Ohh dear PC Stout.........

smiled.

Other than not being very good at speaking when a camera is shoved in his face, Pc Stout did nothing wrong.

He was right that it was Sec 24 PACE that the cyclist should have been arrested for, for failing to give his details having committed an offence.

He was right that he does not need to know the word perfect definition to lawfully arrest the cyclist.

I would also have seized his camera under S19 PACE as it will cleary show evidence of the offence the cyclist committed.

I would have given the cyclist 1 chance to give me his details, first refusal he would have been in cuffs.

Why would I have acted like that, well I will not give people an ounce of my discretion when they act like this bloke did in his clear attempt to goad and wind the Officer up. The Cyclist was wrong on so many levels about the law.

Servants, not masters.

trouble was, the police officer was slightly worried as it seemed like this guy new some sort of law that meant if he did cuff him then he would have been put in the wrong and made to look even more stupid that he now does all over the internet which is slightly unfair really on him.

And the lesson here folks:

Don’t mess with Baz if he hasn’t had his coffee in the morning… he don’t take no $hit from no one ya hear!!!

:hehe:

+1 for Baz.

His ranting was annoying me.

Failure to stop at a red light + ‘giving it lip’ in any other country = Truncheon.

This is a prime example of where this country is going. The policeman was only doing his job. How far are you to take that crap before you just cuff him?

Yea, because he carries a loaded firearm while working.

Yea, but where do you draw the line on unlawful arrest?
Speaking as a taxpayer, I’d rather that my money was spent going after bigger fish (cyclist going through a red light = death wish/ waste of tax payer’s money IMO). Of course, I realise that I can never *really * influence that specific a decision also that *everyone * needs to be reminded of what they shouldn’t be doing.

I’ve seen this activist guy before and I support his committment to democracy, free thinking and the desire not to be dictated to by an over-mighty state or over-mighty corporations

HOWEVER :smiley:

I think that in the pursuit of these ideals it is important to pick the right battles - I don’t think this incident was worth turning into a confrontation - e.g. the police officer is obviously not a bad bloke or a thug or anything - if the activist guy had not turned it into a confrontation the officer would probably just have told him not to do it again and that would have been it.

There are situations where people have confronted the state or big corporations and they have been right to do so - we only live in a democracy, women have the vote etc because people like the activist guy have been prepared in the past to stick up for democratic values etc - He just needs to be more selective and save the confrontation for the more serious stuff.

+1, but you know what cyclists are like! :wink:

Yeah - they can make you a bit irrational sometimes (joke!) :smiley:

While Baz is correct.

The guy has a point. If the very people employed to police the Law cannot tell you what that Law says…how are you supposed to obey it?

We use the adage that ignorance is no defence of the law, but this stems from the Romans that had a handful of laws, that everyone could remember. We have tens of thousands of laws. So many laws in fact that there are documented cases of Judges and Barristers, and even the CPS making mistakes as to what the current Law actually says.

If the legal system itself cannot know the Law how can you as an ordinary citizen who has not the training know exactly what the Law is and how you are to comply?

This should be simplified then.

Person runs the red light. Gets caught. Accepts fine.

Wasn’t even like he apologised, or said the sun was in his eyes etc - he was just looking to make a situation from nothing.

Arsehole in my opinion.

what an idiot.

The copper should of taken command abit more, he should of made this dude speak when spoken too and given him yes or no answers rather than letting him rattle on.

This is perfect reason why I kept a “Police Handbook” with all laws, including traffic offences in my back pocket for w@nkers like this:D

OK, considering how many laws there are in this country, do you mean to tell me you will ONLY accept the authority of a police officer who has every single one of them memorised… VERBATIM…

Now that’s a “reasonable” approach to law and order if ever I heard one! :hehe:

If a copper can’t tell you verbatim what the Law says…how does he or you know that you have contravened that Law?

If you accept what a copper says as The Law, then does this not place the police in the position of Law Makers, rather then simply enforcers of the Law.

No point arguing that Solicitors, Barristers, Judges or Parliament can intervene if those Coppers are incorrect…because the Police are Judge, Jury and Executioner.

This offence would have warranted a Fixed Penalty Notice, which has been specifically designed for a Police Officer to issue on the street, and for it to be ENTIRELY in your best interest to accept and pay.

So you would have to contest the punishment issued against you, before you can get anyone else to intervene and make sure that the Police are not making up the Law as they go.

I don’t think that is acceptable.

I am not suggesting mass disobeyance of the Law, but I am saying that this does not really seem to be the best position for “free” people to be in.

I have said before and I will say again FPN are a direct infringement on our freedoms and should immediately be removed, you should have to go to court where a properly trained Judge, and in some cases a Jury of your peers, examines the evidence against you and decides your fate based on your personal circumstances.

Not a random copper that doesn’t even know the exact wording of a statute issues fines which are in the public’s best interest to pay. Regardless of the facts or the personal situation of the person taking the fine.

Gobshite lawyers, its not what you did wrong its how to play the system.

Shame the Street cops dont have a legal helpline to call.

damnit I’m at work without headphones and can’t see this!!!

This man has no redeeming qualities on this occaision. A waste of oxygen here. At the very least reminding him not to jump the red might save the huge cost of investigating his death had he been killed in doing so. Money well spent IMHO…
Hats off to the copper. Policing surely is hard enough without some sceptic freedom fighter trying to make a (poor) point.

You’ve hit the nail on the head.

If they carried a pda, and just typed the alleged offence - it would bring up the EXACT wording.

As said, you can’t be expected to remember every word, of every offence - but someone jump a red light IS, and this will give you the exact wording to ram down his gobby throat.

Done.