A speeding/evidence question for the legal eagles
Discussion
A friend of mine was recently pulled by an unmarked car for speeding on a NSL dual carriageway. He was asked to take a seat in the unmarked car and was shown the video of him driving along the inside lane at just under 80mph. He then pulled into lane 2 to pass a slower car and accelerated while passing the slower car then pulled back into lane 1 and reduced his speed back to just under 80. The police car following pretty much stayed with him from lane 1 to lane 2 then back to lane 1 and hit 103mph for a short while during the overtake. The whole sequence took less than about 20 seconds. My friend was cautioned and was sent a court date. He in-turn requested all the evidence as is his right.
The problem is that the evidence has arrived and is just the officers statement that my friend was travelling at 103mph for half a mile and a speedo calibration certificate. While my friend does not deny he may have hit 103mph during the acceleration he does deny that it was for half a mile. As he points out, it would take around 17 seconds to do half a mile at 103 and the whole video from a few seconds before to a few seconds after the manoeuvre was only about 20 seconds. As the police have not submitted the video as evidence is there any way my friend can get a hold of this in order to show that while he was speeding, he was only over 100mph for a very short amount of time?
He is most frustrated as he says that while he did accelerate as he pulled out to pass the slower car it is only the fact that the car behind him also pulled out and appeared to be accelerating hard that he went as quick as he did in order to get back into lane 1 and out of the way of the car behind. (Hence he dropped back immediately to just under 80mph.)
The problem is that the evidence has arrived and is just the officers statement that my friend was travelling at 103mph for half a mile and a speedo calibration certificate. While my friend does not deny he may have hit 103mph during the acceleration he does deny that it was for half a mile. As he points out, it would take around 17 seconds to do half a mile at 103 and the whole video from a few seconds before to a few seconds after the manoeuvre was only about 20 seconds. As the police have not submitted the video as evidence is there any way my friend can get a hold of this in order to show that while he was speeding, he was only over 100mph for a very short amount of time?
He is most frustrated as he says that while he did accelerate as he pulled out to pass the slower car it is only the fact that the car behind him also pulled out and appeared to be accelerating hard that he went as quick as he did in order to get back into lane 1 and out of the way of the car behind. (Hence he dropped back immediately to just under 80mph.)
You can request the video - the CPS will have to disclose it to you. It may take a defense statement though...
BTW - you want the whole video from start to finish, the entire shift - they are even more reluctant to disclose this. I am assuming that there are calibration runs at the start and end which is why you need the whole video...
Sean
BTW - you want the whole video from start to finish, the entire shift - they are even more reluctant to disclose this. I am assuming that there are calibration runs at the start and end which is why you need the whole video...
Sean
NugentS said:
You can request the video - the CPS will have to disclose it to you. It may take a defense statement though...
BTW - you want the whole video from start to finish, the entire shift - they are even more reluctant to disclose this. I am assuming that there are calibration runs at the start and end which is why you need the whole video...
Sean
BTW - you want the whole video from start to finish, the entire shift - they are even more reluctant to disclose this. I am assuming that there are calibration runs at the start and end which is why you need the whole video...
Sean
Sean
Many thanks for the reply. My friend will be pleased to hear this as apparently the video clearly shows the police car accelerating towards him as he executes the overtake of the slower car in lane 1. (It also apparently shows that at the point of maximum speed reading the police car was visibly gaining on my friend thus the police cars recorded speed of 103 will be in excess of my friends maximum speed.)
Your friend needs to remember that the offence he'll be tried for isn't "speeding for half a mile at over 100mph" - just "breaking the posted limit"...of which he is banged to rights.
You can request the video, if you're going to court - and indeed you probably should so that the speed you were doing can be calculated - but the chances are that your friend (on this occasion) will definitely have exceeded the limit by some margin...so perhaps time spent trying to consider mitigating circumstances (such as the conditions etc) would be better.
But there's a helluva lot more educated people than I on this matter
You can request the video, if you're going to court - and indeed you probably should so that the speed you were doing can be calculated - but the chances are that your friend (on this occasion) will definitely have exceeded the limit by some margin...so perhaps time spent trying to consider mitigating circumstances (such as the conditions etc) would be better.
But there's a helluva lot more educated people than I on this matter
tigger1 said:
Your friend needs to remember that the offence he'll be tried for isn't "speeding for half a mile at over 100mph" - just "breaking the posted limit"...of which he is banged to rights.
You can request the video, if you're going to court - and indeed you probably should so that the speed you were doing can be calculated - but the chances are that your friend (on this occasion) will definitely have exceeded the limit by some margin...so perhaps time spent trying to consider mitigating circumstances (such as the conditions etc) would be better.
You can request the video, if you're going to court - and indeed you probably should so that the speed you were doing can be calculated - but the chances are that your friend (on this occasion) will definitely have exceeded the limit by some margin...so perhaps time spent trying to consider mitigating circumstances (such as the conditions etc) would be better.
My friend does not have an issue with the fact he was caught speeding. The issue is the ‘mitigating circumstance’ that he felt he was being "pushed" from the car behind accelerating towards him whilst he was in the process of passing the slower car. He is certain that the video clearly shows this, particularly as he can clearly be seen moving back into lane 1 immediately he is passed the slower car and returning to his previous ‘cruising speed’
tigger1 said:
Your friend needs to remember that the offence he'll be tried for isn't "speeding for half a mile at over 100mph" - just "breaking the posted limit"...of which he is banged to rights.
Yes but given that exceeding the ton will almost certainly be short ban territory, and the speed he actually did probably not he may wish to have a 'Newton' hearing ie. 'yes I was speeding , but not by that margin'.
Einion Yrth said:
tigger1 said:
Your friend needs to remember that the offence he'll be tried for isn't "speeding for half a mile at over 100mph" - just "breaking the posted limit"...of which he is banged to rights.
Yes but given that exceeding the ton will almost certainly be short ban territory, and the speed he actually did probably not he may wish to have a 'Newton' hearing ie. 'yes I was speeding , but not by that margin'.
That's exactly it. Like all of us, he does not want to receive a ban.
Isn't it the case that 30mph over the speed limit can only recieve a max 3 point penalty?
One of my mates had to go to court with a 106 case, slapped with 9 points and £980 fine. That was nice, but he kept his license... but he was more than 30mph over... so they saved him a ban, but now he's steady Eddie on the roads...
I may be totally wrong, but worth looking into. That way, he could plead guilty, but not to excess of 100mph, get a 3 pointer and be on his way?
I take no responsibility if this is all bull, but I'm pretty sure it's the case?
Good luck!
One of my mates had to go to court with a 106 case, slapped with 9 points and £980 fine. That was nice, but he kept his license... but he was more than 30mph over... so they saved him a ban, but now he's steady Eddie on the roads...
I may be totally wrong, but worth looking into. That way, he could plead guilty, but not to excess of 100mph, get a 3 pointer and be on his way?
I take no responsibility if this is all bull, but I'm pretty sure it's the case?
Good luck!
The problem is that he has not been given a fixed penalty on which to plead guilty and accept 3 points, he’s simply had a court summons. (I think this is because of the speed.) He would be more than happy to take a 3 point FP as he is not denying he was speeding. What he wants to prove is that he was only at his top speed for a for short period and was only there because the car behind was accelerating towards him and he wanted to get out of its’ way. He also wants to show that at the time of the 103 encountered by the police car it was still gaining on him so my friend must have been going slightly slower and thus would be under the magic ton.
black-k1 said:
The problem is that he has not been given a fixed penalty on which to plead guilty and accept 3 points, he’s simply had a court summons. (I think this is because of the speed.) He would be more than happy to take a 3 point FP as he is not denying he was speeding. What he wants to prove is that he was only at his top speed for a for short period and was only there because the car behind was accelerating towards him and he wanted to get out of its’ way. He also wants to show that at the time of the 103 encountered by the police car it was still gaining on him so my friend must have been going slightly slower and thus would be under the magic ton.
Get the video, try to used fixed / known points to calculate the cars actual speed. If the closing is obvious then it shouldn't be difficult to show that there's more than a 3mph difference between the speed of the police car and your friends.
Not sure how likely it is that a mag' will accept "I was pushed by the car behind", when there was no physical contact...
tigger1 said:
black-k1 said:
The problem is that he has not been given a fixed penalty on which to plead guilty and accept 3 points, he’s simply had a court summons. (I think this is because of the speed.) He would be more than happy to take a 3 point FP as he is not denying he was speeding. What he wants to prove is that he was only at his top speed for a for short period and was only there because the car behind was accelerating towards him and he wanted to get out of its’ way. He also wants to show that at the time of the 103 encountered by the police car it was still gaining on him so my friend must have been going slightly slower and thus would be under the magic ton.
Get the video, try to used fixed / known points to calculate the cars actual speed. If the closing is obvious then it shouldn't be difficult to show that there's more than a 3mph difference between the speed of the police car and your friends.
Not sure how likely it is that a mag' will accept "I was pushed by the car behind", when there was no physical contact...
As the speed is close to ban territory I would sugggest your friend pushes hard for the video. It does sound sensible to admit to speeding but NOT by that margin. He should have the video expertly analysed before the trial to establish his true speed. A vehicle following does not register his speed unless the gap is constant at all times.
It could be the difference between a ban and a fine/points.
Many thanks for the replies and advice. My friend will be pushing for the video as he is sure it will show that if he – not the police car - did hit over 100mph (which is possible) it was for a very short amount of time and for less the a tenth of a mile.
As has been said, it’s the difference between a fine/points and a ban so it’s worth putting in some effort to get the correct just result.
As has been said, it’s the difference between a fine/points and a ban so it’s worth putting in some effort to get the correct just result.
black-k1 said:
Many thanks for the replies and advice. My friend will be pushing for the video as he is sure it will show that if he – not the police car - did hit over 100mph (which is possible) it was for a very short amount of time and for less the a tenth of a mile.
As has been said, it’s the difference between a fine/points and a ban so it’s worth putting in some effort to get the correct just result.
As has been said, it’s the difference between a fine/points and a ban so it’s worth putting in some effort to get the correct just result.
If he did hit a tom, even for a small length of time, then "he's not the Messiah, he's a very naughty boy".
It seems like it'll be a difficult task to show that he didn't breach 100mph - might(I stress MIGHT!) be wiser to go for the Newtong wotsit, "Yes, I was speeding, definitely, but never did a sausage over 90mph/95mph"...keep it sensible though, not taking the pee (75mph isn't going to be believable).
Friend of mine was done couple of years ago for 116mph on a D/C. On the summons he pleaded guilty to speeding but added that he wasn't doing 116mph as the Seat diesel he was driving wasn't capable of such speeds. (IIRC the hand book stated top speed as 105mph)
A return summons arrived stating court date and that he was pleading 'not guilty'. When he phoned the courts for an explanation they told him that by denying the speed he had to plead not guilty. It was suggested he submit an engineers report of the top speed for that car and a speed tested run report to confirm it couldn't do it. If this was submitted then he would be found not guilty of the offence, as the charge against him was for 116mph and couldn't be altered just to get a prosecution.
As it would have cost quite a bit of money to get the 2reports he changed his plea to guilty and got a 3 month ban and £250 fine.
A return summons arrived stating court date and that he was pleading 'not guilty'. When he phoned the courts for an explanation they told him that by denying the speed he had to plead not guilty. It was suggested he submit an engineers report of the top speed for that car and a speed tested run report to confirm it couldn't do it. If this was submitted then he would be found not guilty of the offence, as the charge against him was for 116mph and couldn't be altered just to get a prosecution.
As it would have cost quite a bit of money to get the 2reports he changed his plea to guilty and got a 3 month ban and £250 fine.
TOPTON said:
If this was submitted then he would be found not guilty of the offence, as the charge against him was for 116mph and couldn't be altered just to get a prosecution.
That doesn't make sense. You could never argue that the speed was *exactly* 116 mph and not 115 mph or 117 mph. I don't believe you actually get charged with driving at 116 mph, I think you are charged with exceeding the speed limit and the recorde speed is just used as evidence that you were exceeding the limit.
GreenV8S said:
TOPTON said:
If this was submitted then he would be found not guilty of the offence, as the charge against him was for 116mph and couldn't be altered just to get a prosecution.
That doesn't make sense. You could never argue that the speed was *exactly* 116 mph and not 115 mph or 117 mph. I don't believe you actually get charged with driving at 116 mph, I think you are charged with exceeding the speed limit and the recorde speed is just used as evidence that you were exceeding the limit.
I agree.
I also remember a case in recent years where a guy in (I think) a punto was "done" for one-hundread and something, but he got off because the car was tested and physically incapable of the speed that he'd been charged with though, but I think this was because it called into question the evidence of the device used to measure his speed. Somebody must remember this!? About 18 months - two years ago (guessing).
tigger1 said:
GreenV8S said:
TOPTON said:
If this was submitted then he would be found not guilty of the offence, as the charge against him was for 116mph and couldn't be altered just to get a prosecution.
That doesn't make sense. You could never argue that the speed was *exactly* 116 mph and not 115 mph or 117 mph. I don't believe you actually get charged with driving at 116 mph, I think you are charged with exceeding the speed limit and the recorde speed is just used as evidence that you were exceeding the limit.
I agree.
I also remember a case in recent years where a guy in (I think) a punto was "done" for one-hundread and something, but he got off because the car was tested and physically incapable of the speed that he'd been charged with though, but I think this was because it called into question the evidence of the device used to measure his speed. Somebody must remember this!? About 18 months - two years ago (guessing).
I reckon that this must be have been the case with my mate Mo, showing that whatever was used to measure his speed was well out, therefore cannot be used as evidence. It was just a court clerk that gave him the imformation, not a solicitor, so may not have been correct.
Besides that, you do get charged with driving at a particular speed/exect number, if that speed is quoted in the summons. If it is "exceeding the posted limit" then that could be anything over and not specific. That is why keeping below the magic 100 (ban territory)is important to some
TOPTON said:
I reckon that this must be have been the case with my mate Mo, showing that whatever was used to measure his speed was well out, therefore cannot be used as evidence. It was just a court clerk that gave him the imformation, not a solicitor, so may not have been correct.
Besides that, you do get charged with driving at a particular speed/exect number, if that speed is quoted in the summons. If it is "exceeding the posted limit" then that could be anything over and not specific. That is why keeping below the magic 100 (ban territory)is important to some
Besides that, you do get charged with driving at a particular speed/exect number, if that speed is quoted in the summons. If it is "exceeding the posted limit" then that could be anything over and not specific. That is why keeping below the magic 100 (ban territory)is important to some
So (if I understand correctly), you have to get prosecuted for the specific speed, then appeal and have the whole thing quashed as your car cannot acheive the stated speed. If you argue at sentencing, you'll just get done for exceeding the speed limit in general.
black-k1 said:
tigger1 said:
Your friend needs to remember that the offence he'll be tried for isn't "speeding for half a mile at over 100mph" - just "breaking the posted limit"...of which he is banged to rights.
You can request the video, if you're going to court - and indeed you probably should so that the speed you were doing can be calculated - but the chances are that your friend (on this occasion) will definitely have exceeded the limit by some margin...so perhaps time spent trying to consider mitigating circumstances (such as the conditions etc) would be better.
You can request the video, if you're going to court - and indeed you probably should so that the speed you were doing can be calculated - but the chances are that your friend (on this occasion) will definitely have exceeded the limit by some margin...so perhaps time spent trying to consider mitigating circumstances (such as the conditions etc) would be better.
My friend does not have an issue with the fact he was caught speeding. The issue is the ‘mitigating circumstance’ that he felt he was being "pushed" from the car behind accelerating towards him whilst he was in the process of passing the slower car. He is certain that the video clearly shows this, particularly as he can clearly be seen moving back into lane 1 immediately he is passed the slower car and returning to his previous ‘cruising speed’
Having defended myself in court on two occasions I would say that this factor is paramount. It all comes down to the *exact* wording of the statement and what the video evidence shows.
If the officers statement gives a vague account of breaking the limit, then this may be a true statement. However, if the statment does read that the driver was travelling at 103 mph for half a mile, then *this is false*. On this account the driver should plead not guilty. The officer has not used a device to accurately measure speed, it sounds like he has used his own speed, of which is not constant or a consistant distance from the driver, presented this as *fact* as your friends speed and presented this without caveat or a stated margin of error.
If your friend has the video evidence and can show it in court the officer will find it impossible to prove to the court that his statement is true. Thus his statement and his testimony should be discounted, unless he is going to admit that his statement is wrong and testify something else, such as '80-90mph for a short period of time'. Of course this is what he should have done in his statement in the first place, but he will unlikely want to go back on himself as that would show that he is not only changing his mind, but also showing a lot of ahem... 'bias' in presenting his evidence.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff