Challenge speeding offence

Mildly_Miffed

Yorkshirebloke68 said:

where do I state stands to reason dunnit etc,  you arrogant !!!!!!. Your cherry picking all the easy options to admit guilt,  just to cave in to peer pressure and a system which is psychologically designed to ' don't dare question " ignoring that there are credible contradictions and no explanation given when politely asking for help. Sarcasm & Arrogance is a vile trait that no one asked for. At the end of the day its money and points i, and any reasonable person would question with such glaringly obvious contradictions.. this forum is meant to offer valid advice not sone jumped up self righteous tw4t's ignorant opinion.  So !!!!!! if you just come on here to gloat and act smug.

OK, I'm out.

I apologise for trying to help you see the mistakes in your flawed assumptions.

Good luck in court. I hope your attitude there is better than here and the other place.

paul_c123

Putting to one side all the emotion etc for a moment, and using the assumption that a single image shows the speed gun device taking a valid reading (ie ignoring the 58mph picture which missed the van but photographed a field, and the interpretation of the two images at different times and distances then making a calculation which isn't how the authorities determine the speed), doesn't this photograph prove 55 in a 50 enough to convince the OP he might have been speeding?

Or are we using the argument that its a motorcaravan, not a van?

Yorkshirebloke68

TooManyPoints said:

ignoring that there are credible contradictions and no explanation given when politely asking for help.

I beg to differ.

You have been given ample explanations for your confusion - explanations which will be provided to the court if you should defend the charge on the basis you describe.

The difficulty is that you gave consistently dismissed those explanations and instead maintain you are right. 

this forum is meant to offer valid advice

My advice (which is reasonably valid because I know a little bit about these things) is to minimise the damage by pleading guilty. Your alternative is to plead not guilty and defend the charge on the basis you describe. It is my belief you will not succeed with that. 

So it’s your call and ranting at people on here with whom you disagree will not alter that. 

Just out of interest, is there any reason why his has only just attracted your attention? Have you only just learned of the allegation? I ask because it may influence the way you are treated in the event you decide to plead guilty. I can advise you about that if you are interested.

But if you're only going to rant and rave , throwing insults, you need not bother.

I cannot understand why no one would question the speed time distance,  poor photo,  etc  ? Really cannot,  its basic science and physics .. they give a distance they claim must be accurate as calibration certificate states,  and insist I speed up so cannot be braking , and the time of 7 seconds is the 3 things any science teacher or test administrator needs to work out . By simply insisting " 'our laser is right ' and one picture of grass doing 58mph? Is the " evidence i was speeding " no onec has offered a simple explanation but just opinion and some are arrogant snide comments that don't do anything but gloat. Its impossible that both are right ? There is no justification to say its beyond doubt .. when its clearly not.. 

Yorkshirebloke68

Not 1 simple logical explanation.. just opinions and " plead guilty, take the hit etc..? Is this just camera operators or traffic cops comments or if you offered advice , what's your validation and experience to comment? As it feels like opinions and not one person has seen my side? It'd be great to see someone factually state how and why the issues mentioned will be tolerated by a magistrate or jury ? Its so loaded against anyone to just cave in .These camera operators are not infallible 

Rover_Driver

A possibility is that the pictures you were sent were 'to identify the vehicle' (especially the one of just the numberplate) which are often sent when the Police are sent a query. The Police may have other pictures of the incident which they can use as evidence. As above, if the vehicle is a goods van, and not on a motorway, both pictures show it is exceeding the speed limit.

RandomTourist

The process goes like this:

Speed gun instantaneously measures speed. 

If it's over the tolerance, police office requests driver's details from registered keeper.

Police can, if asked, supply pictures to help identify the driver: the pictures have no other purpose.

RK can ignore this - if so it's a guaranteed fine and 6 points and inflated insurance premiums for some years

Or RK can tell the police

Same for the driver (whether the same person as the RK or not)

So now the driver has responded.

Driver has potentially three choices, two of which depend on the driver being reasonably sure the offence has been committed.

1. Awareness course. Benefit: no points, no record on driving licence. Cost: about the same as (2), pplus some time.

2. Fixed penalty. £100 and 3 points; the points are unlikely to have any impact on employment or insurance (unless the driver keeps collecting them....)

The third option will arrive if the driver does nothing, or if they opt for it:

3. Court appearance. Once again there are choices:

3a Plead guilty - outcome much the same as 2 but likely to be financially worse (you are using up court time which we all pay for through our taxes)

3b Plead not guilty. Now the courts are required to accept that the speed gun (even if calibration were out of date) is functioning correctly. To demonstrate that it was not, the defendant will need to bring an expert witness to contradict the evidence of the police's expert witness. In the event of conviction, the defendant will need to pay both lots of costs as well as a fine and a victim surcharge and the court costs. The evidence will hinge on (a) identifying vehicle and driver and (b) instantaneous measurement being correct. (a) is a slam-dunk. 

Now a number of people here and on FTLA who know the process very well indeed have explained this. They see (b) as being a slam-dunk too, and are trying to save you time and money. It's too late now to save you points.

If you feel lucky, go for it. But do please let us know what the outcome is. If you are found not guilty there will be useful information for the folk on FTLA as well as elsewhere.

Nobbie1967

Yorkshirebloke68 said:

Not 1 simple logical explanation.. just opinions and " plead guilty, take the hit etc..? Is this just camera operators or traffic cops comments or if you offered advice , what's your validation and experience to comment? As it feels like opinions and not one person has seen my side? It'd be great to see someone factually state how and why the issues mentioned will be tolerated by a magistrate or jury ? Its so loaded against anyone to just cave in .These camera operators are not infallible 

People have seen your side and taken the time to explain why some of the assumptions you have made are mistaken. Looking at the evidence provided by the police it appears you were caught doing 55 mph unless the radar detector was faulty. It was within calibration, so it will be a high risk and high cost strategy to defend this successfully. People on here can’t magic up a viable defence for you from the information provided. I think this thread has run its course now. Good luck in whatever you decide.

Car_54

Yorkshirebloke68 said:

Not 1 simple logical explanation.. just opinions and " plead guilty, take the hit etc..? Is this just camera operators or traffic cops comments or if you offered advice , what's your validation and experience to comment? As it feels like opinions and not one person has seen my side? It'd be great to see someone factually state how and why the issues mentioned will be tolerated by a magistrate or jury ? Its so loaded against anyone to just cave in .These camera operators are not infallible 

The simple logical explanation is that the photos you've seen are not "evidence". They're essentially provided to demonstrate that your vehicle was at the time and place of the offence. That is a fact, not an opinion. The police are not obliged to disclose evidence at this stage.

The alleged speed was measured by laser in a matter of milliseconds, not averaged over a distance. Again, not an opinion.

It is perfectly possible to exceed the limit momentarily, while still maintaining an average below the limit. That is simple maths, not opinion.

No jury will be involved. Either a bench of three magistrates, or a District Judge. We can't predict their decision, but my opinion (shared by most other posters) is that they will either see or be persuaded of the flaws in your defence.

It is a fact, again not opinion, that the outcome of a guilty verdict will be very expensive for you, especially if you enlist an expert witness. Although an expert may well save you some money by persuading you of the futility of proceeding.

Finally, it is a fact that the system is not loaded to impose higher costs on anyone seeking to defend himself. Rather the fixed penalty system was designed to offer those accepting their guilt a quick and cheap alternative to the cost (for both sides) and time of a court appearance.

Yorkshirebloke68

RandomTourist said:

The process goes like this:

Speed gun instantaneously measures speed. 

If it's over the tolerance, police office requests driver's details from registered keeper.

Police can, if asked, supply pictures to help identify the driver: the pictures have no other purpose.

RK can ignore this - if so it's a guaranteed fine and 6 points and inflated insurance premiums for some years

Or RK can tell the police

Same for the driver (whether the same person as the RK or not)

So now the driver has responded.

Driver has potentially three choices, two of which depend on the driver being reasonably sure the offence has been committed.

1. Awareness course. Benefit: no points, no record on driving licence. Cost: about the same as (2), pplus some time.

2. Fixed penalty. £100 and 3 points; the points are unlikely to have any impact on employment or insurance (unless the driver keeps collecting them....)

The third option will arrive if the driver does nothing, or if they opt for it:

3. Court appearance. Once again there are choices:

3a Plead guilty - outcome much the same as 2 but likely to be financially worse (you are using up court time which we all pay for through our taxes)

3b Plead not guilty. Now the courts are required to accept that the speed gun (even if calibration were out of date) is functioning correctly. To demonstrate that it was not, the defendant will need to bring an expert witness to contradict the evidence of the police's expert witness. In the event of conviction, the defendant will need to pay both lots of costs as well as a fine and a victim surcharge and the court costs. The evidence will hinge on (a) identifying vehicle and driver and (b) instantaneous measurement being correct. (a) is a slam-dunk. 

Now a number of people here and on FTLA who know the process very well indeed have explained this. They see (b) as being a slam-dunk too, and are trying to save you time and money. It's too late now to save you points.

If you feel lucky, go for it. But do please let us know what the outcome is. If you are found not guilty there will be useful information for the folk on FTLA as well as elsewhere.

Totally ignored the stats AGAIN?. How can 7 seconds using even video evidence provided contains measurements 
150m covered Q: is this correct? Yes 353m - 203 m ="150m
Time 7 seconds and stating I was 55mph and trying to suggest 58mph using a field ? No? OK ignore the faulty photo ? Why provide it then ? Answer this How can a vehicle do 55mph and speed up cover, but cover only 150m when that would be 175m at least, ? How ? Because the gun is right but its measurements of distance is wrong? 
Its flawed to bits.  
Who are the flta members that know so much? Traffic cops? camera operators? Driving lawyers ? As no one has suggested they are anything other than opinions.. I mentioned im a veteran as it gives credibility to understanding range and optics plus I hold a science degree and have ran tests on speed time distance. Im not claiming the gun may not be accurate , but its claimed  its milliseconds shot says I was travelling at 55mph,  which in itself is a  technicality offence , not reckless , as a much heavier campervan can shoot by at 60mph ( mines a stealth camper but not registered so technically the 50mph speed i know about) .. the whole thing causes questions that have still not been answered with the contradiction of evidence which is all I asked for to be explained without a shadow of doubts.  All im hearing is opinions,  not backed up with links, facts or even legal case reasoning.  The govt website states demand non contradiction.  
Last post as this is useless speaking to no one who offers anything but please this etc . !!!!!! I know the routine favours caving in to bullying and intimidating fine aspects .. if you all never stand up for yourself because of money ? Its basic physics.  

paul_c123

THE TIME DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO PICTURES ISN'T USED TO MEASURE SPEED