PolicePilot camera evidence 'not admissable'.....
Discussion
Well, in Scotland at least......
www.sundaymail.co.uk/news/tm_objectid=16612892&method=full&siteid=64736%26headline=exclusive%2d%2dcleared%2d115mph%2ddriver%2d%2di%2dwill%2ddo%2dit%2dagain-name_page.html
22 January 2006
EXCLUSIVE: CLEARED 115MPH DRIVER: I WILL DO IT AGAIN
Speeder's vow after loophole escape
By Himaya Quasem
A MORONIC driver who escaped punishment after being clocked at 115mph in his Porsche yesterday bragged: "I'll do it again."
Robert Anderson, 47, should have been banned from driving after being caught by speed patrols but escaped because of a legal loophole.
He said: "The Porsche is an amazing motor. If you give it a bit of boot it's up to 100 in no time.
"The way I figure it, there is no point in having a Porsche if you're not going to use it."
Anderson, who is due in the dock over a second speeding charge later this month, also boasted that police missed him driving at 130mph.
He said: "The sheriff said I was a very lucky man because he wanted to ban me from driving for a great length of time.
"My average speed when I was caught was about 115mph but I could have been doing 130mph.
"It was wet and the road was busy. Driving conditions were difficult.
"The Porsche Centre says the car is capable of being driven at that speed so I just went for it.
"The police were using an unmarked BMW and I saw it sitting beside me at the traffic lights. The driver nodded at me but he wasn't in uniform.
"When I set off again this BMW was right behind me. I thought he was trying to intimidate me. I just put my foot down to get away."
Anderson got off because the police used a camera that does not have government approval.
It meant evidence gathered from the vehicle-mounted PolicePilot camera, used by all of Scotland's forces, was inadmissable in court.
The loophole - which was first exposed seven years ago - means thousands of other motorists caught driving over the speed limit by the same devices could have their convictions quashed.
Anderson, of Helensburgh, was caught in his Porsche Boxter on the A82 approach road to Erskine.
He was charged with speeding but said the case should be dismissed as the camera is not on a list of devices approved for use in the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988.
Kevin Delaney, head of traffic and road safety at RAC, said: "This is extremely worrying.
"If people are able to exploit this loophole then the police should be doing something about it.
"It's no good them grumbling the speeders got off on a technicality. Their job is to enforce the law."
Certificate
Anderson, a CCTV engineer, had his case at Dumbarton Sheriff Court adjourned twice between August 2005 and January 2006 when he demanded police produce a "type approval certificate" for the PolicePilot.
Depute fiscal Rhona Baird was forced to abandon the case as no such certificate existed.
Since the case on January 18, Anderson has been charged in a second speeding incident - for driving at 46mph on the 30mph A814 Cardross Road.
But he is confident he will be cleared again as the hand-held radar gun used to catch him does not have government approval either.
Anderson said: "None of these devices have been government approved.
"I will get off this latest charge because there is no certificate for the device those officers used either."
In 1999, motorist James McDonald escaped a driving ban at Livingston Sheriff Court using the same loophole. He had been caught driving at 101mph.
PolicePilot is approved for use in many other countries, including England, where it was given Home Office approval in 1994.
Steve Walker, Group product manager from Petards, who manufacture PolicePilot, said: "It is manually operated and is an attended piece of equipment and therefore doesn't need type approval.
"The PolicePilot has been used to catch a significant number of speeders and is the kind of technology used in programmes like 'Police, Camera, Action."
The Association of Chief Police Officers Scotland said individual police forces decide what equipment they use.
www.sundaymail.co.uk/news/tm_objectid=16612892&method=full&siteid=64736%26headline=exclusive%2d%2dcleared%2d115mph%2ddriver%2d%2di%2dwill%2ddo%2dit%2dagain-name_page.html
22 January 2006
EXCLUSIVE: CLEARED 115MPH DRIVER: I WILL DO IT AGAIN
Speeder's vow after loophole escape
By Himaya Quasem
A MORONIC driver who escaped punishment after being clocked at 115mph in his Porsche yesterday bragged: "I'll do it again."
Robert Anderson, 47, should have been banned from driving after being caught by speed patrols but escaped because of a legal loophole.
He said: "The Porsche is an amazing motor. If you give it a bit of boot it's up to 100 in no time.
"The way I figure it, there is no point in having a Porsche if you're not going to use it."
Anderson, who is due in the dock over a second speeding charge later this month, also boasted that police missed him driving at 130mph.
He said: "The sheriff said I was a very lucky man because he wanted to ban me from driving for a great length of time.
"My average speed when I was caught was about 115mph but I could have been doing 130mph.
"It was wet and the road was busy. Driving conditions were difficult.
"The Porsche Centre says the car is capable of being driven at that speed so I just went for it.
"The police were using an unmarked BMW and I saw it sitting beside me at the traffic lights. The driver nodded at me but he wasn't in uniform.
"When I set off again this BMW was right behind me. I thought he was trying to intimidate me. I just put my foot down to get away."
Anderson got off because the police used a camera that does not have government approval.
It meant evidence gathered from the vehicle-mounted PolicePilot camera, used by all of Scotland's forces, was inadmissable in court.
The loophole - which was first exposed seven years ago - means thousands of other motorists caught driving over the speed limit by the same devices could have their convictions quashed.
Anderson, of Helensburgh, was caught in his Porsche Boxter on the A82 approach road to Erskine.
He was charged with speeding but said the case should be dismissed as the camera is not on a list of devices approved for use in the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988.
Kevin Delaney, head of traffic and road safety at RAC, said: "This is extremely worrying.
"If people are able to exploit this loophole then the police should be doing something about it.
"It's no good them grumbling the speeders got off on a technicality. Their job is to enforce the law."
Certificate
Anderson, a CCTV engineer, had his case at Dumbarton Sheriff Court adjourned twice between August 2005 and January 2006 when he demanded police produce a "type approval certificate" for the PolicePilot.
Depute fiscal Rhona Baird was forced to abandon the case as no such certificate existed.
Since the case on January 18, Anderson has been charged in a second speeding incident - for driving at 46mph on the 30mph A814 Cardross Road.
But he is confident he will be cleared again as the hand-held radar gun used to catch him does not have government approval either.
Anderson said: "None of these devices have been government approved.
"I will get off this latest charge because there is no certificate for the device those officers used either."
In 1999, motorist James McDonald escaped a driving ban at Livingston Sheriff Court using the same loophole. He had been caught driving at 101mph.
PolicePilot is approved for use in many other countries, including England, where it was given Home Office approval in 1994.
Steve Walker, Group product manager from Petards, who manufacture PolicePilot, said: "It is manually operated and is an attended piece of equipment and therefore doesn't need type approval.
"The PolicePilot has been used to catch a significant number of speeders and is the kind of technology used in programmes like 'Police, Camera, Action."
The Association of Chief Police Officers Scotland said individual police forces decide what equipment they use.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff