mangogrooveworkshop
|
| posted on 16/8/10 at 07:15 PM |
|
|
Police could not pursue the robbers because they were not wearing helmets
Incredible
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1303435/Police-forced-let-thieves--riding-motorbikes-helmets.html
No chase: Shop owner Tony Crawford. Police could not pursue the robbers because they were not wearing helmets
Today, however, critics reacted to the decision with incredulity - and demanded to know whether any offender could be given carte blanche to flee
simply by riding a motorbike without donning proper headgear.
And the officers' chief constable admitted the guidelines, which apply across the country, risked getting in the way of tackling crime - but
blamed pressure from politicians and the media.
Traffic officers spotted the balaclava-clad trio as they sped away from a showroom in Altrincham, Greater Manchester after smashing their way in to
steal high-performance motorcycles worth a total of £20,000.
They radioed their duty inspector moments after the late night raid but were told that because the thieves weren't wearing crash helmets or
protective clothing, it would be unsafe to pursue them.
Instead the raiders were left to make their escape, and nearly a week on they remain at large while the garage's furious owner has been forced
to shut his fledgling business.
Victim Tony Crawford, who runs Manchester Motorbike Store, said: 'It's just bizarre that a criminal's health and safety is more
important than catching them.
'But it's not the police I blame, it's the politicians who've put these ridiculous rules in place who are responsible.
'What message are they sending out? They're effectively telling criminals that as long as they make their getaway on a motorbike and
don't wear a helmet, the police won't be allowed to chase them.
'That can't be right.'
He was backed by Graham Brady, Conservative MP for Altrincham and Sale West who said: 'I am astonished that the welfare of criminals in the act
of breaking the law should be put before the public's expectation that criminals should be apprehended when the opportunity presents.
'I expect most police officers would be deeply frustrated not to be allowed to pursue criminals because of health and safety issues of this
sort.'
Chris Burrows, chairman of the Greater Manchester branch of the Police Federation, confirmed that officers found such situations 'incredibly
frustrating' but said they had to comply with guidelines.
Superintendent Steve Nibloe, of Greater Manchester Police, confirmed the officers were following 'a nationwide policy which gives clear guidance
that motorbikes should not be pursued because of the higher risk of injury to the rider'.
He added: 'The officers were asked not to pursue the suspects as they were not wearing the correct safety equipment and were not wearing
helmets, so it is clear to me the correct decision was taken.'
Police forces have come in for intense criticism over the number of deaths during high-speed pursuits, and they say new guidelines drawn up by the
Association of Chief Police Officers are aimed at balancing the potential risk against the gravity of the crime.
The rules mean an offender thought to be highly dangerous would be more likely to be chased with less regard for their safety, while the road
conditions and the proximity to schools or playgrounds would also be considered.
But yesterday Greater Manchester Chief Constable Peter Fahy ((CRCT)) suggested they had gone too far in protecting criminals' interests.
'At the moment I think officers feel that because of the way things are viewed by investigating bodies, the media and politicians, it's
the welfare of the suspected offender that has to come first,' he said.
'My concern is that is out of kilter with the public mood out there.'
Earlier this month it emerged that instead of making suspects wear blue boiler suits while in custody, the force offers to bring them their own
clothes from their homes.
Police have traced one of the stolen bikes - a Yamaha R1, a Honda 1000 Fireblade and a Honda CBR 600 - following the raid last Thursday but are still
appealing for information.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1303435/Police-forced-let-thieves--riding-motorbikes-helmets.html#ixzz0wnX0yRzT
|
|
|
|
|
richard thomas
|
| posted on 16/8/10 at 07:29 PM |
|
|
Should get away with armed robbery from now on so long as you don't wear eye protection and earplugs if this is the way it's
going....
|
|
|
mistergrumpy
|
| posted on 16/8/10 at 07:30 PM |
|
|
This has been the policy for ages, it's just appeared in the news today.
The only time I know of that police can chase motor bikes is the specialist off road teams chasing off road bikes and on the road it's only
something like a murder that they can be pursued. TBH most officers will just pull their vehicles over and stop just in case the rider comes off, they
can prove thet weren't chasing because all the vehicles have black boxes in them.
|
|
|
scootz
|
| posted on 16/8/10 at 07:44 PM |
|
|
The Forces that I have a bit of knowledge won't allow bike pursuits unless it's a matter of life and death... and even then it's
unlikely!
I guess the Police are just tired of getting a kicking for doing their job properly, so are now content to take the kicking for not doing the job
properly.
It's Evolution Baby!
|
|
|
skodaman
|
| posted on 16/8/10 at 08:05 PM |
|
|
Stealing a motorcycle should carry the death penalty, particularly if it's with a view to removing the engine and putting it in a car. 
Skodaman
|
|
|
GMPMotorsport
|
| posted on 16/8/10 at 08:17 PM |
|
|
If in doubt blame on Health & Safety, where has common sense gone?
www.gmpdevelopments.co.uk
www.gmpmotorsport.co.uk
ARDS Instructer.
|
|
|
Peteff
|
| posted on 16/8/10 at 08:53 PM |
|
|
I bet they weren't wearing hi vis vests either  They deserve to die in flames for such recklessness.
yours, Pete
I went into the RSPCA office the other day. It was so small you could hardly swing a cat in there.
|
|
|
snakebelly
|
| posted on 16/8/10 at 08:59 PM |
|
|
bean bag gun, shot to the head, no helmet, no problem.
|
|
|
Danozeman
|
| posted on 16/8/10 at 09:02 PM |
|
|
If it wa sin america theyd have shot the tyres out or shot them if they refused to stop. This is the sort of policing we need over here.
Dan
Built the purple peril!! Let the modifications begin!!
http://www.eastangliankitcars.co.uk
|
|
|
StevieB
|
| posted on 16/8/10 at 09:10 PM |
|
|
I'm afraid I have to agree with the rule on this one.
The problem is that yoofs will nick a bike then drive round recklessly looking for a police chase just for the thrill of it.
I watched one of the many Police! Stop! Kill! programmes on TV where this was the case and over several days two particular cops were taunted by the
same kids on a bike. They started to give chase, reported it in and were told to call it off over the radio once they'd confirmed no helmets.
No matter though, as the cops happened across the lads carrying a fuel canister one day and that was it - nicked. Good policing IMHO.
|
|
|
pekwah1
|
| posted on 16/8/10 at 10:14 PM |
|
|
that's a load of crap!
if some little scrote thinks it's ok to just go and steal whatever they like, they get what comes to them.
It's their own fault if they can't ride a bike properly if they steal it, so if they fall off and hurt their precious little faces then so
be it!
I don't understand why any criminal should be given such nice treatment, they deserve what they get and they shouldn't be allowed to just
run free
|
|
|
SteveWalker
|
| posted on 16/8/10 at 10:21 PM |
|
|
Police are not to chase riders without helmets, drivers who are at risk of injuring themselves during a chase, etc. - so how are these criminals to
be discouraged when they know that acting recklessly will cause the police to leave them alone? There should be a simple policy of always chasing them
- if they kill or injure themselves or people who have chosen to ride with them, hard luck, they shouldn't have been committing a crime and
should have stopped for the police in the first place. It only makes sense not to chase where they are likely to injure an innocent person.
Somehow I don't think they'd break off the chase if someone had stolen 20 grand in cash, but they will if they've stolen a 20K
vehicle?
|
|
|
mistergrumpy
|
| posted on 16/8/10 at 10:31 PM |
|
|
quote:
Somehow I don't think they'd break off the chase if someone had stolen 20 grand in cash
Sorry to tell you but you're wrong. First hand experience here.
|
|
|
Paul TigerB6
|
| posted on 16/8/10 at 11:15 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by SteveWalker
Police are not to chase riders without helmets, drivers who are at risk of injuring themselves during a chase, etc. - so how are these criminals to
be discouraged when they know that acting recklessly will cause the police to leave them alone? There should be a simple policy of always chasing them
- if they kill or injure themselves or people who have chosen to ride with them, hard luck, they shouldn't have been committing a crime and
should have stopped for the police in the first place. It only makes sense not to chase where they are likely to injure an innocent person.
Agree totally - the scumbags are happy to take the risk so if they just happen to die then so be it. Saves the cost of a trial and the 2hrs community
service they'd get!! What'll be next - maybe drivers who dont wear seatbelts dont get chased in case they injure themselves??
It really does come to something when the H&S brigade involve themselves in protecting criminals!!
|
|
|
morcus
|
| posted on 17/8/10 at 01:02 AM |
|
|
It does seem a stupid policy but there isn't any real alternative. If something did happen it wouldn't just effect those who deserve it
but you've got to think of the other people like the police and anyone else who happens to be using the roads legally unfortunantly.
I believe they can still use helicopters to tell the ground forces where they've gone and get them when they've stopped.
Its not a good message to put out though, want to avoid the police, get a stolen bike and don't wear a helmet.
In a White Room, With Black Curtains, By the Station.
|
|
|
mad4x4
|
| posted on 17/8/10 at 06:37 AM |
|
|
I'm away to drive up a Motorway at highspeed with out a seatbelt on .......
Scot's do it better in Kilts.
MK INDY's Don't Self Centre Regardless of MK Setting !
|
|
|
smart51
|
| posted on 17/8/10 at 06:59 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by mangogrooveworkshop
...dailymail...
You really should stop reading that. Its for your own good.
|
|
|
Bluemoon
|
| posted on 17/8/10 at 08:42 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by smart51
quote:
Originally posted by mangogrooveworkshop
...dailymail...
You really should stop reading that. Its for your own good.
 PMSL
|
|
|
mistergrumpy
|
| posted on 17/8/10 at 09:24 AM |
|
|
morcus seems to have hit the nail on the head. It's not a great policy to put out and although it has been around for ages to publicise it it
just daft. I'd probably put this down to the Manchester Evening News first picking it up as they constantly seem to pick up all the negatives of
the police.
TBH though as I said the job has said not to do it and at the end of the day it's the bobby who's license will be revoked and who will
face jail if the other person injured themselves which is a REALLY bad place to be if you're in the police and there's so much lack of
support from within the job who'll happily rag you over the coals then why should the bobby risk it. You have to face reality sometimes and bite
your bottom lip and leave things.
|
|
|
Steve Hignett
|
| posted on 17/8/10 at 10:41 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by StevieB
I watched one of the many Police! Stop! Kill! programmes on TV where this was the case and over several days two particular cops were taunted by the
same kids on a bike. They started to give chase, reported it in and were told to call it off over the radio once they'd confirmed no helmets.
No matter though, as the cops happened across the lads carrying a fuel canister one day and that was it - nicked. Good policing IMHO.
But they let him go, it was reported at the end of the program. Not enough evidence...
|
|
|
02GF74
|
| posted on 17/8/10 at 11:04 AM |
|
|
if it could be guarantteed that the thieveing scrotes would not cause death or injury to other road users or pedestrians, then it is a bad policy.
the thieves show they do do not care about their own lives so would care even less about others.
it is not ideal but the punishment should be more severe, most likley when caught, they will be put on a goverenement funded scheme to ride motorbikes
on waste ground.
|
|
|
Rod Ends
|
 posted on 7/9/10 at 03:49 PM |
|
|
He won't be re-offending! 
|
|
|
Ninehigh
|
| posted on 7/9/10 at 08:54 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Rod Ends
He won't be re-offending!
There you go, if you rob something and then do one on a motorbike the police can't get you but Karma will!
|
|
|
JoelP
|
| posted on 7/9/10 at 09:03 PM |
|
|
the point that no one seems to have made yet, is that this policy ENCOURAGES a crook (or delinquant) not to wear a helmet. So though you may well save
his life by not chasing him now, the fact that you didnt chase makes him more likely not to wear a helmet in future.
Essentially, its the same as doing a deal with terrorists. Short term gain for long term loss.
|
|
|
JoelP
|
| posted on 7/9/10 at 09:09 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Rod Ends
He won't be re-offending!
In fact thats my point exactly
He got away first time so thought he was best not to wear a helmet in future, and now he's dead.
Not one to gloat over someones misfortune...
result!
|
|
|
