Nightmare,

Have to disagree with you on a couple of points:

Courts don't like smart asses who think they can fight their own cases. If you've ANY thoughts about pleading not guilty to an offence, get a lawyer. If you're pleading guilty, you don't need one but a good lawyer will still be able to get your offence (and therefore any subsequent penalty) reduced - the lawyer representing a friend of mine got the prosecutor to accept a plea of guilty to a REDUCED SPEED (109mph reduced to 99mph) which meant he got off with 6 points and £250 instead of a ban. You'll never do that on your own!

And, as far as the EUCoHR case is concerned, a precedent has already been set in Scotland so you would win a case against the police if they insist on you incriminating yourself. But, as I said, it would involve a lot of hassle and it would make the papers. Only worth it if you've got the bottle to carry it through - and you'd never be able to do it without a brief.

The whole system is designed to make people cough up the cash to minimise the time and the expense. If you're prepared to fight (but you've got to have a rock-solid case), you shouldn't be convicted. Prosecutors now are starting to plea-bargain with motorists too - plead guilty to a lesser offence and we'll guarantee you a lesser penalty. They get their conviction for little effort, they get your cash, you get a record. It stinks.

All the best,
Brian

 

Brain,

Totally agree should you plead 'not guilty' without a lawyer - but in a speeding case you never have a case to plead not guilty do you? no evidence, no case....evidence...you're screwed! I doubt that a lawyer will be able to save you more money than he will cost, if you see what I mean!

Night

 

Night,

Agreed! But if it's important to you, and a lawyer can save you some points or a ban, he's worth every penny whatever he costs!

 

Following on from the posting regarding illegally sought evidence being inadmissible, I have often wondered if an unmarked police car travelling in excess of the speedlimit without it's "lights and tones on" is breaking the law ? and hence its evidence invalid ?

 

Haven't read all the posts on this one and so what I say may already have been said BUT first thing GET a solicitor.

Why? Well Gatso evidence is becoming very flakey as they can get triggered by all sorts and if they don't have the painted lines on the road a simple Gatso photo may not even stand up.

Secondly a Solicitor will make your appology to the court sound more sincere, and at the end of the day 93 in a 60 limit - you stand to get banned.

 

Cheers Phil. You mention the white lines, Im not aware of any being there, however I may be wrong.

From all thats been said, it looks unlikely that Ill get banned as the cut off for a ban is 35mph over the posted limit, and I was doing 33, well have to see, it depends on the judge (if I do go to court).

As far as the solicitor goes, what you say is true, however I agree with the point that someone (apologies) made, they are unlikely to save me more than they cost. I will request the evidence and then I will know whether there were any lines on the road.

Im not intending to fight my own case in court if it does come to that, providing I feel the evidence is fair, I will plead guilty at the first opportunity.

Im not exactly sure if this was a GATSO, all I saw was a small flash about 6" above the level of the road on the left ditch. No GATSO style box, nothing else, I didnt even notice a van sitting nearby.

As it flashed, myself and passengers dismissed it as a reflection, it was that hidden!!

Doeas anyone know anything about this sort of new generation camera?? Ive never seen anything like it B4.

Cheers again

Richie.

 

It could have been a mobile camera - basically there are 3 rubber strips that are hollow and as you drive over the strips air is forced out - the speed is calculated and triggers (or not) the mobile camera.

 

Hmmm sounds novel, how reliable are said devices, that doesnt sound as accurate as doppler radar to me??

Rich

 

Richie,

I'd guess you were caught either by a mini-Gatso or by a Speedmaster linked to a stills camera.

Mini-Gatsos use radar similar (but at a different frequency) to the big grey boxes we all know and hate, but require calibration stripes painted on the road to determine your precise speed from the photograph because other external factors can affect the doppler effect that the system relies upon to determine your speed. Gatsos, contrary to popular belief, are not very reliable on their own which is why prosecution is only ever accompanied by photographic proof of two pictures taken half a second apart. With reference to both photos, it's a simple calculatoin to work out how far the vehicle travelled in the half-second and, from that, work out the speed. The speed printed on the photograph will be accepted if it's within a tolerance range of the manual calculation.

Speedmaster uses either Truvelo-type rubber strips (as PhilB mentions) or buried piezo-electric wires to activate any speed-measuring device that plod decides to connect to them. Both the Truvelo and the piezo-electric methods are very accurate although the rubber strip type can be destroyed by vehicles over time (or immediately by locking up your brakes as you pas by). The reason that there are three strips is so that the vehicle's direction can be determined. These don't need calibration stripes painted on the road because the system is so accurate.

Wait for the evidence to arrive and make your decision based on that.

All the best,
Brian

 

Ritchie,

Hav eyou seen those new blue cameras all down the A90, and on the Aberdeen - Peterhead road ????

How do they work then ???

 

The blue cameras are part of the RAC traffic flow monitoring system & are being erected on all major roads. They read part of the registration number at two ajacent points & work out average speed. Once the system is up & running it will be used to highlight congestion. They are not police related speed cameras.

 

Thank **** for that.