Police stopped a car travelling the wrong way along a motorway by crashing into it head-on.
The Honda Jazz was travelling at 50mph, West Midlands Police said.
The driver of the car, a 77-year-old man with dementia, had been reported missing from his home in Rowley Regis. He was uninjured.
One of the officers suffered a minor injury.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-28866050
|
|
Brave decision by the police what else could they do?
|
It must have taken some nerve (for the police) - playing 'chicken' when you know the other guy's not going to avoid you!
Assuming it was known he had dementia, howcome he was still holding a licence? Perhaps he'd forgotten...
|
|
If they'd have factored the cost of the operation they could have used a sacrificial civilian worker.
|
>> If they'd have factored the cost of the operation they could have used a sacrificial
>> civilian worker.
The compo paid to an sacrificial civvy would be enormous.
I doubt the stop was "head on" in quite the dramatic way it was reported.
|
>> I doubt the stop was "head on" in quite the dramatic way it was reported.
>>
So do I, a 50 mph direct hit from a Jazz is a significant impact, even if you are stopped.
|
>> >> I doubt the stop was "head on" in quite the dramatic way it was reported.
>>
>> So do I, a 50 mph direct hit from a Jazz is a significant impact, even if you are stopped.
>>hThe radio report This afternoon said the BiB nudged him over and into the "ditch"
However
www.west-midlands.police.uk/latest-news/news.aspx?id=1504
The vehicle was travelling at around 50mph and officers took the decision to make deliberate contact with the side of the Honda to bring it to a stop.
So nudged off seems to be what happened ?
|
|
It's times like this you need a driverless car with the crash avoidance turned off.
Last edited by: VxFan on Wed 20 Aug 14 at 20:08
|
|
No way was this a head on as it doesn't fit with the Speed kills mantra unless the Police car was flat out in reverse to lessen the collision speed or the Honda was persuaded to slow down against the central reservation.
|
>> It's times like this you need a driverless car with the crash avoidance turned off.
>>
If he had a driverless car he wouldn't have been driving in the first place.
Or perhaps there will be computer viruses that cause driverless cars to develop dementia and drive the wrong way along motorways.
|
Harrumph. 'Crash mitigation' is what the device is called, and you wouldcertainly have to switch it off if you intended to ram another car off the road.
Which is what seems to have happened really. Not a 'head-on' at all, just a ram into the side or appropriate flank of the other car. The sort of thing that almost makes you fancy being a traffic-car copper.
You can't blame the little twerps for wanting a good headline, by they are silly these days, these pseudo-hacks.
|
>> Not a 'head-on' at all, just a
>> ram into the side or appropriate flank of the other car.
You'd have to be a pretty good driver to do that accurately at an approaching speed of perhaps 100 mph.
Or do you mean the police car was also driving in the wrong direction, and just came alongside? Seems unlikely - that would mean 2 lanes occupied by cars going in the wrong direction.
|
>> You'd have to be a pretty good driver to do that accurately at an approaching speed of perhaps 100 mph.
One would expect an intercept car to be well and ruthlessly driven surely.
>> Or do you mean the police car was also driving in the wrong direction
Who knows? I wasn't there. Police powers include closing one or both carriageways.
|
>> If he had a driverless car he wouldn't have been driving in the first place.
I meant for the police for circumstances such as this.
|
Assuming it was known he had dementia, howcome he was still holding a licence? Perhaps he'd forgotten...
I suspect he doesn't now have a licence, but did, came across the keys and just set off.
|
|
Would have been good practice for drone pilots
|
|
Sad for the driver and his family. Awful disease that statistically will affect a significant percentage of us all. Scary thought.
|
Not daft at all, but needing nerve and fine judgement. Spectacularly good driving on Plod's part, and you can hear his satisfaction in his voice afterwards. Perhaps a bit of relief too... But the essential thing is, no serious injuries to anyone.
Promote that man immediately.
(I hope Fc and Wp aren't going to trash me for that)
Last edited by: Armel Coussine on Thu 21 Aug 14 at 17:32
|
I think there was more luck than good judgement.
I'm presuming there was not a rolling road block behind as at least one vehicle passed up the nearside. Had there been a sterile area they could have turned around and created an opportunity for a tactical resolution. If not driving the wrong way on a dual carriageway or motorway is a no no.
I think their thought process was that the driver seeing their blue lights would stop (unless it was a suicide by cop scenario). I don't know what they were hoping to achieve by blowing their horn?
It must have been a bottom clenching moment when they realised the other vehicle was not going to stop. There was only one way for them to go, which was left, and the oncoming vehicle to it's right. As it was it did not deviate. Had it done so it would have been head on. Not good. As it was it slowly lost its momentum against the Police car and presumably the central reservation.
So it ended well, fair play and well done. BUT?
|
>> It must have been a bottom clenching moment when they realised the other vehicle was not going to stop.
That's what I meant when I said it needed nerve. The glaring headlights make it difficult to see exactly but it seems that the police car went straight at the miscreant, who slowed and tried to squeeze past against the central reservation. By the time the vehicles were passing, very close, both were moving fairly slowly. A quick jink to the right by the Plod driver finished the job.
Chapeau!
Plod, and the miscreant who fortunately was an absent-minded person of mature years, could have been killed if the latter had turned out to be a crazed psychopath on speed...
|
|
Wouldn't trash that observation AC. I do believe though that the the satisfaction was more of a justification/support for what had happened.
|
In my mind it was a justified decision and the right thing to do in the circs.
There's often not a great deal of support for police drivers if they go away from the script, hence some of the self justification from the driver on the video.
If it had all gone horribly wrong though, he'd have been no doubt hung drawn and quartered.
|
>> In my mind it was a justified decision and the right thing to do in
>> the circs.
I think that's about right. The guy was wrong way on a motorway, about as dangerous as it comes.
Even if they knew driver was old/incapacitated rather than youthful/sozzled they'd not much alternative.
|
>> In my mind it was a justified decision and the right thing to do in
>> the circs.
Of course it was, in effect what the copper did was perform a quick field test of how dangerous the driver could be, and it was clear very dangerous indeed. The next quick thinking thing to do was turn it into a side swipe hard enough to disable the car but safe enough to minimise injuries.
Which he did.
|
>> >> In my mind it was a justified decision and the right thing to do
>> in
>> >> the circs.
>>
>> Of course it was, in effect what the copper did was perform a quick field
>> test of how dangerous the driver could be, and it was clear very dangerous indeed.
>> The next quick thinking thing to do was turn it into a side swipe hard
>> enough to disable the car but safe enough to minimise injuries.
>>
>> Which he did.
Shed load of paperwork tho!
|
Having now seen the vid, I'm not sure I'm convinced he did intend to do that.
Maybe I think he realised the other car was going to hit them and thought 'oh crap, time for a sharp exit' and didn't quite get out of the way in time and decided to say 'ah well, y'see I meant to do that...'
|
Well, it worked out good for the lads....brownie points all round. Difficult to create a sterile zone, I would have thought, as the offending vehicle would be heading towards any stopped traffic, including the police cars.
I seem to remember a similar scenario many years ago when the two man crew of the road patrol car were killed in a deliberate head on. Maybe M5 or M6.
Can't find it on Google, though.
|
|
And that is often the issue. Its fine when you can summon up sufficient trained resources in the appropriate vehicles and in the right location to perform a safe stop but that takes an inordinate amount of time which is a luxury when events are happening in the here and now. Its a judgement call and putting yourself on the line to try and resolve at the earliest opportunity to prevent potential serious consequences. As WP stated if it had gone wrong the Police get hung out to dry.
|
>> As WP stated if it had gone wrong the Police get hung out to dry.
>>
Sounds just like the armed forces.
|
>> >> As WP stated if it had gone wrong the Police get hung out to
>> dry.
>> >>
>>
>> Sounds just like the armed forces.
Hey its a fact of life, if anyone* gets anything spectacularly wrong they get hung out to dry, why does everyone moan they are a specially hounded case.
*unless of course you are a politician, then you hang someone else out to dry.
|
|
The police and military discipline and punishment is a bit different to a civilian who can make a cock up and just walk away.
|
|
why couldnt the cops have gotten in front of him and braked him in with a low impact shunt?
|
>> why couldnt the cops have gotten in front of him and braked him in with
>> a low impact shunt?
>>
That would involve the Police car also travelling the wrong way up a motorway and unless as FC has already said, the m/way had been previously closed, that is an enormous 'no-no'.
|
>> Hey its a fact of life, if anyone* gets anything spectacularly wrong they get hung
>> out to dry, why does everyone moan they are a specially hounded case.
>>
If you are paid to do a job that has inherent risks attached to it, particularly in public service... and make a decision in good faith that is intended to benefit society as a whole and/or your employer... then I think you should expect to receive a degree of leeway if it all goes horribly wrong (subject to some obvious provisos to prevent criminality being hidden behind alleged good faith).
I see this as being different to the average Joe simply making a mistake.
|
>> I see this as being different to the average Joe simply making a mistake.
Its not, really it isn't.
|
>>
>> >> I see this as being different to the average Joe simply making a mistake.
>>
>> Its not, really it isn't.
>>
Is that the voice of experience speaking again?
|
>> >>
>> >> >> I see this as being different to the average Joe simply making a
>> mistake.
>> >>
>> >> Its not, really it isn't.
>> >>
>>
>> Is that the voice of experience speaking again?
Oh whatever, can't you ever keep anything non personal?
|
>> Oh whatever, can't you ever keep anything non personal?
>>
Nothing personal, I am impressed that you are so knowledgeable about military law and police disciplinary procedures.
Do you have "Pension traps" in civvie street?
Last edited by: Old Navy on Fri 22 Aug 14 at 17:53
|
>>
>> Do you have "Pension traps" in civvie street?
>>
Depends on how good their pension is!
|
>> >> Oh whatever, can't you ever keep anything non personal?
>> >>
>>
>> Nothing personal, I am impressed that you are so knowledgeable about military law and police
>> disciplinary procedures.
>>
>> Do you have "Pension traps" in civvie street?
No mostly because the pensions are not as good in civvy street. Still does not alter the matter about public responsibility and being hung out to dry being solely a matter for the police or the military. Ever heard of criminal responsibility?* Scores of roles in life have dire consequences in the event of a mistake, Doctors, Nurses, Airline Pilots maybe?
Just pointing out that no-one is "special" in this regard
* A pity tho it never seems to work up to those in charge like the law was intended.
|
>> Do you have "Pension traps" in civvie street?
With another thought, yes we do, we can loose our pensions without doing anything wrong.
|
>>
>> Its not, really it isn't.
>>
One is deliberate, an intended consequence or a quick decision intended to benefit others, but then goes wrong.
The other is a mistake.
|
Very fine line, although I see what you are getting at, plenty of business and other decisions that "go wrong" come in to the same category IMHO.
The penalty or "pension trap" bit is unfair unless some illegality is involved and should not apply for mistakes in any circumstance, and is very rare, but not totally unknown, in "civvy street"
|
Police in head on crash to stop driver. - Dutchie
