Is this good use of Police time?
Discussion
I've had a laser jammer fitted to my car for at least 6 years. It's probably gone off around 10-15 times in response to laser speed traps. I would say on 50% of those occasions I wasn't breaking the speed limit anyway. The other times, I've slowed down as soon as I've heard the warning in the car (so, in practise I've responded to it's warning in the same way as a detector rather than just carry on driving at the same speed knowing I won't get caught).
I've not been stopped, warned or informed by anyone in all this time that the use of a jammer is illegal.
My girlfriend borrowed my car for a day a few weeks ago. Driving through town, she heard the warning go off and saw a laser speed trap van further down the road. She wasn't stopped at the time and didn't feel that she was over the speed limit at the time.
On Monday night this week at about 8 pm we get a knock on the door. Two policemen ask my girlfriend if she was driving my car at the time, which she admitted and then proceed to caution us both and arrest my girlfriend on the charge of 'perverting the course of justice'.
They then make me take the jammer off the car (if I refused they would seize the car) as evidence.
My girlfriend is taken to the nearest 'designated station' which is 30 minutes away for a taped interview.
In the station she is treated just like any other criminal. Belt, jewellry, money etc. taken off her and put in a plastic bag. She's read her rights and the interview conducted.
The two arresting officers are reassuring her that it's just procedure and that the desk sergeant will release her with a warning. But oh no, the sergeant decides that this is not something she can do and refers it to the CPS. A date is set for her to return to the station to hear what the CPS want to do with it.
During the interview, she gives them the facts - Yes she knew that my car has various devices fitted to it, but she doesn't know what they all do (true). She did not operate the jammer herself as it turns on with the ignition, so anyone driving it would be unaware that it was fitted and what it does.
I also have a separate laser/radar detector fitted to the car, so the fact that there's a warning sound in the car when she approached the speed trap van doesn't mean that she set out to 'pervert the course of justice' that day does it?
The officers admitted that it is not illegal to buy or own a laser jammer, so they can't arrest me for anything. My girlfriend had no intent to use the jammer, it just happened to be on at the time she drove my car. How then can they arrest her?
I have no doubt that the CPS will decide there isn't enough evidence to take this to court and if they don't does this mean that charges are dropped and I get my property back?
Regardless of the rights and wrongs of using a laser jammer in the first place;
Is it right that this law should be used for this purpose? If they want to ban the use of these devices, then pass a law!
Is it right that my girlfriend (or anyone in the same situation) should be treated in the way she was?
Is this good use of police time and is it preventing accidents and protecting the public from anything?
What's your opinion?
I've not been stopped, warned or informed by anyone in all this time that the use of a jammer is illegal.
My girlfriend borrowed my car for a day a few weeks ago. Driving through town, she heard the warning go off and saw a laser speed trap van further down the road. She wasn't stopped at the time and didn't feel that she was over the speed limit at the time.
On Monday night this week at about 8 pm we get a knock on the door. Two policemen ask my girlfriend if she was driving my car at the time, which she admitted and then proceed to caution us both and arrest my girlfriend on the charge of 'perverting the course of justice'.
They then make me take the jammer off the car (if I refused they would seize the car) as evidence.
My girlfriend is taken to the nearest 'designated station' which is 30 minutes away for a taped interview.
In the station she is treated just like any other criminal. Belt, jewellry, money etc. taken off her and put in a plastic bag. She's read her rights and the interview conducted.
The two arresting officers are reassuring her that it's just procedure and that the desk sergeant will release her with a warning. But oh no, the sergeant decides that this is not something she can do and refers it to the CPS. A date is set for her to return to the station to hear what the CPS want to do with it.
During the interview, she gives them the facts - Yes she knew that my car has various devices fitted to it, but she doesn't know what they all do (true). She did not operate the jammer herself as it turns on with the ignition, so anyone driving it would be unaware that it was fitted and what it does.
I also have a separate laser/radar detector fitted to the car, so the fact that there's a warning sound in the car when she approached the speed trap van doesn't mean that she set out to 'pervert the course of justice' that day does it?
The officers admitted that it is not illegal to buy or own a laser jammer, so they can't arrest me for anything. My girlfriend had no intent to use the jammer, it just happened to be on at the time she drove my car. How then can they arrest her?
I have no doubt that the CPS will decide there isn't enough evidence to take this to court and if they don't does this mean that charges are dropped and I get my property back?
Regardless of the rights and wrongs of using a laser jammer in the first place;
Is it right that this law should be used for this purpose? If they want to ban the use of these devices, then pass a law!
Is it right that my girlfriend (or anyone in the same situation) should be treated in the way she was?
Is this good use of police time and is it preventing accidents and protecting the public from anything?
What's your opinion?
Isn't a law in the process of being passed through parliament making the use of jammers illegal?
I know that detectors are ok but jammers are not ( will not be ) allowed.
Clearly its not a high priority to the Police as it took a while for them to call round.
However, it does seem a bit OTT to interview your girlfriend etc, but you know how the law is with speed etc at the moment. It is the most heinous crime you can commit. It's all getting out of hand now.
My sympathies mate, but I wouldn't be surprised if the CPS go for this as they feel that this must be policed. Proving that she was using it KNOWINGLY will be difficult though. But do they have to? It is installed in your car and is now illegal.....is that enough for them to prosecute?
I know that detectors are ok but jammers are not ( will not be ) allowed.
Clearly its not a high priority to the Police as it took a while for them to call round.
However, it does seem a bit OTT to interview your girlfriend etc, but you know how the law is with speed etc at the moment. It is the most heinous crime you can commit. It's all getting out of hand now.
My sympathies mate, but I wouldn't be surprised if the CPS go for this as they feel that this must be policed. Proving that she was using it KNOWINGLY will be difficult though. But do they have to? It is installed in your car and is now illegal.....is that enough for them to prosecute?
If she didn't intend to use it, then there is no mens rea for the offence. It is not illegal to have a laser jammer fitted to a car. There is therefore no case for her to answer.
These policemen behaved in an arrogant, heavy-handed manner and should be ashamed of themselves. Why is it that when you report your car stolen, the Police could not care less, but some of them (not all) behave so abysmally towards a law-abiding member of the public in relation to such a mnior matter?
These policemen behaved in an arrogant, heavy-handed manner and should be ashamed of themselves. Why is it that when you report your car stolen, the Police could not care less, but some of them (not all) behave so abysmally towards a law-abiding member of the public in relation to such a mnior matter?
Sorry to disagree Zod.
Here is my "evidence" which I have cut and paste from a website:-
Q What is the SLD920 laser diffuser / blinder?
A This is not radar/laser detectors but laser diffuser. It installs under the front grill and diffuses the laser beam of hand held laser speed guns by emitting infra red light of the same frequency. It also signals audible (bleep) to warn you to slow down. Please note these units are technically illegal because they could be considered to "pervert the course of justice and interfere with police communications".
www.radardetectors.co.uk
Here is my "evidence" which I have cut and paste from a website:-
Q What is the SLD920 laser diffuser / blinder?
A This is not radar/laser detectors but laser diffuser. It installs under the front grill and diffuses the laser beam of hand held laser speed guns by emitting infra red light of the same frequency. It also signals audible (bleep) to warn you to slow down. Please note these units are technically illegal because they could be considered to "pervert the course of justice and interfere with police communications".
www.radardetectors.co.uk
Fight the CPS every step of the way. Jammers are currently not illegal, although there are moves afoot to make them so.
AFAIK, there are two prosecutions that have been bought and both have just said "ok, do me" No-one has bothered to fight it yet.
IANAL, but IIRC, to pervert the course of justice there has to have been a crime committed, which of course there hasn't been so far. (Apart from the looming miscarriage obviously) I would imagine if you bothered to go to court with this, the CPS would have to fold.
I think the CPS are probably kite flying to try and get some column inches to discourage their use despite the fact that jammers are currently legal in the UK.
AFAIK, there are two prosecutions that have been bought and both have just said "ok, do me" No-one has bothered to fight it yet.
IANAL, but IIRC, to pervert the course of justice there has to have been a crime committed, which of course there hasn't been so far. (Apart from the looming miscarriage obviously) I would imagine if you bothered to go to court with this, the CPS would have to fold.
I think the CPS are probably kite flying to try and get some column inches to discourage their use despite the fact that jammers are currently legal in the UK.
edc said:
What are the tests for 'perverting the course of justice'?
I mean, many people don't intend to speed but are prosecuted anyway. Ignorance is not always bliss.
In this instance "Perverting the course of Justice" means stopping the authorities from getting a speed fix on you because you have jammed their signal"
In other words they didn't get their 60 sovs
To be fair to the arresting officers, who were actually reasonably friendly, they were just doing what they were told to do by someone higher up. This seems to be a new iniative (at least for my force). I suspect that they are given a long list of all the vehicles which they haven't been able to get a reading from and they follow it up with a knock on the door in the hope that they find a few jammers in the process.
The treatment she received at the station is a different matter, though...
And yes, I intend to fight it all the way. These heavy handed tactics are nothing to do with fighting crime or preventing accidents. They are just trying to bully us.
>> Edited by fastfreddy on Wednesday 4th August 13:19
The treatment she received at the station is a different matter, though...
And yes, I intend to fight it all the way. These heavy handed tactics are nothing to do with fighting crime or preventing accidents. They are just trying to bully us.
>> Edited by fastfreddy on Wednesday 4th August 13:19
ah - which area are you in?
I got stopped with a jammer early this year and I voluntered to take it off there and then. so nothing came of it.
I know make sure its off when Im in town or under the speed limit.
Use it sparingly is the key. dont speed in towns. - which i know your gf wasnt.
I got stopped with a jammer early this year and I voluntered to take it off there and then. so nothing came of it.
I know make sure its off when Im in town or under the speed limit.
Use it sparingly is the key. dont speed in towns. - which i know your gf wasnt.
...into the fray and with unanswerable questions.
Way back in 1891 in R v Vreones, High Court defined "perverting the course of Justice" as follows:
When a person acts or embarks of a course of conduct that has a tendency to, and is intended to, pervert the course of justice. (In this case the police in catching people enaged in the unlaw act of speeding).
In R v SOOKOO 2002 charge should only be preferred where cases had a serious aggravating circumstances. This included where Police time and resources were wasted, or public wrongly detained or accused as having been identifiedf by an offender.
What is the purpose of the fitting of such a jamming device? To prevent a reading of speed in a speed enforcement programme by Police? The use of such a device is such a concern that HMG are going to prohibit in the future?.
The evidence of the presence of the device is there, the fact that it played some part in the Police pro gramme to effect a proper reading. But probably the most killing with will be what was asked and replies given at the taped interview, at which none of us are privy to.
The Police have a right to seize evidence which should be returned if case not prosecuted or an aquittal occurs.
At the moment it will be down to CPS to look at ALL the evidence available and make a decision as to whether to go ahead. Not good that there have been convictions under similar circumstances. I for one don't know which they will go.
DVD
Way back in 1891 in R v Vreones, High Court defined "perverting the course of Justice" as follows:
When a person acts or embarks of a course of conduct that has a tendency to, and is intended to, pervert the course of justice. (In this case the police in catching people enaged in the unlaw act of speeding).
In R v SOOKOO 2002 charge should only be preferred where cases had a serious aggravating circumstances. This included where Police time and resources were wasted, or public wrongly detained or accused as having been identifiedf by an offender.
What is the purpose of the fitting of such a jamming device? To prevent a reading of speed in a speed enforcement programme by Police? The use of such a device is such a concern that HMG are going to prohibit in the future?.
The evidence of the presence of the device is there, the fact that it played some part in the Police pro gramme to effect a proper reading. But probably the most killing with will be what was asked and replies given at the taped interview, at which none of us are privy to.
The Police have a right to seize evidence which should be returned if case not prosecuted or an aquittal occurs.
At the moment it will be down to CPS to look at ALL the evidence available and make a decision as to whether to go ahead. Not good that there have been convictions under similar circumstances. I for one don't know which they will go.
DVD
bryan35 said:
didn't know that jammers were illegal. The government are in the process of banning radar detectors because the superhet which they contain can cuase interference to other services.
Garbage. The government are in the process of banning radar detectors because they can. All radio receivers (with some obscure and irrlevant exceptions) contain superhet mixers.
I think the important thing to remember here is the wording "are going to make illegal" The only conclusion that can be drawn from this is that as we write, they are not illegal.
How can you pervert the course of justice when your actions are not in themselves illegal? Does this mean that you can carry out a legal action, yet still act illegally?
I think it needs a proper test case to establish what the law actually is becasue AFAIK, the only prosecutions presented thus far have been succesful because the accused effectively said "ok, I'm nicked"
How can you pervert the course of justice when your actions are not in themselves illegal? Does this mean that you can carry out a legal action, yet still act illegally?
I think it needs a proper test case to establish what the law actually is becasue AFAIK, the only prosecutions presented thus far have been succesful because the accused effectively said "ok, I'm nicked"
Yes, which is why I am happy for it to go to court.
She was told that she could request a copy of the interview tape and we are waiting for it so we can check this.
If she did not have any intent to (or wasn't aware that she had) perverted the course of justice, then there is no case to answer IMO. Most of the time I forgot that the jammer was installed and several other people have driven my car without knowing that it was fitted. So were they setting out to pervert the course of justice? How could they be?
Test case? Yes please - bring it on...
She was told that she could request a copy of the interview tape and we are waiting for it so we can check this.
If she did not have any intent to (or wasn't aware that she had) perverted the course of justice, then there is no case to answer IMO. Most of the time I forgot that the jammer was installed and several other people have driven my car without knowing that it was fitted. So were they setting out to pervert the course of justice? How could they be?
Test case? Yes please - bring it on...
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff