I can’t see how the policeman could really justify not just the carrying on trying to overtake but the fact he was doing 130 mph in those conditions to catch a car that can’t be seen on the film that he thought was earlier speeding. Which way did he intend going at the roundabout?
mechanic77:
Which way did he intend going at the roundabout?
The way which would make him look best on camera. 
As far as I can see there is fault on both sides, however the main problem seems to relate to the punctured ego of South Yorks police. We’re on a bit of a thrill trip here - 120+ for the camera. Unfortunately fate decided to rain upon his moment of stardom.
This fits rather neatly with todays’ news regarding the 90000 police cars caught on camera. South Yorks police have the defence of not being able to identify the driver & case dropped. Fortunately we can see the driver here, but he won’t have to bother claiming any responsibilty as his chief constable has already cleared the deck for him.
Anyway, well done to Reed Boardall, not so much “red mist” as the glare of fame…
I’d go 80-20 in the truck drivers favour - it was mainly his fault.
He wasn’t allowed in lane 3 and he was. So he was in the wrong.
However, why the hell didn’t the copper have his flashing blues on? What happened to ‘see and be seen’? 
I can’t understand why he didn’t bother with them. Is it really that much extra effort to put them on? If I was hammering along at 130mph, I would want EVERYONE to see I was coming!
Mind you, you are only allowed blues n’ twos on if your answering an ACTUAL emergency call, not one made up for a camera crew.
If the same thing happened today you could just say that you took your hands off the wheel as the WTD meant you could not drive anymore even though you were under your tacho hours
Reef:
montana man:
Not being pedantic ( as alegedly thats your job ) but shouldn’t that be Anti LGVer Reef ■■?
Oh i thought it was a heavy goods vehicle not a light goods vehicle
ROG !!! ROG !!! HELP !!! Please clarify oh knowledgeable one
I think we need some new terminology - how about…
SGV=Small Goods Vehicle
MGV=Medium Goods Vehicle
LGV=Large Goods Vehicle
HGV=Huge Goods Vehicle
We can then decide what type of vehicle goes into each catagory
Can someone move this to the other running debate on this subject please
ROG:
I think we need some new terminology - how about…
SGV=Small Goods Vehicle
MGV=Medium Goods Vehicle
LGV=Large Goods Vehicle
HGV=Huge Goods Vehicle
We can then decide what type of vehicle goes into each catagory
Can someone move this to the other running debate on this subject please
But are those the legaly correct terms
I think that should be clarified before we get the newbies confused and them taking that as gospel.
You can’t go inventing new terminology because you are unsure of the correct existing ones really.
That could be incredibly misleading especially bearing in ming you Sig ROG
Like others have said, the LGV shouldn’t have been in lane 3, but if he didn’t know the road or recognised the road signs (foreign driver ?) then he was positioning him self for a right turn at the roundabout.
However
he was already halfway into lane 3 when this prat tried to overtake him. Surely anyone with half a brain would not have tried to squeeze thru a diminishing gap that wasn’t there to start with.
(I didn’t hear any sound of skidding as if he was trying to slow down, just him trying to go through with the gas pedal floored)
heavy goods vehicles, coaches and trailers are not allowed in the outside lane of a motorway with 3 or more lanes except in an emergency or if ordered to do so by the appropriate authorities.
i saw no emergency and there certainly wasn’t any persons of authority or otherwise ordering the driver into lane 3, the signs clearly show that lane 3 comes to an end and the motorway ends within a mile of that so the hgv driver had no reason to be in lane 3 at all.
he is in the wrong place, at the wrong time and in collision with the wrong person - talk about bad luck.
Ok im gonna be hated for this! the officer was driving within his trained capabilities, he was driving in the correct lane, and at the speed he was driving at he would have been able to clear the LGV before it went into a 2 lane!
The LGV moved over into what was actually the the 3rd lane, it had not become a 2 lane at the time he moved across!
Therefore the fault of the RTC in my opinion is the LGV drivers, he clearly did not show or display any observations of the vehicle whether flashing lights or not .
The officers actions under the circumstances were correct.
But the whole basis of advanced driving, from civvy stuff to Police Class 1 (sorry… Police Advanced… not to drag this topic off into another debate) is self preservation. It doesn’t matter what someone should do, it’s what they do do, that you need to anticipate and plan around.
As often quoted, it’s no good having “John Doe, died 14-4-07, but he was in the right” on your gravestone.
The training is to your observations and abilities, your right about anticipation of others errors, but even the best police advanced driver would not have been able to forsee a LGV moving into the 3rd lane, and not using his observation skills, If we looked at every eventuality no one would drive anywhere as we would always be waiting for someone to make a mistake.
I also know that no risk is an acceptable one, but you have to use common sense and rational, and risk assess and scan throughout your drive.
I would never have forseen this coming and i would not have driven any differently to the officer in this case!
I was unfortunate circumstances and lack of observations and driving skills on the LGV driver half. again this is my own personal opinion from what i have seen in the clip.
Firebird:
The training is to your observations and abilities, your right about anticipation of others errors, but even the best police advanced driver would not have been able to forsee a LGV moving into the 3rd lane, and not using his observation skills,
No but any body whos eyes work could see that the “officer” continued to try and pass even though the vehicle was well into lane 3
If we looked at every eventuality no one would drive anywhere as we would always be waiting for someone to make a mistake.
True if we were all glory boying it at a ton thirty on a non life threatening call for the cameras
I also know that no risk is an acceptable one,
and he took a risk simple as that
but you have to use common sense and rational, and risk assess and scan throughout your drive.
As we all do everyday (well most of us) and common sense says it was a dumb move 
I am not anti police Firebird but guys like that do the force about as good in the eyes of drivers and the public as some of the idiot “professional” truckers
Oh and one final point I belled my brother in law and showed him the vid, which he was well aware of already ,and watched it with him.
He is a (sorry if the terminology is incorrect, don’t really like him that much ) pursuit specialist in the inner city stolen car something or other and he also does assessment drives and accident investigation for the neighbouring forces after there guys have a bump. His word’s were “What a[zb]ing [zb] poor piece of driving. If it was my call the only car he would see the inside of again would be his own”
Also at the end of the film he tells control he will move both vehicles to the services for exchange of info A no - no I am reliably informed
There’s good and bad in every profession and the wagon driver deserves as big a ■■■■ kicking to 
Not an expert, but I do feel it’s “extremely unfortunate” for such a highly trained officer (as I’m sure he will believe himself to be) to be involved in 2 (that we know of ) on-film, high speed accidents within such a relatively short space of time!
Very embarrassing I’d have thought? S’pose he has to justify them somehow.
His attitude & arrogance though, (copper’s) stinks. Nothing new there then.
I dont think he was still trying too pass in Lane 3, he was braking hard and fighting the wheel, i think he chose the 3rd lane to use the barrier as a buffer too rather than risk losing further control
I haven’t seen the video on YouTube, but from what I remember from it being broadcast on TV…
IMHO, it was at least 50% the police driver’s fault, if not more. The excessive speed that he was doing, coupled with the layout of the road and the fact that (from memory) he was driving without sirens or blue lights would mean that it would be perfectly possible for the truck driver to check both mirrors before pulling out and still not see the police car.
Yes, it’s true that the truck driver should not have pulled into lane 3 of a motorway, but I remember something about getting into the right lane for a roundabout/junction. I don’t know the road layout, so I don’t know about that, but given that the HGV driver could easily be thinking that the road was clear of other vehicles (because the police driver was missed due to his speed), it’s certainly not unreasonable for the truck driver to use that “empty” road to get into lane early.
The police driver, however, drove into a situation where he put himself at risk - he could see that the truck was indicating, and his speed was excessive given the lack of sirens and lights.
Just MHO…
I don’t think the HGV driver was deliberately trying to block him, as he had his indicator on for ages and was intending to turn right at the roundabout, thought wrongly that he needed to be in the 3rd lane and maybe was just having a dim moment. If it’s true that the copper made up the story of a phantom speeding motorist for the camera, he should be disciplined. Which is probably why he didn’t have his blues on if it wasn’t a real shout. I think he did have his alternate flashing lights on which would normally be enough and as he was marked as well… I think the truck driver was just not sure of where he needed to be and may have been a bit flustered and not paying full attention to observation which happens to the best of us. All persuit driving at that speed is calculated risk and is they didn’t “go for it” sometimes, they’d never catch anyone.
6 miles at 130 mph and he still didnt catch him and when the accident happened the car was no where in sight so how would he know which way the car would have gone at the island.
bit of possing that went ■■■■ up 
jon
Just been along that stretch of road and have to re-evaluate my previous comment. Lane 3 merges into lane 2 and therefore, I cannot see any reason why the HGV driver moved into lane 3 apart from trying to impede progress of police car.
And the roundabout is at least half a mile from the scene, i dont think u can even see it from there so why sort yer lane changing out that early anyway ? especially as u can see the motorways virtually dead.