Notice of Intended Prosecution

Rodney_Trotter

Jamie_Carter wrote: »

We need to deal with the facts, not fiction.

We do.

But it's ok for you to assume there wasn't a barrier.

Rodney_Trotter

Jamie_Carter wrote: »

Isn't that obvious???


They were caught in an average speed camera stretch, which is designed to catch people who break the speed limit.

And that is why I said its not necessarily dangerous.

AdrianC

Rodney_Trotter wrote: »

Sadly that appears to be the way of this board. Trial by forum means you're guilty regardless of the evidence

He has been accused of exceeding the speed limit. In the very first post, he admitted that he was on that particular road at that particular time, and that his awareness of the road conditions was insufficient for him to even notice the large and brightly illuminated speed limit signs, and that he does not know what speed he was doing.

What weight do you think that "evidence" would carry to a magistrate if the case went to court?

Rodney_Trotter

And that proves my point.

AdrianC wrote: »

He has been accused of exceeding the speed limit. In the very first post, he admitted that he was on that particular road at that particular time, and that his awareness of the road conditions was insufficient for him to even notice the large and brightly illuminated speed limit signs, and that he does not know what speed he was doing.

What weight do you think that "evidence" would carry to a magistrate if the case went to court?

Did the OP say that about the signs or is that something you have added because that's how they should be?

Jamie_Carter

Rodney_Trotter wrote: »

We do.

But it's ok for you to assume there wasn't a barrier.

How is a barrier relevant to this thread??


I was just giving examples of a few of the various reasons for reduced speed limits on roadwork sections of motorways. I wasn't being specific to this case.

Jamie_Carter

Rodney_Trotter wrote: »

And that is why I said its not necessarily dangerous.

But unless you know more about the exact circumstances, then your remark is pointless. They were speeding, and that is the point of the thread.

Jamie_Carter

Rodney_Trotter wrote: »

And that proves my point.




Did the OP say that about the signs or is that something you have added because that's how they should be?

I take it you have never driven through an average speed limit section of a motorway??

Rodney_Trotter

Jamie_Carter wrote: »

But unless you know more about the exact circumstances, then your remark is pointless. They were speeding, and that is the point of the thread.

I agree, it wasn't me who claimed the OPs driving was dangerous.

Rodney_Trotter

Jamie_Carter wrote: »

I take it you have never driven through an average speed limit section of a motorway??

I have many times, why?

Jamie_Carter

Rodney_Trotter wrote: »

I have many times, why?

Well it sounds like you are as observant as the OP then.