61 in a 30mph - anyone know a good lawyer in Leicestershire?
Discussion
Find someone you can sign on as carer for to demonstrate your licence is very important, and get plenty of character references.
It was a long time ago, but in 1994ish, I got caught at 78 in a 30, and had seven days plus £500, no points, and I laid it on thick about job being dependent on car, lose livelihood, etc etc. Also had a cop give a reference for me, explaining that the road was unmarked, and even the cops locally thought the limit was 60 as there are no streetlights, no pavements, at the time no houses at all, it was a country lane and all around there were 60. The council, however, had changed this one recent to me getting nicked in expectation of a new housing estate being built in the next THREE years, and traffic cottoned on.
Clerk of the court was a client of mine, and the consensus was I had to get done for the outright offence, but there was enough doubt about signage that it was kept to a minimum. Fine was set by means test so that stung a bit, but hey, I just went on holiday to the states for a fortnight.
It was a long time ago, but in 1994ish, I got caught at 78 in a 30, and had seven days plus £500, no points, and I laid it on thick about job being dependent on car, lose livelihood, etc etc. Also had a cop give a reference for me, explaining that the road was unmarked, and even the cops locally thought the limit was 60 as there are no streetlights, no pavements, at the time no houses at all, it was a country lane and all around there were 60. The council, however, had changed this one recent to me getting nicked in expectation of a new housing estate being built in the next THREE years, and traffic cottoned on.
Clerk of the court was a client of mine, and the consensus was I had to get done for the outright offence, but there was enough doubt about signage that it was kept to a minimum. Fine was set by means test so that stung a bit, but hey, I just went on holiday to the states for a fortnight.
bensimmo said:
Saw them in the van (way too late and it was dark, pitch black, with a camera van, which is a first for me) and have got a NIP Notice of intended prosecution through.
That's a new one for me, outside of Scotland & New Forest. Will / Does the scamera night time scourge spread down the A1/M11?daytona355 said:
Find someone you can sign on as carer for to demonstrate your licence is very important, and get plenty of character references.
It was a long time ago, but in 1994ish, I got caught at 78 in a 30, and had seven days plus £500, no points, and I laid it on thick about job being dependent on car, lose livelihood, etc etc. Also had a cop give a reference for me, explaining that the road was unmarked, and even the cops locally thought the limit was 60 as there are no streetlights, no pavements, at the time no houses at all, it was a country lane and all around there were 60. The council, however, had changed this one recent to me getting nicked in expectation of a new housing estate being built in the next THREE years, and traffic cottoned on.
Clerk of the court was a client of mine, and the consensus was I had to get done for the outright offence, but there was enough doubt about signage that it was kept to a minimum. Fine was set by means test so that stung a bit, but hey, I just went on holiday to the states for a fortnight.
daytona 355 said " Find someone you can sign on as carer for to demonstrate your licence is very important, and get plenty of character references. It was a long time ago, but in 1994ish, I got caught at 78 in a 30, and had seven days plus £500, no points, and I laid it on thick about job being dependent on car, lose livelihood, etc etc. Also had a cop give a reference for me, explaining that the road was unmarked, and even the cops locally thought the limit was 60 as there are no streetlights, no pavements, at the time no houses at all, it was a country lane and all around there were 60. The council, however, had changed this one recent to me getting nicked in expectation of a new housing estate being built in the next THREE years, and traffic cottoned on.
Clerk of the court was a client of mine, and the consensus was I had to get done for the outright offence, but there was enough doubt about signage that it was kept to a minimum. Fine was set by means test so that stung a bit, but hey, I just went on holiday to the states for a fortnight.
It was a long time ago, but in 1994ish, I got caught at 78 in a 30, and had seven days plus £500, no points, and I laid it on thick about job being dependent on car, lose livelihood, etc etc. Also had a cop give a reference for me, explaining that the road was unmarked, and even the cops locally thought the limit was 60 as there are no streetlights, no pavements, at the time no houses at all, it was a country lane and all around there were 60. The council, however, had changed this one recent to me getting nicked in expectation of a new housing estate being built in the next THREE years, and traffic cottoned on.
Clerk of the court was a client of mine, and the consensus was I had to get done for the outright offence, but there was enough doubt about signage that it was kept to a minimum. Fine was set by means test so that stung a bit, but hey, I just went on holiday to the states for a fortnight. "
Quoted for posterity ...
as that's either bulls
t or numerous counts of PCoJ / perjury as another person has commented poor vbisibility and the gritters being out really doesn;t demonstrate a huge amount of insight does it ...
Perverting the course, perjury? You really have to get out more dipstick. It's called mitigation. But if you want to accuse me properly, do it, and we can always go to court over your libel. Nothing in my post suggested anything whatsoever that is wrong, read it without your biased attitude.
My comments were to encourage the poster to make sure he collects as much mitigation as possible since he is, as was I, on for a ban. Speeding isn't a hanging offence, and the sooner people like you realise you can challenge it, the better. Moron
My comments were to encourage the poster to make sure he collects as much mitigation as possible since he is, as was I, on for a ban. Speeding isn't a hanging offence, and the sooner people like you realise you can challenge it, the better. Moron
daytona355 said:
Find someone you can sign on as carer for to demonstrate your licence is very important,
.
So get someone to lie that you're their carer and then lie in court yourself that you need your licence to care for the person. .
I think you need to get your butler to have a look at that in the law books.
Who said lie? I said, find someone to sign on as carer for, I didn't say pretend you had. Read it, thought there was still a competence test in the force. If he does that, someone needing care at a difficult time gets some, and he gets a great bit of mitigation..... Presumption isn't evidence officer, thought you would know that
By the way, wasn't it Elwood Blues?
By the way, wasn't it Elwood Blues?
I'm not in a hole, read my post. It's you who demonstrated English is not your first language. What area are you in elroy, I might need to avoid it in the future for fear of being caught doing 65 in a 60, but being written up at 95 given your assumption that everyone should make stuff up
daytona355 said:
Who said lie? I said, find someone to sign on as carer for, I didn't say pretend you had. Read it, thought there was still a competence test in the force. If he does that, someone needing care at a difficult time gets some, and he gets a great bit of mitigation..... Presumption isn't evidence officer, thought you would know that
By the way, wasn't it Elwood Blues?
You clearly suggest that the OP fabricate the 'mitigation' by finding someone to care for that the Op is not currently doing and at this time has no intention of doing. You then suggest that he submit that to a court so a penalty is mitigated by that action.By the way, wasn't it Elwood Blues?
Here is the definition of perjury: The crime of willfully and knowingly making a false statement about a material fact while under oath.
As the OP will be under oath to submit mitigation what you are suggesting is difficult to detect but perjury all the same.
Maybe 61 in a 30 is going to highlight the matter to Leicestershire police; it isn't difficult for them to spot perpetrators of such a speed from his description on here. I'm sure a court will look unfavourably at fabricated mitigation of this nature and your opinion is somewhat distorted from fact and law.
Edited by tapereel on Tuesday 8th March 11:14
Sorry dum dum, read again, I suggested he become a carer, a much needed and highly rewarding occupation for someone to carry out. If he does, he can use it in mitigation, if he doesn't, he can't. Mitigation of offences is allowable in a court, and can be given consideration if the magistrate thinks it relevant. At no point can anyone suggest that I have told him to lie. That would be wrong, and I can't imagine anyone would be so stupid as to lie in court with the penalties they could impose. I think people like you sometimes want to sound like you are legal experts when in reality, you are just posturing morons.
I doubt the police are going to care what a lot of people on an Internet forum think, they will be concerned, hopefully, with the facts. If the accused has mitigating circumstances that are genuine and proven, those are the ones they have to look at. In this country, thankfully, you are innocent until proven guilty, for your post to be correct, there would have to be assumption that the OP would concoct some falsehood, which he I'm sure would never do.
I doubt the police are going to care what a lot of people on an Internet forum think, they will be concerned, hopefully, with the facts. If the accused has mitigating circumstances that are genuine and proven, those are the ones they have to look at. In this country, thankfully, you are innocent until proven guilty, for your post to be correct, there would have to be assumption that the OP would concoct some falsehood, which he I'm sure would never do.
tapereel said:
You clearly suggest that the OP fabricate the 'mitigation' by finding someone to care for that the Op is not currently doing and at this time has no intention of doing. You then suggest that he submit that to a court so a penalty is mitigated by that action.
Here is the definition of perjury: The crime of willfully and knowingly making a false statement about a material fact while under oath.
As the OP will be under oath to submit mitigation what you are suggesting is difficult to detect but perjury all the same.
Maybe 61 in a 30 is going to highlight the matter to Leicestershire police; it isn't difficult for them to spot perpetrators of such a speed from his description on here. I'm sure a court will look unfavourably at fabricated mitigation of this nature and your opinion is somewhat distorted from fact and law.
Here is the definition of perjury: The crime of willfully and knowingly making a false statement about a material fact while under oath.
As the OP will be under oath to submit mitigation what you are suggesting is difficult to detect but perjury all the same.
Maybe 61 in a 30 is going to highlight the matter to Leicestershire police; it isn't difficult for them to spot perpetrators of such a speed from his description on here. I'm sure a court will look unfavourably at fabricated mitigation of this nature and your opinion is somewhat distorted from fact and law.
Edited by tapereel on Tuesday 8th March 11:14
daytona355 said:
I doubt the police are going to care what a lot of people on an Internet forum think, they will be concerned, hopefully, with the facts. If the accused has mitigating circumstances that are genuine and proven, those are the ones they have to look at. In this country, thankfully, you are innocent until proven guilty, for your post to be correct, there would have to be assumption that the OP would concoct some falsehood, which he I'm sure would never do.
Just to highlight your ignorance... the police have nothing to do with this now.Elroy Blue said:
When in a hole, stop digging.
His other thread contributions in SP&L suggest that he's both very attached to his shovel and prone to fantasy. I wish this place had an ignore button sometimes...Signing up to be someone's carer (when you technically are not) is very sketchy behaviour indeed, and tantamount to perjury. However, I'm sure he'll bluff and bluster his way out of this one.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff