Langham

[richardb]

Turned on the BBC news tonight to be confronted by a lot of coverage of the closing stages of Langham's trial. Couldn't help noticing that one of the police officers making a press statement was Inspector Derek Cuff who was a CH from 71-78(?)

[Richard Ruck]

Turned on the BBC news tonight to be confronted by a lot of coverage of the closing stages of Langham's trial. Couldn't help noticing that one of the police officers making a press statement was Inspector Derek Cuff who was a CH from 71-78(?)

Inspector??

Last I heard he was a sargeant in Crawley!

I also remember Dave Elliott chucking him out of the band.....

[Mid A 15]

Having read this thread and registered the name he popped up on the 9pm news on Radio 5 live last night making a statement.

[sejintenej]

Turned on the BBC news tonight to be confronted by a lot of coverage of the closing stages of Langham's trial. Couldn't help noticing that one of the police officers making a press statement was Inspector Derek Cuff who was a CH from 71-78(?)

Inspector??

Last I heard he was a sargeant in Crawley!

I also remember Dave Elliott chucking him out of the band.....

I wonder why......


I realise that there are considerably more than 200 police officers presently serving and that Derek Cuff is probably as innocent as new blown snow but this exchange made me thing of an article in The Times about what you are not supposed to know including

»Two hundred serving police officers have criminal records for offences that include assault, breach of the peace, theft and vandalism.

and

Documents suggested that one in 15 officers has broken the law

Referring to the latter I remember an interview with a senior police officer who opined that the average person has broken 30 laws before he/she gets to the office each morning. My thought was "why are you sitting there spouting off and not out on the street arresting everyone going to their place of employment and make the courts work for their living."

[englishangel]

Of course if you do 31 mph in a 30mph area you are breaking the law, and even though it is not 'against the law' if you check your hair/teeth/shave in the rear view mirror while driving you could be done for driving without due care and attention.

Had a drink the night before and hungover, you may still be 'over the limit' and even if you ate not, if you have an accident you can still be done for driving under the influence, ditto with some medications.

It is very easy to 'break the law'. (and that is just while driving.)

[sejintenej]

you can still be done for driving under the influence, ditto with some medications.

This is what is getting me worried. Having asthma I take prescribed medication daily; it is clearly stated as OK when using machinery, driving etc. I also have to take anti-histamine but in a form which the manufacturers state is non-drowsiness forming. I have never had any apparent (to me) side effects and none of at least six prescribing doctors and consultants have mentioned the driving aspect.

OTOH from the latest police statement on TV, if you are caught driving and you have ANY medication (even if prescribed) in your system then they will automatically do you.
Of course in court the police will simply state that the driver was a) under the effect of medication and b) unfit to drive. Who will the jury believe - the police officer or the drug manufacturers who state that their drugs have no such side effects?

I suggest that this is a George Brown way to get drivers off the road so they don't have to improve them, impose greater and greater fines and reduce greenhouse gases.

[J.R.]

........ but do certain prescribed medications make you down-load material of an unsavorary nature ?