Page 1 of 2
one for the lawyers out there..........
Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 4:48 pm
by David Bryce
A mate has posted this elswhere:
I was pulled over yesterday for alledgedy doing 91mph on a dual carriageway and got the standard 3 points and £60 notice.
The officer who pulled me was not a traffic plod, and used one of those handheld guns that record trees doing 28mph! I told him that I was not doing 91, just 77 (which you cant be ticketed for) and I wanted to see his training certificate to use the radar gun - plus the guns calibration certificate within the 28 days I am allowed before making a decision on whether to go to court. Also he could not have my licence as that would be an admission of guilt and I am allowed a 7 day period in which to produce it anyway. Additionally on the ticket he described my blue car as silver
Is it worth arguing, or do these cases always end up with a conviction?
what do you guys think?
Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 5:03 pm
by ed
Hmmm, tough one! They will throw the book at him if he loses!
How many points has he already got?!
Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 5:05 pm
by The_Rossatron
If he was actually doing 77 then I'd say definately worth arguing!
if he's trying to pull a fast one... then no.
Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 5:16 pm
by DDtB
Surely if he admits he was doing 77 then he has admitted to actually exceeding the speedlimit on that road by 7 mph and they can do him for that...
I was under the impression that the 10% above speedlimit threshold was to allow for equipment errors/discretion on the part of the police etc. but if the alleged offender actually states they knowingly exceeding the speedlimit....regardess of by how much, I'd be a little concerned about the implications of that!!
but then I'm not a lawyer so I don't actually know!!
Re: one for the lawyers out there..........
Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 5:19 pm
by Skyenet
David Bryce wrote:
just 77 (which you cant be ticketed for)
I wonder where in law it says you can't be ticketed for doing 77. If the speed limit is 70 then surely 77 is still breaking the speed limit. I do realise that some Police Forces do follow guidelines that allow for something like
10% plus 2mph but that is only a guideline as far as I know.
If his speedo said 77 then I would reckon worth fighting it as most speedos
that I have checked against a GPS over read by about 8-10%, except the Elise which was 100% accurate
Iain
Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 5:19 pm
by mac
He's just admitted to breaking the law - what an idiot!
Mac
Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 5:20 pm
by DDtB
He'd better hope Me, Mac & Iain aren't on his jury then....
Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 5:23 pm
by simon
Yep, pretty dumb and tbh I think that for £60 and 3 points assuming he was actually doing 91 he should really just accept it.
Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 5:52 pm
by thinfourth
If he was doing 77 in a 70 then they will bugger him anyway
For all the hassle and grief just send off the tax bill and accept the 3 points because if he goes to court then he will be punished for fighting the system so will get higher fine and more points
Sucks big style but he is worse then any kitten killing baby eater hes a car driver
Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 5:57 pm
by MacK
I would say if he is alledged to have been doing 91, but is adamant he wasn't and was doing 'considerably' less than 91, then they (the police) should provide the relevant 'evidence' he is looking for and legally entitled to ask for and see.
He shouldn't have admitted exeeding the speed limit, but thats not the point if he wasn't doing 91.
/not a lawyer faction/
Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:15 pm
by PhilA
more then ever, we are in the need of the help of
Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:20 pm
by DDtB
PhilA wrote:more then ever, we are in the need of the help of
dooooo beeee doooo dooooo...... doooo doooo beeeee doooooo.....
Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 6:35 pm
by mac
I wouldn't be suprised if it was to catch folk out -
Under caution "you were doing 98" - "no, I was only doing 82" clink.
Mac
Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 9:20 pm
by tut
If he had been doing 77 on his speedo, actual in most cars would be around 74, he would not have been pulled.
Likely hood is that he was doing what he was booked for.
tut
Posted: Sat Mar 03, 2007 12:16 am
by Mr Momo
you do the crime - now do the time.......