Butkus

There's going to be a backlash if they keep treating people like this. They're just making people's lives a misery. Is this really a terrible crime? I think not. This makes me so angry.

The peasants are revolting!

[Edited by Butkus - 9/5/2003 5:50:41 PM]

Ajax

Inforcer:
Don’t mess them about, but it is you right to ask for a copy of the primary evidence and this they must disclose.

If they base it on the video print alone, that would weaken the case, and if the video print was of poor quality and the reason can’t be accounted for who knows.

You can only ask



On the other side of the coin

I have done a number of passes and used the speed gun and they are very good at doing their job, instant reading.

Your best bet is to question reliability and continuity of evidence

It costs nothing to ask……………………………………….

My view is that you were most likely speeding, sorry!



[Edited by Ajax - 9/5/2003 7:48:15 PM]

Inforcer

Hi
had some photographic evidence sent to me today by mr Plod and I am a bit concerned! the picure shows another vehicle along side me and the road where it was took is right on the border of me leaving a 30mph limit into a 40mph limit.

I drive along the strech of road every day and seen the sneaky *******s hiding undercover and always stick to the limit I phoned the ticket office and asked the question "whos to say it was the other vehicle answer "we only speed check the vehicle in one direction" I find this hard to belive shorly a mobile camera would catch people in either direction and I was leaving a 30 why not target vehicles entering the 30mph from a 40mph limit?

they told me to send them a letter and has put a hold on the matter for now any idea's guys

ps I dont need any preachers sticking the boot in so **** off in advance!!

Inforcer

Thanks fotopic can my day get any worse!!!!!!

Avi

Link to photo

Inforcer

cheers Avi
have a look people what do you think worth a bitch fight with the BIGGER BROTHERS?

beemerboy

Busted mate, and banged to rights like a good 'un

you wont weasle out of this

and you'll have to change your name to enforced!!! LMFAO

BB

LB

The GATSO camera is only approved for use when driving away from the camera.

Looking at your picture just because there was a car on the other side of the road coming towards you is no reason to suspect that is has had any interference with the image that was taken.

The picture clearly shows your car doing 39MPH. That is simply a case of a £60 fine and 3 points. Why not just accept it, rather than go through all this hassle and wasting of time if it really was you driving?

Inforcer

Cheers moderator, its not a scooby in the picture I take it then? or nothing to do with an every day event which has happened to loads of scoob owners. It was only posted for 10 minutes that got to be a record!!!!!!!
cogratulations on moving my thead to non scooby related
thanks for nothing!

Inforcer

preachers

owbow

Breaking news - 21st August 2003 - Pace and problems - maybe Mr Justice Owen broke the law completely...
We've been sent a copy of the following letter containing a skeleton argument which is being submitted in a SIGNED forms case by a solicitor:



Dear Sirs
Re: CASE REF NUMBER

Further to my previous correspondence regarding the above alleged motoring offence:

I have been informed that the Honourable Mr Justice Owen has decided [dpp v Yorke & Mawdesely 2003] that the Section 172 notice of the NIP amounts to a voluntary confession made under the provisions of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act [PACE].

I should be grateful if you would please detail why my legal rights under the provisions of PACE were not explained to me prior to my completion of the form.

I would like to submit the following skeleton argument and should be grateful if you would ensure that I receive a substantive reply by return:

1 The prosecution case is said to be based on a voluntary confession, which has, as aforementioned, been made under the provisions of The Police and Criminal Evidence Act [PACE].
2 I will submit that I was neither cautioned, nor offered an explanation of my rights, prior to being required to complete the voluntary confession (s172 of the NIP).

3 In the circumstances, I will submit that my rights under the provisions of PACE have been breached.

4 I will further submit that, as I was deprived of my rights under PACE, I have been deprived of my right, under Article 6 of the ECHR, to a fair trial and that I may be the victim of a malicious prosecution.

Under the circumstances therefore any prosecution is bound to fail.
In the light of this, you may wish to consider withdrawing your case rather than waste the Court's and witness' time. In the event that you decide to proceed with the case and my not guilty plea is successful, I will make an application for my costs.

I look forward to hearing from you by return.


If this is correct, it's game over for the cameras for a while at least.

http://www.safespeed.org.uk/unsigned.html


have a gander at this website...

Inforcer

so you can get away doing say 50 coming the other way then?
why not point the dammed thing on the entry of the 30mph not leaving the 30mph into a 40mph zone and I mean yards away from the 40mph if only to tax the motorist! (fish in a barrel)

IanW

I am the Moderator who moved this thread!

Why did I move it?

The forum 'ScoobyNet General' is for 'General Subaru / ScoobyNet Discussion'. The thread was mooved as per the guidelines which are posted at the top of that forum, or can be found here. And more specifically the section below:-

When will a thread be moved?

o When the thread clearly belong in another forum
o When the topic moves onto a subject more appropriate to another forum.
o A thread will be moved to the Muppets where it’s deemed too “silly” for other forums.

Scoobynet reserves the right to move any thread for any reason.

This thread is regarding a speeding offence, which is Non-Scooby Related, yes there is an Impreza in the picture, however the picture does not change the topic of the thread.

Regards

Ian

LB

Because the limit is 30MPH until you pass the sign. I am sure that the local police have done speed enforcement in other areas as well. They will have chosen the location to do it carefully rather than just setting up there to tax the motorist as you put it.

Inforcer

cheers Owbow maybe I should attach this to the letter I am sending the ticket office bet they would **** themselves I wonder how popular their cv would be after being made redundent.

ho-ho-ho

Inforcer

LB thats lame mate are you a copper.
the scoob can ecelarate from 30mph to 38mph in a blink you cant see the sign in the pic but we are talking yards

I guess you drive and NEVER break the limit!!!!!
what did I say about preachers always lurking in the background!!

Dracoro

LB - he stated that is was NOT a gatso but a plod with some equipment. He states that he did NOT exceed the limit and believes that the car coming the other way has triggered the equipment to read 39mph, not him.

LB

No I am not a Police Officer

It is accelerate, and I know full well how the Subaru Impreza does, I own one myself. It doesn't matter if the sign is only yards away, the limit is still 30MPH until you pass the sign.

Nope I do break the speed limit, I honestly dont believe that there is anyone out there who can say they they dont! However if/when I get caught I will just take the punishment. 3 points make very little difference to the cost of insurance these days!

LB

There are 'Mobile Gatso's' on the list of decives which are approved for speed enforcement.

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/docs/speed.html

Inforcer only mentioned that it was a mobile speed camera. The Mobile Gatso works on the same principal as the normal gatso as far as I am aware.

midget1500

i know man, i know. you're hardly a criminal but there you go, the powers to be are out to get you for doing nothing than driving your car.

i'm not supporting speeding as such, but the whole system needs to wise up

this sort of catching people at speed limit borders is so ****, yes, it's black and white wrong, but it's sly and ****. cars don't accelerate from 30/40 or deccelerate from 40/30 instantly (not even your scoobies!) it's a progression from one to the other yet they punish you for going through that transistion. different if you plod through a decent distance into a 30 at 39 or whatever.

AndyBrew

I'd go for the not signing the form thing, and don't get scared off by there sh!ty letters that come back stick to your guns and see what happens

The emphasis on speeding by the old bill is an absolute joke and they have lost any respect from the general public that they may have had before

Camera's are a ridiculous stealth tax and no speeding related offence can truly be judged unless with the human eye and a level of common sense applied, simple as that.

I live in a cul-de-sac that's technically a 30mph limit, now the dustbin lorry omes down our straight at speeds of this nature which is down right dangerous, and any little kid would be toasted but it is not illegal, however doing 47 mph on the A6 which is dual-carriageway is, and guess where the speed cameras go

Inforcer

LB: "Inforcer only mentioned that it was a mobile speed camera. The Mobile Gatso works on the same principal as the normal gatso as far as I am aware."

so you dont know what you are talking about then !That's why I started this thread !
I dont want to be done for someone else's offence and need to know the score and, if it was me, ok,I would admit it(on here) Im only human! Like you said we all speed.

ps

IM NOT SIGNING THE FOOKING THING ANYWAY!!!!!!!!!!!

IanW

You need to know exactly what device caught you.

If you were caught with something like an LTI 20.20 you will not have any hope of being able to blame the oncoming car. As it has the ability to distinguish between cars in traffic situations and only takes 0.3 seconds to acquire the speed of its target.

speedking

The picture shows that it was taken on 30th May. Did you receive the NIP within 14 days?

Also the speed shown looks like -39mph which means that the offender was travelling away from the camera. Perhaps someone can confirm? IIRC the bikers jailed for doing silly speeds achieved -150mph, which made me smile at the time.

I reckon you've got no chance unless you can argue that the van in the photo was reversing and came past you at a hell of a speed

Inforcer

cheers Ian

"You need to know exactly what device caught you.

If you were caught with something like an LTI 20.20 you will not have any hope of being able to blame the oncoming car. As it has the ability to distinguish between cars in traffic situations and only takes 0.3 seconds to acquire the speed of its target."

you have got me down as guilty as charged then by the sound of it!
how do I find out! what it was

IanW

No I dont have you down as 'Guilty as Charged' I was just giving a few facts regarding the LTI 20.20 and how it works.

If you want to know what you were caught using, then contact the people who issued you the ticket, they should have this information avaliable.

WRX Wannabe

Doh!

Looks like you wont get away with it

Pay the fine and then go buy the ROAD ANGEL

wrxmark

I was under the impression that two pictures were taken therefore the speed of the vehicle could be calculated. Maybe I`m wrong but that would be a weak case to present if you could not prove the camera was not faulty or in this case your defence is the other motor setting it off. I have and no doubt others have set off cameras facing in the other direction
I would assume they have another picture showing the distance you travelled and in what length of time.
Interesting to see the outcome of the letter refering to breach of PACE.Don`t think the RTA is subject to that particular point as your are required as registered keeper to provide details of the driver by law or provide an adequate answer. This is not subject to PACE.
I believe that it will go nowhere but some solicitor will make some more cash out of it.

IanW

Copy of the image without needing a 'Clicky'

Ajax

Inforcer:

Sorry M8 it was you that triggered the picture, this is the reason why.


If you look at the video print the speed is -38 the negative mark on the reading is for vehicle travelling away from the device.

Otherwise it is just the 38 on its own.

The format of the image looks like a LTI 20/20 just by looking at the format of the time and date set up, it captures video of the event and you have been sent a video print from that video.

Ask for a copy of the primary evidence under disclosure, this is a copy of the video tape.

That will bring on the pain.