Vague locus defence

[edoneill]

Been reading up a bit on the "vague locus" defence - ie if the location stated on a NIP is too vague.

I have seen one suggestion that the NIP should be specific to about 1/4 mile, but also seen a response from a police force rejecting a vague locus claim for a stretch of road - think it was stated as "M62, Liverpool" - because they said the M62 was only in Liverpool for about 1km.

In my case the location refers to a section of road that's between 2 and 3 miles long depending on how you deem one town to end and the next one to start.

Does anyone know how vague a NIP can be in terms of distance along a particular road - and whether or not it's an instant drop or if it's up to the mags on the day and what mood they are in?

Cheers
Ed

[justinp1]

In my case the position was something like A42, Borth or something like that, reasonably specific but certainly not to 1/4 mile, maybe not a mile.

Did not question this fact in my case but my gut feeling is that it is a dead end. The reason why is that the mags are not legally trained and really not interested in listening to 'loopholes' if they do not make a difference to the actual evidence in the case.

If you are relying on a particular nuance of the law or case law you really need a solicitor not only to put forward the case in legal language, but to give it credibility to the mags and also defend the theory against the CPS comebacks.

Edited by justinp1 on Friday 6th October 00:06

[bga]

edoneill said:

Does anyone know how vague a NIP can be in terms of distance along a particular road - and whether or not it's an instant drop or if it's up to the mags on the day and what mood they are in?

One of my colleagues recently got points & fine despite the Junction written on the NIP not actually existing. He took it to court but they weren't having any of it & he got 6pts + £300 for 104 on the M1

[turbobloke]

bga said:

edoneill said:

Does anyone know how vague a NIP can be in terms of distance along a particular road - and whether or not it's an instant drop or if it's up to the mags on the day and what mood they are in?

One of my colleagues recently got points & fine despite the Junction written on the NIP not actually existing. He took it to court but they weren't having any of it & he got 6pts + £300 for 104 on the M1

Magistrates Courts - justice by the yard, pile em high and send em down, get yer dirt cheap justice at the Mags Court, special offers every day.

[Dwight VanDriver]

Quotes law book:

Where the error in the notice is as to the place, it is a question of fact and degree whether the defendant has been misled and that a mis-statement is not fatal if the defendant has not been mis-led by the mis-statement.

A Notice alleging excessive speed 'between' two places more than 10 miles apart was held good in Bresford v St Albans [1905]

dvd

[DeMolay]

Dwight VanDriver said:

Bresford v St Albans [1905]

Interesting, DVD, but what about Young v Day [1959]:

Young v Day said:

"The police certainly had the information and it is obvious that they could have been more specific because, even if they could not specify the place by reference to an intersection, a building, or a church, they could indicate that the alleged offence took place a quarter of a mile from Hothfield or half a mile from Bethersden, or wherever the place was."

Edited by DeMolay on Friday 6th October 11:14

[edoneill]

Yes, Young v Day is normally quoted, as a result of which (apparently) a location which is 4 miles or longer is considered too vague. The problem is how short a location can be in order still to be considered vague. This seems to depend not exclusively on the length but also the availability of features.

I would have thought that a location which is a 2.5 mile long stretch of road with lots of features (including roundabouts, side roads etc) and no direction of travel specified, is verging on a strong vague locus case. If it was 4 miles or longer it would definitely be a goer.

There was a suggestion that 1/4 mile or 1/2 mile is what a location should pinpoint and that anything longer might be considered vague.

There is also some confusion with S172; some people think that vague locus reinforces an assertion that the driver could not be identified - but as I understand it, vague locus is to do with the NIP being invalid, nothing to do with S172 / inability to remember who was driving within that particular location.

Could do with help though since I will need to choose whether to use this approach or the PACE approach.

[DeMolay]

What is the location given as on the NIP?

[edoneill]

Well, I don't want to give the actual location as shown just in case it turns out to be a vague locus opportunity and it causes NIPs to be reissued. After 14 days I wouldn't mind giving the real details.

But

The format is

At <time> hours on <date>
at A111, Croydon Road, Croydon, Surrey (have changed the road number, town and county)
Contrary to S81(1)RTRA 84 etc etc

In other words it has a road number, and a road name, and a town. The road (as identified by the road number) is very long (10s of miles). The road as identified by the road name (ie Croydon Road) is about 5 miles long. The section of that road which could reasonably be described as being within Croydon (as opposed to the numerous surrounding towns) is about 2.5 miles long and contains more than one speed trap location.

[DeMolay]

I think you're worrying unnecessarily. Also, it's difficult to give advice for a fictional location, as there may be local subtle idiosyncracies.

[Dwight VanDriver]

Unfortunately arguements like this cannot be settled on the Forum and the place where it will be is either at Mags or Crown Court (or even higher).

It would seem the main thrust of the NOIP is to bring the matter fairly quickly to the attention of the driver so that he can prepare his defence. If the details on the NOIP does not do so then I would suspect they will rule in his favour.

dvd