Inaccurate Laser/Camera equipment
Discussion
Violation of European Law. Section 172 of The Road Traffic Act is used to request information that incriminates. Failure to comply with the legislation is a criminal offence which results in penalty if charged. The ECJ in numerous cases have stated that you cannot request information that would incriminate by way of penalty.
There are numerous cases awaiting a hearing before the ECJ however, the waiting time for such a hearing is long. In the meantime the government rakes in £225 million in corrupt speeding fines. Corrupt because the camera/laser equipement have been proven inaccurate within Crown Courts amongst other matters and still, the judiciary persist to prosecute.
The petition further highlights matters.
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/Violation/
N.B. This thread belongs to Cen, noticed it was posted without a title!
There are numerous cases awaiting a hearing before the ECJ however, the waiting time for such a hearing is long. In the meantime the government rakes in £225 million in corrupt speeding fines. Corrupt because the camera/laser equipement have been proven inaccurate within Crown Courts amongst other matters and still, the judiciary persist to prosecute.
The petition further highlights matters.
http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/Violation/
N.B. This thread belongs to Cen, noticed it was posted without a title!
The point on self-incrimination has been raised before in the European Court of Human Rights and in previous cases they have upheld it on the basis you still have the choice of not complying. The trouble is many of the cases come from other EU States so they have to apply the same principles across the board.
I can't comment on the accuracy of speed cameras because it depends on whether they are used correctly and sensationalist journalists after a story will deliberately operate them incorrectly to get a cheap headline. having said that, I haven't seen the company responsible for making these devices rush forward to publicly and scientifically prove their accuracy beyond doubt by correct use.
Still, no harm in keeping at 'em because clarifying the law is just as important as enforcing it.
I can't comment on the accuracy of speed cameras because it depends on whether they are used correctly and sensationalist journalists after a story will deliberately operate them incorrectly to get a cheap headline. having said that, I haven't seen the company responsible for making these devices rush forward to publicly and scientifically prove their accuracy beyond doubt by correct use.
Still, no harm in keeping at 'em because clarifying the law is just as important as enforcing it.
I agre with the priciple behind the petition, but unfortunately the petition is poorly worded :-
"The aforementioned section then, violates European Law. The ECJ (European Court of Justice) have on numerous occasions in prior case stated that in Criminal Offences, information that would incriminate by means of penalty is forbidden."
What was meant, I assume, was :-
"The aforementioned section then, violates European Law. The ECJ (European Court of Justice) HAS on numerous occasions in prior caseS stated that in Criminal Offences, DEMANDING by means of penalty information that would incriminate is forbidden."
Has the ECJ actually made such a statement?
"The aforementioned section then, violates European Law. The ECJ (European Court of Justice) have on numerous occasions in prior case stated that in Criminal Offences, information that would incriminate by means of penalty is forbidden."
What was meant, I assume, was :-
"The aforementioned section then, violates European Law. The ECJ (European Court of Justice) HAS on numerous occasions in prior caseS stated that in Criminal Offences, DEMANDING by means of penalty information that would incriminate is forbidden."
Has the ECJ actually made such a statement?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff