Discussion
Hi guys,
I was stopped over a month ago doing 130 and was given my verbal NIP. I have still not heard anything but am aware that the court has up until 6 months from the date of the offence to lodge the case.
Is there a way I can check up on it without reminding them of it? I am clinging to the hope that it might get dropped. I know it is a small chance but it is still a chance. I do not want to remind them to ban me though.
The other question is regards the system I got caught with.
It was a stationary vehicle with one BiB and he had a video similar to a VASCAR setup. Does he need to follow you with VASCAR or can he just sit there over a set distance and time you and pull you over as you pass him?
If so, what is the minimum distance he needs to measure me over? It was .165 miles, around 265 metres. I was timed at 4.54 seconds, but any error he made at the start and finish could mean the time was more like 5.5 seconds, or even 6 seconds. This is a technicality really as I was doing 130mph
I was hoping that because it was less than 1 mile, it was not a valid reading but accept that might be slim. Alternately, he did not actually show me any footage of me, just his clock (the car was facing forward, so I approached him from behind
)
I was hoping he might have just done it to scare me and not actually have anything. I have certainly learned my lesson.
It just sucks not knowing.
Thanks guys,
Q
I was stopped over a month ago doing 130 and was given my verbal NIP. I have still not heard anything but am aware that the court has up until 6 months from the date of the offence to lodge the case.
Is there a way I can check up on it without reminding them of it? I am clinging to the hope that it might get dropped. I know it is a small chance but it is still a chance. I do not want to remind them to ban me though.
The other question is regards the system I got caught with.
It was a stationary vehicle with one BiB and he had a video similar to a VASCAR setup. Does he need to follow you with VASCAR or can he just sit there over a set distance and time you and pull you over as you pass him?
If so, what is the minimum distance he needs to measure me over? It was .165 miles, around 265 metres. I was timed at 4.54 seconds, but any error he made at the start and finish could mean the time was more like 5.5 seconds, or even 6 seconds. This is a technicality really as I was doing 130mph
I was hoping that because it was less than 1 mile, it was not a valid reading but accept that might be slim. Alternately, he did not actually show me any footage of me, just his clock (the car was facing forward, so I approached him from behind
) I was hoping he might have just done it to scare me and not actually have anything. I have certainly learned my lesson.
It just sucks not knowing.
Thanks guys,
Q
Being honest, I would be surprised if they 'forget' about a 130mph case, but you never know....
As you are already aware, they have 6 months from the date of the alleged offence to lay an information with the Magistrates' Court - the summons can be served several weeks after that. Unfortunately, you don't really have any options at the moment other than waiting. Grim, I know..
There may be some useful info regarding time / distance devices here.
As you are already aware, they have 6 months from the date of the alleged offence to lay an information with the Magistrates' Court - the summons can be served several weeks after that. Unfortunately, you don't really have any options at the moment other than waiting. Grim, I know..
There may be some useful info regarding time / distance devices here.
SS2, I read that and understand what it is saying.
However, is this not open to a large amount of operator error ?
Say, the distance they measure they click the switch late .. and then time someone and switch early .. then shorter time over greater distance equals higher speed.
Any traffic officer please comment, how do you get it right, not wrong ?
Thanks
However, is this not open to a large amount of operator error ?
Say, the distance they measure they click the switch late .. and then time someone and switch early .. then shorter time over greater distance equals higher speed.
Any traffic officer please comment, how do you get it right, not wrong ?
Thanks
andyuk911 said:
SS2, I read that and understand what it is saying.
However, is this not open to a large amount of operator error ?
Say, the distance they measure they click the switch late .. and then time someone and switch early .. then shorter time over greater distance equals higher speed.
Any traffic officer please comment, how do you get it right, not wrong ?
Thanks
However, is this not open to a large amount of operator error ?
Say, the distance they measure they click the switch late .. and then time someone and switch early .. then shorter time over greater distance equals higher speed.
Any traffic officer please comment, how do you get it right, not wrong ?
Thanks
Am not a traffic officer, but I do understand the system, and as you say it is open to error. This error is magnified the shorter the time/distance used to get a reading. There is also the factor that it is in fact possible to 'lean on' the reading through slow/fast operator interaction in a way which will increase the alleged speed. This speed it represented to the court to a hundredth of an mph so it does at least look like a machine has taken the reading, however in actuality the process is rather more simple.
The subject has been argued of the pros and cons of VASCAR before, and of course like any case where there is a margin of error the case can be argued. However, in this scenario with the OP at almost double the speed limit, the errors of the operator would have had to have been so huge that they could only have been intentionally falsified.
That was not the case, and I dont see the mags going for that anyway even if the OP could find a solicitor with the balls to go down this route!
What the OP could do however is try to opt for a 'Newton' hearing. This is the kind of thing that an experienced solicitor would need to negotiate on your behalf. Basically the OP would be saying:
I didnt do 130 and I am going to plead not guilty and fight you all the way on that one. However... if you change the 'offer' to a speed of say 98, then I will plead guilty to that, and you (Mr CPS brief) will have an easy life.
Of course the potential for punishment for a guilty plea on 98 is a lot less than being found guilty of 130...
"This is a technicality really as I was doing 130mph"
Guilty by your own admission then. Difficult for anyone to find many mitigating circumstances since you have admitted guilt.
However, if you were in your wedgimental blazer, pink cords and bwown bwogues looking every inch a pongo - and had reason to suspect that the 2 dark-skinned bearded chaps in the car behind were paying you rather too much attention for your comfort.....
Guilty by your own admission then. Difficult for anyone to find many mitigating circumstances since you have admitted guilt.
However, if you were in your wedgimental blazer, pink cords and bwown bwogues looking every inch a pongo - and had reason to suspect that the 2 dark-skinned bearded chaps in the car behind were paying you rather too much attention for your comfort.....
Edited by nickwilcock on Thursday 10th May 20:32
Doesn't mean I shouldn't try!
So the VASCAR can be used when it is stationary without the car on the screen?
Over a short distance like 265m?
Operator error of say .5 seconds on each click making a total of 1 sec error which is reasonable, over 4.5 seconds makes a 22% error making the speed nearer 100mph which is much more within the realms of plausability and smaller fine/ban.
Just thinking here.
So there is no minimum distance for VASCAR?
When I receive the Summons, how long on average before the actual hearing?
Thanks
So the VASCAR can be used when it is stationary without the car on the screen?
Over a short distance like 265m?
Operator error of say .5 seconds on each click making a total of 1 sec error which is reasonable, over 4.5 seconds makes a 22% error making the speed nearer 100mph which is much more within the realms of plausability and smaller fine/ban.
Just thinking here.
So there is no minimum distance for VASCAR?
When I receive the Summons, how long on average before the actual hearing?
Thanks
The 'potential terrorist' ploy might work.......
In GW1, a chum was driving back to Riyadh late one night. Concerned by the car behind, he put his foot down. So did they. He roared into the compound with the other car close behind - to find that they were Saudi undercover police wondering what he was doing driving at that time of night. They had a good laugh over it.
Good luck. Wattisham based with a handle like that?
In GW1, a chum was driving back to Riyadh late one night. Concerned by the car behind, he put his foot down. So did they. He roared into the compound with the other car close behind - to find that they were Saudi undercover police wondering what he was doing driving at that time of night. They had a good laugh over it.
Good luck. Wattisham based with a handle like that?
Edited by nickwilcock on Thursday 10th May 20:39
Quickstop said:
Doesn't mean I shouldn't try!
So the VASCAR can be used when it is stationary without the car on the screen?
Over a short distance like 265m?
Operator error of say .5 seconds on each click making a total of 1 sec error which is reasonable, over 4.5 seconds makes a 22% error making the speed nearer 100mph which is much more within the realms of plausability and smaller fine/ban.
Just thinking here.
So there is no minimum distance for VASCAR?
When I receive the Summons, how long on average before the actual hearing?
Thanks
So the VASCAR can be used when it is stationary without the car on the screen?
Over a short distance like 265m?
Operator error of say .5 seconds on each click making a total of 1 sec error which is reasonable, over 4.5 seconds makes a 22% error making the speed nearer 100mph which is much more within the realms of plausability and smaller fine/ban.
Just thinking here.
So there is no minimum distance for VASCAR?
When I receive the Summons, how long on average before the actual hearing?
Thanks
It is physically possible to use VASCAR whilst moving or still, however, it must be said that from a stationary position it does invite error is the primary and secondary points of reference will have different parrallax errors.
Similarly, 4.5 seconds is not a long time, the cases I have heard of have all been 10 seconds plus, so it stands to reason that over 4.5 seconds there will be twice as much error affecting the reading as at 10 seconds, and 4 times as much as 20 seconds.
I was caught in a similar way ( 10 years ago ). It was alleged that I was doing 92, when I am sure it was about 80. Anyway, I knew I had been going above the limit, and would not be banned, so I didn't make a fuss.
Anyway, to answer your original question, after being stopped, I heard nothing for five and half months ( I was just thinking they had forgotton to ) and then received a court summons for about a month after that.
If I were you, I would not remind them about it, but neither should you think they have forgotton just because you don't hear anything for a while.
Good Luck, and let us know what the outcome is.
Anyway, to answer your original question, after being stopped, I heard nothing for five and half months ( I was just thinking they had forgotton to ) and then received a court summons for about a month after that.
If I were you, I would not remind them about it, but neither should you think they have forgotton just because you don't hear anything for a while.
Good Luck, and let us know what the outcome is.
In my days when Vascar was driven by steam the minimum distance was two tenths of mile. Under this the device would not accept and error mode appeared.
If the Plodmobile was stationary then it will be operating on a pre-fed distance.
All he had to do was use the time switch.
Whilst some operator error is possible bear in mind that with two good reference points then one has anticipation of the target vehicle at these points which cuts the error down to a bare minumum or non at all instead of reacting to the vehicle at the point with possible 0.68 sec error either way.
T & SS had an error sheet which gave example of effect of various time/distance errors and which were surprisingly of little effect on the average speed.
Unless of course our friend had an itchy trigger finger........
dvd
If the Plodmobile was stationary then it will be operating on a pre-fed distance.
All he had to do was use the time switch.
Whilst some operator error is possible bear in mind that with two good reference points then one has anticipation of the target vehicle at these points which cuts the error down to a bare minumum or non at all instead of reacting to the vehicle at the point with possible 0.68 sec error either way.
T & SS had an error sheet which gave example of effect of various time/distance errors and which were surprisingly of little effect on the average speed.
Unless of course our friend had an itchy trigger finger........
dvd
BIG DUNC said:
I was caught in a similar way ( 10 years ago ). It was alleged that I was doing 92, when I am sure it was about 80. Anyway, I knew I had been going above the limit, and would not be banned, so I didn't make a fuss.
Anyway, to answer your original question, after being stopped, I heard nothing for five and half months ( I was just thinking they had forgotton to ) and then received a court summons for about a month after that.
If I were you, I would not remind them about it, but neither should you think they have forgotton just because you don't hear anything for a while.
Good Luck, and let us know what the outcome is.
Anyway, to answer your original question, after being stopped, I heard nothing for five and half months ( I was just thinking they had forgotton to ) and then received a court summons for about a month after that.
If I were you, I would not remind them about it, but neither should you think they have forgotton just because you don't hear anything for a while.
Good Luck, and let us know what the outcome is.
5 and a half months later
. I know they have 6 months, but I do think it's a little wrong to let you "Stew" for that amount of time. I'd rather get it over with. Surely you could sue them for the stress they've caused you? 
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff