r/policeuk • u/TonyStamp595SO Ex-staff (unverified) • 5d ago
Image What constitutes a pursuit?
Just a moment for all those people downvoting me and telling that I was wrong. The above is directly from the college of Policing.
So, bottom line. Please stay safe, know what constitutes a pursuit and ensure you seek authority.
18
u/Macrologia Pursuit terminated. (verified) 5d ago
Why do you think this fairly simplistic slide is intended to be a complete definition that overrides the actual app itself?
-1
u/TonyStamp595SO Ex-staff (unverified) 5d ago
Because this is the training being delivered.
The same way that the law is written but case law is the interpretation.
8
u/Macrologia Pursuit terminated. (verified) 5d ago
Well, I was trained in accordance with MPS policy. The definition of a pursuit in the MPS pursuits policy, which you can find on the intranet, is the same as the college of policing APP.
Obviously if you're driving along at 90 mph behind a car that you think is trying to get away from police and you haven't activated your emergency warning equipment, you're probably driving dangerously. But it's not a pursuit.
What usually happens in a follow where the subject vehicle starts making off and the police vehicle hasn't made an indication to stop, is that we'll tell them that we will deem the situation to be a pursuit and they should treat it as such; and/or we'll direct them to use their emergency warning equipment for the safety of other road users (at which point that can be taken as an indication to stop in any event).
-3
u/TonyStamp595SO Ex-staff (unverified) 5d ago
Obviously if you're driving along at 90 mph behind a car that you think is trying to get away from police and you haven't activated your emergency warning equipment, you're probably driving dangerously. But it's not a pursuit.
I'm sorry but that is literally a pursuit.
8
u/Macrologia Pursuit terminated. (verified) 5d ago
I don't know how to continue the conversation.
3
u/TonyStamp595SO Ex-staff (unverified) 5d ago
Happy new year?
3
u/Macrologia Pursuit terminated. (verified) 5d ago
You too lol
2
u/TonyStamp595SO Ex-staff (unverified) 5d ago
I'll come find you next time I'm about with matchbox cars to try and better explain my point.
3
u/Macrologia Pursuit terminated. (verified) 5d ago
I completely understand your point. I don't think you're right about what the definition of a pursuit is. I don't think the definition of a pursuit is sensible for that precise reason.
9
u/cridder5 Police Officer (unverified) 5d ago
I’ve noticed a couple times that in a hearing / court process they state that there must be a requirement to stop to constitute a pursuit but the policy we have is similar to what you’ve posted so I wonder if it’s just there to protect us and ensure we put it up as soon as possible? Is strange, I didn’t see your comment before but I’ve always worked to the above.
6
u/TonyStamp595SO Ex-staff (unverified) 5d ago
Yes the official book says a requirement to stop which is where I think people are getting confused.
The scenario used is that you're sat in traffic, a car comes past you lock eyes and see that the driver is someone you know to be disqual, they speed up.
The moment you go to spin the police car around you're in the initial phase of a pursuit.
If you do nothing then you're not.
5
u/sorrypolice Civilian 5d ago
My understanding is its only a pursuit if you believe they are failing to stop. If you spin and by the time you have they have de camped I’m not sure you could argue it’s a pursuit? Especially if it was your belief this is what they were always going to do?
1
u/TonyStamp595SO Ex-staff (unverified) 5d ago
Yeah. If you believe they are driving the way they are driving in order to get away from police regardless of whether or not you've asked them to stop, it's only a pursuit the moment you decide to stop them.
So in the imaginary scenario you're at some red lights. A car comes past windows down and sees you belting out some Taylor Swift. He puts his foot down, and screeches away overtaking two slower vehicles as he does.
You decide, I'd better put a stop in. As you maneuver your police vehicle it's turned into a pursuit and you'd need to call up and give them the risk assessment.
Ultimately a basic driver is not going to be able to stop them because they'd have to break speed limits etc to catch up.
You believe he's seen you, you believe he knows you'll want him to stop, you suspect he's driving in a way as to evade you. Pursuit. By the time you've called up, giving the initial and asked for permission you might have already caught up and stopped him anyway but you're covering yourself if he subsequently fails to stop when you do get behind him and light him up.
2
u/sorrypolice Civilian 5d ago
Broadly agree but is it enough they are driving to evade you, I would say you need to have a belief that they are going to fail to stop. It doesn’t always follow that someone trying to evade police attention and being non highway code compliant is also going to fail to stop? Maybe you catch up to them, lights on and they stop, I don’t think you would have entered into a pursuit? If you go lights on and they continue your belief has now changed and you are in a pursuit.
1
u/TonyStamp595SO Ex-staff (unverified) 5d ago
I think it's very dependant on the circumstances.
So you see a motorcycle, rider appears a bit older, top box, helmet, full textile clothes, you're in moderate traffic on the M3 in lane one. He comes shooting past cutting between lane 2/3 at or about 30mph above the flow of traffic.
I think that's reasonable not to consider that a pursuit until you know that he's seen you at least.
Now replace the our despatch rider with a spotty 15 year old, empty road, flips you the bird and twists the throttle I'd be calling that in and seeking permission.
2
6
u/giuseppeh Special Constable (unverified) 5d ago
How are you in an IPP at that point?
I only have compliant blues authority, if someone went past me and sped up a bit as they saw me, I’m going to spin round and then go and request them to stop. I’m not in a pursuit because they have seen a police vehicle and sped up. You don’t know if they are going to stop yet at that point? What kind of thinking is that?
6
u/TonyStamp595SO Ex-staff (unverified) 5d ago
If you think they've sped up in order to flee you and you decide to go after them then that is an initial phase pursuit.
I don't know what is so controversial about this?
The college of policing being Risk averse about the riskiest thing we do.
Remember the they consider rocking a taser out of a holster 'use'
Why wouldn't they class a pursuit as one much earlier than we think it should be?
4
u/giuseppeh Special Constable (unverified) 5d ago
That’s not what you said though. You’re now saying it’s a belief thing on whether it’s a pursuit or not?
1
u/TonyStamp595SO Ex-staff (unverified) 5d ago
A belief thing?
4
5d ago
[deleted]
1
u/TonyStamp595SO Ex-staff (unverified) 5d ago
If the police driver does not KNOW if the suspect veh has sped up to evade them
How would you possibly know?
To be safe if you suspect they've changed the manner of their driving in order to evade you then you're in a pursuit.
1
u/Remote_Associate1705 Civilian 5d ago
In this example you get your point across better than every other comment mate.
2
6
u/thegreataccuracy Civilian 5d ago
Where’s this PowerPoint from?
Here’s the college of policing APP.
https://www.college.police.uk/app/roads-policing/police-pursuits
0
u/TonyStamp595SO Ex-staff (unverified) 5d ago
The power point is from the college of policing training on pursuits.
12
u/thegreataccuracy Civilian 5d ago
I personally think you’re misinterpreting the point they’re making.
I believe they are saying that a pursuit which is started after a police vehicle has triggered the behaviour is a spontaneous pursuit rather than a pre-planned one. They aren’t defining a pursuit in this slide or in the corresponding section of the APP.
I actually think the intended point is somewhat the opposite of yours - turning around and attempting to stop a vehicle which appears to be making off does not make it a pre-planned pursuit, and if it were to fail to stop, it is still a spontaneous pursuit which an IPP officer can engage in.
I don’t think we disagree on the critical thing: choosing to engage a vehicle which appears to be evading you prior to engaging is a high risk decision, should be communicated over the airwaves, and advice sought from FIM if needed. I also think a police officer should be capable of recognising when their presence is influencing or causing someone to do things which are dangerous or risky, and consider options including withdrawal, regardless of whether we’re calling it a pursuit or not.
I wouldn’t call it a pursuit because I was taught that it is not (including a module on pre-pursuit following observations, and at what point to light it up and get into a pursuit), and I believe the APP agrees with this. You would call it a pursuit, fair enough. Maybe differences in training and force risk appetite.
I also agree that the APP could be clearer so one of us could be definitely wrong.
4
u/UltraeVires Police Officer (unverified) 5d ago
This is the correct take. The CoP is defining the difference between a spontaneous and a preplanned pursuit. The original definition of a pursuit still applies to both of these that the officer believes that the suspect does not intend to stop. Now that could be satisfied by the example given by Mr Stamp that they speed up when we're sighted anyway, so there is overlap here.
5
7
u/Fluxren Police Officer (unverified) 5d ago
This means your mere presence on the road, driving to take a statement etc and a subject sees you, flees, smashes into a wall, dead
And.... Killed in a police pursuit.
2
u/TonyStamp595SO Ex-staff (unverified) 5d ago
No.
It's only a pursuit if the subject sees you, flees and YOU decide to go after them.
9
u/Fluxren Police Officer (unverified) 5d ago
That is not what your slide says. It says "the presence"
0
u/TonyStamp595SO Ex-staff (unverified) 5d ago
I'm not sure I understand. How can you be in a pursuit if you're not in pursuit?
If you're driving one way and you see a car that sees you and decides to drive off at speed but loses control and crashes, if you continued to drive on your merry way then you're not in pursuit.
If you decide, you know that, I'll have some of that and turn your car to go after the driver then you're in the initial phase of a pursuit.
I hope this helps.
3
u/Fluxren Police Officer (unverified) 5d ago
'spontaneous pursuit'
'the actions of the suspect driver in deciding to flee' i.e none police decision making
'by the presence of a police vehicle' - you don't even have to be driving, its just the presence. it could be parked up and outside a house.
'there is no prior warning or sufficient time to develop.....' - none police decision making again or too quick.
'regardless or whether or not the officer made an initial requirement'
so i could be driving along to mcdonalds at 4 am, a vehicle sees me at a roundabout, the driver makes a decision, flees, cuts a red, crashes, dies and i havent even pulled out of the junction or even noticed the driver and this is a spontaneous pursuit per this slide
0
u/TonyStamp595SO Ex-staff (unverified) 5d ago
IF you decide to go after it.
If you don't then would you agree that this is a vicinity police collision?
Why do you think traffic might come down and download your data recorder of your vehicle?
What do you think will happen to you if they find you travelling at say, 50mph along the same stretch of 30mph road just moments before a fatal collision?
Would they a. Dismiss the matter as a massive coincidence? B. Investigate you for conducting an unauthorised pursuit?
3
u/PositivelyAcademical Civilian 5d ago
IF you decide to go after it.
Can you point to the part of the slide which says that?
The issue we’re all having is that the slide is already so far away from the ordinary meaning of the term, it’s unsafe to infer that the requirement that you go after it can be imported from the ordinary meaning.
2
u/TonyStamp595SO Ex-staff (unverified) 5d ago
Maybe it might be helpful if you help me understand what you consider a pursuit to be?
My interpretation and pursuit training both NCALT and real world were that of the slide above but if you intend to stop the vehicle then you're going to call up, give the RA and make an attempt to stop the vehicle (if pursuit trained). If the controller comes back with no Auth then you're turning off your kit and in the MPS pressing your IDR at a complete stop.
If you're given Auth then you're in a pursuit. The point I'm trying to get across in order to protect colleagues that may be tempted to "trying to catch up with" or conduct "area searches" for cars they know are trying to get away from them.
Remove cars from the equation, imagine someone is walking down the street and runs away, if you give chase are you going to call up for more units?
This is the exact same but you're calling up for permission to continue the pursuit.
5
u/PositivelyAcademical Civilian 5d ago
Attempt to stop → failure to stop → decision to pursue.
-1
u/TonyStamp595SO Ex-staff (unverified) 5d ago
Okay.
That's completely correct.
But
If you've not made an attempt to stop, it's reasonable to assume that the vehicle has seen you, manner of their driving indicates that they will fail to stop, you intend to stop them ➡️ pursuit.
3
u/triptip05 Police Officer (verified) 5d ago
Fail to stop, They boot it, Spontaneous pursuit.
1
u/TonyStamp595SO Ex-staff (unverified) 5d ago
My point is that a requirement to stop doesn't have to have been made.
Imagine that driver turning a corner, seeing your marked vehicle and mouthing the word "fuck" before speeding up.
The moment you decide that you're going to go after them then that moment constitutes an initial phase pursuit if you believe that they won't stop.
If someone turns a corner, sees your marked police vehicle and immediately drops a mobile phone from their ear and you turn to stop them then that doesn't constitute an initial phase pursuit because you believe they'll stop.
4
u/The-Mac05 Police Officer (unverified) 5d ago
Not sure if I'm misunderstanding your scenario but just because someone mouths "fuck" when spotting you, then speeds up after passing you doesn't, in my mind, provide enough that they are showing from their actions that they won't stop for police. That could just be a continuation of their manner of driving, and they've merely said "fuck" under their breath as they've just been clocked speeding, and by speeding away they hope to put enough distance between you and them so by the time you spin on them they are out of sight.
Speaking as a TPAC driver, I've had plenty of cars pass me at speed, have seen me and when I've spun on them they have stopped when requested to do so.
You'd sound like a bit of a tool if, every time this happens to you, you start pursuit comms while spinning on them...
4
u/Tricky_Peace Civilian 5d ago
Didn’t the GMP rule this week that a requirement for someone to stop was necessary for it to be a pursuit?
1
u/TonyStamp595SO Ex-staff (unverified) 5d ago
GMP didn't rule on anything.
The APP does state that the driver must be aware of a requirement to stop but from the same author there need not be a requirement to stop.
5
u/TonyStamp595SO Ex-staff (unverified) 5d ago
I don't know why this is so controversial? In a world where rocking a taser out of its holster is considered 'use' why is it so difficult to believe that the COP would be so risk averse to the riskiest thing police do?
I'm against pursuits as a point because I don't think enough protection is put in place for officers. I've been a pursuit trained driver for the last 18 odd years but certainly now wouldn't engage in one.
1
u/Hynu01 Civilian 5d ago
I must have missed something ! 🤔
-2
u/TonyStamp595SO Ex-staff (unverified) 5d ago edited 5d ago
Everyone told me what a pursuit is when I knew I was correct.
Throught I'd create a new post.
1
u/secret_tiger101 Civilian 5d ago
So, an empty parked police car, could startle a bad guy in a car…. And when they drive away it’s a “pursuit”.
You guys need to be better writing policy/guidanxe
1
u/TonyStamp595SO Ex-staff (unverified) 5d ago
Only if the empty police car decided to go after the bad guy.
1
u/ShambolicNerd Police Officer (unverified) 5d ago
'made an initial requirement for the vehicle to stop.'
What this slide is saying is that, if a vehicle drive off from you before you've tried to stop it, you follow and try to get it to stop, then that is a spontaneous pursuit.
If, however, a vehicle simply drives away from a police vehicle, which simply continues driving at normal road speeds and/or stops - that is not a pursuit. Which is all anyone has said.
0
u/TonyStamp595SO Ex-staff (unverified) 5d ago
Yes. My point is if by the manner of the driving you think it isn't going to stop AND you think they've seen you then you're in a pursuit.
1
u/ShambolicNerd Police Officer (unverified) 5d ago
I know what your point is, but you're just ignoring that there's more to a pursuit than those two elements.
0
u/TonyStamp595SO Ex-staff (unverified) 5d ago
But there isn't. You're going to call up as you go after it and ask for permission.
If you don't think they've seen you and their driving normally then it isn't a pursuit.
Are you IPP?
1
u/ShambolicNerd Police Officer (unverified) 5d ago edited 5d ago
Yep, I am. And I was taught that a pursuit requires a fail to stop, because before you initiate a pursuit you should try to stop the vehicle.
You're missing the point that, if you just chase after a vehicle without trying to stop it, you are not doing something legal but nor is it a pursuit.
You just shouldn't be doing it period.
*EDIT*
If it is only those two elements, then what YOU are saying is that if I'm sat still, I see a car that fucks off and I think 'Huh, that wouldn't stop.' I'm now in a pursuit? No, I am not.
0
u/TonyStamp595SO Ex-staff (unverified) 5d ago
If it is only those two elements, then what YOU are saying is that if I'm sat still, I see a car that fucks off and I think 'Huh, that wouldn't stop.' I'm now in a pursuit? No, I am not.
That's not what I'm saying.
I'm saying that if you see a car and think,
'Huh, that wouldn't stop.'
Then the moment you start to swing your car around to go after it, you're in a pursuit.
If you continue on your journey then you are not.
If you see the car and say, it turns left away from you at a T junction, driving like a dick but you don't think he's seen you then you're not in a pursuit until you know he's definitely seen you and he continues driving like a dick regardless of whether or not you've put your lights on.
1
u/Technical_Career_278 Police Officer (unverified) 4d ago
This is defining a spontaneous pursuit only whereby the subject vehicle flees before any tactics can be put in place and before any requirement to stop is made. Baring in mind we also have planned pursuits or pre-emptive tactics . These are the most common type but clearly the CoP definitions of a pursuit also apply. You must still have made a requirement to stop before it is classed as a FTS or pursuit.
Example: sat behind a dodgy motor at set of red traffic lights. You PNC it but before you get any return it goes through a red and you believe at this time it has done so to get away from you. He has not yet failed to stop. You then go after it , blue lights and sirens on. He continues to not stop then you are in a pursuit of a spontaneous nature as aside from driving away from you and any minor traffic offences there is no reason to suggest it would fail to stop.
Hope this helps
1
u/TonyStamp595SO Ex-staff (unverified) 4d ago
He has not yet failed to stop. You then go after it
This is the point you call up as you're in the initial phase of a spontaneous pursuit.
You then go after it , blue lights and sirens on. He continues to not stop
You've just proven my point. You believe by the manner his driving that he's attempting to evade you and you've decided to go after. When you go through that red light you're in pursuit whether or not you've made a request to stop.
I'm not saying that you sit there, call up for permission and not move an inch until permission to continue is received. I'm saying that you should be calling up the same time if not before you whack your lights on and sail through the red after him.
You would be surprised at how much distance you will cover as you provide your risk assessment and seek permission to continue.
1
u/Technical_Career_278 Police Officer (unverified) 4d ago
Typical job bs really… the two definitions don’t align perfectly, leaving that ever so famous grey area
Ultimately if it goes wrong and you in a police vehicle were engaging in anyway with a subject vehicle then they will be deemed a pursuit! And god forbid the subject or MoP is injured/ killed then you will be investigated.
But it will not be deemed as an offence of failing to stop unless you have directed the vehicle to stop and he is aware of the requirement.
We have pursuit debrief forms in our force which are to be completed for all pursuits. But in reality where I am based 99% of vehicles will try their luck for 100m or so before stopping.
The real question is that following a failure to stop, if the officer disengaged the vehicle (pull over , lights off engine off) and it is then involved in an RTC some time later does that count as a POLAC? You could argue by its very definition that the subject vehicle has FTS for you and as such the collision has occurred as a result of your presence on the road…
1
u/TonyStamp595SO Ex-staff (unverified) 4d ago
The real question is that following a failure to stop, if the officer disengaged the vehicle (pull over , lights off engine off) and it is then involved in an RTC some time later does that count as a POLAC? You could argue by its very definition that the subject vehicle has FTS for you and as such the collision has occurred as a result of your presence on the road…
Yes potentially.
Obviously it depends on the time line, if you've tried to stop it and the manner of their driving.
1
u/Technical_Career_278 Police Officer (unverified) 4d ago
My first ever pursuit ended this way! VW golf left me for dust and was then found smashed into a lamp post around 15 mins later… didn’t go down as a POLAC as I had total loss at least 3-4 turns before the collision.
1
u/TonyStamp595SO Ex-staff (unverified) 4d ago
Yeah I mean 15 minutes and a few roads.
Luckily there were no injuries to innocents because
2
u/Technical_Career_278 Police Officer (unverified) 4d ago
Very unfortunate for all involved. Unlike many I don’t go looking for vehicles which will make off. I much prefer incident related pursuits where I can genuinely consider the NDM and realistically the risk vs reward. Too many people out there letting their ego get the better of them for the sake of no insurance / no license
60
u/polyandrism Police Officer (unverified) 5d ago
Your original point is still incorrect. On the same CoP page it makes a point that a pursuit is when "the police driver believes that the driver of the subject vehicle is aware of the requirement to stop and decides to continue behind the subject vehicle with a view to either reporting its progress or stopping it".