Motorist is banned over speed trap alert
Discussion
Mon Ami Mate said:
Motorist is banned over speed trap alert
By Stewart Payne
(Filed: 03/06/2004)
Sgt Sarah Cashman told the court that when she cautioned Harding and confiscated the sign he told her: "I stop people speeding down here. I am only doing what I think is right".
I know she's the AO but they really could have used someone else as PR!!
Could there be a a PR backlash where a dangerous situation on a road was being watched by possibly two policeman manning a Talivan.
Instead of raising cash & whilst waiting for an accident to happen they could have directed traffic instead.
Surely there are some rules about what a trained police officer should do in this situation. I know for a trained nurse there is some rule about assisting at traffic accidents, Ie you must.
The government, the councils & the scamerships should be brought to thier knees over this.
Instead of raising cash & whilst waiting for an accident to happen they could have directed traffic instead.
Surely there are some rules about what a trained police officer should do in this situation. I know for a trained nurse there is some rule about assisting at traffic accidents, Ie you must.
The government, the councils & the scamerships should be brought to thier knees over this.
PetrolTed said:True, but clerks can be as blinkered as magistrates sometimes. I've heard some can give you some proper grief if you try to defend yourself, for instance. It's quite possible they just saw it was to do with a speed trap, so they just handed down a driving ban.
Mrr T has a point. For the clerk of the court to advise a ban on driving there has to be more to it (trying to find out).
I didn't know that clerks could do that though, that's put me right off signing up! "Oh sod the jury, they look bored anyway. GUILTY!!!"
D-Angle said:
Mrr T has a point. For the clerk of the court to advise a ban on driving there has to be more to it (trying to find out).
True, but clerks can be as blinkered as magistrates sometimes. I've heard some can give you some proper grief if you try to defend yourself, for instance. It's quite possible they just saw it was to do with a speed trap, so they just handed down a driving ban.
I didn't know that clerks could do that though, that's put me right off signing up! "Oh sod the jury, they look bored anyway. GUILTY!!!"
You are correct Clerks can be quite difficult because the Court has to follow proper procedures and if it did not then a sentance could be appealed. But to apply a sentance which is not even mentioned in the relevant law, no it would not happen, which is why I asked if any bib know of any other sections which he could have been charged under, or has s89(2) been amemded.
IS IT SAFETY OR CASH?? the question suddenly becomes rhetorical.
As i said on the other thread regarding this same subject its just so sad that decent members of the community are punished by over zelous and miss-guided plod.
In turn they alienate themselves from the public at large, making the'yre own jobs harder - they should all loose their driving licences!!!!!!!
>> Edited by Bar_steward on Thursday 3rd June 11:49
As i said on the other thread regarding this same subject its just so sad that decent members of the community are punished by over zelous and miss-guided plod.
In turn they alienate themselves from the public at large, making the'yre own jobs harder - they should all loose their driving licences!!!!!!!
>> Edited by Bar_steward on Thursday 3rd June 11:49
This is completely absurd and unjust.
The road concerned does have its share of accidents, and I think it even has signs indicating the number of casualties on that stretch of road. Only as justification for the cameras that appear from time to time.
Even so, the guy was doing 'the public' a favour in two ways - improving safety by getting people to make sure they slow down where they should and in saving on some scamera fines for those that might not have done so anyway.
The copper concerned should surely have just asked/told him to remove the sign, without going to the time and trouble of charging him?
The authorities then backed-up that bad decision by an even worse decision in bringing the case to court.
The magistrate/clerk made the whole sorry affair even worse by applying not just a fine, but a driving ban - and not even allowing for appeal to possibly prevent this.
Great country we live in - the jobsworth Bliar brigade get to have their way at everyone else's expense...
Am I correct in believing that laws were changed fairly recently to include 'warning of a speed camera' as a traffic offence of some sort? Taken to mean that flashing your headlamps to warn cars approaching a speed trap could get you nicked. If so, I guess the court would have used this ploy to bring a driving ban even though the 'offender' was not driving at the time?
Bl**dy disgusting way to improve 'road safety', whatever spiel they come up with to justify it next.
The road concerned does have its share of accidents, and I think it even has signs indicating the number of casualties on that stretch of road. Only as justification for the cameras that appear from time to time.
Even so, the guy was doing 'the public' a favour in two ways - improving safety by getting people to make sure they slow down where they should and in saving on some scamera fines for those that might not have done so anyway.
The copper concerned should surely have just asked/told him to remove the sign, without going to the time and trouble of charging him?
The authorities then backed-up that bad decision by an even worse decision in bringing the case to court.
The magistrate/clerk made the whole sorry affair even worse by applying not just a fine, but a driving ban - and not even allowing for appeal to possibly prevent this.
Great country we live in - the jobsworth Bliar brigade get to have their way at everyone else's expense...
Am I correct in believing that laws were changed fairly recently to include 'warning of a speed camera' as a traffic offence of some sort? Taken to mean that flashing your headlamps to warn cars approaching a speed trap could get you nicked. If so, I guess the court would have used this ploy to bring a driving ban even though the 'offender' was not driving at the time?
Bl**dy disgusting way to improve 'road safety', whatever spiel they come up with to justify it next.
Put me down for a tenner too.
Ted,
is it worth a global email to all PH'ers??? Worded correctly (ie not on the scrounge, for a good cause) briefly detailing this case as I'm sure there are many members who would support this who may have missed the post or not be logging on for a few days.
I suggest we get enough to sort the poor old sod out and get a bit of publicity out of it by ridiculing the 'authorities' (and I use that word laughably), and then give any excess to a PH approved charity.
Mark
Ted,
is it worth a global email to all PH'ers??? Worded correctly (ie not on the scrounge, for a good cause) briefly detailing this case as I'm sure there are many members who would support this who may have missed the post or not be logging on for a few days.
I suggest we get enough to sort the poor old sod out and get a bit of publicity out of it by ridiculing the 'authorities' (and I use that word laughably), and then give any excess to a PH approved charity.
Mark
PetrolTed said:I'll contribute a £10.00 - Paypal or whatever any good Ted? Rich...
TED .. how about we club together and pay this poor bloke's costs for him? would that be good or bad publicity for you? i reckon that as a decent - sounding pensioner he dererves a bit of support .. if you don't want to do it through PH maybe we could do something off-site? might get some wider coverage of the story maybe?
joo
Gassing Station | General Gassing [Archive] | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff