Speeding :(

owen_money

ado wrote: »

BTW was it the road traffic police who stopped you or was it a response or neighbourhood PC. Traffic police cars have calibrated speedos whilst those of response or neighbourhood are not, and therefore their officers would have to rely on their experience to estimate your speed.

Is it really right that people should be convicted of speeding just based on someones experience to estimate the speed? As you say its an estimation, how can that provide a safe conviction? You can see how people get stitched up. At least its only speeding, people have got stitched up for worse things.

wrightk

i know a guy whos now 70 odd who used to be a police officer quite high up in the force here. He once told me estimations of speed given by officers used to be used as evidence in court but it isnt anymore and they threw it out a long time ago as it is so unreliable.

They used to practice with their backs turned to a car going at, say 30mph (this was in the day of the type of police cars you see in heartbeat) and the officers would estimate the speed. They found that if for example the car was going along in a gear lower than what is normal for that speed, the officers would overcompensate by adding about 10mph to their predicitions!

So, as for estimations i dont think that would stand up in court at all. If they have some hard evidence ie laser,speed trap or otherwise plead guilty. If not, dont plead guilty, and learn your lesson and dont do it again

TadleyBaggie

Portly_Pig wrote: »

You need a Newton hearing and proper legal advice.

^^^^ This ^^^^

Strider590

Portly_Pig wrote: »

Audio and video is on all the time, the audio can no longer be turned off. Its a matter whether the evidence is time stamped to be saved.

I mean't on your phone

Alexwild

I think I remember seeing one of those traffic cops type programs where the officers used landmarks (2 bridges for example) that they knew were a certain distance apart and times how long it took the driver to travel between them. On a non-traffic car, if they have a video recording they can use it as evidence. I don't know if that's still the case though.

Years ago I was pulled over late one night on my way back from Staines. I was being tailgated in a 40 zone and so accelerated to increase the gap. The tailgater then shot up behind me an put on their blue lights. Once out the car the copper said he had to do 50mph to catch me up. It took all my might of willpower to void pointing out to him that the laws of physics dictate that if they caught me up by doing 50mph, I was doing significantly less! Fortunately I held my nerve, looked at my shoes and apologised profusely and, once I'd passed the breathalyser test, was allowed on my way. The gits then followed me home until I turned down my road giving me a quick smug flash of the blues again before speeding off.

maninthestreet

closed wrote: »

dining at 50 is very dangerous

as is putting your hands up at 50.

Surely you have heard of 'Fast Food' ??