NIP - Single witness, no measuring device (Excess of 50MPH)

[vonhosen]

daytona355 said:

vonhosen said:

That's fine on a personal basis, but what you say is poor advice for others as a point of law because it is factually incorrect.

Mine wasn't a point of law, it's a point of personal experience, of which I have lots. I Have many friends who are Feds, and they have reaffirmed my experiences. In this area, unless you are prepared to agree when they ask if you were going too fast, anything other than a traffic marked or unmarked car can't nick you for speeding due to the lack of calibrated evidence. At one point, while pulled over by a town panda, I actually rang a traffic officer I know, and asked him to confirm whether the cop was in the right whilst on hands free at full volume, and he confirmed for that officer that he needed to go find something else to do!

Speeding is an outright offence, if you are PROVED by use of a home office approved device to have been speeding, or if you ACCEPT or confirm that you were speeding/going a bit quick/too fast/not sure etc, they can stick you on. If, however, you have the forethought to vehemently deny any problem, and confirm that you were carefully making sure your speed was correct, and demonstrate the knowledge of the limit in which you are travelling, they have NO CASE. They may try to cajole you into admitting guilt, make an assumption you will collapse into a fit of remorse, or generally lose your bottle, but proof is king, and if they haven't got it, they don't get the points for the ticket

I'm sure you think you are right, but you aren't on so many levels.
You state as fact things you clearly have no idea about, things that only a little research will be able to confirm.
If you wish to remain in bliss, then happily remain ignorant to the truth. Don't expect those who are willing to do a little research to establish the truth of the matter to swallow what you claim. They know better.

You don't have to admit the offence to be convicted with opinion supported by an uncalibrated measurement device where the margin in question is not small & in the relevant cases that margin was 10mph over the limit.
Also you can be convicted without admission on the opinion of two Police officers without the support of any measurement device at all (let alone an uncalibrated one) when they form the opinion, independently at the same time, that you were exceeding the limit.

Edited by vonhosen on Wednesday 3rd February 10:41

[Jim1556]

SS2. said:

That's how it is - the legislation calls for more than the say-so of just one person to be sufficient evidence to convict for excess speed (on roads other than motorways, anyway).

I get that, but we are human after all, opinions can vary and shouldn't be taken as gospel - look what happens when multiple witnesses are questioned about a stressful event, there'll be 14 different accounts of what happened (even with experienced people).

Proof, is much harder to argue against.

As I said, 2 pissed off plod could put your licence & liberty in jeapardy...

Edited by Jim1556 on Thursday 4th February 12:37

[vonhosen]

daytona355 said:

Ever heard of human rights mate? Even plod have to have a reason to search a car or house, or even a person.

Needing a reason doesn't mean they need a warrant. Fail.

[anonymous-user]

daytona355 said:

Ever heard of human rights mate? Even plod have to have a reason to search a car or house, or even a person.

What does that have to do with incorrect statements about a locked / unlocked cars and warrants? Re-read the what you wrote and then my reply, and perhaps you'll realise how irrelevant the above is. Either do that or just write something else which is irrelevant and diversionary to keep pretending you know what you are talking about.

Tip when blagging; do it to those who know even less than you do.

daytona355 said:

Your verbal admission of speeding is enough to stick you on and get you a ticket from a cop with no calibrated evidence. If you don't admit the crime, that's the point, he has to PROVE it.

It requires proof regardless of an admission or not. An admission isn't even relevant since it's an absolute offence, anyway.

daytona355 said:

Proof is in the pudding, my licence, zero points, pulled over once every three drives in the fezza at least, so let's say a conservative ten times per annum. Pulls in other cars, more rare but I'd say average every couple months at least.

Of course, your alleged personal experiences extrapolate across every stop and interaction across the whole country.

Here's some of your brilliant logic in action in a different manner. I know a young chap with a supercar, he has never been pulled over, ergo, supercar owners never get pulled over, therefore what you are saying is wrong. Doesn't ring true, does it?

[tankplanker]

A few years ago I got pulled over by a police officer who'd seen me accelerate hard onto a (clear) dual carriage way from the slip road. I'd admit I'd floored it to the 70mph limit but then I'd stuck cruise control on at 70mph according to the sat nav. He tried to get me to admit to going over 80mph and it took about 5 minutes of denials before he gave up.

[daytona355]

Like I said, nil points on my licence, touch wood, last ban in the mid-90's for a measly 70 in a 30 which was unposted and fooled even the two cops I took to court to testify on my side that it's unposted. Doubt however you like, I couldn't care less, I have been driving super cars since 2002, lots of them, and my experiences have taught me that I am pretty much spot on. If I weren't, I'd have been almost perma-banned given plods outrageous attempts at times to incarcerate my licence. Maybe it's just that Bristol, as I have long suspected, is full of socialists and communists who hate anyone with a nice car and a need to get anywhere quicker than a horse and cart

[anonymous-user]

daytona355 said:

Doubt however you like, I couldn't care less

I don't doubt how the law works and what established legal principles exist. I'll take those over some questionable anecdotes, surprisingly enough.

[BertBert]

I'm just wondering what your point is in relation to the topic? What exactly are you spot on about?
Bert

daytona355 said:

Like I said, nil points on my licence, touch wood, last ban in the mid-90's for a measly 70 in a 30 which was unposted and fooled even the two cops I took to court to testify on my side that it's unposted. Doubt however you like, I couldn't care less, I have been driving super cars since 2002, lots of them, and my experiences have taught me that I am pretty much spot on. If I weren't, I'd have been almost perma-banned given plods outrageous attempts at times to incarcerate my licence. Maybe it's just that Bristol, as I have long suspected, is full of socialists and communists who hate anyone with a nice car and a need to get anywhere quicker than a horse and cart

[daytona355]

Some of you guys on here are very very insecure it seems, some have very little respect for anyone's else's opinion. Just because I have a different opinion, and different experience, of dealing with the accusation of speeding, you all get defensive and think you know better, and try to pretend I couldn't have had the incidents I have? Weird, life deals it's cards randomly chaps, I get very lucky compared to some of you it seems when dealing with the fuzz, no need to hate it, maybe I will get my come uppance one day, but so far, so good

It's quite funny seeing the indignant posts by some to be fair, I'm guessing you guys are the ones who feel like they are the forum 'brains'? That's great, and I'm sure you help lots of people, congratulations, but try to remember, a forum is for everyone to express their opinions, they don't have to match yours to be relevant, correct, or reflect that persons experience. Nothing is personal as far as I am concerned, and if I can amuse/inform/inspire confidence for someone else by telling a few of my experiences, then so be it, I'll be happy.

I absolutely see that I will be coming across as some cocky donut, but the truth is, when it comes to police stops, I've been stopped so many times over the last 25 years that I've simply become very very confident when dealing with the cops, I don't scare, I don't panic, and I know an awful lot about the way they are supposed to work and use it to my full advantage, a little smoke and mirrors with them. Maybe your average cop is expecting a trembling, law abiding nice citizen to be sat in the car waiting to be friendly and nice, and most probably are, so they are taken aback when they walk up to my car and find me, sitting there waiting to hear the accusations and then deflecting and negating whatever they say. As I said, my policy of be polite but firm, always say no, always immediately demand proof, has got me out of more points than I'd care to think about. Works for me, maybe it wouldn't for others, but at least I can lighten the tone on a subject that many people find very worrying and stressful

[paintman]

johnao said:

Were these prosecutions based upon your opinion alone, or was there secondary evidence to support your opinion?

As I said earlier I wasn't aware that uncorroborated evidence of opinion - either by another officer or a device - was possible. I wasn't aware of the motorway one mentioned in another post, most likely because I never worked the motorway.
Other than the two I have mentioned the rest were opinion of excess speed corroborated by one of the following for a figure:
Calibrated speedometer or vascar.
Muniquip & pro-laser although there were usually two of us - as my role was double crewed - although it could be argued that you were alone as whilst one of us was dealing with a speeder the other would continue operating the device once the stopped driver had been offered the opportunity to view the speed recorded. Never bothered with anything under 40 in a 30 limit or 50 in a 40.
Those that were getting towards that figure or spotted us & got their speed down would usually get a finger wagged as they went past.

For those that wanted to argue the toss I simply went through a well practised verbal routine & either reported or ticketed them. I was doing this before FPNs came in as well & then it would usually be a HO/RT1 unless all documents produced and report, FPNs just speeded the process up.
Up to them whether they paid the ticket/pleaded guilty/pleaded not guilty.

Edited by paintman on Thursday 4th February 09:49

[vonhosen]

daytona355 said:

Some of you guys on here are very very insecure it seems, some have very little respect for anyone's else's opinion. Just because I have a different opinion, and different experience, of dealing with the accusation of speeding, you all get defensive and think you know better, and try to pretend I couldn't have had the incidents I have? Weird, life deals it's cards randomly chaps, I get very lucky compared to some of you it seems when dealing with the fuzz, no need to hate it, maybe I will get my come uppance one day, but so far, so good

It's quite funny seeing the indignant posts by some to be fair, I'm guessing you guys are the ones who feel like they are the forum 'brains'? That's great, and I'm sure you help lots of people, congratulations, but try to remember, a forum is for everyone to express their opinions, they don't have to match yours to be relevant, correct, or reflect that persons experience. Nothing is personal as far as I am concerned, and if I can amuse/inform/inspire confidence for someone else by telling a few of my experiences, then so be it, I'll be happy.

I absolutely see that I will be coming across as some cocky donut, but the truth is, when it comes to police stops, I've been stopped so many times over the last 25 years that I've simply become very very confident when dealing with the cops, I don't scare, I don't panic, and I know an awful lot about the way they are supposed to work and use it to my full advantage, a little smoke and mirrors with them. Maybe your average cop is expecting a trembling, law abiding nice citizen to be sat in the car waiting to be friendly and nice, and most probably are, so they are taken aback when they walk up to my car and find me, sitting there waiting to hear the accusations and then deflecting and negating whatever they say. As I said, my policy of be polite but firm, always say no, always immediately demand proof, has got me out of more points than I'd care to think about. Works for me, maybe it wouldn't for others, but at least I can lighten the tone on a subject that many people find very worrying and stressful

Opinions & experience are fine, what they don't always equate to though are fact, the law & required legal standards etc.
So if you say something like 'they need a warrant to search my car because I've locked the door', it's not factually true. They need to satisfy the legislative requirements which actually means there are many circumstances where they don't need a warrant to search a locked car.
All you've been picked up on is where you appear to be claiming 'they need' to do/have something, but what you appear to be claiming is factually incorrect.

I'm not having a go at you & there is no malice in this or any other post.
Just setting out the facts of what the the actual legal position is (i.e. that opinion of two officers OR opinion of one officer supported by an uncalibrated speedo reading is sufficient to convict for exceeding the speed limit) so that people can be aware when deciding their course of action.

[Ken Figenus]

Its been over a decade since I've had a pull for speeding by a real human being. I then found being polite and friendly, mentioning it was a low hazard scenario and apologising if I really was a little over was far more successful in reducing the incident to a ticking off. Heading straight into a confrontation or stonewalling or willie waving MUST surely be less successful? That is unless discretion really has been subverted by the need for quotas (to show efficiency and 'success') and a hard nosed approach really is best by now? Sad day if so.

[anonymous-user]

daytona355 said:

Some of you guys on here are very very insecure it seems, some have very little respect for anyone's else's opinion. Just because I have a different opinion, and different experience, of dealing with the accusation of speeding, you all get defensive and think you know better, and try to pretend I couldn't have had the incidents I have? Weird, life deals it's cards randomly chaps, I get very lucky compared to some of you it seems when dealing with the fuzz, no need to hate it, maybe I will get my come uppance one day, but so far, so good

No problem with opinions and experiences. It's just they don't trump established law and what is theoretically possible.

[daytona355]

At what point was I stating law, I was stating experience, and a 100% success rate in the last 20 years despite tens of stops, whilst my driving style is best described as 'urgent', or 'pants on fire'

[anonymous-user]

daytona355 said:

The CPS would never go to court without calibrated proof UNLESS the speeder admitted his offence and signed to confirm his admission. Otherwise it's all hearsay

Hearsay has clear points of law. Incorrectly defining is stating it and discussing it. Same with the warrant nonsense.

VH pointed out points of law (uncalibrated corroboration), to which you replied:

daytona355 said:

If what you are saying is correct, then why haven't I got 400 points.

I.e. because in your experience it's not true, what VH said (a point of law) isn't correct.

[daytona355]

So explain to me, when I get stopped, and get off EVERY time, despite cops being convinced I was speeding, how does that happen if they can just claim I was speeding and get a conviction? There are PH posters on here that know me, and know how often I've gotten away with no problems at all, which couldn't happen unless cops, certainly in this area, were able to convict on a presumption that they can calculate speed when a car is travelling in another direction, or even the same one, without any calibrated or even non-calibrated device. Maybe if you are talking extremes, where a car flashes past so obviously quickly in a 30 limit that it is common sense that it was too fast, but when you are talking 80 or 90 in a 70, or 70/80 in a 60, looking quick can be very subjective depending on the viewpoint, weather, lighting and even the type of car. Why do you think I get pulled so often, it's a Ferrari 458 in black, most cops see it in traffic and spin round to chase me down at times, still get a tug and accused of speeding as soon as the road clears in front of me, despite my waving hello at them to let them know I've seen their less than covert pursuits.

I think it's confidence, when a cop approaches me, I'm not sitting there frightened of them, I'm confident, I'll express my opinion that I was in the clear, whether I was or not, and if they insist on their opinion, I will make sure that I demonstrate I'm not lying down and taking it, much like the muppet who stopped me in the C63 that time. If they don't have the tape, or the laser evidence, or a traffic car with vascar, I won't allow them to force an opinion on me, and therefore presumably they back down on the basis that they lose their confidence. Of course, I'm not saying they don't try to give out their usual lectures to save face, but the fact remains, I have used my tactics to keep a clean licence for over 20 years.

Anyhow, if you want true protection in the event of speeding stops, I can sell licence insurance, which you can get as long as you have eight or less points already/expected on your licence, and if you lose it thru totting up, or a medical condition, you can claim a monthly benefit to cover costs up to £3000 per month (there are levels of cover) to pay for a driver, car, taxis or whatever until you get the licence back! I can also organise laser diffusers which are class one, running them myself proves they negate camera vans and lone wolf coppers on the road and bash simple blinders hands down.

[BertBert]

It's a very interesting concept and well done for lightening the debate BTW (if that's not too condescending).

You should franchise your approach and run seminars, write books etc

Your experience doesn't chime with many posters on here I guess. For me for example, I don't often drive like a loon these days, and don't have extensive experience of stops. But they were all the same, BiB has speed gun, vascar or whatever, actual numerical evidence, 3 points, off you go.

Are you saying that your super-blagging technique (of which I am in genuine awe - do you want a job?) works even then?

Or are you saying that your jammer stops actual proper speed detection and you just get stopped because of driving like a loon in a car that says please Mr Plod pull me over? Then you brazen it out as there isn't any evidence.

Genuine interest.

Bert

[anonymous-user]

daytona355 said:

So explain to me, when I get stopped, and get off EVERY time, despite cops being convinced I was speeding, how does that happen if they can just claim I was speeding and get a conviction?

Most police officers don't enforce excess speed and most won't consider corroboration in that respect, most will be single-crewed and nearly all speed enforcement is automated.

It's a rare type of prosecution, but it can, and has occurred.

Remarkably, despite your bragging of driving everywhere quickly, you've never managed to go past an automated van in 20 years, have you? Unless when you have you've stopped and forced the automated equipment to acquiesce by producing Mr confidence

If there's evidence of an offence, there's evidence. If not, there's not. It doesn't bother me either way as they just happen to be the circumstances presented. Over-confidence and pub lawyer legal knowledge mean nothing if there's evidence of an offence.

[BertBert]

La Liga said:

Remarkably, despite your bragging of driving everywhere quickly, you've never managed to go past an automated van in 20 years, have you? Unless when you have you've stopped and forced the automated equipment to acquiesce by producing Mr confidence

daytona355 said:

I can also organise laser diffusers which are class one, running them myself proves they negate camera vans and lone wolf coppers on the road and bash simple blinders hands down.

[vonhosen]

daytona355 said:

So explain to me, when I get stopped, and get off EVERY time, despite cops being convinced I was speeding, how does that happen if they can just claim I was speeding and get a conviction? There are PH posters on here that know me, and know how often I've gotten away with no problems at all, which couldn't happen unless cops, certainly in this area, were able to convict on a presumption that they can calculate speed when a car is travelling in another direction, or even the same one, without any calibrated or even non-calibrated device. Maybe if you are talking extremes, where a car flashes past so obviously quickly in a 30 limit that it is common sense that it was too fast, but when you are talking 80 or 90 in a 70, or 70/80 in a 60, looking quick can be very subjective depending on the viewpoint, weather, lighting and even the type of car. Why do you think I get pulled so often, it's a Ferrari 458 in black, most cops see it in traffic and spin round to chase me down at times, still get a tug and accused of speeding as soon as the road clears in front of me, despite my waving hello at them to let them know I've seen their less than covert pursuits.

I think it's confidence, when a cop approaches me, I'm not sitting there frightened of them, I'm confident, I'll express my opinion that I was in the clear, whether I was or not, and if they insist on their opinion, I will make sure that I demonstrate I'm not lying down and taking it, much like the muppet who stopped me in the C63 that time. If they don't have the tape, or the laser evidence, or a traffic car with vascar, I won't allow them to force an opinion on me, and therefore presumably they back down on the basis that they lose their confidence. Of course, I'm not saying they don't try to give out their usual lectures to save face, but the fact remains, I have used my tactics to keep a clean licence for over 20 years.

Anyhow, if you want true protection in the event of speeding stops, I can sell licence insurance, which you can get as long as you have eight or less points already/expected on your licence, and if you lose it thru totting up, or a medical condition, you can claim a monthly benefit to cover costs up to £3000 per month (there are levels of cover) to pay for a driver, car, taxis or whatever until you get the licence back! I can also organise laser diffusers which are class one, running them myself proves they negate camera vans and lone wolf coppers on the road and bash simple blinders hands down.

But you don't control their choices, they do.
The fact they don't want to spend the time going to court for a speeding offence doesn't mean that if they choose to spend the time doing it you can't be convicted on that opinion/uncalibrated speedo evidence.
It's their choice.
When I was a Police officer I let far more traffic offences slide (that's a wide gamut of traffic offences, not just speeding), than I reported. That was based on what I considered the best use of my time rather than how confident or not they presented themselves to me.