78 on the A19 dual carriageway - court CMH in 2 weeks - how do i get them to reveal their proof?

[MikeebEos]

Hi 

 

I have to attend court in 2 weeks for a case management hearing.  

 

I was sent a speeding fine last year and I did not believe I was speeding, therefore I decided to put them to "proof".

 

I have a few questions that I need answering regarding the case, how do I request information from the Police and when do I do this.  I thought you put these questions at trial, but someone has told me I need to request this information before going to court!!

 

I would welcome any help or advice

[honeybee13]

Hi.

 

I've moved your thread to the Speeding Offences forum for further advice from the forum regulars.

 

HB

[honeybee13]

I did not believe I was speeding, therefore I decided to put them to "proof".

 

Can you tell us what you've done so far about putting them to proof please?

 

HB

[MikeebEos]

HI Honeybee,

 

Thanks for responding so soon

 

Unfortunately i have asked for any proof as i dont know how to go about it !!

[honeybee13]

You have asked for proof or you haven't please?

 

This thread may have information that's relevant to your case. This cagger wanted to ask for proof in advance of the case but it didn't necessarily work the way they thought.

 

 

Hopefully people will be along later to advise you.

 

HB

[dx100uk]

can I be so bold and ask what speed in what zone please?

 

 

[MikeebEos]

78 on a dual carriageway

[dx100uk]

and was this a dual lane in each direction carriageway - with barriered central reservation?

 

 

[MikeebEos]

Yes, duel carriageway in both directions with barriered central reservation. 

 

It was the A19

[dx100uk]

78 in a 70 is not usually prosecuted and which you are allowed to do unless you are not in a car, or in a speed restriction area, so..either these apply? 

 

 

[MikeebEos]

Thanks dx, 

 

Apologies as I do not fully understand..  "unless I am not in a car"??

There are no speed camera signs or any limit number signs at all on the stretch of road I was travelling and it is not a speed restriction area

[Bromptonaut]

The limit for cars is 70 on dual carriageway but is lower for some other vehicles such as vans. What make/model of vehicle were you driving at time you were 'flashed'.  

[MikeebEos]

I was driving a Peugeot 207 

[dx100uk]

you sure its for speeding and not forgetting to name the driver in time?

78 in a 70 is not really within the realms of a FPN or summons or what ever ... I think I've seen?

man in the middle posted the chart sometime back on a thread here.

 

dx

 

 

 

[Man in the middle]

20 hours ago, MikeebEos said:

Unfortunately i have asked for any proof as i dont know how to go about it !!

Not a particularly good idea.

 

The only evidence you are entitled to is that which the prosecution will rely on to convict you.

 

In a case such as yours this will usually consist of statements from the camera partnership which states that your vehicle was detected by an approved device operated in the correct manner. It will also be accompanied by the response you (presumably) provided, naming yourself as driver. (Please confirm or otherwise that you have done this).

 

There will also probably be a photograph of your vehicle to show that it was your car that was detected. You should have already been provided with this material before you entered your plea and if you have that's all you will be getting.

 

The situation is that an approved device operated in the correct manner is presumed to be accurate unless it can be proved otherwise. The burden then falls to you to "prove otherwise". What evidence do you have to show that the device could not be relied upon?

 

I take it you were offered and declined a speed awareness course (if you are eligible and the offence was not in Scotland) and a Fixed Penalty?

 

I forgot to add that at he Case Management Hearing you will be asked to state the nature of your defence. If you simply say you do not believe you were speeding and want the prosecution to prove it the court's Legal Advisor (who advises the Magistrates on Legal Matters but also has a duty to support unrepresented defendants through the court processes) will almost certainly advise you of what I have said above. You will probably be asked if you want to reconsider your plea. 

 

If you go to trial and are convicted you face a fine of half a week's net income, a surcharge of 10% of the fine (Minimum £32) and £620 prosecution costs. If you plead guilty you will be granted a 33% discount on your fine and pay only £85 costs. Three points will be imposed either way.

[MikeebEos]

Hi Man in the middle, 

 

Thanks for your response.

 

Yes, I have provided my section 172, and was then provided with a witness statement from the camera officer - which also says in his statement that "I was, was not" speeding???  Obviously when he cut and pasted the statement he forgot to cross out which one...

 

The photograph provided was just of my number plate

 

They did not offer a speed awareness course 

 

I remember seeing the speed van at the time far out into the distance, I remember looking at my speedometer and thinking "good job i wasnt speeding" there was a car who had passed me minutes earlier that was speeding.

 

Surely the "burden of proof" does not fall on my shoulders (Innocent until proven guilty)... they are taking me to court - therefore they have to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that it was me and their evidence is watertight.  The burden of proof is upon them - so I am putting them to proof...

 

I have some questions that need answering.  Was the camera calibrated properly? Do they have proof that it was tested before set up as should be? etc etc

 

My main concern / question is this...

Officers are not allowed to just aim the camera's from car to car in the hope they catch a speeding motorist. 

They have to have "PRIOR" opinion that i was speeding before aiming the camera at the car. 

 

I was so far away I do not believe for one minute that the officer had prior opinion that I was speeding. 

The camera evidence is just used to "corroborate the officers prior opinion that a vehicle was travelling in excess of permitted speed limit" APCO code section 5

 

How do i get answers to these questions

- or is this left for me to ask at trial?

 

I would like to see all the paperwork and evidence to ensure they have followed all the correct procedures and regulations set out in APCO 

 

My main defence is that the officer could not EVER had "Prior" Opinion that I was speeding and therefore the conviction is unsound and illegal...

[Bromptonaut]

Man in Middle will be along soon but surely ACPO stuff is guidance and has no force in law? 

 

Why, if he sees your car coming towards him at what he estimates to be at or in excess of limit, can you be confident that camera officer  had no Prior Opinion? 

[dx100uk]

oh dear we know what sites you've been reading...

 

did you check if he had his hat on too and it had a yellow band...

 

do yourself a favour, drop what can be deemed at the freeman of the land twaddle equivalent of motoring offences sites and simply admit it - will be far cheaper.

 

dx

 

[Man in the middle]

1 hour ago, MikeebEos said:

Surely the "burden of proof" does not fall on my shoulders (Innocent until proven guilty)

 

As I explained, the device is presumed (in law) to be accurate. If your defence is that it was not then you have to prove it (on the balance of probabilities). If you do not, provided the prosecution proves that it was an approved device operated correctly you will be convicted.

1 hour ago, MikeebEos said:

Was the camera calibrated properly? Do they have proof that it was tested before set up as should be? etc etc

 

You cannot simply go "fishing" in the hope you may discover a discrepancy. The prosecution does not have to routinely prove  calibration nor does it have to prove it was set up correctly. If you believe that it was not you will have to mention that as part of the basis of your NG plea and state why.

 

It will be up to the court to decide if you have a valid reason for requesting proof of either. If they do you are entitled to ask the prosecution to bring evidence to the trial. If they do not you have no such entitlement.

 

The same applies to your request for evidence of compliance with ACPO processes and procedures. (Incidentally the ACPO was abolished in 2015 and replaced by the National Police Chiefs' Council - NPCC - though most of the ACPO guidelines were adopted by the new organisation).

 

That said, these are sets of guidance to officers and failure to comply does not necessarily prove fatal to a prosecution.

 

It also seems from what you say that the NPCC guidelines for prosecution were not followed. Enforcement normally begins at 79mph.

 

More than that, for speeds up to 86mph a course is normally offered and for speeds of 87-95mph a Fixed Penalty is the usual disposal.

 

Do you know why these were not offered or did you say from the outset that you would not accept either? In any case, it is of interest but of no consequence. The decision to prosecute you (or not) is entirely at the discretion of the police.

 

Your "prior opinion" defence is unlikely to fly. There is no absolute requirement for the operator to have formed such an opinion. Most of them do as it would be pointless to focus on a vehicle poodling along at 45mph or so.

 

If you want to cross-examine the officer (or civilian operator) who detected you, request that he  comes to court and gives his evidence in person. If he testifies that he had formed no prior opinion of your speed formed but simply focussed on you on the off chance do you think (provided the evidence of the device holds up) you will be acquitted? After all, a fixed (unmanned) camera does not "form an opinion" does it?

 

If you really want to defend this, do yourself a favour and find a motoring solicitor that will give you a free initial consultation and run your points past him or her. It might save you a few bob.

[Manxman in exile]

21 hours ago, honeybee13 said:

You have asked for proof or you haven't please?

 

This thread may have information that's relevant to your case. This cagger wanted to ask for proof in advance of the case but it didn't necessarily work the way they thought.

 

 

Hopefully people will be along later to advise you.

 

HB

 

Hi HB

 

I've just posted on that thread because I was concerned that people might get the wrong idea from that thread title.  I've got no problem with the advice given by other posters on that thread, but surely the OP there went completely down the wrong route by using GDPR?  Isn't justice/evidence of criminal offences etc a specific exception from GDPR - or am I wrong?

 

I only mention this because it would be unfortunate if anybody misunderstood and came to the conclusion that GDPR was the way to get evidence - which of course it isn't.

[MikeebEos]

25 minutes ago, dx100uk said:

oh dear we know what sites you've been reading...

 

did you check if he had his hat on too and it had a yellow band...

 

do yourself a favour, drop what can be deemed at the freeman of the land twaddle equivalent of motoring offences and simply admit it - will be far cheaper.

 

dx

 

 

WTF !!!

 

Don't know what you are talking about !! I think it is you who are talking twaddle... the questions i raised are legitimate questions raised by expert lawyers

 

I am looking for good advice on the correct legal process... so no i am not just going to roll over - the law is a there for the benefit of all parties.  

 

If we all had your deluded, spineless acceptance of authority - we might as well pack our bags and move to North Korea

[dx100uk]

FTP mr brandt?

but you are not an expert lawyer....

and you dont drink or play golf with the judges.

 

It puzzled me about 78 in a 70...why are they after you?

 

Dx

[MikeebEos]

Ha ha - just had to look up what FTP mr brandt meant...

 

Yeah, FTP

 

No, im not an expert lawyer and I dont play golf... does that mean I cannot use what they do?

 

I came here in the hope of maybe getting a renegade lawyer that may want to help a LIP or advise me how to play the game...

 

Dont know why they are after me - it is just a money grabbing scheme anyway - who cares if it is lawful or morally correct.  They are just crunching the numbers and I am just another brick in the wall...

[dx100uk]

it was the Korean comment that pricked my ears..i thought your were a follower..

 

like yourself we here are not generally of the attitude of blindly accepting to do what we are told too nor refrain from standing upto 'whomever', but, throwing or appearing to want to throw everything but the kitchen sink at them to try and find a reason is not the way to go, as MiTm said 'fishing' is not the answer.

 

I wonder how many others cars probably around you, doing the same speed or more, also got NIP's and why you were p'haps singled out.

shame you don't ? have a dashcam with GPS data?, 

 

dx

 

[Man in the middle]

Please don't let this thread degenerate into a slanging match!

 

I've given you the benefit of my knowledge (which is not inconsiderable in these matters). I can also add that I have seen a number of defendants "put the prosecution to proof" in the way you plan to and have seen none of them acquitted. I've pointed out the potential pitfalls. I've told you the obstacles you face if you go on a fishing trip. I've told you what the prosecution has to provide in the way of proof and what it does not. There was one point I didn't address:

 

6 hours ago, MikeebEos said:

There are no speed camera signs or any limit number signs at all on the stretch of road I was travelling and it is not a speed restriction area

 

There is no requirement to provide warnings signs that speed cameras - either fixed or mobile - are in operation. If the stretch of road was subject to the National Speed Limit you will only find repeater signs if the road has a system of streetlighting.

 

I'm intrigued as to why (a) you have been subject to action below the NPCC's guidelines and (b) why you were not offered a course or fixed penalty. But if you don't want to "roll over" that's your choice. But bear in mind that failure will cost you the thick end of a Grand.

 

It would be nice if you informed us of the outcome.