Uninsured Driver Flees A Car Crash | Motorway Cops: Catching Britain's Speeders | Channel 5
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 1 янв 2023
- After dialling 999, the cops are surprised to find that the caller ha fled the scene. It can only mean that there's something to hide...
Motorway Cops: Catching Britain's Speeders: Documentary series following the work of the traffic police as they enforce the law on some of Britain's busiest and most dangerous roads.
Subscribe to Channel 5 for more: bit.ly/35P9Rz7
Watch this and more Full Episodes on My5: tinyurl.com/y5fvp6ly
Download the My5 App:
App Store: apple.co/2sHmfTx
Google Play: bit.ly/2LjieuK
More from Channel 5:
Like: / channel5uk
Follow: / channel5_tv
Instagram: / channel5_tv
Channel 5 is home to your favourite TV Shows, Drama, Documentaries, History, Sports and Soaps; everything you are looking for is here!
You can find whole episodes and box sets on www.my5.tv/
#Channel5 #MotorwayCops 
Развлечения
“Think I’ve got whiplash” bloke wanted his money 😂
Needed that money to pay his fines & court fees 🤣😂
He'd have done well to actually have insurance then if that was his plan.
@@tomsixsix Still got the drinking charge and insurance goes through the roof after his ban is over
He crashes a car, then goes and attempts to hire another car? Revoke his license
For life
@@ianpennington5856 also fine him alot of money that cost him a place to live & a job to work at for life cuz he be homeless
Ban more like .. he could have killed them people and wasting our Police time
I mean best bit, depending on what he blew in custody, he probably wouldn't of got charged. Legal limit is 35 but different forces charge at different rates. The met only charge 40 plus I'm sure
In 20 years ive crashed 3 cars, should i be banned aswell?
I got hit off of my motorbike by a drugged up driver with no driving license & therefore no insurance or tax. Broke my back in 2 places, dislocated & shattered by shoulder. He got a driving ban for a year (what does that matter, he never had a licence before what would stop him in the future)? and like £600 fine. That's it. For breaking my back and smashing my shoulder. It's disgusting. These need harsher punishments.
You never see the inspector until the tv turn up.
He was surely just buying time for the alcohol to leave his system. He blew 36, so very likely by the time he gave abbé identical reading it was 35 or lower
You just know he’s gone down the station, blew 34 on the machine and got away with the drink driving charge
Think you'll find that due to the length of time between the colission occuring and them catching him that any decent solicitor worth their salt would be bringing up the fact that the police can't prove when he consumed alcohol and that the alcohol in his system could easily have been consumed after the incident.
@@ndvrgnt_hikikomori Poor reasoning tbh. Easily debunked.
Surely it doesn't warrant police sirens and blue lights ? No car insurance throw the book at him !
I really don't understand how there are any uninsured drivers on UK roads these days. Surely we have the technology to stop that happening very easily with the camera network that we have over the UK roads?
That’s what already happens. But the police can’t be everywhere at the same time.
@@johnb8956 Oh I'm not blaming the police at all, just feels like our tech could have found a way around this by now. If they are in a car park and an ANPR system picks them up on the way in then the exact location of the car is known so we can send in a recovery truck to seize it.
Really you need a division which is part police and part DVLA. I would guess that the main issue is that the police likely can't justify spending much time on the problem as an uninsured driver isn't a problem until they hit someone.
@@sinthariasinestra9777 Seizing and crushing a car doesn't need to involve the courts. The police already have that power.
Cameras dont detect number plates... ANPR does
@@KentRoads That's why I mentioned it in my comments above 3 months ago 🙂
It would be a great use of the ANPR system. Automatic car collection like the DVLA started doing for car tax years ago. Imagine someone drives to the shops and parks their car, by the time they've finished shopping they come out to an empty space with a note to say their car has been seized and will be crushed.
Zero excuse, zero tolerance.
Imagine how much money it is costing the rest of us on our insurance each year.
I love this show
Blowing 36 1 1/2 hours later, I’m going to guess he got away with “Over The Prescribed Limit”, but hopefully there was a “Field Impairment Test” performed at the station after evidential breath test that showed impairment.
Methinks he knew what he was doing
I think the wife knew too i reckon she knew he wasn't going to the hospital but sent the cops there to give him more time for his alcohol level to come down, she should be done for perverting the course of justice.
@@Iori.Thomas Would never ever get charged, not in a month of Sundays. All she has to do is say "that's what he told me". The onus is on the prosecution to PROVE beyond all reasonable doubt that she knew he wasn't. They can't realistically prove that. Any half decent defence barrister would put so much doubt into the jury's mind they'd have no choice but to find her not guilty.
@@thefiestaguy8831 never said he would however it still doesn't justify drink driving then leaving a scene of a collision. Nothing you can say can justify drink driving and to be honest it kind of sounds like your trying to justify what he did if you had people you love and care about die because of a drink driver which i hope you never have to go through, you would not be saying what your saying yes he may get off but that doesn't justify him and his wife lying to the police and endangering other people's lives and the fact he then went to hire another vehicle shows you his lack of concern for anyone else on the road.
@@Iori.Thomas I think you've got the wrong end of the stick or can't read properly. I didn't once justify his actions which are not excusable. I simply said she wouldn't be charged with the offence in a month of Sundays because they have to prove everything, and she has to prove nothing. They can't realistically prove it.
Please tell me what part of that comment justifies his actions?
It's a blood or urine test much more precise but time limited if he takes another 30 minutes he might be in the clear
Shockingly inresponible. Ban him for life.
Great job done by the police.
If I remember correctly, wasn't the other driver unlicensed or something not passed test??
I think the tape has been cut early
There was definitely no need to blue light it to A&E 🙄.
Unfortunately he'll probably get a £500/800 fine for the insurance which is still less than the policy which probably would have started at £1000, The drink is a ban,point's of his licence and £500 fine
Did they do a count back?
Since he’s been out of sight for some time then unless he made admissions that he hadn’t drank alcohol since the incident he could realistically claim that he’d had a drink to numb the pain from the crash.
Obviously police always ask when your last drink was, as they need to wait 20 minutes after last drink, so just depends if he was clever enough to say he drank something
Any injuries.. errrm think ive got a bit of whiplash ££££
If other police officer are already with the bloke are the blues really necessary?
Yes.
No lol
Yes, because he can get there quicker and then resolve the matter more quickly, freeing up the resources to go on to other jobs.
@@cambs0181 not really. He wasnt needed in the first instance.
@@cambs0181 that's not how thr laws on the of blue lights work though. They are for use when attending an emergency only as they create risk and hazard by thier use. The trade off was decided not worth it in anything other than responding to an emergency and that why the laws were made that way. I'm not saying your point isn't a valid opinion, but as the police like to say all the time, the law is the law. Ambulances only use blue lights on high risk calls or when they have a patient onboard who is at high risk of dying. They don't just drive around with blue lights on all the time so it's quicker to free up resources, wether they should or not with the shortage of Ambulances we have, is another matter. But there's always going to be the arguement of if someone dies in a collision due the use of blue lights when there wasn't a risk to life was it worth it.
Ahh this is Inspector Anton. Does everyone he comes across except two Lord's of the realm. Talk about Double standard's.
Drink driver's should get a lifetime ban and if they are caught driving ten years in prison I have seen the consequences of drinking and driving and it is not pretty.
My rule I don't touch alcohol for a minimum of Forty eight hours before driving
Surely with today’s technology there’s got to be away breath tests can be backdated to give a accurate reading of what it would’ve been an hour or so a go.
If you run from a crash and are caught within a short time, and fail the breathalyser by just over the legal limit. It’s pretty obvious that if he’d been breathalysed at the scene, he would have a lot more over the legal limit.
By the time he gets to station you can bet that he’ll not fail the the stations breathalyser.
The only way to stop this is to change the law and make it an offence to drive with any in alcohol in you bloodstream, and if caught driving with alcohol in you bloodstream, you should be banned for life.
I believe count back calculations are already done in come cases.