conviction based upon calibrated speedo only?

[fergus]

In the absence of any other evidence (e.g. video, laser, vascar, etc), can the use of a calibrated speedo in police car be used as the sole means of 'evidence' in a conviction for exceeding the speed limit? Does this boil down to Driver + Observer versus the plaintiff if the case goes to court?

Also, is it an arrestable offence to not produce a driving license at the roadside?

PS I haven't checked pepipoo yet!

[SS2.]

fergus said:

In the absence of any other evidence (e.g. video, laser, vascar, etc), can the use of a calibrated speedo in police car be used as the sole means of 'evidence' in a conviction for exceeding the speed limit? Does this boil down to Driver + Observer versus the plaintiff if the case goes to court? PS I haven't checked pepipoo yet!

One officer's statement and a (proven) calibrated speedo would be enough to convict. The case law was set 60 odd years ago, IIRC.

The officer forms 'prior opinion' of excess speed and this is corroborated by means of the calibrated speedometer..

[justinp1]

fergus said:

In the absence of any other evidence (e.g. video, laser, vascar, etc), can the use of a calibrated speedo in police car be used as the sole means of 'evidence' in a conviction for exceeding the speed limit? Does this boil down to Driver + Observer versus the plaintiff if the case goes to court? Also, is it an arrestable offence to not produce a driving license at the roadside? PS I haven't checked pepipoo yet!

To be honest the speedo doesnt even need to be calibrated. Further to that, the officer doesnt need to even be in a car to provide evidence that can be tendered.

It is not an arrestable offence, you have the opportunity to show it at a police station of your choice. However, if you police think you are not telling the truth about who you then you are on thin ice a bit.

This wouldnt happen to be linked with a very similar thread posted today about a guy who was pulled for speeding on his motorbike would it?

[fergus]

justinp1 said:

fergus said: In the absence of any other evidence (e.g. video, laser, vascar, etc), can the use of a calibrated speedo in police car be used as the sole means of 'evidence' in a conviction for exceeding the speed limit? Does this boil down to Driver + Observer versus the plaintiff if the case goes to court? Also, is it an arrestable offence to not produce a driving license at the roadside? PS I haven't checked pepipoo yet! To be honest the speedo doesnt even need to be calibrated. Further to that, the officer doesnt need to even be in a car to provide evidence that can be tendered. It is not an arrestable offence, you have the opportunity to show it at a police station of your choice. However, if you police think you are not telling the truth about who you then you are on thin ice a bit. This wouldnt happen to be linked with a very similar thread posted today about a guy who was pulled for speeding on his motorbike would it?

Yes - same person! Just curious. Thanks for help/advice guys!

[SS2.]

justinp1 said:

To be honest the speedo doesnt even need to be calibrated. Further to that, the officer doesnt need to even be in a car to provide evidence that can be tendered.

For admissibility of speedo evidence, verification is required that the speedo used to corroborate a single officer's prior opinion of excess speed was accurate. This can be done by post-calibrating shortly after the event, IIRC.

Whilst a single BiB does not require to be in a car to form prior opinion of excess speed, a prescribed form of corroboration will be required for his opinion to be of any evidential value..



>> Edited by SS2. on Tuesday 4th April 14:17

[turbobloke]

"Also, is it an arrestable offence to not produce a driving license at the roadside?"

No, but if you then get asked for your name and address and the BiB claims reasonsble grounds for not believing you, and you have no other proof then you can be arrested. MoPs can be arsey, BiB can be arsey, it's the same world.

[mg6b]

justinp1 said:

It is not an arrestable offence,

All or any offences whatever they are are now arrestable under the SOCAP 2006.
Even number plate offences!

You cannot have your house searched for a summary offence but anything else now has that option!

justinp1 said:

you have the opportunity to show it at a police station of your choice. However, if you police think you are not telling the truth about who you then you are on thin ice a bit.

I refer to the answer above!



>> Edited by mg6b on Tuesday 4th April 14:29

[vonhosen]

SS2. said:

justinp1 said: To be honest the speedo doesnt even need to be calibrated. Further to that, the officer doesnt need to even be in a car to provide evidence that can be tendered. For admissibility of speedo evidence, verification is required that the speedo used to corroborate a single officer's prior opinion of excess speed was accurate. This can be done by post-calibrating shortly after the event, IIRC. Whilst a single BiB does not require to be in a car to form prior opinion of excess speed, a prescribed form of corroboration will be required for his opinion to be of any evidential value..

Depends on the margin over the limit. Where the margin over the limit is not small an officer's opinion & an uncalibrated speedo is sufficient, though it is good practice even in such cases to get the speedo checked after.

You can theoretically be convicted just on the opinion of two Police officers (independently formed at the same time) without any measurement device being involved.

[xxplod]

Thanks MG6B - I was just about to mention the law changes! Might pee off the custody skipper if arrests are made for minor stuff on a regular basis!

[mg6b]

xxplod said:

Thanks MG6B - I was just about to mention the law changes! Might pee off the custody skipper if arrests are made for minor stuff on a regular basis!

Tell me about it

[dickymint]

vonhosen said:

SS2. said: justinp1 said: To be honest the speedo doesnt even need to be calibrated. Further to that, the officer doesnt need to even be in a car to provide evidence that can be tendered. For admissibility of speedo evidence, verification is required that the speedo used to corroborate a single officer's prior opinion of excess speed was accurate. This can be done by post-calibrating shortly after the event, IIRC. Whilst a single BiB does not require to be in a car to form prior opinion of excess speed, a prescribed form of corroboration will be required for his opinion to be of any evidential value.. Depends on the margin over the limit. Where the margin over the limit is not small an officer's opinion & an uncalibrated speedo is sufficient, though it is good practice even in such cases to get the speedo checked after. You can theoretically be convicted just on the opinion of two Police officers (independently formed at the same time) without any measurement device being involved.

Could you tell me how you calibrate a speedo? ie. equipment, method used?

[IaHa]

dickymint said:

Could you tell me how you calibrate a speedo? ie. equipment, method used?

Check against laser, comparing the speed recorded on laser against that shown on the uncalibrated speedo.

Or be followed by a car with a calibrated speedo or vascar for a distance to compare readings.

Case law of Nicholas v Penny 1950 allows an uncalibrated speedo to corroborate officer's prior opinion of speed, but as has been said, it should only be used when speed is well over the limit.

[turbobloke]

Thanks for the information IaHa, but purely in the spirit of PH social intercourse isn't that a tad technologically incestuous?

Say the laser was an LTI 2020 that can and has shown a wall in a Court to be travelling at speed, that's not calibration surely, as the device itself is so, erm, unreliable. The same is true for checking one speedo against another, albeit to a lesser degree, it's ripe for systematic error

Although I'm old fashioned, and some would just leave off the fashioned, what happened to timing with a stopwatch over a precise distance? I know that has limitations as well but I'd prefer it to being stuffed by a dodgy hairdryer

[mg6b]

turbobloke said:

Thanks for the information IaHa, but purely in the spirit of PH social intercourse isn't that a tad technologically incestuous? Say the laser was an LTI 2020 that can and has shown a wall in a Court to be travelling at speed, that's not calibration surely, as the device itself is so, erm, unreliable. The same is true for checking one speedo against another, albeit to a lesser degree, it's ripe for systematic error Although I'm old fashioned, and some would just leave off the fashioned, what happened to timing with a stopwatch over a precise distance? I know that has limitations as well but I'd prefer it to being stuffed by a dodgy hairdryer

Measured mile with a calibrated stopwatch. They are still used regularly to check accuracy of speedo's.

[IaHa]

turbobloke said:

Thanks for the information IaHa, but purely in the spirit of PH social intercourse isn't that a tad technologically incestuous? Say the laser was an LTI 2020 that can and has shown a wall in a Court to be travelling at speed, that's not calibration surely, as the device itself is so, erm, unreliable. The same is true for checking one speedo against another, albeit to a lesser degree, it's ripe for systematic error Although I'm old fashioned, and some would just leave off the fashioned, what happened to timing with a stopwatch over a precise distance? I know that has limitations as well but I'd prefer it to being stuffed by a dodgy hairdryer

I'll regularly check the calibrated speedo over a measured mile for my own use, but if one of the area bods has a speeder on an uncalibrated speedo at 62mph, I'll generally ask them to run through the laser at the same speed. If the laser was an LTI dodgyscope, and my 'slip training' caused me to record a speed of 68 mph, then we'd have a bit of a problem. (This has never happened btw )
In those circumstances, or if the situation dictates, I might ask the other car to do a paced run.

I wouldn't personally as a matter of course run the car through the mile. I don't think it makes the evidence any stronger.

[justinp1]

turbobloke said:

Thanks for the information IaHa, but purely in the spirit of PH social intercourse isn't that a tad technologically incestuous? Say the laser was an LTI 2020 that can and has shown a wall in a Court to be travelling at speed, that's not calibration surely, as the device itself is so, erm, unreliable. The same is true for checking one speedo against another, albeit to a lesser degree, it's ripe for systematic error Although I'm old fashioned, and some would just leave off the fashioned, what happened to timing with a stopwatch over a precise distance? I know that has limitations as well but I'd prefer it to being stuffed by a dodgy hairdryer

A good point. The irony of what you say is that up until a few years ago, the ACPO Code of Practice stated that the LTI2020 had to be tested each day by a run through by a police vehicle with a calibrated speedo.

For obvious reasons they dont do this any more, no doubt the manpower involved in such a pointless check... of course who needs to check a device which measures the speed of an object on a moving object, when you can get away with just measuring the distance of a stationary object! And thus the ACPO document was changed. The cynical ones among us will say that the SCP or police would not want a whole days results invalidated by the LTI2020 being a bit out on the 'test run'!

Back to the point though... it does all come down to good practice as it then could be possible to test a speedo with an LTI2020 then do another run and test the LTI2020 with the newly 'calibrated' speedo...

[dickymint]

In the real World any calibration should be traceable by an unbroken chain of calibrations back to a National or Internation standard. The unit under test should be calibrated by a more accurate "standard" (usually 10 times more accurate) this standard is in turn calibrated by a more accurate "standard" etc etc. What you SHOULD NOT do is calibrate a unit with a non traceable "standard" and then in turn calibrate this "standard" with the unit under test!! Are you with me? cos it confuses me sometimes What happens is you get into a loop and are constantly accruing errors every time you do it.

Furthermore the measured mile scenario is only calibrated at a single point eg 62MPH. What about the other drivers that were done that day for 30 in a 40, 40 in a 50 indeed 100 in a 70 ?? A true calibration should prove that the speedo is linear which would involve at least a 3 point calibration at say 20,60 and 100 MPH. The only accurate way to calibrate a speedo (or scamera) is out of the car in a controlled environment where repeatability is possible.
While I'm at it is the stopwatch calibrated and how? I very much doubt it.

To sum up - from what i've seen and heard these so called calibrations are a complete farce.

[mg6b]

dickymint said:

To sum up - from what i've seen and heard these so called calibrations are a complete farce.

They are accurate enough for magistrates to understand that the person standing before them has been exceeding the limit when that evidence is put before them.
Magistrates are shown the equipment and shown how it works in anger. In my area they have to attend a patrol period with RPD in the early weeks that they start to adjudicate on the bench.

[turbobloke]

mg6b said:

They are accurate enough for magistrates to understand that the person standing before them has been exceeding the limit when that evidence is put before them. Magistrates are shown the equipment and shown how it works in anger. In my area they have to attend a patrol period with RPD in the early weeks that they start to adjudicate on the bench.

That's a good policy and we can only hope it's repeated more widely. However, taking an LTI 2020 into these mags courtrooms and showing them their bench is exceeding the courtroom speed limit for furniture (zero) would also be recommended