Help for Relative - 38mph in a 30mph zone help - don't understand photos - Can 1 second evidence have you for speeding ?

[Murpheus]

I know what it's like to be done for speeding but the camera evidence I was given all made sense to me at the time.

 

I had travelled 34-35 metres in 2 seconds and I am aware 38 mph is very close to 17 metres per second so fair cop. 

 

A relative has given me access to very similar police website  photos but this time I'm scratching my head.

 

1st photo the car is 147.4 metres away with 24 seconds on the clock [frame 47 I think bottom left] allegedly doing 37 mph. 

2nd photo 152 5 metres still 24 seconds on the clock frame 53 allegedly doing 38 mph.

3rd photo still 152.5 metres and still 24 seconds on the clock frame 54 allegedly doing 38 mph.

Last photo is number plate but no time stamp like there was in my case.

 

Both mine and relative were clocked by a mobile speed van that crudely hides just as you enter or in my relatives case leave 30 mph zone.

 

Apart from the speed indications of 37 and 38 mph, there is nothing to prove an offence took place,

 

what I note is 147.4 metres and 152.5 metres which indicate 5.1 metres per second, nothing more.

 

Unless the police have more photos can my relative be punished with this evidence?

 

Can I upload a PDF with all the info bar number plate of course.   

 

Edited March 22, 2022 by dx100uk
Spacing

[dx100uk]

please space your posts in the future.

 

yes in one mass PDF

[Man in the middle]

Mobile hand held speed cameras work on either a laser or radar principle. The photographs do not usually form part of the evidence used to prove the speed but are more to identify the vehicle. The evidence to prove speed comes from the device itself, either in the form of a printout or, as you can see, with a stamp denoting the speed measured. The measurement of the vehicle's speed is taken in about a third of a second.

 

The device will be Home Office approved and if your relative takes the matter to court, evidence will be produced to show that it was operated in the correct manner. If both these are successfully demonstrated to the court, readings produced by it are presumed to be correct unless the contrary can be proved. The burden to provide that proof in on your relative.

 

The driver should be offered a course for that speed, provided he or she has not done one for an offence committed in the last three years.

[Murpheus]

Relative is going to phone tomorrow to see if there are any more photos.

Like I said earlier my evidence for speeding clearly indicated 34 metres in 2 seconds,  ie 7,8, and 9 seconds are on the same type of camera evidence.

Anyway here is the photos, notice how it looks like 38 just past the 60 mph sign, c'mon we all speed up a bit once we approach that sign !

1 second evidence..pdf

[Man in the middle]

Quote

Relative is going to phone tomorrow to see if there are any more photos.

 

For what purpose?

 

The photographs you have posted demonstrate simply that the vehicle has travelled 5.1m within the same second.

 

It could be in 0.1sec (e.g. 08:55:24.01 to 08:55:24.11) , or it could be in 0.99sec (e.g. 08:55:24.00 to 08:55:24.99).

 

They give no clear indication of  the speed of the vehicle because you do not know the time elapsed between the two images and they cannot be relied upon to prove the speed.

 

It is unlikely that any other photographs (if they exist) will be any more conclusive.

 

At 38mph 5.1 metres will be travelled in 0.3 sec (near enough) and that ties in with my understanding of the time a mobile speed camera takes to measure speed (as I mentioned earlier).

 

So it is not surprising that the two images were taken within the same second. There is a 70% chance of that - they would only be taken in different seconds if the first image was taken at more than mm:ss.70 (when the second image would be taken after the clock has ticked over to the following second).

 

Your relative should be aware that he is not entitled to any evidence at this stage.

 

He must respond to the "Section 172" request for driver's details within the 28 days allowed or risk committing a separate offence which carries six points on conviction. 

[Murpheus]

2 dimensional photos can be deceiving but believe me when I got done the distance travelled 15 metres per second [38 mph] could be plainly seen. looking at my relatives photos the car has barely moved which makes me want to question it. 

 

Is there a new speed gun on the block that can nick you in a second?

 

Why were my photos,

15.03.07, 145.9 metres...

15.03.08 , 130.3 metres...

15.03.09, 115 metres 

15.03.09, 110 metres.

 

In both cases the camera graphics, timers, and other scaling are identical but at least I know for definite I was speeding given all that extra information.

 

Will update tomorrow, thank     

[Man in the middle]

You are not comparing like with like. Your relative's photographs are typical of any seen taken by similar devices. The photographs are not used to calculate the speed. To do that to within 1mph you would need the elapsed time to two decimal places and you do not have it even to one.

 

If your relative doubts the accuracy of the device he will have to decline the offers of a course or fixed penalty and plead not guilty in court. He will have to show that the device cannot be relied upon and he is most unlikely to do that without expert help. If he fails he will face an income related fine and prosecution costs of at least £620. That figure may be higher if the prosecution has to enlist expert help to counter his claims.

 

He can put his claims to the police when he makes his return but they usually prefer any arguments to be tested in court.

[Murpheus]

I have written a letter which will be included with the admission from relative to driving the car.

It will be posted first class registered tomorrow. Searched other sites and found out you can make an informal appeal to be included with your admission. Not all Police forces do this but there is nothing to lose, thumping a keyboard for 5 minutes and pressing print hasn't been at all stressful.

 

[Man in the middle]

No there is nothing to lose (except the stamp).

 

But you should be aware that such a request does not constitute an "appeal" (either formal or informal). This is not like a parking ticket - it is an allegation of a criminal offence and there is nothing to appeal as no conviction has been recorded. It will be simply a request that the police re-examine their evidence and use their discretion to take no further action. I believe there is no reason for them to do this. They have the speed recorded by an approved device and that's all they need. But as you say, you (or rather your relative) have nothing to lose.

[Murpheus]

Well they must have wiped their arse on my letter. Never mind relative got speed awareness course

 

[Man in the middle]

25 minutes ago, Murpheus said:

Well they must have wiped their arse on my letter. Never mind relative got speed awareness course

 

I shouldn't imagine they did that. They simply processed the case in the normal way. The people in the ticket office are not "decision makers" in the way you asked them to be. They have a fairly rigid process which they usually stick to. In the case of a transgression in a 30mph limit, their process is:

 

Under 35mph - No Action

35-42mph - Offer a course.

43-49mph - Offer a Fixed Penalty (£100 and three points)

50mph and above - court action.

 

What you were asking them to do is to consider a challenge to the evidence they have which verifies the speed. They will normally only do this in the event of a plate mis-read. Other than that, as far as they are concerned, the evidence they have is reliable enough for court action and if you want to challenge its reliability then court is the only place to do so. If your relative had ignored the offer a course a fixed penalty would have been offered (provided there was still time to prosecute in the event of the offer not being taken up). If that offer was ignored then court action would be taken.

[BazzaS]

On 22/03/2022 at 20:49, Murpheus said:

 

Anyway here is the photos, notice how it looks like 38 just past the 60 mph sign, c'mon we all speed up a bit once we approach that sign

What you are actually saying is “we all risk a speeding ticket because we exceed 30mph while still in the 30 zone”.

 

”it is a limit, not a target” and if you don’t want to risk a ticket (sounds like you’ve had at least one already!) - speed up if you want, but only after you’ve reached the sign

 

(pet peeve for me, BTW, people who drive at 40 in a 30 [for no apparent good reason], followed by driving 40 in a 50 [again, for no apparent good reason] - cruise control stuck?!?)