Help wrongly accused of using mobile phone whilst driving

longforgotten

I hope you get on ok

I'm afraid what I've heard of dealings with the police is if its your word against theirs they'll win 99 times out of 100. Perhaps its best to not take the risk and take it on the chin. Very gawling I know but might be cheaper in the long run.

I would never trust a copper ever since one waved my Dad, who was driving his car, out onto the main road , out of a car park. It appeared a helpful gesture, until as soon as Dad's tyres touched the main road he then stopped him and did him for a bald tyre. Later found out the copper had gone around the car park looking at all the cars, checking them. I would suggest it would have been a better PR exercise to have warned Dad rather than actually set him up ! I can't help thinking they'd nick their own mother !

mgriff1887

I have just read through this thread..makes very interesting reading.
I was driving home today, and was pulled over by a very young policeman who cut in behind me on a large roundabout. He asked me if I knew what I was being pulled over for. To which I replied honestly 'No'. He said that I had been pulled over for 'Using a mobile phone whilst driving' I was in shock! I had NOT been using my phone! I asked him if he was serious, and soon saw by his expression that he was. He was quite a nice chap - but was obviously sadly mistaken in what he saw. Now, I DO have my mobile in a holder (I have the option of a bluetooth headset or Loudspeaker to take calls), and a TomTom Go Sat Nav device on display. I believe that when he cut in behind me, he saw either my phone or my TomTom and assumed that I was making a call.
When I challenged him on this and asked him if he COULD be mistaken, he along with his (even younger looking) colleague looked at each other and I could see the unspoken realization that they knew that they were in fact mistaken. In fact the WPC could not look me in the eye as she spoke to me.
I asked him to take the phone to the station so that there could be no assertion that I had tampered with it..he refused. I asked him to write down the exact time that he allegedly saw me using it. He would not do that but said that he would estimate the time when he wrote out the ticket. I was not happy with this because I HAD received a call about 3 minutes earlier which I took hands free. If I go to court and produce records they will point to this call as 'evidence'. I am damned if I do, damned if I dont!
They nonetheless proceeded to issue me a £60.00 penalty and a 3 point endorsement. Funnily enough a while back I saw a WPC driving a big police van eating a huge ice cream..tried to get a photo but I was too slow!
I am the kind of person that cringes and fumes when I see people using their phones when driving. I would never manually use my phone whilst driving.
I have a clean license, and have never ever had even the slightest hint of a police record. We motorists are now fighting a loosing battle!
It makes me sick that I pay the best part of £1000.00 per month in TAXand can never seem to to get assistance from the police when I need it, but when they need to fill their quotas I get stung!
I wonder how many people were being mugged or knifed whilst this was taking place!!!
Sorry to go about this but I am soooo passionate about this!
children are being kidnapped under our very noses and the police have nothing to go on...or so they say. They never know where to start, and always say that they have no leads! they appeal for witnesses but rarely get anywhere. We just hold our breaths, pray and wait for the inevitable sad news..
BUT, you park your car AN INCH over a red line ANYWHERE in the country, and they can produce CCCTV footage of where you came from how long you were parked, and where you drove to. They can re-construct your whole journey!! WHY? I'll tell you WHY because they can get MONEY out of you, thats why!!! Who cares about the safety of our children! if they find them there is no money in it. They would rather spend MY TAX MONEY to put up more and more cameras to get more and more money out of me.
So.....there you go.
Sorry to have taken up so much of your time reading this.

gromituk

I don't understand your posting. What is illegal full stop is to use a hand-held phone while driving. If you say you have devices in holders, then they wouldn't have pulled you over just because they had seen them.

As to the rest, well I'm glad that you hate people using phones hand-held while driving, which makes me puzzled about your attack on the priorities of the police. After all, many more people get killed in road accidents than are kidnapped, and I imagine that the primary threat to children's safety is poor driving.

Driving is expensive. To be able to go wherever you like, door to door, in a heated metal box without expending any effort, while using huge amounts of energy for which ultimately everyone suffers, is a privilege, not a right.

Oh and I know how annoyed you are (goodness knows I would be) but please try to avoid the "speed cameras are to raise money" myth. It is quite clear where the revenue from speed cameras goes - into road safety measures. One death costs rather a lot of speeding fines.

grayme-m

gromituk wrote: »

Oh and I know how annoyed you are (goodness knows I would be) but please try to avoid the "speed cameras are to raise money" myth. It is quite clear where the revenue from speed cameras goes - into road safety measures. One death costs rather a lot of speeding fines.

Here is an email I received from someone that disagrees with you Gromit:

Hi Graham --

Something very disturbing came to light last week...

Research into whether speed cameras shift accidents elsewhere was cancelled by Government, it emerged on Tuesday.

The Government were due to research the side effects of speed cameras -- in other words they were going to tell us whether cameras simply change the landscape of road safety, by shifting accidents elsewhere, as many BTST members have been saying for ages.

What I'm talking about here is the dramatic braking caused by speed cameras, the lack of traffic officers looking out for other motoring offences such as drink or drug driving, as well as other indirect consequences.

The Government were going to do this investigation, but now they’re not...

The admission came in response to an enquiry made by us under the terms of the Fre'edom of Information Act.

One BTST campaigner said... “It is grossly irresponsible that the DfT has cancelled the important ‘side effects’ speed camera research. I can only conclude that they were scared about the likely results and would rather save face than save lives.”

Research indicates that at best, speed cameras save about 25 lives a year.

That's obviously a very good thing ... except ...

... If the side effects cause MORE than this number of fatalities, then the cameras are actually killing more people than they’re saving.

The fact is that we don't know for sure (although I am sure you will probably have an opinion on this one, Graham?)

There have been accusations of a cover-up.

Imagine... if it turned out that speed cameras do not actually save lives -- and even COST lives, that's hardly the stuff the DfT would be wanting to crow about.

And while this possible conspiracy is going on, more and more speed cameras and mobile locations are being set up all over the UK.

Last month, we added 26 new speed camera sites and 11 new mobile speed trap locations to the BTST Locator Database.

If you already own a BTST Locator, then I strongly suggest you update it NOW so that you are completely up-to-date.

If not, then you can grab your own Locator at: http://www.xxxxxxxxxxxx.com/danstrauss/

All the best,



Dan Strauss, Site Manager.




Personally I also believe that they are used to extract money at opportunities where they are unneccesary; I drive past them on certain roads where I cannot see what the hazard is that warrants them over others.

Plus, correct me if I am wrong, but I thought the fines ended up in the Government's coffers rather than into road safety measures.

Anyway, back on topic, I'd be livid if 'caught' using a mobile phone as I just don't. What is to stop a dodgy policeman just catching me, issuing out a penalty and then it is his word against mine if it goes to court?

As Mike says, why can't they use video evidence?

gromituk

And the moon landings were faked too. :rolleyes: (I can accept that government figures are exaggerated though - exaggeration occurs on both sides.)

Personally I don't have particularly strong opinions about speed cameras, but every set of traffic lights should have red light cameras, and I don't understand why they aren't installed every time a set of lights is replaced/added - the additional cost is peanuts.

I'm sure there are police abusing the new phone usage rules, but they've got so many opportunities for abuse already that I hardly think it makes much difference (cold comfort for the victims here though that is).

Nobody should use any sort of a mobile phone while driving. Common sense and research shows that it is very distracting (not comparable at all to listening to the radio or talking to a passenger), and the unfortunate thing about collisions (euphemistically called "accidents") is that the victims are often innocent parties. Don't put it in a holder - switch the damned thing off. That's what voicemail and SMS is for. The call can wait.

grayme-m

Not much to add to the rest of your post; but I've nearly had an accident as a result of a speed camera.

The problem is not speed in itself, it is people not driving correctly (either on phones, too fast for conditions, to close to the car in front, etc)?


I can't see any other evidence being fair on using a phone other than video, even evidence the phone was used is not enough if a passenger was using it?

mgriff1887

I agree that using mobile phones is a hazard..however the law does allow for their use whilst driving if they are 'hands free' and there is no manual contact with the phone. It can be argued that even using them in this way can be somewhat unsafe..
However is it more unsafe than smoking at the wheel? I am a non smoker and I am amazed that it is legal to open a pack of cigs, put one in your mouth, then light it with a naked flame, proceed to drug yourself and others in the vehicle and produce noxious smoke that can get in your eyes and obscure your vision! I wonder which is more unsafe??

banger9365

the law is clear on using a mobile phone when you are driving and using handsfree or car kits you will and can get 3 points and £60 fine if found using them
http://www.thinkroadsafety.gov.uk/advice/mobilephones.htm
look at number 3
3) Is a driver allowed to use any other equipment like a hands-free mobile phone? Why don't you just make it illegal to use all mobiles when driving?
The use of a hands-free phone or other equipment is not specifically prohibited because it is difficult for police to see it in use. But if you drive poorly because you are distracted by a phone conversation for example, then the police can prosecute for failing to have proper control of the vehicle. The same penalty applies as for hand-held phones - 3 points and a £60 fine.
HGV and PCV drivers can lose a lot more than 3points and £60 fine just little reminder for professional drivers out there like me

MrCrusher

tillson wrote: »

I am going to leave it here. There seems to be quite a lot of unsubstantiated general accusations regarding the integrity of the police going on here. Perhaps the fact that no one can evidence their remarks says it all.

I think the plain fact is that people can't accept being told that they are doing something wrong. And when confronted with the fact rely on the rather tired excuse of the police making it all up.

I know these are listed elsewhere on this thread but I would suggest that ALL drivers on this forum browse the following websites-I think you will find them both very useful AND enlightening regarding the current state of Traffic Law enforcement and government Transport policy. Be sure to read the Press Releases and News sections on the ABD website. You'll find all the articles about Richard Brunstrom- Chief Constable of North Wales especially worrying.

http://www.abd.org.uk/

http://www.pepipoo.com/

Not only is the legal advice offered invaluable, their no nonsense, none politicised, none agenda based information is a breath of fresh air.

The people who are trying to limit our personal freedom through the creeping nanny state, spin and useless over-legislation would have free reign to do to us whatever they wanted without the likes of these websites, keeping their eyes open for us.

What makes matters worse, there are too many sheep out there who believe all the hype and spin that we are force fed which makes it that much easier for the Government and it's agents- Police, etc to do whatever they want to us.

Eg-Speed related deaths, Climate change, Osama Bin Laden+ 9/11=Iraq War, etc, etc.

Who says the Powers that be don't lie to us.

They're all rants for a different forum though.

MrCrusher

madmax2 wrote: »

stiffnuts69 can you please clarify what you mean by "bull"? I think it is highly irrelevant how many posts people have on and whether they are "newbies" as you put it.

Here, here