INSURRECTION - Part 3
Discussion
For any resistive but legal concept to be successful, the depth of the problems have to be fully understood.
The single largest problem I have constantly encountered in ways that are almost always totally unacceptable is the behaviour of the Prosecution Services; the DPP in England, and the PF in Scotland.
I am going to highlight three cases; I have dozens of examples but for reasons of confidentiality I would not want to use them. The three I will use are two against myself and one against my oldest son, who has given his consent. I will start with his case, the most outrageous.
In the Autumn of '98 my son had borrowed my '81 Audi Quattro for the weekend. This was one of the very first Quattros brought into the country and was therefore left hand drive, they only made the first ones in this form; this is important for reasons that will reveal themselves.
He was driving home through the South Side of Glasgow, (30 mph limit) at around 2am in misty conditions when he was stopped by a Rover 827 Vitesse with Dayglo striping and lamp units on the roof and full detection equipment.
He was given a breath test, passed it and then charged with doing 47 mph and given a HORT1.
He asked to see the VASCAR readings and video and was told the equipment had been "switched off". He then asked how the speed had been detected, now this is REALLY good!
Remember this is '98 not '58. The talker mumbled that they had used a calibrated speedometer.
My son actually burst out laughing and said "WHAT!!!"
He asked once again to be shown the equipment and was totally ignored. As he left the vehicle the talker said, "Really nice car by the way"
My son at that moment said he has never been nearer murdering someone than then!
I resolved to inspect this vehicle as I have done on several occasions. It took FOUR court appearances to get an order from a magistrate to inspect the vehicle.
At every one of these appearances the Fiscal attempted to prevent me having access to this police vehicle.
Why?
On the fourth appearance we were lucky to get a stipendiary magistrate, that is one who is legally qualified and needs no "accomplice" whispering in her ear. She put the Fiscal firmly in his place by informing him that all police vehicles were public service vehicles and were not owned by the Fiscal's office, and if it is the requirement of the Defence that the vehicle be inspected then it must be so.
I carried out the inspection of the vehicle at the Traffic Department in Glasgow.
A very pleasant Inspector made it available to me and the first thing I noticed was that it was over six years old and had been to the moon and back. My main interest in this vehicle was the installation of the detection equipment and in particular this "calibrated speedometer". What I found was a hole in the dash where the VASCAR should have been. Upon challenging the Inspector about this he said that he wasn't sure where it was!! Unbelievable.
The only speedometer fitted to the car was the one for the driver, and yes it appeared to have been calibrated, by a company called IRS.
Their engineer confirmed to me that they had calibrated it on the vehicle for Rover when it was brand new but according to their log it had never been checked since then, bear in mind this is an electronic speedo. He sympathised but refused to appear in court to substantiate this.
At the trial I was prevented from giving evidence of a technical nature because I was acting as my son's agent despite the fact that there is provision within the Criminal Procedure Scotland act to do just that.
The Fiscal called the two Officers who had been in the car. The first one, the talker revealed that he had only been in the Traffic for six weeks and had still not done any VASCAR training. At the time of the incident he had no Traffic experience whatsoever but claimed to be able to "operate" a calibrated speedometer, even although it was on the wrong side of the car and couldn't be seen by him.
Just so you understand this, I used to service the police Jags and Rovers in the early seventies, and the 3.8 mk2s and XJ6s had a huge Smiths calibrated speedometer inserted in the glove box right in front of the passengers face. It was a beautiful piece of equipment and had facility to lock it up on a speed reading. But to do this accurately took a great deal of practice and just the right conditions, because the driver would have to follow the target car at exactly the same distance and speed for the measured fifth of a mile to get an accurate reading.
This individual admitted he had never been trained to do so. Upon showing him a photograph of the car to ask if he had stopped it because he found it an attractive target, (which I am convinced was the case) he started arguing that the car in the photo was not mine because it was left hand drive, then went on to argue categorically that the car he had stopped was right hand drive, despite the fact that it is a physical impossibility for a right hand drive Quattro to exist at this age.
The Fiscal then called FIVE further officers from the Traffic Department who had driven this car over the years to confirm that the speedometer was working properly. On cross examination not one of them knew how a calibrated speedometer worked, nor how to test it, nor could they supply a test certificate for this car, simply because it didn't exist of course.
The Fiscal then went on to produce a surveyor from the Roads Department who claimed that he had made two stone markers at the side of the M8 Motorway that were precisely a mile apart and the police used these to calibrate their equipment. What did he know about calibrated speedometers? Nothing.
Over lunch my son revealed to me that he had had enough and was not prepared to go on the stand, simply because he considered that his temper would probably get the better of him. I knew however that there was ample grounds at this stage for an appeal to the High Court so it wasn't a total loss.
I informed the judge, another lady stipendiary magistrate, that we were withdrawing our defence and she would have to pass judgement on what had been before her.
She found him guilty and fined him exactly the same amount as the Fixed Penalty had been, £25.
My son gave up on the legal system that day, he told me to forget the appeal and that he would never have believed the system could have gotten this bad had he not experienced it himself.
That trial, from the issue of the Fixed Penalty in the vehicle to us finally walking out of court, must have cost tens of thousands of pounds and involved SEVEN police officers giving evidence for a simple speeding charge that, of course, should never have been issued in the first place.
The behaviour of the Fiscal's Office was simply utterly outrageous, the quality of the evidence was at best, desperately shaky, and the procurement of all these other officers totally irrelevant and a complete abuse of the power of a public office.
But this is where they have an Achilles Heel and this is where we can hit them the hardest!
The single largest problem I have constantly encountered in ways that are almost always totally unacceptable is the behaviour of the Prosecution Services; the DPP in England, and the PF in Scotland.
I am going to highlight three cases; I have dozens of examples but for reasons of confidentiality I would not want to use them. The three I will use are two against myself and one against my oldest son, who has given his consent. I will start with his case, the most outrageous.
In the Autumn of '98 my son had borrowed my '81 Audi Quattro for the weekend. This was one of the very first Quattros brought into the country and was therefore left hand drive, they only made the first ones in this form; this is important for reasons that will reveal themselves.
He was driving home through the South Side of Glasgow, (30 mph limit) at around 2am in misty conditions when he was stopped by a Rover 827 Vitesse with Dayglo striping and lamp units on the roof and full detection equipment.
He was given a breath test, passed it and then charged with doing 47 mph and given a HORT1.
He asked to see the VASCAR readings and video and was told the equipment had been "switched off". He then asked how the speed had been detected, now this is REALLY good!
Remember this is '98 not '58. The talker mumbled that they had used a calibrated speedometer.
My son actually burst out laughing and said "WHAT!!!"
He asked once again to be shown the equipment and was totally ignored. As he left the vehicle the talker said, "Really nice car by the way"
My son at that moment said he has never been nearer murdering someone than then!
I resolved to inspect this vehicle as I have done on several occasions. It took FOUR court appearances to get an order from a magistrate to inspect the vehicle.
At every one of these appearances the Fiscal attempted to prevent me having access to this police vehicle.
Why?
On the fourth appearance we were lucky to get a stipendiary magistrate, that is one who is legally qualified and needs no "accomplice" whispering in her ear. She put the Fiscal firmly in his place by informing him that all police vehicles were public service vehicles and were not owned by the Fiscal's office, and if it is the requirement of the Defence that the vehicle be inspected then it must be so.
I carried out the inspection of the vehicle at the Traffic Department in Glasgow.
A very pleasant Inspector made it available to me and the first thing I noticed was that it was over six years old and had been to the moon and back. My main interest in this vehicle was the installation of the detection equipment and in particular this "calibrated speedometer". What I found was a hole in the dash where the VASCAR should have been. Upon challenging the Inspector about this he said that he wasn't sure where it was!! Unbelievable.
The only speedometer fitted to the car was the one for the driver, and yes it appeared to have been calibrated, by a company called IRS.
Their engineer confirmed to me that they had calibrated it on the vehicle for Rover when it was brand new but according to their log it had never been checked since then, bear in mind this is an electronic speedo. He sympathised but refused to appear in court to substantiate this.
At the trial I was prevented from giving evidence of a technical nature because I was acting as my son's agent despite the fact that there is provision within the Criminal Procedure Scotland act to do just that.
The Fiscal called the two Officers who had been in the car. The first one, the talker revealed that he had only been in the Traffic for six weeks and had still not done any VASCAR training. At the time of the incident he had no Traffic experience whatsoever but claimed to be able to "operate" a calibrated speedometer, even although it was on the wrong side of the car and couldn't be seen by him.
Just so you understand this, I used to service the police Jags and Rovers in the early seventies, and the 3.8 mk2s and XJ6s had a huge Smiths calibrated speedometer inserted in the glove box right in front of the passengers face. It was a beautiful piece of equipment and had facility to lock it up on a speed reading. But to do this accurately took a great deal of practice and just the right conditions, because the driver would have to follow the target car at exactly the same distance and speed for the measured fifth of a mile to get an accurate reading.
This individual admitted he had never been trained to do so. Upon showing him a photograph of the car to ask if he had stopped it because he found it an attractive target, (which I am convinced was the case) he started arguing that the car in the photo was not mine because it was left hand drive, then went on to argue categorically that the car he had stopped was right hand drive, despite the fact that it is a physical impossibility for a right hand drive Quattro to exist at this age.
The Fiscal then called FIVE further officers from the Traffic Department who had driven this car over the years to confirm that the speedometer was working properly. On cross examination not one of them knew how a calibrated speedometer worked, nor how to test it, nor could they supply a test certificate for this car, simply because it didn't exist of course.
The Fiscal then went on to produce a surveyor from the Roads Department who claimed that he had made two stone markers at the side of the M8 Motorway that were precisely a mile apart and the police used these to calibrate their equipment. What did he know about calibrated speedometers? Nothing.
Over lunch my son revealed to me that he had had enough and was not prepared to go on the stand, simply because he considered that his temper would probably get the better of him. I knew however that there was ample grounds at this stage for an appeal to the High Court so it wasn't a total loss.
I informed the judge, another lady stipendiary magistrate, that we were withdrawing our defence and she would have to pass judgement on what had been before her.
She found him guilty and fined him exactly the same amount as the Fixed Penalty had been, £25.
My son gave up on the legal system that day, he told me to forget the appeal and that he would never have believed the system could have gotten this bad had he not experienced it himself.
That trial, from the issue of the Fixed Penalty in the vehicle to us finally walking out of court, must have cost tens of thousands of pounds and involved SEVEN police officers giving evidence for a simple speeding charge that, of course, should never have been issued in the first place.
The behaviour of the Fiscal's Office was simply utterly outrageous, the quality of the evidence was at best, desperately shaky, and the procurement of all these other officers totally irrelevant and a complete abuse of the power of a public office.
But this is where they have an Achilles Heel and this is where we can hit them the hardest!
Not sure at the start whether you were complaining about a Vascar Check or a follow, from which later in your post seems to be what what you questioned.
Regarding the follow then in Nicholas v Penny [1950]it was held a person could be convicted on the evidence of one policeman supported by evidence by him of the reading of a speedometer or other mechanical means, even though there was no evidence that the speedometer had been tested. In that case it was stated that the offender had been going 10 mph in excess of the limit and the Court commented on the amount of the excess;had the speed been only 2 mph in excess of the limit, they may have called for evidence of the accuracy of the speedometer.
Likewise in Swain v Gillett [1974] held that a speedometer reading was capable of amounting to corroboration of a police officer's opinion evidence about the speed of a vehicle without proof of testing of the accuracy of the speedometer.
Night time pull, then presume police car would be double crewed? If so forget about the speedo. Held two police officers independently forming an opinion about the speed of an offending vehicle is sufficient as a matter of law to support an offence of speeding.
As to calibrated speedometer, in my day, all I knew was that these were fitted as Police extras by the maker of the vehicle. The needle was accurate in that there was no wow and flutter as speeds increased/decreased . No attention was given to it unless a secondary check by stopwatch against a measured mile revealed a fault when it was repaired by Garage Mechanics and agin retested over the measured mile.It was Force policy that following the detection of an offence of speeding, accuracy had to be checked over measured mile by stopwatch by two officers and appropriate entry made in Pocket Book as to speeds times etc and signed by each other.
At the end of the day in a Court appearance it is up to the Magistrates to weigh up the evidence and come to a decision on Guilt.
Obviously no action was taken against any person who had been reported prior to the fault being detected.
DVD
>> Edited by Dwight VanDriver on Friday 17th September 08:07
Regarding the follow then in Nicholas v Penny [1950]it was held a person could be convicted on the evidence of one policeman supported by evidence by him of the reading of a speedometer or other mechanical means, even though there was no evidence that the speedometer had been tested. In that case it was stated that the offender had been going 10 mph in excess of the limit and the Court commented on the amount of the excess;had the speed been only 2 mph in excess of the limit, they may have called for evidence of the accuracy of the speedometer.
Likewise in Swain v Gillett [1974] held that a speedometer reading was capable of amounting to corroboration of a police officer's opinion evidence about the speed of a vehicle without proof of testing of the accuracy of the speedometer.
Night time pull, then presume police car would be double crewed? If so forget about the speedo. Held two police officers independently forming an opinion about the speed of an offending vehicle is sufficient as a matter of law to support an offence of speeding.
As to calibrated speedometer, in my day, all I knew was that these were fitted as Police extras by the maker of the vehicle. The needle was accurate in that there was no wow and flutter as speeds increased/decreased . No attention was given to it unless a secondary check by stopwatch against a measured mile revealed a fault when it was repaired by Garage Mechanics and agin retested over the measured mile.It was Force policy that following the detection of an offence of speeding, accuracy had to be checked over measured mile by stopwatch by two officers and appropriate entry made in Pocket Book as to speeds times etc and signed by each other.
At the end of the day in a Court appearance it is up to the Magistrates to weigh up the evidence and come to a decision on Guilt.
Obviously no action was taken against any person who had been reported prior to the fault being detected.
DVD
>> Edited by Dwight VanDriver on Friday 17th September 08:07
I FOUGHT THE LAW
Breakin' rocks in the ... hot sun
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
I needed money, 'cause I ... had none
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
I left my baby and I feel so bad
I guess my race is run
Well, she's the best girl ... I've ever had
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
Robbin' people with a . . . six gun
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
I miss my baby and the ... good fun
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
I left my baby and I feel so bad
I guess my race is run
But, she's the best girl ... I've ever had
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
Aye thank yow..
Street
Breakin' rocks in the ... hot sun
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
I needed money, 'cause I ... had none
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
I left my baby and I feel so bad
I guess my race is run
Well, she's the best girl ... I've ever had
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
Robbin' people with a . . . six gun
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
I miss my baby and the ... good fun
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
I left my baby and I feel so bad
I guess my race is run
But, she's the best girl ... I've ever had
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
Aye thank yow..
Street
Streetcop said:
I FOUGHT THE LAW
Breakin' rocks in the ... hot sun
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
I needed money, 'cause I ... had none
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
I left my baby and I feel so bad
I guess my race is run
Well, she's the best girl ... I've ever had
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
Robbin' people with a . . . six gun
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
I miss my baby and the ... good fun
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
I left my baby and I feel so bad
I guess my race is run
But, she's the best girl ... I've ever had
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
Aye thank yow..
Street
Street
All very amusing, but it does come across with an air of smugness and Police superiority over the public. IMHO it does nothing to help this discussion thread. You MUST BE CONSISTANT in your opinions. As you said to me yesterady, you do indeed tend to blow hot and cold.
Sorry; don't intend to be smug....(never been called that before, so I mustn't be it in real life I suppose)...
Anyway...I like to see the lighter sides of life..hence the song..
Don't read too much into it...I'm still one of the good guys....
Street
>> Edited by Streetcop on Friday 17th September 09:31
Anyway...I like to see the lighter sides of life..hence the song..
Don't read too much into it...I'm still one of the good guys....
Street
>> Edited by Streetcop on Friday 17th September 09:31
Streetcop said:
Sorry; don't intend to be smug....(never been called that before, so I mustn't be it in real life I suppose)...
Anyway...I like to see the lighter sides of life..hence the song..
Don't read too much into it...I'm still one of the good guys....
Street
>> Edited by Streetcop on Friday 17th September 09:31
Sooooooooo glad to hear it mate.
Phew..........thought you had become a bar steward copper for a moment
blademan said:
Sorry; don't intend to be smug....(never been called that before, so I mustn't be it in real life I suppose)...
Anyway...I like to see the lighter sides of life..hence the song..
Don't read too much into it...I'm still one of the good guys....
Street
>> Edited by Streetcop on Friday 17th September 09:31
Sooooooooo glad to hear it mate.
Phew..........thought you had become a bar steward copper for a moment
I have had a reputation at times for being one..but never smug or holier than thou...just in the right place at the right time regularly..
Street
nickwilcock said:
Confucius say:
"He who farts against thunder invites a lightning strike on his arse"
He is also reported to have said:
"He who pisses against the wind wets own trousers!"
Bearing such considerations in mind I still think it is right to fight for what one believes in. The initial difficulty seems to be deciding - as a group - just what we believe in.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
Dwight VanDriver said:
Not sure at the start whether you were complaining about a Vascar Check or a follow, from which later in your post seems to be what what you questioned.
Regarding the follow then in Nicholas v Penny [1950]it was held a person could be convicted on the evidence of one policeman supported by evidence by him of the reading of a speedometer or other mechanical means, even though there was no evidence that the speedometer had been tested. In that case it was stated that the offender had been going 10 mph in excess of the limit and the Court commented on the amount of the excess;had the speed been only 2 mph in excess of the limit, they may have called for evidence of the accuracy of the speedometer.
Likewise in Swain v Gillett [1974] held that a speedometer reading was capable of amounting to corroboration of a police officer's opinion evidence about the speed of a vehicle without proof of testing of the accuracy of the speedometer.
Night time pull, then presume police car would be double crewed? If so forget about the speedo. Held two police officers independently forming an opinion about the speed of an offending vehicle is sufficient as a matter of law to support an offence of speeding.
As to calibrated speedometer, in my day, all I knew was that these were fitted as Police extras by the maker of the vehicle. The needle was accurate in that there was no wow and flutter as speeds increased/decreased . No attention was given to it unless a secondary check by stopwatch against a measured mile revealed a fault when it was repaired by Garage Mechanics and agin retested over the measured mile.It was Force policy that following the detection of an offence of speeding, accuracy had to be checked over measured mile by stopwatch by two officers and appropriate entry made in Pocket Book as to speeds times etc and signed by each other.
At the end of the day in a Court appearance it is up to the Magistrates to weigh up the evidence and come to a decision on Guilt.
Obviously no action was taken against any person who had been reported prior to the fault being detected.
DVD
>> Edited by Dwight VanDriver on Friday 17th September 08:07
Hi DVD,
thanks for your input, very informative unlike some would be rock stars on here! By the way Street, that's a crap song and you were flat in the second verse!!
DVD, your reference to past cases reinforces one of the main points here, the first case was in 1950, the second 1974, not long after VASCAR had been introduced.
As you can appreciate this is an extremely brief sketch of what actually happened, because I don't want to take up too much of Ted's bandwidth and I want to keep everyone's attention on the issues.
This copper I named the talker has to have been the most precocious, ill-mannered ignoramous I have ever had the misfortune to cross examine. He was a liar, it was as simple as that; I could see it in his eyes when I questioned him.
The whole point here is that this is NOT 1950, and this guy thought it acceptable to throw the clock back thirty years and ignore all the thousands of pounds worth of equipment that was installed in this vehicle; equipment that had taken years and even nore money to develop so that the doubts and inaccuracies were removed from the system that was desperately flawed using speedometers. Worse still his senior officer in the vehicle sits in total silence and permits this to go on without uttering a sound. Even worse still, the Fiscal jumps on the bandwagon and involves FIVE other officers and a civilian witness to try and browbeat the accused by sheer weight of numbers.
In Scotland DVD, police officers always work in pairs, evidence has to be corroborative from two sources to be acceptable in Scottish courts except in certain circumstances.
The whole point about that is that he couldn't see the speedometer from the passenger seat, unless he was draped over the shoulder of the driver in an extremely intimate fashion! On top of this the speedometer had NEVER been tested since it was new, almost SIX YEARS.
My God, am I being unreasonable here!!
It takes me almost seven months and four court appearances to get to see this vehicle and when I do the VASCAR unit has been removed. WHY??!! Because I am convinced it was faulty and had I tested it and discovered this I would have demanded that all speeding convictions dating back to the last proper test certificate on this vehicle were rescinded; these people know that's what I would have done.
As a Traffic Cop you know that the Vascar units can be calibrated in the car at any time, all you need is a measured distance, that's what the evidence from the civilian was about. But what the hell was he doing there? They didn't use VASCAR; you can't calibrate a speedo in the car, the process requires incredibly accurate equipment and skill, particularly when it';s electronic, but at the end of the day it's purely theoretical, because all it takes is a change of tyres or the wrong pressure setting and the rolling radius of the wheel is altered thereby altering the speedo reading.
The single most important point about evidence is the quality of it; and I'm sorry, but if you consider that what has happened here constitutes evidence of a sufficient quality to secure a conviction you have a serious problem with the concept of law and justice.
Hi Iolair....you have indeed perfected the principles of hype and tension by constantly leaving us without the info we need to see what you're talking about. However, I'm getting very bored waiting. Will you please get to the point and tell us what you're intentions are, and the basis for these intentions??
J.
J.
PetrolTed said:
So was your son speeding or not?
I think you'll like this bit.
Just before he was stopped my son passed through a speed camera, one that he knows very well and therefore wouldn't speed through. It didn't go off, but immediately he passed through it the headlamps and blue lights appeared in his rear view mirror, so he couldn't see if it went off with the traffic car.
I wrote to the Enforcement Section to request a photo of the police vehicle going through the camera, therefore proving it was going very much faster than his car and couldn't have used the speedo method of detection. No answer the first time or the second; eventually on the third attempt I was told, predictably, that it was confidential information and that details about police vehicle activities were not available to the public.
jeremyadamson said:
Hi Iolair....you have indeed perfected the principles of hype and tension by constantly leaving us without the info we need to see what you're talking about. However, I'm getting very bored waiting. Will you please get to the point and tell us what you're intentions are, and the basis for these intentions??
J.
Hear hear! I discovered these threads yesterday and I thought it was odd. Your proposals awaited for insurrection and anarchy!
jeremyadamson said:
Hi Iolair....you have indeed perfected the principles of hype and tension by constantly leaving us without the info we need to see what you're talking about. However, I'm getting very bored waiting. Will you please get to the point and tell us what you're intentions are, and the basis for these intentions??
J.
I appreciate what you're saying but this takes hours of work and huge amounts of effort. I need to be sure that everyone is aware of what is going on in the courts and behind the scenes.
If you simply pay a Fixed Penalty you never see any of this.
There is no intention to build hype or tension believe me, that's not how I work.
If everyone goes into this with their eyes wide open it has a much better chance of success.
I am doing almost all of this at the moment on my own, but I'm trying to put things in place so that as ideas develop we can all contribute and handle the amount of work that has to be done.
Patience is a virtue!
Streetcop said:
I FOUGHT THE LAW
Breakin' rocks in the ... hot sun
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
I needed money, 'cause I ... had none
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
I Fought the Law and the ... law won
I fought the law and the ....... law LOST
Sean
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff