To have refused to get out of my car for the police in the middle of the night?

[AngeloMysterioso]

Was driving home from work at just after 2 a.m last night when I was pulled over by a pair of male coppers in a squad car after I swerved in the road to avoid a pothole.

I stopped, lowered my window a crack and then turned the engine off and made sure all the doors were locked. They both got out of the car and came over, asked about where I was going, where I’d been etc etc and then asked about the swerve- I explained about the pothole, and that I didn’t consider the move to have been dangerous as there were no other vehicles or anywhere near me (they had been some distance in front of me at the time and on the other side of the road but there was absolutely no chance of a collision) and no pedestrians anywhere around.
Then they asked if I would get out of the car and take a breathalyser test. I refused- I said I’d happily drive to the police station (maybe a mile- mile and a half away) and take a breathalyser there, but that I didn’t feel safe getting out of my car and being alone with two massive blokes in the middle of the night with no other people around, and them being in a uniform didn’t change that for me.

They asked a few more questions about my work, if they needed to would anyone be able to verify that I’d been working, gave me a lecture about driving safely and in the end let me go home with no further action taken - but I’ve just had a phonecall from another police officer basically telling me off for not just doing as I was told.

Was I BU?

Have you seen the stop & search statistics?

@gold22 Yes and people can drive with a small amount of alcohol in their system, which I also do not agree with. Yes it was my commenting on that the police automatically assume drink driving/drug driving. I made the point that some of us are just on the road at the time as we have to be. I you also aware that a lot of police are 'users' too!

Well that does appear to be the case for OP. I'd hope because the officers assessed the situation and realised she had a sensible reason to refuse and presented no actual risk.

In this, and I’m sure many other similar situations, the police were behind a car in the early hours of the morning and observed the driver behaving erratically.

They weren’t behind me, they were coming towards me on the other side of the road- but still a fair distance away when I went round the pothole. After they passed me they did a u-turn and pulled me over.

Had they been behind me they’d have had to dodge the pothole themselves and the whole thing might never have happened.

I wasn’t “driving erratically”, it wasn’t some violent sharp manoeuvre or anything- I just drove around a pothole! Maybe saying I swerved makes it sound more dramatic than it actually was. I don’t think I even crossed the lines in the middle of the road.

I don’t think I‘ve made the whole thing sound like some sort of Mexican stand off but if I have that wasn’t my intention- they were perfectly polite and I was polite back.

TBF I don't think they could have let her take the test in the car if she was only prepared to open the window a crack, they have to keep hands on the device.

I agree I'd be following up the phonecall if only to understand it.

We were on our way to a fancy dress party. Daylight time. Stopped at the junction a police car went past. Pulled out. He did a 180 pulled us in. Asked where we were going. Said to a party. Where is the party? He asked, in town we said. Wasn't giving him the exact address.

Why did you pull us over OH asked. Policeman replied because your wife hesitated at the junction when she saw me WTF!! I don't make a habit of pulling out of junctions when a car is approaching great way to get t boned.

Anyway OH knows a chief inspector. When he related the story he was annoyed at the cowboy tactics used by this officer.

Our chief constable years ago said if you get pulled over as a lone woman don't get out of the car but say you'll report to the police station if necessary

Rosscameasdoody the police aren't here to stop people at 2am. The swerving is. Separate thing. Driving at 2am is not a crime, we live a democracy (apparently!)

I think you keep missing the actual point- police aren't pulling people over and breathalysing them for being on the roads in the early hours- they do that should they have reasonable suspicion that the driver may be under the influence, this doesn't have to be a smell, although yes this would build the suspicion obviously.

A car swerving in the road can easily be an indication that the driver is under the influence, especially when the police car hasn't been behind and has not had to miss the pothole- it's acceptable to pull them over on that basis to establish the facts. Yes a driver can have a low level of alcohol in their systems and be driving legally, but my point was it doesn't take much to be over the limit hence there isn't always an obvious smell of alcohol to indicate they're drunk driving.

Also yes, I'm sure police do drink aswell - what's the bearing of that on this situation?

Yes, as I've said, in the OP's case she's fortunate that the police appear to have applied an element of common sense and discretion. My comment was aimed more at the users who appear to be under the impression that they can just refuse to comply with no consequences, or that the police will happily watch you drive yourself off to a random point of your choosing, or stand around waiting while you summon your DH.

They need to realise that regardless of what Wayne Couzens or any other police officer might have done, they don't have an opt out because they might be a bit frightened, and that refusing to comply with the police has potential to very quickly result in you needlessly getting yourself nicked, and potentially ending up with a conviction.

Yeah or raped and murdered and photos of your body circulated for laughs. I'll take my chances.

@Bunsandtophats
disrespectful???

respect is earned.

@Hoolihan Yes same here! They can arrest me before I would get out of that car.

We have always aimed for policing by consent

www.gov.uk/government/publications/policing-by-consent/definition-of-policing-by-consent

In particular, ’To recognise always that the power of the police to fulfil their functions and duties is dependent on public approval of their existence, actions and behaviour and on their ability to secure and maintain public respect.’

They have lost the respect of an awful lot of women.

A young woman near me was killed by a cop some years ago. He pulled her over on a dark road.

Surely refusing to give a breath test means you're a high risk offender!?
I think you've been very very lucky they haven't pursued this with you

They advise you to stay in your car with doors locked! Honestly, you just can't win!

I stupidly got out once when I was in my 20's. I'd been clubbing it and was made up to the nines! Male and female coppers. They checked where I was going I told them home and gave them the name of the farm. I think the male copper was so shocked that I was in my clubbing outfit he just said drive safely and that was it! 🤣🤣🤣

Oh my goodness.. are you joking? OP was being ridiculous and I feel genuinely embarrassed for women at this point. She’s lucky they didn’t arrest her.

If they sack all the abusers, misogynists, rapists etc then they'll have olenty of vacancies to recruit more female officers.

what percentage is “many”??? Is this more or less than the general make population?

Irrelevant. Members of the general male population don't have powers to tell me what to do. The police should be held to a far, far higher standard, and instead they have allowed many officers to remain in post despite multiple instances of misogynistic, abusive and violent behaviour. Their colleagues covering up for them and not reporting. UK policing operates by consent and as you can see if they wish us to consent to it they will have to change their entire culture, and many of their existing staff.

@CarrieBsWardrobe what is it about berating women, that you think will make women trust the police better?

The Met has a better answer, they have started to check all the back cases and accusations are are taking rather belated steps to cleaning up their act.

Whatever force you work for is obviously not, if you are to be believed as a spokes person.

You’re still using this vague “many”. It’s a waving the hand in a tough direction. The numbers I found suggest 0.3% of the met were on restricted duties due to accusations of a sexual nature.

And how safe are those double crewed female officers going to feel when having to deal with groups of 6ft blokes on their own with no male back up? Clearly no idea what dangers police face every day and night!

@SleepingRedSnowBootsAndThePea and you think that's a real solution to the situation I gave? Okay, how about this one-

There is a male kicking the shit out of his girlfriend for the umpteenth time, he's well known for this and has been in prison numerous times, the victim has rang the police - the offender has warning markers for violence towards emergency service workers, weapons and on the other occasions where he feels like not fighting, he legs it. Offender is 6ft 2 and keeps himself in check so is of bigger build.

There are no male cops left on the shift, not because they've done anything wrong but because they've been pushed out for purely female cops to come through. What then, with all the training in the world, women as a general rule are not as strong as men and that situation above is going to be harder to control, especially with a male who already doesn't give a shit about assaulting females. What if he runs, generally speaking, men are faster, are the female cops likely to catch him or would the male cops likely be faster and stand more of a chance?

Female only cops is putting more women at risk than they currently are, from someone who actually has a clue about policing