"Speed Guns dont work" says Police Supt charged with driving at 79mph..

Altarf

T800 wrote: »

A senior policewoman clocked speeding is challenging the charge by claiming that the speed gun used by her own force was not accurate

So why is she doing that?

T800 wrote: »

Superintendent Helen Chamberlain, 43, was recorded driving at 79mph on a road with a 50mph limit.

Ah I see. Now that is unusual, a police officer being prosecuted for speeding

T800 wrote: »

She was given a verbal warning by the officer who stopped her.

You mean the usual conversation when a speeding copper is stopped by one of their own (and that conversation isn't "your nicked"), especially so when it is a senior officer stopped by one of the rank and file.

T800 wrote: »

But a more senior officer disagreed with the decision and asked the Crown Prosecution Service to review the case.

Ah, now we get to the real story, she had previously pi**ed off someone more senior, and this is his revenge.

T800 wrote: »

Supt Chamberlain, from Harworth, Nottinghamshire, who works for Nottinghamshire police's city division, pleaded not guilty to a charge of speeding at Nottingham magistrates' court on Wednesday.

So she now retaliates by challenging the speed camera, knowing full well all the problems such a defence from someone in the police will cause.

withabix

If she loses, she ought to be sacked for Misconduct in Public Office or something suitable.

skiddlydiddly

Judas wrote: »

Absolutely nothing new here; people regularly try these defences and most of them fail these days although it wouldnt surprise me if in this case they happen to lose a calibration certificate somewhere

Secondly the office who gave out the caution should be up on a misconduct charge; no way anyone else driving at that speed would have received anything less than a summons on that day.

Maybe, maybe not.They have a certain amount of discretion and I've been present when its been given.A friend was speeding well over the posted limit, late at night with me in the car.We had a genuine reason for this which the police accepted and he was let off.

darich

Coveredinbees!!!! wrote: »

29 MPH over the limit and she's blaming an inaccurate reading what's that a 58% error

She doesn't need it to be proven as 58% inaccurate......just enough to prove that her speed as charged is wrong and then can get off.

But even with a 10-15% margin for error......she was significantly over the limit and deserves to be punished.

Paradigm

I think we will probably find that there will be some "compromise" resulting in a speed awareness course

I very much doubt this will get near a court!

tomstickland

The hand held guns can create massive errors - remember the 30mph wall?

Altarf

Paradigm wrote: »

I think we will probably find that there will be some "compromise" resulting in a speed awareness course

I very much doubt this will get near a court!

I bet the compromise is an early retirement on health grounds by either the Superintendent or the boss she annoyed.

Paradigm

Altarf wrote: »

I bet the compromise is an early retirement on health grounds by either the Superintendent or the boss she annoyed.

Quite possibly, with a very lucrative pay off!

Like I said, if this gets to court I'll chew my own leg off A deal will be done!

VK-2008

she will get slap on wrist thats it
but as i said the cops will have not followed certain procedures they are supposed to when doing a speed check meaning she will know how to get off on technicalities

skiddlydiddly

Judas wrote: »

They do but this would never be 60% over the speed limit; 60% under every guideline is a summons and potential ban territory.

The fact that a reviewing officer knew this proves the officer on duty was guilty of misconduct.

It was significantly over 60%, much much more but there were extenuating circumstances which the officer accepted.This was a patrol car though, no speed gun involved.