i was pulled over recently for a minor traffic offence and have to go to court, i was told that seen as the officer was by himself and not wearing a hat i could get it chucked out of court, was just wondering how true this was??
2007-03-12 09:28:00 · 23 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Law Enforcement & Police
some people have commented that this is ridiculous, maybe but then sum of the answers are pretty stupid too. the road traffic acts states that to be able to pull someone over legally the officer MUST be in FULL uniform, no ifs or buts!! it also states that a plain clothed officer cannot by law pull you over, he has to get the help of an officer in FULL uniform!! so all you so called know it alls need to read up on something before trying to luck clever!! so with that in mind am i right in what i say??
2007-03-13 21:57:02 · update #1
(UK) - stated cases (cases heard on appeal, which then decide any similar cases in future) have altered the meaning of 'full' uniform... it basically now means an officer who's appearance is one of wearing a uniform -ie, anyone who appears to be a uniformed officer due to their clothing - a hat is not required. This has had to come in, when you think of the variety of uniform now worn - yellow reflective tabards, polo shirts, white shirts & epaulettes, overalls, traditional hemets, berets, flat caps, baseball hats, cargo pants, cycling gear, leather motorcycle suits - you name it, someone wears it!
2007-03-14 05:02:04 · answer #1 · answered by skipper409 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No they dont by law.Some years ago the courts decided that a policeman without his hat on was not in uniform and the road traffic act only gives a police officer in uniform the right to pull over cars but this was sensibly reversed years ago.
So the info was correct once but is about 30 years out of date in the UK.
2007-03-13 04:24:18 · answer #2 · answered by frankturk50 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
This is a myth that is as old as the hills, the police do not have to wear hats to enforce traffic law. They have to be identifiable as a police officer and this can be as little as the "POLICE" badge on their body armour if they are wearing jeans.
Please dont try and use this as your only line of defence in court the magistrate will not be amused and will probably give you heavy court costs for wating time IF you are found guilty of the original offence.
2007-03-13 10:23:29 · answer #3 · answered by rick_wenham 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The Road Traffic Act makes reference in some parts to the powers only being executed by 'a police officer in uniform'. Strictly speaking a police officer who is not wearing a hat is not in uniform.
2007-03-13 17:27:47 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
Complete rubbish if you really think something as minor as that will get you off think again.
Why would not wearing a hat get you off?
Did you not recognise him as a Police Officer?
Did you or did you not commit the offence?
If you have to go to court whose fault is it (yours)?
Aren't driving offences one of the many things police officers are supposed to cover? No insurance, no MOT, vehicle construction and use regs and poor driving(due care) etc etc to name a few.
At the end of the day you either commited the offence or not and a police officer not wearing a hat will not get you off.
It all sounds pretty desparate.
2007-03-12 17:56:43 · answer #5 · answered by Roaming free 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
That might be a violation of their departmental regulations, but not enough to get a summons thrown out. You can be issued a summons by a plain clothes officer as long as they are on duty and acting in an official capacity. If that is your best defense, just pay the fine.
2007-03-13 04:31:31 · answer #6 · answered by Kenneth C 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It used to be true that for certain traffic offences the officer had to be in full uniform, including the hat. Unfortunately for you the rules were changed.
2007-03-12 16:33:23 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 5⤊ 0⤋
I've got an idea. Don't pay your fine or go to court. When you get picked up for the eventual warrant or suspended license, tell the judge the initial charge was bogus because the cop wasn't wearing a hat.
2007-03-12 20:19:20 · answer #8 · answered by Combatcop 5 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Of course not that is the silliest thing I have ever heard.
many departments don't even issue or have hats, they get dirty or damaged. In some departments it is considered proper unitform, and the department wants them worn all the time, but not wearing it does not take away the ticket.
Note in 20 plus yeasrs, I never even wore a hat and not a single ticket was invalid.
2007-03-12 23:55:32 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
There isn't a grain of truth to it. The issue of whether or not the officer was wearing a hat has absolutely nothing to do with the offense that you committed that caused him to pull you over.
Quit whining and go pay your ticket.
2007-03-12 17:09:39 · answer #10 · answered by Team Chief 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋