Speeding charge defeated
Discussion
Today's Daily Mail reports on footballer Dwight Yorke who escaped a speeding conviction.
To summarise from the article, although the police had calibrated the laser speed gun, they failed to produce evidence that it had been operated in accordance with the Type Approval conditions laid down by the Home Office.
Macclesfield magistrates dismissed the case on the grounds that they did not find the evidence of the laser gun admissible.
quote:
Today's Daily Mail reports on footballer Dwight Yorke who escaped a speeding conviction.
To summarise from the article, although the police had calibrated the laser speed gun, they failed to produce evidence that it had been operated in accordance with the Type Approval conditions laid down by the Home Office.
Macclesfield magistrates dismissed the case on the grounds that they did not find the evidence of the laser gun admissible.
But will Joe Bloggs off the street be able to use this ?? Will there be Emergency legislation intoduced to close down this loophole ??
But will Joe Bloggs off the street be able to use this ?? Will there be Emergency legislation intoduced to close down this loophole ??
I wouldn't consider this a 'loophole' per se. Home Office Type Approval not only grants permits to certain types of speed measuring devices but also sets strict criteria as to how they are deployed and operated in the field. Incorrect use of equipment can lead to errors in data collection, no matter how thoroughly a device has been maintained and calibrated.
What appears to have happened here is that the defence has asked for evidence that the speed trap was indeed set up and operated correctly, which in my opinion (speaking from an IT Quality Management perspective) is a perfectly valid question.
Most individuals would probably not be aware how to challenge a speeding allegation from a scientific perspective. It is therefore conceivable that some may end up being prosecuted in situations where potentially the speed reading was not valid.
Just my $0.02 worth.
>> Edited by Deadly Dog on Wednesday 6th February 10:40
The guidelines relating to the operation of portable speed-measuring equipment relate to where such equipment can be positioned within the particular speed restriction in question. For example it would be beyond these guidelines to set up and operate a speedtrap at the point where the speed restriction came into effect. To my knowledge there is nothing in the guidelines pertaining to the use of such equipment relative to traffic junctions etc.
On the issue of the Magistrates' decision in the Yorke case, this is not a loophole in the law, just an example of where the police and the CPS had failed to prepare their case properly in response to the requirements of the appropriate legislation. The fact that they are unlikely to repeat their mistake, given the adverse publicity in this case, will be the main factor in preventing others from invoking this tactic in the future.
On the issue of the Magistrates' decision in the Yorke case, this is not a loophole in the law, just an example of where the police and the CPS had failed to prepare their case properly in response to the requirements of the appropriate legislation. The fact that they are unlikely to repeat their mistake, given the adverse publicity in this case, will be the main factor in preventing others from invoking this tactic in the future.
I don't know the full details behind this case - the solicitor representing Mr.Yorke has not disclosed the Type Approval conditions which the Police were unable to prove they had followed. However was the failure to produce evidence due to an administrative error during the case preparation? Or was it because the Police did not carry out the necessary compliance checks before using the trap, or that they failed to make a documented record of these checks?
If it was due to either of the latter reasons, then the Police may now be extra conscientious when setting up traps in the future. Nevertheless no defence worth their salt should take that for granted.
This is certainly not the first speeding case to be thrown out on a Type Approval compliance technicality. There are a number of eye-opening examples documented at the excellent Speedtrap Bible website. Perhaps Mr.Yorke’s solicitor got his information there!
If it was due to either of the latter reasons, then the Police may now be extra conscientious when setting up traps in the future. Nevertheless no defence worth their salt should take that for granted.
This is certainly not the first speeding case to be thrown out on a Type Approval compliance technicality. There are a number of eye-opening examples documented at the excellent Speedtrap Bible website. Perhaps Mr.Yorke’s solicitor got his information there!
quote:
Interesting about the junction thing: I had thought that a speed trap had to be set on a road that had an uninterrupted 400yd straight, with no side roads/street furniture.. reason being that any signs/traffic make a reading questionable. Oh well, just me then?
I believe that is one of the Type Approval conditions for a radar-based fixed post installation such as a Gatso.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff