cost of principals
Discussion
frustrated at not being allowed to tell the truth
My partner rec'd a speeding ticket about a year ago for riding his motorbike at 40mph in a 30mph area by claim of a roadside unit.
I was riding pillion at the time of the alleged offence.we had just left the Nottingham City hospital and travelled about 150 yards towards a left turn towards our home.My partner is not guilty of this offence.He has no points on his license.He is extremely conscientious in his riding.He has no specific argument with the speeding regulations or use of cameras..indeed he welcomes them.
Nonetheless as he believes in his innocence he pleaded not guilty by post and got a court date.Subsequently we attended the court together and were informed that he could enter a plea of guilty and be dealt with immediately..(and possibly would find this to be the cheaper option ) or he could plead -not guilty- and be heard at trial later .The magistrates would not accept a plea of not guilty without my partner agreeing that his defence will be to contest the accuracy of the equipment used.so the case was deferred to February.He feels left with no choice but to plead guilty to something he didn't do since he does not have the ability to prove that the equipment was faulty. also if found guilty from a not guilty plea the costs will be very high ! So to plead guilty.. is this the only option even when it is not correct..just to try to keep the costs and fine as little as possible because of financial hardship ?
This is bad news and I'm not really going to make it better I'm afraid. Unfortunately you may be correct that he has to take the pain of the ticket if you can't afford the costs of losing. It's a horrible situation to be in and I feel for you both. However, unless it will cause him to lose his license then it is probably the best option.
The BiB on here maybe able to help with what exactly to ask for but you need all of the evidence on the calibration status of the equipment used. When it was calibrated before the incident, when it was calibrated after the incident and if any adjustment needed to be made at the second calibration.
Have you seen the picture? Does it show 2 people on the bike? If so do they match you and your partner? Is it your bike?
Unfortunately in these cases if the picture is of you and your vehicle then you do have to prove the equipment was faulty. This is very difficult as it is more likely the bike speedo that is inaccurate giving you a false sense of security. Sorry this doesn't really help.
The BiB on here maybe able to help with what exactly to ask for but you need all of the evidence on the calibration status of the equipment used. When it was calibrated before the incident, when it was calibrated after the incident and if any adjustment needed to be made at the second calibration.
Have you seen the picture? Does it show 2 people on the bike? If so do they match you and your partner? Is it your bike?
Unfortunately in these cases if the picture is of you and your vehicle then you do have to prove the equipment was faulty. This is very difficult as it is more likely the bike speedo that is inaccurate giving you a false sense of security. Sorry this doesn't really help.
WARNING - LONG REPLY - BUT WELL WORTH THE READ!
I'm going through a very similar situation and totally sympathise.I am contesting the speed at which I was measured at as it was totally over the top and I have never driven at anywhere near that speed at the specified location. I even went back to the location, starting from the same set of lights and could not get upto anywhere near the speed I am accused of. My engine had also had some work carried out just prior to that and as a result I was taking this very easy.
Unfortunately the motorist will never win the argument no matter what.
I have spent somewhere in the region of £1500
in legal fees to-date in order to raise doubt over the equipment and it's use with the type of car I had (yes I sold it because of this!) and the speed trap location.
This has led to bull and even more bull from the cops and even an "amended" witness statement from the only officer at the scene (yes that's right folks - 1 copper, 1 laser gun, no photographs, no video footage, nothing, and he was parked illegally!). This amended statement, by the way, is acceptable in the eyes of law, and allowed the copper to admit he callibrated the device after I left by completing a drive-thru with another copper. Yet at the time, when I asked him, he told me that he had not yet calibrated the device but would do so later, he then included in his statement that he carried out the drive-thru calibration at a time when I was actually still standing talking to him!!!
Sorry for the long Rant but I think it might give you some insight and save you some money!
To further enhance this the revised witness statement went on to say that I boasted about the performance of my vehicle to the extent that I said it was as fast as a formula 1 car.
Point 1 - Why would I do say such a thing after being pulled over by a police officers.
Point 2 - The bit about a formula 1 car is technically incorrect and anybody that knows me knows that I would not bullshit like that.
I have even spent money on an expert witness company to come and have a look at all the evidence - in their opinion this situtation is not a winning one for me on the grounds, and I quote, "the magistrates are totally in bed with the CPS and police with regards to these matters and unless you are a millionaire you will have to take it up the a**e!"
Some counties, not all, are totall lying b*****ds and will do anything to get the conviction.
For your information it may be possible to obtain Legal Aid if you have financial problems - you need to ask for this on Appeal at the Magistrates (I think). In fact my lawyer has commented to say that he can't wait for this to happen cause they CPS will crap themselves if someone gets sanctioned for Legal Aid.
Somebody will eventually topple this one believe me.
IT'S A TOTALL OUTRAGE THAT 1 COPPER WITH NO OTHER EVIDENCE APART FROM HIS WORD AGAINST MINE CAN GET A CONVICTION.
I understand that the courts are under a lot of pressure and so are the police force. I also have a lot of respect for police officers as I have a number of friends whom are in the force.
BUT what I can't stomach is this type of justice.
WE ARE INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY - UNLESS YOU HAVE LOTS OF MONEY - OR UNLESS YOU HAVE BEEN DONE FOR SPEEDING.
Best of luck and no doubt I will post up my results when mine eventually gets to trial. Nearly some two years later!
I'm going through a very similar situation and totally sympathise.I am contesting the speed at which I was measured at as it was totally over the top and I have never driven at anywhere near that speed at the specified location. I even went back to the location, starting from the same set of lights and could not get upto anywhere near the speed I am accused of. My engine had also had some work carried out just prior to that and as a result I was taking this very easy.
Unfortunately the motorist will never win the argument no matter what.
I have spent somewhere in the region of £1500
in legal fees to-date in order to raise doubt over the equipment and it's use with the type of car I had (yes I sold it because of this!) and the speed trap location. This has led to bull and even more bull from the cops and even an "amended" witness statement from the only officer at the scene (yes that's right folks - 1 copper, 1 laser gun, no photographs, no video footage, nothing, and he was parked illegally!). This amended statement, by the way, is acceptable in the eyes of law, and allowed the copper to admit he callibrated the device after I left by completing a drive-thru with another copper. Yet at the time, when I asked him, he told me that he had not yet calibrated the device but would do so later, he then included in his statement that he carried out the drive-thru calibration at a time when I was actually still standing talking to him!!!
Sorry for the long Rant but I think it might give you some insight and save you some money!
To further enhance this the revised witness statement went on to say that I boasted about the performance of my vehicle to the extent that I said it was as fast as a formula 1 car.
Point 1 - Why would I do say such a thing after being pulled over by a police officers.
Point 2 - The bit about a formula 1 car is technically incorrect and anybody that knows me knows that I would not bullshit like that.
I have even spent money on an expert witness company to come and have a look at all the evidence - in their opinion this situtation is not a winning one for me on the grounds, and I quote, "the magistrates are totally in bed with the CPS and police with regards to these matters and unless you are a millionaire you will have to take it up the a**e!"
Some counties, not all, are totall lying b*****ds and will do anything to get the conviction.
For your information it may be possible to obtain Legal Aid if you have financial problems - you need to ask for this on Appeal at the Magistrates (I think). In fact my lawyer has commented to say that he can't wait for this to happen cause they CPS will crap themselves if someone gets sanctioned for Legal Aid.
Somebody will eventually topple this one believe me.
IT'S A TOTALL OUTRAGE THAT 1 COPPER WITH NO OTHER EVIDENCE APART FROM HIS WORD AGAINST MINE CAN GET A CONVICTION.
I understand that the courts are under a lot of pressure and so are the police force. I also have a lot of respect for police officers as I have a number of friends whom are in the force.
BUT what I can't stomach is this type of justice.
WE ARE INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY - UNLESS YOU HAVE LOTS OF MONEY - OR UNLESS YOU HAVE BEEN DONE FOR SPEEDING.
Best of luck and no doubt I will post up my results when mine eventually gets to trial. Nearly some two years later!
Been there myself, and been put in exactly the same position after officers manning a Golden River (lines in the road check) insisted in their two line entry in a single pocket book, that I must have been speeding because of the sound of the engine (TVR V8S at the time). Convicted despite having proof that there were roadworks nearby with temp traffic signals, that they contravened ACPO guidelines in relation to being 'invisible' and being within a certain distance of a speed limit change to NSL (less than 50m in this case.
I sympathise and know of lots of other serving officers who have suffered the same fate... just goes to prove some of us aren't in cahoots with courts and Traffic Police eh!
I sympathise and know of lots of other serving officers who have suffered the same fate... just goes to prove some of us aren't in cahoots with courts and Traffic Police eh!
This is outrageous. "You sounded like you where speeding" not even a "he looked like he was speeding" never mind an actual radar speed reading.
**999** said:officers manning a Golden River (lines in the road check) insisted in their two line entry in a single pocket book, that I must have been speeding because of the sound of the engine (TVR V8S at the time).
This is why speeding offences should be treated like all others and have specific proof (especially when it's so easy with radar/laser) to convict. It should not be possible to convict just on a perception. Especially if one serving (but off duty) officer's word is not as good as a serving officer's who is on duty. The CPS would never take a case to court if it was "He looked like he was going to break into that house" so why should they do it on a "he looked/sounded like he was speeding".
Is it any wonder people are losing all respect for the Police force as a whole. I know there are alot of good officers out there but it just takes a few in each force doing this to really destroy the reputation of that force.
>> Edited by icamm on Thursday 9th January 18:34
Cherrybuns.
Some questions.
Were you stopped at the time by the Police?
Did you recieve a section 172 (name the driver form attached to an NIP)?
Have you requested copies of all the evidence from the prosecution (statements, photographs etc)?
Do you remember the actual incident?
You need to look at the whole of the case against you and not just the part about the technical acuracy of the equipment.
In my view the Magistrates have absolutely no powers to tell you on what grounds you may wish to contest a case against you. This would be a gross abuse of their power and certainly against your human rights under ECHR. In fact it would even go against the Habeous Corpus of Magna Carta times!
If the case is in February there is still time to do something about it. I would suggest a consultation with a Solicitor that specialises in Road Traffic Offences. I believe the first consultation is free.
Some questions.
Were you stopped at the time by the Police?
Did you recieve a section 172 (name the driver form attached to an NIP)?
Have you requested copies of all the evidence from the prosecution (statements, photographs etc)?
Do you remember the actual incident?
You need to look at the whole of the case against you and not just the part about the technical acuracy of the equipment.
In my view the Magistrates have absolutely no powers to tell you on what grounds you may wish to contest a case against you. This would be a gross abuse of their power and certainly against your human rights under ECHR. In fact it would even go against the Habeous Corpus of Magna Carta times!
If the case is in February there is still time to do something about it. I would suggest a consultation with a Solicitor that specialises in Road Traffic Offences. I believe the first consultation is free.
I dunnow, if your that certain that it is unjust, then you have no option BUT to fight it.
Take the points, and then you are "marked". Only a matter of time until the next lot, then your insurance goes up. and up.. and stays up for 5 years.
Perhaps catching a few gun carrying 'gangsta' types would be a better way of preventing death & injury..?
Best of luck.
C
Take the points, and then you are "marked". Only a matter of time until the next lot, then your insurance goes up. and up.. and stays up for 5 years.
Perhaps catching a few gun carrying 'gangsta' types would be a better way of preventing death & injury..?
Best of luck.
C
Ere Madcop, I think I already suggested that :-).
Seriously though, good points as always. Would they have a chance of getting the case thrown out just on he basis of what they were told to use fo their defence? Or, at the least, would it help? If so then getting a copy of the court proceedings where it has this statement in black and white would be a good start.
CB listen to Madcop. Definately speak to a lawyer and get all these details sorted so you can find out what sort of case you have. At the very least it will give you a better idea (than us non-lawyers writing on here) of your chances of winning. I hope you can find the way to fight it.
Good luck.
Seriously though, good points as always. Would they have a chance of getting the case thrown out just on he basis of what they were told to use fo their defence? Or, at the least, would it help? If so then getting a copy of the court proceedings where it has this statement in black and white would be a good start.
CB listen to Madcop. Definately speak to a lawyer and get all these details sorted so you can find out what sort of case you have. At the very least it will give you a better idea (than us non-lawyers writing on here) of your chances of winning. I hope you can find the way to fight it.
Good luck.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff