BBC Home

Explore the BBC


23rd September 2019
Accessibility help
Text only

BBC Homepage

Channel Islands
Guernsey
Jersey


Contact Us


Like this page?
Send it to a friend!

 

or register to join or start a new discussion.


Discussion:

More Scamera Scandal:

Messages  1 - 20 of 139

 
First | < Previous 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next > | Last
 

Message 1 - posted by wabbit, Mar 21, 2008

Kent Police have had to abandon 150 prosecutions for 'speeding' drivers after one of their scamvan operators was caught out 'Fixing' the speed of vehicles in order to gain (unlawful/illegal) convictions.

www.motorcyclenews.c...

How low will these scumbags stoop?
Complain about a message      

Message 2 - posted by wabbit, Mar 21, 2008

Patsy?????...am waitin'......<biggrin>
Complain about a message      

Message 3 - posted by patsy, Mar 22, 2008

This operator should be severely dealt with as should anyone else caught breaking the law.

.....after one of their scamvan operators was caught out 'Fixing' the speed of vehicles in order to gain (unlawful/illegal) convictions.

Quoted from this message

Complain about a message      

Message 4 - posted by U4357578, Mar 22, 2008

I think that the question as to whether he's broken the law is yet to be dealt with. Perhaps you shouldn't judge him on hearsay evidence.


Moving on, if he is guilty, of course he should be punished but wouldn't it prove Wandys point that these cameras have been and are being used illegally?

What is your own opinion on that, Patsy?
Complain about a message      

Message 5 - posted by wabbit, Mar 22, 2008

This operator should be severely dealt with as should anyone else caught breaking the law.

.....after one of their scamvan operators was caught out 'Fixing' the speed of vehicles in order to gain (unlawful/illegal) convictions.

Quoted from this message

I believe that the operator has been suspended and internal investigation is underway, if the person is found to have commited the alleged offence, then I'm pretty sure he/she will be dismissed.

If dismissed they should face a jail sentence too IMO, as an unknown number of other innocent 'victims' will never really be known.

(There are conflicting reports on the number of 'victims' of this persons scam, one says 150 prosecutions abandoned, another says 120?)

How many of the 'unknown victims' have suffered licence/job/home loss or even marriage breakdown or, even possible suicide?

Anyway, on another thread Patsy gave a link which included this:
In-built anti-tampering security measures prevent camera settings being altered by the officers (or anyone else).

Quoted from this message

The incident referred to in this thread proves this to be untrue!

Just proving my point that those employed by the so called 'safety' orgs, include ruthless criminals.

Complain about a message      

Message 6 - posted by pompomwhiting, Mar 22, 2008

Any recrimminations for the scambag employer? Oops! You didn't did you Pats?

Pom would like to see a law abiding enforcement officer behind every camera in order to restore their credibility but then again thinks it would serve society better to trust people to keep to speed limits.
Complain about a message      

Message 7 - posted by pompomwhiting, Mar 22, 2008



How many of the 'unknown victims' have suffered licence/job/home loss or even marriage breakdown or, even possible suicide?



Thanks once again Wandy. You passion has helped Pom no end. <hug>
Complain about a message      

Message 8 - posted by wabbit, Mar 22, 2008

Thank you Pom, words like those make my day. xx
Complain about a message      

Message 9 - posted by wabbit, Mar 22, 2008

Message 4 - posted by jonah**.

What is your own opinion on that, Patsy?

Quoted from this message

<laugh>
You Are Joking, of course, Aren't You?
Complain about a message      

Message 10 - posted by wabbit, Mar 23, 2008

pssssst, Innit quiet on 'ere?
<biggrin>

Complain about a message      

Message 11 - posted by patsy, Mar 23, 2008

I gave my opinion in message 3.

But as you say, we can't judge this alleged incident on hearsay. <erm>

posted by jonah, Yesterday

I think that the question as to whether he's broken the law is yet to be dealt with. Perhaps you shouldn't judge him on hearsay evidence.

Moving on, if he is guilty, of course he should be punished but wouldn't it prove Wandys point that these cameras have been and are being used illegally?

What is your own opinion on that, Patsy?

Quoted from this message

Complain about a message      

Message 12 - posted by U4357578, Mar 24, 2008

I gave my opinion in message 3.

But as you say, we can't judge this alleged incident on hearsay.

Quoted from this message



Yes but you gave your opinion on how he and anyone else breaking the law should be dealt with. Now see if you can answer the question that I actually asked...
if he is guilty, of course he should be punished but wouldn't it prove Wandys point that these cameras have been and are being used illegally?

Quoted from this message



See if you can agree with Wandy that these cameras have been used illegally. After all the proof has been laid before you often enough.

Patsy, the more you wriggle out of answering questions and avoid giving honest answers, the more you prove that people like Wandy are right.
Complain about a message      

Message 13 - posted by VeryTrue, Mar 24, 2008


See if you can agree with Wandy that these cameras have been used illegally. After all the proof has been laid before you often enough.

Quoted from this message


But what exactly is it supposed to prove? wandy seems to be under the delusion that it somehow demonstrates that speed cameras are intrinsically evil, but all it actually shows is that there are lowlife in every walk of life and that, happily, they at least sometimes get caught.

Would you believe that stories like news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/... "prove" that all police intelligence operations should be shut down, or that the lies told by the police to realize the conviction of the Guilford Four means that all anti-terror operations should be stopped?
Complain about a message      

Message 14 - posted by U4357578, Mar 24, 2008

No VT, it's the fun of watching Patsy wriggle and squirm her way out of answering.

Moving on, when the criminal justice system gets (e.g.) a terrorist conviction wrong they do something about it, again and again and again<blush>.

Blimey! They even disbanded the West Midland Regional Crime Squad for their corrupt methods.

It doesn't exactly give the man on the number 87 bus confidence in the system, does it?
Complain about a message      

Message 15 - posted by patsy, Mar 24, 2008

Well jonah,

I am pleased I amuse you. <smiley>

Answering? if you recall you told me not to bother.<erm>

- posted by jonah
...... it's the fun of watching Patsy wriggle and squirm her way out of answering.

Quoted from this message

Complain about a message      

Message 16 - posted by U4357578, Mar 24, 2008

Yes Patsy, the way you carry on amuses me<hug>

Nobody is that good<erm>but prey tell me, why do you think I asked you not to bother? Because you rarely ever answer questions perhaps?
Complain about a message      

Message 17 - posted by VeryTrue, Mar 24, 2008


It doesn't exactly give the man on the number 87 bus confidence in the system, does it?

Quoted from this message


Well, if he had only learned to stick within the speed limit, he would still have his driving licence so he wouldn't be stuck on the number 87...
Complain about a message      

Message 18 - posted by patsy, Mar 24, 2008

jonah,
<hug>
I answer, but it appears that I don't give you the answers you want.

Because you rarely ever answer questions perhaps?

Quoted from this message

Complain about a message      

Message 19 - posted by U4357578, Mar 24, 2008

Well Patsy, you still haven't told me what 10% + 2mph means. Or why that rule applies when it is illegal to exceed the limit. Nor have you told me about NHS cleaning contracts...

That's why I said that you don't give answers.
Complain about a message      

Message 20 - posted by VeryTrue, Mar 24, 2008


Well Patsy, you still haven't told me what 10% + 2mph means. Or why that rule applies when it is illegal to exceed the limit.

Quoted from this message


I thought that had already been explained quite clearly. If the speed cameras issued tickets at 30.0001MPH, then there would be umpteen leach-like lawyers licking their lips over the prospect of endless tedious legal challenges about the accuracy of speed measurements.
Complain about a message      
First | < Previous 1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next > | Last

This discussion is tagged with:
- Nottingham

getting involved How to reply to messagespopup icon
complain  Alert us about a messagepopup icon
online safety Are you being safe online?popup icon

Messages  1 - 20 of 139

 


About the BBC | Help | Terms of Use | Privacy & Cookies Policy