Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Wed Oct 16, 2019 23:03

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 82 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 25, 2005 01:42 
Offline
User

Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2005 12:06
Posts: 20
Right, who want's to decipher the signatures on the document below?

Blackdouglas spotted it.... :D

Then i'll tell you what it's actually from :o

Image

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 25, 2005 09:14 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 10:44
Posts: 485
Location: Glos, UK
Well, no idea what the top one says, but the two "in the presence of" seem to be our good friend Steve Callaghan, and the other is our even better friend Frank Garrett!

It looks like it's something to do with the LTi 20/20, I'm guessing it's its type approval document or something?

_________________
Carl Prescott


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 25, 2005 09:21 
Offline
User

Joined: Wed Mar 10, 2004 15:05
Posts: 1225
Location: Glasgow
Images from hosting sites are blocked here. :(

I can read 'Steven Callaghan" though. :lol:

Go on - tell us...


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 25, 2005 10:05 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Apr 22, 2005 10:30
Posts: 2053
Location: South Wales (Roving all UK)
Tell us

.... contract to supply the Lti 20-20?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 25, 2005 12:39 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 10:44
Posts: 485
Location: Glos, UK
Heh, just read over at PePiPoo that it's actually more likely a Steven Gallagher, not our Mr Callaghan. Ah well, it was a good conspiracy theory whilst it lasted! :lol:

_________________
Carl Prescott


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 25, 2005 15:25 
Offline
User

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 12:33
Posts: 770
Location: Earith, Cambs
How does the signature compare to Callaghan's on the letter sent from Cumbria Constabulary to Paul?
Has anyone heard any 'rumblings' from Cumbria Constabulary resulting from the formal complaints?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 25, 2005 20:11 
Offline
User

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 15:52
Posts: 461
Its not his sig Cooperman i saved a copy of the pic from here when it appeared and its nothing like the one shown....pity.:rolleyes:

_________________
"Safety" Scamera Partnerships;
Profitting from death and misery since 1993.

Believe nothing- Question everything.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2005 00:33 
Offline
User

Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2005 12:06
Posts: 20
I know, bugger :?

then again, Clanger callaghans got more than enough on his plate already :lol:

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Oct 26, 2005 12:40 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 27, 2005 17:53
Posts: 16
Insider wrote:
I know, bugger :?

then again, Clanger callaghans got more than enough on his plate already :lol:


AS have other Scamerati... :twisted:

But, for the books, Cumbria now has my complaint as well.

_________________
“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”

Mahatma Gandhi


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Nov 03, 2005 18:31 
Offline
User

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 12:33
Posts: 770
Location: Earith, Cambs
What's the latest?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 12:01 
Offline
User

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 12:33
Posts: 770
Location: Earith, Cambs
It's gone awfully quiet.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Nov 08, 2005 19:12 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 00:15
Posts: 5232
Location: Windermere
I know - all you can hear is the ticking of the clock.... and the machine scrubbing leaves off the railway line after midnight......!
At least it doesn't sound it's horn for the three footpaths behind my house!

Seven fatalities in the Border TV region over the weekend. :(
And two horses yesterday, struck by a car. Do they count as KSI's?

One elderly couple were killed on the A66 near Threlkeld. I wonder how much is down to the weather we seem to be stuck with at present?
There was a twisted bonnet on the verge of Bannerigg this week - not sure if it was the result of a traffic incident, or whether it had fallen off a scrap wagon - it was so badly twisted!! :o

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Feedback
PostPosted: Fri Nov 11, 2005 21:53 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 11:46
Posts: 27
Has anyone heard anything from the Cumbria Cops?

:? :? :?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Nov 11, 2005 22:51 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 00:15
Posts: 5232
Location: Windermere
Not since their acknowledgment. :oops:

The accident on Bannerigg involved a car (whose bonnet still resides there) coliding with a bend warning sign, which has been flattened.

Naturally CAPITA or the Highways Authority are rushing to reinstate the warning sign as soon as possible. :x

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 12, 2005 18:25 
Offline
User

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 12:33
Posts: 770
Location: Earith, Cambs
I received a communication from them on Thursday. I can't reveal it's contents as it's 'Restricted', but it appears the investigation is continuing and I'll be contacted again later.
Anyone else had any follow-up emails?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Nov 12, 2005 23:25 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 00:15
Posts: 5232
Location: Windermere
Not yet.

Who did the restricting bit? :o Do you mean the little bit of legalese at the bottom?
Quote:
This email, its content and any file transmitted with it,
may be confidential/legally privileged, and are for the
intended recipient only. It may contain information
protected by law. Any unauthorised copying, disclosure
or other processing of this information may be unlawful
and may be a criminal offence.

The bit underneath is more pertinent:
Quote:
If you have received
this email in error please advise Cumbria Constabulary
on 01768 891999 or via email return, and delete this
email and any attachments immediately. Any opinions
expressed in this document are those of the author and
do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Cumbria
Constabulary
.

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Mumbo-Jumbo
PostPosted: Sun Nov 13, 2005 09:43 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2005 11:46
Posts: 27
I have an email trail with the Staffordshire scam going back about 2 years. When the latest challenge to the Think! advertising "Safety Cameras - Saving Lives Year on Year" started the bollocks at the bottom of the emails thickened and is now exactly the same as above. Clearly, scam central is involved.

It would be interesting to get a leagl opionion on this, surely it could be construed as limiting free speech?


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Nov 13, 2005 13:13 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Tue Feb 15, 2005 00:15
Posts: 5232
Location: Windermere
I dont see the need for a legal opinion.

It says it MAY be confidential, and divulging it MAY be a criminal offence.

Well if they are not sure, then get it cleared up.

However they go on to say that the person writing the information which may or might not be confidential, is expressing his own opinion and not that of the Constabulary!!!!! I presume then that it is even more vague!

QED! A "lack of legs to stand on" springs to mind!

It is interesting to read the writings of Lord Stevens, former Met. Police chief.
He casually lets slip items in articles in the News of the World column he writes, regarding operational methods used by the police which I believe should NOT be in the public domain.
In his biography, he has a good go at David Blunkett - former Home Secretary. However while this might seem like sour grapes, it is likely to be a direct responce to comments made by David Blunkett in HIS biography, in which he slagged off Lord Stevens!!
David Blunkett appears to have had a low opinion of many of the police over which he was in overall charge, and has made this quite clear.
Yet both these men should have been bound by the official secrets act. I dont blame Lord Stevens - Blunkett cast the first stone, but it can only lead to more officers moving up through the ranks at present, feeling they too have a right to speak more openly and be critical of their superiors.
They SHOULD however be free to express an opinion (either here or in other forums) providing that it is accepted that they are:
Quote:
opinions [expressed in this document are those] of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of XXXXX
Constabulary
.

However there are reports that they are being "discouraged" from doing so!! :x

Not good for policing in the long term - witness the present furore over the role of police officers in the 90 day terror ammendment vote. :(

The present spat which led to this thread is a prime example of an action which can only be damaging to the perception of the police role in law enforcement.
Police dont enact laws, they only enforce laws enacted on our behalf by our elected representatives. The present situation is going to lead to a blurring of those lines, and we the public will feel, and may well be, worse off. More protesting war veterans being arrested under anti-terror laws will see civil unrest grow, fuelled by those with a different agenda. :oops: :cry:

_________________
Time to take responsibility for our actions.. and don't be afraid of speaking out!


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sun Nov 13, 2005 23:24 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 14:26
Posts: 4364
Location: Hampshire/Wiltshire Border
The problem with a public body replying to you with a disclaimer "this is the opinion of the writer only and not the authority" is that the reply is thus rendered worthless.

You are complaining to the official body not some individual - the response must be on behalf of the authority. This is the whole point about SCs communications to the ISP.

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Nov 14, 2005 11:22 
Offline
User

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 12:33
Posts: 770
Location: Earith, Cambs
I, for one, feel sure that the Detective Chief Superintendent responsible, with his team, for investigating this matter will and is being very thorough.
Maybe at this point we should just let him complete his enquiries and investigations and await the results, confident in the belief that the Cumbria Constabulary's Professional Standards Department will act in a proper and professional manner. Their communications with me so far lead me to believe they will.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 82 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.315s | 13 Queries | GZIP : Off ]