As reported in the mainstream press, PC Paul Brown broke the law although the magistrates found is excuse ‘acceptable’.
PC Paul Brown is a police driving instructor and was on a personal meeting with the college where his son attended.
PC Paul Brown was apparently running late for a personal meeting, so he decided to ‘put his foot down’.
PC Paul Brown, 48, jumped red lights and used the powerful BMW X5’s sirens and lights intermittently during the 17-mile round trip to discuss his son’s education at a college.
PC Paul Brown, as a ‘driving instructor’ is expected to maintain Continued Personal development (CPD).
While there is no written policy on this, it is expected, (no doubt for safety reasons), that any CPD he intends is logged and senior officers notified. It is also believed that he should have a passenger for extra observations during any training.
If for example, PC Paul Brown caused a fatal accident during his CPD, he would have ‘some mitigation’ for the necessity for his driving manner. In this incident, PC Paul Brown notified NO ONE of his intent to undertake CPD.
PC Paul Brown, in Court, claimed he was ‘practising his driving skills‘ to ensure they were “up to scratch”.
What a coincident that he decided to do this when he was late for a meeting to attend his sons college.
During the drive to college, PC Paul Brown drove at 85mph on a 30mph limit road at Eaton, Norwich, and 86mph in a 40mph zone. Speed limits on such road are set usually due to potential pedestrians.
PC Paul Brown risked the lives of others to ensure he was not late for a meeting.
Harry O’Sullivan, prosecuting, said the dad, a Norfolk Police driving instructor since 2016 and an officer for 18 years, had not been authorised to use the car for his training while driving alone to and from the college.
PC Brown has insisted he was carrying out CPD and had told colleagues about his plans in advance.
PC James Waller, however, (then a senior driving instructor at the force), denied PC Brown had told him that he was going to carry out CPD at the time.
So, someone is lying… and our guess is that it was the ‘cop on the stand’.
Fortunately, no one as injured, but if a child was killed by this officer, we wonder if his excuse would still stand.
This appears to be yet another absurd decision by magistrates that protect a police officer breaking the law.
Any person named in this or any other article is invited to comment.