"Panda cars" and speeding ?
Discussion
With all the talk about the decline of full-time traffic units, I wondered about the likelihood or legalities of being stopped by an ordinary police car.
Let's say you are on an urban dual carriageway with a 30 limit, and overtake a marked police Astra at 50mph. Since they have no special equipment (video, vascar etc), even if they stop you, can you be successfully prosecuted for speeding ?
(note, this is all purely hypothetical, not even a "friend" has actually done this!)
Strictly speaking, there needs to be 2 pieces of evidence i.e. an officer's opinion and that of a laser gun, or fellow officer, IIRC.
Blatantly speeding in front of a marked police car (whther traffic of not) is taking the pi55 and I wouldn't be suprised by the subsequent pull and meticulous checking of car for any possible fault.
You pays yer money and takes yer chance.
Blatantly speeding in front of a marked police car (whther traffic of not) is taking the pi55 and I wouldn't be suprised by the subsequent pull and meticulous checking of car for any possible fault.
You pays yer money and takes yer chance.
In theory, we could do you for speeding based on our speedos but we would have to get them calibrated after the fact and summons speed adjusted accordingly. (remember the offence is excess speed not 50 in a 30 so just have to prove the speed was inexcess of the limit).
As CA..... has said im sure there could be other things we can find on a vehicle to give either NEFPN's or FPN's. Or maybe enough for due care and attention or similar offences.
As CA..... has said im sure there could be other things we can find on a vehicle to give either NEFPN's or FPN's. Or maybe enough for due care and attention or similar offences.
tw99 said:
With all the talk about the decline of full-time traffic units, I wondered about the likelihood or legalities of being stopped by an ordinary police car.
Let's say you are on an urban dual carriageway with a 30 limit, and overtake a marked police Astra at 50mph. Since they have no special equipment (video, vascar etc), even if they stop you, can you be successfully prosecuted for speeding ?
(note, this is all purely hypothetical, not even a "friend" has actually done this!)
I hate to have to tell you this but the last time I looked all the Panda cars in Scotland were fitted with calibrated speedometers and, believe it or not, the courts still accept that as a piece of specialised equipment and the Fiscal will prosecute on the evidence of two officers in the car.
Outrageous but true.
^Slider^ said:
Why is it outragious that the courts will accept the evidence of 2 officers and a calibrated speedo?
Because Slider, the evidence is highly questionable and usually inaccurate, particularly when it's carried out by two officers who have no traffic training whatsoever.
Clocking another vehicles speed accurately utilising a calibrated speedometer requires a great deal of skill, training and experience and is a very precisee process.
The calibration of the speedometer is also academic unless the vehicle is extrememly well serviced and maintained to a standard that keeps it within the original manufacturers limits; a change to a different set of tyres will totally change the accuracy of a speedometer.
When I was involved in police vehicles the traffic cars were serviced to the highest standards imaginable, the panda cars quite frankly were falling to bits.
I was informed that the panda cars were fitted with calibrated speedometers to ensure that the police drivers adhered to the speed limits accurately; and I can hear the laughter from PHers all over the country right now!!
^Slider^ said:
Why is it outragious that the courts will accept the evidence of 2 officers and a calibrated speedo?
This isnt a dig at you here, but in my recent findings, its so open to abuse its unreal.
There is nothing stopping them making the whole thing up.
In a perfect world, when the force singles out all the BAD APPLES, then yes this is fine. After all, 50 in a 30 is a bit OTT imho...
Independeant physical evidence from a laser gun, camera or the likes of should have to be there to support each and every case.
Jon
IOLAIRE said:
Why is it outragious that the courts will accept the evidence of 2 officers and a calibrated speedo?
Because Slider, the evidence is highly questionable and usually inaccurate, particularly when it's carried out by two officers who have no traffic training whatsoever.
Clocking another vehicles speed accurately utilising a calibrated speedometer requires a great deal of skill, training and experience and is a very precisee process.
The calibration of the speedometer is also academic unless the vehicle is extrememly well serviced and maintained to a standard that keeps it within the original manufacturers limits; a change to a different set of tyres will totally change the accuracy of a speedometer.
When I was involved in police vehicles the traffic cars were serviced to the highest standards imaginable, the panda cars quite frankly were falling to bits.
I can see the argument if we are talking lower limits such as say 35 in a 30 but i dont see how it applied when we could be talking about the higher margins like 40+ in a 30.
Do they not calibrate using the mile (i honestly dont know the score in regards to this) if the speedo has been used to prosicute??? same as laser calibration at the start and end of a shift of enforcement?
evolution666 said:
Why is it outragious that the courts will accept the evidence of 2 officers and a calibrated speedo?
This isnt a dig at you here, but in my recent findings, its so open to abuse its unreal.
There is nothing stopping them making the whole thing up.
In a perfect world, when the force singles out all the BAD APPLES, then yes this is fine. After all, 50 in a 30 is a bit OTT imho...
Independeant physical evidence from a laser gun, camera or the likes of should have to be there to support each and every case.
Jon
I havent really folowed your posts regarding your ordeal... But i can see it could be open to abuse, as could laser enforcement. Vascar etc are a different kettle of fish as its all on tape.
I just cant see the point in making anything up as id personally rather have you bang to rights that falsify evidence.. all comes to he who waits. Shame there are a few bad apples that make us all look bad, just bear in mind the majority of officers are good guys and its the few that ruin it for everyone.
PS. didnt take anything personally mate.
Gareth
^Slider^ said:
^Slider^ said:
Why is it outragious that the courts will accept the evidence of 2 officers and a calibrated speedo?
Because Slider, the evidence is highly questionable and usually inaccurate, particularly when it's carried out by two officers who have no traffic training whatsoever.
Clocking another vehicles speed accurately utilising a calibrated speedometer requires a great deal of skill, training and experience and is a very precisee process.
The calibration of the speedometer is also academic unless the vehicle is extrememly well serviced and maintained to a standard that keeps it within the original manufacturers limits; a change to a different set of tyres will totally change the accuracy of a speedometer.
When I was involved in police vehicles the traffic cars were serviced to the highest standards imaginable, the panda cars quite frankly were falling to bits.
I can see the argument if we are talking lower limits such as say 35 in a 30 but i dont see how it applied when we could be talking about the higher margins like 40+ in a 30.
Do they not calibrate using the mile (i honestly dont know the score in regards to this) if the speedo has been used to prosicute??? same as laser calibration at the start and end of a shift of enforcement?
Oh no, absolutely not Slider; you can calibrate VASCAR and all other forms of electronic detection equipment as you operate them, but not a speedometer.
It has to be removed from the vehicle and calibrated in a lab using information about that specific vehicle, gearbox and final drive ratios, vehicle type, tyre make and size, etc.
Any deviation away from these specifics afterwards alters the calibration and renders the speedometer inaccurate.
^Slider^ said:
I thought they could be ran down a calibrated distance and do the speed distance time thing.
Must have read it somewhere on here i think.
Absolutely, at end of shift what is wrong with driving down measured mile or other officially accredited marked distance provided by County Surveyor dept. Timing with chronometer, appropriate notes in pocket book(s), sorted.
In short nothing wrong with that at all.
Flat in Fifth said:
I thought they could be ran down a calibrated distance and do the speed distance time thing.
Must have read it somewhere on here i think.
Absolutely, at end of shift what is wrong with driving down measured mile or other officially accredited marked distance provided by County Surveyor dept. Timing with chronometer, appropriate notes in pocket book(s), sorted.
In short nothing wrong with that at all.
Quick, easy and accurate (+cheap) way of callibrating speedos. Should be done because no end of times we get idiots blatantly being idiots and we arnt able to do a great deal about their speed. Abeit they may get fined for other matters, but not always.
Flat in Fifth said:
I thought they could be ran down a calibrated distance and do the speed distance time thing.
Must have read it somewhere on here i think.
Absolutely, at end of shift what is wrong with driving down measured mile or other officially accredited marked distance provided by County Surveyor dept. Timing with chronometer, appropriate notes in pocket book(s), sorted.
In short nothing wrong with that at all.
I'm tempted to be a wee bit sarcastic with you both you lads because what I've explained is pretty simple.
You CANNOT calibrate a speedo in the car, there is no mechanical or electronic facility top do so.
What you can do is check its calibration over a measured mile with a stopwatch; you are both suggesting you do that AFTER a shift, after you've booked say a dozen speeders.
What do you then do when you discover it's inaccurate?
Attempt to cancel the FPs?
I am really too tired to go into this just now but I will at some point later today, it makes interesting reading.
I think you are hyping the calibration aspect IOLAIRE.
Like FiF I see nothing wrong in BIB in any Police car following somebody exceeding the speed limit, using the white lines to keep a fairly constant distance behind over more than two tenths of a mile and noting the maximum and minimum speeds displayed on the speedo. And no it doesn't take ages to do this or distract attention. If speed exceeded then driver reported and at end of shift driving police vehicle over measured mile at set indicated speed against time of a stop watch. i.e. 60 mph = 1 minute 50 = 1.12sec.
Why do I see nothing wrong becuase it is something I used for years and was accepted at Courts.
If the speedo was found to be more than plus/minus 2secs out then ALL previous drivers reported were no actioned, which still is AFAIAA Force policy.
High Court cases such as Nicholas v Penny [1950] and Swain v Gillett [1974] have held such practice in order without the evidence from one officer and no evidence of any test to speedometer.
Are you getting in early as IF and I repeat if Cameras go and Traffic officers replace them you will attack them for reporting speeders?
Of interest, as it appears there is nobody from Hull in the Forum have a look at:
http://tinyurl.com/5ahhl
DVD
Like FiF I see nothing wrong in BIB in any Police car following somebody exceeding the speed limit, using the white lines to keep a fairly constant distance behind over more than two tenths of a mile and noting the maximum and minimum speeds displayed on the speedo. And no it doesn't take ages to do this or distract attention. If speed exceeded then driver reported and at end of shift driving police vehicle over measured mile at set indicated speed against time of a stop watch. i.e. 60 mph = 1 minute 50 = 1.12sec.
Why do I see nothing wrong becuase it is something I used for years and was accepted at Courts.
If the speedo was found to be more than plus/minus 2secs out then ALL previous drivers reported were no actioned, which still is AFAIAA Force policy.
High Court cases such as Nicholas v Penny [1950] and Swain v Gillett [1974] have held such practice in order without the evidence from one officer and no evidence of any test to speedometer.
Are you getting in early as IF and I repeat if Cameras go and Traffic officers replace them you will attack them for reporting speeders?
Of interest, as it appears there is nobody from Hull in the Forum have a look at:
http://tinyurl.com/5ahhl
DVD
Very Good! but lets hope the trainings a little better this time. They lost at least two cars in accidents within a couple of months before they disbanded. Also hope they get decent cars. The Proton Pandas are probably good cars, but who'd believe they are for real if you come into the area from outside?
This calibration thing that seems to exercise Iolaire so much.
Don't disagree that to properly calibrate any instrument so it can be presumed to have some degree of accuracy until the next calibration point then it has to have some means of adjustment.
Example micrometer. Calibrated against standard, adjusted if necessary, calibration status sticker attached with next date. If operating a reliable system then it still has to be checked, and the check recorded in writing at the start and end of shift when the instrument is used. If equipment found to be out of calibration or reading incorrectly on the daily check then a review needs to be done of all jobs inspected since last time instrument found to be OK. It could be that all product has to be recalled and reinspected, it could be no further action, all depends.
Lack of such a basic system of calibration and instrumentation meant I took to task a High St bank who wanted to stop counting notes out when you withdrew cash and merely measure a pile of notes on an electronic scale. No checks, records or anything in place. "Well the machine is new so it must be accurate." I don't think so. Policy changed.
Now consider instruments that are not completely adjustable to make them accurate, say a ship's magnetic compass. Start of every season one swings the compass and small magnets are placed so as to counteract any errors. Nevertheless it is impossible to correct all the errors on every point of the compass. Therefore using known bearings a deviation table or curve is drawn up, so that a true magnetic heading can be obtained by reading the compass and applying the corrections from compass deviation curve and the chart variation to get a true heading. Any navigators will know CADET, Compass ADd East, True, or error west compass best, error east compass least.
It works, I and others have put our lives on the line using such methods of ensuring accuracy of instruments. OK so today GPS and other electronic navigation systems, good old defunct Decca and inertial systems make it simpler, but you have to have a manual back up when the electrics fail.
To get back to cars, therefore it is quite simple to do the timed run calculation over a range of speeds for a particular vehicle and draw up the equivalent of a deviation table / curve. Does not need removal of instrument from vehicle.
Indeed if circumstances are such that one wants to read a tachograph extremely accurately, then it needs to be checked and there is a precise method for doing it. Use of a measured distance in the vehicle is included in the method.
Of course finally it is perfectly OK, if an instrument is not in a calibration system or have a current deviation curve available to make a one off check. What is to be measured and the allowable errors determines the nature and method of the one off checks to be made. Quite in order if not the preferred situation.
DVD summarises the situation perfectly correctly as one might expect from such an experienced base.
The point that is being made is to totally and utterly refute Iolaire's suggestion that any system of speedometer / instrument checking which does not involve removal of said instrument bla bla bla is invalid. Clearly it is not, there are perfectly good simple ways which require discipline and method to be operated. Bit like the system of car control really.
And on that note I'm off to watch the idiot box, who David Baddiel thinks he is.
hat, coat, door,
FiF
>> Edited by Flat in Fifth on Tuesday 23 November 21:07
Don't disagree that to properly calibrate any instrument so it can be presumed to have some degree of accuracy until the next calibration point then it has to have some means of adjustment.
Example micrometer. Calibrated against standard, adjusted if necessary, calibration status sticker attached with next date. If operating a reliable system then it still has to be checked, and the check recorded in writing at the start and end of shift when the instrument is used. If equipment found to be out of calibration or reading incorrectly on the daily check then a review needs to be done of all jobs inspected since last time instrument found to be OK. It could be that all product has to be recalled and reinspected, it could be no further action, all depends.
Lack of such a basic system of calibration and instrumentation meant I took to task a High St bank who wanted to stop counting notes out when you withdrew cash and merely measure a pile of notes on an electronic scale. No checks, records or anything in place. "Well the machine is new so it must be accurate." I don't think so. Policy changed.
Now consider instruments that are not completely adjustable to make them accurate, say a ship's magnetic compass. Start of every season one swings the compass and small magnets are placed so as to counteract any errors. Nevertheless it is impossible to correct all the errors on every point of the compass. Therefore using known bearings a deviation table or curve is drawn up, so that a true magnetic heading can be obtained by reading the compass and applying the corrections from compass deviation curve and the chart variation to get a true heading. Any navigators will know CADET, Compass ADd East, True, or error west compass best, error east compass least.
It works, I and others have put our lives on the line using such methods of ensuring accuracy of instruments. OK so today GPS and other electronic navigation systems, good old defunct Decca and inertial systems make it simpler, but you have to have a manual back up when the electrics fail.
To get back to cars, therefore it is quite simple to do the timed run calculation over a range of speeds for a particular vehicle and draw up the equivalent of a deviation table / curve. Does not need removal of instrument from vehicle.
Indeed if circumstances are such that one wants to read a tachograph extremely accurately, then it needs to be checked and there is a precise method for doing it. Use of a measured distance in the vehicle is included in the method.
Of course finally it is perfectly OK, if an instrument is not in a calibration system or have a current deviation curve available to make a one off check. What is to be measured and the allowable errors determines the nature and method of the one off checks to be made. Quite in order if not the preferred situation.
DVD summarises the situation perfectly correctly as one might expect from such an experienced base.
The point that is being made is to totally and utterly refute Iolaire's suggestion that any system of speedometer / instrument checking which does not involve removal of said instrument bla bla bla is invalid. Clearly it is not, there are perfectly good simple ways which require discipline and method to be operated. Bit like the system of car control really.
And on that note I'm off to watch the idiot box, who David Baddiel thinks he is.
hat, coat, door,
FiF
>> Edited by Flat in Fifth on Tuesday 23 November 21:07
Flat in Fifth said:But -
The point that is being made is to totally and utterly refute Iolaire's suggestion that any system of speedometer / instrument checking which does not involve removal of said instrument bla bla bla is invalid.
IOLAIRE said:
You CANNOT calibrate a speedo in the car, there is no mechanical or electronic facility to do so.
What you can do is check its calibration
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff