7 West Yorkshire police cars in high-speed chase of Porsche Cayenne 

Fourteen months?! For driving like that? Threatening to kill police officers with his car?? That's unbelievable.

Technically, it's over 10 years. As a foreign offender, once you get sentenced to more than 12 months,that's automatic deportation.Thus you automatically banned from the UK for re-entry for 10 years. The Judge is smart,to him, the earlier he gets deported, the less cost to tax payers. Why sentence him to 5 years and keep him behind bar in UK for years at UK expense?

@@SevenEllen It is shocking considering Pedos who kiddy fiddle get less. And if you are a bent copper you get a pat on the back.

he is banned from driving for 5years that's a very long time. Longest I've seen so far anyways.

@@Swinju That makes sense I guess. No reason to let them back in 10 years though. They should be permanently banned from re-entry.

Why was the driver's face blurred out??

@@brimkathstampex2306 He could’ve been born like that.

i started playing nfs mw pursuit music over it 😂

he was an immigrant and they don't like to make them look bad because they let so many in.

It was shit, we pay too much for our cars and can’t afford to put because of damages

The thing is though, how are you going to enforce a life ban, or any ban for that matter? It's not realistic. Lunatics like this guy will just carry on driving even though they've been disqualified, as he's shown.

He already didn't gave the right to drive,mhecwas disqualified. Only a lengthy custodial sentence, and as someone else suggested, confiscation of his assets to cover costs involved

Courts almost NEVER disqualify for life, it is so incredibly rare.

@@thefiestaguy8831 I know, it baffles me as to why. Driving is a privilege and these people have absolutely no right to be driving imo

Disqualification for life just means he will drive illegally for life lol. What's the point.

this country is a joke when it comes to sentencing. only drug dealers are sentenced harshly whereas an nonces and murderers have it easy.

As soon as the UK gets a government that is willing to invest properly into the police and justice system. That means more police out on the streets, the creation of new prisons and the general public accepting that a new prison may be built in their area and not make a song and dance about having a prison built near to where they live. Without more prisons, the judges will forever have their hands tied by the government on dishing out only token sentences so as to avoid prison overcrowding. In the meantime, expect crime to continue to rise.

When we have prisons to put criminals in or they deport immigrants like this man. But sadly that will NEVER happen as the UK is just far too woke and leftist liberalist now.

Anything above 12 months is immediate deportation. For 10 years. Plus 2 more months for sorting out shit, and getting him out of the country. Or would you rather he stays a drain on the state for 5 years?

I agree

Exactly - no one normally mentions this. I'm usually screaming this at the screen.

He's an immigrant and should have been deported and banned from w teeing the country, but this is the weak ass pathetic liberalist UK. Shocked he was sent to Prison at all.

@@DC-ef5qk keep screaming LOL

@@DC-ef5qk Thats Coz it Did not work in the past or anywhere in the world.. Hasher punishments for Crimes just breed Harder crooks. its a catch 22

I too think we (i.e. Europe, not just the UK) are too lenient with these morons. That said, the US has a greater percentage of its population behind bars than anyone in the world apart from China, yet I still wouldn't want to live there. More jail time and bigger jails doesn't seem to solve their problems. Our solution (too lenient) clearly isn't working, but nor is theirs. I sometimes wonder, sadly, if there actually is a solution?

I agree with you both.. He's pathetic and his sentence is even more pathetic!

If he had killed someone, he’d have been charged and sentenced accordingly. But, he didn’t. So, he wasn’t.

He didn't kill anyone. Serious like?

@@MKRM27 And that make i perfectly OK until it's one of you family members, Won't be so flippant? Other people lives to throw except not your family member anyone else doesn't matter

@@Johnketes54 blahhh

Must be White skinned so they charged him for mental distress. If Black skinned then for aggression and violent and if brown skinned then for terrorism. Racist Police are to serve white community. What could we expect from community which was built from colonial wealth and denies atrocities?

Agree 100%

I've got more respect for the Criminal than the Police. Death comes to us all Money is Printed Rule #1 Thou shalt not Kill.......But a Payed Soldier is a Murderer!! Humans only have Time👍

correct

Ten years in jail. I don’t think so. I would encourage pursuit of a financial recovery - take his house or whatever it takes.

@@rscosworthfan Of course it's not correct. If you hand out ten years for things like this, the criminal think he may as well make the crime fit the punishment.

I suppose its a question of cost analysis. Larger cars would be heavier and more expensive per unit - and require much larger engines therefore to reach the same speeds. Which would affect fuel efficiency and so cost would go up and time available for patrols would be reduced as they would have to refuel more regularly. Also I would assume replacing more standard parts of normal cars is cheaper than replacing custom more heavy duty ones. Also, I would presume - although I do not know this as fact - that panels would still need to be replaced on a heavier-duty car after collision for safety standards. So I suppose the only true benefit would be protecting officers in the event of contact, however, I would guess if safety was a serious concern they would have implemented safety features into the cars already - above standard ones.

The problem with making Police cars tougher with armour, ram-bars, etc, is that they become more dangerous to other vehicles/people, so if a Police car hits another vehicle, the damage/injuries to potentially innocent bystanders could be much worse. It's also possible that the changes would be such that the Police car manufacturer's type-approval for safety for that vehicle model could be voided.

There's a few reasons this isn't done. I'm serving in a different force and NONE of our general patrol cars, or even traffic cars have bullbars or armour. Some of our fleet are even just plain cars, no lights, no siren, nothing, just a plain car. 1) Cost - just fitting a car with decals, lightbars, siren, control unit, radio, MDT/IVMA etc costs thousands, easily £6,000--£7,000, it takes a team of technicians days if not longer to fully kit them out from start to finish. In terms of just the labour cost alone you're probably looking at several grand. 2) It looks too oppressive - public perception is everything. 3) More dangerous to other road users, such as pedestrians, cyclists, motorbikes, and even other car drivers in any collision. 4) It will of course weigh more and be less efficient, thus costing more to operate, whilst it might only be a few pounds a week, if you factor how many police vehicles there are in the UK and the fact that police vehicles are LITERALLY used 24/7 365 days a year, it will very quickly add up to be a lot of money over a financial year.

But tax payers pay for that bmw. They don't care, and they don't pay for them

But then who would buy BMW's other than the average gobby males with no bollocks?

You do realise judges don’t set the punishment levels available to them?

Old fogeys with 1970 values,

@@Johnketes54 Those 'old fogeys' would be dishing out harsher sentences if they were able to apply 1970s sentencing. It is the Home Office guidelines and the government that is the problem and not so much the judges.

Why blame judges? Blame instead the sentencing guidelines and the system that allows these scumbags the freedom to do this.

When will you people learn why that's a terrible idea and why our court systems (correctly) don't give such sentences? Think, man.

In reality people like you should be banned from typing for inability to write an error-less sentence in your supposedly mother tongue (not just for your racist assumptions). We should probably ban you from our country too for 20 years to life, trouble is no other country would be bothered to adopt you.

Yes but the lefties would really worry because he might be a ethnic minority and get shot! Like our travellers, So perhaps remember the predicament he is in and not abuse his saviour's hospitality

I don't give a damn where he's from. He'll be a threat to life wherever he is in the world if he's allowed to drive. I wouldn't be ok hearing he'd killed anyone in the world regardless of which country.

The name of the offender is Robert Williams and is from Leeds (see description). I went back to listen to the conversation in the cell and it seems that he spoke with a hint of a northern accent but seemed to be so intoxicated with something that his speech was very slurred. I fail to see why he wasn't charged with driving under the influence of an illegal substance.

Totally agree!!!

How do police know which reckless drivers are under the influence when theyre chasing them?? They don't find that out until they bring the pursuit to am end.

Who cares about themselves they don't

@@james8833 They only require a moving traffic offence to be committed in order to pull a driver for DUI.

@@bluebottle1617 Incorrect. I'm serving in a different force. They can stop you without any reason. They can check for alcohol under the following conditions: Suspicion of alcohol (Smell alcohol on a stop for instance). Moving traffic offence (Such as swerving left/right, harsh braking for no apparent reason or going very slowly). RTC/RTA. They don't have to commit a moving traffic offence to be stopped and checked for alcohol levels, if you're swerving left and right you can still be stopped and breathalysed.

@@thefiestaguy8831 Do you have the change in the Road Traffic Act 1988 which brought in arbitrary stops or the case law which brought it about? The conditions who mention were in when I was in the job in the 70s/80s.

They are rubbish

Most off them drink tea 😂

They do

@@stony303 They should’ve used it in this chase ages ago then! They had plenty of opportunities!

For the UK it's seen as a last resort option, only to be used when they present too much of a danger. PIT maneuvers can easily prove fatal for officers, the suspect and the public as the car can easily flip or go somewhere the officer wasn't intending. Instead they prefer to use the T-PAC as it often proves safer for all involved. Is also worth mention police cars in the UK are not fitted with bull bars and can be disabled by doing a pit

@@PieMan001 LOL they take hours and hours in the US, ...they have the reactions of Sloths🤣

They can't use the pit manoeuvre because Maggie Thatcher shut them down.

Back to Rwanda

@@edwardvalivonis23 Rwanda has less crime than UK. wonder how that happened

Should be banned from driving for life. Not that it will prevent him from driving, but still...

@@82vittagreed. It’s a shambles, I guess a ban for life would just mean more jail time and longer jail time for each repeating offence.

The pit is only used in extreme circumstances due to the dangers it can cause, instead the UK force is trained to used the safer T-PAC

@@trentr9762 Yeh but this guy WAS dangerous or did you not watch the video ??

@@crazycouter Bruh. The blue flashing lights warn people to move out of the way, and, also, how many people and cars were on the road at the time of the chase?

There is a huge difference between USA & Britain. Relatively open spaces versus much more congested areas. 90% of the time it would be too dangerous (to others) in UK.

Also difficult to do to a vehicle like it. Four wheel drive, 300+ bhp & 2 tonnes in weight. The Police cars weigh less and even if Four Wheel Drive they don't have the shove to complete that manoeuvre

It's not his, it's his girlfriends car 😂

@@harryjay4555 shame. I bet she's not happy with the damage

@M-ARKY Obviously own an utter shitbox if you don't find that believeable.

So you saw the hidden damage underneath right?

@@Combatting they got hit from the side, the damage wouldnt be under on the belly. the damage was a pushed in rear wheel arch which wouldnt have stopped them .

@@Mathewmartialart You clearly weren't listening to the police in the vehicle reporting that their airbags had deployed. You are assuming far too much and it is unfair to expect police officers to engage in a high speed pursuit with a damaged vehicle without that damage being properly assessed. When Josh asked you whether you had seen the damage underneath, he didn't necessarily mean under the car, but underneath the bodywork.

@@andrewjones-productions stop talking rubbish, the rear arch damage hasnt had their airbags deployed at all. try again mate.

Wasted? It's their job to prevent people like him killing people.

The offender's name is Robert Williams and comes from Leeds. Where exactly do you intend to deport him to?

@@andrewjones-productions Wales.

​@@andrewjones-productions. You lying bellend!

How unfunny. You obviously know it's repeating it to make it clear over the radio.

@@Perseus7567 Duh-uh.

> These pursuits should be examined in court as part of sentencing They are.

it's those two parrots' fault, they are good for posing and stories telling only

The US Do it sure, but a lot more people die in the US from police chases than in the UK proportionally. Wonder why. But hey, you're a big fan of it, so let's get the police to PIT someone at 80-100 MPH in to the back of your car 👍

That Porsche is like 4.5-4.8 it’s a quick car

​@@paulburns2287Ah yes, 0-60 is the only metric that matters when it comes to speed. Not gear ratios, Torque, Top Speed, Drag coefficients at higher speeds, Tyre grip efficiency ratios, Rear wheel horsepower... Nope, just 0-60 🙄

They are all traffic police units, they aint response officers for broken in houses, they only deal with mainly traffic issues as thats what they are trained for.

@@thwalesproductions yes exactly the point

@@thwalesproductions yes exactly ,

i see you don't understand the point....

That doesn't make good tv though. These shows are a joke.

Blow the car never mind tyres

But old fogey judges would be up in arm fair trail and all that bollocks OK, Fair sentencing and not by some old fool

@@Johnketes54 id say they had their fair trial the moment they failed to stop. The only "stinger" used should be the propelled type..

a Cayenne weighs 2.2 tonnes and is 4x4. A monkey could have taken out the lightweight police vehicles in one of these. I have one, the handling is unreal.

@@bostonbikebits6539 its not a new cayenne mate, looks like an 04 plate

​@@jays1175still doesn't take away the fact 2.2t car would wipe most cop cars out

@@andy110492 the cops had an x5 which is similar weight

@@jays1175 they don't have many of them and the x5 would struggle to keep up as it's a cayenne s which is a v8

Cause then he might die and we’ll have teenage girls making tiktoks about police brutality

Yea, because they are better drivers than you so you can't talk

British police are not use to pit maneuvers as they use TPAC tactics instead

Interceptors surprised he didn’t play a funny yes they need to retrain

@@xvxngeful3368 Something called "tactical contact"

@@Lancashire999 Oh shush! , it was a terrible bit of driving by the police. Facts are facts. No real need for you to shoot your mouth off over the comment, we don’t have to be a trained police driver to know that was a very poor attempt, at speed, with his trusting colleague as passenger.