, he would have driven into the back of me. Cop says "driving safely would mean having the presence of mind to drive over a rabbit if it ran onto the road". I replied saying "What about a sheep or a deer?" That comment (I assume) got me detained for another 20 minutes without any contact from the cop before he came back and told me I could go.

[@Andy-fd5fg]

Oh dear you were driving slower than the limit..... you are such a naughty person 🤪 Some people, including the police seem to forget it is a limit and NOT a target. Better hope you aren't seen by the police when you don't try and avoid killing that dear with your car, else they might use the Deer Act of 1991 on you.

[@craig361]

you were more than likely pulled because typically people driving that slow are driving under the influence

[@gfo8755]

As a former traffic cop. That officer was a disgrace. He didn't know what he was talking about.

[@pauleff3312]

This is what gets the old bill a bad name and disliked - and when something serious happens, they need our help.... And then they wonder why no-one comes forwards to help them?!

[@hicky62]

Great example of how certain police officers approach their job and why so many people have a negative attitude to them. The cammers child will only remember a police officer upsetting them and arguing with their father. For what? A none event really, 56 mph for less than 50 metres, and staying in the outside lane for a bit too long. The officer was probably having a quiet day and needed to show he was doing something, then tried to bully the cammer into admitting he'd committed and offence. Waste of time all round, but the child will remember it for a long time to come.

[@leedorney]

And got her 1st lesson; them and us...

[@davidvanderklauw]

But will that child vote the same mob back into power when he grows up?

[@Broadsword999]

The joke is that what these guys should be doing is chasing down all the badly modded fast hatchbacks driven by people with no clue, no insurance and no regard for other road users.

[@nikthompson4718]

The cammers attitude is also poor. The child will also learn if you argue and sound pathetic, you might get your own way.

[@aliensliveinme]

@@Broadsword999 if you want to target no regard for other road users they'd be better off chasing down expensive German saloons and Chelsea tractors.

[@robg521]

In 1980 one of my young biker mates got pulled over by 2 cops, they explained that they pulled him over because he kept looking over his shoulder at them while riding his bike. My friend replied that he had recently passed his test and also just last week passed his ACU advanced riders course and he was following what he had been trained to do on the course, [as in … keep looking behind you on a periodic basis] The cops looked at each other, burst into laughter, and walk back to their car pissing themselves laughing and drive off, my friends was left there feeling humiliated. He was so angry about this that we wrote to one of the biker magazines and they published his account as an article.

[@caramelldansen2204]

police are evil

[@bmused55]

To be fair, the cammer's attitude stinks too. He was confrontational from the outset. He WAS speeding and he WAS lane hogging and he doesn't like he's been pulled for it. That being said, the officer trying to say he was doing 70 is either outright lying or the speedo in his car is buggered (I note it is not a traffic car, just a local beat car), so won't have any calibrated equipment on board.

[@Rroff2]

Yeah I'm on the fence as to the cammer - his driving was not commendable, though not terrible, and I wouldn't have a problem with the police stopping him to have a friendly chat with a bit of advice. But that isn't what happened. You also never know when the police might have a reason to make progress which doesn't require emergency lights and siren so getting out the way when the cammer clearly wasn't catching the other traffic would be the right thing to do.

[@commanchi7]

Considering the length of time it was taking him to reach the cars in the left-hand lane there would've been no harm in him moving over, the police car would've overtaken them all before he'd of reached the first car for an opportunity to overtake. There's a difference between OCD lane jumping every 5 seconds and spending 20 seconds in the outside lane before passing.

[@timrober75]

completely agree. Aside from the laughable way the Police dealt with it, the cammer was speeding and had poor lane discipline... add to that the instant realisation when the audio in the car started you could hear the attitude straight away. I am a bit confused as to why Ashley is being so lenient on him to be honest.

[@ivanwover]

If I was confronted by a bullying, lying, corrupt officer who had the nerve to criticise my attitude I think I'd be fairly upset

[@LomTong]

​@@ivanwoverthe cammer didn't have the chance to find out he was bullying or lying before he started yelling at him like a pink faced walrus. The copper absolutely shouldn't have lied, but the cammer also could've avoided this confrontation at several points. 4 of which are very obvious to anyone with a social IQ over that of a toddler. 1. Using the lanes correctly in the first place 2. Not speeding 3. Not gesticulating at the cop when he was alongside 4. Not being an arrogant prick from the moment he opened his window.

[@DaveW-h2r]

The copper tried to imply he had "paced" the driver, but it appears this is neither a traffic constable or driving a traffic car, so I highly suspect he isn't qualified to pace the speed. I would be requesting a subject access request for any body worn video or video from the police car. If it is demonstrably that the constable knowingly lied, I would be making a complaint.

[@j100j]

But they are allowed and encouraged to lie. That's the problem.

[@deanmoncaster]

The only thing the cop got right was him sitting in the outside lane needlessly. On the whole the copper just made up a complete scenario then tried to convince him that it was true. The copper needs to hand his badge in and quit the force

[@Tazymandius]

Copper was deluded at best, corrupt at worst, blatantly making up falsehoods. Probably had a bad day "at the office" and needed to throw his weight around a bit, disgusting behaviour.

[@dafyddthomas7299]

To be un/fair police officer brought had right to pull over driver (not for speeding) for lane hogging

[@Tazymandius]

@dafyddthomas7299 If the copper had left it at lane hogging I'd totally agree but he went to make up a fallacy about speeding then when that wasn't working changed it up to the other driving being aggressive.

[@dafyddthomas7299]

@@Tazymandius On lane hogging we both agree but lying speed no no from cop shop. All Drivers should ask for that evidence ( video / still) of speeding to be shown from cop shop. However c%^^%^% Copper could dish him fine for speeding cammer couldn't appeal but it will fail, as his evidence (Car cam) shows him speeding and police can still do me / you for simply driving over 1 MPH over the limit

[@esmeecampbell7396]

​@@dafyddthomas7299I'm not sure if road traffic can get a court case on "I saw him and he seemed to be over the speed limit" these days. Yes the person wouldn't have been able to win at Court because the only evidence they have shows they were speeding. But the CPS don't know that, so the likelihood is they wouldn't decide to go to Court over it unless they still accept that Coppers eyes are enough and that not every car needs a speed sensor on board, because clearly the officer didn't have one otherwise he'd say "I paced you for a while and you were doing 56mph" rather than "I was doing 70 and it took a while to catch up so you were doing 60 or 70"

[@valeriesimpleton2525]

Glad the driver stuck up for themself

[@47milesaway]

*himself

[@colinmoore6068]

@@47milesaway gender identification assumption

[@47milesaway]

@@colinmoore6068 hahaha

[@itsmyview2024]

themselves

[@chrisclarke8451]

Correcting grammar in KZbin comments, Jesus get a life man

[@jasonk7072]

This police officer doesn’t really understand the poor reputation the force currently has. For many people the only contact they have with the police is when driving and it leaves an impression. They police by cooperation and consent and this sort of thing erodes that.

[@paul756uk2]

He's part of the reason the police have got the reputation they have.

[@j.tann1970]

Watch on KZbin how many innocent street photographers not breaking the law get harassed by the UK police and then tell us they police by cooperation and consent. And no, not all those photographers are "auditors", I don't agree what those auditor people do but they are still not doing anything illegal either. Mostly it's the police misunderstanding privacy laws with them policing based on current Gen Z views that privacy is expected in public when the laws say otherwise. It does not help when there are conflicting laws on the issue, one law says privacy is not expected in public but data protection law gives people privacy in public! But the police can not stop photography based on data protection laws, those are applied after the fact if the photos are publicised when people are identifiable by one means or another. Instead the police make some sort of BS excuse like public order offense to demand, not ask, demand the photographers identify and explain themselves! Now tell us again they police by cooperation and consent! lol

[@TheAlexagius]

There is no reason to ever contact or interact with the police unless you legally must or if required for an insurance claim, they're at best unhelpful and more often than not will try to fit you up for a crime to try to boost their god awful statistics.

[@andyclark8354]

I once had the biggest argument with a police officer, because I was eating a pizza. Parked in a long, off road lay-by, late at night. Couldnt believe it,even offered them a slice,didnt want it. Handed over the usual insurance and licence docs. Nothing happened. Somebody fancied an argument, not me!

[@AJTrain]

I had this a few years back, came up to a patrol car doing 30 in a 40 late at night. They turn left at the roundabout and I turn right going home. Road turns into a national B road and accelerate up to 60. 30 seconds later there's blue lights in the mirror. They claimed they stopped me as I was driving a new, dark saloon car at night and there had been burglaries in the area, fair enough, then the allegation that I was speeding. They said they had to do 80 to catch up with me. I tried to be as polite as possible but explain in primary school logic that if someone is far away from you and already going 60, you're going to need to do more than 60 to catch up to them! Queue the blinking and confused stare between them before wishing me a good evening and off they popped.

[@alleywatson]

Brilliant

[@ryansellar9149]

If he'd said he'd pulled him for lane hogging I'd have been like fair enough. I mean the road wasn't busy and he wasn't holding anyone up but it's not as if it takes any effort to steer back left

[@jacob1121]

Yeah a simple caution for lane hogging would have been more than fair and reasonable.

[@asilver2889]

Lane 'hogging' not actually a breach of law, just possible indication of careless driving. Very subjective..

[@plungerboobies6816]

Not true. ​@@asilver2889

[@Tillyard86]

“I've got no reason to make it up” and yet you still did! 😂

[@bestintheworld568]

As a younger driver in my early 20s, which is some 15 years ago now, I was rightly pulled over for doing nearly 40 into a 30 zone. The officer asked me “Do you know why you were pulled over?” and I rather sheepishly replied “Yep…” She was nice as pie about it, asked for my licence etc, did her checks, and let me go with a stern warning. I’ve had no issues with the police since. The copper in this video though is just giving more reasons for the anti-police brigade to point the finger with blatant lying and creating further stigma. I feel sorry for the good officers out there who have to deal with the public, when there’s clowns like this in their ranks making up their own laws.

[@nigeltaylor58]

This is exactly why I have front and rear dashcam fitted to my car, numerous times I have been followed by Police for several miles and stay within speed limit and then stopped for driving suspiciously because I drive as an IAM driver in which I passed my IAM test 24 years ago. When stopped I immediately inform the Police officers I have dashcam that is recording everything and that it maybe used as evidence. I have even been followed on M5 by Police doing 70mph and several cars have overtaken me going a lot faster, but the way I see it, it’s always a pleasure to have Police escort and I feel safe on the roads.

[@xo2quilt]

Once, many decades ago, I was pulled over. The officer asked me if I knew why he pulled me over. I promptly said "speeding and following too close". He was totally taken aback and didn't give me a ticket. Now, I don't give the police any reason to pull me over., but I was young and stupid back then,

[@declanthomas7159]

"Quite a dangerous road" i would LOVE to see proof on that one. This is a relatively new bit of ring road around east Leeds which as you can see has plenty of nothing around and yet is limited to 50 with signs warning of seemingly imaginary speed cameras which I've never seen myself, mobile or otherwise. Most hazardous thing there is where the officer pulled him over.

[@Eric_Hunt194]

Ah, West Yorkshire Police... the nation's finest, as shown so many times in recent years! 😂😂😂😊

[@Liamwhatmough]

I've never understood why they built these new roads exactly like national speed limit ones with wide lanes, crash barriers, etc, and then slap a 40 or 50mph speed limit on it. Especially given that most new vehicles are much much safer than they used to be and brake a lot quicker and with ABS and ESC. The people coming up with these speed limits have either never driven, or it is something more sinister, and being seen as a potential revenue stream from speeding tickets. There is a road near me where the speed limit used to go 30/60/30/60 over 15/20 miles or so. Now it goes 60/30/40/30/50/30/60/20/30/50/40 since they put average speed cameras up, and some of the speed limit change signs now only have one sign on the left indicating the speed limit sign, rather than one on each side, like the used to be. I am almost certain this is done to confuse drivers not familiar with the road into getting a ticket. There is one bit where it is 30, changes to 40 for not even 50m, and then back to 30.

[@mdcollins1984]

Thought I recognised it. I’m on that once or twice a week. Not really sure what the purpose of the 50 is; yes, the roundabouts are fairly frequent, but it’s never busy (certainly not when I’m on it, a handful of cars at most) and nowhere near as busy as as the York outer ring road which is single carriageway 60 limit.

[@michaelhope8899]

Devil's advocate time ....... the police officer WAS right to pull him as there wasn't any need for the viewer to be in lane 2....he wasn't overtaking the cars in lane 1.

[@gordon861]

I bet if he had moved over, the cop would have kept gaining on him until he was just sitting over his right shoulder so that he would either get too close to the VW or would have to pull out in front of the cop to overtake.

[@Kieran.Robertson]

A fair assessment

[@michaelhope8899]

@@gordon861 Exactly. Even if I was gaining the two cars after the VW I would have pulled into lane 1just so I'm out of the way

[@ianmason.]

And if that's what he _had_ done, was what he addressed from the get go, and offered decent words of advice, nobody would have a problem. It's the embroidering of the evidence and the obvious attempt to "get a result" on spurious claims that worries and annoys people.

[@jcskyknight2222]

And he was speeding.

[@horspiste]

I live in a residential area where the speed limit is 20mph, yet on the straighter sections of road 90% of drivers are clearly ignoring that and many are doing 40mph+ - so that by adhering to the limit I find myself being aggressively tailgated and subject to insane over/under takes - yet I NEVER see any sign of police enforcement. On any view surely 40mph in a residential 20mph must be more dangerous than the minor infringements by this cammer on an almost empty dual carriageway? No wonder the police get no respect these days.

[@TestGearJunkie.]

20mph is a dangerous limit in itself for this very reason. I notice that Wales have abandoned it.

[@skylarius3757]

The road should also have speed humps or other traffic calming measures to enforce the speed limit.

[@davem9204]

Sounds like the road shouldn't have a 20mph limit, and should be higher. Many drivers treat bad speed limits with contempt if they feel they won't get caught.

[@horspiste]

@@TestGearJunkie. I suggest you take a long hard look at your attitude and what it says about you. You appear to be suggesting that impatience and aggression are appropriate traits for drivers. Wales haven't abandoned it, they are re-considering the limits in a few areas. Most of the current 20 limits will remain.

[@horspiste]

@@davem9204 limits are set for all sorts of reasons, not what motorists think they "should be". No doubt most of these speeders would describe themselves as"law abiding" citizens.

[@raymondpenn1066]

After reading most of the comments on here, something is missing. He was doing as high as 56mph according to his GPS equipped satnav. That means, even being a bit generous, that his speedo was showing around 60mph. In a fifty zone. Driver had plenty of notice if only he looked down at the instruments. He was taking a chance and got caught out. It is sheer luck that he didn't get points and a fine. He's continuing to ride his luck as he has released video evidence showing his actual speed, time, date and location in to the public domain.

[@OliverTrist]

You are 100% correct. He was travelling at a speed greater than the prescribed limit. And, he was in an overtaking lane when he wasn’t physically in the act of overtaking; if he had remained at 52-3 mph for another couple of minutes, he would have passed them… that is NOT ‘physically in the act of overtaking’. I occasionally travel at 71 mph in a 70 limit. If I choose to do this, I have only myself to blame if I get questioned by the authorities. Bottom line; the cammer was speeding and the cammer was in an overtaking lane when he wasn’t overtaking. If neither of those situations weren’t true, he would not have been pulled over.

[@jamessharpe2625]

​@@OliverTrist Completely agree. I personally don't have an issue with speeding for the most part and I don't think the cammer was speeding to a point it was unsafe but his lane discipline was atrocious - even speeding he should have been in the left lane and I bet the copper wouldn't have pulled him.

[@User_cruiser24]

It’s not sheer luck that he didn’t get points and a fine it’s down to lack of evidence. The accuracy of the drivers dash cam is not reliable evidence. I’m speaking from first hand experience as the magistrate dismissed my case on this basis.

[@robinallen7356]

There was absolutely no public safety reason to stop him. His speed was barely a crawl higher than the other traffic. His position in the second lane wasn't upsetting anyone. The only person that did something wrong there was the police officer - and then to police-splain "It's about your safety" while holding a young child captive stopped in a dangerous place on a fast road... It's not about safety. It's about quotas. It's about seeing an opportunity to 'catch' someone. It's a game to him.

[@gameforalaugh5743]

so the police officer admitted to going 60/70 (although he didn't), in a 50 zone without any particular need, he needs investigating

[@nigels.6051]

Send the dashcam footage in to police complaints, given his behaviour I would expect some action to be taken. This behaviour is not good for police-public relations and should be stopped. Sending dashcam footage to police complaints does work and is reasonably easy, so if you have a disagreement with an officer, make sure you get their details, or at least their vehicle license plate if it is a driving standards issue - they should be setting an example, not violating the law and getting away with it.

[@Slaeowulf]

"given his behaviour I would expect some action to be taken" Would you, though?

[@ronrolfsen3977]

"without any particular need" You seen on the dashcam that the guy was speeding and driving on the right when he really did not need to. The police officer catching up to him and reprimanding him is part of his job. Do not like the way he went on about it. But he did have a legitimate need. Just watching the dashcam proofs that. Given there was a need, he was allowed to go over the speed.

[@jaycee330]

@@nigels.6051 " would expect some action to be taken. " Chance'll be a fine thing.

[@nigels.6051]

@@Slaeowulf It depends on if the officer investigating your complaint thinks that lying/entrapment is acceptable. In my view it isn't, so I would expect something to happen, maybe a training course. I am not aware of many attempts at using the police complaints service against police officers in relation to driving issues, but every one I am aware of where dashcam footage has been submitted, has had some sort of disciplinary outcome. Police complaints is there to uphold decent standards and ensure that the public support the police service, and it appears to be staffed by the people we would want there, not by police officers like the one seen here. I can not see how accusing people of doing 70 in a 50 and the other accusations when there is no evidence can be good for police relations, this behaviour needs to change, especially if it is what they are being trained to do, and police complaints is the way to change it.

[@Archerdon88]

The officer sounds about 15 years old. Clearly has no clue what he’s doing. The fact he even blatantly asks the driver “but you were speeding?” Is just plain incompetence

[@theaikidoka]

It isn't incompetence, it's a deliberate technique. You establish common ground with little things, and before you know it, you can get people to agree to big changes in their attitude. Think of it like haggling, you start off at two ends of the price (did and didn't speed) and little by little end up at a sale (admitting speeding).

[@ronrolfsen3977]

They hope you reply something like "Sure, but not 70 miles per hour!"

[@Bozebo]

And this is why they avoid stopping anyone who might actually be dangerous and involved in serious organised crime. They just get away with driving however they want, because unskilled and unsupported police don't want the issue. So instead they bully other drivers to be seen to be doing something and that ends up being the only skill they have built up on the job.

[@LowryYT]

fresh out of the academy behaviour

[@richardharvey1732]

Hi Ashley, this example of one individual officer overstepping his proper mark is not unusual, he gets more and more entangled in his own distorted narrative, he stretches the truth and reality because he does know that he is on weak grounds, this is what many people do when their statements are challenged, it stems from a deeply embedded cultural behaviour of competitive assertion, that any admission of doubt is a sign of weakness. This is one of many sad parts of our 'modern' competitive social disorder that people get caught up in without any proper understanding of what they are doing. The worst part of it is that it tends to be self-sustaining, it is very hard to go right back to the start and modify the initial triggering that sets it off, compounded by the manner in which so many other people think it is right and proper to take one side or the other, truth and reality have no 'sides'. The underlying issue here is of course the fundamental weaknesses of the police training policy, they should know that this is what people are like and in particular those who choose to join the force in order to gain power and authority over 'normal' people. Cheers, Richard.

[@gordon861]

Once the cops story starts to change the question should be 'is your bodycam recording your statements?'. Because it can be demanded in you court and will show that the cop appeared to be unsure what he was accusing the driver of, obviously had no evidence to back it up and was instead rambling in an attempt to get a fake confession. I also think after this incident I would have left it a week and then requested a copy of the bodycam from the stop, and then maybe report it back as a learning opportunity.

[@dotty3002]

I don't agree with the officer but being someone who travels this road every day for work there is a lot of speeders on it it was only last week that we got overtaken by someone doing at least 100mph double the speed limit, like the officer said as well there has been some bad crashes on this road already and it's only been open a couple of years

[@jaysimpson6857]

I could see a lot from his perspective, you have to realise the cam car’s speedo would have likely been reading nearly 60mph and the Volkswagen would have looked very close from his perspective, I get why he felt he had a duty to advise someone there.

[@ianwatts8446]

Would never have got to court...Officer failed to Caution the driver before questioning him in relation to an offence, a breach of Code 'C" of P.A.C.E as such any evidence, admissions would be inadmissible and the CPS would drop the case like a brick. A fundemental mistake made by so many officers.

[@leejohnson3209]

Hmmm I'm going against the consensus here, there was enough there for a stop. Lane discipline, breaking the speed limit, possible intoxication. We don't want to live in a police state, but at the same time we complain when the police let things go.

[@davem9204]

I can only think the officer was looking at his lane discipline, which was very poor, but not his speed. The cammer was only barely over the speed limit, so wouldn't have been detectable by the police driver from that far back. The officer just tried on the speeding lie to try and get the cammer to admit to breaking the law as it's probably easier to get a conviction on speeding than lane discipline. I've been pulled a couple of times by non-traffic police trying to accuse me of speeding, when I was under the limit. They were just trying it on with me, and seeing if I would bite to admit to speeding. Like Ashley in a recent video I was probably targetted for driving a particular type of car.

[@leejohnson3209]

@@davem9204I would have been very confident if I were the cammer that I could probably not be done for speeding in that situation, and I certainly wouldn't admit I was. But by the same token, knowing I had been speeding for the last mile or so, I certainly wouldn't be mouthy to the officer either! I'd be a bit humble. The officer however, should never have claimed he was doing 70mph though, bit naughty that. Inexperience perhaps? It was a tenuous pull, but if the officer gets a gut feeling from someone's driving that something might be worth checking they should. If it's a drink driver we're praising the officer's diligence...

[@ivanwover]

Where the hell have you got intoxication from?

[@leejohnson3209]

@@ivanwover its in the video, he swerved in the lane slightly. If it's your job to pick up on things lie that you do notice. Just a few mistakes all small, cumulatively gave this officer enough reason want to check him out.

[@5uper5kill3rz]

of course you are

[@dannyboyy31]

I do agree that the police didn’t handle this well at all and the accusation of doing 60 to 70 miles an hour was patently false. But they were right to call out the lane hogging. I would’ve been getting pretty frustrated if I was stuck behind that for a mile or so.

[@dafyddthomas7299]

Copper should have cited this as main reason (lane hogging) and gave him 3 FPS + £100 for inconsiderate driving

[@stewartlittle7931]

So what would give you the right to speed?!!

[@dannyboyy31]

@@stewartlittle7931 That’s besides the point. What gives the cammer the right to lane hog? It literally says in the highway code ‘do not enforce the speed limit’ or words to that effect.

[@stewartlittle7931]

@@dannyboyy31 It does not say that, you probably need to re-read the highway code!

[@dannyboyy31]

@@stewartlittle7931 So do you, if you think lane hogging is acceptable!

[@rickandy1215]

didn't the cop get caught in his own lie and admitted he was speeding? he accused the driver of doing 70mph,but then he said he was doing 58 mph,without his blues on,in a 50 limit,and he still caught the driver up.

[@jacob1121]

I saw a motorcycle get pulled over because an inattentive driver didn't give him the right of way and he blipped the throttle to get out of harms way. If I wasn't acting as a witness on his behalf the police would have deemed his acceleration "reckless".

[@godamighty]

Police do NOT need lights and sirens to contravene traffic rules/laws. The lights and sirens are there as warning devices to other motorists and not a requirement. Example police don't drive around lights and sirens to a burglary at 2am but still drive quickly to get there. Might pop lights on to clear a junction at slower speeds then off again

[@devlinrawlings3322]

I got hit by a lorry recently (hit and run) phoned the police and they said they weren't gonna stop him despite being next to a police officer

[@Ultima2876]

Easy to panic in these situations if you haven’t prepared and seen the tactics they use beforehand. Good video.

[@iBrows2]

Mentioning you have a dash cam is just inviting them to seize it for evidence and then everything recorded is open to scrutiny. Once you've been pulled over, you have absolutely nothing to gain by being confrontational. If you genuinely believe you've been mistreated, save it for afterwards and lodge a complaint with the relevant force. The cammer was way too confrontational for no reason, especially considering they were in the wrong.

[@_Mentat]

Yes, too confrontational. But announcing you have cameras can head off a prosecution and save you time, money and risk. Your cameras are not prosecution quality; they are not type approved. They can save you in court because "beyond reasonable doubt" is a high bar, but they cannot convict you.

[@supergeekjay]

@@_Mentat That doesn't make sense and I don't think you understand what type approval actually is. It doesn't make sense because CCTV footage is used in court, and some CCTV footage (hell, even police interview room CCTV) quality is GARBAGE. Dashcam quality way outstrips the quality of most CCTV. Type approval is NOT for legal purposes, only that a device is suitable for use in a certain region/country and meets performance/safety standards. Type approval simply means that the product is certified to meet certain requirements for its type, whatever that may be.

[@davem9204]

@@supergeekjay I think he means the type approval as a speed measuring device, not the camera part.

[@_Mentat]

@@supergeekjay The speed on the driver's camera comes from a device that hasn't been approved by the Home Office for use in court - it's not "type approved". Also, the camera doesn't have a certificate of calibration. Likely the manufacturer will claim it is indicative not conclusive. Conviction requires proof "beyond reasonable doubt". The driver's equipment isn't providing that so it's not a problem for the police to seize it. Even GATSOs can be thrown out of court if their calibration or service history is out of date. So much more so a device that was never intended for prosecution.

[@stevekenilworth]

id stay quite, if they do not see it allow them to dig deep hole. that guy in london accused speeding the speed bumps made it look like it, he refused to exit his car the smashed window dragged him out, payout £30k the info i can find and his camera had sound on so everything was rec not one charge just a big payout for uk standards but usa prob 1/4 million if not more. stay quite about camera if you get bad cop (far to many these days) just allow them to dig own grave a very deep hole for them to try explain later

[@formidable38]

This is a tricky one. He was speeding, speeding is an absolute offence, if they want, they could nick you for doing 52 in a 50 and Ive heard of this happening! The officer is overly harsh though as he was clearly not doing 65 to 70. I think the driver drew attention to himself by staying in the outside lane for longer than nessescary. He could also have been a bit calmer and try to defuse the sittuation. There's no point in raising your voice with coppers like these, you'll just dig yourself deeper.

[@Kieran.Robertson]

A perfect assessment

[@c5cha7]

Honestly if the driver was more calm, didn't confirm nor deny and just let the officer talk they'd have been done and nothing would have come of it.

[@flat6croc]

The only snag here is that to prosecute for 52 in a 50 you're going to need calibrated device evidence. This was not a case of clear excessive speed and dangerous driving, which can be prosecuted without calibrated speed evidence and based on the officer's experience and judgement. I don't think the police vehicle was a traffic car and probably didn't have the requisite equipment, so actually in this case the officer probably could not in fact nick him for speeding. Well, the exception to that being the driver volunteered a confession to speeding. The officer would not have been able to provide evidence of speeding.

[@Species1571]

I had no problem with him staying in lane 2 while nobody was approaching, but once the police car appeared and he slowed down, why not move back over? Especially approaching a roundabout where you are going straight ahead anyway? Probably would have been the end of it, so partially self-inflicted I would say.

[@dafyddthomas7299]

I have - the left lane was completely empty for miles; should pull out to lane 2 nearer to cars when overtaking them, Copper should have cited this as main reason (lane hogging) and gave him 3 FPS + £100 for inconsiderate driving

[@clickrick]

@@dafyddthomas7299 "inconsiderate" would only apply if there was a queue of traffic behind being held up. That did not apply, and staying in lane 2 increased the space each vehicle had, and thus reduced risk.

[@larry702]

​@clickrick Whether it be a queue or just one car, if the left lane is clear for miles then it is basic lane discipline to get back into it. There's no reason the cammer shouldn't be getting back to the left hand lane after overtaking the white car at 0:30 (obviously after making sure to give the white car plenty of space)

[@dafyddthomas7299]

@@larry702 True on this

[@GaryNumeroUno]

Maybe the driver was from Queensland or Western Australia where everyone loves to sit in the right hand lane! 😂 I was disappointed in the officer's handling of the incident. I'm sure mentioning the dash cam took the wind out of his sails. (The police car has dash cam as well...!!! 🤔🤔🤔). Hence the warning. 😅

[@hikaru9624]

Why is that road 50mph anyway? What's the benefit? I still have no issues with the police, but let's not pretend all officers are infallible. We're all human and we all make mistakes. Thankfully dash cameras are non biased. 55 is still speeding by definition in this case but he was not doing 70.

[@Finreii]

He might have been doing 70 to catch up because he was far back, but no where near when he was pacing

[@redtela]

I'd just like to remind the officer in this video what the flash of a headlight means - "I am here." I've never seen any officer feel so important as to announce their presence. The battenburg plastered all over the car tends to do that for them.

[@GeorgeFoot]

It is taught in advanced driving courses as a way to request move over so that you can pass - bringing the drivers attention to your presence behind them.

[@redtela]

@@GeorgeFoot one would also presume, advanced drivers should consider how their actions may be interpreted by those with lesser training.

[@GeorgeFoot]

@redtela Yes I expect they do

[@CharlieWard98]

3:35 If the police officer was also supposedly doing 68-70mph, aren't they also speeding? Or are they excempt even without their lights on?

[@MrHabushi]

Exemptions apply regardless of lights.

[@CharlieWard98]

​@@MrHabushi I didn't know that - thanks!

[@nowillnoway]

@@CharlieWard98 the exemptions apply regardless of lights *but* must only be used in the exercise of their duties. If the officer was speeding just as part of their routine patrol/driving, then it remains an offence; they'd have to demonstrate that they were speeding to catch up to a suspicious vehicle or were en route to an emergency etc.

[@AndrewPaul]

I've had them do the exact same thing to me in West Yorkshire before now. I wasn't speeding then either and told the officer so. Turns out they had no proof of the offence (because it didn't happen) and it was a fishing expedition to check license / tax / insurance / MOT - the driver even got out to check my tyres (which had all been replaced about a fortnight beforehand). His partner was a nice guy to be fair, but the driver had an attitude problem and seemed determined to get me for something. In the end, they let me go without charge or warning as they couldn't get me on anything. I was a young 18 year old lad then - I'm 36 now and as Ashley says, when they're trying to pressure you into telling them what they want to hear, just bat it back, keep calm and as long as you're certain you've not done anything wrong stick to your guns and put the onus back on them to prove what it is they're saying.

[@Jupa]

police couldnt have pulled over a better man. the camera guy is great, i wouldve been too shocked and confused to be so composed as he was.

[@PedroConejo1939]

I would counsel against claiming to have dashcam footage during the stop - same in an accident. You don't know you have decent footage until you've checked and secured it. Personally, I've found being less confrontational is better, but it's not easy to stay calm and collected if the stop seems to be petty or worse. In Texas I was told of the unofficial offence called POP - P***ing Off the Police. You learn to be polite around them so they don't go looking for minor infringements. This fits in with the philosophy of being nice to anyone who has it in their gift to make or ruin your day. And never answer the question, 'Do you know why I've stopped you?' - it wasn't asked here in those exact words, but questions like that are an invitation to self-incriminate. 'Perhaps you'd like to tell me why you've stopped me, sir.' I agree, that copper didn't handle that ever so well.

[@_Mentat]

In the UK we have the unofficial "attitude test". Manners can get you out of many situations. Also, if you sound like you can afford an expensive lawyer, or are one, you're less likely to wind up in court. I know someone who sat quietly while a traffic officer took apart his car looking for drugs that weren't there. His date also watched quietly. She was the daughter of the county chief of police (Chief Constable). Eventually she made a phone call.

[@smilerbob]

Never admit it is all on dashcam as the officer _could_ caution you and then take the SD card as “evidence” never to be seen again, or the evidence used against you Quite often officers will go phishing for information and remember it is down to them to prove the offence not for you to admit it. Although I did hold my hands up many, many years ago after being caught red handed using my mobile phone. Was polite, held my hands up and let go with a stern warning rather quickly

[@123MondayTuesday]

Couldn't you have waited until you got home to check your Tinder?

[@smilerbob]

@@123MondayTuesday No need for Tinder as I was phoning home

[@PedroConejo1939]

I agree Bob. Leave the dashcam bit until you know you have clear evidence on it, and they've committed to their statement. I was always reluctant to have the speed displayed on my dashcam, but I think on balance, given I don't habitually speed, it's better to have it than not. There are videos on what to say, and what not to say to coppers. It can be a mistake to assume they're on your side, no matter what they may say.

[@mihohobaba]

@@PedroConejo1939 Good advice generally. I would change "It can be a mistake to assume they're on your side" to "It is ALWAYS a mistake to assume they're on your side", though.

[@smilerbob]

@@PedroConejo1939 Anyone that has submitted dash cam footage to the police will know the warning given - “Please be aware that if the officer reviewing the footage deems that any part of your driving falls below what is expected then you can also be prosecuted for any offence seen by the officer” Dash cams can incriminate as much as they can protect…the same as any words spoken to any officer

[@keith6400]

The opening gambit is usually "I expect you know why I have stopped you" to elicit some sort of admission. It is better to reply "The police are allowed to stop any motorist for no reason, if they wish to do so"

[@mikeoxlong5928]

I thought the police had to have a reason to pull a vehicle over?

[@keith6400]

@@mikeoxlong5928 Check with the Blackbelt Barrister. Normally they do not randomly stop an individual but they are allowed to and at Christmas in some towns they stop everyone for potential breath tests.

[@keith6400]

@@mikeoxlong5928 The police are allowed to stop any vehicle randomly and establish who the driver is. If you have no identifying documents, credit or bank cards absolutely nothing they can detain you until it can be established who you are. Normally the check who the registered owner of the vehicle is before they pull you over and if you give a different name you could be interrogated a bit more deeply. Normally they have a suspicion such as four males in a car, a car registered out of the area particularly at certain times of the day. If the insurance for the vehicle relates to a member of the opposite sex.

[@autisticlogistics3713]

There was a time back when I owned an M4, baring in mind it is loud with open valves. I was coming home from work with cruise control on at 60 mph with the valves open. A police car travelling up the other side of the road accused me of speeding, they also tried to state they were doing 90 mph to try and catch up with me, yet how is that possible. I pulled into the petrol station and the officer in the passenger seat got out and tried giving me the run down, the driver was the one trying to accuse me of speeding which I wasn't and I continuously stated I was using cruise control. They finished off by just telling me to slow down yet I was doing the national speed limit.

[@subrogation747]

Ask the force for a copy of the police car’s dashcam footage then compare the two.

[@neiloflongbeck5705]

If you are accused, ask them to show you evidence of the offence. It's your right.

[@jcskyknight2222]

I mean that’s not always going to work. For example if I stab someone in the street and a policeman sees me do it then they aren’t going to let me go on the grounds that they can’t prove it right there.

[@TerribleFire]

You dont have to answer what speed you were doing at least not at the roadside. Just answer the question "do you know what speed you were doing" with "yes". Then you are not driving without due care and attention.

[@jacob1121]

Never answer any question with simply "Yes". The police have a habit of asking "Do you know what speed you were driving?" then pausing for a fraction of a second and rapidly say "It was 70 wasn't it?" Right in the same moment as you are responding with "Yes." to their first question. What you should say instead is "I was not speeding" or "I was driving the speed limit." Any dirty trick in the book to get you to incriminate yourself.

[@dafyddthomas7299]

For lane hogging - should have been charged £100 + 3 FPS; inconsiderate driving

[@illegalopinions4082]

​@@dafyddthomas7299It's not really lane hogging if there's nobody behind him. He'd have passed the cars anyway if he'd continued to do 55

[@thegreycat2260]

police: Do you know why I stopped you? me: If you have short term memory loss, you should really see a doctor.

[@arod9998]

100% agree with the Police Officer. The driver was sat in lane 2 overtaking thin air. The Highway Code is simple. Keep left unless overtaking. 100% this guy joins a motorway and spends his entire journeys in lane 2 of a lane 3 motorway. He should send in clips of him navigating a roundabout, probably in the wrong lane every time 😂

[@haloKINGSstudios]

Theres no such thing as below threshold for prosecution. The way the law is written, you could be over by 1mph and get prosecuted.

[@hypergolic8468]

This guy has children in the car, the police officer has now just made a load of children, who dad has probably shown this to them to show his speed, now question the police. I grew up in the country where our Police were respected: now....Well done officer.

[@dafyddthomas7299]

Should have cited him for his lane hogging

[@hypergolic8468]

@@dafyddthomas7299 You know what: if he'd said that, then I'd agree fully with you. But, the 70mph claim, that is wrong and he's just undermined his authority. It makes you wonder why he did not use that as his main reason for intervention. but I do agree with you about lane hogging, bane of my life!

[@dafyddthomas7299]

@@hypergolic8468 On the speed front yes; should have shown the record speed via video recorded evidence; otherwise don't think they have much legs to stand on to dish out a Speeding ticket - driver could submit his evidence; but it shows him breaking speed limit and inconsiderate driving - lane hogging

[@hypergolic8468]

@@dafyddthomas7299 Like everything in life I guess it's how it's approached. I think if the opening statement had been about lane hogging then this would have been a none event in the way it continued on. And it would have been very difficult for the dad to have argued that with the kids. I always work on the maxim of it been an overtake, as it is on a single carriageway. Lane hogging is infuriating, as a car driver, even more so when you're in a HGV!

[@ibs5080]

Greetings from the seafront at Deal Walmer in Kent. About to enjoy another car show. I'm trying to get on with life after the passing away of my dear mum on July 3rda I'm sure she would be happy knowing I'm enjoying the kind of things her and I enjoyed for many years. Will also look at this video. Interesting title.

[@I_Evo]

Be great to know what the history of the speed limit on that road is, probably a previous 60 or even 70 road.

[@driving_all_over]

I think it opened as a 50 although anyone on here from Leeds correct me if I’m wrong

[@MIEJ4]

Opened exactly two years ago with a 50 limit. Folk see it as being in the countryside and nobody around, probably not realising there are plans to build loads of houses all around it.

[@declanthomas7159]

​@@MIEJ4used this road plenty and didn't know that last bit. I wonder if the speed cameras that are on the signs will also be installed then

[@aztimms]

Like all recently engineered primary routes (green route signs) they all seem to have become 50 by default. No real reason on a dual for this, but on a single now the the lorry limit is 50 it eliminates overtaking needs I suppose?

[@jackking5567]

Reminds me of the first time I was stopped by police when riding my motorcycle. The officer pulled a pen from his pocket, shoved the pen into my exhaust and said "go on admit it - you've removed the baffles". I countered with how does he think the exhaust gasses get out of the exhaust. Police fish for something to get someone with. I still got a producer!

[@matthewfox9143]

I have had very similar happen to me in the past before I became an ADI. I was doing 51 on the Sat-Nav and 53 on the cars speedometer and all I said is how did you come out of nowhere and catch me up without having your blues and twos on and he didn't know what to say. He just let me go and said just watch your speed please.

[@Matmamtmamtmamtmamtm]

"So you're saying I'm lying". Absolutely, give us your name and badge number and let's see you defend your accusations to Professional Standards.

[@Emanicas]

How the cop is acting is so anger inducing xD

[@tobystephenson7625]

I agree - I thought the cammer was quite cool in spite of the being provoked - you need to be really careful in this situations - one F word slipping out when the Copper is clearly being ridiculous and you'd be in the back of his car in cuffs with coppers like that. Disgrace to the force

[@Jonc25]

We should never forget the good things that the police do.

[@claptrappers]

No. The police should ONLY do 'good things'; like this one, too many of them go out of their way to do bad things. This one needs to be removed from the force. I suspect this officer was on a mission to 'do' someone or was triggered by the motorist giving a bit of verbal during the overtake. Most people would submit to an authority figure and accept a punishment they didn't deserve. It was only because the driver pushed back and was well aware of the events and pointed his dashcam that the officer retreated back to his car after giving a road safety lecture instead. Steer clear from them, too many bad apples.

[@stevekenilworth]

@@claptrappers a great example what happened to AB, Justice West Hampstead Police Station 4 parts it is shocking what they did to him and im sure a very big payout . other stuff like i found a freedom of information online regarding the met. the document on average met pays out court settlements for abuse powers, wrongful arrest, assault, false imprisonment, average is around £7 million yearly some years £8 million few years high £6 million. i feel that drop in the bucket the police state we currently living in as that only met and not inc in court settlements and other forces

[@stewartevans9753]

Noddy's day wasn't made in this case! 😮

[@grahamnutt8958]

👮 - "I've no reason to lie". 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 His version of events is not the same as to what everyone else on here just witnessed. Leaving it there.

[@Henry-fu2hc]

"I was doing 68/70 miles per hour, is there a reason I didn't smash into the back of you?" Well Mr Officer I would assume because you used your brakes... but thanks for admitting to going 20mph over the speed limit without any reason!

[@ronrolfsen3977]

I do not like the way how he was policing. But he did say the driver caught his attention. So he was still policing. So he had a reason to break the speed limit. Catching up to someone who was breaking the law. And considering we all seen the dashcam. It seems the police officer was technically right in his assessment the driver was speeding. I have seen a few people pointing this out, but the officer was completely in his right to go over the speed limit on this occasion.

[@DrRusty5]

​@ronrolfsen3977 Pretty sure they can't exceed the speed limit without blue lights on?

[@ronrolfsen3977]

@@DrRusty5 Yes they can. There are exemption for emergency responders and light are not always a must. Lights are only for emergencies. Catching up to someone speeding is not an emergency unless that person is fleeing or I guess going insanely fast. Even in emergencies situation there might be legit reason not to use sounds and lights. In cases where alerting people might not be in the best interest. If they however they have no lights there is no requirement for you to get out of the way. However if a police car is speeding toward you. Still try do so if it can be done safely. They might have very legit reason to go fast. In my country there are more exception. Pretty sure same is true for UK. In my country they can use the bus lane and stuff even without lights and can ignore other rules. Clearly this can only be done while policing and not just because they want to get back to the precinct for dinner. This is the UK law BTW: Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984 section 87 "No statutory provision imposing a speed limit on motor vehicles shall apply to any vehicle on an occasion when it is being used for [F2fire and rescue authority], for ambulance purposes or police purposes, if the observance of that provision would be likely to hinder the use of the vehicle for the purpose for which it is being used on that occasion."

[@hayleygerbil3109]

Absolutely disagree with the copper making up rubbish, but equally the cammer had an attitude as soon as the copper pulled him over. Both need to reflect on this.

[@harveycraig26]

Wow! Some retraining needed for that officer I think. Really not the best advertisement for the force.

[@Eric_Hunt194]

It's West Yorkshire Police, I doubt they care about their reputation at this point!

[@TiberiusWallace]

Road policing is all about visibly following for extended lengths of time and forcing errors.

[@jaysimpson6857]

I’ve had my life temporarily ruined by corrupt police officers, twice! And I think most police officers are without a conscience and get pleasure from the use and abuse of their powers but this time I don’t think that was the case and can probably understand how things looked from the officers perspective, also I think Ashley is right in suggesting that the officer could have been looking for other offences, though not sure how things would have gone down had there not been a distressed child in the car. I’ve been pulled by far worse and if I was told that this is the standard of policing to expect in the future I would accept it, though granted maybe my experiences are extreme and I should expect more but in this day and age and with the state of the country I feel I’m just being realistic.