Speeding Jetskis - police action - brilliant news

[Twister_Ken]

FWIW, I'm with Dylan.

My permanent mooring is alongside a fairway. To get ashore I have to cross the fairway in my itsy-bitsy tender, with its two oar power motor. Almost everything gives me as much room as it can, and slows down. Thanks guys.

The most frequent exceptions are small angler type boats, usually with an outboard driving them at their low hull speed, but kicking up an extremely inconvenient wash, mid size RIBs, and PWCs (altho we don't see many that far up the river).

The twassocks who travel at excess speed will, one day, put someone in the water by capsizing a small tender. Or they'll cause injury aboard a moored yacht, when it suddenly rolls to its gunwales. Or they'll collide with something, coz they ain't such good drivers as they think they are.

 

[dylanwinter]

I am confident that the channel from tide line to tide line is a lot less than 500 meters wide through those moorings - any locals out there care to comment.

 

[Major Catastrophe]

I am confident that the channel from tide line to tide line is a lot less than 500 meters wide through those moorings - any locals out there care to comment.

Show us were it was and we can calculate the distance.

http://maps.google.co.uk/?ie=UTF8&ll=51.723838,0.821571&spn=0.099743,0.21801&t=h&z=12


emmyloupinkchic, once she has finished scaring her son and viewing kitten videos, is going to need some firm evidence before she dons her size 10 hobnails and pointy hat and sets out to feel their collars.

Incidentally, having freeze framed your video there is no way of identifying the jet skis or the drivers, so your identification is your word against theirs.

Please understand me, I think they deserve to have the book thrown at them, but trial by Youtube is not the way to do it and your policeman mate, AKA emmyloupinkchic, will be laughed out of the CPS office.

 

[pendlecats]

FWIW, I think that as a craft, that has proved to be dangerous, should be used with care and when in the close proximity of moored or anchored boats, close to shore or anywhere there could be swimmers be used with extreme care.

The ones in the video were treating this responsibility with contempt, and as such should be brought to book, those that think they were not speeding, well, whatever book that does fit should be used, cos there will be one, that stops their arrogant mindless attitude to others safety.

I'm not into these things just like I'm not into motorbikes, but I have the greatest of respect for those that do and enjoy their hobby with safety and respect for others.

 

[dylanwinter]

I was on a mooring in the Strood - well above the jetty. Google shows that at no point is the strood more than 200m wide.

It is up to the beak to decide if a youtube video is evidence

the policeman - contact details are here

http://www.zoominfo.com/people/Lofti...61140265.aspx#

Simon is the one who will have to follow this up. I for one am glad that he is prepared to be proactive when it comes tracking down those who travel at stupidly dangerous speeds in crowded moorings and is prepared to put the interests of peaceful law abiding water users above those of the lawbreakers. I can't see the moral difference between a video shot by a human being and posted on youtube and a video shot by a CCTV camera.

 

[Elessar]

I can't see the moral difference between a video shot by a human being and posted on youtube and a video shot by a CCTV camera.

1, I could stalk you if I don't like you until you do something outside the rules. Oh is that propwash I see, no cone, tut tut tut, gotcha.
2, If I had a tape, I could approach an offender and sell evidence before posting.
3, If I had offended I could intimidate cameramen before they get the chance to post.

cctv is regulated and therefore probably fair. Trial by you tube, no thanks. I'd rather let the jetskier off than slide down that slippery slope.

If this had been a yottie being prosecuted the tone of this post would be very different. Because it's a jetskier it is colouring judgement.

 

[RIB_imposter]

SIncidentally, having freeze framed your video there is no way of identifying the jet skis or the drivers, so your identification is your word against theirs.

Please understand me, I think they deserve to have the book thrown at them, but trial by Youtube is not the way to do it and your policeman mate, AKA emmyloupinkchic, will be laughed out of the CPS office.

Unfortunately, as you own a motor boat, your reasonable and logical question will probably not be addressed, as you have been classified as a "petrol head". I had the same problem previously with the OP. If you hold your breath for any kind of sensible response, you will inevitably go blue and fall over.

I did NOT try and justify the jetskier. I said him being prosecuted made me smile.What I said was I am worried for my (future) privacy if we are all to be tried by you tube.

The arguments are being aired because again and again the petrol heads wade in to attempt to defend the indefensible.

I don't think anyone has tried to defend the speeding through your moorings or said that they thought the PWC riders had acted appropriately? But a number of people have questioned the validty of youtube evidence, and if this is the best use of police time. I also questioned why the "police were going to prosecute" this when what they should be doing is investigating - and establishing the facts/evidence.

My "justifications" were not meant to suggest that these guys had acted correctly in this case or were not at fault but were a response to the specific statement by another forumite (which I did quote) that "It is hard to find any reason, justification or excuse for the use of craft at the videoed speeds within close proximity to moored vessels."

However you seem determined that anyone who questions your / the police response is (1) sticking up for the PWC users (2) a crazy petrol head. I'm neither.

 

[jac]

Surprised at those sticking up for people breaking the law and risking peoples lives. Seems at odds with the response from the thames lot about the "yob" who videoed himself speeding there and posted...... Is it now that the MOBO's are closing rank to defend one of there own?

anyway.

As the tragic incident of last weekend shows - using any kind of craft at high speed in amongst others is dangerous.

As others have said - a bit of wash may be annoying to some - but excessive wash may swamp a small dinghy - but the key thing for me is that a boat moving at high speed may kill if it hits you whilst you're in . Granted a yacht doing 6 knots may still kill you but you have to set the limit at some level which allows people to make reasonable progress without recklessly endangering others and you have far more reaction & avoidance time at 6 than you do at 20.

For those saying that their spark plugs foul up or their wash is worse - then your boat is possibly not seaworthy. It should be able to cope with whatever conditions are likely to be faced - using it where you KNOW that you will have to stick to that speed you should have no excuse for having a vessel that can't cope - it's similar to the idiots who set out into storms in vessels that can't cope.

This is hardly trial by you tube - you tube and the public can't do anything with those pictures other than tut and debate and the culprit is not named. Only the police / CPS can do that and in the mean time they may just persuade one risky jetskier to slow down or avoid getting too close in case they get filmed and prosecuted.

The video may be admissable in court - they are probably not a case in themselves but may lead to witnesses making statements if approached or even a guilty plea by the driver and as for a waste of police time - This is actually dangerous - I wpould rather they investigated this than some of the weirder things that they sometimes get bashed for investigating.

Good Work Dylan - now just to get the dinghy clubs to stop laying courses that take up 99.9% of the available water!!!

 

[Elessar]

Surprised at those sticking up for people breaking the law and risking peoples lives. Seems at odds with the response from the thames lot about the "yob" who videoed himself speeding there and posted...... Is it now that the MOBO's are closing rank to defend one of there own?

Who has stuck up for the jetskier? Can't see any defence of the jetskier whatsoever.
Why do you think a mobo person would automatically stick up for a jetski?

And the bloke on the thames forum was a high spirited youth, who thankfully did no harm. He outed himself fortunately before he had an accident, saw the error of his ways and apologised publicly. I expect he learned from his actions and is now enjoying his boat. Far better result than a prosecution.

 

[sighmoon]

Fascinating reactions to this. I'm surprised it attracted so much controversy.

Man commits crime; there's a witness. What more do you need?

Witness also took a video. More evidence. Seems pretty straightforward to me.

Please understand me, I think they deserve to have the book thrown at them, but trial by Youtube is not the way to do it and your policeman mate, AKA emmyloupinkchic, will be laughed out of the CPS office.

The video on youtube is not the trial, merely evidence of a crime. The trial will be in front of a judge. A policeman has been made aware that a crime has taken place, and there is evidence; what choice does he have but to pursue it?

Youtube evidence has been used before:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/08/14/norfolk_broads_idiot/

 

[Doghousekeeper]

Currently in employment?

What's the first thing a professional (insert any role appropriate to the discussion) says when he starts work?







"Do you want fries with that?"

 

[JasonClark]

Fascinating reactions to this. I'm surprised it attracted so much controversy.

Man commits crime; there's a witness. What more do you need?

Witness also took a video. More evidence. Seems pretty straightforward to me.



The video on youtube is not the trial, merely evidence of a crime. The trial will be in front of a judge. A policeman has been made aware that a crime has taken place, and there is evidence; what choice does he have but to pursue it?

Youtube evidence has been used before:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/08/14/norfolk_broads_idiot/

You are indeed correct ! YouTube evidence has been used countless times as evidence in court, everything from kids beating up other kids and filming it on there Mobile's to petrolheads flying down the motorway at crazy speeds, incidentally it was'nt all that long ago the police managed to nab someone who's mate filmed him doing a 140 MPH on a motorbike on our local motorway, it ended up on youtube the police duly found it and managed to track him down and before he knew he was sat in court and fully prosecuted all on the back of a youtube video.

 

[Major Catastrophe]

Fascinating reactions to this. I'm surprised it attracted so much controversy.

Man commits crime; there's a witness. What more do you need?

Witness also took a video. More evidence. Seems pretty straightforward to me.



The video on youtube is not the trial, merely evidence of a crime. The trial will be in front of a judge. A policeman has been made aware that a crime has taken place, and there is evidence; what choice does he have but to pursue it?

Youtube evidence has been used before:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/08/14/norfolk_broads_idiot/

Not in this case, it hasn't come to court and there is no evidence they intend to proceed with a prosecution that I can find. In any case, the man was identifiable. In the matter we are discussing, the jet ski drivers and indeed exact details of their craft are just blurs and you cannot prosecute unless you can positively and undeniably identify the driver.

This entire discussion is ridiculous and just to put the record straight, yet again, their actions were stupid, probably dangerous, but there is little evidence they have broken any bye-law that can be proved beyond reasonable doubt in court. As to idiots filming themselves speeding on motorcycles with the speedometers in the picture, that is an entirely different ball game.

If I were to film a motorist speeding down my road, without any calibrated speed reading, despite Sarabande's video frame time signal (I think a death would be required before Essex police embarked on such a costly forensic adventure) the police wouldn't look at it.

They cannot even prosecute a driver who is caught on a villager operated speed gun supplied by the police and used to put the bejesus up errant speeders.

The offence has to be collected by a trained operator or calibrated static camera.

If anyone gets charged in this case, I will eat my ha....erm dinner.

Now, who hasn't stopped their strings slapping the masty thing?

 

[Clarky]

Jetskiers

I regularly sail dinghies on the sea and have been quiet scared by jetskiers doing what I can only describe as buzzing me,the kids in my boat were in tears because of it.Obviously we are quite vunerable in a dinghy .Next time I will film them and then try and get more evidence ie when they load the jet skis on to their trailers ,car numbers etc.
If we all did this regularly perhaps tragedies like the recent one could be avoided.
I think its good the police are sorting out jet skiers ,they seem to think they are above being held to account for some fairly awful and dangerous behaviour at times.

 

[maxi77]

I sincerely hope that prosecution by Youtube doesn't become the norm, but inless the drivers of the jetskis can be positively identified and traced this is a gross misuse of police time and public money to even try and trace them. I assume there is a speed limit within the moorings the alleged offence took place. If not, then upsetting you is not prosecutable.

Must admit, those ripples they caused looked fearsome.

My advice is to chill out a bit.

The answer to illegal or anti social behaviour is not to chill out, that just encourages the prats to do it again.

This is not prosecution by Youtube, rather the reality that mr plod does check out youtube for information on those breaking the law in a variety of ways. Round here they have been using it to track down gang members showing off illegal weapons, should we be chilling out about this too.

Not taking action makes law breaking acceptable is that what you advocate.

 

[Observer]

I have some sympathy with small boats for whom an 8kts speed limit is in that difficult area above displacement speed but below minimum planing speed. I have a 6m RIB (but no reliable speed meter unless I have h/held GPS mounted and powered up) and, in a quiet area of a speed restricted harbour, which typically has a speed limit of 8 or 10 kts, out of sight of officialdom and well away from moored boats, I will often try to balance the boat speed to be 'just on the plane'. The resulting speed is ~10-12 kts (maybe more or less over ground depending on stream/tide). The alternative is to plough along at 4-5kts, because at 8 kts I would be simply burning loads of fuel for not much advantage, the boat riding bow high and not feeling comfortable or settled.

However, in amongst the moorings or with lots of traffic around, it's simply absolutely necessary to slow down to 4-5kts in order to reduce wash and avoid upsetting other users.

So I acknowledge that I do from time to time exceed the speed limit (as I do when driving on the road) but, I believe, I pay due regard to the reasons for the existence of the limit.

There is, to my mind, a qualitative distinction to be drawn between that and (as appears to be the case from dylan's video) tearing through a narrow channel, probably in shallow water, at double the speed limit or more and paying little or no regard to the convenience, comfort or safety of other water users.

 

[fireball]

I have some sympathy with small boats for whom an 8kts speed limit is in that difficult area above displacement speed but below minimum planing speed.

It's a limit ... not a target .... !!!
Theortically I should lay into you about abusing the speed limit and instruct you to potter along at 4-5kts creating minimum wash without breaking the limit.
In practice I rather suspect your one of the sensible ones who acknowledges the general synopsis and along with your local knowledge you can determine if it is 'safe to speed' at that particular time.

I drive a 6m support rib for the club (on a rota basis) and it is impossible to cover the racing and stick to the speed limit - as the dinghies are all capable of doing over 8 knots (the limit in the harbour) so you have to exceed the limit from time to time - it is just a case of minimising when you do so and with no inconvenience to other water users.

IMHO the Chichester harbour patrol boats are not interested in the 'slightly over the limit' speeders - providing they are doing so sensibly, it is the ones that take the pee that they want - an unofficial policy which can be seen in their court cases.

 

[snooks]

In the matter we are discussing, the jet ski drivers and indeed exact details of their craft are just blurs and you cannot prosecute unless you can positively and undeniably identify the driver.

Erm..S'cuse me? Ever thought about the detail you're seeing on Youtube isn't what the camera captured? Youtube is compressed, and the frame rate reduced, the video Dylan shot is likely to have far more detail...

So if there is more information on the original footage, the driver, his PWC and his mate might well be positively identified.

 

[Fire99]

I have to be honest, I love a bit of speed and to be honest over the past 10 years or so i've owned a couple of boats where I could really tramp along.
My Brother used to have a speed boat and it really gets the pulse racing at 40-50kts.

However, the key point is that this was always done in open water.

Having just watched the youtube clip, I have to be honest, the PWC/Speedboat 'riders' are bang out of order.
In mooring areas like West Mersea I always expect there may be someone in a dinghy boarding their boat or perhaps just doing some boat inspections.
I've been known to be in the dinghy having a good look at my outdrive leg etc.

To be honest, the wash is probably far less than a motorboat pushing their displacement speed but that's not the point. It's about safety.

I don't want some blanket rules applied to PWC/Powerboat owners but i'd like to see cases like this followed up as at the moment, dare i say alot of people think rules at sea are guidlines and not the rules.

 

[Major Catastrophe]

I have watched in HD and the jetskiers are just blurs or have their faces turned away. I expect the boat and driver may be easily identified, but even then I doubt any prosecution will take ever place.