Discussion
I have to confess that despite my court experience, I have never defended a case involving a talivan, so I'm at a disadvantage because I have one now.
No 2 son has received an NIP from the Fiscal for an apparent offence up north.
His company secretary very kindly filled in the s172 and sent it back without telling him, then when challenged about it said that all the lads in the company get so many of these things that she doesn't want to bother him with the numbers.
I said if she is good with numbers ask her if she's heard of P45!!
It's his 30th birthday this weekend; he's been driving since 17 and hasn't had as much as a parking ticket, and he's utterly raging. 6-45am in the middle of the Highlands on an utterly deserted road; pathetic.
So all you BiBs out there, I need as much info on these awful things as possible, maybe a couple of photos from your archive Street?
No 2 son has received an NIP from the Fiscal for an apparent offence up north.
His company secretary very kindly filled in the s172 and sent it back without telling him, then when challenged about it said that all the lads in the company get so many of these things that she doesn't want to bother him with the numbers.
I said if she is good with numbers ask her if she's heard of P45!!
It's his 30th birthday this weekend; he's been driving since 17 and hasn't had as much as a parking ticket, and he's utterly raging. 6-45am in the middle of the Highlands on an utterly deserted road; pathetic.
So all you BiBs out there, I need as much info on these awful things as possible, maybe a couple of photos from your archive Street?
^Slider^ said:
It was probably an LTI 20/20 camera same as BiB use if it was laser, if it was radar then i dont know. Im not sure what you want to know about these things??
Gareth
I believe that there have been cases where civilians have been operating the equipment, that would interest me, simply because there are a number of differences in the way the law operates in Scotland and I think a civilian involved in prosecution techniques would not be acceptable to a Scottish court.
Also the technical aspect of the equipment; my son says that at the locus there are definitely no delineated markings on the road, so I need to know how they corroborate the photographic evidence.
If it was a laser then there would be no road markings as speed calibration is done prior to and after each shift, all you would get on the picture is the range the shot was taken from and the detected speed. I believe they work from defracted light but the technical aspect i do not know about.
In England they are operated by civilians as well as police officers, and they will provide a statement giving the time, place and date of calibration before the shift started and the time date and place of calibration after the shift finished.
There are certain rules that need to be followed during operation, ie independant power source for the laser, mobile phones switched off and Airwave sets put into tx inhibit (transmit inhibit) if they use airwave radio equipment in scotland.
They are pretty foolproof but it is totally dependant on the operator as i believe in the states one case was thrown out and LTI20/20 lost its type aproval after it showed a court wall moving at 4mph.
I can probably find out some more info if needed but as you say the law is a tad different in scotland. And i will need to know specific questions to ask our traffic guys. Although some of the traffic on here may be able to help.
But, the system with civilian operators here is so tight that the kit is foolproof if all calibration is carried out or else they would not be allowed to use the equipment.
Is your son looking at silly speeds here?
Gareth
In England they are operated by civilians as well as police officers, and they will provide a statement giving the time, place and date of calibration before the shift started and the time date and place of calibration after the shift finished.
There are certain rules that need to be followed during operation, ie independant power source for the laser, mobile phones switched off and Airwave sets put into tx inhibit (transmit inhibit) if they use airwave radio equipment in scotland.
They are pretty foolproof but it is totally dependant on the operator as i believe in the states one case was thrown out and LTI20/20 lost its type aproval after it showed a court wall moving at 4mph.
I can probably find out some more info if needed but as you say the law is a tad different in scotland. And i will need to know specific questions to ask our traffic guys. Although some of the traffic on here may be able to help.
But, the system with civilian operators here is so tight that the kit is foolproof if all calibration is carried out or else they would not be allowed to use the equipment.
Is your son looking at silly speeds here?
Gareth
Thanks for that slider.
He is accused of doing 87 in a 70 but there is a reference on the charge to a temporary speed limit due to road works but he said there were no road works there, and he had a witness with him. It seems strange because 70 is the maximum speed limit anywhere, so I don't understand that reference.
He also claims that he saw the van from at least half a mile away at the bottom of a dip and he was only doing 65 when he passed it; he actually described the camera looking out of the van window and the Dayglo rear doors!!
He's bringing the documentation over to me on Sunday, so I'll be able to get a better idea then.
You have to understand that I have my three children fully versed in everything that's going on with enforcement nowadays, so I find it very strange indeed that any of them would deliberately speed past a talivan after sighting it from half a mile away.
He is accused of doing 87 in a 70 but there is a reference on the charge to a temporary speed limit due to road works but he said there were no road works there, and he had a witness with him. It seems strange because 70 is the maximum speed limit anywhere, so I don't understand that reference.
He also claims that he saw the van from at least half a mile away at the bottom of a dip and he was only doing 65 when he passed it; he actually described the camera looking out of the van window and the Dayglo rear doors!!
He's bringing the documentation over to me on Sunday, so I'll be able to get a better idea then.
You have to understand that I have my three children fully versed in everything that's going on with enforcement nowadays, so I find it very strange indeed that any of them would deliberately speed past a talivan after sighting it from half a mile away.
Are you under the impression "roadworks" involved because the offence on the paperwork is shown as being contrary to:
The 70mph, 60mph and 50 mph (Temporary Speed Limit) Order, 1978 and which was continued indefinitely in 1978. This being the usual charge.
I note also you mention that a civilian cannot form an impression for speed (as part of the corroboration required by law). I have seen others mention this but as yet have been unable to come up with High Court judgement, if there is one. Any comment black rats?
DVD
The 70mph, 60mph and 50 mph (Temporary Speed Limit) Order, 1978 and which was continued indefinitely in 1978. This being the usual charge.
I note also you mention that a civilian cannot form an impression for speed (as part of the corroboration required by law). I have seen others mention this but as yet have been unable to come up with High Court judgement, if there is one. Any comment black rats?
DVD
Check out www.pepipoo.com - it's got a thread on civilian operators in the judicial process part of the forum 
Streetcop said:
hiya James,
Your poor boy....wish him all the best for his birthday from me anyway...
As for talivan..if it is indeed the LTI it's extremely accurate and precise and the video recordings are usually spot on..
I'm at a loss to think how you can dispute it, unfortunately...
Street
The LTi20/20 accurate???? Are you having a laugh? The LTi20/20 is singularly the worst piece of speed detection device used today. IOLAIRE, your son has many options open to him right now. DO NOT let your son send in the NIP just now until he has fully considered his options.
Streetcop; if you want I can send you a 4 hour DVD of a Welsh policeman using the LTi20/20. Your impression of that particular piece of equipment may change somewhat when you view the farcical images it contains. Example - the crosshairs on the screen pointing directly at a car coming towards the screen : the speed reading showing -044mph (which means it was travelling AWAY from the screen at that speed. Accurate???? Absolutely not.
DeMolay said:
hiya James,
Your poor boy....wish him all the best for his birthday from me anyway...
As for talivan..if it is indeed the LTI it's extremely accurate and precise and the video recordings are usually spot on..
I'm at a loss to think how you can dispute it, unfortunately...
Street
The LTi20/20 accurate???? Are you having a laugh? The LTi20/20 is singularly the worst piece of speed detection device used today. IOLAIRE, your son has many options open to him right now. DO NOT let your son send in the NIP just now until he has fully considered his options.
Streetcop; if you want I can send you a 4 hour DVD of a Welsh policeman using the LTi20/20. Your impression of that particular piece of equipment may change somewhat when you view the farcical images it contains. Example - the crosshairs on the screen pointing directly at a car coming towards the screen : the speed reading showing -044mph (which means it was travelling AWAY from the screen at that speed. Accurate???? Absolutely not.
Hi DeMolay,
just off to bed when I caught this.
I'm afraid it's too late, as I said in the post, his dopey secretary sent it off without even telling him!!
But having said that he didn't sign it, she did, without his knowledge and permission so there might be some mileage in that.
When I defend these cases I always tend to go down the technical route anyway, due to the fact that there always seems to be faults somewhere along the line that can be picked up on.
Everyone seems to forget, including the magistrates, that the onus of proof is always on the Crown, all the defence need do for an acquittal is show reasonable doubt.
I'd like a copy of that video though, if you can tell me where to get it.
There's also an ongoing situation with regard to "disclosure" of the video evidence.
You probably know that it is a defendant's right to see full copies of the prosecution evidence 7 days before any court hearing.
In the case of videos from talivans they are usually (almost always?) failing to disclose the evidence. This leads to the video being inadmissible because it wasn't disclosed. No video means no evidence of any offence. Case dismissed.
See www.pepipoo.com for details.
You probably know that it is a defendant's right to see full copies of the prosecution evidence 7 days before any court hearing.
In the case of videos from talivans they are usually (almost always?) failing to disclose the evidence. This leads to the video being inadmissible because it wasn't disclosed. No video means no evidence of any offence. Case dismissed.
See www.pepipoo.com for details.
An LTI 20-20 is not an accurate piece of equipment, as previously noted.
Calibration wise the APCO guidelines are seriously flawed as well. Most SCPs calibrate it against a stationary target. This achieves nothing in the calibration stakes. Since the unit operates based on a time function then until the calibration checks this time function the unit is NOT calibrated. In some countries the LTI is outlawed for speed detection purposes because it is so inaccurate, it should only be used as a distance measurement device.
A proper calibration would include measurement of a vehicle travelling at a known speed, repeated several times at different speeds, for example 20, 40, 60 and 80 mph.
IOLAIRE, in your son's case he has probably not yet received a NIP? Is the process the same in Scotland, where the registered keeper gets the original, the keeper fills in the driver details (in this case the CoSec has nominated your son) and then the driver gets a NIP? IF so you still have time to formulate a defence, CEN recommends a reference to the ECJ case Weh v. Austria, in this case the judges stated that it was not permitted to force (by threats of penalisation) a confession in a criminal case. This would apply, but has yet to be directly tested. Your son may well be advised to return his NIP uncompleted stating this reason (by reference to the case indicated). With luck the problem should go away, I suggest you contact cen via his profile for more details.
Calibration wise the APCO guidelines are seriously flawed as well. Most SCPs calibrate it against a stationary target. This achieves nothing in the calibration stakes. Since the unit operates based on a time function then until the calibration checks this time function the unit is NOT calibrated. In some countries the LTI is outlawed for speed detection purposes because it is so inaccurate, it should only be used as a distance measurement device.
A proper calibration would include measurement of a vehicle travelling at a known speed, repeated several times at different speeds, for example 20, 40, 60 and 80 mph.
IOLAIRE, in your son's case he has probably not yet received a NIP? Is the process the same in Scotland, where the registered keeper gets the original, the keeper fills in the driver details (in this case the CoSec has nominated your son) and then the driver gets a NIP? IF so you still have time to formulate a defence, CEN recommends a reference to the ECJ case Weh v. Austria, in this case the judges stated that it was not permitted to force (by threats of penalisation) a confession in a criminal case. This would apply, but has yet to be directly tested. Your son may well be advised to return his NIP uncompleted stating this reason (by reference to the case indicated). With luck the problem should go away, I suggest you contact cen via his profile for more details.
IOLAIRE said:
Hi DeMolay,
just off to bed when I caught this.
I'm afraid it's too late, as I said in the post, his dopey secretary sent it off without even telling him!!
But having said that he didn't sign it, she did, without his knowledge and permission so there might be some mileage in that.
When I defend these cases I always tend to go down the technical route anyway, due to the fact that there always seems to be faults somewhere along the line that can be picked up on.
Everyone seems to forget, including the magistrates, that the onus of proof is always on the Crown, all the defence need do for an acquittal is show reasonable doubt.
I'd like a copy of that video though, if you can tell me where to get it.
When you say the 'dopey secretary sent it off', do you mean the company received an NIP for the vehicle which your son uses? In which case, he will receive his in due course and you can then consider your options.
If you mean the secretary has signed YOUR SONS NIP, then she is not permitted to do so. The only person who can fill in an NIP that is addressed to a specific person is THE SPECIFIC PERSON.
Can you clarify which it is please as it is important.
DeMolay said:
Hi DeMolay,
just off to bed when I caught this.
I'm afraid it's too late, as I said in the post, his dopey secretary sent it off without even telling him!!
But having said that he didn't sign it, she did, without his knowledge and permission so there might be some mileage in that.
When I defend these cases I always tend to go down the technical route anyway, due to the fact that there always seems to be faults somewhere along the line that can be picked up on.
Everyone seems to forget, including the magistrates, that the onus of proof is always on the Crown, all the defence need do for an acquittal is show reasonable doubt.
I'd like a copy of that video though, if you can tell me where to get it.
When you say the 'dopey secretary sent it off', do you mean the company received an NIP for the vehicle which your son uses? In which case, he will receive his in due course and you can then consider your options.
If you mean the secretary has signed YOUR SONS NIP, then she is not permitted to do so. The only person who can fill in an NIP that is addressed to a specific person is THE SPECIFIC PERSON.
Can you clarify which it is please as it is important.
Sorry, I'm really busy today, just trying to catch up.
I'm getting the documentation from my son tonight so I can find out exactly what the situation is logistically.
I am fairly sure that the Scottish procedure at the start is very similar; I'm also sure that no individual has the right to act on your behalf without your prior knowledge and permission, so if the secretary did just that it could raise an interesting set of questions.
I'll post back later tonight and let you know what I have.
safespeed said:
There's also an ongoing situation with regard to "disclosure" of the video evidence.
You probably know that it is a defendant's right to see full copies of the prosecution evidence 7 days before any court hearing.
In the case of videos from talivans they are usually (almost always?) failing to disclose the evidence. This leads to the video being inadmissible because it wasn't disclosed. No video means no evidence of any offence. Case dismissed.
See www.pepipoo.com for details.
Interesting. Does this work for photographs too?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff