Unbelieveable cop negligence

[spudchucka]

We just received a phone call from a cop who gave me the outcome of a situation we were involved in on tuesday.
I was travelling with my colleuges back from Auckland to Hammy after my flight back into NZ, we were behind a hyundia Stellar which wouldnt keep a constant speed 100km/h then 60km/h we went to pass he would speed up, we came up to Ohinewhai 4 lanes and went to pass, he saw this and swerved in front of us causing us to nearly hit the Armco, we stayed behind and dialled *555 , while giving directions to the cops the "offender"went out into oncoming traffic and narrowly missed a head on.
The cops pulled him over in Huntly which was great, they uncovered he was on "spray" and was off his face, he was also an illegal driver ie no licence.
we gave our account and left the scene while the driver was processed.
the cop rang today and said that he came right after 5 mins, he was on his way to Wellington,so he booked him for careless driving and sent him on his way!!!!!!
Now I find that completely inexcusable, he was obviously a danger to everyone on the road he had no licence.
No poetic licence was used this is exactly how it happened and exactly what the cop said, so Craig from Huntly police stn SHAME ON YOU MATE!!!!!!!!

I can understand from your story why you are pissed off but before everyone crucifies this cop lets look at what the possible outcomes were.

1: If the guy is driving without a licence and has not been previously forbidden to drive then about all the cop could do is give him a $400 ticket and take the keys off him. The keys could then be picked up by any fully licenced driver that he brings into the station to uplift them. There is no power to impound the vehicle in this instance.

2: If the guy is unlicenced and has been forbidden to drive then the law says that the car must be impounded for 28 days. Its one of the only areas in law that gives police power where the word "must" is used. The driver could be arrested however this has been frowned upon in the past and unless arrest is absolutely necessary then a summons is prefered. So if this was the case the guy should have got a Traffic Offence Notice and his car taken off him.

3: If the guy was charged with Careless there is no power of arrest so again he would have got a TON and would be later summonsed to court. Again if he was unlicensed and forbidden to drive then the above would also apply.

4: You can charge a person with driving under the influence of drugs however I'm not sure off the top of my head that an aerosol spray would be considered a drug. In any case to prove it would require a doctors assessment and a blood test and considering how quickly these things wear off by the time a Dr was located there would be stuff all chance of proving anything.

Also I would like to know exactly what the cop meant when he said he "sent him on his way". Are you 100% sure that he put the guy back in his car and sent him on his merry way? If the guy was unlicensed then I'm sure that would not be the case and it certainly wouldn't be the case if the guy was forbidden to drive or disqualified.

Don't forget that cops have to act within the law and just because you think something should happen, (like that guy getting locked up because he is a menace) doesn't mean it can legally happen from a law enforcement point of view.

By the way I totally agree that the guy should not be permitted anywhere near a motor vehicle but the outcomes are limited by what is allowable under the current legislation.

[Hooks]

maybe you should make a formal complaint - you could do it in the time it took to write this post. There is nothing to be gained from bitching on here about it.

Yeah !!! What he said !! ... don't bitch mate, get it sorted and make a complaint or else he will do it again and someone WILL die ...... Anyone who displays poor judgement in a position that requires them to be making calls in an on-going role should be put under scrutiny immediately .... They are as dangerous as those they are supposed to be saving us from.

[Lou Girardin]

Same old justifications from our friend. I'm interested to hear what he says about Ireana Asher (Rave On). It starting to sound like Canute has a modern accolyte.
Whatever cops do it's never wrong.

[Hooks]

Hey Spud ... you're nearly a whore ... better get your permit !! ...

[spudchucka]

Same old justifications from our friend. I'm interested to hear what he says about Ireana Asher (Rave On). It starting to sound like Canute has a modern accolyte.
Whatever cops do it's never wrong.

I'm not saying that what was done was right or wrong or justifying anything. All I did was give an account of what could have legally happened as an outcome. If people want to judge the guy at least make it an informed judgement.

Good to see you have confirmed you only posted that other thread as a big old troll, as usual.

[marty]

4: You can charge a person with driving under the influence of drugs however I'm not sure off the top of my head that an aerosol spray would be considered a drug. In any case to prove it would require a doctors assessment and a blood test and considering how quickly these things wear off by the time a Dr was located there would be stuff all chance of proving anything.

.

'driving under the influence of a drink or drug'. petrol/aerosol/glue etc are not covered by this legislation. being creative with dangerous/reckless when people have been sniffing HAS been known to work, but it is very difficult, and invariably endures the wrath of the bench, as it is so difficult to prove - there is no legislative power to require a blood test, or even a drs examination - this is the same for DUI drugs - it is up to the individual to volunteer to the test, unless they are under arrest for another related offence (eg dangerous), and the drs exam is done subsequent to that (it is considered a search subsequent to arrest). the bleating liberals though, after insisting that the traffic legislation is broadened to 'protect' themselves, now bleat that the police powers are too oppressive, and defend them in court when they themselves are caught, leading to case law being created, making it difficult for the legislation to be utilised to get guys like this off the street.....

[spudchucka]

the bleating liberals though, after insisting that the traffic legislation is broadened to 'protect' themselves, now bleat that the police powers are too oppressive, and defend them in court when they themselves are caught, leading to case law being created, making it difficult for the legislation to be utilised to get guys like this off the street.....

There is just no pleasing the Lou's of this world. They are born to whinge!

[riffer]

At the end of the day, its the usual story. The legal process works on a series of steps that must be followed. And this means that you if you are a dishonourable, direputable criminal minded oxygen-stealer you will be able to manipulate the system to gain an advantage over your fellow, honest honourable man.

Disappointing, and dangerous, but this is the price we pay for our free society. The bad people will always take advantage of the good.

I would hope the person driving had a friend who was capable of driving, ad the police allowed him to take over the wheel of the car.

Maybe you should ring him again, Quasi.

[scumdog]

Same old justifications from our friend. I'm interested to hear what he says about Ireana Asher (Rave On). It starting to sound like Canute has a modern accolyte.
Whatever cops do it's never wrong.

Grow up Lou, do something positive - or get another windmill to tilt at!! - or stop trolling!!

[Quasievil]

Thanks spud, I was interested in all that, apparently he did let him continue on his jorney, I guess his judgement must have been sound, I guess I was a bit shocked to hear it is all. Personally i would have taken his keys for a period of time Im sure cops can do that

anyway, focusing on the Rally

Later people

[Blakamin]

Ok.,... dont wanna stir shit, but what about motorway patrol when they let the unlicenced driver drive his car home????

[NC]

There is just no pleasing the Lou's of this world. They are born to whinge!

The Snozberries, taste like? Snozberries!!!

[scumdog]

Thanks spud, I was interested in all that, apparently he did let him continue on his jorney, I guess his judgement must have been sound, I guess I was a bit shocked to hear it is all. Personally i would have taken his keys for a period of time Im sure cops can do that

anyway, focusing on the Rally

Later people

Yeah, we CAN forbid them if we see fit but hey, who knows the circumstances of this case?

[spudchucka]

Thanks spud, I was interested in all that, apparently he did let him continue on his jorney, I guess his judgement must have been sound, I guess I was a bit shocked to hear it is all. Personally i would have taken his keys for a period of time Im sure cops can do that

anyway, focusing on the Rally

Later people

I certainly would have taken the guiys keys and forbid him to drive for 12 hours. Its not a guarantee that he won't drive but at least you've done something positive.

I understand why you would be frustrated but the cop may not have had too many options. Only he will know the full story so we're only guessing here.

[spudchucka]

Ok.,... dont wanna stir shit, but what about motorway patrol when they let the unlicenced driver drive his car home????

Didn't see it but I've escorted unlicenced drivers home in the past so that the vehicle isn't left somewhere that it could be a hazard or get stolen.