'No less than' 76 in a 50

[Martin_M]

pork911 said:

OP from what and how you've posted i imagine you failed the attitude test by jumping straight to a fail on the ahole test

What is it that the OP said or did that has made you label him as an ahole?

I'm hoping the lawyers on here will post up their thoughts on the lack of video evidence if they have the chance. I was once followed by a police van through my estate, only to be told to watch my speed when I pulled up in my drive. The attitude of the officers was disgraceful and I was advised that they had to accelerate to 50mph to catch up with me. I then advised them that of course they had to as they were stationary at a roundabout when I passed them. I ended up making a complaint and received a very positive response from their inspector. On the other side of the coin, I worked with some very fair and genuinely nice officers as a special constable.

I do however think that it's unprofessional for an officer to ask what someone does to afford such a car. Asking your occupation is one thing but to phrase it the other way is ignorant in my opinion. I certainly wouldn't ask the parents of the children in my school what they do to be able to afford such and such a car.

[bad company]

Durzel said:

As an aside I find it very hard to understand (I'm taking the OP account as read) people not having any kind of ID on them whatsoever. When I go to the gym I still have my wallet somewhere, or at least bank card in case of emergency or whatever.

I understand the op completely on this point. Theft from lockers at gyms is very common so I never leave anything valuable. I would either have to take my chances with the locker or leave cash/cards etc., in the car so I leave them at home.

[R8Steve]

pork911 said:

OP from what and how you've posted i imagine you failed the attitude test by jumping straight to a fail on the ahole test

I'd love the hear how you come to that conclusion.

Take's one to know one I suppose eh?

[pork911]

So how well do you think you hid your irritation and annoyance?

[anonymous-user]

pork911 said:

So how well do you think you hid your irritation and annoyance?

When you're in a hole.......

Only one ahole here, methinks.

[R8Steve]

pork911 said:

So how well do you think you hid your irritation and annoyance?

Quite well as it happens, there are some polite people left in the world it may shock you to know. I did question the speed and the video situation as I'm sure anyone would but if he thought I was an asshole I can only presume he'd made his mind up before he even met me.

[Pit Pony]

When my father in law was still driving, his was pulled over on the way home from a lunch time pub lunch, and asked "Can you tell me what your number plate is?" He answered by telling Plod the number. Plod says "Can you tell me, how I'd know that? " Plod then had to calm my father in law down, who was not impressed that some scrote had stolen his plates whilst he had been at the pub.

[pork911]

R8Steve said:

pork911 said:

So how well do you think you hid your irritation and annoyance?

Quite well as it happens, there are some polite people left in the world it may shock you to know. I did question the speed and the video situation as I'm sure anyone would but if he thought I was an asshole I can only presume he'd made his mind up before he even met me.

So the annoyance and irritation over what you felt were impertinent and irrelevant questions only bubbled later, resulting in a rant on the internet? Hmmmmm.

[CoolHands]

he has every right to question the officer who has stopped him, even in an irritated manner! Indeed why shouldn't he be irritated, if he wasn't speeding at 70-whatever.

They wouldn't have arrested you if the car wasn't reported as stolen, and you gave correct details and are insured have licence etc which obviously you do or they would have nicked you. The threat to drag you down the station was an empty one.

In view of their attitude I defo think you should plead not guilty and make the tts right it up properly.

[R8Steve]

pork911 said:

R8Steve said:

pork911 said:

So how well do you think you hid your irritation and annoyance?

Quite well as it happens, there are some polite people left in the world it may shock you to know. I did question the speed and the video situation as I'm sure anyone would but if he thought I was an asshole I can only presume he'd made his mind up before he even met me.

So the annoyance and irritation over what you felt were impertinent and irrelevant questions only bubbled later, resulting in a rant on the internet? Hmmmmm.

That's correct, there's a time and place for everything. If you refer to my original post it was a simple question, has anyone had a FPN with the words 'no less than' on it as it seems a bit vague, that is all.

[Phatboy317]

pork911 said:

So how well do you think you hid your irritation and annoyance?

What's it like to be perfect?

[Martin_M]

pork911 said:

So the annoyance and irritation over what you felt were impertinent and irrelevant questions only bubbled later, resulting in a rant on the internet? Hmmmmm.

What are you talking about? Are you like this face to face?

[TVR1]

Durzel said:

Unfortunately whilst "no less than 76mph" isn't a particularly strong statement I don't think it's fatal to any case. The crime is speeding, and the speed is an aggravating factor. If the court believes on the balance of probabilities that you were speeding, particularly on the testimony of someone who is assumed to be impartial, unemotional, trained and experienced, then that's the conclusion they'll likely reach. If you know you were speeding (and it sounds like you do) then you'd essentially be arguing a case on pure technical and/or credibility terms, which doesn't sound very strong to me.

IANAL though, just my 2p.

Rather glad that YANAL. Speeding was decriminalised quite a long time ago and FYI if the case went to Court, it wouldn't be heard at Civil Court.

[pork911]

R8Steve said:

That's correct, there's a time and place for everything. If you refer to my original post it was a simple question, has anyone had a FPN with the words 'no less than' on it as it seems a bit vague, that is all.

yeah, sure looks like that simple question

[vonhosen]

R8Steve said:

That's correct, there's a time and place for everything. If you refer to my original post it was a simple question, has anyone had a FPN with the words 'no less than' on it as it seems a bit vague, that is all.

It's not vague in relation to whether you were exceeding the speed limit though.
They don't have to show the exact speed you were travelling at, just convince the court you were travelling at 'a' speed that was in excess of the limit.

i.e. if when I am doing 76mph in a 50 & you are pulling away from me & at no time am I able to maintain a constant distance from you in order to measure your speed with my speedo, then I can say that you were doing no less than 76mph in a 50 at that time.

[R8Steve]

pork911 said:

R8Steve said:

That's correct, there's a time and place for everything. If you refer to my original post it was a simple question, has anyone had a FPN with the words 'no less than' on it as it seems a bit vague, that is all.

yeah, sure looks like that simple question

You’re the officer in question, aren’t you? Can’t imagine why you would act as such otherwise tbh!

vonhosen said:

It's not vague in relation to whether you were exceeding the speed limit though.
They don't have to show the exact speed you were travelling at, just convince the court you were travelling at 'a' speed that was in excess of the limit.

i.e. if when I am doing 76mph in a 50 & you are pulling away from me & at no time am I able to maintain a constant distance from you in order to measure your speed with my speedo, then I can say that you were doing no less than 76mph in a 50 at that time.

There is absolutely no way I was doing more than 76, never mind enough to noticeably pull away from someone in that short a distance which is my point. I had already slowed from a 70mph zone to enter the 50mph zone knowing fine well it is a police hotspot, both marked and unmarked. There was no lights in my rear view mirror during this time and the officer, by his own admission, came on at the last slip road which is approx half a mile at most away. So he would have needed to come on to the motorway round a twisty sliproad, accelerate to at least 76mph, observe me keeping pace or accelerating away from him at a time I would have be slowing for a junction that is a sharp corner with a set of traffic lights almost immediately off it?

Sounds doubtful to me. Had he said you were doing 56 in a 50 and gave me an FPN, fair enough, I accept that would be possible. To say I was doing closer to 80, more than 50% over the speed limit, no.

[JustinP1]

R8Steve said:

There was no lights in my rear view mirror during this time and the officer, by his own admission, came on at the last slip road which is approx half a mile at most away. So he would have needed to come on to the motorway round a twisty sliproad, accelerate to at least 76mph, observe me keeping pace or accelerating away from him at a time I would have be slowing for a junction that is a sharp corner with a set of traffic lights almost immediately off it?

It's entirely this situation where the chap I assisted that I mentioned previously was able to show doubt in the officer's statement.

There are standards that should be met on a follow check, as least for best practice. 3 tenths of a mile springs to mind, and the officer should have noted markings by the side of the road as reference points.

The chap I helped came prepared with photos of where the follow check allegedly took place, and also Google maps of the road showing how long it was, with measurements, to show that it was impossible for the follow check described in the statement to happen on that road.

Whether you fight it though comes down to the depth of your pocket. The other issue is that for 26 over the limit, in court, you won't end up with 3 points should you lose.

[Mr2Mike]

R8Steve said:

Has anyone received a speeding ticket with ‘no less than’ before?

Yes, I had a "not less than 90mph" when I was pulled on my bike last year. Copper was pretty decent bloke and said he reckoned I had been over 100 at a couple of points, but was going to reduce the penalty to 3 points and fine by putting that down and that I may be able to get a bike speeding course (which I did in the end).

That said it probably helped that his video of me was almost completely useless as it was so washed out due the sun! It had the desired effect though, I slowed down a bit though also spent more time looking back up slip roads!

[blindswelledrat]

R8Steve said:

There is absolutely no way I was doing more than 76, never mind enough to noticeably pull away from someone in that short a distance which is my point. I had already slowed from a 70mph zone to enter the 50mph zone knowing fine well it is a police hotspot, both marked and unmarked. There was no lights in my rear view mirror during this time and the officer, by his own admission, came on at the last slip road which is approx half a mile at most away. So he would have needed to come on to the motorway round a twisty sliproad, accelerate to at least 76mph, observe me keeping pace or accelerating away from him at a time I would have be slowing for a junction that is a sharp corner with a set of traffic lights almost immediately off it?

Sounds doubtful to me. Had he said you were doing 56 in a 50 and gave me an FPN, fair enough, I accept that would be possible. To say I was doing closer to 80, more than 50% over the speed limit, no.

R8, an identical thing happened to me some years ago and I 100% understand and agree with your frustration.
Effectively they were wrong, and just because you were speeding it doesn't mean you should accept it. Most of us speed on a daily basis and none of us would be happy with a speeding fine based on nothing other than "well you did speed at some stage that day", regardless of whether it's correct. It didn't help in my case that the officers were complete tossers and actually constructed lies to back their story up. Anyone who will read this will probably think that sentence is bks and I must have 'failed the attitude test' or similar, but the terrifying thing is that it's true and you feel helpless because you know you wont be believed. The reality is that every profession has their bad eggs.

A couple of actual legal points which don't seem to have been mentioned (sorry if it is repeated- I only skim read).
They can actually do this with no measuring equipment if 2 police officers independently form the same view of your speed. That counts as evidence.
I had planned to defend it and prove that it was impossible for me to be doing the speed they said, hence their opinion was incorrect. In the end I took expert advice and the solicitor dismissed my own thought process and in the space of 2 seconds and then immediately laughed at the police evidence which stated "I asked my colleague if he believed Blindswelledrat was speeding" and said that this sentence instantly destroyed the "independently forming" opinion of the second officer.
As it ended up the police didn't even turn up to court and I got my costs paid.

[R8Steve]

blindswelledrat said:

R8, an identical thing happened to me some years ago and I 100% understand and agree with your frustration.
Effectively they were wrong, and just because you were speeding it doesn't mean you should accept it. Most of us speed on a daily basis and none of us would be happy with a speeding fine based on nothing other than "well you did speed at some stage that day", regardless of whether it's correct. It didn't help in my case that the officers were complete tossers and actually constructed lies to back their story up. Anyone who will read this will probably think that sentence is bks and I must have 'failed the attitude test' or similar, but the terrifying thing is that it's true and you feel helpless because you know you wont be believed. The reality is that every profession has their bad eggs.

A couple of actual legal points which don't seem to have been mentioned (sorry if it is repeated- I only skim read).
They can actually do this with no measuring equipment if 2 police officers independently form the same view of your speed. That counts as evidence.
I had planned to defend it and prove that it was impossible for me to be doing the speed they said, hence their opinion was incorrect. In the end I took expert advice and the solicitor dismissed my own thought process and in the space of 2 seconds and then immediately laughed at the police evidence which stated "I asked my colleague if he believed Blindswelledrat was speeding" and said that this sentence instantly destroyed the "independently forming" opinion of the second officer.
As it ended up the police didn't even turn up to court and I got my costs paid.

I appreciate you clarifying that this kind of thing does happen and not like some jumping to the fact that I must be an asshole for it to happen!

I can genuinely say that I was not doing that speed and done nothing to antagonise the officer who stopped me. Do i feel hard done by? Yes, and why shouldn’t I. I’m sure if the police came up to someone in the street and gave them a breach of the peace fine when they were simply walking to work would feel the same. Unlikely to happen, but again, not impossible.

Unfortunately due to the fear of having someone with pork911’s mentality as a judge in court and the potential to get more than 3 points due to the alleged speed I believe it’s too much risk>reward in this case. I will pay the FPN and take the points. I currently have a clean licence so it’s not the end of the world.