Surrey police mobile units

[observer]

I've picked up a NIP for 68 mph (13 October) on the A308 Staines bypass approaching the Ashford roundabout. It was a mobile unit with the operator sitting inside and zapping through a hole in the rear door.

Can anybody here (BiB or otherwise) tell me:

1. type of speed measurement equipment used
2. whether the operator was police or civilian

Thanks.

[steff]

Why dont you write a letter to the people who issued the NIP and ask them?

[Streetcop]

steff said:

Why dont you write a letter to the people who issued the NIP and ask them?

In my force, you will find out if you go to court...

It doesn't really matter what type of equipment really, LTI, Leica whatever..

As for police or civilian personnel "Constable or other person authorised by Chief Constable" is all that is required to operate the machine...

[telecat]

Because Street, when challenged the DPP will not procede without the evidence being provided by a Police Officer. Civilian operators are not able to give evidence in court because they are not able to give an opinion on the speed of a vehicle before they zap them.

[Streetcop]

telecat said:

Because Street, when challenged the DPP will not procede without the evidence being provided by a Police Officer. Civilian operators are not able to give evidence in court because they are not able to give an opinion on the speed of a vehicle before they zap them.

In my force they are all coppers in the vans....

The opinion of speed thing is something I'm going to get clarified in the next 24 hours..and will report back..

[Dibble]

telecat said:

...when challenged the DPP will not procede without the evidence being provided by a Police Officer.

Have you any more info on this, or the case of Dpp v WHELTON at Bristol Crown Court (I think) from April of this year. I've Googled, but can't find a judgement. I'm told this was a successful challenge against the use of civilian camera technicians.

telecat said:

Civilian operators are not able to give evidence in court because they are not able to give an opinion on the speed of a vehicle before they zap them.

Can I run this hypothetical situation past you?

What if a civilian camera operator is 48 years old, has been driving since he wa 17, and has done IAM, RoSPA, track racing, rallying, etc etc, is an ex-police officer, with 28+ years experience as a traffic officer, including a whole raft of qualifications, such as training others on the correct use of speed detection/enforcement equipment.

The other operator is a PC aged 20. He has only held a driving licence since he was 18 1/2, and only has two years service, is just out of his probation, and is now on traffic.

Why is the PC more able to form a prior opinion of excess speed than the civilian?

[bluepolarbear]

Dibble said:

Why is the PC more able to form a prior opinion of excess speed than the civilian?

Is the 20yr old - Why? - Because that is what the law says. Just the same as why 69 in the fog on the motorway is safe as houses as in 29 pass the school at chucking at time. The law can not be wrong.

[edc]

bluepolarbear said:

Dibble said: Why is the PC more able to form a prior opinion of excess speed than the civilian? Is the 20yr old - Why? - Because that is what the law says. Just the same as why 69 in the fog on the motorway is safe as houses as in 29 pass the school at chucking at time. The law can not be wrong.

That's a bit misleading. The law does not say that a 20yr old PC is able to form a prior opinion of excess speed than the civilian described above. It just lays down the rules for evidence.

Similarly the law does not say it is safe to do 69 in fog on M-way but rather allows a permissible max speed of 70 (or 60) and then adds/stipulates certain riders and restrictions to take into account conditions.

[Dibble]

bluepolarbear said:

Dibble said: Why is the PC more able to form a prior opinion of excess speed than the civilian? Is the 20yr old - Why? - Because that is what the law says. Just the same as why 69 in the fog on the motorway is safe as houses as in 29 pass the school at chucking at time. The law can not be wrong.

No it's not the 20 year old. S89 RTRA 1988 states it's a constable or any person authorised by the Chief Officer (paraphrased from memory).

[gopher]

It is not a point of experience is a point of posistion. A Police Constable has the upholding of the law as their main priority, when they operate the gun they do so only to catch law breakers, and they have an obligation to do so fairly.

A civilian may have other priorities, upholding the law may not be of interest to them, imagine if they got "Performance" bonuses like the council traffic wardens? (not saying they do as yet)

My 2p

Cheers

Paul