Ambulance driver being prosecuted for speeding!

[Rilot]

BBC news artical
Crown prosecutors say a vehicle carrying vital transplant organs does not qualify as an ambulance - and have charged an ambulance driver with speeding after he was clocked at 104mph.
West Yorkshire driver Mike Ferguson was rushing a liver from Leeds to Cambridge for an emergency transplant when he was caught.

Both Cambridgeshire and Lincolnshire Police recorded the ambulance speeding on the A1 in the early hours of the morning of 16 January.

Mr Ferguson, who has an unblemished record of 36 years service, was in an official vehicle with blue lights flashing. Traffic was light and road conditions were understood to be good.

'Dangerous precedent'

While Cambridgeshire officers have not taken any action, their counterparts in Lincolnshire charged Mr Ferguson.

Mr Ferguson told BBC News Online: " I was just doing my job, but the police have a differing point of view."

And he added: "I was asked to move an organ as soon as possible.

"I didn't know the condition of the organ, or the recipient."

Lincolnshire Police referred inquiries to the Crown Prosecution Service.

"Not an emergency"

Alison Kerr, the chief Crown Prosecutor for Lincolnshire told BBC News Online: "Having looked at all the facts, the CPS believes that this was not a medical emergency, and therefore should be put before the court for them to decide.

"As the law stands a vehicle does not qualify as an ambulance if it is carrying transplant organs."

Mr Ferguson's union, the GMB, has taken up his case, saying in a statement that he was acting routinely to deliver the organ in time.

Union spokesman John Durkin said the case could set a dangerous precedent.

He said: "If certain police forces say that drivers risk prosecution, then do they have the right to say who will survive these life-saving operations?

"I don't want that on my conscience."

Unison, the biggest union representing ambulance workers, has called for an urgent review of legislation to take the burden of responsibility off individuals in life-or-death situations.

Mr Ferguson's case at Grantham Magistrates' Court has been deferred at the request of the defence solicitor.

I think this is disgusting. I cannot believe that the CPS are even persuing this case. This country has gone anti speed mad.

I've just been listening to Jeremy Vine on Radio2. He is interviewing the driver and a representative from BRAKE. The woman from BRAKE is a flippin fanatic. All she cares about is reducing speed. She says, speed is the biggest killer on UK roads and she also thinks that killing speeding is the be all and end of road safety.

Why don't they ask the transplant patient if he thinks the driver should be prosecuted?

 

[orient]

Saw it on the news about noon, and i just couldnt quite understand it? Blue lights flashing, obvious emergancy why should speeding be classed as a hazard in this case, people were moving out of the way, he wouldnt have been doing a ton down EVERY road, just long straight ones surely

Would you stop the army/navy/air force from speeding if a bomb threat or similar had been warned? NO! surely it should be the same/similar for saving a life (especially if its your job).

 

[G-Man]

@ this countries law < think that sums up my feelings on this matter.

 

[schnipps]

Originally posted by Rilot
I think this is disgusting. I cannot believe that the CPS are even persuing this case. This country has gone anti speed mad.

I've just been listening to Jeremy Vine on Radio2. He is interviewing the driver and a representative from BRAKE. The woman from BRAKE is a flippin fanatic. All she cares about is reducing speed. She says, speed is the biggest killer on UK roads and she also thinks that killing speeding is the be all and end of road safety.

Why don't they ask the transplant patient if he thinks the driver should be prosecuted?

Spot on, I would love for someone to fit a speed measuring device to that womans car and monitor her speed over a month without her knowing. Bit like a tacograph that HGV's have. Id bet heavily that she breaks the limit now and again. Its a load of honk.

Actually saying that she probably has never even driven

 

[James_N]

bloody ridiculous imo

next they are going to say that house fires and stuff like this arent emergancies.

@ this country

 

[barkingboy]

What is likely to happen to this chap as far as his licence / punishment / job is concerned?

 

[ShadowMan]

if he's convicted, the >100mph speed indicates an immediate 3 year ban. this would cause him to lose his job as it sounds like he drives for a living. he could also be heavily fined which woulb be wrong as it was what he's meant to do. the liver could have deteriorated if he'd gone much slower so he should have been going as fast as he safely can.

hopefully he'll be fine.

 

[Kitchster_uk]

I wonder what that daft bint would have said if it was her or a child of hers waiting for the transplant? This guy was doing his job, th car is well fettled as far as brakes, tyres and suspention is concerned and is capable of the speeds he was doing. It had it's lights on so what's the problem?

Oh wait, he drives a car so he must have horns on his head and a fetish for torturing small animals....

 

[Slime101]

Its bloody disgusting how they thing they can prosecute a man who was involved in saving lives.

 

[blun]

Originally posted by ShadowMan
if he's convicted, the >100mph speed indicates an immediate 3 year ban.

I dont think it would be a 3 year ban, hopefully no ban at all if/when they realise the error of their ways.

 

[asix]

that is so rediculios i wondered if it was aipril 1st for a moment... im sure a jundge will see mitigatign sercomstanses and be leaniant... well i hope so any way.

 

[Rilot]

Originally posted by Kitchster_uk
I wonder what that daft bint would have said if it was her or a child of hers waiting for the transplant

This was asked of the BRAKE woman by the ambulance driver. The response was something along the lines of not wanting the driver to speed thus endangering other peoples lives. She also said that it was almost certain that he would have crashed if he had been driving for much longer and as such the transplant would have been destroyed in the crash.

I love the attitude of BRAKE.

If you break the speed limit by as much as 1mph you WILL crash and you WILL die and you WILL kill a child.

So from this you can infer that if you always drive 1mph below the limit you will NEVER kill anyone no matter how you drive. Roundabouts on a dual carrdgeway? No problem, I was doing 69mph. Sleet and hail at night down a twisty road? No problem, I was doing 59mph. Hit a child? No problem, the child will live as I was doing 29mph. We all know that chocolate and flowers grow out of the front of your car is you hit a child at 29mph.

If swearing were allowed on this forum I'd be doing it a lot right now.

******* boils my blood

 

[Lowe]

This country seems to be spiralling into a pit of "jobsworth" Police crap.

I can't believe they are even trying to prosecute the driver.

 

[A]

discusting this, i hate BRAKE and THINK people with vengence, all it takes it some common sense.

 

[[TW]Fox]

Anyone who thinks a trained advanced driver on the A1 (Dual Carriageway) in a car with flashing blue lights and a siren at 3:33am in the morning travelling at 104mph is more dangerous than Mr Average at 60mph at 3:33pm in the afternoon (Little angels as far as the 'tards from Brake are concerned) is a complete an utter idiot.

 

[kaiowas]

Originally posted by ShadowMan
if he's convicted, the >100mph speed indicates an immediate 3 year ban. this would cause him to lose his job as it sounds like he drives for a living. he could also be heavily fined which woulb be wrong as it was what he's meant to do. the liver could have deteriorated if he'd gone much slower so he should have been going as fast as he safely can.

hopefully he'll be fine.

Unlikely he'd be treated that harshly. Normally 100+ would be an almost certain ban (although not for anywhere like 3 years). In this case he should be able to plead that his livelyhood depends on being able to drive and and will almost certainly avoid a ban at the expense of a fine.

Of course the above assumes that the judge is a senile old duffer without the common sense to throw the whole thing out of court although I'd say that the publicity this has received will dramitically increase the odds of him getting off either completely or with token punishment depending on how much flexibility the law provides.

 

[MajikNWA]

Absolutely disgusting. The force pressing charges should hang their heads in shame. I can only hope that someone in power with their head screwed on steps in and quashes this before it goes too far, and the force pays the driver for inconvenience.

Majik

 

[Gilly]

Originally posted by MajikNWA
Absolutely disgusting. The force pressing charges should hang their heads in shame. I can only hope that someone in power with their head screwed on steps in and quashes this before it goes too far, and the force pays the driver for inconvenience.

Well and truly agreed.

This sort of thing really gets on my wick.

I'd like this woman from BRAKE to be interviewed by the users of this forum. Her slewed take on the road users of today would be sorted out sharpish.

 

[A]

Dept of Transport has said it sees no need for the charges, yet its the at the discretion of the courts/prosecutors too decide what to do.

 

[[TW]Fox]

These Brake and Think! campaigns are pathetic. Seen the one at TV at the moment?

'At 35mph, it will take an extra 21 feet to stop'.

Errr, no. That's blatantly incorrect. Are they seriously trying to get us to beleive that whether you drive a Fiesta 1.25 with drum brakes or a Subaru Impreza WRX STi with vented high performance disc brakes, you'll take an extra 21 feet to stop?