In message e.net
Mark Goodge wrote:

On Sat, 18 Apr 2009 20:18:10 +0100, rail put finger to keyboard and
typed:

In message t
"MB" wrote:


There is an example in the Motoring Telegraph of a driver booked by a
RLC camera because he moved out of the way for a police vehicle. It
took him a long time to be able to prove he was innocent.

There has been talk in the press about crossing a red light to allow an
emergency vehicle to get past but the police always give a blanket
"thou shalt not go through a red light"


I repeat, rubbish.

Why do you think it's rubbish? Do you have counter-evidence?


As the police have the power to instruct a driver to pass a red light (but
not a flashing red light) then stating that 'police always give a blanket
"thou shalt not go through a red light' is patent rubbish.

--
Graeme Wall

This address not read, substitute trains for rail
Transport Miscellany at www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

In message , at 10:44:16 on Sun,
19 Apr 2009, rail remarked:
As the police have the power to instruct a driver to pass a red light (but
not a flashing red light) then stating that 'police always give a blanket
"thou shalt not go through a red light' is patent rubbish.

When the only "instruction" to do so is sirens and lights behind, the
police advise you don't run the red light. Obviously a quite separate
policemen (not inside the car in question) could instruct you to - but
that's a very different set of circumstances.
--
Roland Perry

In message
Roland Perry wrote:

In message , at 10:44:16 on Sun,
19 Apr 2009, rail remarked:
As the police have the power to instruct a driver to pass a red light (but
not a flashing red light) then stating that 'police always give a blanket
"thou shalt not go through a red light' is patent rubbish.

When the only "instruction" to do so is sirens and lights behind, the
police advise you don't run the red light. Obviously a quite separate
policemen (not inside the car in question) could instruct you to - but
that's a very different set of circumstances.

I would take a police car behind me blipping his siren as an instruction to
move aside. Note that doesn't necessarily mean running the red light as in
crossing the junction, but, as in the two times I've done it (and not been
prosecuted) crossing the white stop line and moving in front of the car in
the next lane. Admittedly neither time was the Met involved.

--
Graeme Wall

This address not read, substitute trains for rail
Transport Miscellany at www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

In message , at 11:24:48 on Sun,
19 Apr 2009, rail remarked:
I would take a police car behind me blipping his siren as an instruction to
move aside.

The Met advice makes it quite clear what their expectations are.

Note that doesn't necessarily mean running the red light as in
crossing the junction, but, as in the two times I've done it (and not been
prosecuted) crossing the white stop line

The offence is crossing the white line, not literally passing the red
light.

and moving in front of the car in the next lane.

--
Roland Perry

In message
Roland Perry wrote:

In message , at 11:24:48 on Sun,
19 Apr 2009, rail remarked:
I would take a police car behind me blipping his siren as an instruction
to move aside.

The Met advice makes it quite clear what their expectations are.

I did point out that specifically the Met were not involved.


Note that doesn't necessarily mean running the red light as in
crossing the junction, but, as in the two times I've done it (and not been
prosecuted) crossing the white stop line

The offence is crossing the white line, not literally passing the red
light.

Hence why I said that, your point is?


and moving in front of the car in the next lane.


--
Graeme Wall

This address not read, substitute trains for rail
Transport Miscellany at www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail

In message , at 11:56:31 on Sun,
19 Apr 2009, rail remarked:

I would take a police car behind me blipping his siren as an instruction
to move aside.

The Met advice makes it quite clear what their expectations are.

I did point out that specifically the Met were not involved.

I would not expect other forces to have different advice, particularly
when it comes to running red lights.

Note that doesn't necessarily mean running the red light as in
crossing the junction, but, as in the two times I've done it (and not been
prosecuted) crossing the white stop line

The offence is crossing the white line, not literally passing the red
light.

Hence why I said that, your point is?

That you were leaving yourself open to prosecution, especially if there
had been a camera.
--
Roland Perry

In message
Roland Perry wrote:

In message , at 11:56:31 on Sun,
19 Apr 2009, rail remarked:

I would take a police car behind me blipping his siren as an
instruction to move aside.

The Met advice makes it quite clear what their expectations are.

I did point out that specifically the Met were not involved.

I would not expect other forces to have different advice, particularly
when it comes to running red lights.

The key word is expectations, not instructions.


Note that doesn't necessarily mean running the red light as in
crossing the junction, but, as in the two times I've done it (and not
been prosecuted) crossing the white stop line

The offence is crossing the white line, not literally passing the red
light.

Hence why I said that, your point is?

That you were leaving yourself open to prosecution, especially if there
had been a camera.

So how come I have blatantly broken the law twice right in front of a
policeman in uniform and not been prosecuted?

--
Graeme Wall

This address not read, substitute trains for rail
Transport Miscellany at www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail