'Speeding Has Devastating Consequences. We Must Educate Drivers About Them'.
So, why don't you start with yourself, Chief Superintendent?
By Andrew Alderson, Chief Reporter
17th April 2005)
The morning rush-hour traffic had begun to die down as the marked police car sped along the North Circular road with PC Mark Bradley at the wheel and his commanding officer, Chief Supt Les Owen, in a passenger seat.
Chief Supt Owen, who was running late for a meeting in central London, was impatient as other drivers held up their vehicle and, on one occasion, bellowed "Use your mirrors" at another motorist.
Their Vauxhall Omega, which occasionally sounded its emergency siren, passed scores of cars on the dual carriageway, which was not surprising, given its speed. It consistently hovered at around 80mph, recording 82mph in a 40mph limit and 86mph in a 50mph limit.
This is the sort of excessive speed that Chief Supt Owen has often warned can lead to an increased risk of death or injury for other road users. He, after all, is the head of the Metropolitan Police's traffic unit and in recent years has launched a series of safety campaigns aimed at speeding motorists.
In October 2003, Chief Supt Owen supported a campaign called London Safety Camera Partnership, which introduced digital speeding cameras for the Limehouse Link tunnel, an accident blackspot. He spoke of the "devastating consequences" of deaths and injuries from road accidents, many of which were caused by speeding. "At the Traffic Operational Command Unit, we aim to educate drivers first and foremost about the hazards and repercussions of speeding," he said.
Six months earlier, Chief Supt Owen had backed another road safety campaign with the words: "By making drivers aware of the consequences that speeding cars can have on themselves, their passengers and other motorists and pedestrians, we hope to change behaviour on the roads, making them safer for everyone."
This weekend Chief Supt Owen is facing disciplinary action by the Metropolitan Police's Internal Investigations Command. The actions of PC Bradley, who appeared in court last week on a speeding-related charge, will also be considered and he has been relieved of driving duties.
Yesterday a spokesman for Scotland Yard said of the incident: "Chief Supt Les Owen was in the vehicle at the time. Misconduct matters, if any, will now be considered following the end of this court proceedings against PC Bradley. The matter is under supervision by the Independent Police Complaints Commission."
The speeding took place as Chief Supt Owen was being driven from the foot of the M1 to the Metropolitan Police's traffic headquarters in Buckingham Palace Road, via Plumstead in east London where they were to pick up another senior policeman. It only ended in court because, on the way to Plumstead, the officers encountered a fatal road accident. It is understood that they submitted the vehicle's video recording - traffic cars routinely record their journeys - in case it provided clues about the accident.
When investigators watched the video and realised how fast the police vehicle had been travelling in a non-emergency, the Metropolitan Police handed over the evidence to West Midlands police to investigate.
Last week PC Bradley, 44, successfully appealed against a court's decision to give him six penalty points on his driver's licence. The penalty was reduced to three points. At Redbridge magistrates court on January 31, PC Bradley had admitted speeding and was also fined £250 over the incident on February 4 last year. His legal team argued that six penalty points were too harsh because he was an advanced driver who could drive safely at speed.
Judge Pitts told PC Bradley that the circumstances surrounding his speeding did not fit into the exemption from prosecution given to drivers responding to an emergency. He also said that he did not want to pre-judge any internal disciplinary action by the Metropolitan Police.
There were no reporters in court 18 at Snaresbrook Crown Court in east London for the last week's hearing because nobody was aware of its importance and implications. However, senior officials close to the case informed The Sunday Telegraph about it because they felt the "scandal" needed to be exposed.
Chief Supt Owen, who has had a long and distinguished career in the police force, does not face criminal charges. In court, PC Bradley was asked whether he had been instructed to break the speed limit and he said that he had not. However, he said that, because they were late for the meeting, there was an implication that he had to drive quickly.
The disclosure of the incident comes just days after Wiltshire police launched an anti-speeding campaign on the M4 in which officers targeted motorists driving just over the 70mph limit - 79mph instead of the usual 85mph.
Road safety campaigners are furious that a police car - particularly one carrying such a senior officer with responsibilities for road safety - was travelling at such speeds in busy city traffic.
There was controversy five years ago when a car belonging to Denis O'Connor, then chief constable of Surrey, was caught in a speed trap doing 78mph in a 50mph limit in his own county. Mr O'Connor apologised for the incident - which took place days after the Home Office launched an anti-speeding campaign - but no action was taken against his driver, after the police officer who stopped the car was said to have "used his own discretion".
Lawyers say that it is rare for any motorists driving at such speeds to escape an automatic ban. Last week, however, Lord Howard, a Tory peer, kept his licence despite driving at 113mph in a 70mph limit. Magistrates heard that his charity work would suffer if he could not drive, and he was fined £470 and received six points on his driver's licence.
Robert Roscoe, a solicitor specialising in criminal law, said of the incident involving Chief Supt Owen: "These are huge speeds and, unless there are special circumstances, they would normally lead to an immediate ban for the driver. Speed limits are there to be followed and we all, whether we are police officers or members of the public, take a chance if we flout the law."
From:
http://portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;sessionid=FCB1H0ZJ3ILPXQFIQMGSNAGAVCBQWJVC?xml=/news/2005/04/17/nspeed117.xml
My emphasis.