Pulled for speeding - Question re in car video

[streaky]

"... the entrance to the road is a full right handed turn at a set of lights which i entered far faster than the police car did."

There is likely to be little benefit in mentioning this in court.

Streaky

[10 Pence Short]

agtlaw said:

I'd written a reply about absent prosecutors, traffic courts, assistant prosecutors, outside counsel, etc. however, is this what you're looking for? http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/44/sectio...

Thanks. I was actually asking over an unrelated pondering... Some proceedings can only be instituted with permission of the Attorney General. This power can sometimes be delegated to a CPS Prosecutor. I was wondering if in those terms whether Prosecutor was a specific, individual role or was in fact any CPS staff authorised to issue proceedings?

[herewego]

Steffan said:

REALIST123 said:

Steffan said:

I would respectfully suggest that taking the time you are committing to this research for a defence into considering whether a change in approach in your driving is needed. We all speed from time to time but if you regard 55 in a 30 as acceptable over some distance, then I do think it is your appreciation of the dangers of speeding that requires careful consideration at length.

But he has said, more than once, that he wasn't doing 55mph.

It is difficult not to incur minor penalties in motoring on the crowded roads of the UK. Since the OP admits to speeding at that time in that place I think it would be better to stop wasting time on what is likely to be a fruitless exercise and accept the penalty. The OP could win the case but experience and observation of such cases over many years suggests he is more likely to lose the case. As many others on OH have suggested, In which case the penalties are very likely to be higher and the costs of defence definitely are going to be considerably higher than those of pleading guilty. As others have suggested I would move on to more productive activities. Motoring Law in the UK is weighted on the side of the Police. Magistrates are more likely to believe the Police. Unpalatable, yes. But fact.

In this case the OP says the video does not show his car speeding through the 30 limit, only when at a roundabout which I suppose is when the cop stopped him. If he pleads not guilty and requests the video be shown the magistrate or whoever will surely dismiss the case if the car doesn't even appear in the supposedly speeding part of the video.

[Steffan]

herewego said:

Steffan said:

REALIST123 said:

Steffan said:

I would respectfully suggest that taking the time you are committing to this research for a defence into considering whether a change in approach in your driving is needed. We all speed from time to time but if you regard 55 in a 30 as acceptable over some distance, then I do think it is your appreciation of the dangers of speeding that requires careful consideration at length.

But he has said, more than once, that he wasn't doing 55mph.

It is difficult not to incur minor penalties in motoring on the crowded roads of the UK. Since the OP admits to speeding at that time in that place I think it would be better to stop wasting time on what is likely to be a fruitless exercise and accept the penalty. The OP could win the case but experience and observation of such cases over many years suggests he is more likely to lose the case. As many others on OH have suggested, In which case the penalties are very likely to be higher and the costs of defence definitely are going to be considerably higher than those of pleading guilty. As others have suggested I would move on to more productive activities. Motoring Law in the UK is weighted on the side of the Police. Magistrates are more likely to believe the Police. Unpalatable, yes. But fact.

In this case the OP says the video does not show his car speeding through the 30 limit, only when at a roundabout which I suppose is when the cop stopped him. If he pleads not guilty and requests the video be shown the magistrate or whoever will surely dismiss the case if the car doesn't even appear in the supposedly speeding part of the video.

If the OP goes ahead I would be interested to see the result. There is a general tendency in motoring today for offenders (as yet unproven) to seek ways out of their possible predicament on web pages. Understandable I suppose but I suspect that the majority eventually realise that the downside risk is substantial. Perhaps the OP will get off, I rather doubt it. But I do wish him well. No one likes being prosecuted.

[Exige77]

Steffan said:

If the OP goes ahead I would be interested to see the result. There is a general tendency in motoring today for offenders (as yet unproven) to seek ways out of their possible predicament on web pages. Understandable I suppose but I suspect that the majority eventually realise that the downside risk is substantial. Perhaps the OP will get off, I rather doubt it. But I do wish him well. No one likes being prosecuted.

What about the OP's appreciation of the dangers of speeding ?

Someone could have been killed.

[agtlaw]

10 Pence Short said:

Thanks. I was actually asking over an unrelated pondering... Some proceedings can only be instituted with permission of the Attorney General. This power can sometimes be delegated to a CPS Prosecutor. I was wondering if in those terms whether Prosecutor was a specific, individual role or was in fact any CPS staff authorised to issue proceedings?

I've been involved in a couple of cases where permission from the DPP was needed to institute proceedings - which can be delegated to "a Crown Prosecutor". This is possibly helpful? - http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/a_to_c/consent_to_pros...

A very quick search suggests that an appointment as a "Crown Prosecutor" would be upon completion of pupillage or a training contract.

[anonymous-user]

Steffan said:

REALIST123 said:

Steffan said:

I would respectfully suggest that taking the time you are committing to this research for a defence into considering whether a change in approach in your driving is needed. We all speed from time to time but if you regard 55 in a 30 as acceptable over some distance, then I do think it is your appreciation of the dangers of speeding that requires careful consideration at length.

But he has said, more than once, that he wasn't doing 55mph.

It is difficult not to incur minor penalties in motoring on the crowded roads of the UK. Since the OP admits to speeding at that time in that place I think it would be better to stop wasting time on what is likely to be a fruitless exercise and accept the penalty. The OP could win the case but experience and observation of such cases over many years suggests he is more likely to lose the case. As many others on OH have suggested, In which case the penalties are very likely to be higher and the costs of defence definitely are going to be considerably higher than those of pleading guilty. As others have suggested I would move on to more productive activities. Motoring Law in the UK is weighted on the side of the Police. Magistrates are more likely to believe the Police. Unpalatable, yes. But fact.

Whatever.

Not really interested in what he does or doesn't do, I was just responding to the part of your post that implied that the OP thinks 55 in a 30 zone is acceptable, when he has said nothing that indicates that.

Do you read what's posted before replying?

[elanfan]

Why don't you write a polite and most importantly friendly letter to the CPS pointing out that which you have already said here. State you are not looking to challenge speeding itself as an offence but genuinely feel hard done by on the evidence as presented. Ask if they would allow you to plead guilty to a lesser offence of 39 or 40 instead of wasting court time challenging the 55 figure with a not guilty plea.

an apology in there somewhere wouldn't hurt either - got to be worth a go - both sides in effect benefit.

[agtlaw]

elanfan said:

Why don't you write a polite and most importantly friendly letter to the CPS ...

CPS is not involved. Complete waste of time.

[elanfan]

Anthony - sorry I wasn't trying to mislead. Who would have issued him with the NIP and is there any point writing as I suggested to someone??

On another issue I hope to be able to update you on the matter we corresponded about in the summer by mid January.

[agtlaw]

elanfan said:

Andrew - sorry I wasn't trying to mislead. Who would have issued him with the NIP and is there any point writing as I suggested to someone??

On another issue I hope to be able to update you on the matter we corresponded about in the summer by mid January.

The CPS only get involved at or after the 1st court hearing. The police ask/tell the court to issue the summons. No point writing to anyone.

[Pixelpeep]

thank you for all the replies.

I will update when i get the paperwork through.

[Grandfondo]

Steffan said:

It is difficult not to incur minor penalties in motoring on the crowded roads of the UK. Since the OP admits to speeding at that time in that place I think it would be better to stop wasting time on what is likely to be a fruitless exercise and accept the penalty. The OP could win the case but experience and observation of such cases over many years suggests he is more likely to lose the case. As many others on OH have suggested, In which case the penalties are very likely to be higher and the costs of defence definitely are going to be considerably higher than those of pleading guilty. As others have suggested I would move on to more productive activities. Motoring Law in the UK is weighted on the side of the Police. Magistrates are more likely to believe the Police. Unpalatable, yes. But fact.

In motoring cases you are presumed guilty and you have to prove otherwise.

[rambo19]

ArmaghMan said:

This sums up perfectly what is wrong with the justice system.
A few years ago I got a fixed penalty, 3 points and £60, not for speeding, but another trivial offence. I wanted to fight it if for no other reason that the plod was an arrogant little bd and I wanted my day in court with him.
Went to see my solicitor, as you do in these situations. She stated that in all probability we should win, but that by the time we were finished I would be £2000 minimum down.
She also stated that if the RM disliked the fact that we had fought the case the penalty could be a lot worse.
And they wonder why people hate the police!

Don't get that.
Why fight something when your wrong.
Better of complaining to the chief constable.

[Froomee]

I got 6 points and a £345 fine for doing 78mph in a 30mph (laser gun) by pleading early and stating my reasons for needing my car.

In a separate case my friend got prosecuted for 135mph (I think) with a professional witness statement from two officers with absolutely no video to back it up.

If it was me I'd seek legal advice. Failing that plead guilty as early as possible (if their speed is honestly close to accurate otherwise you will definitely get a ban for wasting their time), write your mitigation where asked and provide details of why you need your car on the day.

The good news is speeding in a "30" classes as an SP30 so if you don't get a ban it hardly affects your insurance mine went up about 5/10% absolute max the year after and didn't affect my current policies at the time

[10 Pence Short]

The '30' in SP30 has nothing to do with the speed limit.

[Snowboy]

REALIST123 said:

But he has said, more than once, that he wasn't doing 55mph.

Has he?
He said the police car wasn't doing more than 55, but I don't recall him mentioning his speed.

If I was a cynic I might suggest that the OP was speeding, and knows it, but is arguing against the proof, not against the crime.

[CoolHands]

^ and what's wrong with that? If you are going to be prosecuted, there should be proper evidence.

[Pixelpeep]

Snowboy said:

REALIST123 said:

But he has said, more than once, that he wasn't doing 55mph.

Has he?
He said the police car wasn't doing more than 55, but I don't recall him mentioning his speed.

If I was a cynic I might suggest that the OP was speeding, and knows it, but is arguing against the proof, not against the crime.

Pixelpeep said:

i can't be sure re speed, but if i had to guess i would say 40

I have already said i am pretty sure i was above the speed limit, but not 55mph as claimed.

[tehguy]

Froomee said:

In a separate case my friend got prosecuted for 135mph (I think) with a professional witness statement from two officers with absolutely no video to back it up.

They don't need video evidence, the opinion of two officers alone (or just one if it's a motorway) is sufficient to convict. The point being that the police are supposed to be trusted people and there is no reason for them to lie. Why would they risk their jobs/freedom (perverting the course of justice is an imprisonable offence) just to secure a speeding conviction on someone they have never met before? They are not trying to fit you up.

You can of course plead not guilty and opt for a Newton hearing, where you admit you are speeding but contest the actual speed. Don't forget, the offence is the same, the speed just determines the level of punishment. The court cannot offer you a speed awareness course or a fixed penalty so all you will be trying to reduce is the points and fine, if they accept that you were doing 50 instead of 55 in a 40 then the outcome will most likely be the same anyway, but you'll have wasted a lot more money by going to court because you'll have to pay costs too.

Follow-checks can be done over as little as 1/8 of a mile and they don't need to utilise the equipment fully in order to do it, a trained officer using a stopwatch and a calibrated speedometer is sufficient. If he drove at a constant speed and was not gaining on you, then you were obviously travelling at more than that speed.

You'll have a very tough time fighting this, considering you don't actually have ANY evidence at all that you weren't doing 55mph, except for thinking that you weren't (which a court will not accept as evidence).