Oh well it had to happen didn't it,
took on the might of Nottinghamshire Police, the Speed Camera people and all associated with them today in court, in a very tense battle, which lasted just over 2 hrs, they used all the tricks they knew, underhand tactics, some very clever denials but alas i used the shield of common sense,truth & flashed my baby blues at the lady judge.


In the case of Kemp V's the Crown......................................


WE FIND THAT THE DEFENDANT USED ALL DILLAGENCE AT HIS DISPOSAIL TO ASSCERTAIN WHO THE DRIVER OF THE VEHICLE WAS AT THE ALLEDGED TIME OF THE OFFENCE, THE PROSECUTION HAVE LOST / NOT SENT SOME VITAL INFORMATION WHICH COULD HAVE HELPED THE DEFENDANT IN HIS QUEST TO IDENTIFY THE DRIVER. THEREFORE WE FIND THE DEFENDANT

NOT GUILTY, OF BOTH CHARGES, CASE DISMISSED, Mr. KEMP U ARE FREE TO LEAVE THE COURT

:

THE MILKY BARS ARE ON ME

More details on what they did wrong and missed later i need BEER

 

Congratulations mate, well done
Dont let the blouses on here tell you otherwise either
astraboy.

 

Nice one Dazza01 - enjoy that beer.

tiggers.

 

Come on then Daz don't keep us all in suspense

 

Whey - 2 fingers the scamera crew!! Nice one m8

 

well done

 

The lady judge was obviously distracted by your baby blues - that or her spelling is atrocious

 

well done

 

nice one.

 

ok wrote down what happened, but it was 3 pages long, so will keep it short and sweet
Date of offence 15th May 2003
1, NIP took 38 days to reach me, they said i wasn't registered keeper, yet 9 days after buying the car from York, (which happened to be 5 days before the offence) where i actually brought a tax disc so the V5 was sent straight off, i was pulled over by a traffic car on the A52 in Bramcote at 02.48 in the morning, i was on way home from work, they check the car over, no prolems check the reg number ask me my name, addy to confirm all ok, producer to take to the nearest and show MOT / Insurance.

All fine and dandy

2. When i finally receive the NIP, 38 days after event, who was driving me or the wife as the car is used daily by both of us ???, so i call them ask for piccy so i can identify driver, they say i must write in and request it. But in the meantime because i haven't filled in and signed the NIP, i could be liable for the offence of failing to furnish driver details so in haste i fill in NIP but forget to sign it and also send letter attached stating i am not owning up to this untill i see the piccy

Well no piccy so August 25th I send new letter asking where piccy is ? i also state that i called before and that this is the 2nd letter i sent, well in court they ask me to produce copy of said letter **** me i forgot it, got all others but that one, but has luck would have it, the witness says that she has seen the said letter, so the judge then asks her for the copy, well blow me down with a feather she's lost her copy too but because under oath she has stated receiving the letter and reading it, she was then asked why they didn't send me a copy ????
Her reply was on the offence of failing to furnish u don't need photo evidence, true but this was to aid me to identify the driver of a speding offence not failing to furnish.

So in the end they went out to chatter amoungst themselves for 10 minutes as they do, came back in and agreed with me that i had done everthing possible to identify the driver but was not helped by them losing a copy of the letter requesting it and then not sending me a copy of the piccy :

NOT GUILTY, U R FREE TO GO
There is justice in the world sometimes

ps... the witness is the lady from Arnold HQ who checks the NIP's and signs them before they are sent to you

 

Well done, excellent result especially as paragraph 4 defences (no idea who was driving) are becoming more and more difficult to win on after several high profiles ones recently.

Everyone should take note of this: at least DEMAND to see all the evidence they have against you. In many cases no evidence is presented, indicating that it is lost, illegal in some way or just plain incorrect and they are not willing to open it to examination. If they do send you evidence which you think screws you then you have the option to plead guilty at any point.

This general persecution of motorists has to stop and the only way to stop it is to fight it.

 

Thx's all for the replies chaps, my spelling's terrible or is it my fingers are too quick for my brain

just remember chaps i was lucky on this occasion,
next time i might not be

but there's 4 bottles of Stella in the fridge waiting for me when i get home in the morning couldn't have a beer earlier cos of work

 

Nice one Dazza, my boss has managed this 4 times now

 

PMSL

Well done mate. I got the text today but thought WTF's this as i was having a sh1te in a clients office (not literally although that would of been novel and livened things up )

Congrats anyway mate, have more beer!

 

excellent i used similar tactic of 'cannot be certain who was driving' back in 1997 when i was nip'd for dangerous driving, it never even went to court.

 

Well done Dazza - it does restore a little bit of faith in the system when you hear stories like this. Just goes to show if everyone fought the tickets rather than just paying the fine, the whole system would collapse. They'd never cope with the number of cases and the number that would be thrown out for things such as this would cost them so much that they would have to rethink the whole speed camera policy. So you all know what to do!

Chris

 

I agree with Chris, and everyone else, it is important to keep fighting them if you want to continue to be allowed to drive at all.

One thing I will urge though is caution when it comes to the paragraph 4 (I didn't know who was driving at the time...) defence.

It is perjury to tell lies in court, don't do it. The police will do it, don't lower yourself to their level.

Some magistrates are given to look upon the para4 defence as a mere attempt to escape what they believe is justice. This has become more marked of late as they were, certainly in some areas, sent a little memo telling them to hit para4 defences hard. Many demand the most stringent levels of proof that you can't possibly know who was driving, and even then are prone to handing down random and summary convictions.

I would, therefore, suggest that you use the paragraph 4 defence only in situations where you honestly do not know who was driving and that you be prepared to prove that you couldn't possibly know. As you can imagine proving that you don't know something is much, much harder than proving that you do know something. It looks to me like Dazza was successful mostly because the CPS cocked up rather than because of his defence, he got off on what you might describe as a technicality.

So, despite the courts being fair and independant (yeah, right. Did you know they actually benefit financially from speeding fines as they are members of the camera partnerships?) they are also under orders to close the flood gates on paragraph 4 defences.

Good luck to everyone fighting the persecution of motorists but be careful out there, the government hate you for it. However, even though paragraph 4 is now difficult people are still winning on it and there are lots of other effective defences.

 

Nice one Dazza, Drinks on you m8 Have a good un

 

Thx's again guy's

Scoobchrissy, the pic's come out well m8, thx's alot, see ya Sunday

Dazza
<<<1hr to go before the stella gets it>>>

 

excellent news mate. my case was rather more drawn out (8 court appearances over 10 months!) but also resulted in a not guilty verdict, which happened to be on my birthday last year! what a present that was! like getting my licence for the 1st time all over again!

keep fighting

Owain

 

Nice one m8,

oh and do i take the corner

 

Excellent result! Positive proof that people should fight before they are convicted. Especially if you do not know who was driving.

 

Dazza,

Excellent result.

If you don't mind me asking how much did this cost you? Or did the court award costs to be covered, if so how much would it have cost had you lost?

Damian.

 

You handled that well Dazza.

Les

 

Excellent mate - one for the little guy, and one in the face for the extorting persecuters with a naive sense of simplistic 'you did bad' morality. NICE ONE!

I recently demanded that a pic of my alledged heinous 'wheel in a bus lane' offence was sent to me as I wasnt willing to assume my unproven guilt. It came 5 months later - this morning. However I can't apply your experience though - the pic deffo had stubble and manly shoulders (very unflattering lighting though, cough!) D

 

Thats great news, I bet their faces were a picture...............

 

Now that's a toughy, it cost me £4.80 to park my car in Broadmash car park for the time i was there

I went to a solicitor but he wanted in excess of £700 to represent me while not having that money the throw away, as i was assuming i would be convicted anyway i decided to go it alone.
So i went along told the judges the story, gave the prosecutor some sh!te, when in the witness box he asked me why i couldn't remember who was in the car 38 days prior to receiving the NIP, i then bet him that he didn't know what the date was 38 days ago let alone know where his car was
that pi$$ed him off somewhat

Got no costs awarded, i was told i was NOT GUILTY which was good enough for me

 

B2Z - no mate fraid you are still up for one... [Actually I dont mind paying mine after seeing the pic. My mistake? Well I wore a front number plate this ONE time I drove to work on 4 wheels instead of 2 - hands up cowboy!)