The role of the British police

Three relevant cases have come to my attention in the past few days. The best known is probably that of Michael Thompson who whilst driving his car in Grimsby noticed a mobile speed camera and that many oncoming cars seemed to be speeding. He decided to flash those cars to warn them to slow down. As a result he found himself in court and found guilty of wilfully obstructing a police officer in the course of their duties.Now this strikes me as rather peculiar. Did any of the drivers flashed by Michael Thompson slow down? If they did then surely the road was safer as a result and thus Michael Thompson was providing a public good. So what offence did Michael Thompson actually commit? I cannot see how Michael Thompson stopped the speed trap from working or interfered with the work of the Police. Was the role of the police officers on that day to measure the speed of passing vehicles and to fine any that were driving faster than the legal speed limit? If so then Michael Thompson did not obstruct their work.If this was not their assigned role, then what was it?


If Michael Thompson was simply warning others to adjust their, then, future behaviour so as to reduce their exposure to criminal liability then how is this wilfully obstructing a police officer in the course of their duties? Surely the signs outside every office that Smoking is not permitted within this building is also preventing a crime from being committed, is not a sign in a town centre advertising that CCTV is in operation is also designed to prevent a crime from being committed. Why are some crimes worthy of being prevented but motoring offences must be captured and the drivers prosecuted or fined?

I believe that the Crown Prosecution Service's case explanation included the note that The Highway Code informs drivers to

'Only flash your headlights to let other road users know that you are there. Do not flash your headlights to convey any other message or intimidate other road users.'

It would seem that Michael Thompson clearly breached this part of The Highway Code; however a breach of the Highway Code is not necessarily a criminal offence and that was not what Michael Thompson was charged with.

So why has Michael Thompson now got a criminal record? Is it simply because he encouraged others to stay within the law and upset a police officer by so doing?
Is this what the 21st century British police think their role is?


In another story, The Mail reports that:

'A police officer escorted an expectant mother to hospital just minutes before she gave birth - then slapped her husband with a ticket for speeding.

John Coughlin was handed the penalty for driving 102mph in a 55mph zone as he rushed wife Angela to the delivery room of the Catholic Medical Centre in Manchester, New Hampshire.

The trooper waited outside as the couple’s baby boy Kyle was born, six minutes after their arrival at the hospital, then pounced on the excited new father as he emerged to call relatives.'

That story is from the United States but I wonder if you doubt it could happen in the UK. The cases of jobsworth police issuing tickets to people they know will pay the fine, rather than looking to catch burglars, muggers and vandals are legion.


Finally Kable reports that:

'Millions of people who reported crimes have had their details stored on police databases

The revelation has emerged from information provided in response to a freedom of information request from the Press Association. It shows that police forces in England and Wales have kept data about people who call 999 or non-emergency numbers to report their concerns or pass on information.

The study discovered that West Midlands Police has more than a million records on people who have reported offences over the past 12 years.

Other forces, including Lancashire, Cleveland, Avon and Somerset, Gloucestershire, West Mercia and North Wales, hold more than 150,000 each.

The Press Association said that senior officers admitted the information could be used against people as part of any future police investigation. However, they insisted gathering the data was necessary to fight crime, protect the vulnerable and ensure concerns were dealt with properly.'

To the modern British police and their political masters, every member of the public is likely to be guilty of something and so should be watched. The number of crimes on the statute book increases year after year so that the State could choose when to arrest any one of us, after all we are all likely to have infringed one law or other at some time.


Over two years ago I blogged that:

'These transgression taxes are easy to collect if middle-class, law-abiding people are the transgressors and that is why it is them rather than the violent or dangerous that are targeted. A 'street warden' will be more likely to issue a fine to a 50 year-old householder whose bin is overfull because they had a party or who has managed to include a piece of plastic wrapping in the paper recycling bin, than he/she would be to try and fine six youths who are throwing empty beer cans at a bin on the High Street, and missing. The householder is easier to identify, more likely to pay and much less likely to give the "street warden" a good kicking.

If Michael Thompson had heeded my words and stayed cowed rather than protesting when pulled over by the police maybe he would not have been charged, fined and found himself the owner of a criminal record.