JVS & BBC Three Counties Radio ~ It’s Simply a Matter of Research

By Dave Eden – The Community Press Group -

BBC Three Counties Radio host Jonathan Vernon-Smith promotes ‘good cop, bad cop’ hypocrisy

A couple of weeks ago I was invited by BBC Three Counties Radio to guest on the Jonathan Vernon-Smith morning show.

For those that don’t know him, which will be just about everyone, I found Jonathan to be an amiable, well-spoken man and the very antithesis of a genuine journalist interested in the subject under discussion.

But who am I to judge? Jonathan, after all, is the recipient of a ‘Gold’ Gillard award for the ‘Best Mid-Morning’ radio show.

In fact, out of a 30-minute, pre-recorded, interview he elected to play just a few seconds of it; a few seconds that prevented the disclosure of serious police corruption being discussed. In fact, the lack of any real substance to the circumstances, surrounding the issue of police officers entrapping motorists in sign-written vehicles, by encouraging them to use their mobile phones whilst driving on a motorway, was deemed perfectly acceptable. This was despite the fact that a solicitor invited to discuss the issue on the show pointed out to JVS that this was illegal.

The argument was made by JVS that, if they answered a call made by a police officer, they were likely to answer any call they received and therefore were predisposed to breaking the law. This attitude was seemingly accepted and endorsed by many of his listeners.

Skirting around the issue of police corruption, which I will expand upon in another article, let’s take a look at the greater implications of such actions.

It would seem to me that JVS and some members of his audience are not blessed with an ability to engage critical thinking or see the larger issue. Government statistics attribute 23% of all traffic accidents to drivers using mobile telephones, with many such accidents being fatal. As a road-policing sergeant (retired) I have scene managed multiple fatal accidents that have been the consequence of mobile phone usage. With this information being known to the road-policing officer, instigating the call, he or she must now be culpable for any accident that occurs as a result of their actions? Do you think JVS, or any of his listeners who support this method of entrapment, would embrace the methodology if, as a result of its deployment an accident occurred, in which one of their loved ones was killed?

Additionally, one of the most dangerous environments a motorist can find himself or herself in is on the hard shoulder of a motorway, which is exactly where they will be when being reported.

More police officers have been killed on the hard shoulder of motorways than by any other method.

Statistically, you are significantly more likely to be killed on the hard shoulder of a motorway than on the carriageway. In excess of 1,500 people die or are seriously injured on motorway hard shoulders annually. Given these facts, would any reasonable person truly believe that there is ever any justification for entrapping or enticing a motorist to use a mobile phone, endanger their live and the lives of other motorists?

Later in the week JVS enlightens us with more words of wisdom, this time on the subject of speed, specifically the rights and wrongs of covert, zero tolerance speed cameras on motorways. During the show he advises one caller to complain after he alleged an unmarked police car drove closely behind him, forcing him to exceed the speed limit. Given the acceptance of the mobile phone entrapment argument, one can only presume that an entrapment methodology is equally valid in relation to speeding offences. With only 3% of traffic accidents being caused by speed, as opposed to 23% being caused by the use of mobile phones whilst driving, surely encouraging a motorist to speed is a far superior and safer entrapment methodology. According to JVS, apparently not, as he seems to believe that the less dangerous act of being encouraged to speed is worthy of a complaint against the police.

Why do I want to shout “hypocrite”?

Mr. Vernon-Smith then continues to demonstrate his amazing ability for non-critical thinking and advocates that speeding is justified as a hazard avoidance methodology; “…for the safety of my family.”

He claims to have acquired this knowledge from a police advanced driver who promoted the concept that overtaking a hazard, such as an HGV using the centre lane whilst overtaking another HGV in the nearside lane, justifies an increase in speed to 80mph! As an advance police driver, with a clean record for over 20 years, I seriously doubt the validity of this claim. Advanced driving is all about, forward vision, hazard recognition and taking appropriate action on the approach to any hazard. An increase in speed from 70mph to 80mph, when overtaking a vehicle travelling at its maximum allowed speed of 56mph, is a simple mathematical calculation. At 70mph the passing time is 2.6298 seconds. At 80mph it is 1.5339 seconds; a difference of just over a second. However, the stopping distance at 70mph (in dry conditions) is 315ft. At 80mph (in dry conditions) it is 400ft.

The real danger is caused by the additional speed and greatly increased stopping distance. If a vehicle travelling between 65 and 70mph pulls out into the path of the overtaking vehicle, then the likelihood of the overtaking vehicle being in collision with it is increased by almost 25%.

Mr. Vernon-Smith’s biography identifies that he was employed as a BBC researcher. Maybe he needs to go back to his former skill set before he doles out any more dangerous motoring advice?

Judging by his recent work, the enthralling ‘Abandoned in Slippers’ story; the seat-gripping saga of a man wearing ‘SLIPPERS’ abandoned in the safety of a coach station for 2 hours before he could be put on another bus. Oh the inhumanity I hear you cry! However, let’s not forget the unspoken, but equally newsworthy sub-text of ‘luggage separation anxiety’.

This can only be described as radio genius!

Is it any wonder he got an award? Word on the street is, we hear, although I stress it’s just a rumor at this stage, that he’s planning a further major scoop titled ‘Who’s parking outside my house?’

Jonathan obviously believes that he, and his card-carrying colleagues at the BBC, is the pinnacle of professional journalism and other lesser mortals are simply bloggers ‘masquerading as journalists’ or ‘conspiracy theorists’ as he had the audacity to post on Twitter regarding The Community Press Group Ltd.

It appears that this Tweet has now been deleted.

I would challenge Mr. Vernon-Smith to produce one single piece of evidence that I, or any of my colleagues are, ‘conspiracy theorists’.

I have never written or spoken about anything I cannot definitively and empirically prove. I have never subscribed to, what some may consider, ‘conspiracy theories’, or personally promoted them.

However, I have a healthy respect for those that elect to follow, research and evidence their own understanding of what may, or may not, be the truth. I have no right to judge or belittle the opinions and beliefs of others. Our open editorial policy at The Community Press Group leaves the door open to any citizen journalist to publish whatever they consider to be of relevance; ours is not to judge, but to accept diversity of opinion and to take ownership of what we believe in. I am open to all interpretations of the reality of life and sincerely believe that the opinions of others are of equal importance to any opinions I may possess.

For instance, I am not a religious man. The existence of any deity is something that cannot be known. Yet billions of people worldwide choose to live their lives by the doctrines of religious teachings and scriptures. Is it not a fact that belief in an all powerful deity controlling the destiny of our planet and its billions of inhabitants is nothing more than just that, a belief, an emotional and intellectual commitment to something for which no provable evidence exists?

To me this could be construed as ‘conspiracy’; the greatest conspiracy of all. Yet I suspect that even the hugely opinionated Mr. Vernon-Smith would tread carefully around this subject.

So why does he, and others like him, think it’s acceptable to belittle and ridicule others that may hold other or alternative beliefs?

Is the question (or ‘conspiracy’) that the world may be run by a cabal of corrupt, self-indulgent international bankers and politicians, working towards global dominance through monetary control, illegal wars, domination of the supply of utilities, the basic needs of humanity, such as food, water and shelter and who have the determination of who lives or dies, of any less credibility than the existence of deities? Personally, I think not!

I may elect to believe that it is not as structured and deliberate as some may proclaim. However, I cannot ignore the millions suffering from the consequences of war, starvation and extremes of poverty. Whatever the cause, be it the alleged illuminati, the Bilderberg Group, (who recently met in Watford) wholesale global corruption, individual greed or sheer incompetence and disregard for the human condition by the powers that be, the significances of flawed global foreign and monetary policies are there for all to see.

What is important, is that we the people, regardless of individual opinions, religions, political bias, race, sexuality or perceived intellectual and social status, take ownership of the holistic problems and make this world a better place for our children and their descendants.

In the mean time, let’s leave the likes of Mr. Vernon-Smith to challenge the Earth shattering issues such as ‘Dogs on Leads’ and the lifestyle choices of ‘Swingers’.

I don’t know about you, but I for one can sleep sound at night, in the knowledge that JVS has his finger on the pulse and that he and other professional BBC journalists are out there ‘researching’ and challenging the burning issues of the day!

http://communitypressgroup.com/articles/jvs–bbc-three-counties-radio–its-simply-a-matter-of-research/