Keep quiet and we'll quash your conviction.......
Discussion
http://www.epost.co.uk/displayNode.jsp?nodeId=144936&command=displayContent&sourceNode=144919&contentPK=13155634&moduleName=InternalSearch&formname=sidebarsearch
KEEP QUIET, AND WE'LL QUASH YOUR CONVICTION
11:02 - 08 September 2005
Motorists who were wrongly convicted of speeding at a speed camera site near Bristol could get their convictions quashed. A group of 13 motorists who are fighting the conviction have been offered a deal by the Avon and Somerset Safety Camera Partnership - the organisation which runs the cameras.
If they settle, it could have ramifications for more than 200 other drivers who were also fined for breaking the speed limit on a stretch of the A370 near Flax Bourton.
But one of the group - Richard Barclay from Backwell - is annoyed the settlement includes a gagging clause and that he would be saddled with his own legal costs.
Last year, Bryan Dunthorne, from Lockleaze, and John Hatton, from Weston-super-Mare, both successfully overturned their speeding convictions brought against them after they were snapped outside the village near the end of the Long Ashton bypass.
The partnership is offering to remove penalty points from the licences and return fines if the motorists involved bear the legal costs and there is no publicity about the settlement.
The settlement would take place between the partnership and the group to avoid a judicial review.
Mr Barclay, one of the group being represented by Bath-based solicitors Simon West, appealed to drivers who suspected they were wrongly convicted to come forw a rd .
Mr Barclay, who was given three points on his licence and fined £60 after being caught by a mobile unit in September 2003 on the Long Ashton bypass near Flax Bourton, said: "I thought it was disgraceful when I heard they would only agree to settle with us if they had no publicity.
"I was told by my solicitor that in order to proceed I will have to pay more legal fees and agree to this gagging order.
"One of the reasons I am doing this is out of principle, not just to get the £60 back, as I have already had to fork out a lot of money to get this far. They have already admitted they got it wrong in other cases.
"It's as if they are trying to deter people from going on with the court action. If I was fighting this on my own I would be facing a bill for more than £1,000 in legal costs, and the three points will be off my licence in a year anyway.
"I have said I am not prepared to go ahead with the case unless they lift the ban on publicity.
"Others from the group of 13 have also decided not to continue under those terms." Simon West Solicitors say they are still waiting for instructions from their clients about whether they want to make a settlement with the partnership, or apply for a judicial review.
That will mean the process of law under which the drivers were convicted will be examined.
In a letter to Mr Barclay, Simon West said: "The terms of their agreement would be that each side bear its own costs and there be no p u bl i c i t y. " It is usual for a settlement to go ahead without publicity.
Mr Barclay said: "I feel that it is a simple matter of them giving us our money back in the same way a shop would if you were overcharged.
"There's no grey area, it seems straightforward enough. They got it wrong and should correct their mistake, but instead want to hide behind smoke and mirrors.
"What galls me even more is that I was caught by two police officers operating a mobile speed camera, and I wonder whether it is the best use of the constabulary's resources. " Dave Gollicker, spokesman for the Safety Camera Partnership, said: "We cannot make a comment about this because the legal action is still going on."
KEEP QUIET, AND WE'LL QUASH YOUR CONVICTION
11:02 - 08 September 2005
Motorists who were wrongly convicted of speeding at a speed camera site near Bristol could get their convictions quashed. A group of 13 motorists who are fighting the conviction have been offered a deal by the Avon and Somerset Safety Camera Partnership - the organisation which runs the cameras.
If they settle, it could have ramifications for more than 200 other drivers who were also fined for breaking the speed limit on a stretch of the A370 near Flax Bourton.
But one of the group - Richard Barclay from Backwell - is annoyed the settlement includes a gagging clause and that he would be saddled with his own legal costs.
Last year, Bryan Dunthorne, from Lockleaze, and John Hatton, from Weston-super-Mare, both successfully overturned their speeding convictions brought against them after they were snapped outside the village near the end of the Long Ashton bypass.
The partnership is offering to remove penalty points from the licences and return fines if the motorists involved bear the legal costs and there is no publicity about the settlement.
The settlement would take place between the partnership and the group to avoid a judicial review.
Mr Barclay, one of the group being represented by Bath-based solicitors Simon West, appealed to drivers who suspected they were wrongly convicted to come forw a rd .
Mr Barclay, who was given three points on his licence and fined £60 after being caught by a mobile unit in September 2003 on the Long Ashton bypass near Flax Bourton, said: "I thought it was disgraceful when I heard they would only agree to settle with us if they had no publicity.
"I was told by my solicitor that in order to proceed I will have to pay more legal fees and agree to this gagging order.
"One of the reasons I am doing this is out of principle, not just to get the £60 back, as I have already had to fork out a lot of money to get this far. They have already admitted they got it wrong in other cases.
"It's as if they are trying to deter people from going on with the court action. If I was fighting this on my own I would be facing a bill for more than £1,000 in legal costs, and the three points will be off my licence in a year anyway.
"I have said I am not prepared to go ahead with the case unless they lift the ban on publicity.
"Others from the group of 13 have also decided not to continue under those terms." Simon West Solicitors say they are still waiting for instructions from their clients about whether they want to make a settlement with the partnership, or apply for a judicial review.
That will mean the process of law under which the drivers were convicted will be examined.
In a letter to Mr Barclay, Simon West said: "The terms of their agreement would be that each side bear its own costs and there be no p u bl i c i t y. " It is usual for a settlement to go ahead without publicity.
Mr Barclay said: "I feel that it is a simple matter of them giving us our money back in the same way a shop would if you were overcharged.
"There's no grey area, it seems straightforward enough. They got it wrong and should correct their mistake, but instead want to hide behind smoke and mirrors.
"What galls me even more is that I was caught by two police officers operating a mobile speed camera, and I wonder whether it is the best use of the constabulary's resources. " Dave Gollicker, spokesman for the Safety Camera Partnership, said: "We cannot make a comment about this because the legal action is still going on."
If a case before a Mags Court a finding of Not Guilty can lead to the defendant asking FOR HIS COSTS, not the other way round.
In not being able to prosecute the SCP IMHO are virtually saying there is no offence so it is they who should return monies collected and remove points - period. They should also be aware that civil proceedings could be taken against them by drivers who have suffered an increase in their Insurance premium as a result of the three points.
I have heard some things in my time - like you get off 60 quid for speeding but we saddle you with X pounds in Legal Costs. Un- believeable.
dvd
In not being able to prosecute the SCP IMHO are virtually saying there is no offence so it is they who should return monies collected and remove points - period. They should also be aware that civil proceedings could be taken against them by drivers who have suffered an increase in their Insurance premium as a result of the three points.
I have heard some things in my time - like you get off 60 quid for speeding but we saddle you with X pounds in Legal Costs. Un- believeable.
dvd
Smacks of corruption und perverting course of justice... 
Typical - proof they are
STASIS 
Story in public interest - und if they are "promoting road safety" - then they accept they have made serious mistake and not just refund the fine/remove the points to ALL affected - but COMPENSATE for the inusrance loads and "false incrimination of reputation"
twazaks...
But story would appear to prove everything we have thought about these people...and why we should support safespeed and ABD...
Typical - proof they are
STASIS Story in public interest - und if they are "promoting road safety" - then they accept they have made serious mistake and not just refund the fine/remove the points to ALL affected - but COMPENSATE for the inusrance loads and "false incrimination of reputation"
twazaks... But story would appear to prove everything we have thought about these people...and why we should support safespeed and ABD...
francisb said:
This looks like a gift to a good lawyer.
it strikes me that a good lawyer is wasted on magistrates. you cant win an arguement with an idiot. lets face it; they are the dregs of their profession, one rung above the truely idiotic cps 'lawyers'.
Magistrates are generally 'lay' people who have no specific legal training, they are NOT legal professionals at all, merely people who volunteer to give up their time to sit as a magistrate. They are advised on points of law by the court clerk who is trained for the job.
This means if you do go to court you should bear this in mind and explain any legal points you wish to make.
jewhoo said:
you cant win an arguement with an idiot.
They drag you down to their level and beat you with experience.
My mate's dad happened to be owed a favour by a top London Barister and was represented in Magistrates court for driving with out due care. I was the only witness for the prosecution (against my wishes) and I have to say there is no way the CPS could have had any chance with the number of LARGE books he brought with him.
By the end of the trial the magistrates and CPS solicitor looked shell shocked, and all his costs were awarded against the CPS. (I have no idea how must a Top London Barister Charges, but I guess it's more per hour than most people earn in a week?)
I suspect that it is possible in this case that even more people might be affected than the news story suggests, ie. if it was published then a *thousand* more people might think "hang on".
Either way a "no publicity" clause is a disgusting trick and I'm glad they aren't accepting it.
Gareth
Either way a "no publicity" clause is a disgusting trick and I'm glad they aren't accepting it.
Gareth
francisb said:
This looks like a gift to a good lawyer.
it strikes me that a good lawyer is wasted on magistrates. you cant win an arguement with an idiot. lets face it; they are the dregs of their profession, one rung above the truely idiotic cps 'lawyers'.
Hi Francis
As a Magistrate I would enjoy hearing your reasoned argument as to how I fall into the category of "Idiot"?
I have a degree, am in Mensa and run a fairly successful business. For my PH qualifications I have a racing licence and drive a quick car. I like to think I have an open mind so step up and take the floor.....
A
PS it's spelt "Truly"
Agnostic said:
As a Magistrate I would enjoy hearing your reasoned argument as to how I fall into the category of "Idiot"?
I have a degree, am in Mensa and run a fairly successful business. For my PH qualifications I have a racing licence and drive a quick car. I like to think I have an open mind so step up and take the floor.....
A
PS it's spelt "Truly"
Its always nice to meet the exception that proves the rule. Is a high opinion of one's self and a tendency to correct others trivial mistakes also a job requirement?
francisb said:
As a Magistrate I would enjoy hearing your reasoned argument as to how I fall into the category of "Idiot"?
I have a degree, am in Mensa and run a fairly successful business. For my PH qualifications I have a racing licence and drive a quick car. I like to think I have an open mind so step up and take the floor.....
A
PS it's spelt "Truly"
Its always nice to meet the exception that proves the rule. Is a high opinion of one's self and a tendency to correct others trivial mistakes also a job requirement?
Francis
I have far from a high opinion of myself, you called me and my ilk an idiot, I was merely stating some facts about myself that I hoped went towards proving your statement incorrect?
Instead of trying to provoke a response to your flipant comment why do you not do as asked and explain your reasoning?
The reason for putting down some credentials for being on this site were merely to counter your obvious pigeon-holing of people you dislike.
A
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff