Caught speeding twice in 15 seconds!
Discussion
Help!
I have received 2 NIPs for different speeds but at the same recorded time 17.10pm on the same day on the same dual carriageway. I have questioned these NIPs as I couldnt have been doing 94mph and 92mph at the same time.
The delightful speed camera people have now responded by saying they had 2 camera vans on the same road at the same time, etc.
They have very kindly sent me the photographs too! These indicate a difference in time of 15 seconds between photos! What is strange is that one photo shows only the front of the car while the second photo only shows the rear of the car!!?? I am suspiscious about this! Was there only actually one speed camera?
The speed camera people also claim in their reply that they have calculated that I had driven 636 meters in the 15 seconds. Is this significant?
They now are going to prosecute me for both offences!
What can I do?
Are they allowed to position 2 cameras close together?
I have received 2 NIPs for different speeds but at the same recorded time 17.10pm on the same day on the same dual carriageway. I have questioned these NIPs as I couldnt have been doing 94mph and 92mph at the same time.
The delightful speed camera people have now responded by saying they had 2 camera vans on the same road at the same time, etc.
They have very kindly sent me the photographs too! These indicate a difference in time of 15 seconds between photos! What is strange is that one photo shows only the front of the car while the second photo only shows the rear of the car!!?? I am suspiscious about this! Was there only actually one speed camera?
The speed camera people also claim in their reply that they have calculated that I had driven 636 meters in the 15 seconds. Is this significant?
They now are going to prosecute me for both offences!
What can I do?
Are they allowed to position 2 cameras close together?
. You need to read the pepiboo site! Then diligently look at all your petrol and shopping receipts etc with your wife. Try as hard as you can to ascertain who was driving the car (assuming the photo's don't identify you)on that day. Then go to court and explain that try as much as you could you really can't be sure who was driving.
Failing that, delay things until after september when there may be an EU ruling. Again, this is on the Pepiboo site.
Failing that, delay things until after september when there may be an EU ruling. Again, this is on the Pepiboo site.
...and the civilian camera technicians are now taking out the extra kit and mounting it at the front of the van, ostensibly to get people travelling in both directions.
The upshot of this is that they could feasibly get the same person twice, once towards and once away. The photos would have different operator numbers on in this case though.
The upshot of this is that they could feasibly get the same person twice, once towards and once away. The photos would have different operator numbers on in this case though.
Seriously though, surely this is one and the same 'crime' and being done for it twice 
. I cannot beleive it is right, common sense and all that.
Childish mode on, so if I was in a fight and punched some one that would be ABH/GBH or some such and I would be done for it. If I hit him twice is it two offences
, if I hit him 4 times is it 4 . I really can't see how it makes sense, this country is getting really fecked up.
Harry
>> Edited by HarryW on Wednesday 18th August 22:09
. I cannot beleive it is right, common sense and all that. Childish mode on, so if I was in a fight and punched some one that would be ABH/GBH or some such and I would be done for it. If I hit him twice is it two offences
, if I hit him 4 times is it 4 . I really can't see how it makes sense, this country is getting really fecked up. Harry
>> Edited by HarryW on Wednesday 18th August 22:09
Boosted Ls1 said:
You need to read the pepiboo site!
Hope you don't mind me saying but it's pepipoo
[url]www.pepipoo.com[/url]
Mike has lots of useful info there.
I was indirectly involved in a similar case some time ago, where the driver's legal beagle got the charges reduced to one instance only, on something called 'same occurrence offence' grounds. Even in the days of the scamerati this should still apply surely?
turbobloke said:
You need to read the pepiboo site!
Hope you don't mind me saying but it's pepipoo
[url]www.pepipoo.com[/url]
Course I don't mind you correcting me. I'm trying to help, just like you
I think that would be 636*4*60 = 152.64 kph or 95.4 mphpaulatt said:
Help!
I have received 2 NIPs for different speeds but at the same recorded time 17.10pm on the same day on the same dual carriageway. I have questioned these NIPs as I couldnt have been doing 94mph and 92mph at the same time.
The delightful speed camera people have now responded by saying they had 2 camera vans on the same road at the same time, etc.
They have very kindly sent me the photographs too! These indicate a difference in time of 15 seconds between photos! What is strange is that one photo shows only the front of the car while the second photo only shows the rear of the car!!?? I am suspiscious about this! Was there only actually one speed camera?
The speed camera people also claim in their reply that they have calculated that I had driven 636 meters in the 15 seconds. Is this significant?
They now are going to prosecute me for both offences!
What can I do?
Are they allowed to position 2 cameras close together?
Assuming that you are taking the "wrap" with at least one of the NIPs. Ask them for the calibration records of both cameras. Ask for a written statement that there were two cameras at that site. Ask for details of where all the partnership cameras were on that day. Go to court and take out a private procecution for attempting to pervert the course of justice.
Themoss said:
Surely this then counts as ONE offence of speeding if it's all part of the same sequence of events? How the hell can they turn a camera round and get you again whn you're travelling along the same short stretch of road? Absolutely outrageous if it's true.......
Also highly illegal as you cannot be tried for the same offence twice.
Dibble said:
There was one of these in our force area where someone got done from the front, the mobile camera was turned around, and they got "done" from the rear ([Kenneth_Williams]Ooh, Matron[/Kenneth_Williams]) as well.
I seem to remember they got two lots of points and fines.
LanCASH£re - eh? I am sure Lancs is all the safer for me and my wife (and our new L-driver
) to drive through as a result of that. 
Why am I not surprised...
Was that not in the local rag at time? My initial reaction? Send photos to tabloid press - and contact the local TV company. You could even end up on GMTV
on same settee as wotsisname over this Absolutely crazy!
Safety?
Nope! Revenue raising? 
Presume you accept that you were speeding?
Consider then:
If this is the case and you are happy to accept one sting then consider writing back and point out that the circumstances outline duplicity and in law only one offence was committed and that you are prepared to accept one offence. There are precedents :
where a driver was seen driving erratically by two police officers in seperate observations two miles and 10 minutes apart this was held to be one activity (O'Brien v Brabner 1885).
The theft of 76 Library books over a two and half year period likewise (R v Tower Bridge Metropolitan Stipendary Magistrates,ex p Chaudry 1994).
By stating that you do not accept that this incident is two offences and as such feel Magistrates may well be of the same opinion.It may bring them to their senses and accept one offence for which you are holding your hand up to as opposed to having to go the whole hog with a Court hearing.
There is also another avenue in that by electing a day at Court and by subterfuge having one of the two offences dealt with seperately and convicted.When the hearing for the second offence takes place claim " autrefois convict" - for a person cannot be tried for an offence if he has been previously convicted of the same, or substantially the same offence. Whilst this is generally only available at a trial on indictment and not entered at a Mags Court, the same principle applies. Obviously this is complicated and you will have to seek the advice /guidance of a member of the legal profession.
DVD
Consider then:
If this is the case and you are happy to accept one sting then consider writing back and point out that the circumstances outline duplicity and in law only one offence was committed and that you are prepared to accept one offence. There are precedents :
where a driver was seen driving erratically by two police officers in seperate observations two miles and 10 minutes apart this was held to be one activity (O'Brien v Brabner 1885).
The theft of 76 Library books over a two and half year period likewise (R v Tower Bridge Metropolitan Stipendary Magistrates,ex p Chaudry 1994).
By stating that you do not accept that this incident is two offences and as such feel Magistrates may well be of the same opinion.It may bring them to their senses and accept one offence for which you are holding your hand up to as opposed to having to go the whole hog with a Court hearing.
There is also another avenue in that by electing a day at Court and by subterfuge having one of the two offences dealt with seperately and convicted.When the hearing for the second offence takes place claim " autrefois convict" - for a person cannot be tried for an offence if he has been previously convicted of the same, or substantially the same offence. Whilst this is generally only available at a trial on indictment and not entered at a Mags Court, the same principle applies. Obviously this is complicated and you will have to seek the advice /guidance of a member of the legal profession.
DVD
This is, of course, absolutely atrocious, intolerable and a misuse of powers.
It's interesting from the point of view of statistics though - how many other scamera partnerships have cottoned onto this idea of raising extra revenue?
2005 ..........."A Government Official has stated that Speeding fines have doubled in the last year but the total number of individual drivers prosecuted has remained the same". He was unable to provide an explanation for this but did say that deaths on the road have remained at the same level as 2004. Off camera he was heard to say to a colleague that he was approving the installation of a further 10,000 fixed cameras over the next two years so that the Treasury can reduce it's funding to Police forces nationwide.
2006 ......... The Treasury has announced a 50% cut in Police funding.
A Government Official who approved the installation of 10,000 new speed cameras has been Knighted in (Tony Blairs) new years honours list.
Road deaths have increased by 5% since 2004.
It's interesting from the point of view of statistics though - how many other scamera partnerships have cottoned onto this idea of raising extra revenue?
2005 ..........."A Government Official has stated that Speeding fines have doubled in the last year but the total number of individual drivers prosecuted has remained the same". He was unable to provide an explanation for this but did say that deaths on the road have remained at the same level as 2004. Off camera he was heard to say to a colleague that he was approving the installation of a further 10,000 fixed cameras over the next two years so that the Treasury can reduce it's funding to Police forces nationwide.
2006 ......... The Treasury has announced a 50% cut in Police funding.
A Government Official who approved the installation of 10,000 new speed cameras has been Knighted in (Tony Blairs) new years honours list.
Road deaths have increased by 5% since 2004.
Now here is proof, not that it was required, that these parasites are nasty evil cash grabbing vermin and nothing more.
There can be no right and proper explanation for this double summons. If a burglar steals my video and I photograph him twice does he get two fines?? I think not.
Fight it until your last breath.
How much more of this does the Government think people will take ???
There can be no right and proper explanation for this double summons. If a burglar steals my video and I photograph him twice does he get two fines?? I think not.
Fight it until your last breath.
How much more of this does the Government think people will take ???
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff