Can they really do me for an offence they have no proof of??
Discussion
To avoid duplication, I'll post the link to the thread I started on this a short time ago in the TVR forum.
www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=365312&f=13&h=0
www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=365312&f=13&h=0
AFAIK & IANAL, but all it legally needs is the BiB's opinion that you were speeding to make a conviction. They don't actually need photographic or any other sort of evidence although that would potentially make it easier for them to prosecute.
A mate of mine lost his licence for DD after another driver reported him for carrying out an unsafe overtaking manouver. It was their word against his and he came a cropper even though noone and nothing was harmed. I know that's perhaps oversimplifying it, but that was the crux of the case.
A mate of mine lost his licence for DD after another driver reported him for carrying out an unsafe overtaking manouver. It was their word against his and he came a cropper even though noone and nothing was harmed. I know that's perhaps oversimplifying it, but that was the crux of the case.
Just jumped ower t'fence from Plod/Speed forum.....
Firstly I have to disagree with Tvrgit there is no such offence of 'excessive speed'. Those words come into play if dangerous driving etc is being considered.
The offence is exceeding a speed limit - Sect 89 Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984.
For this offence,as you all know NOIP required. As V8 was stopped then it will have been verbal. The standard speil is " You will be reported for the consideration of the question of prosecution for exceeding a speed limit." This usually is also followed by the'Official caution' i.e. "Your not obliged to say anything but it may harm your defence etc. etc." Not strictly necesssary and events before hand will have proved the offence and requires no verbals/admission from driver.
Now the NOIP verbal is not set in stone and various words have held to be OK providing imnformation is given that the offender is under no illusion that he is being reported. hence it may well be that the terminology 'excessive speed 'has crept in.
If the officer was alone, then he alone cannot prove the offence as the offence of speeding requires corroboration. His opinion has be corroborated by another officer alongside, the speedometer of his vehicle, vascar etc etc. On speedometer calibration whilst it has been held the needle can say it all, at higher speeds it has been stated that this should occur with some evidence the speeo in correct working order i.e. run over a measured mile against stop watch/rolling road.
None of this helps V8 at the moment for it will be the evidence of the officer that will matter,i.e. what he puts in his statement to CPS, who if they believe, will authorise prosecution and issue summons. No FPN was issued so its a Court hearing.What he should do is sit down and make copious notes of the incident in detail so that it remains fresh in his mind and for future use (see issue summons below)
So now it is the sweat until arrival of the summons which could take some months- four to five not unusual. When it arrives a decision will have to be made as to plea. Remember it is only a Not Guilty plea that there will be an entitlement for all the evidence to be brought out under disclosure rules before trial, from which it may be possible to open holes in the case.
We have V8's account only so far and he will appreciate that there are two sides to the story so I can only go on what has been posted. If what posted is absolutely correct then he has been dealt with most callously. No need for it.
Thread also opened on Plod/Speed Law which I only follow so will post this there as well.
dvd
Firstly I have to disagree with Tvrgit there is no such offence of 'excessive speed'. Those words come into play if dangerous driving etc is being considered.
The offence is exceeding a speed limit - Sect 89 Road Traffic Regulation Act 1984.
For this offence,as you all know NOIP required. As V8 was stopped then it will have been verbal. The standard speil is " You will be reported for the consideration of the question of prosecution for exceeding a speed limit." This usually is also followed by the'Official caution' i.e. "Your not obliged to say anything but it may harm your defence etc. etc." Not strictly necesssary and events before hand will have proved the offence and requires no verbals/admission from driver.
Now the NOIP verbal is not set in stone and various words have held to be OK providing imnformation is given that the offender is under no illusion that he is being reported. hence it may well be that the terminology 'excessive speed 'has crept in.
If the officer was alone, then he alone cannot prove the offence as the offence of speeding requires corroboration. His opinion has be corroborated by another officer alongside, the speedometer of his vehicle, vascar etc etc. On speedometer calibration whilst it has been held the needle can say it all, at higher speeds it has been stated that this should occur with some evidence the speeo in correct working order i.e. run over a measured mile against stop watch/rolling road.
None of this helps V8 at the moment for it will be the evidence of the officer that will matter,i.e. what he puts in his statement to CPS, who if they believe, will authorise prosecution and issue summons. No FPN was issued so its a Court hearing.What he should do is sit down and make copious notes of the incident in detail so that it remains fresh in his mind and for future use (see issue summons below)
So now it is the sweat until arrival of the summons which could take some months- four to five not unusual. When it arrives a decision will have to be made as to plea. Remember it is only a Not Guilty plea that there will be an entitlement for all the evidence to be brought out under disclosure rules before trial, from which it may be possible to open holes in the case.
We have V8's account only so far and he will appreciate that there are two sides to the story so I can only go on what has been posted. If what posted is absolutely correct then he has been dealt with most callously. No need for it.
Thread also opened on Plod/Speed Law which I only follow so will post this there as well.
dvd
Edited by Dwight VanDriver on Friday 9th March 16:28
Doesn't sound like there's going to be enough to go on to me.
I can't imagine trafpol pulling in these circumstances without doing a proper measurement of speed (and being everso slightly pleased with themselves that they could do a constant-distance follow).
My guess is that it will NFA, but watch the post. If he didn't issue a ticket there and then, why not?
I can't imagine trafpol pulling in these circumstances without doing a proper measurement of speed (and being everso slightly pleased with themselves that they could do a constant-distance follow).
My guess is that it will NFA, but watch the post. If he didn't issue a ticket there and then, why not?
7db said:
Doesn't sound like there's going to be enough to go on to me.
I can't imagine trafpol pulling in these circumstances without doing a proper measurement of speed (and being everso slightly pleased with themselves that they could do a constant-distance follow).
My guess is that it will NFA, but watch the post. If he didn't issue a ticket there and then, why not?
I can't imagine trafpol pulling in these circumstances without doing a proper measurement of speed (and being everso slightly pleased with themselves that they could do a constant-distance follow).
My guess is that it will NFA, but watch the post. If he didn't issue a ticket there and then, why not?
Legally, not being able to ascertain the exact speed of the vehicle needn't be a bar. What you are having to prove is that the speed (whatever it was) exceeded the limit.
If he didn't issue a ticket there & then it may well be that he considered the breach not suitable for FPN, but suitable for summons.
What I mean is, that if I can't pace & distance a vehicle because I can't keep up, it doesn't mean that I can't provide evidence of what speed I was doing & that it was pulling away from me. There is not a bar legally to me providing that evidence & it be sufficient to prove the offence of speeding.
Edited by vonhosen on Friday 9th March 18:19
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff