RE: Meredydd Hughes on the legal offensive

[sprinter885]

Thank heavens for another example of eloquent comment by Paul Smith & SafeSpeed. Well said that man

I really should sign up :

Edited by sprinter885 on Wednesday 23 May 13:14

[rallye alex]

what really gets me here is that didnt the DFT release figures that c. 5% of deaths/accidents are casued by speeding and that was down from c. 30% they were previously claiming because they realised their figures were wrong!



this should have highlighted some pretty obvious things, yet now we see that even more cameras will be installed and they can be located anywhere and also put 1 after the other to catch people who speed up after the 1st.



god it gives me rage, the level of corruption and incompetance is an endless joke!

[Mr Freefall]

With 'twats like this, is a wonder that anyone would want to join the force anymore, especially Traffic, as they are becoming the most hated part of the force very very rapidly, mainly due to people like this, and the policy's they stand for.



Mr F

[jwo]

And perhaps if the scamera partnerships operated as they should, above board, transparently, in accordance with guidelines and didn't treat speeding as one big money grabbing scheme opportunity then the tax payer would not have to fork out yet more money for the scamera partnerships to try and defend their incompetence!

[mybrainhurts]

This is oild news, announced long ago...



It's good to air it again, but why..?

[scotal]

Merrydiddy Huge said:

We are going to demonstrate that spurious cases get a slap. This team will defend the integrity of enforcement equipment and help us win high-profile cases.”



“We are saying to drivers who think they can try it on, ‘Come and get us if you think you are hard enough’. We have won every case we have supported.

When did a senior member of Britain' Police SERVICE decide to talk like a pissed-up cockney market trader?



Are we meant to respond to that sort of talk with chants of "Stick your cameras up your arse! You can stick your cameras up your arse!"



Or when we see policemen out and about do the "yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyooooooooooooouuuuuuuuuu'rrrrrrrrrrreeeeeesssssssssshhhhhhhhhhiiiiiittttttttaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhh" so beloved of Football fans during a goal kick?



If this really is the best he can manage maybe Mr Huge ought not be allowed control of anything more than a lollipop crossing?

(Quite leaving aside the 6 points for speeding thing, sacking offence, surely)

[mybrainhurts]

Med Hughes is my Chief Constable....



Three reasons why he doesn't have a grip on reality...



(1)...He reduced South Yorkshire trafpol numbers to pay for more firearms officers



(2)...He lowered the trigger speed of fixed cameras because deaths weren't falling....some cameras are set to 32...deaths are still not falling



(3)...He has more points than me



Time to sit in a field and put the thinking cap on, Mr Hughes...

[fluffnik]

All of ACPO should be sacked.

[herewego]

This part of the article is missing:

Drivers who challenge speed camera fines will face a new team of expert witnesses dedicated to the task of rebutting spurious arguments put forward by so-called loophole lawyers.



The Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo) has created the team, called Road Safety Support, to help forces struggling to cope with the rising number of drivers contesting tickets by citing legal technicalities. Thousands of drivers have had tickets cancelled after arguing that police failed to comply with certain aspects of the law when enforcing speed limits.



Many have claimed that cameras have not been properly calibrated to record speed accurately. Others have argued that speed limit signs have been obscured or that mobile cameras have given false readings.



Police often fail to contest such cases and cancel the ticket, either because they lack the resources to prove in court that the claims are false or because they do not want to risk losing the case and establishing a precedent.



See:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/art...

[7db]

herewego said:

...Others have argued that speed limit signs have been obscured...

Given how poor much of the UKs signage is, this is quite likely to open a few doors

[Pickled Piper]

What a ing tt. Is this supposed to instill respect for the Police Service? The actions and comments of this idiot do nothing but undermine confidence in the service.

More bullying bluster from the Police; "if you challenge us in Court we will take you to the cleaners", i"f you use a laser diffuser we will confiscate your car".

Praise be to Paul Smith.

pp

[mybrainhurts]

fluffnik said:

All of ACPO should be sacked.

ACPO...



ACCUMULATION of CLUELESS PONTIFICATING OBSESSIVES

[esselte]

herewego's article said:

Many have claimed that cameras have not been properly calibrated to record speed accurately. Others have argued that speed limit signs have been obscured or that mobile cameras have given false readings......Police often fail to contest such cases and cancel the ticket, either because they lack the resources to prove in court that the claims are false or because they do not want to risk losing the case and establishing a precedent

So does this mean that the CPS are unable to prove the "defendants" guilty ?Or that enough doubt surrounds the "infallible" cameras/dodgyscopes? If there's doubt then why,for goodness sake, are they still allowed to be used when they could cost an honest man his livelihood? It's a crock isn't it?

Edited by esselte on Wednesday 23 May 14:19

[esselte]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

It only means they've cherry picked the ones they got involved in...

[Biggriff]

I would class myself as a pretty law abiding citizen but all this does is simply add to the perception that the Police are not there to protect me and my family, and turns me into someone who is unlikely to cooperate with the police and to generally be unwilling to be a witness to any crime.



It's those that can afford to pay that are being targetted, not the real criminals. Put more trafpol out there, not cameras and lets have more arrests for bad/dangerous driving and being uninsured.



Think I will put cloned plates on my car, and have it uninsured with no RFL. Actually why not give up work and stop paying all that tax and go and claim benefits.

[Flat in Fifth]

Article said:

Mr Hughes added: "I respect competent lawyers who go through the evidence on behalf of their client. My job is to make sure the prosecution case is as robust as the defence."

Personally I don't have much of a problem with that statement, though picking and flicking nits, I think he should have said that it's his job to ensure the prosecution is correct. It's the CPS job to ensure that the prosecution is in the public interest, with all that entails and with all cans open and worms everywhere.

What I find utterly unnacceptable is the way that when someone does try to go through the evidence they are prevented from doing so by what can only be said to be bordering on abuse of process. Ref Peter Ward thread as simply one example.

And another thing Mr Hughes, in trying to make the case as robust as the defence, as in a case I mentioned on Peter Ward's thread, will such efforts involve a whole bus load of bobbies standing about at various points over the countryside, talking on radios, holding stop watches, waving flags at each other, all to support the prosecution by vascar/speed pilot of a motorist where a) the recorded speed was faster than the vehicle could actually achieve and b) the reporting officer from his claimed vantage point not only could not see the timing marks, but also he couldn't even see the actual section of road in question. !!!???!!!



Mr Hughes...... not in my name you don't.

Edited by Flat in Fifth on Wednesday 23 May 14:27

[rimmer]

just trying to find more ways of screwing us for every single penny they can get.

[havoc]

Biggriff said:

I would class myself as a pretty law abiding citizen but all this does is simply add to the perception that the Police are not there to protect me and my family, and turns me into someone who is unlikely to cooperate with the police and to generally be unwilling to be a witness to any crime.

I agree with all those sentiments.



As individuals, many of the police I meet and (rarely) have dealings with seem like good people in need of our support and help.



As an organisation, I don't trust them ONE BIT. They are getting overly-focused on (misguided?) targets, drowned in (probably unnecessary) paperwork, excessively politicised, and, quite clearly in this instance, overly hung-up on petty little things rather than the 'big picture'.



Exactly HOW MUCH is this task-force costing, and what good could that money/resource do elsewhere. What a f'g joke! The ACPO are clearly taking the speeding thing personally, and of course there are too many senior and political careers wedded to it to do anything as sensible and worthwhile as a policy U-turn...so like the mythological Roman tar-baby, they're (and we're) getting stuck deeper and deeper into it...until no end/exit appears possible.

[Andy Zarse]

Flat in Fifth said:

Article said:

Mr Hughes added: "I respect competent lawyers who go through the evidence on behalf of their client. My job is to make sure the prosecution case is as robust as the defence."

Personally I don't have much of a problem with that statement, though picking and flicking nits, I think he should have said that it's his job to ensure the prosecution is correct. It's the CPS job to ensure that the prosecution is in the public interest, with all that entails and with all cans open and worms everywhere.

What I find utterly unnacceptable is the way that when someone does try to go through the evidence they are prevented from doing so by what can only be said to be bordering on abuse of process. Ref Peter Ward thread as simply one example.

And another thing Mr Hughes, in trying to make the case as robust as the defence, as in a case I mentioned on Peter Ward's thread, will such efforts involve a whole bus load of bobbies standing about at various points over the countryside, talking on radios, holding stop watches, waving flags at each other, all to support the prosecution by vascar/speed pilot of a motorist where a) the recorded speed was faster than the vehicle could actually achieve and b) the reporting officer from his claimed vantage point not only could not see the timing marks, but also he couldn't even see the actual section of road in question. !!!???!!!



Mr Hughes...... not in my name you don't.

Pretty much says all I'd want to say about the idiot Meryddyyddydydyyydydydd Hughes. Who the hell does he think he is to deny ordinary people, who believe they're innocent and have a case to make, a proper shot at justice? Shame!

[nelly1]

So, if you have the audacity to challenge your £30 fine, take it to court and lose, will the costs now skyrocket to accomodate this crack team of APCO legal-eagles?