Francis Case - appeal dismissed
Discussion
em.tim_s said:
was this the non-signing case?
Yes. I'm afraid so. Looks like not signing the form is an S172 offence for the time being at least.
The best way to beat the cameras is the Safe Speed way... i.e. they are TERRIBLE for road safety.
Best Regards,
Paul Smith
Safe Speed
www.safespeed.org.uk
Muncher said:
Surely the ABD would help fund it?
Anyone got a report of the case yet?
From: Idris Francis <irfrancis@o...>
Date: Tue Mar 16, 2004 4:49 pm
Subject: Sorry to say, Appeal to High Court lost today. A skirmish lost, but the war is being won. + Media spots
Tu 16th March - coincidentally, the 60th anniversary of the Great Escape.
Not in my case though.
I am not suppposed to comment on the proceedings until the 2 judges give
their reasons in finding against me , in about 14 days time.
I can I think point out that today was specifically about the precise
meaning of S172, and in no way on the issue of whether speed cameras save
lives or cost lives - the issue that really matters
From that date we will have 21 days in which to decide whether to appeal
to the House of Lords, on what is, I believe, agreed to be a point of
public importance.
As agreed with my solicitor afterwards, this is the end of the line for all
those involved in similar "unsigned forms" cases - the only logical step
now is to change any plea to Guilt, explaining in mitigation that the law
was unclear until today, and today, and you understood that you were
complying with the law by supplying the information, albeit unisgned.
I am advised that the cost of appealing to the House of Lords is likely to
be of the order of £12,000, and I have to say that I am not inclined to
spend that money in the hope of 3 more senior judges overturning the ruling
of the two today.
So the deaths arising from this insance policy - cutting police patrols,
and distracting drivers from their primary task of driving safely according
to the conditions to one of keeping just within arbitrary speed limits -
will continue a bit longer
But not indefinitely, as the writing is already on the wall - and on the
headstones - for speed cameras
In the unlikely event that there was widespread support, including a
fighting fund specifically for the purpose, enough to cover costs, I would
be happy to go ahead, having got this far. I am not however convinced that
this would be an effective way of spending limited resources.
No doubt we can expect within a few days another gloating, vindictive press
release from Hampshire Speed Camera Partnerships, and no doubt they will
forget to mention that during their first two years of operation, when
cameras went from 23 to 51, deaths went from 69 to something over 110.
However, as their PR man Julian Hewitt said to the Mail on Sunday:
"Where we've put cameras, we've had a reduction in casualites. Deaths might
have gone up up on other parts of the road. I don't know what happens away
from our cameras"
One good thing to emerge - more publicity for the campaign
I should be inteviewed on the Henry Kelly Drive Time show at 6.05 pm today
- Classic FM 100-102 mhz
Also Southern Counties Radio, late afternoon
Thursday night Harlech (ITV1, Wales) TV, Wales This Week programme about
speed cameras including an interview I did last week. (also available on
the Web)
Press Association and 2 other reporters at the courts did interviews, lots
of photographers around. so might get some newspaper coverage
Also BBC 1 South are preparing a programme, date and time not yet known
Idris
), also transparency in administration is essential.Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff