BBC Television programmes  permalink

Motorway Cops - Irresponsible?

Messages: 1 - 37 of 37
  • Message 1. 

    Posted by BooBoo2 (U1168789) on Monday, 2nd September 2013

    On the very first "pursuit" on tonight's programme the "cops" stated that they would abort chasing the criminals if the later were to take unreasonable risks. Now I can quite understand the logic behind that philosophy however is that not simply providing those desperate to get away with a tactical advantage? Does that not put the rest of us in more danger? Perhaps not being so candid about strategy might have been more sensible.

    As an aside why are certain individuals pixelated in some shots and not in others, better editing is needed perhaps?

    Reply to this message 1

    Report message1

  • Message 2

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by zelda (U2012536) on Monday, 2nd September 2013

    It's a daft programme anyway and IMO does little to enhance the police's reputation. However, I would imagine that they have to get the permission of anyone involved in the show to have their faces shown and if they say no, they pixilate them.

    Reply to this message 2

    Report message2

  • Message 3

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by GaryB007 (U3895241) on Monday, 2nd September 2013

    It's not new information. Many Police programs have shown chases being aborted due to the danger. It does, a you say however, give the bad guys some useful advice on how not to get caught - assuming the helicopter's not on the case, in which case they'll normally back off anyway/

    Reply to this message 3

    Report message3

  • Message 4

    , in reply to message 2.

    Posted by BooBoo2 (U1168789) on Monday, 2nd September 2013

    I can understand pixelation particularly before someone is proven guilty but one minute covering a person's identity then the next showing them in their full glory seems a little contradictive (is that a word?).

    I actually like these type if programmes as they give a human side to the police. I do however get a bit twitchy with annoyance when the "baddy" gets away.

    Reply to this message 4

    Report message4

  • Message 5

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Prophet Tenebrae (U5995226) on Monday, 2nd September 2013

    It has been asked before... honestly, I feel as though the whole thing makes the police seem a mix of incompetent bunglers, bureaucratically castrated, flush with their own power and infrequently useful.

    I'm surprised the police are so happy to have their inability to get cases successfully prosecuted made common knowledge... how many times have they shown people with drugs get off with (at most) a suspended sentence?

    I would agree the show is irresponsible but if the police want to come across as regularly inept, incompetent, iniquitous and impotent - I suppose that's their decision.

    Reply to this message 5

    Report message5

  • Message 6

    , in reply to message 5.

    Posted by BooBoo2 (U1168789) on Monday, 2nd September 2013

    It has been asked before... honestly, I feel as though the whole thing makes the police seem a mix of incompetent bunglers, bureaucratically castrated, flush with their own power and infrequently useful.

    I'm surprised the police are so happy to have their inability to get cases successfully prosecuted made common knowledge... how many times have they shown people with drugs get off with (at most) a suspended sentence?

    I would agree the show is irresponsible but if the police want to come across as regularly inept, incompetent, iniquitous and impotent - I suppose that's their decision. 
    I think you are being a little harsh. The police appear to be more frustrated by the ineptitude of the CPS rather that of their own although all those on tonight's programme did get their just deserts.

    Reply to this message 6

    Report message6

  • Message 7

    , in reply to message 6.

    Posted by Prophet Tenebrae (U5995226) on Monday, 2nd September 2013

    It has been asked before... honestly, I feel as though the whole thing makes the police seem a mix of incompetent bunglers, bureaucratically castrated, flush with their own power and infrequently useful.

    I'm surprised the police are so happy to have their inability to get cases successfully prosecuted made common knowledge... how many times have they shown people with drugs get off with (at most) a suspended sentence?

    I would agree the show is irresponsible but if the police want to come across as regularly inept, incompetent, iniquitous and impotent - I suppose that's their decision. 
    I think you are being a little harsh. The police appear to be more frustrated by the ineptitude of the CPS rather that of their own although all those on tonight's programme did get their just deserts. 
    Me? Being harsh? That doesn't sound like me...

    And yes, you can't blame the police for the CPS's failure (or disinterest) to prosecute a case but the point remains that it will make it seem to some that they can behave dangerously and illegally and get off scot dangerously.

    Reply to this message 7

    Report message7

  • Message 8

    , in reply to message 7.

    Posted by GaryB007 (U3895241) on Monday, 2nd September 2013

    It always amazes me that driving with no insurance seems to attract such a trivial penalty. It should be on a par with drink driving and result in a ban.

    Also, I'm surprised at the police calling those they have caught "buddy", etc. I know they want to avoid conflict, but this is going too far. The Thames Valley Police portrayed on Pick TV's equivalent programme are much more harsh, quite rightly IMO.

    Reply to this message 8

    Report message8

  • Message 9

    , in reply to message 8.

    Posted by megamain (U12800305) on Tuesday, 3rd September 2013

    If it gets to the stage where a driver looks like he would happily plough down a bus stop full of people to escape then surely the police should abandon the pursuit. Fortunately most criminals just want to escape being caught, rather than add death by dangerous driving to their list of offences.

    Reply to this message 9

    Report message9

  • Message 10

    , in reply to message 7.

    Posted by Jeff (U13971268) on Tuesday, 3rd September 2013

    And yes, you can't blame the police for the CPS's failure (or disinterest) to prosecute a case 
    Of course the CPS should be disinterested. Their job is to analyse facts to see if a prosecution could succeed, not to take sides.

    Reply to this message 10

    Report message10

  • Message 11

    , in reply to message 10.

    Posted by the_cleaner (U3423083) on Tuesday, 3rd September 2013

    Did like the Weed Van Chase.smiley - yikes


    And that Guy pleading his innocence - with the stolen watch in his pocket.smiley - laugh

    Reply to this message 11

    Report message11

  • Message 12

    , in reply to message 2.

    Posted by Tafkaj (U3674656) on Tuesday, 3rd September 2013

    Did you notice how old the events actually were? The TV listings don't show this to be a repeat, but I noticed that the tax disc on one police car expired on January 2011, so the case (forgotten which one it was) was about three years old.

    Reply to this message 12

    Report message12

  • Message 13

    , in reply to message 12.

    Posted by GaryB007 (U3895241) on Tuesday, 3rd September 2013

    I haven't seen it before and I usually watch these.

    They probably had to delay it due to an ongoing court case or something similar.

    Reply to this message 13

    Report message13

  • Message 14

    , in reply to message 4.

    Posted by st3ph3n (U13643748) on Tuesday, 3rd September 2013

    I can understand pixelation particularly before someone is proven guilty but one minute covering a person's identity then the next showing them in their full glory seems a little contradictive (is that a word?).

    I actually like these type if programmes as they give a human side to the police. I do however get a bit twitchy with annoyance when the "baddy" gets away. 
    When they show the face of a suspect, I think it is when he/she has been found guilty later.
    If the suspect is eventually found NOT guilty or 'no charge' being applied (after arrest) then I think they have to pixilate. It happens with car number-plates as well.
    What niggles me is when a suspect / driver / drunk gives the police loads of grief and abuse or violence, they get pixillated if it goes no further.
    I watched a driver that lied about his identity, gave loads of abuse to the officer and had a problem with his licence. For some reason his face was pixed !

    Reply to this message 14

    Report message14

  • Message 15

    , in reply to message 8.

    Posted by BooBoo2 (U1168789) on Tuesday, 3rd September 2013

    Did you notice how old the events actually were? The TV listings don't show this to be a repeat, but I noticed that the tax disc on one police car expired on January 2011, so the case (forgotten which one it was) was about three years old.  

    Actually I prefer the events depicted to be out of date so that we can at least put a face to the idiots breaking the law. On other programmes all the non-police "participants" are pixelated which makes poor viewing and the "crims" just blur into one (pun intended).


    Of course the CPS should be disinterested. Their job is to analyse facts to see if a prosecution could succeed, not to take sides  


    In an ideal world perhaps but in reality they also consider resources and costs of prosecution. How many times have we seen on these shows somebody banged to rights and all evidentially caught on film for us to be told at the end of the programme that the CPS decided not to pursue the case. It can be terribly frustrating for the law biding amongst us.



    It always amazes me that driving with no insurance seems to attract such a trivial penalty. It should be on a par with drink driving and result in a ban.  

    Totally agree. However I think the police are now able to seize the offender’s car and more often than not it ends up as a compressed metal cube in a scrap metal yard. I guess the offender simply buys another £50 old banger to indulge his law breaking. Unfortunately large swathes of society prefer to live like the wild west, the rest of us pick-up the bill under our insurances.



    Back to my original point …. there has to be a balance between being informative and being too candid. Many criminals are not blessed with an intellect to understands the repercussions of their actions so if a cop says that they abort a chase when the criminal takes too many risks then one assumes that too many risks will be taken. Perhaps they should double bluff the criminal and say that police will abort when the criminal stops his vehicle and comes out with his hands up, it could be worth a try smiley - winkeye.

    Reply to this message 15

    Report message15

  • Message 16

    , in reply to message 15.

    Posted by GaryB007 (U3895241) on Monday, 9th September 2013

    Voice over man is still referring to "the fast lane", something that doesn't exist.

    Reply to this message 16

    Report message16

  • Message 17

    , in reply to message 15.

    Posted by chlest (U15835294) on Monday, 9th September 2013

    9/9/13 motorway cops

    Why does the narrator keep referring to a criminal in a VW Golf GT as driving a Golf GTI?

    they're totally different cars. He might as well call it a VW beetle.

    If the makers of this programme want to be so specific they should get the details right at least.

    are the BBC trying to demonise Golf GTI drivers as reckless?



    Channel 5's Police interceptors is better.

    Reply to this message 17

    Report message17

  • Message 18

    , in reply to message 17.

    Posted by GaryB007 (U3895241) on Monday, 9th September 2013

    One good thing about Police Interceptors is that they don't flip between the various stories anywhere near as much as Motorway Cops. The BBC could learn a little from C5 here (just for a change).

    Reply to this message 18

    Report message18

  • Message 19

    , in reply to message 18.

    Posted by jodie (U14366548) on Monday, 9th September 2013

    A couple of years a go people complained about how events/stories in these types of programmes would run then be paused then another even/story would start only to be paused then the previous story would start again.
    This went on Point of view where Jeremy Vine put the complaints to some bloke who said he took the complaints on board and they'd stop do it but, it's still happening.
    Sort it out ..


    What happened to the elderly man who wanted to get to Holland ?
    Ruddy neighbour came round so i missed the last 10 minutes .

    Reply to this message 19

    Report message19

  • Message 20

    , in reply to message 19.

    Posted by VF (U5759986) on Monday, 9th September 2013

    He died in Holland...

    Reply to this message 20

    Report message20

  • Message 21

    , in reply to message 20.

    Posted by jodie (U14366548) on Tuesday, 10th September 2013

    I had to watch the end on iplayer after reading your post & i was so sad to hear what happened but as stated at the end of the programme He died amongst friends.

    Reply to this message 21

    Report message21

  • Message 22

    , in reply to message 1.

    Posted by Penn (U10777282) on Tuesday, 10th September 2013

    I always remember an episode of "the Thin Blue Line" where a television crew were following the police at their station. David Hain had me in stitches, I don't know if anyone remembers this. Anyway, this is all becoming too true now with these programs.

    Reply to this message 22

    Report message22

  • Message 23

    , in reply to message 17.

    Posted by the_cleaner (U3423083) on Tuesday, 10th September 2013

    9/9/13 motorway cops

    Why does the narrator keep referring to a criminal in a VW Golf GT as driving a Golf GTI?

    they're totally different cars. He might as well call it a VW beetle.

    If the makers of this programme want to be so specific they should get the details right at least.

    are the BBC trying to demonise Golf GTI drivers as reckless?



    Channel 5's Police interceptors is better. 
    The Golf chase started a Mile from where I live.smiley - yikes


    Sad about Bill at the end.smiley - sadface...but he was determined to get to Holland.

    The Woman in the 'outside' lane - could happen to anyone.
    And that Nut, with a Nut missing on his Wheel, with the Kids.smiley - doh

    +++
    Breaking up the stories, is fine by me - can't see what the problem is.
    And why should they do what other programmes do, then there would be moans, it's just like the others.

    Reply to this message 23

    Report message23

  • Message 24

    , in reply to message 23.

    Posted by suffolkman (U15835899) on Tuesday, 10th September 2013

    Taking aside all the other points made about this programme I think last nights episode did a wonderful job of highlighting what a proportion of the good old general public have degenerated into!!
    Drivers giving abuse to two police officers trying to help the woman broken down in the fast lane ! And the amount of people filming the three car crash on mobile phones etc !
    What happened to respect for people be they in uniform as police or as people involved in a traumatic accident!
    Is it no wonder that the "criminal element" of society act the way they do when this is what the "general public" are like

    Reply to this message 24

    Report message24

  • Message 25

    , in reply to message 24.

    Posted by jannemieke (U9267858) on Tuesday, 10th September 2013

    Taking aside all the other points made about this programme I think last nights episode did a wonderful job of highlighting what a proportion of the good old general public have degenerated into!!
    Drivers giving abuse to two police officers trying to help the woman broken down in the fast lane ! And the amount of people filming the three car crash on mobile phones etc !
    What happened to respect for people be they in uniform as police or as people involved in a traumatic accident!
    Is it no wonder that the "criminal element" of society act the way they do when this is what the "general public" are like

     



    Some of the men are really pathetic, they know they've been caught but as cowardly idiots they make up the most stupid stories and the police have to remain calm and polite. If they see themselves on screen, are they not deeply ashamed? The punishments they get are not always hard, they should get higher fines.

    Reply to this message 25

    Report message25

  • Message 26

    , in reply to message 4.

    Posted by TomcatRed (U8418886) on Tuesday, 10th September 2013

    I can understand pixelation particularly before someone is proven guilty but one minute covering a person's identity then the next showing them in their full glory seems a little contradictive (is that a word?).  Are you sure that this happened?

    Please state at what point in the programme and I will have a look on the iPlayer (didn't see the show)

    Reply to this message 26

    Report message26

  • Message 27

    , in reply to message 26.

    Posted by FireChief (U14317872) on Tuesday, 10th September 2013

    Most of the time these car stealers or runners are banned anyway. What's the point of giving them a further ban as punishment. They'll just drive whatever they're given.

    Any pursuit is risky. Both for the public and the criminal. So to stop anyone "running" away from the police, if caught using helicopters, a mandatory punishment of 5 years in prison should be handed down.

    The passenger always seems to get away with any charges. Why not charge them assisting a crime.

    There is a common problem with this police work. The punishments handed down at the end of the programme are always too soft. The thugs must watch these programmes and scoff at how lenient the law is. No deterrent.

    Reply to this message 27

    Report message27

  • Message 28

    , in reply to message 8.

    Posted by Seasick Stevie (U14284749) on Wednesday, 11th September 2013

    It always amazes me that driving with no insurance seems to attract such a trivial penalty. It should be on a par with drink driving and result in a ban. 

    The penalty should depend of the circumstances why the vehicle/driver isn't insured. Obviously the characters in these programs are deliberately either avoiding paying for insurance or are uninsurable for some reason.

    However I've got three insurance policies on three separate vehicles, but was stopped for no insurance. It cost me in total several thousand pounds with six points on my license. I was effectively dealt with as a criminal for the results of a simple clerical error, even though I hadn't avoided any payment of any insurance. In fact all my insurance policies were paid up to date.

    The insurance company wouldn't accept that it was their error, as I had not informed them that I had maximum no-claims-bonus with my previous insurer so had cancelled one of my policies. They'd written to me, but I hadn't read the letter . . . How's that for justice?

    Reply to this message 28

    Report message28

  • Message 29

    , in reply to message 27.

    Posted by Vox_Populi (U3226170) on Wednesday, 11th September 2013

    Most of the time these car stealers or runners are banned anyway. What's the point of giving them a further ban as punishment. They'll just drive whatever they're given.

    Any pursuit is risky. Both for the public and the criminal. So to stop anyone "running" away from the police, if caught using helicopters, a mandatory punishment of 5 years in prison should be handed down.

    The passenger always seems to get away with any charges. Why not charge them assisting a crime.

    There is a common problem with this police work. The punishments handed down at the end of the programme are always too soft. The thugs must watch these programmes and scoff at how lenient the law is. No deterrent. 
    You're spot on FC, I've always reckoned that fleeing from the Police in or on a motor vehicle should carry a mandatory sentence.
    5 years would seem about right, then add the other offences, like no insurance, no licence, etc. etc say about 5 years for each offence and just total them up, it's not difficult and it's fair.
    I reckon the Police have a difficult job sometimes, especially when it comes to Friday and Saturday nights with the drunks.

    Reply to this message 29

    Report message29

  • Message 30

    , in reply to message 26.

    Posted by BooBoo2 (U1168789) on Thursday, 12th September 2013

    I can understand pixelation particularly before someone is proven guilty but one minute covering a person's identity then the next showing them in their full glory seems a little contradictive (is that a word?).  Are you sure that this happened?

    Please state at what point in the programme and I will have a look on the iPlayer (didn't see the show) 
    Episode 1 - Chap with bald head and olive skin driving the van at the beginning of the programme .... pixelated selectively.

    Reply to this message 30

    Report message30

  • Message 31

    , in reply to message 30.

    Posted by the_cleaner (U3423083) on Thursday, 12th September 2013

    I can understand pixelation particularly before someone is proven guilty but one minute covering a person's identity then the next showing them in their full glory seems a little contradictive (is that a word?).  Are you sure that this happened?

    Please state at what point in the programme and I will have a look on the iPlayer (didn't see the show) 
    Episode 1 - Chap with bald head and olive skin driving the van at the beginning of the programme .... pixelated selectively. 
    Does it really matter.

    And was it the same guy.smiley - erm

    Reply to this message 31

    Report message31

  • Message 32

    , in reply to message 31.

    Posted by BooBoo2 (U1168789) on Thursday, 12th September 2013

    I can understand pixelation particularly before someone is proven guilty but one minute covering a person's identity then the next showing them in their full glory seems a little contradictive (is that a word?).  Are you sure that this happened?

    Please state at what point in the programme and I will have a look on the iPlayer (didn't see the show) 
    Episode 1 - Chap with bald head and olive skin driving the van at the beginning of the programme .... pixelated selectively. 
    Does it really matter.

    And was it the same guy.smiley - erm 
    No it doesn't matter .... just answering a question ..... and yes it was the same guy.

    Reply to this message 32

    Report message32

  • Message 33

    , in reply to message 20.

    Posted by Logans Run (U13830424) on Thursday, 12th September 2013

    The old chap,as nice as he was,should never have been allowed to drive to Holland.He couldn't drive the hire car properly and in my opinion should have been give a eye sight test at the road. It may have been the stress of getting to Holland that resulted in his death for all we know.Rest in peace to the old soldier.

    Reply to this message 33

    Report message33

  • Message 34

    , in reply to message 33.

    Posted by zelda (U2012536) on Thursday, 12th September 2013

    The old chap,as nice as he was,should never have been allowed to drive to Holland.He couldn't drive the hire car properly and in my opinion should have been give a eye sight test at the road. It may have been the stress of getting to Holland that resulted in his death for all we know.Rest in peace to the old soldier.  I did think that the police went way beyond the call of duty for the very elderly gent. Very sad he died in Holland but maybe that is what he may have wanted? Just one more time to revisit his old mates and memories. RIP to him.

    Reply to this message 34

    Report message34

  • Message 35

    , in reply to message 34.

    Posted by Tafkaj (U3674656) on Tuesday, 17th September 2013

    This series ought to be cancelled for being off-topic ...

    It's called Motorway Cops, but last night's episode spent most of its time following drug busts or abduction attempts in the city centre.

    Why can't we go so off-topic on these boards if BBC programmes are allowed to do so? It's advertised as Motorway Cops but would be more accurately renamed City Centre Cops, or Drug Busting Cops, or some such.

    Reply to this message 35

    Report message35

  • Message 36

    , in reply to message 35.

    Posted by Peta (U24) on Tuesday, 17th September 2013

    That's the most obscure rationale for 'why you should be allowed to go off topic on a message board', that I've ever seen. smiley - biggrin

    Reply to this message 36

    Report message36

  • Message 37

    , in reply to message 36.

    Posted by Tafkaj (U3674656) on Tuesday, 17th September 2013

    smiley - laugh

    Then I'm clearly not trying hard enough!

    Reply to this message 37

    Report message37

Back to top

About this Board

The Points of View team invite you to discuss BBC Television programmes.

Add basic Smileys or extra Smileys to your posts.

Questions? Check the BBC FAQ for answers first!

Go to: BBC News Have your say to discuss topics in the news

Make a complaint? Go to the BBC complaints website.

BBC News: Off-topic for this board, so contact them directly with your feedback: Contact BBC News

or register to take part in a discussion.



Mon-Sat: 0900-2300
Sun: 1000-2300

This messageboard is reactively moderated.

Find out more about this board's House Rules

Search this Board

Recent Discussions

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.