Neil Smalley

Ok,

Say my car get's photgraphed for speeding and I get a nice little letter in the post asking me who was driving.

What would be the likely outcome if I told them my cousin from Morroco was visiting and drove my car that time after getting KPH and MPH mixed up. I then give a made up address(or an actual one if I can find the morrocan yellow pages) and say there we go mr policeman please do im. Even better, persuade a friend abroad to take the rap pay him some money plus extra and bobs your perverting the course of justice.

I've complied by identifying the driver and the police have so much paperwork I suspect it'll take 6 months to progress and they won't even bother.

Just curious as to the probable outcome. I reckon it'd be dropped.

Mr.Cookie

They'd probably find out you were lying and send you to the bottom with no chance whatso ever of getting back to the<B>TOP</B>

Si
Ps Ain't got a clue really

Neil Smalley

Another question. I understand any points recieved goes on your international driving record. What's that?

Also. What's to stop me swanning off to France, getting a french license and using that everytime I get done?

RonaldoH

Thats ok, if you do get done for it they will know your plan now!!

I do see your logic, although there is a loophole.

R

pslewis

Just say that you - honestly - cannot recall who was driving that car on that date on that part of the road as other drivers have access to the vehicle. This is of course all true, by the way, I am NOT saying lie!

They cannot prosecute the CAR for speeding and MUST prosecute the driver - they must therefore determine who the driver was - and prove it 'BEYOND ALL DOUBT' .... pretty hard from the picture of the back of a car??

The reason that they still prosecute is because most would rather just pay up - what happens to those who own cars that have more than one driver and cannot honestly remember who was driving???? (they do NOT get called to court thats what!!) they cannot allow one of these getting into the papers!!

Just my views entirely!!

Pete

Dave T-S

Neil
Let us know if you are prosecuted or not M8

Paul M

Neil, I was once advised by an Inspector from the West country to do exactly this although when I did get caught by a camera 45 in a 30 zone....camera 30 paces in from a national speed limit.... but then I should have seen it ...if it wasnt hidden behind a road sign...Bast****..I decided to own up and take the rap, they could tell from the photo, the driver was white, mdium build, dark hair and wearing glasses..ie me, Id be weary about ps lewis's advice..perverting the course of justice is a jail offence so is contempt of court!!

Puff The Magic Wagon!

iTrader: (2)

Neil

I do not believe there is an "International Driving Record".

Used to have an Irish licence, which I swopped for an N.I. version. Clocked up a speeding and a bald tyre on it, which never showed. Great thinks I & applies for a UK provisional, which turned up with 6pts!

Eventually took my UK test & had 2 licences, but there was no benefit points wise. However, when couriering in London, I once got stopped by plod for parking within the studs before a pedestrian crossing. When he saw I had a NI licence, groaned, saw another courier behind me & said

"Pretend you've just got 3 points & look cheesed off - I can't be bothered with all the paperwork, so I'm going to do him instead - now **** off!"

When you get stopped & you produce a non-UK licence, they check with DVLA for any UK bans. I imagine the "driving whilst disq" aspect should put one off.

Your original is also "Perverting the course of Justice" & that's imprisonable for quite a few years I think

Leigh

All the more reason to get your rear windows blacked out! (like mine! )

Stuart H

Sorry, not going to get drawn into this one.

I wouldn't recommend perverting the course of justice, unless of course you like prison food and the occasional "Parkhurst press-up"

Neil Smalley

Just want to say this was theoretical and is by no means a real example. Saw a post debating grassing up someone's brother who had denied all knowledge of it on the alt.transport news group.

GM

On the topic of International Driving Licences...

A few years ago a certain Mr McRae got himself a 6 month ban. Conveniently he had a Finnish driving licence as well as his UK one. He couldn't drive in the UK but he was able to drive anywhere else on the Finnish licence. Equally conveniently, he managed to time the ban for March to September (or something like that) so he could compete in some treasure hunt or other that November.

G

boomer

Neil,

taking this (theoretically) even further - what if you said that someone else in your house/flat (who was around at the time, and had access to your keys) was driving. Maybe they don't have an alibi, but neither do you!

It can't be proved either way (for driving or lying), so neither of you can be prosecuted.

Surely it is _much_ easier for the Police to stop you at the time (and possibly use some discretion)? At least they would always get the right person.

mb

Neil Smalley

Boomer, Agreed.

This kinda thing is IMHO farcical. Stuart is quite right when he said it's perverting the course of justice, but when the police are so overworked how in hell are they going to find time to check? We know they'll just ditch the ticket and move on. Not fair, possibly, how it should be, no way, does it happen, apsolutley!

I mean, I could arrange such a thing with my best mate in Australia. IF, big IF he get's the NIP. He writes back and says 'you got me here sport, here's the 60 quid'. I don't get any points(neither does he) the only that effect me is the fine, which compared to the impact of the points is minimal.

As far as the police know it's all legit. How can they PROVE otherwise? Perverting course of justice needs evidence, unlike a lot of motoring convictions. I can't see the police wading thru millions of immigration records just to check something like that. IF records are kept of who enters and leaves the country at all, I doubt this is the case!

Hopefully this has'nt put the wrong ideas in people's heads but it does go to show what a daft system we have put in place, and are escalating at a rapid rate of knots.

Would'nt it be fun if everyone fought these things in the courts, rather than just coughed up.

Paul M

Pete, You seem to forget whats actually coming out of your **** sometimes

You didnt say, if you honestly cant remember
What you actually wrote was:
Just say, that you - honestly - cannot recall who was driving

Check your grammar M8

If you say that Honestly you cant remember, when honestly you can...thats perverting the course of justice in a court of law, and out of court probably obstructing a police office in course of his duties.

If you say it in court, when you've taken an Oath, thats contempt of court

Pete, it was a forward facing unit, I guess technology hasnt reached trailer tents then yet, eh?

All theoretically speaking of course
Paul

fast bloke

Neil,
If your Morrocan cousin got his MPH's and KPH's mixed up, surely he would be gonig slower? If you tell pold this, they will think you are taking the pi55 and look into it further. My advice would be, if you feel the need to tell lies then make them so close to the truth that you youself forget the real truth. This way you can't be tripped up by a clever dectective when you are in a small cell being questioned about perverting the course of the big J

Dave T-S

Theoretically, if you keep to the (theoretical) speed limit, the theoretical would become hypothetical....

pslewis

PaulM - go back and read my comments and issue an public apology

I did NOT say pervert the course of ......

NIETHER did I say be in contemp of court ....

OK?? What I DID say was, (Watch my lips PaulM - you have a problem with the written word) - if you honestly cannot remember who was driving at that time blah blah blah .. then they have to prove it was you.

Also Paul - so the GASTSO flashed you as approached it did it?????????????? dont think so mate!!!! lets blind every speeding motorist with two flashes right in the windscreen??? hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Anyway you can ask for the photo that will be used in evidence (to check who was driving) - if you still cant HONESTLY say who it was then niether can the prosecution.

All the above is NOT contempt or perverting the course of justice!!!

Pete

pslewis

Does anyone know what kind of offence speeding is???

It cant be criminal or we would all have records

But I dont think it is civil either??

So?? this begs the question - does the case have to be proved 'Beyond all reasonable doubt' OR 'on the balance of probability' ??

Pete

James Douglas

My mate was gatso'd on a bike - he said it wasnt him, couldnt remember who borrowed the bike etc. Went to court, Judge looked at photo, asked him if it he has black leathers, said it was obviously my mate and gave him 3 points and moved on to the next case - no messin. You aint gonna get around the law. Even if you have a decent case, theyll still get you. Another mate was done for doing 80mph on a motorway - going up a hill towing a big Boat. He was a solicitor, so he got evidence that it was theoretically impossible for him to be doing 80mph (weight and engine power etc). He got aerial shots and topological charts of the area as well. The judge took one look, and bascically told him the copper saw what he saw and gave him the points anyway!! His brief said the Judge in question was a "hanging judge" who always sided with the police.

I'd accept your 3 points as bad luck and move on. Its not worth the hassle of ruining your life!!!

James

Stuart H

Speeding offences are officially classed as criminal offiences, although they do not provide you with a PNC record.

Speeding is contrary to s89 (1) RTA 1988
<I>Any person who drives a motor vehicle on a road at a speed exceeding a limit imposed by or under any enactment to which this section applies shall be guilty of an offence</I>

Section 89(2) require that a person prosecuted for exceeding the speed limit should not be convicted solely on the evidence of one person. Corroboration of the offence can be provided by VASCAR or similar speed measuring systems.

Forward facing cameras (which don't flash) are now springing up which record the face of the driver, thus preventing people saying they were not driving the vehicle at the time of the alleged offence.

owbow

I've been flashed in the face by a Gatso, but never got a NIP, there were only lines on the other side of the road too.. someone told me badly-adjusted ones do this?!

weird...

Owain McRae.

pslewis

PaulM - you should have nothing to fear a forward facing camera as it is plain to everyone that you have your head stuck right up your 4rse!!!

By the way if it is a criminal offence then the burden of evidence is much higher than in a civil case - hence if they cant prove who was driving then the case fails - simple!!

Pete

Neil Smalley

I thought that if you wrote and said "Dunno who was driving mate, we all took in turns that day" you as the registered keeper got the points.

I.e You have to prove your innocence and not guilt.

pslewis

You have to prove you are innocent????

Nahhhh youve got it all wrong - THEY (the prosecution) have to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that you ARE guilty .. you, as the registered keeper need do nothing at all, say nothing at all; except that you are not sure who was driving, and if a penalty is issued - immediately appeal (do all this through the duty solicitor, its free) You do NOT lie at all - you just let the prosecution prove their case. If they prove that you were driving then ok, you take the penalty - no contempt, no perversion - you just needed evidence produced as you cannot be sure who was driving the car (its a absolutely reasonable request and well within your rights)

Let me just say that I think speeding should be punished and I have only had one speeding offence in 26 years of driving.

I have attended court many times in my youth (I was a bit of a terror!!) but I always had a top brief and I NEVER EVER got done for anything.

Last time I was in court was 4 months ago, the courts hold no fear whatsoever for me and I understand how they work.

Its just all this, 'just pay up' nonsense that gets me. If you cant be sure who was driving then say so and hold onto your guns - husbands and wives often share the driving - imagine if they change over at a motorway station and either just before or just after the car is snapped speeding ...... they may, Honestly, not remember who was driving at that moment in time. So, the prosecution has to help them out with some evidence.

Interesting these 'forward facing' cameras that take a nice photo of the face, as well as the car numberplate, the definition cannot be good at all (and the photo cannot be enhanced - as that is tampering with the evidence and renders it inadmissable). What about in the dark then??? it still takes a nice clear pin sharp photo of your features through a smoked glass screen without flash?? hmmmmmmmmm yeah right!! - this is all just like the TV licence Detector vans ... you ALL know they dont actually work and never have been able to dont you??? they have always worked on the address without licence principle ( but it scared a lot of people into buying licences so it worked!!)

If the story of this David Bailey front view camera slows people down then its a great thing - but it cant work at all times in all weather (imagine a windscreen wiper straight across the offenders face!!!!) - will he be wearing that in court? - of course not!!!

pete

Edited to improve the grammar for PaulM

[This message has been edited by pslewis (edited 06 February 2001).]

Col

Owbow,
There are two gatsos near me that do exactly the same, I think they must be set up wrong. They flash twice at anything over 90mph, but by the time the second flash as gone you are well past it and some poor bugger that is coming the other way thinks they have been caught!

boomer

James Douglas,

if your friend was indeed convicted because he wore black leathers then the judge himself should be sent down on grounds of insanity - that is NOT justice And as for the "hanging judge" - i am afraid that he should be humamely PUT down!

oxbow,

there appears to be a "problem" with normal (radar) gatsos such as they can be triggered by approaching vehicles (who are not on the "detect" side of the road). Maybe you should formally complain to the council that they are a danger to drivers at night and should be removed on the grounds of road safety!

pslewis,

the forward facing cameras take pictures in the infra-red spectrum (with an IR flash) so they do work at night, and i guess (seeing as they are _approved_) get a decent picture of you. Maybe we should all start wearing balaclavas!!!!

mb

pslewis

Infra-red?????

Yes for the speed detection system - but surely not IR film??? have you seen a IR photo??? hardly will convince a court!!!!

Pete

Paul M

I was caught by a Forward facing Ir camera, SO they do Actually work (Pete). As Stuart H said it is a criminal offence and known as an Absolute offence, so a magistrate usually only needs to take the 'OPINION'..thats right 'OPINION' (not innocent until proven) to convict. I quote'Police Officers have little difficulty in finding a motorist who is speeding, so it is difficult to convince a court that the policemen is committing purjury and that the offence wasn't committed'
Basically if a copper nicks you for speeding via any medium, its gonna be tricky to get off!
Theres some sort of precedent from Lister v Bucks. Constab 1975
The reverend Lister was stopped for speeding, he pleeded Not Guilty, He swore on the bible that he was absolutly not speeding and that with his belief in God Almighty he could not lie under Oath else, he would spend his lifetime in hell & damnation, the judge conferred with the single police officer who witnessed the act..... and was found guilty!

pslewis

Well, all I will say is - I would like to see a court get away with fining me for someone else driving my car at an illegal speed!! - it just wouldnt happen

I would get all my costs re-paid by the prosecution too .... they wouldn't dare allow it to go to appeal.

So? its enough to say that in the 'opinion' of the magistrate you are guilty then you are??? this is all new to me - but it may be right (although I have to say that I am very very rarely wrong) I reckon my brief would eat this assumption for breakfast and then come back for more.

Pete