Have the police made a mistake?
- Thread starter Liam-O
- Start date
Thats quite funny.Liam-O said:
A couple of years back my wife was stopped after the police followed her for a mile and once in the back of the van asked if she had had her phone in her hand sitting at the traffic lights. She didnt think she had done anything wrong as all she did was lift her phone from on top of her bag on the passenger seat and put it in the cradle attached to the window, it had her satnav running.
They started writing out a ticket saying she was using her mobile phone which she wasnt. She was sitting stationary at a set of lights with the engine off(mini stop start system)
No amount of check my phone I wasnt actually using it, my satnav is running worked.
The summons came through and we decided to get a lawyer as it was now the principal of it.
Went to court, police lied saying they saw her pressing buttons on her phone (smart phone, no buttons) while it was at waist height trying to hide it (wouldnt be able to see at any angle) and both cops stories were different.
Got thrown out of court but cost £300 for the lawyer. Would have been £100 and 3 points if taking the fine.
Unfortunately if you decide to go down 'the prove it was me' route they will probably just tell you what they told me a few years ago, that you will have to go to court and let the judge make the decision (and we all know how that will end up) resulting in far higher cost than a simple fine. My car was photographed doing 42 mph in a 30 limit, from the back view, so the driver could not be seen at all. My problem was that my wife and I shared the drive of this route twice a day taking our son to school, we just did not know which one of us was driving at the time. Explaining this to the police by letter, all I got in reply was "well if one of you doesn't own up to it you will have to go to court. I checked with my cousin, who is a barrister, and he told me that the right in law not to incriminate oneself does not apply in this case (it's ok if you are a murderer because it does apply!). I had to bite the bullet and say it was me driving and, to this day, do not know if it was!
If you finally receive notice of prosecution, my advice at this point would be to ask for photographic evidence and put the question to the police how they could be sure it was you speeding when you were in a long line of bikes. If you get the response that I did I think you will just have to accept it and move on. Good luck, I hope it works out better for you than it did for me.
If you finally receive notice of prosecution, my advice at this point would be to ask for photographic evidence and put the question to the police how they could be sure it was you speeding when you were in a long line of bikes. If you get the response that I did I think you will just have to accept it and move on. Good luck, I hope it works out better for you than it did for me.
olice:
I've had a traffic cop pull me on the m6 before, he didn't like my "legal" pressed metal plates at all. No matter what I said he was adamant they weren't legal.
When I rang up to complain about him. They put me back on the phone to him, He just said take it to court, I'll just change the story and do you for something else.
Proper bastard!
When I rang up to complain about him. They put me back on the phone to him, He just said take it to court, I'll just change the story and do you for something else.
Proper bastard!
it will cost you £620 in costs alone to dispute it in court..........and they wont be satisfied with £100 for the offence itself either.........and they dont have to prove the lazer was pointed at you .....you have to prove it wasnt, Now enter their expert witness ( for the disputed lazer aim/accuracy ) add another £1200 to £1500 to the bill ......take the points and as an aside your nip was him telling you he was reporting you for the offence at the side of the road ( the 14 day rule doesnt apply in these circumstances)
jimmybell said:
Not only that, points for using a mobile phone whilst driving can add quite a fair bit on to your insurance premium, more so than speeding. So overall £300 isn't that much when you think how much you'd pay in additional premium over the next 3 to 5 years dependant on the company
AndyBeech said:
It would only go to court, for the judge to decide, in these circumstances if the op decided that they would not accept that they were fairly and justly caught speeding and therefore refused to acknowledge that they were the offending driver/rider. If accepting responsibility, It would be as you say, a straightforward fine with points or a speed awareness if they offered it, which is not always guaranteed, even if 3 years has passed since attending a previous one.
Ok I smashed into the back of an unmarked police car on the motorway a few years ago in an Astra Estate ! Completely my fault braked too late ... My car slid sideways into the back of a stationary unmarked police car taking a prisoner to strangeways prison (Manchester) geezer was a proper villan hence the unmarked police car.... caused an absolute fu*kin riot more police than you can ever imagine - helicopter - the full works as they thought it was some kind of "breakout" - absolutely s**t myself as at that time driving was my living !!!!! - ok so here is the curved ball - the law states that you should not stop on the carriageway of a motorway ! even though the traffic had stopped (queuing for the junction no warning or matrix signs) so the fact I ran into the back of a stationary car on a motorway ??? Technically the police car should not have "stopped "on the carriageway ???? and I could not be held responsible as the car ( police car) should not (in the eyes of the law) be stationary on a carriageway of a motorway ??? I never received any correspondence after the accident at all from the police nothing ! I don't even think they contacted the company I worked for at the time for an insurance claim for the damage to their vehicle ..... worry not ... I would challenge any conviction from a "biker group" ask when the
"gun" was last calibrated and confirm it was you and not any of the other 13 on the ride ???? - please don't get me wrong .... If you have over cooked it ! That's life but just remember the police are not completely error free ! We all make mistakes - good luck
"gun" was last calibrated and confirm it was you and not any of the other 13 on the ride ???? - please don't get me wrong .... If you have over cooked it ! That's life but just remember the police are not completely error free ! We all make mistakes - good luck
Just a further though .... Don't want to make light of your worries but ....
Next time you go on a biker "hoon" rip the throttle a bit more and be number 9 or 10 in the group
Good luck
X
Next time you go on a biker "hoon" rip the throttle a bit more and be number 9 or 10 in the group
Good luck
X
slick said:
I disagree. The law should be on the side of the accused and your are innocent until proven guilty. The Police MUST prove that they have followed the correct guidelines and procedures in their actions and that the accused could not actually be someone else.
Now, the reality is that the copper knows they were all speeding but could only process one biker at a time. Unless he pulls them all, he just takes the easy target at the back of the pack. Enter the argument that probably didn't know which individual biker was doing which speed, he will just go with his gut or get one and hope the others learn.
Is it worth challenging this and the accused, proving the copper was wrong, probably not due to the costs involved but I have seen many a conviction thrown out as there was an element of doubt in the Police claims. It isn't fair on the accused but the element of doubt is key if you want to try and get off with it.
H.
I think there is a bit of confusion about burden of proof presumption of innocence etc, but it's quite simple really - the only evidence required re speed is the the officers OPINION about your speed, corroborated by another officer or a reliable device (speedo, gun, VASCAR time/distance unit etc). They don't need to prove the EXACT speed, only that beyond reasonable doubt it was over 60 in your case.
Police can take you to court, or offer you the cheaper more attractive option of an administrative fine or possibly naughty school. If you think the officer was wrong or has cocked up the evidence you can challenge it. The Police will serve all the evidence, you can decide to plead and take the greater fine/costs at that point or fight it at court. There will be no presumption of guilt and normal criminal rules apply.
You asked the right question at the outset, "have the police made a mistake"? I'm guessing you know the answer! So either pay the fine/do naughty school, or challenge it, but I wouldn't get too carried away trying to be Nick 'the loophole Freeman' it'l likely end up as an expensive waste of time and isn't worth it unless you are trying to save your licence/job, better to invest the money in some bigger mirrors
Hope it pans out OK
Police can take you to court, or offer you the cheaper more attractive option of an administrative fine or possibly naughty school. If you think the officer was wrong or has cocked up the evidence you can challenge it. The Police will serve all the evidence, you can decide to plead and take the greater fine/costs at that point or fight it at court. There will be no presumption of guilt and normal criminal rules apply.
You asked the right question at the outset, "have the police made a mistake"? I'm guessing you know the answer! So either pay the fine/do naughty school, or challenge it, but I wouldn't get too carried away trying to be Nick 'the loophole Freeman' it'l likely end up as an expensive waste of time and isn't worth it unless you are trying to save your licence/job, better to invest the money in some bigger mirrors
Hope it pans out OK
Ewazix, you are right about that part where it is a straight forward stop - however that is not the case if they do not stop the driver at the time and accuse the owner who either has to fess up or nominate someone else. If you can't do either - you are guilty (of a different offence code) but still guilty.
The Hamilton case was the last one to go through on that without finding either party guilty. Now they would convict both or force one of them to lie to secure a conviction either way.
The Hamilton case was the last one to go through on that without finding either party guilty. Now they would convict both or force one of them to lie to secure a conviction either way.