PePiPoo Helping the motorist get justice

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

Speeding/Criminal Case Success Stories!
firefly
post Fri, 20 Aug 2004 - 23:28
Post #1


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,705
Joined: 3 Sep 2003
From: ex-Scotland
Member No.: 298



I am trying to build a library of all the PePiPoo cases that have had happy endings, be it written confirmation or timed out.

Can all users post the link to their (or any other cases they know about) threads so a database can be made up. Once I have a list I will edit this post and update it as and when required.

Not that we get them that often, but when the trolls appear on the site and start having a go, it would be nice to point them in the direction of people who have "had a go" and came out unscathed.

Cheers.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
31 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 > »   
Start new topic
Replies (40 - 59)
Advertisement
post Fri, 20 Aug 2004 - 23:28
Post #


Advertise here!









Go to the top of the page
 
Quote Post
firefly
post Tue, 7 Dec 2004 - 11:11
Post #41


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,705
Joined: 3 Sep 2003
From: ex-Scotland
Member No.: 298



S500L's case. Second class NIP served.

confused1.gif


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
johnjo42
post Wed, 8 Dec 2004 - 17:27
Post #42


Member
Group Icon

Group: Life Member
Posts: 1,204
Joined: 18 Jan 2004
From: Northants
Member No.: 783



Had a "fun" win recently.

Charge was speeding. Form sent back properly signed. Video evidence was pretty conclusive BUT

S9 statement said that S172 notice sent out but concluded "no reply has been received".

Prosecutor read out statement but not the last bit.

JJ: "Would you please read it all"

Prosecutor (nice girl with rapidly reddening face) reads final paragraph but says "That's obviously a mistake because......."

JJ: (leaping to feet) objects as witness statement contains warning about prosecution if statement false so Prosecutor can't give evidence.

Submission of no case to answer made on basis that no evidence that client was driver was upheld so case dismissed with order for costs.

Can't comment as to whether this was a just result but it does go to show that the S9 statements should be scrutinised very carefully.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jeffreyarcher
post Mon, 13 Dec 2004 - 00:06
Post #43


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,639
Joined: 5 Jul 2003
Member No.: 134



Micky B, another sub-section (4). Didn't get to summons.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jeffreyarcher
post Tue, 28 Dec 2004 - 21:11
Post #44


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,639
Joined: 5 Jul 2003
Member No.: 134



S2softy, another sub-section (4). He had been named as the driver by his company; so, presumably, the CPS would have had to show that the information 'was in his power to give', or, that being 'Team Leader' made him the 'keeper'.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Red Shiney Wheel...
post Fri, 31 Dec 2004 - 10:41
Post #45


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 71
Joined: 16 Feb 2004
From: Northampton
Member No.: 893



Hi everyone,

After much wrangling with Humberside CPS over confirmation of driver ( I was in Sainsburys about an hour before the alleged offence which was at least 2 hours if not longer drive away) & a side order of out of time NIP I was summonsed for speeding & 172.

Due to appear in court in Jan 2005, armed with erroneous statements from the CPS clerk, Mohindra & a statement from the police officer that he 'formed an opinion...' etc etc dated sometime in June 2004. (The alleged offence was in Dec 2003).

Today I have had a  notice of discontinuance for both charges on grounds of there not being enough evidence to secure conviction.

Merry Christmas RSW!!!

I would like to extend my grateful thanks to all the guys here in Pepipoo whose forum has helped me to have the courage & knowledge to fight the scameraship. Whenever I started feeling down or wavered in the fight I visited the forum and there always something or someone there to bolster my flagging spirits. And as a direct result of visiting this site I have been able to help one or two others in their fights as well.

Merry Christmas & Happy New Year to you all.
RSW
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jeffreyarcher
post Thu, 6 Jan 2005 - 02:13
Post #46


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,639
Joined: 5 Jul 2003
Member No.: 134



dvhttn, another sub-section (4). Didn't get to summons.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jeffreyarcher
post Wed, 12 Jan 2005 - 00:52
Post #47


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,639
Joined: 5 Jul 2003
Member No.: 134



Mickey P, PACE letter time-out.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Pug205GRD
post Thu, 13 Jan 2005 - 16:59
Post #48


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 521
Joined: 17 Apr 2004
From: Somerset, near where they make choppers
Member No.: 1,108



I have had no further communication with Hampshire scameraship and the offence timed out back in October. the mags. have nothing listed in my name or for my address so I guess we had better chalk another one up in the success column.
(Will link my thread when I find it...)


--------------------
The Police ARE The Law, Not ABOVE It...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jeffreyarcher
post Tue, 18 Jan 2005 - 00:59
Post #49


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,639
Joined: 5 Jul 2003
Member No.: 134



Dee's case; fitted up by Essex Traffic.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mika
post Thu, 20 Jan 2005 - 15:45
Post #50


Member
Group Icon

Group: Administrators
Posts: 9,760
Joined: 30 Mar 2003
From: Wiltshire, UK
Member No.: 4



We received the following message today icon_wink.gif :

“Dear PePiPoo,

You might remember I wrote to you last year about the NIP I received (details below).  Well, I asked Robert Dobson to represent me, on your advice, and the other day he rang to tell me that Lincolnshire Police had dropped all the charges, a week before the court case!

What had happened was, I'd explained to them (via Robert) that as I was pregnant at the time of the alleged offence, my husband and I swapped over the driving very regularly because I got uncomfortable either driving or being a passenger for too long.  This didn't seem to cut any ice, and they continued to say they were taking me to court.  Shortly before the date of the court case, they sent copies of the photographs the speed camera took to Robert.  He forwarded them to me, and I could clearly see a hand on the steering wheel in the photographs, and a glint of metal on that hand that I knew was a wedding ring.  I then wrote back to them to say that if they enlarged the photo and enhanced it, I would definitely be able to identify the driver because my husband and I wear very different types of wedding ring.  They wrote back to say that they would not do that, and so Robert pointed out to them that I had surely now done everything I could to show 'reasonable diligence' in identifying the driver, as I was under no obligation to furnish them with this detail about mine and my husband's rings.

Anyway, a long and bizarre story, but perhaps one that might be of interest to your website visitors, especially ones who wear different kinds of wedding rings from their spouses!

Thanks again for your help!

All the best,”


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mondeoman
post Thu, 20 Jan 2005 - 20:58
Post #51


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 79
Joined: 27 Jul 2004
Member No.: 1,458



Offence date 12 June 2004

Original Reply PACE witness statement followed by Right To Silence letter, so I reckon that is one that has now timed out

Chalk another one up to justice biggrin.gif

Now all I 've got to beat is the Scottish legal system and that'd be mondeoman 2 - scammers 0
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
firefly
post Sat, 22 Jan 2005 - 08:55
Post #52


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 4,705
Joined: 3 Sep 2003
From: ex-Scotland
Member No.: 298



doublej's victory at Birmingham Magistrates' Court. 3some.gif
Yorke compliant unsigned form; speeding only. More details here.


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jeffreyarcher
post Mon, 24 Jan 2005 - 01:26
Post #53


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,639
Joined: 5 Jul 2003
Member No.: 134



Taxexile, another sub-section (4). Not even any B&Bs.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Weevil
post Tue, 25 Jan 2005 - 01:08
Post #54


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 98
Joined: 17 Jun 2004
Member No.: 1,319



Alleged offence of speeding on 17th June 2004.
Replied to first NIP using PACE statement. Received some B&B and two reminders, all of which I ignored.

Heard nothing since.

Thanks guys.


D.

PS: Suitable donation on its way to Fighting Fund next payday  :wink:


--------------------
Cheers

D.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
matt1133
post Tue, 25 Jan 2005 - 14:53
Post #55


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,749
Joined: 18 Mar 2004
From: Strasbourg (soon)
Member No.: 1,017



Alexander TG Won his case after quoting Mohindra v DPP He was also Yorke compliant

Another one for the success stories which seemed to have been missed 8)

cheers,
matt


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
matt1133
post Tue, 25 Jan 2005 - 15:01
Post #56


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,749
Joined: 18 Mar 2004
From: Strasbourg (soon)
Member No.: 1,017



Rosewell Won his case

he was defending both speeding and S172.

Speeding dismissed due to inacuracies i.e wrong direction of travel for alleged offence, non disclosure of documents previously promised etc, and radar could have interfered with reading of camera.

S172 dismissed as the allegation was that NO reply was received, however a reply was sent by Rosewell, albeit unsigned.

cheers,
matt


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
matt1133
post Tue, 25 Jan 2005 - 15:17
Post #57


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,749
Joined: 18 Mar 2004
From: Strasbourg (soon)
Member No.: 1,017



Jim_Beam did the double too by successfully defending both speeding and S172 charges due to a 'lost file', an entertaining post.

cheers,
matt


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
matt1133
post Tue, 25 Jan 2005 - 15:29
Post #58


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,749
Joined: 18 Mar 2004
From: Strasbourg (soon)
Member No.: 1,017



John Josephs successfully defended his clients three time in one day on the charge of S172 for each at Leicester Mags Court, top brief.

the allegations were that no replies were received, when infact they WERE sent, albeit unsigned.

cheers,
matt


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
matt1133
post Tue, 25 Jan 2005 - 15:31
Post #59


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 1,749
Joined: 18 Mar 2004
From: Strasbourg (soon)
Member No.: 1,017



As above, Karlsberg was alleged to have not responded to the NIP, he infact did without a signiture though. the case was dropped at Witney Mags Court.

cheers,
matt


--------------------
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
jeffreyarcher
post Thu, 27 Jan 2005 - 00:42
Post #60


Member


Group: Members
Posts: 8,639
Joined: 5 Jul 2003
Member No.: 134



scottish, another sub-section (4). He appears to have been named as the driver by his company. Didn't get to summons.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

31 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 5 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 



Advertisement

Advertise here!

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: Wednesday, 21st November 2018 - 19:11
Pepipoo uses cookies. You can find details of the cookies we use here along with links to information on how to manage them.
Please click the button to accept our cookies and hide this message. We’ll also assume that you’re happy to accept them if you continue to use the site.