120mph on A30 Devon - Court Summons arrives - help!
Discussion
Hi chaps. Please take a look at my partners circumstances below and provide me with your feedback as to how best proceed.
He was pulled over on a 3 lane A road with 3 passengers travelling at a speed in excess of 100mph.
Unmarked Volvo pulled him over and said that they will be prosecuting on basis of “corroboration”. (ie: their word against his).
They had no car camera nor did they clock him with a stationary speed gun. We actually don’t think they were Traffic officers as they were plain clothed officers.
They did say they believed he had been travelling no slower than 115mph (by which measurement I can only assume using their own car speedometer in pursuit?).
The point of us raising this request is to see from you guys how you think the best method to proceed is. We have just brought a house and our credit cards are to the max with typical refurbs + mortgage payments etc…
The “Statement of facts” included in the summons states:
The defendant drove a motor ***** on the said road at a speed exceeding 70 miles per hour. The defendants speed was checked by a police officer and found to ****
(I am not sure what these asterix’s represent, but they’re on the “statement of facts”
We are tempted to submit a guilty plea – how do the magistrates take to this – do they look down on your and impose a more heavy fine/ban if you’re not present? Or are you better off pleading ng and getting a solicitor.
Not that wanting to evade the law is the goal but you think there is enough circumstances here to sustain a not-guilty plea? It’s hard to plead guilty when you don’t know what they’re going to hit you with in terms of evidence?
He was pulled over on a 3 lane A road with 3 passengers travelling at a speed in excess of 100mph.
Unmarked Volvo pulled him over and said that they will be prosecuting on basis of “corroboration”. (ie: their word against his).
They had no car camera nor did they clock him with a stationary speed gun. We actually don’t think they were Traffic officers as they were plain clothed officers.
They did say they believed he had been travelling no slower than 115mph (by which measurement I can only assume using their own car speedometer in pursuit?).
The point of us raising this request is to see from you guys how you think the best method to proceed is. We have just brought a house and our credit cards are to the max with typical refurbs + mortgage payments etc…
The “Statement of facts” included in the summons states:
The defendant drove a motor ***** on the said road at a speed exceeding 70 miles per hour. The defendants speed was checked by a police officer and found to ****
(I am not sure what these asterix’s represent, but they’re on the “statement of facts”
We are tempted to submit a guilty plea – how do the magistrates take to this – do they look down on your and impose a more heavy fine/ban if you’re not present? Or are you better off pleading ng and getting a solicitor.
Not that wanting to evade the law is the goal but you think there is enough circumstances here to sustain a not-guilty plea? It’s hard to plead guilty when you don’t know what they’re going to hit you with in terms of evidence?
Edited by Egro on Friday 2nd November 14:22
Edited by Egro on Friday 2nd November 14:33
Egro - I'm sure he's not the only one to have exceeded 70mph this week.
Suggest you do look at pepipoo - they have some EXCELLENT advice there. In the meantime, my untrained (whisky fuelled) mind tells me the following :
If he can how that OTHER PEOPLE will suffer hardship as a result of him losing his license, this *may* help. Do you have children? Assuming he doesn't own the business - so no employyes of his. You two having a mortgage, which is he had no job would mean both (potentially) struggling with house might also help - maybe not though (I am not a lawyer).
It may be worth looking up about a "Newton Hearing". This is where one can "confess" to the offence, but with a different description of events. E.g. As there's no real evidence of exactly what speed (<cough> For
s sake don't start going into detail on a pulbic forum....</cough> was being done - he could plead guilty to "doing 99mph, but certainly no more". At that speed, a ban is still VERY possible, but for far less time than if say one admitted to doing 120mph. Maybe even possible to accurately claim that one was knowingly doing 90mph, which yes, is far in excess of the posted limit - but it was clear / quiet / safe etc - and that the police only did 100+mph in order to catch up?
Still - telling fibs in court is an absolute no-no, if you get caught it's BRMJ (bum-rape magistrate justice).
IF (and only if) if was clear / quiet / safe etc, I hope he gets a fair result that is not out of line with the actual level of wrong doing. Knowing how easy it is to break 70mph, kin'ell - there but for the grace of God are we all!
Try not to worry too much (easier said than done) - but definitely nip over to pepipoo.
Suggest you do look at pepipoo - they have some EXCELLENT advice there. In the meantime, my untrained (whisky fuelled) mind tells me the following :
If he can how that OTHER PEOPLE will suffer hardship as a result of him losing his license, this *may* help. Do you have children? Assuming he doesn't own the business - so no employyes of his. You two having a mortgage, which is he had no job would mean both (potentially) struggling with house might also help - maybe not though (I am not a lawyer).
It may be worth looking up about a "Newton Hearing". This is where one can "confess" to the offence, but with a different description of events. E.g. As there's no real evidence of exactly what speed (<cough> For
s sake don't start going into detail on a pulbic forum....</cough> was being done - he could plead guilty to "doing 99mph, but certainly no more". At that speed, a ban is still VERY possible, but for far less time than if say one admitted to doing 120mph. Maybe even possible to accurately claim that one was knowingly doing 90mph, which yes, is far in excess of the posted limit - but it was clear / quiet / safe etc - and that the police only did 100+mph in order to catch up? Still - telling fibs in court is an absolute no-no, if you get caught it's BRMJ (bum-rape magistrate justice).
IF (and only if) if was clear / quiet / safe etc, I hope he gets a fair result that is not out of line with the actual level of wrong doing. Knowing how easy it is to break 70mph, kin'ell - there but for the grace of God are we all!
Try not to worry too much (easier said than done) - but definitely nip over to pepipoo.
I'd concur with the "WTF was he doing 120mph for if he is skint and needs the car for work" p.o.v., but that's obviously no help now.
I've been to court twice for alleged speeding.
First was UK mag court about four years ago, for 99mph in a 60mph zone. Pleaded guilty, 1 month ban (I didn't need car for work).
Second was Irish district court this year, alleged 108kph in an 80kph zone. Garda (police officer) witness didn't show, so they "struck out" the case (i.e. decided not to proceed). Result.
Magistrates are normally reasonable people, but have guidelines. If you are pleading/found guilty, they will have to enact a severe punishment. Give them some options - they need the pound of flesh one way or the other. Saying "we are skint and need the car for work" may be true but gives them few options, unless you volunteer for some massive community service.
I'm not convinced that mounting a defence will get you a harsher punishment, provided that you have trained legal representation (so don't waste the courts time on process) - I would guess that the police may think like this but the magistrates don't.
Get proper legal advice and go to court.
John
I've been to court twice for alleged speeding.
First was UK mag court about four years ago, for 99mph in a 60mph zone. Pleaded guilty, 1 month ban (I didn't need car for work).
Second was Irish district court this year, alleged 108kph in an 80kph zone. Garda (police officer) witness didn't show, so they "struck out" the case (i.e. decided not to proceed). Result.
Magistrates are normally reasonable people, but have guidelines. If you are pleading/found guilty, they will have to enact a severe punishment. Give them some options - they need the pound of flesh one way or the other. Saying "we are skint and need the car for work" may be true but gives them few options, unless you volunteer for some massive community service.
I'm not convinced that mounting a defence will get you a harsher punishment, provided that you have trained legal representation (so don't waste the courts time on process) - I would guess that the police may think like this but the magistrates don't.
Get proper legal advice and go to court.
John
First the car the plainclothes were using seems not to be designated the correct vehicle, i.e. calibrated to confirm the speed alleged to be traveling at.
No electronic method of recording,
the word of one witness against others,
the late arrival of documentation regerding the alleged offence, seems to me to be outside the 6 month requirement.
Take advice from a solicitor,
Inform the court authorities that notification has arrived only recently and stall until you can get all the relevant information for the defence together.
No electronic method of recording,
the word of one witness against others,
the late arrival of documentation regerding the alleged offence, seems to me to be outside the 6 month requirement.
Take advice from a solicitor,
Inform the court authorities that notification has arrived only recently and stall until you can get all the relevant information for the defence together.
Egro said:
When we say "large" fine - whats sort of figure are we looking at?
ISTR getting about £700 fine for my "99 in a 60".See for more examples:
http://www.speed-trap.co.uk/Accused_Home/SpeedVSFi...
TBH I'm surprised his company let him have a Scooby as company car. Insurance and possible track wear aside, this is a fairly foreseeable outcome which you'd expect a company to try and avert through policy. Will they support him now?
John
SLCZ3 said:
First the car the plainclothes were using seems not to be designated the correct vehicle, i.e. calibrated to confirm the speed alleged to be traveling at.
Doesn't matter when two officers are present. They could have no speedo at all and still nick you.SLCZ3 said:
No electronic method of recording,
the word of one witness against others,
Well, the word of the accused (who, it seems, was actually doing the speed or thereabouts of which they are accused) against two police officers. What's the option? Make it out that two police officers were lying when the accused knows fine well they've been caught red-handed? If the accused stuffs that up they could be looking at PCJ, which has consequences a bit more serious than having to get a taxi everywhere for six months.the word of one witness against others,
SLCZ3 said:
the late arrival of documentation regerding the alleged offence, seems to me to be outside the 6 month requirement.
Take advice from a solicitor,
Inform the court authorities that notification has arrived only recently and stall until you can get all the relevant information for the defence together.
Verbal NIP at the roadside.Take advice from a solicitor,
Inform the court authorities that notification has arrived only recently and stall until you can get all the relevant information for the defence together.
Documentation arrived on time.
Talking to a solicitor may be helpful in forming a mitigation plea (don't ban me, my children will be homeless etc) but on the face of it, there's not much hope of getting off altogether. The only hope is that the police/CPS/whatever have made some mistake somewhere in the process or the paperwork.
I sympathise with the OP's partner but truly think that they're in the brown'n'smelly on this one.
From what stated there does not seem to be any 'let out'.
Two officers forming opinion speed limit being exceeded
Speedometer of patrol car confirming.
Stop at time and verbal NOIP given.
Summons served within 6 months so information laid in time.
I would tend to go for the sack cloth and ashes route with mitigation clear road,car capable, no danger, stupid etc. Also marshall whatever evidence there is that a disqualification would cause hardship - i.e. loss of job (letter from boss, no wages, no mortgage, no house, wife and kids effected). Magistrates, if convinced, have discretion on these grounds not to disqualify.
But by the sound of it expect a sphincter nipping fine.
dvd
Two officers forming opinion speed limit being exceeded
Speedometer of patrol car confirming.
Stop at time and verbal NOIP given.
Summons served within 6 months so information laid in time.
I would tend to go for the sack cloth and ashes route with mitigation clear road,car capable, no danger, stupid etc. Also marshall whatever evidence there is that a disqualification would cause hardship - i.e. loss of job (letter from boss, no wages, no mortgage, no house, wife and kids effected). Magistrates, if convinced, have discretion on these grounds not to disqualify.
But by the sound of it expect a sphincter nipping fine.
dvd
classiccooper said:
Whilst I don't diagree with speeding itself, you do the 'crime' you do the time.
If you are going to speed, you have to be aware at some point you may get caught.
It's just tough really, and at 120mph with passengers too!!!!!
Request to mods... Is it possible to remove stuff like this because there's someone here seeking advice on a potentially life changing issue, but as usual a string of "You shouldn't have been doing that" type responses come up from feckwits. While you're at it please can you remove this too -- for the same reason. Then those with something useful to add can actually be heard.If you are going to speed, you have to be aware at some point you may get caught.
It's just tough really, and at 120mph with passengers too!!!!!
Edited by classiccooper on Thursday 1st November 07:58
Cheers
SM
supermono said:
classiccooper said:
Whilst I don't diagree with speeding itself, you do the 'crime' you do the time.
If you are going to speed, you have to be aware at some point you may get caught.
It's just tough really, and at 120mph with passengers too!!!!!
Request to mods... Is it possible to remove stuff like this because there's someone here seeking advice on a potentially life changing issue, but as usual a string of "You shouldn't have been doing that" type responses come up from feckwits. While you're at it please can you remove this too -- for the same reason. Then those with something useful to add can actually be heard.If you are going to speed, you have to be aware at some point you may get caught.
It's just tough really, and at 120mph with passengers too!!!!!
Edited by classiccooper on Thursday 1st November 07:58
Cheers
SM
Didn't realise free speech had been taken away.
DucatiGary said:
travelling at 120mph on a 3 lane motorway is SOOOO dangerous for us brits but them germans can do well over that all day long on dual carriageway autobhans.
its like saying the brits are crap drivers.
or we are softer targets for fines?
There are more fatalities on German dual carriageways and autobhans.its like saying the brits are crap drivers.
or we are softer targets for fines?
- awaits, speed doesnt kill......
classiccooper said:
supermono said:
classiccooper said:
Whilst I don't diagree with speeding itself, you do the 'crime' you do the time.
If you are going to speed, you have to be aware at some point you may get caught.
It's just tough really, and at 120mph with passengers too!!!!!
Request to mods... Is it possible to remove stuff like this because there's someone here seeking advice on a potentially life changing issue, but as usual a string of "You shouldn't have been doing that" type responses come up from feckwits. While you're at it please can you remove this too -- for the same reason. Then those with something useful to add can actually be heard.If you are going to speed, you have to be aware at some point you may get caught.
It's just tough really, and at 120mph with passengers too!!!!!
Edited by classiccooper on Thursday 1st November 07:58
Cheers
SM
Didn't realise free speech had been taken away.
It's a bit like someone asking you for directions to Waterloo and you telling them if I were you I'd start from somewhere different.
SM
[quote=L14MNV]There are more fatalities on German dual carriageways and autobhans.
quote]
Where's your source? Why are there? What is this as a percentage of vehicle distance travelled? What's the UK figure? How many of them are caused by there being no speed limit?
Sounds a bit pub talkish to me. I've done 120mph before -- as have most people -- and nothing happened other than I arrived a bit sooner.
SM
quote]
Where's your source? Why are there? What is this as a percentage of vehicle distance travelled? What's the UK figure? How many of them are caused by there being no speed limit?
Sounds a bit pub talkish to me. I've done 120mph before -- as have most people -- and nothing happened other than I arrived a bit sooner.
SM
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff