kart_man

A friend of mine was recently caught on film by one of our Gatzo friends, and has asked for the picture to verify who was driving. StrathClyde police have replied saying that the won't supply the picture !
Surely they have to produce it when asked to ??? Anyone had any similar experiences ?
( posted here as well as scoobynet general for any local input )

ozzy

AFAIK, it's up to the owner of the vehicle to dispute the fine. I'm unsure of the appeal procedure, but I think it would need to go to court for the picture to be shown in evidence either for or against the vehicle.

I don't think there's any procedure in between accepting the fine and disputing it through the courts

Stefan

Amanda-Jane

Have you heard of how to get away with it??

If you ask when he machine was last calibrated then you could get away with it, depending on how long ago it was done. I'll try and find out from my friend how long it is before you get away with it!

AJx

SVX33

yeh think that can work AJ was it a static or mobile camera?

you can say it was someone else driving the car but i think you now have to prove that this is/was the case, failure to inform the courts of who the driver was results also in a charge, correct me if im wrong anyone (just passing on what ive heard in the past).

Where in bonnie scotland you from AJ?
got a scoobaru?
Al

Amanda-Jane

On any form of device that can catch you speeding!

I'm in Hamilton, not got a Scooby yet but very soon

AJx

SVX33

quality! didnt realise it could be for any speeding device, although it makes sense that it is to me i guess.

ahh Hamilton, thats where i go to buy all my ICE for my scoob, not that its an impreza mind you, bit rarer than that

so what Impreza you after?

Al
x

Amanda-Jane

I hope that you are not one of the muppets that annoy me then! I only live round the corner from XS.

AJ

SVX33

moi? muppet? steady!

im from Edinburgh, my tunes are loud but not that loud if thats what you meant by being annoyed.

check the link to see if my cars one of the offenders, surely not!

http://www.scoobynet.co.uk/bbs/thread.asp?threadid=82669

not me!
Al

Amanda-Jane

seen the car about but it is normally the nova's and vtr's that annoy me

AJ

SVX33

yeh and im likely to drive one of them, not that there is owt wrong with them *much* lol

how have people been annoying you? just get some guys from scoobynet to sort them out.

Amanda-Jane

I've met a few of the guys at XS recently

They come round the back of XS and use where I live as a test track along with the guys from Reg Vardy

AJ

SVX33

cool

test track, take it that does your head in then?

just wait til you get your scooby then you can annoy people too :0

mines isnt very loud, will be when its sold and replaced with impreza.

Al
ICQ 14787817

Stan Thorogood

kart_man, if there is more than one person on the insurance your pal may get away with it. Say that you cannot remember who was driving the vehicle that day.

only himself on insurance - keep quiet and pay up or get done for driving without etc

Robertio

iTrader: (1)

I believe that they have to provide the photo. If I get the chance I'll have a check later.

BTW, a gatso would not require any calibration as you can count the number of painted white lines between the 2 photos.

Cosie Convert

Ah, but wouldn't it still need a calibration check for the time interval between the two photo's ??

John Stevenson

Welcome to Scoobynet Stan !!!!!

Robertio

iTrader: (1)

Fair point CC

Having checked ukspeedtraps they do indeed need to be calibrated. According to which, if it goes to court then the accused must be supplied with the original evidence (although I can see no reason why it can't just be handed to you just before you walk into court (hopefully there is one))

kart_man

Thanks for all the input.
I believe the camera was on Great Western Road, but I'm not 100% sure. I'll find out and post later.
Dave

alter_ego

The two on Gt. Western Rd. are bulletproof location-wise, I'm afraid.

AE

Gordo

a friend of mine genuinely didn't know who was driving, him or his wife, and the picture couldn't distinguish between them. the police just dropped the case as no-one could honestly apportion blame.

good luck

G

alter_ego

It looks like they are being economical with the truth. It's probably because of the wording your friend used. AIUI Home Office guidelines tell the Police not to automatically send out the 'photos in case of potential 'embarrassment' to the occupants. However, your friend should ask to see the alledged 'evidence' before filling in any forms. The police must produce the evidence when asked. In some English Force areas this action in itself is enough to derail the process (ISTR reading elsewhere at the time that this is what happened here (5th last paragraph); it's far more cost effective for staff to process several uncontested guilty pleas than to go through the admin of dealing with even a query.

I cannot emphasise this enough; you must get the 'photo for various reasons.
A little known technicality about photography based systems (e.g. traditional Gatsos) is that the 'photo cannot be digitally enhanced. If you cannot make out the number plate from the original, the evidence is no good. Further, for corroboration you should be able to make out the white stripes on the road so that you can work out the speed from the position of the car in the two images.

There are other things concerning location; if you tell me which camera it was and I know it I'll post more if they apply.

BTW, was your friend the owner and driver or was he the driver of someone els's car and the owner has already fingered him?

A_E (IANAL)


(Edited to add B.B.C. link)

[Edited by alter_ego - 4/9/2002 8:00:35 PM]