Some good news (link)
Author
Discussion

GavinPearson

Original Poster:

5,715 posts

281 months

Tuesday 9th August 2005
quotequote all
Worth reading....

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/wiltshire/4737779.stm

Dwight VanDriver

6,583 posts

274 months

Tuesday 9th August 2005
quotequote all
Just musing......

Zapped (unaware)
14 days later summons (first indication)
More days research/solicitor.
Gets camera and then takes shots.

Did the photographs show what signs were in place when she committed the offence? Could they have been? Missing because of damage/vandalism?

With a mop of hair like that maybe she didn't see them?

DVD



>> Edited by Dwight VanDriver on Tuesday 9th August 08:07

rayats

23 posts

258 months

Tuesday 9th August 2005
quotequote all
How can the camera Partnership say 'The speeding offences are proven, it is the signage that isn't'?
Am I missing something, surely if there were no signs then the NSL applied in this case (this is what the court said), so how can any body have been speeding?
Which ever way you look at it the Police and the Partnership were quite happy to prosecute persons who had committed no offence, and it took a member of the public to point this out to them. What about the numerous local traffic officers who must have used this route and must have known about the number of prosecutions - if they didn't there's something seriously wrong with Wiltshire police procedures.

timtonal

2,049 posts

263 months

Tuesday 9th August 2005
quotequote all
You wouldn't have this problem with Trafpol.

rayats

23 posts

258 months

Tuesday 9th August 2005
quotequote all
Dwight VanDriver said:
Just musing......

Zapped (unaware)
14 days later summons (first indication)
More days research/solicitor.
Buts camera and then takes shots.

Did the photographs show what signs were in place when she committed the offence? Could they have been? Missing because of damage/vandalism?

With a mop of hair like that maybe she didn't see them?

DVD

Come on DVD this is a really weak response from you. This happened over a long period of time with thousands of motorist affected. Are you seriously trying to say that the contractor didn't have a duty to check regularly ( at least once a day)to confirm the signs were in place.
What about the enforcement agencies, don't the camera partnership or the Police have a duty to regularly check to see that temporary restriction signs are in place prior to operating the equipment?

The whole purpose of the temporary restriction was 'to protect the operatives whilst the works were taking place'. If it was really that dangerous wouldn't you be checking regularly and wouldn't you wonder why thousands of vehicles were not slowing down in resonse to the limit?

cptsideways

13,884 posts

282 months

Tuesday 9th August 2005
quotequote all
Funny enough I stopped & chatted to the operator of one the £ameras & guess what he was a very nice & helpful Wiltshire area Traffic Policeman !!!!! should have known better or did the overtime bonus have more of an effect on his conscience & ability to perform his duty within the law ? surely they check it out dont they?


I shall point out he was targetting vehicles just at the very end of the roadworks by the NSL signs, which were there, he even let me have a go with the LTI.


I posted about my little chat
www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?f=10&h=&t=84291







>> Edited by cptsideways on Tuesday 9th August 08:34

Dwight VanDriver

6,583 posts

274 months

Tuesday 9th August 2005
quotequote all
Now, now, Rayat I am not rattling your cage and you will note that in her particular case in which she alleges signs missing (afterwards) I MUSED (note) what was present when she committed the offence?

Obviously since her transgression it would appear defects arose.

DVD