Notice of prosecution - continued
Discussion
further to my previous thread where I recieved a notice of intended prosecution for speeding
77mph in a 50mph single carriage way
I checked online for the calibration cert for the cleveland police speed camera, and there doesnt seem to be one?
The latest one is for 7th Jan 2013 to 7th jan 2014
here is the latest certificate
http://www.cleveland.police.uk/downloads/Publicati...
and here are the ones on their website
http://www.cleveland.police.uk/about-us/certificat...
I dont know if the camera numbers match but these are the only cal certs I can find.
can anyone see one that i have missed?
If there isnt an up to date calibration cert, how do i proceed with the situation?
Thanks
Matt
77mph in a 50mph single carriage way
I checked online for the calibration cert for the cleveland police speed camera, and there doesnt seem to be one?
The latest one is for 7th Jan 2013 to 7th jan 2014
here is the latest certificate
http://www.cleveland.police.uk/downloads/Publicati...
and here are the ones on their website
http://www.cleveland.police.uk/about-us/certificat...
I dont know if the camera numbers match but these are the only cal certs I can find.
can anyone see one that i have missed?
If there isnt an up to date calibration cert, how do i proceed with the situation?
Thanks
Matt
Edited by Matt 211988 on Friday 5th December 13:33
Edited by Matt 211988 on Saturday 6th December 09:21
Matt 211988 said:
further to my previous thread where I recieved a notice of intended prosecution for speeding
77mph in a 50mph single carriage way
And were you?77mph in a 50mph single carriage way
Matt 211988 said:
I think we can rule out a clone...Matt 211988 said:
If there isnt an up to date calibration cert, how do i proceed with the situation?
You fill the form in, say "Yes, I was driving", then when you get the offer of points/course, you say "Thanks, but no thanks, because we're going to court over this one, chaps."Good luck with that.
scrwright said:
were you speeding?? if not, fair enough, chase em down on a dodgy calibrated camera
If you were, MTFU and take the points or awareness course.
Why should he? It's for the prosecution to determine he was speeding and to do that they should use calibrated equipment. No way would I roll over and take their freebies. If you were, MTFU and take the points or awareness course.
Over a crest....sneaky as normal.
Tip which worked for me for years.....take the front plate off, especially on that....given me the opportunity to reverse away and go the long way around a few times now.
Admittedly I don't have it off now as I do sub 3k miles a year but before web doing 30k a year I had it off for about 2 years, got pulled over twice for it "sorry officer it fell off, it's here in the footwell and must have fallen off the dash"
Worst case it's a non-endorseable small fine
Tip which worked for me for years.....take the front plate off, especially on that....given me the opportunity to reverse away and go the long way around a few times now.
Admittedly I don't have it off now as I do sub 3k miles a year but before web doing 30k a year I had it off for about 2 years, got pulled over twice for it "sorry officer it fell off, it's here in the footwell and must have fallen off the dash"
Worst case it's a non-endorseable small fine
Boosted LS1 said:
Why should he? It's for the prosecution to determine he was speeding and to do that they should use calibrated equipment. No way would I roll over and take their freebies.
Not quite. If he takes it to court, then it's for the magistrate to determine if he was exceeding the speed limit, based on the case produced by the prosecution and whether the defence can introduce reasonable doubt into that case.Yes, the equipment should be calibrated - and, frankly, probably is. Given the choice between whether they've forgotten to calibrate it or forgotten to get the certificate onto their public website, I know which I think more likely.
But would the equipment being uncalibrated raise reasonable doubt into whether he was exceeding 50mph or not? It's not as if the photos say 52mph. They say 77mph - more than 50% above the limit. There are multiple photos - possibly video, from which those are stills. Did he cover that 289m in much less than the 13sec it would take at 50mph?
For the sake of three points and £100 - or £85 and a morning of tea and biscuits - would YOU gamble a bigger fine, costs and more points based on those odds...? Mebbe if there's a ban hinging on it - but, if so, would 77 in a 50 in a lime green seven-a-like have been a wise use of a morning in the first place?
kiethton said:
Tip which worked for me for years.....take the front plate off, especially on that....given me the opportunity to reverse away and go the long way around a few times now.
Worst case it's a non-endorseable small fine
Nope - worst case is that it's perverting the course of justice, Mr Huhne.Worst case it's a non-endorseable small fine
Matt 211988 said:
further to my previous thread where I recieved a notice of intended prosecution for speeding
...
If there isnt an up to date calibration cert, how do i proceed with the situation?
Thanks
Matt
Regardless of what you do, I'd suggest that you remove those pics, "wash" them of all data (the info in the black boxes) and link to the 'washed' photos. Possibly that ship has already sailed, mind... ...
If there isnt an up to date calibration cert, how do i proceed with the situation?
Thanks
Matt
Edited by Matt 211988 on Friday 5th December 13:33
And in future, "wash" the pics before you post them for the first time .
If this goes to court and you start arguing about a lack of calibration cert, I suspect this thread may make an unwelcome appearance... Going that way is potentially very expensive - being found guilty after a 'not guilty' plea incurs prosecution costs of around £500 to £600 before the fine and 'victim surcharge' plus penalty points.
The untimate insult will be if you plead 'not guilty' and the prosecution bring in RSS (you might even get to meet one of our members on their "dream team" ), you'll be looking at costs just north of £2k for their attendance plus the rest (as above) after being found guilty... This would normally happen only after your defence suggests that the equipment used is unreliable or used wrongly, things like that...
Tread carefully .
You're looking at a summons for 77 in a 50, anyway.
TooMany2cvs said:
Not quite. If he takes it to court, then it's for the magistrate to determine if he was exceeding the speed limit, based on the case produced by the prosecution and whether the defence can introduce reasonable doubt into that case.
Yes, the equipment should be calibrated - and, frankly, probably is. Given the choice between whether they've forgotten to calibrate it or forgotten to get the certificate onto their public website, I know which I think more likely.
But would the equipment being uncalibrated raise reasonable doubt into whether he was exceeding 50mph or not? It's not as if the photos say 52mph. They say 77mph - more than 50% above the limit. There are multiple photos - possibly video, from which those are stills. Did he cover that 289m in much less than the 13sec it would take at 50mph?
For the sake of three points and £100 - or £85 and a morning of tea and biscuits - would YOU gamble a bigger fine, costs and more points based on those odds...? Mebbe if there's a ban hinging on it - but, if so, would 77 in a 50 in a lime green seven-a-like have been a wise use of a morning in the first place?
Yep, I'd make them prove it and that's why I've not had points on my DL since 1980.Yes, the equipment should be calibrated - and, frankly, probably is. Given the choice between whether they've forgotten to calibrate it or forgotten to get the certificate onto their public website, I know which I think more likely.
But would the equipment being uncalibrated raise reasonable doubt into whether he was exceeding 50mph or not? It's not as if the photos say 52mph. They say 77mph - more than 50% above the limit. There are multiple photos - possibly video, from which those are stills. Did he cover that 289m in much less than the 13sec it would take at 50mph?
For the sake of three points and £100 - or £85 and a morning of tea and biscuits - would YOU gamble a bigger fine, costs and more points based on those odds...? Mebbe if there's a ban hinging on it - but, if so, would 77 in a 50 in a lime green seven-a-like have been a wise use of a morning in the first place?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff