Important new document - ACPO Code of Practice
Discussion
This post is a bit long but hopefully worth a read. In case you missed it, the old ACPO guidlines have been replaced by a new, far more comprehensive 97 page ACPO document entitled ACPO Code of Practice for Operational Use of Road Policing Enforcement Technology. This was released in November of last year. Download and print off your copy here:
www.pepipoo.com/files/ACPO/RPET_Code_of_Pratice_Nov_02.pdf
There are a number of factors that make this publication far more significant than the one it replaces. Firstly, here is a quote from the foreward:
"The (speed trap) devices referred to in this Code of Practice, although the subject of rigorous field and laboratory testing, are only as reliable as the user. It is imperative that the procedures set out in this Manual are applied scrupulously - each link in the evidential chain is of importance, and upon its careful application lays the integrity of the Police Service.
These standards are in your hands.
R Brunstrom
Chief Constable
North Wales Police
Head of ACPO Road Policing Business Area"
Mr Brunstrom may have courted severe criticism from many quarters with respect to his attitude towards speeding and speed enforcement but he actually writes something commendably reasonable here.
Previously in a speeding case, in the event that the prosection could not produce evidence to prove that the old ACPO guidelines had been adhered to, they could argue that the guidelines were not recognised in law anyway - so stuff them. However, with this new Code of Practice (and I emphasise Code of Practice) this may not be so easy. If the prosecution now try that old trick on, the defence could simply quote Mr Brunstrom's statement above and then politely ask the prosecution to explain to the Court why they consider the words of the Head of ACPO Road Policing Business Area not to be worth the paper they're written on.
Also, with these words in mind, perhaps we can drag a few of those civilian talivan traitors kicking and squealing into the witness box and get them to explain their "activities" under cross-examination.
I have some interesting feedback on the subject of speed camera Type Approval and why the Type Approval documents are so hard to get hold of. It would appear that the paperwork is not contained in one neat and simple document set but spread over a number of areas. This is due to there being several "interested parties" e.g. the Home Office, the ACPO, the Police Scientific Development Branch etc. Some of these documents are covered by the Official Secrets Act - nothing alarming, just standard practice for all Home Office correspondance apparently. In the case of Gatsos, the key documents are the Installation and Commissioning manuals - yet to fall into our hands but that is only a matter of time. I am reliably informed that, in the meantime, the ACPO Code of Practice should constitute the "conditions of Type Approval." A good lawyer should therefore be able to argue that this Code of Practice IS enforceable in Law under paragraph 4 of Section 23 of the 1991 Road Traffic Act:
www.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts1991/Ukpga_19910040_en_2.htm#mdiv23
This new Code of Practice provides an excellent, detailed insight into speedtrap operation and includes some eye opening information on Type Approval and interference from Tetra radio and GSM sources. To be forewarned is to be forearmed as they say so I would recommend anyone who wishes to stay ahead of the game and/or who is fighting a speeding ticket to read this document thoroughly.
>>> Edited by Deadly Dog on Sunday 12th January 21:41
www.pepipoo.com/files/ACPO/RPET_Code_of_Pratice_Nov_02.pdf
There are a number of factors that make this publication far more significant than the one it replaces. Firstly, here is a quote from the foreward:
"The (speed trap) devices referred to in this Code of Practice, although the subject of rigorous field and laboratory testing, are only as reliable as the user. It is imperative that the procedures set out in this Manual are applied scrupulously - each link in the evidential chain is of importance, and upon its careful application lays the integrity of the Police Service.
These standards are in your hands.
R Brunstrom
Chief Constable
North Wales Police
Head of ACPO Road Policing Business Area"
Mr Brunstrom may have courted severe criticism from many quarters with respect to his attitude towards speeding and speed enforcement but he actually writes something commendably reasonable here.
Previously in a speeding case, in the event that the prosection could not produce evidence to prove that the old ACPO guidelines had been adhered to, they could argue that the guidelines were not recognised in law anyway - so stuff them. However, with this new Code of Practice (and I emphasise Code of Practice) this may not be so easy. If the prosecution now try that old trick on, the defence could simply quote Mr Brunstrom's statement above and then politely ask the prosecution to explain to the Court why they consider the words of the Head of ACPO Road Policing Business Area not to be worth the paper they're written on.
Also, with these words in mind, perhaps we can drag a few of those civilian talivan traitors kicking and squealing into the witness box and get them to explain their "activities" under cross-examination.
I have some interesting feedback on the subject of speed camera Type Approval and why the Type Approval documents are so hard to get hold of. It would appear that the paperwork is not contained in one neat and simple document set but spread over a number of areas. This is due to there being several "interested parties" e.g. the Home Office, the ACPO, the Police Scientific Development Branch etc. Some of these documents are covered by the Official Secrets Act - nothing alarming, just standard practice for all Home Office correspondance apparently. In the case of Gatsos, the key documents are the Installation and Commissioning manuals - yet to fall into our hands but that is only a matter of time. I am reliably informed that, in the meantime, the ACPO Code of Practice should constitute the "conditions of Type Approval." A good lawyer should therefore be able to argue that this Code of Practice IS enforceable in Law under paragraph 4 of Section 23 of the 1991 Road Traffic Act:
www.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts1991/Ukpga_19910040_en_2.htm#mdiv23
This new Code of Practice provides an excellent, detailed insight into speedtrap operation and includes some eye opening information on Type Approval and interference from Tetra radio and GSM sources. To be forewarned is to be forearmed as they say so I would recommend anyone who wishes to stay ahead of the game and/or who is fighting a speeding ticket to read this document thoroughly.
>>> Edited by Deadly Dog on Sunday 12th January 21:41
Turn the new TETRA polis radio and GSM phones off while operating the radar gun. Who bought that technology for fecks sake! Granny gets mugged 2 streets away but they know feck all about it coz they're catching Joe Blow doing 42 in a 30. Gotta larf really.
And it looks like they learned from pointing the gun at that RAF Tornado
If the reading jumps from 47 - 40 they have to abort the check. Gawd bless my Euro 550.
Oh there's so much more... Cheered my Sunday evening up.
>> Edited by Del Sydyway on Sunday 12th January 23:28
And it looks like they learned from pointing the gun at that RAF Tornado
If the reading jumps from 47 - 40 they have to abort the check. Gawd bless my Euro 550.
Oh there's so much more... Cheered my Sunday evening up.
>> Edited by Del Sydyway on Sunday 12th January 23:28
Thanks Deadly Dog, I'm very interested about the Tetra stuff.
I have been contesting this point for some time and everytime the police and CPS have denied any kind of interference. Yet it looks like admittance on their part now.
mmmm.... Wonder whether this one will stand up in court?
I have been contesting this point for some time and everytime the police and CPS have denied any kind of interference. Yet it looks like admittance on their part now.
mmmm.... Wonder whether this one will stand up in court?
Hi Lucozade,
Best of luck with your forthcoming case. Hopefully this document will give you the ammunition you need to prove that you are right and the CPS are wrong with respect to Tetra/GSM interference.
How did you get on with the guys at Pepipoo? I hear on the grapevine that the "reign of terror" of a certain laser "expert witness" could be coming to an abrupt end.
Best of luck with your forthcoming case. Hopefully this document will give you the ammunition you need to prove that you are right and the CPS are wrong with respect to Tetra/GSM interference.
How did you get on with the guys at Pepipoo? I hear on the grapevine that the "reign of terror" of a certain laser "expert witness" could be coming to an abrupt end.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff