The right way – according to Victoria Police
April 6, 2008 by Paul Maric
One of our readers has sent in photos detailing appallingly dangerous driving by a member of the Victorian police force.
Shown below is an unmarked police vehicle – nothing uncommon there I hear you say. If you look closely, the female driver of the vehicle is talking on her mobile telephone (held to her head by her right hand).
Click to see larger image
Seconds after our reader’s passenger took the photographs, the driver then reaches over the wheel with her left hand (while still holding the telephone to her head with her right hand) and puts her indicator on. Effectively, the driver is using her left hand to hold the wheel on the opposite side and then uses the same hand to put her indicator on.
If that wasn’t dangerous enough, the driver then merges in front of our reader’s vehicle – eliminating the two second gap they were keeping with the truck in front of them – and comes within 1-metre of his bull-bar. Maybe she didn’t see the car? Unlikely, considering our reader was driving a 70-series Toyota Landcruiser with a large bull-bar attached.
Click for larger image
Seemingly oblivious to this potential near miss, the driver of the unmarked police vehicle continues on her merry way.
When contacted for comment with regards to the photographs, CarAdvice also posed the question of reprimand toward the driver.
Although we can’t publish the exact response from Natalie Webster – the Media Officer for the Media and Corporate Communications Unit of the Victoria Police – she told us that police are covered under Road Rule 300 (1), exempting them from breaking any law if they were to use a mobile phone while driving.
According to Monash University research (Monash University Accident Research Centre – Report #206 – 2003, authors: K. Young, M. Regan & M. Hammer), the use of a mobile phone while operating a motor vehicle can increase the risk of an accident by up to four times! And that figure disregards whether the driver is a police officer or member of the public – as we are all humans at the end of the day.
The fact that the police have brushed this off on a technicality is truly appalling. The driver of this unmarked police vehicle put the lives of several people at risk and the police are unwilling to even follow the matter up. Being a police officer doesn’t somehow exempt you from a human’s common cognitive train of thought – which puts all of us, despite your job position, in the same boat when it comes to using a mobile phone whilst driving.
This act of dangerous driving poses the question – should members of the police force really be allowed to use a mobile phone while operating a motor vehicle?
Print it: 
Ugh, less of these articles on the front page please.
There are is an equally innumerable amount of arguments for either side here.
I think I’ve said this before, but there should be a rants section for this type of material.
# aubz Says:
April 7th, 2008 at 3:52 pm
Ugh, less of these articles on the front page please…there should be a rants section for this type of material.
There is a rants ’section’, though the format of a blog and a traditional website is very different. Everything goes on the front page once simply because its a blog…
As is with all things really, everyone cuts corners and breaks the rules sometimes. However i do believe that “the law” (police) being exempt from “The Law” is not a good way to lead a good example.
Tom Jakovljevic, 3FPS isn’t that fast, many compact digital camera’s are capable of doing 3FPS. 3FPS by SLR standards is actually very average. Might i add, it’s not the FPS but more the shutter speed that captured that moment in time (speed in this shot is hard to tell as the cars are moving forward at approximately the same speed and plenty of avaialable light meant a fast shutter speed was possible).
Camski, thank you for your advice. Ill remember it when I play with my camera whilst doing a photoshoot. ….
Anyhow, you are incorrect, or you have misunderstood me.
I meant that in normal traffic conditions, you indicate, and merge, it takes a couple of seconds.
If the police person did it real quickly (or dangerously) it would have taken alot less time, and hence needed a fast speed slr to catch the sequence of pictures.
In other words, this has been greatly exagerated by the person commenting on what happened.
Yep, it paints a bad picture for the coppers. Agreed.
Nope, it’s not illegal for them to do so. Agreed.
Should it be, NO.
Whilst I agree the copper could have used a little common sense and at least tried to adhere to the law as it applies to everyone else, I believe to make them follow the same laws would just make things even harder for them.
I am not a copper. I’m a firefighter and I can say that to have to pull over to the roadside to answer calls, be they CB, phone or otherwise (given that these types of calls are the backbone of emergency services for tasking, general information, or other purposes) would create undue delays in response to incidents.
I’m not saying she was responding to an incident, merely that the law for them should be different in this regard for those reasons. And to suggest the law should ONLY apply when attending incidents is also nonsensical and would only serve to show peoples lack of understanding of what it is to be an emergency worker.
I’m not even from Vic and our laws only prohibit mobile telephone use, which we voluntarily abide by, which as i said before, she could/should have done…
I think in the end we need look back and see…
This is giving a bad example to other motorists if they see a police person talking on their mobile without handsfree/bluetooth, what sort of message is this going out.
And yes the police should be using a bluetooth/Handsfree system, and whats this BS about easily hacked? This is not blardy lawnmower man. Given the range of BT, The likelyhood of this is to point of non existant.
the ‘example’ argument is a load of smurf pee. Next we are going to try and argue that because police carry pistols on their belt that we are all going to do it because we are to flaming stupid to work out right and wrong for ourselves.
Sorry, but for the example argument to have any wait the said person would have to argue that they have no ability to make decisions themselves and their actions are nothing more than re enactments of others actions. No one wants to sign up for that stigma so just leave it, cheers.
If we can’t you can’t. Doesn’t matter what the call was about, if we tried explaining what it was “about” we would get fined without question. You can’t set the rules, enforce them and then break them yourselves. Doesn’t work like that. Good story.
Smacks of Hypocracy all over, however there wasn’t an accident on this occasion.Its wrong use a phone without hands free and the driving was debateably poor. Its clear the driver of the Landcruiser was taking the photos given the positioning of his/her vehicle in the lane, and thats just as dangerous.
I don’t suppose the Police will do anything to the driver, one day she’ll get caught out and hopefully the book will be thrown at her. She deserves it 100%.
I do not believe CA are anti-police, I would say they are highlighting hypocracy at its best. Yes Andrew M the police do a good job but it would be ironic if you got pulled over by the cops for using a phone by a copper you’ve just seen using a phone!
No Name: “Yes Andrew M the police do a good job but it would be ironic if you got pulled over by the cops for using a phone by a copper you’ve just seen using a phone!”
I sat next to speeding coppers once, who were doing 10 over with out lights or sirens etc…
They did nothing but give me evils, though in hind sight it was a pretty dumb thing to do.
This is no more hypocrisy than police carrying a firearm, that can kill someone so normally people are not allowed to walk around with one on their belt…
Why dont they use bluetooth?
Anthonii going about the pistols is far fetched and is rubbish, as for talking on the phone while driving IS SOMETHING the police have been pushing AS DANGEROUS, IRRESPONSIBLE and is a DISTRACTION, regardless if your cop, army guy, or a office worker.
She could’ve just been running late to set up her speed camera! Come on, how many drivers still use their mobiles while driving, yet this copper gets the finger pointed at her and made an example of on the web. Maybe the landcruiser driver should do some policing of their own and take photos of ALL drivers on their mobiles, get their licence place details and send it into the local cop shop. Maybe CA should have their own dedicated page of pics of law breakers on their mobiles taken by “concerned” members of the driving fraternity.
I wonder what type of phone it was.
to those few people that have a problem with my comment, show me the part where this police person broke the law?
do you all fail to see that she didnt?
its also like footy players taking drugs. nobody gives 2 hoots when its joe blogs slipping a pill but if someone of high profile gets caught with one in their trouser pocket, only then do people try to make out they really care about problems in society.
off timing ponits it out perfectly when he asks why this photographer doesnt snap all motorists on mobile phones.
speed cameras is a totally different topic
AndrewM:
Surely you’re not that slow?
If you read the article, you would see that the contention of it was in relation to the Police officer driving DANGEROUSLY on a public road – the main reason behind it being the use of a mobile phone.
If you take the time to read through the studies quoted, you would note that a driver is four times more likely to be involved in an accident if they’re speaking on a mobile phone.
That study doesn’t take into account dangerous one hand lane change maneuvers either – which this young lass seems to have nailed down to a tee.
Finally, cutting so finely in between two vehicles like that is downright dangerous at highway speeds.
Why on earth would the passenger of the vehicle be interested in catching all motorists? People know it’s illegal because it’s downright dangerous to speak on a phone while driving, yet it’s legal for the police to do so. The photos simply back up the claims of the Monash University study and cement the fact that police are humans too – with the ability to kill other drivers in an instant.
Shouldn’t you be catching some more speeding motorists who are doing 3km/h over the speed limit? – Pig.
If this police officer was following up on a lead to save a friends life I would want them to be able to break a few of the more petty laws to give them a better chance of being successful. Be thankful that there are people out there who are willing to do this job.
Benjie,
i was initially thinking that you are the un named “spy photographer”
just to reiterate, and as clearly stated, the police woman did not break any laws by talking on the mobile phone.
and also as i said earlier, how are we judge a dangerous manouver by a still photograph?
did the driver (you?) have to brake hard and take evasive action? no brake lights on the cop car indicate that she had to have at least kept the speed flowing.
if you wont merge unless you have a 5 second buffer then it is you that needs to stop impeding the flow of traffic.
im not a copper for the record. nor do i know any coppers.
so whats the real thing in question here?
the officer LEGALLY talking on the phone?
or the manouver which seems typical of that needed in heavy traffic?
No point trying to convince a member of the force, you’re all as useless as each other.
you can call me a copper all you want if it turns you on, but you still havent answered my question you spy photographer you.
Christ you are petty!!! I see a dozens of people a day using their phone while driving but everyone picks on the cops. Yes they are exempt and so they should be. They dont always have to have lights and sirens going to mean they are attending to an urgent job! I’ve seen heaps of cops in my area on their phones- and they are always pulled over. So if they need to take a call while driving it must be important, so thankyou police for looking after us.
If using your mobile phone while driving is so dangerous, how exactly did your reader take these pics? They seem to be from a mobile phone and appear to have been taken from the drivers side of the vehicle.
My question is this:
Whats worse, driving while using your mobile or driving while trying to take pictures of someone driving while using a mobile.
Marc
Azza said
“But that isn’t a Unmarked police car. It’s clearly in Melbourne Victoria, and all Victorian Police cars have red writing on the number plates. This car has blue writing.”
Absolutely incorrect. All Victoria Police unmarked vehicles have the standard Vicroads number plate (as in picture).
All marked Police cars, as well as all non-police government vehicles have the Victorian Government number plate (red instead of blue).
Marc
why dont we do something about it then instead of shuting up our mouths.if we get caught we have to pay the fine so should they.lets all get together and do something about it enough is enough who ever has got balls can join me
mind you 4X4 should not be taken into the city at all so this “reader” with there phone out to take the photo is more of a risk in her big 4X4 and her silly photo taking is wose then the actions of the police who is porbs a far better drive mind you too
NJ:
Surely you’re not that stupid?
That’s the highway which – bypasses – the city…
which is still in metro melbourne yes / or no i think you know the answer heres a hint if the car caught on fire who would come the cfa or mfb benjie?
and there are lots of cattle on our highways too according to benjie
Even though I hate the stuck up drivers of four by fours
(I have been involved in a collision with an arrogant driver of a 4*4 who denied ANY wrongdoing whatsoever)I must agree with Mr. NJ.
police can mind there own buisness we know how to take care of our selves then being watch over like primary school kids
^^^^
YOU TELL EM!!
police are around not only to look after you but to protect the safety and property of others as well as the laws of our society
I don’t believe the stupidity of this article and some the comments being posted.
police are allowed to communicate on mobile phones whilst driving – in fact its usually the main method of communication between station and car as the CBs are often dodgy.
The crap about two cops being present in all cars because the one in the passenger seat is the radio/phone operator is just plain incorrect – the only time you see 2 cops in one car is when they are assigned to general duties, this car is from the traffic branch, they only have one cop per car because they are not attending typically dangerous situations.
Jim,
There is no way of knowing whether or not this vehicle is a traffic vehicle or not. Although I’d lean towards not. More likely a CIB vehicle or even a liason person. It could be federal police for all we know.
Marc