Déjà vu as Metropolitan Police decline to prosecute red light jumping driver (+ video)

Different Cops unfortunately. And even then he probably jumped through several hoops to get it. 

lukei1 wrote:

Yup, similar has happened to me. The Met seem to palm off any case that they don't consider a 100% chance of victory at Magistrates Court. They have basically told me the driver needs to have a solid 2 seconds or so of red light, otherwise they might be let off. I've even sent in video of a Coach jumping a red light and that was not actioned, it just seems so soft-touch for an offence that is so blatant, everyone knows its wrong.

The traffic light will already have been on Amber for three seconds, with green extinguished. The Amber phase is precisely to allow for reaction time and so on, it does not need to be allotted a second time over within the red phase. The courts are making up the law, which is not their role.

 The courts are making up the law, which is not their role.

I think it's more that they're trying to let driver off, because they're drivers and want to crash through red lights themselves. The lights shown on my picture below are indeed on amber for exactly 3 seconds, alhough I don't think they're all the same. The dangerous drivers view the amber light as a signal to speed up, so are often passing through the A6 lights below at 60+ mph

Sriracha wrote:

The traffic light will already have been on Amber for three seconds, with green extinguished. The Amber phase is precisely to allow for reaction time and so on, it does not need to be allotted a second time over within the red phase. The courts are making up the law, which is not their role.

"Yes, I know that's the stop line.

But, just in case, we'll put another stop line over here a bit further on.

And, just in case someone's not paying attention to that, we'll paint another one.

Will that do?"

Ludicrous. I thought that the 2 seconds of red light was coloured amber.....

Exactly. Highway Code: "AMBER means ‘Stop’ at the stop line. You may go on only if the AMBER appears after you have crossed the stop line or are so close to it that to pull up might cause an accident".

I submitted this video and was told the driver got a warning letter, despite it being 3s between the light turning red and him passing through.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ju_T4CSWtXE 

Ooooh, that's some seriously sqeeky brakes tou got there.

It's all rather depressing really. I'm not a vindeictive person and don't particularly want to see people punished, especially for genuine mistakes, but a moving car is a very dangerous thing and they kill 4 people per day in the UK so why don't the police take this sort of thing seriously? 

 I'm not a vindictive person and don't particularly want to see people punished

I am and do. I was not far from being terminated by an A6 driver coming through the red lights illustrated below at 60 mph. This is from one of the Loophole Lawyers Inc. websites:

The minimum penalty for running a red light is 3 points and a £100 fine (the points will remain on the driver’s licence for four years). Prosecution may occur where any part of a motor vehicle crosses the white line at a red traffic light. Increased penalties may be imposed to reflect more severe offences.

If it's left up to the police there will be no penalty at all. They have to be harassed by all means available, because the odds are highly stacked in favour of law breaking motorists. 

Don't misunderstand me, I would be the first one to want to see that person convicted and suitably sentenced, preferably with losing their licence. The point I was trying to make is that if the police don't take this sort of thing seriously it will only continue with the sort of consequences we all know about.