MORE than 4,000 officers from Thames Valley Police were caught speeding or jumping red lights last year - but none of them were penalised.

Officers from Thames Valley Police (TVP) committed 4,031 speeding offences in 2006 and while they was let off, 123,033 ordinary motorists were slapped with fines after they were caught by cameras.

TVP says all offences were written off as they were either exempt or found that no further action needed to be taken against them.

The findings have been slated by Kevin Clinton, head of road safety at campaigning charity The Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA), who said police need to set an example.

He said: "It's much harder to persuade the general public that road safety measures, especially cameras, are a fair and effective way of preventing accidents if there is a feeling that different rules are applied to the police."

But while Thames Valley Police decided not to give out any penalties for its speeding offences - neighbouring forces issued nearly 70 tickets to its officers.

Figures revealed through a Freedom of Information request show Thames Valley Police (TVP) officers clocked up a total of 4,031 offences for speeding or jumping red lights last year.

According to guidance issued by the Association of Police Officers, 3,951 TVP offences were ruled that no further action needed to be taken. This can be done if the officers were responding to an immediate call or were part of a pursuit, but any officer who does not meet the ACPO guidance will be prosecuted, TVP said.

The other 166 caught out were exempt under the Road Traffic Regulations Act because the officers involved were responding to an emergency.

Figures have also shown TVP vehicles were involved in 373 collisions during a pursuit or in an immediate emergency response last year. But in the majority of these smashes the police car did not come into contact with the other vehicle involved.

RoSPA reacted to the figures by saying police should not put themselves or members of the public at risk when chasing suspects and thinks any pursuits should be managed by senior officers.

Mr Clinton added: "Police, when they're caught breaking road traffic laws, need to be treated the same as members of the public. However, we do recognise that police are allowed to exceed the speed limit when responding to emer-gencies, but it's important that they do so in a safe and sensible manner."

And while thousands of officers got away without a penalty, 123,033 ordinary motorists were hit with tickets after their car was snapped by a speed camera in the Thames Valley region last year.

Out of these tickets: 75,856 people opted to pay the £60 fine and get three points on their licence approximately 35,000 signed up for a speed awareness course, which waives the penalty around 7,000 would have been taken to court if motorists wanted to try and overthrow them or if there were problems identifying the speeding driver.

The remaining tickets may have been dropped if the driver could not be traced.

Mike Race, 71, was caught by the controversial speed camera on Marlow Hill twice in one day in 2005.

The retired motoring correspondent from Deeds Grove thought the figures revealed a case of "it's one rule for them and another for us. It's very one sided. Why hasn't there been any kind of figure against the police?"

Maurice Collins, chairman of the TVP Federation, hit back at the figures saying police were under more pressure to get to crime scenes.

He said: "It's not about driving fast it's about driving safely. Safe driving is a bigger issue in the police force than it has ever been. I don't believe our officers drive recklessly for the sake of it. I do believe they take safe decisions in relation to their driving and according to the need.

"Often that need is dictated to by the public. If there is a burglary in progress the victims and the witnesses want the police to get there as soon as possible. The public needs this exemption for the police to tackle crime."