Pulled for speeding - Question re in car video

Pulled for speeding - Question re in car video

Author
Discussion

Pixelpeep

Original Poster:

8,600 posts

141 months

Friday 27th December 2013
quotequote all
Hello - not going to get into the nitty gritty as not strictly relevant for the question

I was pulled yesterday by an unmarked car who had been following me for roughly 4 miles on non motorway roads and he invites me into his car to watch the video.

No part of the video shows a 'target' speed, just the speed of the unmarked police car. the section of road where he said i was committing the offence you cant even see my car until he reaches me at a roundabout.

From doing a little research i see that speeding is the opinion of the officer, which is backed up by either another officer (not present) or by a speed measuring device.

As my speed wasn't locked or measured between two points all there is is the speed the police car was traveling to back up the officers claim

The section of road, although straight has a down hill section (enough for him to lose sight of me) and also the entrance to the road is a full right handed turn at a set of lights which i entered far faster than the police car did.

So, he starts his comparison from how fast he has to go, once the right hand turn was complete to start to gain on me and then keep a level distance?

He is claiming 55 in a 30 hence no offer of fixed penalty but a summons

i do think i was above the speed limit, but not by that much - does anyone think i could question the accuracy of his reading based on the fact that i got round the corner quicker, therefore was already making ground and the fact that at some points he couldn't actually see me to know if he was gaining ?

Cooperman

4,428 posts

249 months

Friday 27th December 2013
quotequote all
If you want to challenge it in court you will need an expert witness.
Be prepared for a high cost case with little chance of winning. But, if you fell that you are up for a fight, then good luck with it.

herewego

8,814 posts

212 months

Friday 27th December 2013
quotequote all
Was 55 the max speed that showed on his speedo?

ikarl

3,730 posts

198 months

Friday 27th December 2013
quotequote all
Expert witness???

You need to request a Newton Hearing I believe. This is where you admit to speeding, but disagree with the speed, for the points you have noted above.

IANAL so need someone else to confirm the process, but I think you speak to the CPS prior to court (or at court).




Something to note, if you argue the speed down to say 50mph, does that make a difference? would you have been given a COFP? What speed do you think you were doing?

Pixelpeep

Original Poster:

8,600 posts

141 months

Friday 27th December 2013
quotequote all
herewego said:
Was 55 the max speed that showed on his speedo?
Yes, at no point did it go above 55 (GPS speed readout overlaid onto the video)

re does the speed make a difference - yes, massively. According to the magistrates court sentencing guidelines;

31-40 in a 30 - 3 points & small fine
41-50 in a 30 - 4-6 points or 7-28 day disqualification & medium fine
51-60 in a 30 - 7-56 day disqualification or 6 points & large fine

i can't be sure re speed, but if i had to guess i would say 40

SV8Predator

2,102 posts

164 months

Friday 27th December 2013
quotequote all
Pixelpeep said:
i can't be sure re speed, but if i had to guess i would say 40
Definitely go to go court and say the above.



Durzel

12,232 posts

167 months

Friday 27th December 2013
quotequote all
The devil is in the detail really. If he was doing 55mph and not gaining on you, then by extension you must've been going at least this fast.

The question you might want to ask yourself is: would you want the video being shown in court? The notion that you weren't doing more than 40mph for 4 miles while he followed you is rather fantastical...

Pixelpeep

Original Poster:

8,600 posts

141 months

Friday 27th December 2013
quotequote all
Durzel said:
The devil is in the detail really. If he was doing 55mph and not gaining on you, then by extension you must've been going at least this fast.
but it wasn't over the same distance - i was already a fair way down the road due to the speed difference in taking the corner and how fast i accelerated into the road - the police car did not have the same capabilities as my car therefore would have to go faster to catch up sooner ?

Durzel said:
The question you might want to ask yourself is: would you want the video being shown in court? The notion that you weren't doing more than 40mph for 4 miles while he followed you is rather fantastical...
He followed me for 4 miles and is using the footage of our last 0.5 miles as the offence. - clearly this was the 'best' evidence of speeding he had captured in the entire time he had been following me.

the whole route was through backroads and country roads, most 30mph, some 50mph but the one he stopped me on was the first 0.5 miles of a 30 coming from a 50.

SS2.

14,455 posts

237 months

Friday 27th December 2013
quotequote all
Pixelpeep said:
From doing a little research i see that speeding is the opinion of the officer, which is backed up by either another officer (not present) or by a speed measuring device.

As my speed wasn't locked or measured between two points all there is is the speed the police car was traveling to back up the officers claim.
A statement from the officer that he corroborated your speed using his own speedometer could be sufficient evidence to convict - there is no requirement for a video, nor for the speedo to be calibrated (or even tested).

Pixelpeep

Original Poster:

8,600 posts

141 months

Friday 27th December 2013
quotequote all
SS2. said:
A statement from the officer that he corroborated your speed using his own speedometer could be sufficient evidence to convict - there is no requirement for a video, nor for the speedo to be calibrated (or even tested).
thats for the offence of speeding - but it's the method he used to work out how fast i was going that i am questioning.

Yes, i was speeding, but i wasn't doing XX speed kind of thing.

How can nothing more than a guess based on nothing scientific be sufficient to 'prove' it was 55mph ?

SS2.

14,455 posts

237 months

Friday 27th December 2013
quotequote all
Pixelpeep said:
How can nothing more than a guess based on nothing scientific be sufficient to 'prove' it was 55mph ?
Short answer ? Well established case law, I'm afraid.

Steffan

10,362 posts

227 months

Friday 27th December 2013
quotequote all
Pixelpeep said:
SS2. said:
A statement from the officer that he corroborated your speed using his own speedometer could be sufficient evidence to convict - there is no requirement for a video, nor for the speedo to be calibrated (or even tested).
thats for the offence of speeding - but it's the method he used to work out how fast i was going that i am questioning.

Yes, i was speeding, but i wasn't doing XX speed kind of thing.

How can nothing more than a guess based on nothing scientific be sufficient to 'prove' it was 55mph ?
It is a fact that the magistrates are very likely to accept the word of the police officer over your unsupported opinion concerning your speed particularly when you are admitting to the offence speeding. I cannot see a successful defence but if you want to waste money and probably incur a higher fine then carry on. Contrition and an apologetic approach might serve you better.

I would respectfully suggest that taking the time you are committing to this research for a defence into considering whether a change in approach in your driving is needed. We all speed from time to time but if you regard 55 in a 30 as acceptable over some distance, then I do think it is your appreciation of the dangers of speeding that requires careful consideration at length.

10 Pence Short

32,880 posts

216 months

Friday 27th December 2013
quotequote all
I would suggest that if the OP wants sympathy from the Mags, he might avoid trying to prove the Officer's wrong because his car wasn't fast enough to keep up. That may be a counter productive approach.

ArmaghMan

2,398 posts

179 months

Friday 27th December 2013
quotequote all
Steffan said:
It is a fact that the magistrates are very likely to accept the word of the police officer over your unsupported opinion concerning your speed particularly when you are admitting to the offence speeding. I cannot see a successful defence but if you want to waste money and probably incur a higher fine then carry on. Contrition and an apologetic approach might serve you better.

I would respectfully suggest that taking the time you are committing to this research for a defence into considering whether a change in approach in your driving is needed. We all speed from time to time but if you regard 55 in a 30 as acceptable over some distance, then I do think it is your appreciation of the dangers of speeding that requires careful consideration at length.
This sums up perfectly what is wrong with the justice system.
A few years ago I got a fixed penalty, 3 points and £60, not for speeding, but another trivial offence. I wanted to fight it if for no other reason that the plod was an arrogant little bd and I wanted my day in court with him.
Went to see my solicitor, as you do in these situations. She stated that in all probability we should win, but that by the time we were finished I would be £2000 minimum down.
She also stated that if the RM disliked the fact that we had fought the case the penalty could be a lot worse.
And they wonder why people hate the police!

AndyBrew

2,774 posts

218 months

Friday 27th December 2013
quotequote all
just give it up, take whats coming, shirt and tie and apologise profusely.

agtlaw

6,680 posts

205 months

Friday 27th December 2013
quotequote all
Pixelpeep said:
Hello - not going to get into the nitty gritty as not strictly relevant for the question

I was pulled yesterday by an unmarked car who had been following me for roughly 4 miles on non motorway roads and he invites me into his car to watch the video.

No part of the video shows a 'target' speed, just the speed of the unmarked police car. the section of road where he said i was committing the offence you cant even see my car until he reaches me at a roundabout.

From doing a little research i see that speeding is the opinion of the officer, which is backed up by either another officer (not present) or by a speed measuring device.

As my speed wasn't locked or measured between two points all there is is the speed the police car was traveling to back up the officers claim

The section of road, although straight has a down hill section (enough for him to lose sight of me) and also the entrance to the road is a full right handed turn at a set of lights which i entered far faster than the police car did.

So, he starts his comparison from how fast he has to go, once the right hand turn was complete to start to gain on me and then keep a level distance?

He is claiming 55 in a 30 hence no offer of fixed penalty but a summons

i do think i was above the speed limit, but not by that much - does anyone think i could question the accuracy of his reading based on the fact that i got round the corner quicker, therefore was already making ground and the fact that at some points he couldn't actually see me to know if he was gaining ?
If you're prepared to admit excess speed but want to challenge the actual speed then it's often better to plead not guilty - you might as well have a trial rather than a trial of issue (a.k.a. a Newton hearing). In other words, put the prosecution to proof on everything rather than simply the speed. Impossible to decide best strategy without seeing the papers. Probably no need for expert evidence.

An agreed speed is probably the simplest solution. This must be done in writing - it's called a Basis of Plea. Prosecution often generous in cases not involving laser / gatso evidence. At an agreed 40 mph you're virtually guaranteed 3pp. You have to hope that there's a prosecutor in court (getting less frequent these days). Otherwise, not guilty then write to CPS later - or whatever you decide.

If you plead guilty to the prosecution case (without a written Basis) then it's settled law that you accept everything alleged.



10 Pence Short

32,880 posts

216 months

Friday 27th December 2013
quotequote all
AGT- quick question; what defines who is or is not a CPS Prosecutor?

anonymous-user

53 months

Friday 27th December 2013
quotequote all
Steffan said:
I would respectfully suggest that taking the time you are committing to this research for a defence into considering whether a change in approach in your driving is needed. We all speed from time to time but if you regard 55 in a 30 as acceptable over some distance, then I do think it is your appreciation of the dangers of speeding that requires careful consideration at length.
But he has said, more than once, that he wasn't doing 55mph.

agtlaw

6,680 posts

205 months

Friday 27th December 2013
quotequote all
10 Pence Short said:
AGT- quick question; what defines who is or is not a CPS Prosecutor?
I'd written a reply about absent prosecutors, traffic courts, assistant prosecutors, outside counsel, etc. however, is this what you're looking for? http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2003/44/sectio...

Steffan

10,362 posts

227 months

Friday 27th December 2013
quotequote all
REALIST123 said:
Steffan said:
I would respectfully suggest that taking the time you are committing to this research for a defence into considering whether a change in approach in your driving is needed. We all speed from time to time but if you regard 55 in a 30 as acceptable over some distance, then I do think it is your appreciation of the dangers of speeding that requires careful consideration at length.
But he has said, more than once, that he wasn't doing 55mph.
It is difficult not to incur minor penalties in motoring on the crowded roads of the UK. Since the OP admits to speeding at that time in that place I think it would be better to stop wasting time on what is likely to be a fruitless exercise and accept the penalty. The OP could win the case but experience and observation of such cases over many years suggests he is more likely to lose the case. As many others on OH have suggested, In which case the penalties are very likely to be higher and the costs of defence definitely are going to be considerably higher than those of pleading guilty. As others have suggested I would move on to more productive activities. Motoring Law in the UK is weighted on the side of the Police. Magistrates are more likely to believe the Police. Unpalatable, yes. But fact.