speeding

silverfoxdude

i got a ticket for speeding a few moths ago and decided to plead not guilty i have just recieved a court summons to plead guilty or if i still want to plead not guilty they will set another date. inside the form there was a statement from the officer and this was part of it (i was operating a pro laser hand held speed detection device number 16265 without recording facilities) so it looks like its just his word against mine? can anyone tell me if they need physical proof?

Conor_3

No, they don't. Good luck but be aware you may end up with 4 points instead of 3 plus higher fine.

anewman

I would only be contesting it if you truly believed you were not speeding. This question is probably best asked on pepipoo.com anyway as those in the know all gather there, and no doubt the question has already been asked there and answers are already there.

bargepole

silverfoxdude wrote: »

i got a ticket for speeding a few moths ago and decided to plead not guilty i have just recieved a court summons to plead guilty or if i still want to plead not guilty they will set another date. inside the form there was a statement from the officer and this was part of it (i was operating a pro laser hand held speed detection device number 16265 without recording facilities) so it looks like its just his word against mine? can anyone tell me if they need physical proof?

They don't need to provide physical proof, the prosecution will rely on the officer's statement, known as an s9.

What you could do, although this is a high risk strategy, is plead not guilty, and when you get the new trial date, write to the local CPS stating that you do not accept the officer's s9 statement, and require him to be present in court to give evidence and be cross-examined by you. You should also request a copy of the calibration certificate for the device, which should have been calibrated within the preceding 12 months.

The CPS procedures over speeding cases are so laissez-faire that they may, and often do, turn up in court without having called their witness or produced the certificate. You can then apply to have the case dismissed, and claim your costs for the return trip to Court at 45p per mile.

However the downside is that if the CPS are on the ball, with proper witness and documentation, you will most likely get hit with a higher fine than £60, costs of £300+ and 4 or more points.

silverfoxdude

bargepole wrote: »

They don't need to provide physical proof, the prosecution will rely on the officer's statement, known as an s9.

What you could do, although this is a high risk strategy, is plead not guilty, and when you get the new trial date, write to the local CPS stating that you do not accept the officer's s9 statement, and require him to be present in court to give evidence and be cross-examined by you. You should also request a copy of the calibration certificate for the device, which should have been calibrated within the preceding 12 months.

The CPS procedures over speeding cases are so laissez-faire that they may, and often do, turn up in court without having called their witness or produced the certificate. You can then apply to have the case dismissed, and claim your costs for the return trip to Court at 45p per mile.

However the downside is that if the CPS are on the ball, with proper witness and documentation, you will most likely get hit with a higher fine than £60, costs of £300+ and 4 or more points.

thanks for your advice although im surprised that a court can find you guilty on just the say so of an officer, as he has no actual proof of my speeding .refering to his gun having no recording facilities.

davetrousers

Are you trying to get away with it?

silverfoxdude

i was driving home at 2am on a major A road country road that was straight and wide you could see a mile ahead of you with no other cars i was doing about 70 instead of 60 this traffic car was hiding in a lane.since this has happened i have never gone over 60 and everyone overtakes me on the same road .he was just being a pratt there to make money.he should be there to look out for dangerous drivers and not to act like a stationery speed camera atleast with them you get warnings

Hintza

silverfoxdude wrote: »

i was driving home at 2am on a major A road country road that was straight and wide you could see a mile ahead of you with no other cars i was doing about 70 instead of 60 this traffic car was hiding in a lane.since this has happened i have never gone over 60 and everyone overtakes me on the same road .he was just being a pratt there to make money.he should be there to look out for dangerous drivers and not to act like a stationery speed camera atleast with them you get warnings

Unfortunately that is the way of the world these days. The motorist is required to pay to keep the lights on just now.

Incisor

silverfoxdude wrote: »

thanks for your advice although im surprised that a court can find you guilty on just the say so of an officer, as he has no actual proof of my speeding .refering to his gun having no recording facilities.

It's nothing to do with facts or the truth. A court will settle for evidence. To them a policeman's statement is copper bottomed evidence.

daveyjp

silverfoxdude wrote: »

i was driving home at 2am on a major A road country road that was straight and wide you could see a mile ahead of you with no other cars i was doing about 70 instead of 60 this traffic car was hiding in a lane.since this has happened i have never gone over 60 and everyone overtakes me on the same road .he was just being a pratt there to make money.he should be there to look out for dangerous drivers and not to act like a stationery speed camera atleast with them you get warnings

So speed limits are optional at times to suit you?

Country roads, see for miles, no danger?. Ever seen a pheasant fly out and hit a car? I have and the car ended up in a ditch on the other side of the road as the driver was so shocked he swerved to avoid it and lost control - good job nothing was coming the other way.

Let those who want to overtake do so, then they get the three points (and risk an accident) not you.

So 70 instead of 60 isn't dangerous? If you were clocked at 70 your speedo was probably reading 75ish.

How much quicker did you get to your desitnation doing 70 rather than 60?

No sympathy from me, but enjoy your day in Court, just take your cheque book to cover costs should you lose.

silverfoxdude

daveyjp wrote: »

So speed limits are optional at times to suit you?

Country roads, see for miles, no danger?. Ever seen a pheasant fly out and hit a car? I have and the car ended up in a ditch on the other side of the road as the driver was so shocked he swerved to avoid it and lost control - good job nothing was coming the other way.

Let those who want to overtake do so, then they get the three points (and risk an accident) not you.

So 70 instead of 60 isn't dangerous? If you were clocked at 70 your speedo was probably reading 75ish.

How much quicker did you get to your desitnation doing 70 rather than 60?

No sympathy from me, but enjoy your day in Court, just take your cheque book to cover costs should you lose.

yeh yeh yeh not asking for your sympathy mr never slips over the so called speed limit