Late NIP - Finally, VICTORY IN THE HIGH COURT
Discussion
havoc said:
peterguk M500 said:
F i F said:
Have you ever stated what you were accused of? eg 79 in a 70 or??
85mph in a 70mph.
In other words, probably a complete waste of everyone's time in the first place!
Edited by HRG. on Friday 6th November 16:13
TJD2003 said:
I too challenged a speeding ticket and won.
However mine was a little different, copper with a gun stopped me on the A55 said I was doing 98 in horrendous conditions, I was doing over 70 and agreed to that but refused to accept I was doing what he said I was.
This is on a November evening in heavy traffic, pouring rain, spray and mist. Tells me he got me 300 meters away and you couldn't even see 300 meters.
Policeman gets very irate I wont accept what he's telling me and offers no ticket as over 95mph and I'm going to court, I would have taken the ticket but he wont give me one.
I note that the car is dry on the drivers door despite torrential rain and the windows are steamed up so believe he took a reading through the glass which is against guidelines.
So I do a bit of digging, he hasn't tested the gun on getting it or returning it, the area where they test the gun has tress growing over it and they cant even test it, police don't even have a form despite guidelines stating they need to test the gun before and after operation. They now tell me guidlines are only guidlines and they dont need to comply with ACPO
Answer to being dry is rain coming the other way, steamed up because he only had the window open just enough for the beam.
Goes to court, crap lawyer I hired does a crap job (turns out she's litigation) policemen brings what looked like a different gun into court and goes through a pantomime of how he got me and I get done 5 points and 300 odd quid by the three old magistrates behind the counter.
Walk out of court and someone hands me a local newspaper, inside is a story about the same copper, same circumstances, same place etc and the defendant proved the copper wrong and got his conviction quashed. Didn't know anything about it till that point, presumed the CPS did because the whole way through the case he looks miserable and surprised when he won.
In the story is this guys lawyer, two days later he's my new lawyer, he knows a guy who has been on the TV and can prove that this reading was impossible, I start collecting images of the measured out are where the gun was supposed to be checked, we hire a meteorologist and prove the rain was actually going towards the police car not away and he would have been wet.
Report comes from laser guy proving that copper could not take sensible reading in those conditions, copper had agreed to conditions in order to prove to magistrates that I was a nut.
3 days before county court police decide that its no longer in the public interest to continue with the case, my over £10,000 costs are now there costs, points and fine are gone.
Everyone told me I was nuts to fight it and I was an idiot wasting my cash, if the copper had just given me my ticket I would have taken it and gone but oh no he had to get greedy.
If you think your right then fight it.
Regards
TJ
Great result! But the system shouldnt be set up so that you have to take it that far. If the CPS knew of the previous case and its circumstances, as the newspaper seemed to, then they should have dropped the caseHowever mine was a little different, copper with a gun stopped me on the A55 said I was doing 98 in horrendous conditions, I was doing over 70 and agreed to that but refused to accept I was doing what he said I was.
This is on a November evening in heavy traffic, pouring rain, spray and mist. Tells me he got me 300 meters away and you couldn't even see 300 meters.
Policeman gets very irate I wont accept what he's telling me and offers no ticket as over 95mph and I'm going to court, I would have taken the ticket but he wont give me one.
I note that the car is dry on the drivers door despite torrential rain and the windows are steamed up so believe he took a reading through the glass which is against guidelines.
So I do a bit of digging, he hasn't tested the gun on getting it or returning it, the area where they test the gun has tress growing over it and they cant even test it, police don't even have a form despite guidelines stating they need to test the gun before and after operation. They now tell me guidlines are only guidlines and they dont need to comply with ACPO
Answer to being dry is rain coming the other way, steamed up because he only had the window open just enough for the beam.
Goes to court, crap lawyer I hired does a crap job (turns out she's litigation) policemen brings what looked like a different gun into court and goes through a pantomime of how he got me and I get done 5 points and 300 odd quid by the three old magistrates behind the counter.
Walk out of court and someone hands me a local newspaper, inside is a story about the same copper, same circumstances, same place etc and the defendant proved the copper wrong and got his conviction quashed. Didn't know anything about it till that point, presumed the CPS did because the whole way through the case he looks miserable and surprised when he won.
In the story is this guys lawyer, two days later he's my new lawyer, he knows a guy who has been on the TV and can prove that this reading was impossible, I start collecting images of the measured out are where the gun was supposed to be checked, we hire a meteorologist and prove the rain was actually going towards the police car not away and he would have been wet.
Report comes from laser guy proving that copper could not take sensible reading in those conditions, copper had agreed to conditions in order to prove to magistrates that I was a nut.
3 days before county court police decide that its no longer in the public interest to continue with the case, my over £10,000 costs are now there costs, points and fine are gone.
Everyone told me I was nuts to fight it and I was an idiot wasting my cash, if the copper had just given me my ticket I would have taken it and gone but oh no he had to get greedy.
If you think your right then fight it.
Regards
TJ
TJD2003 said:
Apparently it was the same CPS prosocuter who lost who acted against me.
They provided the paper work I asked for 1 day before the case, they seemed to want to win no matter the evidence.
Regards
TJ
<vonhosen>It's okay though because now someone in a similar position would have to pay most of that 10k themselves</vonhosen>They provided the paper work I asked for 1 day before the case, they seemed to want to win no matter the evidence.
Regards
TJ
It's wonderful how modern justice serves the public, eh? (for those who have trouble with moral reality, that was sarcastic).
For the record, TJD2003, nice work. In a similar position, I doubt that I would have the tenacity to have fought like you seemed to have done.
Edited by iamed on Friday 6th November 23:01
TJD2003 said:
Apparently it was the same CPS prosocuter who lost who acted against me.
They provided the paper work I asked for 1 day before the case, they seemed to want to win no matter the evidence.
Regards
TJ
This sort of stuff really pisses me off. Its no wonder that most people have no respect for this system.They provided the paper work I asked for 1 day before the case, they seemed to want to win no matter the evidence.
Regards
TJ
blueg33 said:
TJD2003 said:
Apparently it was the same CPS prosocuter who lost who acted against me.
They provided the paper work I asked for 1 day before the case, they seemed to want to win no matter the evidence.
Regards
TJ
This sort of stuff really pisses me off. Its no wonder that most people have no respect for this system.They provided the paper work I asked for 1 day before the case, they seemed to want to win no matter the evidence.
Regards
TJ
Only those inside te system can't see it or choose to deny it.
...and is an abuse of process. Weren't the rules on disclosure changed to stop the prosecution being ambushed by introduction of defence evidence at the last minute?
Also let us not forget that back in 2000 the Attorney General warned that Police officers and lawyers who fail to comply with guidelines on the disclosure of evidence should face disciplinary action.
He went on to say that "too many criminal trials had become trials of what should or should not be disclosed and less about the guilt of a defendant. He said he would be disappointed if police officers and lawyers who committed "gross" breaches of the guidelines were not disciplined."
Taking what is posted above at face value, only one side of the story etc etc, then imo a complaint against both the police officer and the CPS should have been generated and disciplinary action requested.
Also let us not forget that back in 2000 the Attorney General warned that Police officers and lawyers who fail to comply with guidelines on the disclosure of evidence should face disciplinary action.
He went on to say that "too many criminal trials had become trials of what should or should not be disclosed and less about the guilt of a defendant. He said he would be disappointed if police officers and lawyers who committed "gross" breaches of the guidelines were not disciplined."
Taking what is posted above at face value, only one side of the story etc etc, then imo a complaint against both the police officer and the CPS should have been generated and disciplinary action requested.
To be frank, I had too much on my plate to consider takings things further. It had no material impact on my guilt or otherwise and no effect on my sentence further down the line.
For the record, they also introduced new evidence between the plea hearing and the committal to Crown Court, too.
For the record, they also introduced new evidence between the plea hearing and the committal to Crown Court, too.
Sorry 10PS, should have made myself clear, I was referring to tjd2003's story.
I've read your blog and harrowing reading it makes; I understand your position at the time and how you ended up with that decision which was the correct one in the circumstances. CPS were still abusing the process though.
If I think back to my youth, frankly there but for the grace of God...
I've read your blog and harrowing reading it makes; I understand your position at the time and how you ended up with that decision which was the correct one in the circumstances. CPS were still abusing the process though.
If I think back to my youth, frankly there but for the grace of God...
Yes Fif it was against there own supposed fair procedures yet despite asking for it many times before the case they had an excuse for refusal and provided it very close to the court date.
When I went to measure and photograph the area where they supposedly test the accuracy of the speed gun the same copper came out and told me that I shouldnt be allowed to appeal and who did I think I was appealing. Told me I wasnt allowed to measure and take pictures, when I told him it was public land he got very snotty, then tried to talk about the case to which I asked him what the hell he was doing as it couldnt be discussed outside the court.
Saw him some time after the case was won in a petrol station, wouldnt even look me in the eye and ran off without a word.
He lied to me, lied to the court, lied to the CPS and provided false evidence, even bringing a differnt speed gun into the court to prove his actions.
Regards
TJ
When I went to measure and photograph the area where they supposedly test the accuracy of the speed gun the same copper came out and told me that I shouldnt be allowed to appeal and who did I think I was appealing. Told me I wasnt allowed to measure and take pictures, when I told him it was public land he got very snotty, then tried to talk about the case to which I asked him what the hell he was doing as it couldnt be discussed outside the court.
Saw him some time after the case was won in a petrol station, wouldnt even look me in the eye and ran off without a word.
He lied to me, lied to the court, lied to the CPS and provided false evidence, even bringing a differnt speed gun into the court to prove his actions.
Regards
TJ
vonhosen said:
tenohfive said:
odyssey2200 said:
tenohfive said:
I just hope that the £8,000 it cost the tax payer so you wouldn't have to pay a £60 fine leads to changes that mean there won't be a repeat of this.
The CPS had the option to take no further action back in 2007.Was there a wider public interest in seeing the OP pay up or just lazy, bloody-mindedness and the belief that " I am the law" and therefore beyond challenge?
No-one who has anything to do with the legal system thinks they're above being challenged. Everyone in said system has been challenged. Its these challenges that lead to more legislation to close the loopholes and technicalities. But I suspect when that happens there'll be even more complaining about excessive legislation.
Why not just up the FPN penalty & send them all by recorded delivery ?
.Mondeohdear said:
vonhosen said:
tenohfive said:
odyssey2200 said:
tenohfive said:
I just hope that the £8,000 it cost the tax payer so you wouldn't have to pay a £60 fine leads to changes that mean there won't be a repeat of this.
The CPS had the option to take no further action back in 2007.Was there a wider public interest in seeing the OP pay up or just lazy, bloody-mindedness and the belief that " I am the law" and therefore beyond challenge?
No-one who has anything to do with the legal system thinks they're above being challenged. Everyone in said system has been challenged. Its these challenges that lead to more legislation to close the loopholes and technicalities. But I suspect when that happens there'll be even more complaining about excessive legislation.
Why not just up the FPN penalty & send them all by recorded delivery ?
.Mondeohdear said:
vonhosen said:
tenohfive said:
odyssey2200 said:
tenohfive said:
I just hope that the £8,000 it cost the tax payer so you wouldn't have to pay a £60 fine leads to changes that mean there won't be a repeat of this.
The CPS had the option to take no further action back in 2007.Was there a wider public interest in seeing the OP pay up or just lazy, bloody-mindedness and the belief that " I am the law" and therefore beyond challenge?
No-one who has anything to do with the legal system thinks they're above being challenged. Everyone in said system has been challenged. Its these challenges that lead to more legislation to close the loopholes and technicalities. But I suspect when that happens there'll be even more complaining about excessive legislation.
Why not just up the FPN penalty & send them all by recorded delivery ?
.blueg33 said:
Mondeohdear said:
vonhosen said:
tenohfive said:
odyssey2200 said:
tenohfive said:
I just hope that the £8,000 it cost the tax payer so you wouldn't have to pay a £60 fine leads to changes that mean there won't be a repeat of this.
The CPS had the option to take no further action back in 2007.Was there a wider public interest in seeing the OP pay up or just lazy, bloody-mindedness and the belief that " I am the law" and therefore beyond challenge?
No-one who has anything to do with the legal system thinks they're above being challenged. Everyone in said system has been challenged. Its these challenges that lead to more legislation to close the loopholes and technicalities. But I suspect when that happens there'll be even more complaining about excessive legislation.
Why not just up the FPN penalty & send them all by recorded delivery ?
.If we are going to ignore speed as a factor, should we not ignore every other contributory factor that figures in less injury collisions ?
(Factors such as defective tyres, defective brakes, disobeying traffic lights or give way signs, illegal turns, tailgating, drink drive, driving under influence of drugs, road rage etc )
Edited by vonhosen on Sunday 8th November 21:39
vonhosen said:
Mondeohdear said:
vonhosen said:
tenohfive said:
odyssey2200 said:
tenohfive said:
I just hope that the £8,000 it cost the tax payer so you wouldn't have to pay a £60 fine leads to changes that mean there won't be a repeat of this.
The CPS had the option to take no further action back in 2007.Was there a wider public interest in seeing the OP pay up or just lazy, bloody-mindedness and the belief that " I am the law" and therefore beyond challenge?
No-one who has anything to do with the legal system thinks they're above being challenged. Everyone in said system has been challenged. Its these challenges that lead to more legislation to close the loopholes and technicalities. But I suspect when that happens there'll be even more complaining about excessive legislation.
Why not just up the FPN penalty & send them all by recorded delivery ?
.
vonhosen said:
blueg33 said:
Mondeohdear said:
vonhosen said:
tenohfive said:
odyssey2200 said:
tenohfive said:
I just hope that the £8,000 it cost the tax payer so you wouldn't have to pay a £60 fine leads to changes that mean there won't be a repeat of this.
The CPS had the option to take no further action back in 2007.Was there a wider public interest in seeing the OP pay up or just lazy, bloody-mindedness and the belief that " I am the law" and therefore beyond challenge?
No-one who has anything to do with the legal system thinks they're above being challenged. Everyone in said system has been challenged. Its these challenges that lead to more legislation to close the loopholes and technicalities. But I suspect when that happens there'll be even more complaining about excessive legislation.
Why not just up the FPN penalty & send them all by recorded delivery ?
.Von, you are such a good advocate of the law and its enforcement, if people like you could take the blinkers off regarding speed and cameras and apply your intelligence to the real problem, you could make a REAL difference
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff