Got pulled by fuzz
Discussion
Got the blues-and-twos after doing an apparent 92mph on empty three lane motorway over a mile. They were using VASCAR 5000 and car had no cameras. Two plod in vehicle.
Any strong defenses, or do I believe them and suffer the consequences? Non-UK license, so no FPN but copper says that he will state in notes for court that he did intend to issue FPN (which presumably would work in my favour?).
If he were to issue me an FPN, would it be a standard 3 point + £60 job? Just trying to gauge the typical comeback for a 92mph speeding offense on the motorway.
Thanks for any advice.
D
Edited to say: Just wanted to add that the copper-in-charge was a very nice chap and he explained things well. He was very reasonable, we even had a couple of laughs and I walked back to my car satisfied that he was doing his job well.
>>> Edited by -DeaDLocK- on Tuesday 18th January 21:24
Any strong defenses, or do I believe them and suffer the consequences? Non-UK license, so no FPN but copper says that he will state in notes for court that he did intend to issue FPN (which presumably would work in my favour?).
If he were to issue me an FPN, would it be a standard 3 point + £60 job? Just trying to gauge the typical comeback for a 92mph speeding offense on the motorway.
Thanks for any advice.
D
Edited to say: Just wanted to add that the copper-in-charge was a very nice chap and he explained things well. He was very reasonable, we even had a couple of laughs and I walked back to my car satisfied that he was doing his job well.
>>> Edited by -DeaDLocK- on Tuesday 18th January 21:24
Under 96 mph then THE POLICE OFFICER had the discretion to issue you with a FPN but because you do not hold an UK Licence he couldn't (as yet) so has to refer the matter to Court. The fact he is going to mention he would have issued FPN should go some way to have the Mags deal with the case in a similar manner to a FPN i.e. 60 notes and 3 points on a skelton record at DVLA that will be created in your case.
Defence to the VASCAR - where you been boy, heaps by IOLAIRE on this very site.
DVD
Defence to the VASCAR - where you been boy, heaps by IOLAIRE on this very site.
DVD
-DeaDLocK- said:
Got the blues-and-twos after doing an apparent 92mph on empty three lane motorway over a mile. They were using VASCAR 5000 and car had no cameras. Two plod in vehicle.
Any strong defenses, or do I believe them and suffer the consequences? Non-UK license, so no FPN but copper says that he will state in notes for court that he did intend to issue FPN (which presumably would work in my favour?).
How about some honesty then?
Were you speeding or not?
Maybe you should be thinking mitigation rather than defence!
gone said:Errr... maybe I was
How about some honesty then?
Were you speeding or not?
Maybe you should be thinking mitigation rather than defence!
, but I am not sure and I question the accuracy of the device used to record my speed. It's a fairly minor offense and standard of my driving was fine given the circumstances and the conditions (officer had no complaints about the driving - just the speed), and if I just admit guilt (is it legal to admit guilt when one is unsure?) then it should all be wrapped up fairly quickly and from experience of others in my situation I can expect to be £60 out of pocket.
But on the other hand...
D
-DeaDLocK- said:
How about some honesty then?
Were you speeding or not?
Maybe you should be thinking mitigation rather than defence!
Errr... maybe I was
It's a fairly minor offense and standard of my driving was fine given the circumstances and the conditions (officer had no complaints about the driving - just the speed), and if I just admit guilt (is it legal to admit guilt when one is unsure?) then it should all be wrapped up fairly quickly and from experience of others in my situation I can expect to be £60 out of pocket.
But on the other hand...
D
In that case, you must plead not guilty. You need to research the user guidelines for VASCAR and request the training records of the officer who operated the device.
I wish you the best of luck. You may be disappointed with the result if you go to court and do this to find the court believe the officers and not you!
Still. Worth a shot if you like a gamble!
.gone said:
Got the blues-and-twos after doing an apparent 92mph on empty three lane motorway over a mile. They were using VASCAR 5000 and car had no cameras. Two plod in vehicle.
Any strong defenses, or do I believe them and suffer the consequences? Non-UK license, so no FPN but copper says that he will state in notes for court that he did intend to issue FPN (which presumably would work in my favour?).
How about some honesty then?
Were you speeding or not?
Maybe you should be thinking mitigation rather than defence!
Gone, I know you were '
' but when is speeding not speeding? Have you ever let a motorist on a clear dry motorway doing '85' go? If so they were speeding, breaking the law and went unpunished. Here it was 7 mph faster, there was no victim, no harm was done..... Have you ever been to a disturbance in a pub where the majority of the people there were using threating behaviour, or in your judgement, likey to have already commited an assault, yet you arrest only a couple of people (probably for their own safety against the amount of alcohol they have consumed)?
My point is that the rationale behind the laws against 'speeding' in this country are drastically out of date and in need of a major, comprehensive review.
PS How come it is against the law to do '92' however it doesn't seem to be when a traffic car isn't on 'blues and twos' but heading towards the M25 on the M4 in reasonably heavy traffic at speeds of 100 - 110?
Sorry to be sort of 'off topic', but an interesting question on the subject of '92' perhaps?
Sounds painful Rudi!Shame the police were there at all!? Obviously an empty three lane road is a huge accident blackspot - NOT!
What the hell are the trafpol doing wasting tax payers (i.e. my) money in this way, surely they can find something better to do with their time?
Empty three lane roads - doh, no wonder car crime and poor driving is so popular, the rozzers are busy checking blank stretches of tarmac for safe drivers!!!!
What the hell are the trafpol doing wasting tax payers (i.e. my) money in this way, surely they can find something better to do with their time?
Empty three lane roads - doh, no wonder car crime and poor driving is so popular, the rozzers are busy checking blank stretches of tarmac for safe drivers!!!!
Hehe... let's not turn this into another policy-bashing thread shall we?
Fact is even though the conditions were fine, a couple of reasonable police officers chose to issue me with a ticket because they were acting (I'm assuming) out of policy. These same BiB are the sort to also pull over genuine trouble-makers - I'm just collateral damage I guess. Just to give you an idea: when the blues came on I was cruising in lane one!
I'm not all that bothered about it really - just wondering what my options are. I'm just happy that it was a policeman and not a scamera.
D
Fact is even though the conditions were fine, a couple of reasonable police officers chose to issue me with a ticket because they were acting (I'm assuming) out of policy. These same BiB are the sort to also pull over genuine trouble-makers - I'm just collateral damage I guess. Just to give you an idea: when the blues came on I was cruising in lane one!
I'm not all that bothered about it really - just wondering what my options are. I'm just happy that it was a policeman and not a scamera.
D
Globulators said:
Shame the police were there at all!? Obviously an empty three lane road is a huge accident blackspot - NOT!
What the hell are the trafpol doing wasting tax payers (i.e. my) money in this way, surely they can find something better to do with their time?
Empty three lane roads - doh, no wonder car crime and poor driving is so popular, the rozzers are busy checking blank stretches of tarmac for safe drivers!!!!
It obviously wasnt empty
? If you dont see a marked police car then you're observation could be validly questioned?
echo said:He followed me from quite some way back (i.e. wasn't a stationary vehicle by the side of the road). As I accelerated he clearly turned the machine on when I was clearly in the red and kept it on, still behind me, until I naturally slowed down which is when he turned it off. So craftily my "average speed" he recorded was a lot higher than the type of speeds I was typically doing on that stretch.
If you dont see a marked police car then you're observation could be validly questioned?
And at night, there's no way I could've known that the pair of headlights in the distance behind me was a marked car!
D
nords said:
-DeaDLocK- said:
Got the blues-and-twos after doing an apparent 92mph on empty three lane motorway over a mile. They were using VASCAR 5000 and car had no cameras. Two plod in vehicle.
Any strong defenses, or do I believe them and suffer the consequences? Non-UK license, so no FPN but copper says that he will state in notes for court that he did intend to issue FPN (which presumably would work in my favour?).
How about some honesty then?
Were you speeding or not?
Maybe you should be thinking mitigation rather than defence!
Gone, I know you were '
Have you ever been to a disturbance in a pub where the majority of the people there were using threating behaviour, or in your judgement, likey to have already commited an assault, yet you arrest only a couple of people (probably for their own safety against the amount of alcohol they have consumed)?
My point is that the rationale behind the laws against 'speeding' in this country are drastically out of date and in need of a major, comprehensive review.
PS How come it is against the law to do '92' however it doesn't seem to be when a traffic car isn't on 'blues and twos' but heading towards the M25 on the M4 in reasonably heavy traffic at speeds of 100 - 110?
Sorry to be sort of 'off topic', but an interesting question on the subject of '92' perhaps?
I recently got a tug at 90-something and got away with a talking to...
www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?f=10&h=&t=139779
-DeaDLocK- said:
...So craftily my "average speed" he recorded was a lot higher than the type of speeds I was typically doing on that stretch.
but a lot lower than your highest speed?
I guess you are the only one that knows the truth - and it may well have been '92mph on empty three lane motorway' but it sounds from what you say in the following posts more like about a ton on a clear-ish road in the dark with a car following you
echo said:
...So craftily my "average speed" he recorded was a lot higher than the type of speeds I was typically doing on that stretch.
but a lot lower than your highest speed?
I guess you are the only one that knows the truth - and it may well have been '92mph on empty three lane motorway' but it sounds from what you say in the following posts more like about a ton on a clear-ish road in the dark with a car following you
Thats very good Echo! Bravo!!!
nords said:
PS How come it is against the law to do '92' however it doesn't seem to be when a traffic car isn't on 'blues and twos' but heading towards the M25 on the M4 in reasonably heavy traffic at speeds of 100 - 110?
Sorry to be sort of 'off topic', but an interesting question on the subject of '92' perhaps?
Firstly. It is against the law for 'public' motorists to exceed the limit posted on a tin plate or the national limit on certain roads unless of certain circumstances. That is that the vehicle is being used as an ambulance to convey injured people to hospital. It will also include taking a woman in labour to hospital or to a place where the baby can be delivered with medical help. There are no other circumstances where the exceeding of the limit is lawful for a civilian.
Police are allowed to exceed the limits for 'Policing purposes'. That is what the act states. That includes driver training and general policing issues. If it is necessary for a Police officer to exceed the limit to achieve a policing purpose, that is acceptable in law. If the officer is speeding without a policing objective, then he will commit the offence and may be dealt with.
If Police officers drive through a camera site in either a marked or unmarked vehicle and are captured, they are sent an NIP and an exemption notice. If they were genuinely using the vehicle at the time for a policing purpose or objective and can prove it, they will be exempt from the penalty. If they cannot then they are prosecuted just the same as anyone else.
Driving a marked or unmarked police vehicle without blue lights in excess of the limit does not mean that the vehicle is being used for a purpose unconnected with police business. Sometimes it is better to make progress without warning equipment working because it is safer as people so not react badly to the vehicle. The vehicle has usually gone past before they realise and is then not subjected to pannick braking or sudden movements to get out of the way.
At times it is advantageous to attend an incident without warning equipment going, especially if there are suspects on the scene of the incident that need apprehending!
I am afraid that the law covers the use of driving fast when in Police vehicles on duty. We can do it with virtual impunity as long as we have a valid reason to do so should we come unstuck through either collision, enforcement or complaint.
Unmarked surveilance vehicles have to drive extremely fast to play catch up on a live job. This is not strictly an emergency but a necessity to get the job done. It is therefore allowed. Driving a police vehicle fast does not exempt you from the law if you crash!
Following a speeder is not done with blue lights or sirens and can be done for several miles. This is not an emergencey but is covered by the act in relation to 'policing purposes'. Driving fast from the chip shop because the teams meals are getting cold is not a policing objective
!echo said:
out a lot lower than your highest speed?
I guess you are the only one that knows the truth - and it may well have been '92mph on empty three lane motorway' but it sounds from what you say in the following posts more like about a ton on a clear-ish road in the dark with a car following you
Hehehe... possibly, possibly not.
But regardless of what I did or didn't do, I guarantee that in the conditions the alleged excess speed, if committed, wasn't dangerous. Any speeding I may have done was only during a relatively short burst of a long stretch, but I had the misfortune of a police officer on my tail. And anyway I was just cruising, and I did not slow down because I "caught on" to a copper on my tail - when the blue lights went I was shocked! So the 92mph, if accurate, is indicative of the average speed I actually was doing at the time (whilst cruising, not blasting), which IMO isn't a big deal (but which I admit is illegal, in the same way an average speed of 71mph would have been).
It's a minor offense so I'm not too fussed - it's just the ballache of having been given a producer and having to go to court (which I expect will be sometime 4-6 months from now).
D
>> Edited by -DeaDLocK- on Wednesday 19th January 19:10
gone said:
PS How come it is against the law to do '92' however it doesn't seem to be when a traffic car isn't on 'blues and twos' but heading towards the M25 on the M4 in reasonably heavy traffic at speeds of 100 - 110?
Sorry to be sort of 'off topic', but an interesting question on the subject of '92' perhaps?
Driving a marked or unmarked police vehicle without blue lights in excess of the limit does not mean that the vehicle is being used for a purpose unconnected with police business. Sometimes it is better to make progress without warning equipment working because it is safer as people so not react badly to the vehicle. The vehicle has usually gone past before they realise and is then not subjected to pannick braking or sudden movements to get out of the way.
I didn't get where I am today by indulging in pannick braking - or even panic braking for that matter. (/CJ mode) 
Sorry 'gone' that was actually a lovely piece wot you just rit, and barring a bit of nit picking I've no doubt it's a fair summary of the situation.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff