adeel.a

A while a go I posted a situation I had been in where I was accused of speeding by a police offer... I had the hearing a week ago and could not believe the conclusion the magistrates came to...

There was no physicall, electronic or official evidence to prove that I was going over the limit (40mph which I wasn't) nor did the officers follow me for a 3rd of the mile...

After 3hrs of trial, they banned me for 28 days and handed me the court expenses of £200 and a £300 fine.

From a clean license of driving over 6 years... What are my options.... because I feel cheated...

I wasn't given the Witness Statement until I asked for it 5 mins before the trial and only one out of the two officers were present.

What to do ?!?

Ch!lledBudwei2er

From the evidence side, the two officers ( I think they have to be traffic ) that have been in their post for a certain amount of years are counted as more than enough evidence to convict you, and from what I see you were either doing 70 in 30, 80 in 40 , 90 in 50 or 110 in 70 so what else was there to expect, of anything you got off lightly.

wakeboardar

i take it you where banned on the 12 points rule

sounds like it could be a very costly appeal

just my view but i say take it on the chin, cut your losses so to speak
dont forget it would be on you to come up with new evidence

dont let it get you down

waky

Hos

iTrader: (1)

try posting this here:
http://pepipoo.com/NewForums2/viewfo...0829a0a4843a2p

Dave_A

I'd just accept it and take the punishment. I know its not easy thing to do, but your choices imho are limited, and at best will end up costing you more and more money. Cheaper in the long run to get a taxi to work for 4 weeks then start appealing and having to get Barristers involved.

Dave
www.scoobyphotos.com
dave@scoobyphotos.com

tiggers

Ah the British way - be forced into letting someone buttf**k you and then be told by all and sundry to like it.

If you weren't guilty then go and see a solicitor who specialises in road traffic offences (some listed on the spedd camera sites on the net) and get his/her advice as to what to do next. If there's a way to appeal they'll know what to do.

tiggers.

hedgehog

I suspect I remember you posting some time back but can't find the thread now.

However, in your situation there is very little you can do as I doubt if you have reasonable grounds for appeal. As far as I am aware they don't have to disclose the evidence to you unless you request it. Did you request disclosure? If you did request disclosure and didn't get the evidence before the case then you would have been within your rights to request an adjournment on the day. Did you do this?

Did you have a solicitor with experience of motoring offences? While this is an expensive road to travel the money would be less than what you will likely pay in increased insurance premiums over the next 5 years. If you did have a solicitor and he or she allowed the case to progress as you describe then I would certainly have words to see what went on.

The police are expert witnesses in these cases and if in their opinion you were exceeding the speed limit then that is sufficient to convict you. There is no requirement for supporting evidence from cameras etc. Like it or not that is the situation. I am sure you have been travelling at 70mph on the motorway and watched a car go past and thought to yourself "he must be doing 120." A police officer can use exactly the same judgement to decide that you were exceeding the speed limit.

As anyone who watches my posts will know I totally oppose the current spate of speed enforcement by police, cameras and little old ladies and I believe we should fight it all the way. However, in this particular case, and without knowing all the circumstances, it is possible that you were lucky to get off without other charges and perhaps even a short spell in jail. Having a solicitor on the day may not even have saved you from the ban. It greatly pains me to say it but when you look back on this after a few years you might consider yourself to have escaped quite lightly and perhaps you should console yourself with that thought today as I really can't see an appeal working at this stage.

Felix.

Why????

Why not just stick to the speed limits like you did on your driving test.

Leslie

If the law has not changed in recent years, one copper can get you for speeding when following you for a reasonable distance(used to be 3/10 of a mile) by comparing your speed against his calibrated speedometer. Two Coppers can get you with their visual estimate of your speed if they are standing by the side of the road and their estimates agree of course.

Les!

Pavlo

People, why don't you pull your self rightous heads out of your buttocks?

He is saying he wasn't speeding at all.

Paul

IanF

This is worrying, I thought that the police had to have more evidence than just them thinking that you were speeding.

I've been pulled twice, both late at night, both times the police claiming that I was doing 90 in a 60 (I know, I know !!!), but was never worried because I knew they didn't have speed equipment in their car.

No action followed (apart from a producer) on both occasions.

Are there any good sites that give what the grounds for conviction are for speeding?

IanF

ian_sadler

Soz to hear the bad news but as an aside I got stopped by two coppers in a traffic car cos "it sounded like I was speeding" WTF - full Scoobysport decat

Had to blow in the bag and was made to take the black rat stickers off the number plates but that was it

adeel.a

All the replies sound constructive, as you can understand my situation... I have never been stopped by the police in my life. I wasn't even driving my scooby when ths happended... I was driving a Jap MR2...

The police claimed that the exhaust was really loud and when they saw me up ahead, because they had to travel 85pmh, they assumed I was also travelling such speeds... I slowed down, not for them but the roundabout up ahead... they didn't follow me because the distance was too far...

My conclusion is to appeal against the sentence but not against the conviction because it sounds like the police are always right!!! NOT If this is British righteous justice, I am ashamed... conviction without evidence... How is this justice?

The court stated that they will endorse the license, what does this really mean... will my license state 'speeding' and if I ever get stopped again will the police be biased against me?

What to do?

sti555

pointless thread

[Edited by sti555 - 1/20/2004 7:40:03 AM]

DocJock

Why do people reply when it is obvious they have not read the previous posts properly (if at all) ?

STi, it has been stated more than once HE WAS NOT SPEEDING. Why then, should he accept punishment for a *crime* he did not commit?

Try not being so judgemental, especially when you have got your facts wrong.

sti555

Docjock,

he has'nt said he was'nt speeding, just he was not doing 40mph over he limit, how about 30, 25 etc etc.

Look at the facts, & the outcome

Old_Fart

The endorsement is indeed added physically to your driving liscence for all to see. There it reamins for 5(?) years..at which time you can get a new 'clean' licsence. You *do* need to tell your insurance company about it now though, regardless if the appeal That could prove very expensive
Would it bias a policeman in future...well generally I don't carry my liscence about with me...so they don't see it. However if they are aware of your conviction it could indeed make them consider your case more harshly IMHO. FOr all they know, by looking at your record, you are a habitual offender who didn't learn your lesson the last time.....
Cman

adeel.a

Pardon me for addressing you as 'old fart' I'm sure you have a nice name...

However, that is an extremley valid point about insurance and the police if I get stopped again... that is why I would like to appeal against if not anything else, but the endorsement i.e. the sentence.

It tarnishes me for no reason... I pay around £980pa for my insurance. I have 5+NCB... how much will it increase by should you think...

Thanks all in advance

Beastie

iTrader: (2)

Old Fart is close but not absolutely correct.
The endorsement stays on your licence for 4 years after which it can be removed if you send your licence away or change your address. A new licence isnt automatically sent to you.

After 3 years the endorsement doesnt count against you for adding up etc. (exception to this is Drink Driving which is 11 years and 10)

Beastie

Leslie

If they are saying that they thought you were speeding because they were driving at 85 mph to catch up with you then they should not have a case unless they actually caught up and were formating behind you to check your actual speed against their speedo for the minimum distance. There is no way they can estimate your speed correctly when they are behind you with an overtake speed. If the two were saying that they estimated your speed then both coppers should have been in court and they still would have been wrong anyway. I think you were very unfairly and incorrectly treated.

Les

adeel.a

So, Les... you can understand how I feel...

It may be strong terms but I feel mentally raped of my innocence... I feel that I have lost all dignity... I almost feel helpless because I don't know what the outcome could be even I do appeal against the conviction... 'against the police'... aren't they always right... supposing they are the 'good guys'!

If it is in favour of me then I would love to go ahead, but if I have not got a chance then I need to know not to appeal, or whether I have good grounds to appeal on.

I guess I am waiting for the 'go ahead' from a positive source.

I am still very puzzled...

289

If you have legal cover on your insurance, now is the time to use it!

MrShades

Additionally, there is a very good reason why the DVLA recommend that you fold your driving licence in a certain way and keep it in the plastic wallet....

....as, if you are stopped, a police officer is not allowed to remove the licence from the wallet and therefore see what endorsements you may, or may not, have. That could prejudice his decision, obviously, and we wouldn't want that

Therefore, whatever points or bans you have on your licence will not make a shaddow of differene if you are stopped and asked to produce your licence at the road-side.

Shades

adeel.a

That is a strong point, I have still got an old style license and not a new photocard one yet...

The DVLA will be sending mine back to me via the post. If and when I do get a photocard license, will the endorsement show on that or will it be on the counterpart.

Also, good thinking about the legal cover, which I have... how will the insurance legal cover help me... pardon my ignorance...

Jolly Green Monster

iTrader: (4)

I think your problem is going to be that the Police officers involved obviously believe you were speeding.. and a court do have a lot of respect for an officers opinion..

It would be worth discussing your case with a good motoring offences lawyer although I am not sure what they can do now, might have helped at the hearing.

The endorsements are on the paper part that you still get with a photo licence.

Speeding is becoming more and more common and insurance companies are much better than they used to be about it..

Did you get any points or just a ban?

JGM

hedgehog

Can I suggest that you take a look at www.pepipoo.com where there is a case study of an event similar to the one you report, complete with video, it is in the real cases section.

In this case the police report the speed of the other vehicle as between 94 and 104 mph. If you view the available evidence, even just the stuff on the web site, you will be pretty convinced that the victim never got anywhere near 104mph but that the police car probably did to "catch up."

This didn't stop a successful prosecution.

In view of this information you may care to consider your case and you may want to ask if there was a video recorded on the date in question. Unless you launch an appeal and request disclosure then there is no reason for them to give you this video and even if you do request disclosure they may not give it to you as they may say they will not be using it as part of their prosecution etc. They are required to give you the video only a short while before any court hearing which piles the pressure and expense on you. Again it comes down to the "fact" in law that if two police officers say you were speeding then you were speeding. To appeal against this point of law would probably bankrupt you long before you had achieved anything at all. The CPS would probably take it all the way if necessary and they have a lot more cash than you.

It may certainly be worthwhile to seek legal advice from a solicitor experienced in traffic law but no matter how badly done by you feel there is no provision in law for taking your feelings into account. If you feel the police stitched you up and lied to secure your conviction then you will not be the only one, I know several people in a similar position, but the best thing you can do is, probably, to forget about it and move on. Easy to say, I know, but in the long term it might be the best route.

adeel.a

Jollly Green Monster, it was a sraight ban from a clean driving record... not even half a point... been driving for 6 years...

mart360

to quote a phrase""

you must prove your innocence,,,, the old bill only have to prove guilt.... which they have done in this case...

prhaps if you do decide to apeal, you could post "ALL" the evidence on here...

i,m surprised that so many "legal experts" offer there opinions
without seeing all the evidence....

dont take this as a dig,, i appreciate you feel agreived, but unless all the facts are disclosed from both sides it makes any discussions subjective,,,


what was your councils stance during this case????

mart

adeel.a

Mart... you're absolutley right, without knowing both sides of the story, no one can decide anything.

However, how can one prove what the'word' of a police officer who states that he has no proof and the only way he accused/suspected/convicted me for speeding is because he had to travel 85mph and when asked how he knew this, was it recorded...

The only evidence he provided was 'when he last looked at the speedo he saw that he was travelling 85mph in order to close the distance between us'.

I was much ahead of him slowing down approaching a roundabout where we met; letting traffic off the roundabout and going across; that's when the officers requested me to stop.

There were 2 officers at the scene, only 1 officer turned up in court.

How do I prove that I was not speeding?!? Initially he was a few cars behind me behind a transit van which he had to overtake in order to catch up with me... the limit is 40mph... while he drove a 2.0 diesel and I drove a 2.0 Turbo... ofcourse my accelaration would be quicker than his... not necessarily exceeding 40mph.

So you see my predicament... The officers 'word' over mine without evidence, a conviction.

I didn't understand the bit about what stance the council took on this; pardon my comprehension... what did you mean?

Thanks

OllyK

Felix

This gets debated time and time again, but just to re-itterate:
1) Speed does not kill perse, inappropriate speed kills
2) Speed cameras are not saving lives
3) Responsibility is being taken away from drivers, they are starting to think that as long as they are not exceeding the speed limit they will not have an accident.
4) There is no substitute for driver skill and observation
5) Safe roads are having speed limits reduced by beaurocrats as part of the "Speed Kills" campaign rather than beeing set at suitable levels by road engineers. As a result some dual carriage ways have had the speed reduced from 70/60 to 50 or even 40.
6) Speed limits should not be an absolute, what is a safe speed when the road is clear and the conditions are dry etc is not the same as when it is busy and icy.
7) We need to improve driver skill, training and education and put more skilled police officers on the road to enforce road traffic law in an intelligent way rather than relying on dumb cameras.
8) Cameras catch people who exceed the speed limit, they do not catch; drunk drivers, drugged drivers, tired drivers, drivers using hand held mobile phones, drivers doing their hair, drivers read the paper / a map, driver without road tax, drivers without insurance, drivers who have stolen carr etc etc. Personally I think I am safer at 5 mph over the speed limit (assuming I consider it safe to do so) than any of the people mentioned in the earlir list.

I passed the Advanced Motoring Test many years ago as well as passing my Cat C and C+E. Observation is such a major point with all of these, and if you want a real eye opener - get a motorbike for a while! I am looking way ahead down the road when I am driving, continualy asessing what is going on, looking for people who may be doing to do something silly, watching for pedestrians nearing the kerb and so on, that is what driving is about, not watching your speddo 40% of the time and thinking "I'm alright Jack", that attitude kills people!

Here endeth the rant!