First Time Speeding Ticket Help Needed!!

FARE-COP

No 'Bargepole', I wasn't referring to your post, but true to your chosen name, it looks as if you might have jumped in and made assumptions.

Perhaps you'd like to read through the thread again, maybe that will help.

For what it's worth, I agree with you and your post much earlier in this thread.

Perhaps if we all stop and read things a couple of times before responding, we could concentrate on facts.

The fact is that all of these alleged offences start with a driver breaking the law.

You're right, if there is a mitigation that you feel is truly valid, let it go to a Court for independent adjudication.

All I am saying is if you know in your own mind that you were caught fair and square and just want to let off steam, don't make excuses. Take the rap.

Because everyone else has played the emotional issue, perhaps I'll add this and I shall never post on this particular subject again

Can you tell me exactly what time of the day or night a 'domestic' is going to happen in your neighborhood?

Perhaps a young woman who feels threatened might run out of a house, frightened, not thinking of anything but the will to get away from a dangerous drunken bullying partner at 12.30 a.m.

You know the sort of place, a house that is adjacent to an urban dual carriageway with those wide grassy verges. In a blind panic she runs straight into the road.

How did she fare when that car hit her at 44 mph?

How will the driver cope with the memory??

Gordon861

FARE-COP wrote: »

Can you tell me exactly what time of the day or night a 'domestic' is going to happen in your neighborhood?

Perhaps a young woman who feels threatened might run out of a house, frightened, not thinking of anything but the will to get away from a dangerous drunken bullying partner at 12.30 a.m.

You know the sort of place, a house that is adjacent to an urban dual carriageway with those wide grassy verges. In a blind panic she runs straight into the road.

How did she fare when that car hit her at 44 mph?

How will the driver cope with the memory??

What a stupid bloody arguement.
By the same measure we should lower all motorways that pass with 500m of a house down to 30mph along with any train tracks and so on.

As soon as people start trying to build emotional arguments to put over their point of view some idiot brings up this sort of crap everytime.

jaydeeuk1

Gordon861 wrote: »

What a stupid bloody arguement.
By the same measure we should lower all motorways that pass with 500m of a house down to 30mph along with any train tracks and so on.

As soon as people start trying to build emotional arguments to put over their point of view some idiot brings up this sort of crap everytime.

Agree 100%. Nothing winds me up more than the argument that a pedestrian could have crossed the road and not looked, or ran on to the road etc. Regardless of speed if the moron is stupid enough to do that, then they deserve to be hit. And if it was my car they jumped out at, I'd be sure to reverse back over them, and then take them to court to pay for my repairs. They might look in the future.

Perhaps as well as referring motorists who do 32 in a 30 zone to driving courses, the same should be done to pedestrians, cyclists etc who think they own the road as soon as they step off the pavement?

And as for 'coping with the memory', I'll be seething for months...

Treadway1

goldspanners wrote: »

just because your happy to take it lying down then thats fine,doesnt mean everyone else does.
speed limits arent everything.
i too have 2 sets of points on my liscence, one set totally deserved,the other not so.
one set i was going to fast for the area i was in and time of day. the other was late at night,dual carridgeway 30 mph limit and at 12.30 on a wedensday night,caught at the bottom of a hill doing 44 mph.nobody around except me and a police car.

So just because YOU decided that 30 mph wasnt fast enough for that road at that time, you blame the Police Offcer for doing his job????

By the same note, does that mean that if Im in a shop and I dont think that a particular item is worth the price its listed for, that I can just throw whatever money down I want and walk out with it????

As Ive said before in these forums, I completely agree that there are some ludicrously ill judged speed limits in this country, however, they are what they are, and unfortuantely we dont get to choose which laws we do, and do not abide by.

Im all for arguing your case if you believe that evidence is flawed in some way, AND YOU WEREN'T SPEEDING, but if you know you were then put your hands up.

Lets look at it from another point of view. A male burgles a house, and is caught on CCTV. A week later the Police correctly identify the male from the CCTV and arrest him. They know they have the right man (Ill say this for arguments sake, as there are very few mistaken identity speeding fines issued, although I know this does happen), however when the case gets to court, the male argues that the CCTV is flawed in some way, and is acquitted. I completely agree that everyone is innocent until proven guilty, but here we have someone who has committed an offence, who knows they have committed the offence and has been positively identified as the offender, but gets off on a technicality. Is that right?

Treadway1

jaydeeuk1 wrote: »

Agree 100%. Nothing winds me up more than the argument that a pedestrian could have crossed the road and not looked, or ran on to the road etc. Regardless of speed if the moron is stupid enough to do that, then they deserve to be hit. And if it was my car they jumped out at, I'd be sure to reverse back over them, and then take them to court to pay for my repairs. They might look in the future.quote]

I actually quite agreed with the argument that prompted this neanderthal reply, however, I feel youve lost all credibility with this attitude!

Im all for keeping emotion and sentiment out of legal arguments, but not at the expense of someone advocating senseless idiocy as this!!!

sarahg1969

mcduff16 wrote: »

It does my head in when people moan about speed cameras. It`s really quite simply- don`t speed and you won`t get caught in the first place!!!!!!!!!!!!

That's a rather naive attitude.

It has happened to both me and my father. He received a NIP for 48 in a 30 (was doing 24-26). I received one for 39 in a 30 (photos showed they'd caputred a telegraph pole instead).

Of course you will say that if you know you're not speeding then you can take it all the way. But you have to await the issue of a summons and plead not guilty before you are even entitled to see the evidence against you.

How many people assume that the camera never lies and just pay up? Or don't have the courage to allow a summons to be issued against them, for fear of a much harsher penalty?

goldspanners

Treadway1 wrote: »

By the same note, does that mean that if Im in a shop and I dont think that a particular item is worth the price its listed for, that I can just throw whatever money down I want and walk out with it????

yes this is exactly right, you pay what you think its worth and they can sue you for the rest.

why all the question marks? need a new keyboard?

goldspanners

Treadway1 wrote: »

Lets look at it from another point of view. A male burgles a house, and is caught on CCTV. A week later the Police correctly identify the male from the CCTV and arrest him. They know they have the right man (Ill say this for arguments sake, as there are very few mistaken identity speeding fines issued, although I know this does happen), however when the case gets to court, the male argues that the CCTV is flawed in some way, and is acquitted. I completely agree that everyone is innocent until proven guilty, but here we have someone who has committed an offence, who knows they have committed the offence and has been positively identified as the offender, but gets off on a technicality. Is that right?

this is fair enough, if there isnt enough evidence or the evidence is flawed then theres no case to answer.
imagine you looked liked the guy who had just robbed a house or you were wearing the same clothes as him,but you got locked up because you were close enough.

if the police do thier jobs properly then there wont be anyone getting off on a technicality.

MrC_Beds

northstar23 wrote: »

I think it just winds people up hugely when they see 4 or 5 traffic officers manning a speed trap for which the purpose is revenue raising when we have burglaries, knife crime, fraud and all sorts of what we percieve to be more serious crimes going on. I know people will point out that traffic is a specific division but it all comes under the same resource umbrella surely?

The above point hits the nail on the head.

I was driving 20+ years on a clean licence before I got a speeding ticket. The indignation that you feel when you get the letter through the post is something else! I was caught in Bedfordshire, which at the last count, was statistically the most ineffective police service in the UK when it comes to dealing with pretty much anything.

Therefore, it grated on me (as it does most of the generally law abiding population) that the Police are seen to be pursuing the easy to prosecute stuff, to the detriment of dealing with serious criminality and anti-social behaviour, when there is all of a sudden a lack of police officers when a taxpayer dials 999!

The Police, as the prosecuting body, end up losing the support of a large section of society that they could well do with keeping on side. This is despite the fact that the camera van operatives are civilians and that speeding fine revenues go to the Treasury and not the Police and are not directly fed back in to initiatives to alter driver behaviour etc.

The trouble with all of this is that speeding is a non-issue to most people until they are either caught doing it, or are perhaps victims of an accident where excess speed is judged to be the cause. Therefore, it makes me laugh when I read all of the "don't speed and you won't get a ticket" type comments - at the end of the day, every person who has ever got behind the wheel has broken the speed limit at some stage in their driving career (knowingly or unknowingly).....most just haven't been caught!

Treadway1

goldspanners wrote: »

yes this is exactly right, you pay what you think its worth and they can sue you for the rest.

why all the question marks? need a new keyboard?

I think you need to read up on the Theft Acts of 1968 and 1978. What you say about leaving money and the company suing you for the rest is correct but only for situations such as restaurants where you feel the item supplied was substandard and not worth the listed price. If you think you can do this in a high street shop, then Im afraid you are sorely mistaken, as you would quickly be arrested for Theft (Shoplifting).

I dont feel theres any need for the immature comment about my typing either.... Lets just stick to the argument shall we???